[Federal Register: November 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 229)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 74517-74543]
[DOCID:fr30no10-37]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part IV

Environmental Protection Agency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

40 CFR Part 52

 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; 2008 San Joaquin Valley State Implementation Plan for Fine
Particulate Matter; 2007 State Strategy; PM[bdi2].[bdi5];
Proposed Rule

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0516; FRL-9229-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; 2008 San Joaquin Valley State Implementation Plan for Fine
Particulate Matter; 2007 State Strategy; PM[bdi2].[bdi5]

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve in part and disapprove in part
state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by California to
provide for attainment of the 1997 annual and 24-hour fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) in the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) nonattainment area. The SIP
revisions are the SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan (revised 2010) and
portions of the 2007 State Strategy (revised 2009). Specifically, EPA
is proposing to approve the emissions inventories as meeting the
requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA's fine particle implementing
rule and to approve commitments to implement specific measures and meet
specific aggregate emissions reductions by the San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District and the California Air Resource Board. In
addition, we are proposing to find that volatile organic compounds are
a PM2.5 attainment plan precursor in the SJV for which
controls should be evaluated. EPA is proposing to disapprove the
attainment demonstration. EPA is also proposing to disapprove the
reasonably available control measures/reasonably available control
technology demonstration, the air quality modeling, the reasonable
further progress (RFP) demonstration, the contingency measures, and the
attainment and RFP conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA is
also proposing to not grant California's request to extend to April 5,
2015 the deadline for the SJV nonattainment area to attain the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by January 31, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2010-0516, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail or deliver: Frances Wicher, Office of Air Planning
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information for which disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your
comments. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will
be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment.
If EPA cannot read your comments due to technical difficulties and
cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider
your comments.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material)
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
    Copies of the SIP materials are also available for inspection at
the following locations:
     California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento,
California 95812
     San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District,
1990 E. Gettysburg, California 93726.
    The SIP materials are also electronically available at: http://
www.valleyair.org/Air_Quality_Plans/PM_Plans.htm and http://
www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frances Wicher, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-
3957<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, we, us and our
refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The PM2.5 NAAQS and the San Joaquin Valley
PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
II. California's State Implementation Plan Submittals to Address
PM2.5 Attainment in the San Joaquin Valley
A. California's SIP Submittals
    1. SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan
    2. CARB 2007 State Strategy
B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP Submittals
III. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for PM2.5 Attainment
SIPs
IV. Review of the SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan and the SJV Portion
of the Revised 2007 State Strategy
A. Summary of EPA's Proposed Actions
B. Emissions Inventories
    1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
    2. Emissions Inventories in the SJV PM2.5 SIP
    3. Proposed Action on the Emissions Inventories
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures/Reasonably Available
Control Technology Demonstration and the Adopted Control Strategy
    1. Requirement for RACM/RACT
    2. RACM/RACT Demonstration in the SJV PM2.5 SIP
    a. SJVAPCD's RACM/RACT Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
    b. CARB's RACM Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
    c. Local Jurisdictions' RACM Analysis
    3. Proposed Actions on RACM/RACT Demonstration and Adopted
Control Strategy
D. Attainment Demonstration
    1. Requirements for Attainment Demonstrations
    2. Air Quality Modeling in the SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan
    3. PM2.5 Attainment Plan Precursors
    4. Extension of the Attainment Date
    5. Attainment Demonstration
    a. Enforceable Commitments
    i. Commitment must Represent a Limited Portion of Required
Reductions
    ii. The State must be Capable of Fulfilling its Commitment
    iii. The Commitment must be for a Reasonable and Appropriate
Period of Time
    6. Proposed Action on the Attainment Demonstration
E. Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration
    1. Requirements for RFP
    2. The RFP Demonstration in the SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan
    3. Proposed Action on the RFP Demonstration
F. Contingency Measures
    1. Requirements for Contingency Measures
    2. Contingency Measures in the SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan
    3. Proposed Action on the Contingency Measures
G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity

    1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
    2. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the SJV 2008
PM2.5 Plan
    3. April 23, 2010 Budget Adequacy/Inadequacy Finding
    4. Proposed Finding and Action on the Budgets
H. Mid-Course Review
I. Inter-Pollutant Trading for PM2.5 Offsets
V. EPA's Proposed Actions and Potential Consequences
A. EPA's Proposed Approvals and Disapprovals
B. CAA Consequences of a Final Disapproval
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The PM2.5 NAAQS and the San Joaquin Valley
PM2.5 Nonattainment Area

    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA established new national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5, particulate
matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less, including annual
standards of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of annual mean
PM2.5 concentrations and 24-hour (daily) standards of 65
[mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. 40 CFR 50.7. EPA established the standards based on
substantial evidence from numerous health studies demonstrating that
serious health effects are associated with exposures to
PM2.5 concentrations above the levels of these standards.
    Epidemiological studies have shown statistically significant
correlations between elevated PM2.5 levels and premature
mortality. Other important health effects associated with
PM2.5 exposure include aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions,
emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted
activity days), changes in lung function and increased respiratory
symptoms, as well as new evidence for more subtle indicators of
cardiovascular health. Individuals particularly sensitive to
PM2.5 exposure include older adults, people with heart and
lung disease, and children. See, EPA, Air Quality Criteria for
Particulate Matter, No. EPA/600/P-99/002aF and EPA/600/P-99/002bF,
October 2004.
    PM2.5 can be emitted directly into the atmosphere as a
solid or liquid particle (primary PM2.5 or direct
PM2.5) or can be formed in the atmosphere as a result of
various chemical reactions from precursor emissions of nitrogen oxides,
sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia (secondary
PM2.5). See 72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007).
    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by Clean Air Act (CAA) section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the
nation as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On January 5, 2005, EPA
published initial air quality designations for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, based on air quality monitoring data for the
three-year periods of 2001-2003 or 2002-2004. 70 FR 944. These
designations became effective on April 5, 2005.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On October 17, 2006, EPA strengthened the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering the level to 35 [mu]g/m\3\. At
the same time, it retained the level of the annual PM2.5
standards at 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\. 71 FR 61144. On November 13, 2006, EPA
designated areas, including the SJV, with respect to the revised 24-
hour NAAQS. 74 FR 58688. California is now required to submit an
attainment plan for the 35 [mu]g/m\3\ 24-hour standards no later
than 3 years after the effective date of the designation, that is,
no later than December 14, 2012. In this preamble, all references to
the PM2.5 NAAQS, unless otherwise specified, are to the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 standards of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ and annual
standards of 15 [mu]g/m\3\ as codified in 40 CFR Sec.  50.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley (SJV), in the southern part
of California's Central Valley, nonattainment for both the 1997 annual
and 24-hour PM2.5 standards. 40 CFR 81.305. The SJV
PM2.5 nonattainment area is home to 4 million people and is
the nation's leading agricultural area. Stretching over 250 miles from
north to south and averaging 80 miles wide, it is partially enclosed by
the Coast Mountain range to the west, the Tehachapi Mountains to the
south, and the Sierra Nevada range to the east. It encompasses over
23,000 square miles and includes all or part of eight counties: San
Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and the
valley portion of Kern. For a precise description of the geographic
boundaries of the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment
area, see 40 CFR Sec.  81.305. The local air district with primary
responsibility for developing a plan to attain the PM2.5
NAAQS in this area is the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District (SJVAPCD or District).
    Ambient annual and 24-hour PM2.5 levels in the urban
Bakersfield area in the southern SJV are the highest recorded in the
United States at 22.6 [mu]g/m\3\ and 70 [mu]g/m\3\, respectively, for
the 2007-2009 period.\2\ In the SJV, the levels and composition of
ambient PM2.5 differ by season. 2008 PM2.5 Plan,
Figures H-4 and H-5. Higher PM2.5 concentrations occur
during the winter, between late November and February, when ambient
PM2.5 is dominated by ammonium nitrate, formed from
NOX and ammonia emissions, and directly-emitted
particulates, such as wood smoke. During the winter, the SJV
experiences extended periods of stagnant weather with cold, damp, foggy
conditions which are conducive to the formation of secondary ammonium
nitrate particulates and encourage wood burning. During the summer,
PM2.5 levels generally remain below 15 [mu]g/m\3\, the level
of the annual standards. 2008 PM2.5 Plan, Figures H-6 and H-
7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See EPA, Air Quality System, Design Value Report, August 9,
2010. These values are the highest design values in the SJV. A
design value is an ambient concentration calculated using a specific
methodology from monitored air quality data and is used to compare
an area's air quality to a NAAQS. The methodologies for calculating
design values for the annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are
found in 40 CFR part 50 Appendix N Sections 1(c)(1) and (c)(2),
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. California's State Implementation Plan Submittals to Address
PM2.5 Nonattainment in the San Joaquin Valley

A. California's SIP Submittals

    Designation of an area as nonattainment starts the process for a
state to develop and submit to EPA a state implementation plan (SIP)
under title 1, part D of the CAA. This SIP must include, among other
things, a demonstration of how the NAAQS will be attained in the
nonattainment area as expeditiously as practicable but no later than
the date required by the CAA. Under CAA section 172(b), a state has up
to three years after an area's designation as nonattainment to submit
its SIP to EPA. For the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, these SIPs were
due no later than April 5, 2008.
    California has made several SIP submittals to address the CAA's
PM2.5 attainment planning requirements in the San Joaquin
Valley. The two principal ones are the SJVAPCD's 2008 PM2.5
Plan (2008 PM2.5 Plan or Plan) and the California Air
Resources Board's (CARB) State Strategy for California's 2007 State
Implementation Plan (2007 State Strategy).
    In addition to these submittals, the District and State have also
submitted numerous rules that contribute to improving air quality in
the San Joaquin Valley. EPA has approved many of these rules. See
Appendices A and B of the technical support document (TSD) for this
proposal.
1. SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan was adopted by the District's
Governing Board on April 30, 2008 and by CARB on May 22, 2008 and
submitted to EPA on June 30, 2008.\3\ It includes an attainment

demonstration, commitments by the SJVAPCD to adopt control measures to
achieve emissions reductions from sources under its jurisdiction
(primarily stationary sources), and motor-vehicle emissions budgets
used for transportation conformity purposes. The attainment
demonstration includes air quality modeling, a reasonable further
progress (RFP) plan, an analysis of reasonably available control
measures/reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT), base year
and projected year emissions inventories, and contingency measures. The
2008 PM2.5 Plan also includes the District's demonstration
that attainment of the PM2.5 standards in the SJV will
require significant reductions in NOX and PM2.5
emissions (50 percent and 25 percent from 2005 levels, respectively)
and that the most expeditious date for attaining the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley is April 5, 2015. On
September 15, 2010, CARB submitted a minor revision to the 2008
PM2.5 Plan's control strategy to extend the adoption date
for one control measure.\4\ Future references to the 2008
PM2.5 Plan in this proposal will be to the Plan as revised
in 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District Governing Board Resolution: In the Matter of Adopting the
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 2008
PM2.5 Plan, April 30, 2008 (SJVAPCD Governing Board
Resolution), CARB Resolution No. 08-28, May 22, 2008; and letter,
James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB to Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, June 30, 2008, with
enclosures.
    \4\ See letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB to
Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, September
15, 2010, with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. CARB 2007 State Strategy
    To demonstrate attainment, the 2008 PM2.5 Plan relies in
part on measures in CARB's 2007 State Strategy. The 2007 State Strategy
was adopted by CARB on September 27, 2007 and submitted to EPA on
November 16, 2007.\5\ It discusses CARB's overall approach to
addressing, in conjunction with local plans, attainment of both the
1997 PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS not only in the San
Joaquin Valley but also in California's other nonattainment areas such
as the South Coast Air Basin and the Sacramento area. It also includes
CARB's commitments to propose 15 defined State measures \6\ and to
obtain specific amounts of aggregate emissions reductions of direct
PM2.5, nitrogen oxides (NOX), and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) in the SJV from sources under the State's
jurisdiction, which are primarily on- and off-road motor vehicles and
engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See CARB Resolution No. 07-28, September 27, 2007 with
attachments and letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB,
to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 16,
2007 with enclosures.
    \6\ The 2007 State Strategy also includes measures to be
implemented by the California Bureau of Automotive Repair (Smog
Check improvements) and the California Department of Pesticide
Regulation (VOC reductions from pesticide use). See 2007 State
Strategy, pp. 64-65 and CARB Resolution 7-28, Attachment B, p. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 12, 2009, CARB submitted the ``Status Report on the State
Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan (SIP) and
Proposed Revision to the SIP Reflecting Implementation of the 2007
State Strategy,'' dated March 24, 2009, adopted April 24, 2009 (2009
State Strategy Status Report) \7\ which updates the 2007 State Strategy
to reflect its implementation during 2007 and 2008.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See CARB Resolution No. 09-34, April 21, 2009, with
attachments and letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB,
to Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, August
12, 2009 with enclosures. Only pages 11-27 of the 2009 State
Strategy Status Report are submitted as a SIP revision. The balance
is for informational purposes only. See Attachment A to the CARB
Resolution No. 09-34.
    \8\ We will also refer to the 2007 State Strategy as revised in
2009 as the revised 2007 State Strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In today's proposal, we are only evaluating those portions of the
2007 State Strategy as revised in 2009 that are relevant for attainment
of the 1997 PM2.5 standards in the San Joaquin Valley.

B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP Submittals

    CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require a state to
provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing
prior to the adoption and submittal of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet
this requirement, every SIP submittal should include evidence that
adequate public notice was given and a public hearing was held on it
consistent with EPA's implementing regulations in 40 CFR 51.102.
    Both the SJVAPCD and CARB have satisfied applicable statutory and
regulatory requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing prior
to adoption and submittal of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan. The
District conducted public workshops, provided public comment periods,
and held a public hearing prior to the adoption of the Plan on April
30, 2008. See 2008 PM2.5 Plan, Appendix J and SJVAPCD
Governing Board Resolution, p. 3. CARB provided the required public
notice and opportunity for public comment prior to its May 22, 2008
public hearing on the Plan. See CARB Resolution No. 08-28. The District
also provided the required public notice and hearing on the 2010
revision to the Plan. See SJVAPCD Governing Board Resolution No. 10-06-
18.
    CARB conducted public workshops, provided public comment periods,
and held a public hearing prior to the adoption of the 2007 State
Strategy on September 27, 2007. See CARB Resolution No. 07-28. CARB
also provided the required public notice, opportunity for public
comment, and a public hearing prior to its April 24, 2009 adoption of
the 2009 State Strategy Status Report. See CARB Resolution No. 09-34.
    The SIP submittals include proof of publication for notices of
SJVAPCD and CARB public hearings, as evidence that all hearings were
properly noticed. We find, therefore, that each of the four submittals
that comprise the SJV PM2.5 SIP meets the procedural
requirements of CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).
    CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires EPA to determine whether a SIP
submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section also
provides that any plan that EPA has not affirmatively determined to be
complete or incomplete will become complete six months after the date
of submittal by operation of law. EPA's SIP completeness criteria are
found in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.
    The June 30, 2008 submittal of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan
became complete by operation of law on December 30, 2008. We found the
2010 revision to the Plan complete on September 23, 2010.\9\ The
November 16, 2007 submittal of the 2007 State Strategy and the August
12, 2009 submittal of the 2009 revisions to the Strategy became
complete by operation of law on May 16, 2008 and February 12, 2010,
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Letter, Deborah Jordan, EPA-Region 9 to James Goldstene,
CARB, September 23, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for PM2.5 Attainment
SIPs

    EPA is implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under Title 1,
Part D, subpart 1 of the CAA, which includes section 172,
``Nonattainment plan provisions.'' Section 172(a)(2) requires that a
PM2.5 nonattainment area attain the NAAQS as ``as
expeditiously as practicable'' but no later than five years from the
date of the area's designation as nonattainment. This section also
allows EPA to grant up to a five-year extension of an area's attainment
date based on the severity of the area's nonattainment and the
availability and feasibility of controls. EPA designated the SJV as
nonattainment effective April 5, 2005, and thus the applicable
attainment date is no later than April 5, 2010 or, should EPA grant a
full five-year extension, no later than April 5, 2015.

    Section 172(c) contains the general statutory planning requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas, including the requirements for
emissions inventories, RACM/RACT, attainment demonstrations, RFP
demonstrations, and contingency measures.
    On April 25, 2007, EPA issued the Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 72 FR 20586,
codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z (PM2.5 implementation
rule). The PM2.5 implementation rule and its preamble
address the statutory planning requirements for emissions inventories,
RACM/RACT, attainment demonstrations including air quality modeling
requirements, RFP demonstrations, and contingency measures. This rule
also addresses other matters such as which PM2.5 precursors
must be addressed by the state in its PM2.5 attainment SIP,
applicable attainment dates, and the requirement for mid-course
reviews.\10\ We will discuss each of these CAA and regulatory
requirements for PM2.5 attainment plans in more detail
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In June 2007, a petition to the EPA Administrator was filed
on behalf of several public health and environmental groups
requesting reconsideration of four provisions in the
PM2.5 implementation rule. See Earthjustice, Petition for
Reconsideration, ``In the Matter of Final Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule,'' June 25, 2007. These provisions are (1) The
presumption that compliance with the Clean Air Interstate Rule
satisfies the NOX and SO2 RACT requirements
for electric generating units; (2) the deferral of the requirement
to establish emission limits for condensable particulate matter
(CPM) until January 1, 2011; (3) revisions to the criteria for
analyzing the economic feasibility of RACT; and (4) the use of out-
of-area emissions reductions to demonstrate RFP. These provisions
are found in the PM2.5 implementation rule and preamble
at 20623-20628, 40 CFR 51.1002(c), 20619-20620, and 20636,
respectively. On May 13, 2010, EPA granted the petition with respect
to the fourth issue. Letter, Gina McCarthy, EPA, to David Baron and
Paul Cort, Earthjustice, May 13, 2010. EPA is currently considering
the other issues raised in the petition.
    Neither the District nor the State relied on the first, third,
or fourth of these provisions in preparing the 2008 PM2.5
Plan or the 2007 State Strategy. The District has deferred some, but
not all, CPM limits in its rules. EPA does not believe this deferral
affects its proposed disapproval actions on the SIP's RACM/RACT or
expeditious attainment demonstrations. See section II.D.3 of the TSD
for this proposal. We will evaluate any rule adopted or revised by
the District after January 1, 2011 to assure that it appropriately
addresses CPM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Review of the SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan and the SJV Portion of
the Revised 2007 State Strategy

A. Summary of EPA's Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to approve in part and disapprove in part the SJV
2008 PM2.5 Plan and those portions of the 2007 State
Strategy as revised in 2009 specific to PM2.5 attainment in
the SJV.
    We are proposing to approve the emissions inventories in these SIP
revisions as meeting the applicable requirements of the CAA and
PM2.5 implementation rule. We are also proposing to approve
the District's and CARB's commitments to specific measures and specific
aggregate emissions reductions in these SIP revisions as strengthening
the SIP.
    In addition, we are proposing to find that volatile organic
compounds (VOC) are a PM2.5 attainment plan precursor that
must be addressed in the RACM/RACT analysis, RFP and attainment
demonstrations, and for other PM2.5 SIP control
requirements. The Plan as submitted does not treat VOC as a
PM2.5 attainment plan precursor.
    We are proposing to disapprove the air quality modeling analysis on
which the 2008 PM2.5 Plan's attainment, RACM/RACT, and RFP
demonstrations and the State's attainment date extension request are
based because the Plan does not currently include sufficient
documentation and analysis for EPA to determine the modeling's
adequacy.
    Based on our proposed finding that VOC should be a PM2.5
attainment plan precursor and our proposed disapproval of the air
quality modeling, we are proposing to disapprove the 2008
PM2.5 Plan's RACM/RACT analysis and the RFP and attainment
demonstrations and related contingency measures as not meeting the
applicable requirements of the CAA and PM2.5 implementation
rule. We are also proposing to disapprove the transportation conformity
motor vehicle emissions budgets for the RFP milestone years of 2009 and
2012 and the attainment year of 2014.\11\ We are proposing to
disapprove the attainment demonstration for the additional reason that
it relies too extensively on commitments to emissions reductions in
lieu of fully adopted and submitted rules. Rules that have either not
been adopted in final form or have not been submitted to and approved
by EPA cannot be credited toward the attainment demonstration. Finally,
we are proposing to not grant the State's request to extend the
attainment date for the PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV to April 5,
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ While the attainment date for PM2.5 areas with a
full five-year extension would be April 5 2015, reductions must be
implemented by 2014 to achieve attainment by that date. See 40 CFR
51.1007(b). We refer, therefore, to 2014 as the attainment year and
April 5, 2015 as the attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's analysis and findings are summarized below and are described
in more detail in the TSD for this proposal which is available online
at http://www.regulations.gov in the docket, EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0516, or
from the EPA contact listed at the beginning of this notice.

B. Emissions Inventories

1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
    CAA section 172(c)(3) requires states to submit a ``comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant.'' The PM2.5 implementation rule requires
a state to include direct PM2.5 emissions and emissions of
all PM2.5 precursors in this inventory, even if it has
determined that control of any of these precursors is not necessary for
expeditious attainment. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1) and 72 FR 20586 at 20648.
Direct PM2.5 includes condensable particulate matter. 40 CFR
51.1000. PM2.5 precursors are NOX,
SO2, VOC, and ammonia. Id. The inventories should meet the
data requirements of EPA's Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule
(codified at 40 CFR part 51 subpart A) and include any additional
inventory information needed to support the SIP's attainment
demonstration and (where applicable) RFP demonstration. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1) and (2).
    A baseline emissions inventory is required for the attainment
demonstration and for meeting RFP requirements. As determined on the
date of designation, the base year for this inventory should be the
most recent calendar year for which a complete inventory was required
to be submitted to EPA. The baseline emissions inventory for calendar
year 2002 or other suitable year should be used for attainment planning
and RFP plans for areas initially designated nonattainment for the
PM2.5 NAAQS in 2005. 40 CFR 51.1008(b).
    EPA has provided additional guidance for PM2.5 emissions
inventories in ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of
Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional Haze Regulations,''
November 2005 (EPA-454/R-05-001).
2. Emissions Inventories in the SJV PM2.5 SIP
    The baseline planning inventories for direct PM2.5 and
all PM2.5 precursors for the SJV PM2.5
nonattainment area together with additional documentation for the
inventories are found in Appendix B of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan.
Both average winter day and average annual day baseline inventories are
provided for the year 2005 (the reference year for the air quality

modeling) and each year from 2009 to 2014. These baseline inventories
incorporate reductions from federal, State, and District measures
adopted prior to 2007. 2008 PM2.5 Plan, p. B-1 and 2007
State Strategy, Appendix A, p. 1. A winter inventory is provided
because the majority of high PM2.5 days in the SJV occur
during the winter months between November and February. 2008
PM2.5 Plan, Figures H-4 and H-5.
    Table 1 is a summary of the average annual day inventories of
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors for the
baseline year of 2005 and the projected attainment year of 2014. These
inventories provide the basis for the control measure analysis and the
RFP and attainment demonstrations in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan.
    As a starting point for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan's
inventories, the District used CARB's 2002 base year inventory. An
example of this inventory and CARB's documentation for its inventories
can be found in Appendices A and F, respectively, of the 2007 State
Strategy. The 2002 inventory for the SJV was projected to 2005 and
future years using CARB's California emissions forecasting system
(CEFSv 1.06). 2008 PM2.5 Plan, p. B-1. Both base year and
baseline inventories use the most current version of California's
mobile source emissions model approved by EPA for use in SIPs,
EMFAC2007, for estimating on-road motor vehicle emissions. 73 FR 3464
(January 18, 2008). Off-road inventories were developed using the CARB
off-road model.

         Table 1--San Joaquin Valley Emissions Inventory Summary for PM2.5 and PM2.5 Precursors for the 2005 Base Year and 2014 Attainment Year
                                                     [Annual average day emissions in tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    PM2.5              NOX               SO2               VOC              Ammonia
                Emissions inventory category                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2005     2014     2005     2014     2005     2014     2005     2014     2005      2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Sources..........................................     13.3     14.4     80.1     56.5     20.4     22.0    121.5    129.5      19.8      23.0
Area Sources................................................     51.5     45.2     13.5     10.7      0.9      0.9    140.7    128.0     355.9     423.1
On-Road Mobile Sources......................................     12.1      8.9    327.9    206.7      2.6      0.7     94.8     57.2       6.2       4.8
Off-Road Mobile Sources.....................................      9.0      6.6    153.9    102.2      2.4      0.8     62.7     48.5       0         0
                                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...................................................     86.0     75.0    575.4    376.2     26.4     24.5    419.8    363.2     382.0     451.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Proposed Action on the Emissions Inventories
    We have reviewed the emissions inventories in the 2008
PM2.5 Plan and the inventory methodologies used by SJVAPCD
and CARB for consistency with CAA requirements, the PM2.5
implementation rule, and EPA's guidance. We find that the base year and
projected baseline year inventories are comprehensive, accurate, and
current inventories of actual or projected emissions of
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the SJV
nonattainment area as of the date of their submittal. We propose,
therefore, to approve these inventories as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 172(c)(3), the PM2.5 implementation rule and
applicable EPA guidance. We provide more detail on our review of the
inventories in section II.A. of the TSD.

C. Reasonably Available Control Measures/Reasonably Available Control
Technology Demonstration and Adopted Control Strategy

1. Requirements for RACM/RACT
    CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan ``provide
for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures
[RACM] as expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in
emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through
the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology
[RACT]), and shall provide for attainment of the national primary
ambient air quality standards.'' EPA defines RACM as measures that a
state finds are both reasonably available and contribute to attainment
as expeditiously as practicable in its nonattainment area. Thus, what
constitutes RACM/RACT in a PM2.5 attainment plan is closely
tied to that plan's expeditious attainment demonstration. 40 CFR
51.1010; 72 FR 20586 at 20612. States are required to evaluate RACM/
RACT for direct PM2.5 and all of its attainment plan
precursors. 40 CFR 51.1002(c).
    For PM2.5 attainment plans, EPA is requiring a combined
approach to RACM and RACT under subpart 1 of Part D of the CAA. Subpart
1, unlike subparts 2 and 4, does not identify specific source
categories for which EPA must issue control technology documents or
guidelines, or identify specific source categories for state and EPA
evaluation during attainment plan development. 72 FR 20586 at 20610.
Rather, under subpart 1, EPA considers RACT to be part of an area's
overall RACM obligation. Because of the variable nature of the
PM2.5 problem in different nonattainment areas which may
require states to develop attainment plans that address widely
disparate circumstances, EPA determined not only that states should
have flexibility with respect to RACT and RACM controls but also that
in areas needing significant emission reductions to attain the
standards, RACT/RACM controls on smaller sources may be necessary to
reach attainment as expeditiously as practicable. 72 FR 20586 at 20612,
20615. Thus, under the PM2.5 implementation rule, RACT and
RACM are those reasonably available measures that contribute to
attainment as expeditiously as practicable in the specific
nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010; 72 FR 20586 at 20612.
    Specifically, the PM2.5 implementation rule requires
that attainment plans include the list of measures a state considered
and information sufficient to show that the state met all requirements
for the determination of what constitutes RACM/RACT in a specific
nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010(a). In addition, the rule requires
that the state, in determining whether a particular emissions reduction
measure or set of measures must be adopted as RACM/RACT, consider the
cumulative impact of implementing the available measures and to adopt
as RACM/RACT any potential measures that are reasonably available
considering technological and economic feasibility if, considered
collectively, they would advance the attainment date by one year or
more. Any measures that are necessary to meet these requirements which
are not already either federally promulgated, part of the state's SIP,
or otherwise creditable in SIPs must be submitted in enforceable form
as part of

a state's attainment plan for the area. 72 FR 20586 at 20614.
    A more comprehensive discussion of the RACM/RACT requirement for
PM2.5 attainment plans and EPA's guidance for it can be
found in the PM2.5 implementation rule preamble (72 FR 20586
at 20609-20633) and in section II.D. of the TSD.
2. RACM/RACT Demonstration in the SJV PM[bdi2].[bdi5] SIP
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan and the 2007 State Strategy are the
latest in a series of air quality plans that the District and CARB have
developed to provide for attainment of the federal air quality
standards in the SJV. These planning efforts have resulted in a
comprehensive set of rules and programs that address the vast majority
of emissions sources in the Valley. Many of these District and State
rules are among the most stringent in the nation.
    For the 2008 PM2.5 Plan and the 2007 State Strategy, the
District, CARB, and the local agencies (through the SJV's eight
metropolitan planning organizations (MPO)) each undertook a process to
identify and evaluate potential reasonably available control measures
that could contribute to expeditious attainment of the PM2.5
standards in the SJV. We describe each agency's efforts below.
a. SJVAPCD's RACM/RACT Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
    The District's RACM/RACT analysis, which focuses on stationary and
area source controls, is described in Chapter 6 and Appendix I of the
2008 PM2.5 Plan. To identify potential RACM/RACT, the
District reviewed potential measures from a number of sources including
EPA's list of potential control measures in the PM2.5
implementation rule preamble (72 FR 20586 at 20621), measures in other
nonattainment areas' plans, and measures suggested by the public during
development of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan. 2008 PM2.5
Plan, pp. 6-6 to 6-8. The identified potential measures, as well as
existing District measures, are described by emissions inventory
category in Appendix I. These measures address emissions of direct
PM2.5, NOX and SO2. See 2008
PM2.5 Plan, p. 6-8 and Appendix I. Potential RACM/RACT
controls for VOC or ammonia were not specifically identified or
evaluated.
    From the set of identified potential controls for PM2.5,
NOX, and SO2, the District selected measures for
adoption and implementation based on the technological feasibility and
practicality of emissions controls, the potential magnitude and timing
of emissions reductions, cost effectiveness, and other acceptable
criteria. 2008 PM2.5 Plan, p. 6-7.
    After completing its RACM/RACT analysis for stationary and area
sources under its jurisdiction, the District developed its ``Stationary
Source Regulatory Implementation Schedule'' (2008 PM2.5
Plan, Table 6-2) which gives the schedule for regulatory adoption and
implementation of the selected RACM/RACT measures. The District also
identified a number of source categories for which feasibility studies
would be undertaken to refine the inventory and evaluate potential
controls. These categories and the schedule for studying them are
listed in Table 6-4 of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan.
    In the five years prior to the adoption of the 2008
PM2.5 Plan, the SJVAPCD developed and implemented
comprehensive plans to address attainment of the PM10
standards (2003 PM10 Plan, approved 69 FR 30005 (May 26,
2004)), the 1-hour ozone standards (2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Plan,
approved 75 FR 10420 (March 8, 2010)), and the 8-hour ozone standards
(2007 Ozone Plan, submitted November 16, 2007). These plans for other
NAAQS have resulted in the adoption by the District of many new rules
and revisions to existing rules for stationary and area sources in the
SJV. In general, the SJVAPCD's current rules are equivalent to or more
stringent than those developed by other air districts. In addition to
these stationary and area source measures, the District has also
adopted an indirect source review rule, Rule 9510, to address increased
indirect emissions from new industrial, commercial and residential
developments. See SJVAPCD Rule 9510 ``Indirect Source Review,'' adopted
December 15, 2005. EPA proposed to approve this rule as a revision to
the California SIP on May 21, 2010. 75 FR 28509. The District also
operates incentive grant programs including the Carl Moyer program,\12\
to accelerate turnover of existing stationary and mobile engines to
cleaner units. 2008 PM2.5 Plan, Section 6.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment
Program provides incentive grants for engines, equipment and other
sources of pollution that are cleaner than required by
federal,State, or local rules, providing early or extra emission
reductions. Eligible projects include cleaner on-road, off-road,
marine, locomotive and stationary agricultural pump engines. The
program achieves near-term reductions in emissions of
NOX, PM, and VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, the District identified and
committed to adopting and implementing 13 new control measures for
direct PM2.5, NOX, and/or SO2. In
Table 2 below, we list these measures, which mostly involve
strengthening existing District rules, along with their anticipated and
actual adoption, initial implementation, and final compliance dates. As
can be seen from Table 2, the District has met its intended rulemaking
schedule and has only two rule actions remaining (S-COM-6 and S-COM-
10). On Table 3, we list the expected emissions reductions from each
measure. We note, however, that the District's commitment is only to
the aggregate emissions reductions of direct PM2.5,
NOX, and SO2 shown. See 2008 PM2.5
Plan, p. 6-9 and SJVUAPCD Governing Board Resolution, p. 5. The
reductions listed on Table 3 are those anticipated to be achievable
from each measure at the time the 2008 PM2.5 Plan was
adopted. Actual reductions from each measure once adopted may be
greater or less than those anticipated. Finally, on Table 4 we give the
current SIP submittal and approval status of the measures in the Plan.

                          Table 2--San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2008 PM2.5 Plan Specific Rule Commitments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Year
    Measure number &        District rule     Rule making completion    Actual adoption    Compliance  Actual compliance   reductions     Actual year
      description              number                  date                  date             date            date           start      reductions start
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S-AGR-1................  4103--Open Burning  2nd Q--2010............  April 2010........         2010  June 2010........         2009  2010
S-COM-1................  4320--Advanced      3rd Q--2008............  October 2008......         2012  July 2012 to              2012  July 2011
                          Emissions                                                                     January 2014.
                          Reductions for
                          Boilers, Steam
                          Generators and
                          Process Heaters
                          (> 5 MMBtu/hr).
S-COM-2................  4307--Boilers,      3rd Q--2008............  October 2008......         2012  July 2010 to              2012  July 2010
                          Steam Generators                                                              January 2016.
                          and Process
                          Heaters (2 to 5
                          MMBtu/hr).

S-COM-3................  4308--Boilers,      4th Q--2009............  December 2009.....         2011  January 2011.....         2011  January 2011
                          Steam Generators
                          and Process
                          Heaters (0.075 to
                          < 2 MM Btu/hr).
S-COM-5................  4703--Stationary    3rd Q--2007............  September 2007....         2012  January 2012.....         2012  July 2009
                          Gas Turbines.
S-COM-6................  Rule 4702--         4th Q--2010............  Scheduled for              2012  TBD..............         2012  TBD
                          Reciprocating                                December 2010.
                          Internal
                          Combustion
                          Engines.
S-COM-7................  4354--Glass         3rd Q--2008............  October 2008......         2009  PM10 & SOx--              2009  PM10 & SOx--June
                          Melting Furnaces.                           Under revision....                January 2011.                   2009
                                                                                NOX limits--                    NOX limits--
                                                                                January 2014-                   January 2011
                                                                                2018.
S-COM-9................  4902--Residential   1st Q--2009............  March 2009........    Attrition  Attrition........         2011  January 2010
                          Water Heaters.
S-COM-10...............  4905--Natural Gas-  4nd Q--2014............  TBD...............    Attrition  TBD..............         2015  TBD
                          Fired, Fan Type
                          Residential
                          Central Furnaces.
S-COM-14...............  4901--Wood Burning  3rd Q--2009............  October 2008......         2010  2008.............         2010  2008
                          Fireplaces and
                          Wood Burning
                          Heaters.
S-IND-9................  4692--Commercial    2nd Q--2009............  September 2009....         2011  January 2011.....         2011  January 2011
                          Charbroiling.
S-IND-21...............  4311--Flares......  2nd Q--2009............  June 2009.........         2010  July 2011........         2010  July 2011
M-TRAN-1...............  9410--Employer      4th Q--2009............  December 2009.....         2012  January 2012.....         2012  January 2012
                          Based Trip
                          Reduction Program.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2008 PM2.5 Plan, Table 6-2. ``Actual'' information is taken from the individual rules as adopted or revised.

         Table 3--San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Estimated Emissions Reductions for 2008 PM2.5 Plan Specific Rule Commitments
                                                              (tons per average annual day)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                NOX Emissions Reductions
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2009            2010            2011            2012            2013            2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S-AGR-1........................  4103--Open Burning.....            1.21            1.95            2.68            2.67            2.66            2.65
S-COM-1........................  4320--Advanced                        0               0               0            1.49            1.50            1.52
                                  Emissions Reductions
                                  for Boilers, Steam
                                  Generators and Process
                                  Heaters (> 5 MMBtu/hr).
S-COM-3........................  4308--Boilers, Steam                  0               0            0.12            0.27            0.39            0.55
                                  Generators and Process
                                  Heaters (0.075 to < 2
                                  MMBtu/hr).
S-COM-5........................  4703--Stationary Gas                  0               0               0            2.21            2.21            2.21
                                  Turbines.
S-COM-7........................  4354--Glass Melting                1.22            1.25            1.18            1.60            1.67            1.58
                                  Furnaces.
S-COM-9........................  4902--Residential Water               0               0            0.20            0.25            0.32            0.40
                                  Heaters.
S-COM-14.......................  4901--Wood Burning                    0            0.04            0.08            0.07            0.07            0.06
                                  Fireplaces and Wood
                                  Burning Heaters.
    Commitment to Total NOX      .......................            2.43            3.24            4.26            8.56            8.82            8.97
     Reductions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               PM2.5 Emissions Reductions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S-AGR-1........................  4103--Open Burning.....            1.60            2.57            3.53            3.52            3.50            3.49
S-COM-1........................  4320--Advanced                        0               0               0            0.23            0.24            0.24
                                  Emissions Reductions
                                  for Boilers, Steam
                                  Generators and Process
                                  Heaters (> 5 MMBtu/hr).
S-COM-14.......................  4901--Wood Burning                    0            0.39            0.76            0.73            0.71            0.69
                                  Fireplaces and Wood
                                  Burning Heaters.
S-IND-9........................  4692--Commercial                      0               0            2.17            2.21            2.25            2.28
                                  Charbroiling.
    Commitment to Total PM2.5    .......................            1.60            2.96        4.46 \1\            6.69            6.70            6.70
     Reductions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                SO2 Emissions Reductions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S-AGR-1........................  4103--Open Burning.....            0.06            0.10            0.14            0.14            0.14            0.14
S-COM-1........................  4320--Advanced                        0               0               0            0.76            0.76            0.76
                                  Emissions Reductions
                                  for Boilers, Steam
                                  Generators and Process
                                  Heaters (> 5 MMBtu/hr).
S-COM-14.......................  4901--Wood Burning                    0            0.01            0.02            0.02            0.02            0.02
                                  Fireplaces and Wood
                                  Burning Heaters.
M-TRAN-1.......................  9410--Employer Based                TBD             TBD             TBD             TBD             TBD             TBD
                                  Trip Reduction
                                  Programs.
    Commitment to Total SO2      .......................            0.06            0.11            0.16            0.92            0.92            0.92
     Reductions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This column sums to 6.46 tpd. Because the 4.46 tpd figure is given in Table 6-3b in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan and used in the attainment demonstration in
  Table 9-1 in the Plan, we are assuming that it reflects the District's intended emissions reductions commitment.

 Table 4--SIP Submittal and Approval Status of SJVAPCD Rules in the 2008
                               PM2.5 Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 4103--Open Burning (Phase  Not submitted....  Most current revision
 IV).                                               of rule approved:
                                                    May 17, 2007 at 74
                                                    FR 57907 (November
                                                    10, 2009)
4320--Advanced Emissions        Submitted........  Submittal date: March
 Reductions for Boilers, Steam                      17, 2009 Submittal
 Generators and Process                             found complete:
 Heaters (> 5 MMBtu/hr).                            April 20, 2009 New
                                                    rule
Rule 4307 Boilers, Steam        Approved.........  75 FR 1715 (January
 Generators and Process                             13, 2010)
 Heaters (2 to 5 MMBtu/hr).
Rule 4308 Boilers, Steam        Submitted........  Submittal date: May
 Generators and Process                             17, 2010 Submittal
 Heaters (0.075 to < 2 MMBtu/                       found complete: June
 hr).                                               8, 2010 Most current
                                                    revision of rule
                                                    approved: October
                                                    20, 2005 at 72 FR
                                                    29887 (May 30, 2007)
Rule 4703 Stationary Gas        Approved.........  74 FR 53888 (October
 Turbines.                                          21, 2009)
Rule 4702 Reciprocating         Under              Most current revision
 Internal Combustion Engines     development,       of rule approved:
 (2010 revisions).               expected           January 18, 2007 73
                                 adoption           FR 1819 (January 10,
                                 December 2010.     2008)
Rule 4354 Glass Melting         Not Submitted....  Most current revision
 Furnaces (2008 revisions).                         of rule approved:
                                                    August 17, 2006 at
                                                    72 FR 41894 (August
                                                    1, 2007)
Rule 4902 Residential Water     Approved.........  75 FR 24408 (May 5,
 Heaters.                                           2010)
4905--Natural Gas-Fired, Fan    Adoption           Most current version
 Type Residential Central        scheduled for      of the rule
 Furnaces.                       2014.              approved: October
                                                    20, 2005 at 72 FR
                                                    29886 (May 30, 2007)
Rule 4901 Wood Burning          Approved.........  74 FR 57907 (November
 Fireplaces and Wood Burning                        10, 2009)
 Heaters.
Rule 4692 Commercial            Submitted........  Submittal date: May
 Charbroiling.                                      17, 2010
                                                   Submittal found
                                                    complete: June 8,
                                                    2010
                                                   Most current revision
                                                    of rule approved:
                                                    March 21, 2002 at 68
                                                    FR 33005 (June 3,
                                                    2003)
Rule 4311 Flares..............  Submitted........  Submittal date:
                                                    January 10, 2010
                                                   Submittal found
                                                    complete: February
                                                    4, 2010
                                                   Most current revision
                                                    of rule approved:
                                                    June 20, 2002 at 68
                                                    FR 8835 (February
                                                    26, 2003)
Rule 9410 Employer Based Trip   Submitted........  Submittal date: May
 Reduction Program.                                 17, 2010
                                                   Submittal found
                                                    complete: June 8,
                                                    2010 New rule.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. CARB's RACM Analysis and Adopted Control Strategy
    Source categories for which CARB has primary responsibility for
reducing emissions in California include most new and existing on- and
off-road engines and vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and consumer
products. In addition, California has unique authority under CAA
section 209 (subject to a waiver by EPA) to adopt and implement new
emission standards for many categories of on-road vehicles and engines
and new and in-use off-road vehicles and engines.
    Given the need for significant emissions reductions from mobile and
area sources to meet the NAAQS in California nonattainment areas, the
State of California has been a leader in the development of some of the
most stringent control measures nationwide for on-road and off-road
mobile sources and the fuels that power them. These standards have
reduced new car emissions by 99 percent and new truck emissions by 90
percent from uncontrolled levels. 2007 State Strategy, p. 37. The State
is also working with EPA on goods movement activities and is
implementing programs to reduce emissions from ship auxiliary engines,
locomotives, harbor craft and new cargo handling equipment. In
addition, the State has standards for lawn and garden equipment,
recreational vehicles and boats, and other off-road sources that
require newly manufactured equipment to be 80-98 percent cleaner than
their uncontrolled counterparts. Id. Finally, the State has adopted
many measures that focus on achieving reductions from in-use mobile
sources that include more stringent inspection and maintenance
requirements in California's Smog Check program, truck and bus idling
restrictions, and various incentive programs. Since 1994 alone, the
State has taken more than 45 rulemaking actions and achieved most of
the emissions reductions needed for attainment in the State's
nonattainment areas. See 2007 State Strategy, pp. 36-40. As is noted in
the 2007 State Strategy, EPA has approved California's mobile source
program as representing best available control measures. See 2007 State
Strategy, Appendix G, 69 FR 5412 (February 4, 2004) and 69 FR 30006
(May 26, 2004) (proposed and final approval of SJV 2003 PM10
Plan).
    CARB developed its proposed 2007 State Strategy after an extensive
public consultation process to identify potential SIP measures. This
process is described in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan at 7-11.\13\
From this process, CARB identified and committed to propose 15 new
defined measures. These measures focus on cleaning up the in-use fleet
as well as increasing the stringency of emissions standards for a
number of engine categories, fuels, and consumer products. Many, if not
most, of these measures are being proposed for adoption for the first
time anywhere in the nation. They build on CARB's already comprehensive
program described above that addresses emissions from all types of
mobile sources and consumer products, through both regulations and
incentive programs. See Appendix A of the TSD. Table 5 below lists the
new defined measures in the 2007 State Strategy, which also include one
measure each from the California Bureau of Automotive Repair and the
California Department of Pesticide Regulation. As shown in this table,
the State has adopted many of the measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ More information on this public process including
presentations from the workshops and symposium that proceeded
adoption of the 2007 State Strategy can be found at http://
www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm.

          Table 5--2007 State Strategy Defined Measures Scheduled for Consideration and Current Status
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Primary area  (SC  and/
       Defined state measure                or  SJV)              Adoption year             Current status
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smog Check Improvements............  Both..................  2007-2008.............  Elements approved 75 FR
                                                                                38023 (July 1, 2010).
Expanded Vehicle Retirement........  Both..................  2008-2014.............  Adopted CARB June 2009;
                                                                                Bureau of Automotive
                                                                                Repair September 2010.
Revisions to Reformulated Gasoline   Both..................  2007..................  Approved, see 75 FR 26653
 Program.                                                                             (May 2, 2010).
Cleaner In-use Heavy Duty Trucks...  Both..................  2008..................  Adopted 2008, pending
                                                                                revisions.
Auxiliary Ship Cold Ironing and      SC....................  2007-2008.............  Adopted December 2007.
 Other Clean Technologies.
Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuels  SC....................  Fuel: 2007............  Adopted July 2007.
                                                             Engines: 2009.........
Port Truck Modernization...........  SC....................  2007-2008.............  Adopted December 2007 and
                                                                                December 2008.
Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner  Both..................  2007-2008.............  In progress.
 Locomotives.
Clean Up Existing Harbor Crafts....  SC....................  2007..................  Adopted November 2007,
                                                                                revised June 2010.
Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Engines....  Both..................  2007..................  Adopted 2007, pending
                                                                                revisions.
Cleaner In-Use Agricultural          SJV...................  2009..................  On-going through incentive
 Equipment.                                                                           grant programs.
New Emissions Standards for          Both..................  2009-2010.............  Partial adoption, 2008;
 Recreational Boats.                                                                  additional regulation in
                                                                                public review.
Expanded Off-Road Recreational       Both..................  By 2010...............  Adopted November 2008.
 Vehicle Emissions Standards.
Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above    Both..................  2007..................  Adopted June 2007.
 Ground Storage Tanks.
Additional Evaporative Emissions     Both..................  By 2010...............  Partial adoption, 2008.
 Standards.
Consumer Products Program (I & II).  Both..................  2008 & 2010-2012......  Phase I--Approved 74 FR
                                                                                57074 (November 4, 2009).
Department of Pesticide Regulation.  SJV...................  2008..................  Adopted 2008, amended 2009.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SC = South Coast Air Basin. Source: 2009 State Strategy Status Report, p. 23 (footnotes in original not
  included)

    Appendix A of the TSD includes a list of all measures adopted by
CARB between 1990 and the beginning of 2007. These measures, reductions
from which are reflected in the Plan's baseline inventories, fall into
two categories: Measures that are subject to a waiver of Federal pre-
emption under CAA section 209 (section 209 waiver measures or waiver
measures) and those for which the State is not required to obtain a
waiver (non-waiver measures). Emissions reductions from waiver measures
are fully creditable in attainment and RFP demonstrations and may be
used to meet other CAA requirements, such as contingency measures. See
EPA's proposed approval of the SJV 1-Hour Ozone Plan at 74 FR 33933,
33938 (July 14, 2009) and final approval at 75 FR 10420 (March 8,
2010). The State's baseline non-waiver measures have generally all been
approved by EPA into the SIP and as such are fully creditable for
meeting CAA requirements.
    In addition to the State's commitments to propose defined measures,
the 2007 State Strategy includes enforceable commitments for direct
PM2.5, NOX, and VOC emissions reductions from
mobile source categories that are crucial for attainment of the
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley. For the SJV, the 2007
State Strategy includes State commitments to achieve 5 tpd of direct
PM2.5, 76 tpd of NOX, and 23 tpd of VOC
reductions. See 2007 State Strategy, p. 63 and CARB Resolution 07-28,
Attachment B, p. 6. The 2007 State Strategy indicates that the State
expects to achieve these emissions reductions in the San Joaquin Valley
by the projected attainment year of 2014 from the measures listed in
Table 5 or other similar measures. In the 2007 State Strategy, CARB
provides an estimated emissions reduction for each measure to show
that, when considered together, these measures can meet the total
commitment. CARB states, however, that its enforceable commitment is to
achieve the aggregate emissions reductions for each pollutant by the
given dates and not for a specific level of reductions from any
specific measure. See 2007 State Strategy, p. 58. A summary of the
estimates from the proposed measures is provided in Table 6 below.
    As mentioned above, CARB's commitment is also to propose specific
new measures that are identified and defined in the 2007 Strategy
State. See 2007 State Strategy, pp. 64-65 and 2009 State Strategy
revisions, pp. 22-23.

   Table 6--Expected Emissions Reductions from Defined Measures in the 2007 State Strategy for the San Joaquin
                                            Valley 2014 Tons Per Day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Measure                                   PM2.5            NOX             VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smog Check Improvements (BAR)...................................            0.05             3.3             2.9
Expanded Vehicle Retirement.....................................            0.01             0.5             0.7
Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program..................              --              --             2.9
Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks................................             3.6            61.4             6.4

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives.............             0.2             7.2             0.5
Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (>25hp).......................             0.8             3.7             0.9
Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment...........................             NYQ             NYQ             NYQ
New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats...................              --             0.1             1.3
Expanded Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Emissions Standards......              --              --             2.2
Consumer Products Program.......................................              --              --             3.2
Pesticides......................................................              --              --             2.5
Totals:.........................................................               5              76              23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2009 State Strategy Status Report, p. 6. Only defined measures with reductions in the SJV are shown
  here.
NYQ = Not yet quantified.

c. The Local Jurisdictions' RACM Analysis
    The local jurisdictions' RACM analysis was conducted by the SJV's
eight MPOs.\14\ This analysis focused on potential NOX
emissions reductions from transportation control measures (TCM). TCMs
are, in general, measures designed to reduce emissions from on-road
motor vehicles through reductions in vehicle miles traveled or traffic
congestion. The analysis' results are described in Chapter 7 (pp. 7-8
to 7-11) of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan. It addressed NOX
but not direct PM2.5, SO2, or VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ These eight MPOs represent the eight counties in the San
Joaquin Valley nonattainment area: The San Joaquin Council of
Governments, the Stanislaus Council of Governments, the Merced
County Association of Governments, the Madera County Transportation
Commission, the Council of Fresno County Governments, Kings County
Association of Governments, the Tulare County Association of
Governments and the Kern Council of Governments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, the SJV MPOs reviewed and
updated the RACM analysis they performed for the SJV 2007 [8-hour]
Ozone Plan, based on EPA's guidance in the preamble to the
PM2.5 implementation rule. For the 2007 Ozone Plan, they
developed a local RACM strategy after an extensive evaluation of
potential RACM for advancing the 8-hour ozone standard attainment date.
After reviewing the 2007 Ozone Plan's local RACM analysis, EPA's
suggested RACM, recently-developed plans from other areas, and the
potential emission reductions available from the implementation of TCMs
in the SJV, the MPOs determined that there were no additional local
RACM for NOX, beyond those measures already adopted, that
could advance attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV. 2008
PM2.5 Plan, p. 7-11.
3. Proposed Actions on RACM/RACT Demonstration and Adopted Control
Strategy
    Under the PM2.5 implementation rule, RACM/RACT are the
set of measures necessary for expeditious attainment. The measures must
address emissions of PM2.5 and all PM2.5
attainment plan precursors that are necessary for such expeditious
attainment. Thus, in order for a PM2.5 plan to demonstrate
that it provides for RACM/RACT, it must also demonstrate that it
provides for expeditious attainment. 72 FR 20586 at 20612-20623. As
discussed in section IV.D.2. below, we are proposing to disapprove the
air quality modeling in the 2008 PM2.5 plan because there is
insufficient documentation for us to determine its adequacy. Air
quality modeling establishes the level of emissions reductions needed
for attainment in an area. Thus, uncertainties about the adequacy of
the air quality modeling result in uncertainties regarding the
emissions reductions needed for attainment. Without a reliable estimate
of the emission reductions needed for attainment, we are unable to
determine if the measures in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan include all
RACM/RACT that will provide for attainment of the PM2.5
NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley as expeditiously as practicable.
    In addition, as described in section IV.D.3. below, EPA is
proposing to determine that VOC is a PM2.5 attainment plan
precursor in the SJV nonattainment area. Under the PM2.5
implementation rule, States must address all PM2.5
attainment plan precursors in their RACM/RACT analyses. See 40 CFR
51.1002(c)(3). Neither the District nor the local jurisdictions
(through the MPOs) evaluated potential RACM/RACT for VOC emission
sources.
    For these reasons, EPA is proposing to find that the 2008
PM2.5 Plan, together with the revised 2007 State Strategy,
does not provide for the implementation of RACM/RACT as required by CAA
section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1010 and to disapprove the SJV
PM2.5 SIP's RACM/RACT demonstration. It appears, however,
that the State, District, and local jurisdictions have identified and
otherwise provided for the implementation of a comprehensive set of
measures that are among the most stringent in the nation and, should
the District and State correct the deficiencies in the attainment
demonstration and appropriately address VOC as an attainment plan
precursor in its RACM/RACT demonstration, we may be able to approve the
SIP's RACM/RACT demonstration.
    Because they will strengthen the California SIP, we are proposing
to approve the SJVAPCD's commitments to adopt and implement specific
control measures on the schedule identified in Table 6-2 (as amended
June 15, 2010) in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, to the extent that
these commitments have not yet been fulfilled, and to achieve specific
aggregate emissions reductions of direct PM2.5,
NOX and SOx by specific years as given in Table
6-3 of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan.
    We are also proposing to approve, as a SIP strengthening measure,
CARB's commitments to propose certain defined measures, as given on
page 23 of the 2009 State Strategy Status Report, and to achieve
aggregate emissions reductions of 5 tpd direct PM2.5, 76 tpd
NOx, and 23 tpd VOC in the San Joaquin Valley by 2014 as
given on page 21 of the 2009 State Strategy Status Report.

D. Attainment Demonstration

1. Requirements for Attainment Demonstrations
    CAA section 172 requires a State to submit a plan for each of its
nonattainment areas that demonstrates attainment of the applicable
ambient air quality standard as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than the specified attainment date. Under the PM2.5
implementation rule, this demonstration should consist of four parts:
    (1) Technical analyses that locate, identify, and quantify sources
of

emissions that are contributing to violations of the PM2.5
NAAQS;
    (2) Analyses of future year emissions reductions and air quality
improvement resulting from already-adopted national, state, and local
programs and from potential new state and local measures to meet the
RACM/RACT and RFP requirements in the area;
    (3) Adopted emissions reduction measures with schedules for
implementation; and
    (4) Contingency measures required under section 172(c)(9) of the
CAA.
    See 40 CFR 51.1007; 72 FR 20586 at 20605.
    The requirements for the first two parts are described in the
sections on emissions inventories and RACM/RACT above (sections IV.B.
and IV.C.) and in the sections on air quality modeling,
PM2.5 precursors, extension of the attainment date, and
attainment demonstration that follow immediately below. Requirements
for the third and fourth parts are described in the sections on the
control strategy and contingency measures (sections IV.C. and IV.F.),
respectively.
2. Air Quality Modeling in the SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan
    The PM2.5 implementation rule requires states to submit
an attainment demonstration based on modeling results. Specifically, 40
CFR 51.1007(a) states:

    For any area designated as nonattainment for the
PM2.5 NAAQS, the State must submit an attainment
demonstration showing that the area will attain the annual and 24-
hour standards as expeditiously as practicable. The demonstration
must meet the requirements of Sec.  51.112 and Appendix W of this
part and must include inventory data, modeling results, and emission
reduction analyses on which the State has based its projected
attainment date. The attainment date justified by the demonstration
must be consistent with the requirements of Sec.  51.1004(a). The
modeled strategies must be consistent with requirements in Sec.
51.1009 for RFP and in Sec.  51.1010 for RACT and RACM. The
attainment demonstration and supporting air quality modeling should
be consistent with EPA's PM2.5 modeling guidance.\15\

    \15\ EPA's modeling guidance can be found in ``Guideline on Air
Quality Models'' in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W and ``Guidance on the
Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air
Quality Goals for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and
Regional Haze'', EPA-454/B-07-002, April 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

See also, 72 FR 20586 at 20665.
    Air quality modeling is used to establish emissions attainment
targets, the combination of emissions of PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors that the area can accommodate without
exceeding the NAAQS, and to assess whether the proposed control
strategy will result in attainment of the NAAQS. Air quality modeling
is performed for a base year and compared to air quality monitoring
data in order to determine model performance. Once the performance is
determined to be acceptable, future year changes to the emissions
inventory are simulated to determine the relationship between emissions
reductions and changes in ambient air quality throughout the air basin.
    The procedures for modeling PM2.5 as part of an
attainment SIP are contained in EPA's ``Guidance on the Use of Models
and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals
for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and Regional Haze.'' A
brief description of the modeling in 2008 PM2.5 Plan and our
concerns regarding it follows. More detailed information about the
modeling is available in section II.D. of the TSD.
    CARB and the District jointly performed the air quality modeling
for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan. Significant time, money, and effort
by CARB, the District, and many others have gone into preparing the air
quality modeling to support the attainment demonstration in the 2008
PM2.5 Plan for the San Joaquin Valley, including support for
the multi-million dollar California Regional Particulate Air Quality
Study (CRPAQS). CRPAQS is a cooperative effort involving California
cities; State and local and air pollution control agencies, federal
agencies, industry groups, academics, and contractors. Field data for
CRPAQS were collected during the 14 months from December 1999 through
February 2001 and included short-term, intensive monitoring during the
fall and winter. The study's design placed emphasis on collecting
sufficient continuous air quality and meteorological data, both at the
surface and aloft, to support receptor and photochemical modeling. Data
and modeling results based on the CRPAQS study provided solid
underpinnings for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan.
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan uses multiple modeling analyses to
demonstrate attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV. It
mainly relies on several variants of an approach based on receptor
modeling for the annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This approach begins
with Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) modeling, which distinguishes the
ambient PM2.5 contributions of several broad emissions
source categories based on how they match the chemical species
components of PM2.5 measurements. The CMB results are then
refined with emissions inventory data to distinguish additional source
categories; an area of influence analysis to better reflect particular
sources affecting a monitor; and information from past photochemical
modeling to assess how secondarily-formed PM2.5 will respond
to changes in precursor emissions. Several variants of this approach
were used with CMB results from different locations and different base
case years. This modeling only addresses the annual PM2.5
standard.
    The receptor modeling approaches are supplemented with an
attainment demonstration using photochemical modeling with the
Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model. This modeling
incorporates data collected during CRPAQS. The CMAQ modeling addresses
both the annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards.
    EPA recommends that States prepare modeling/analysis protocols as
part of their modeled attainment demonstrations. Guidance, p. 133. The
Guidance at pp. 133-134 describes the topics to be addressed in this
modeling protocol. A modeling protocol should detail and formalize the
procedures for conducting all phases of the modeling analysis, such as
describing the background and objectives, creating a schedule and
organizational structure, developing the input data, conducting model
performance evaluations, interpreting modeling results, describing
procedures for using the model to demonstrate whether proposed
strategies are sufficient to attain the NAAQS, and producing
documentation to be submitted for EPA Regional Office review and
approval prior to actual modeling.
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan's modeling protocol is contained in
Appendix F and includes descriptions of both the receptor modeling
approaches and the photochemical modeling. Additional description of
the photochemical modeling is also covered in Appendix G, and also in
the additional appendix entitled ``Regional Model Performance
Analysis'' (RMPA). The protocol covers all of the topics recommended in
the Guidance, except that it does not identify how modeling and other
analyses will be archived or made available to the public. See
Guidance, p. 117.
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan's air quality model performance is
discussed in the RMPA, starting at p. 6. Overall, modeling performance
is not sufficiently documented for EPA to fully evaluate it. While
substantial effort went into preparing the materials for model
evaluation, the 2008 PM2.5 Plan has relatively little
discussion of the evaluation results and no discussion of sensitivity
or diagnostic testing, both of

which are necessary for confidence in the model and the performance
statistics presented. Without such testing, it cannot be determined if
the model is adequately simulating the physical and chemical processes
leading to PM2.5 in the atmosphere and if the model will
respond in a scientifically reasonable way to emissions changes. Also
insufficiently documented are the Plan's deviations from EPA's guidance
on performing the Speciated Modeled Attainment Test (SMAT). Although,
the Plan cites several factors as justifying such deviations (e.g., the
prevalence of ammonia, the dominance of ammonium nitrate, the effect of
substantial controls on fugitive dust and direct carbon emissions (p.
G-10 and p. 3-20)), it does not provide sufficiently detailed
explanations for EPA to understand exactly what these deviations are or
to judge whether these deviations are acceptable. Another example of
insufficient documentation is that the Relative Reduction Factors,
which are the key results from the model for use in the attainment
test, and details of their calculation, are not presented in the 2008
PM2.5 Plan. Given this lack of documentation, EPA cannot
determine at this time whether the attainment tests are adequate and
meet EPA guidance.
    In addition to a modeled attainment demonstration, which focuses on
locations with an air quality monitor, EPA's Guidance requires an
unmonitored area analysis. This analysis is intended to ensure that a
control strategy leads to reductions in PM2.5 at other
locations that have no monitor but that might have baseline (and
future) ambient PM2.5 levels exceeding the NAAQS. The
unmonitored area analysis uses a combination of model output and
ambient data to identify areas that might exceed the NAAQS if monitors
were located there. The analysis should include, at a minimum, all
counties designated nonattainment and the counties surrounding the
nonattainment area. In order to examine unmonitored areas in all
portions of the modeling domain, EPA recommends use of interpolated
spatial fields of ambient data combined with gridded modeled outputs.
Guidance, p. 29.
    In lieu of an unmonitored area analysis, the 2008 PM2.5
Plan section entitled ``Unmonitored peaks'' presents a simple screening
analysis. This consists of a filled concentration contour plot (Figure
3 on p. G-20), and the observation that ``there are no areas with steep
gradients that would result in higher design values than those measured
at monitors.'' 2008 PM2.5 Plan, p. G-15. This analysis
departs significantly from the procedures recommended in the Guidance
and does not adequately substitute for an unmonitored area analysis
consistent with the procedures recommended in the Guidance. Without an
unmonitored area analysis, EPA cannot determine whether emission
reductions in the Plan are sufficient for attainment of the NAAQS at
locations without an air quality monitor.
    In summary, the 2008 PM2.5 Plan lacks or fails to
adequately document several significant elements of a modeling
demonstration including: a provision for access to the underlying
modeling data, the sensitivity and diagnostic testing of the air
quality model, a discussion of the relative reduction factors, and an
unmonitored area analysis. While the modeling appears to be essentially
sound, the documentation provided in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan is
not sufficient for EPA to fully evaluate its adequacy. An attainment
demonstration must demonstrate, i.e. document with evidence and
analyses, that the controls will result in attainment. Without
sufficient documentation, the Plan states but does not adequately
demonstrate that it provides for attainment of the PM2.5
standards in the SJV. Although it is not necessary to provide
comprehensive documentation on every single facet of a modeling
analysis, the level of documentation in the Plan falls significantly
short of what is necessary for a reliable attainment demonstration, as
described in the EPA's modeling guidance. Given the lack of
documentation and the absence of an unmonitored area analysis, EPA
cannot at this time propose to approve the Plan's air quality modeling.
We also cannot determine at this time that the modeling provides an
adequate basis for the RACM/RACT, RFP, and attainment demonstrations in
the Plan.
3. PM2.5 Attainment Plan Precursors
    EPA recognizes NOX, SO2, VOCs, and ammonia as
the main precursor gases associated with the formation of secondary
PM2.5 in the ambient air. These gas-phase PM2.5
precursors undergo chemical reactions in the atmosphere to form
secondary particulate matter. Formation of secondary PM2.5
depends on numerous factors including the concentrations of precursors;
the concentrations of other gaseous reactive species; atmospheric
conditions including solar radiation, temperature, and relative
humidity; and the interactions of precursors with preexisting particles
and with cloud or fog droplets. 72 FR 20586 at 20589.
    As discussed previously, a state must submit emissions inventories
for each of the four PM2.5 precursor pollutants. 72 FR 20586
at 20589 and 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1). However, the overall contribution of
different precursors to PM2.5 formation and the
effectiveness of alternative potential control measures will vary by
area. Thus, the precursors that a state should regulate to attain the
PM2.5 NAAQS could also vary to some extent from area to
area. 72 FR 20586 at 20589.
    In the PM2.5 implementation rule, EPA did not make a
finding that all potential PM2.5 precursors must be
controlled in each specific nonattainment area. See 72 FR 20586 at
20589. Instead, for reasons explained in the rule's preamble, a state
must evaluate control measures for sources of SO2 in
addition to sources of direct PM2.5 in all nonattainment
areas. 40 CFR 51.1002(c) and (c)(1). A state must also evaluate control
measures for sources of NOX unless the state and/or EPA
determine that control of NOX emissions would not
significantly reduce PM2.5 concentrations in the specific
nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(2). In contrast, EPA has
determined in the PM2.5 implementation rule that a state
does not need to address controls for sources of VOC and ammonia unless
the state and/or EPA make a technical demonstration that such controls
would significantly contribute to reducing PM2.5
concentrations in the nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(3) and (4).
Such a demonstration is required ``if the administrative record related
to development of its SIP shows that the presumption is not technically
justified for that area.'' 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(5).
    ``Significantly contributes'' in this context means that a
significant reduction in emissions of the precursor from sources in the
area would be projected to provide a significant reduction in
PM2.5 concentrations in the area. 72 FR 20586 at 20590.
Although EPA did not establish a quantitative test for determining what
constitutes a significant change, EPA noted that even relatively small
reductions in PM2.5 levels are estimated to result in
worthwhile public health benefits. Id.
    EPA further explained that a technical demonstration to reverse the
presumption for NOX, VOC, or ammonia in any area could
consider the emissions inventory, speciation data, modeling
information, or other special studies such as monitoring of additional
compounds, receptor modeling, or special monitoring studies. 72 FR
20586 at 20596-20597. These factors could indicate that the emissions
or ambient

concentration contributions of a precursor, or the sensitivity of
ambient concentrations to changes in precursor emissions, differs for a
specific nonattainment area from the presumption for that precursor in
the PM2.5 implementation rule.
    The SJV 2008 PM2.5 Plan does not explicitly identify the
pollutants that have been selected as PM2.5 attainment plan
precursors as defined in 40 CFR 51.1000. The Plan addresses only
NOX and SO2 in the RFP and attainment
demonstrations and in the District's RACM/RACT analysis, and thereby
implicitly identifies NOX and SO2, but not VOC or
ammonia, as attainment plan precursors. It does include supporting
documentation for the inclusion of NOX as an attainment plan
precursor and for the exclusion of ammonia. However, as discussed
below, it does not fully evaluate the impact of controlling VOC as a
precursor for PM2.5 attainment, even though other
information in the Plan indicates that controlling VOC, in addition to
SO2 and NOX, may contribute significantly to
reductions in ambient PM2.5 levels in the SJV.
    As mentioned above, ambient contribution and ambient sensitivity to
emissions changes may both be considered in determining whether the
presumption for an attainment plan precursor should be reversed. The
2008 PM2.5 Plan contains numerous qualitative statements
that San Joaquin Valley's ambient PM2.5 levels are dominated
by ammonium nitrate, and that NOX reductions are more
effective at reducing ambient PM2.5 than reductions in the
other precursors. Most of those statements are in Chapter 3 and
Appendix F, and are based on excerpts of findings from CRPAQS. Several
of the cited CRPAQS documents are available at CARB's ``Central
California Air Quality Studies'' Web site (at http://www.arb.ca.gov/
airways).
    For the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008
PM2.5 Plan contains some qualitative descriptions of
precursor ambient contributions. For example, the 2008 PM2.5
Plan states on p. 2-8 that annual concentrations are driven by
wintertime concentrations and further, that the highest short term
concentrations are driven by ammonium nitrate, as found in the CRPAQS
study:

    For most of the sites within the SJV, 50-75% of the annual average
PM2.5 concentration could be attributed to a high
PM2.5 period occurring from November to January. At non-
urban sites, the elevated PM2.5 was driven by secondary
[ammonium nitrate].\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Quote from ``Initial Data Analysis of Field Program
Measurements,'' DRI Document No. 2497, July 29, 2005; Judith C.
Chow, L.W. Antony Chen, Douglas H. Lowenthal, Prakash Doraiswamy,
Kihong Park, Steven D. Kohl, Dana L. Trimble, John G. Watson, Desert
Research Institute.

    There are also quantitative data in the Plan's Appendix G (p. G-21,
Table 2) and, projected to 2014, in the Receptor Modeling Documentation
(RMD). Ammonium nitrate for 2000 monitored data ranges from 24-36
percent of total PM2.5, and if projected to 2014, ranges
from 36-51 percent, confirming the importance of NOX, one
source of the nitrate in ammonium nitrate, as a precursor that
significantly contributes to annual PM2.5 levels in the SJV.
    In addition to composition data, ambient sensitivity to emissions
changes can also be a consideration in determining which pollutants
should be regulated in the attainment plan for a specific area. For
ammonium nitrate PM2.5, which is formed from both ammonia
and NOX, a key issue is whether the control of either or
both precursors would be effective at reducing ambient PM2.5
concentrations. Among the findings cited in the 2008 PM2.5
Plan that address this issue are that:

    Particulate [ammonium nitrate] concentrations are limited by the
rate of [nitric acid] formation, rather than by the availability of
[ammonia].

and

    Comparisons of ammonia and nitric acid concentrations show that
ammonia is far more abundant than nitric acid, which indicates that
ammonium nitrate formation is limited by the availability of nitric
acid, rather than ammonia * * *. This study's analyses suggest that
reductions in NOX emissions will be more effective in
reducing secondary ammonium nitrate aerosol concentrations than
reductions in ammonia emissions. Reductions in VOC emissions will
reduce secondary organic aerosol concentrations and may reduce
ammonium nitrate. * * * The results indicate ammonium nitrate
formation is ultimately controlled by NOX emission rates
and the other species, including VOCs and background ozone, which
control the rate of NOX oxidation in winter, rather than
by ammonia emissions.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Quote from Lurmann, F. et. al., 2006, ``Processes
Influencing Secondary Aerosol Formation in the San Joaquin Valley
During Winter,'' Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association,
(56): 1679-1693, cited at 2008 PM2.5 Plan p. 3-10.

    These findings are based on the relative abundance of ammonia
relative to nitrate: There is so much ammonia present that
significantly reducing its emissions would still leave ample ammonia to
form ammonium nitrate. On the other hand, NOX is scarce
(relative to ammonia), so reducing it could reduce ammonium nitrate
significantly.
    Finally, sensitivity results from photochemical modeling were used
in conjunction with the CMB results mentioned above. The 2014 RMD
section on ``Review of control strategy effectiveness supported by CMAQ
nitrate particulate evaluation'' shows the projected effect of a 50
percent reduction of NOX emissions on PM2.5
concentrations annually and in shorter seasonal episodes. For the
annual concentration, the NOX reduction resulted in a
predicted 5 [mu]g/m\3\ PM2.5 reduction, while for the winter
episode the NOX reduction resulted in a predicted 28 [mu]g/
m\3\ PM2.5 reduction. 2014 RMD, p. 80. A 50 percent
reduction in ammonia emissions, on the other hand, predicted
PM2.5 reductions of only 0.1 [mu]g/m\3\ on an annual basis
and 0.3 [mu]g/m\3\ during the winter episode. RMD, p. 81. When compared
to the annual and 24-hour NAAQS of 15 and 65 [mu]g/m\3\, respectively,
the effect of NOX reductions appears to be significant while
the effect of ammonia reductions does not. Thus, the data and modeling
results presented in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, as well as the
results of the cited studies, support the identification of
NOX and the exclusion of ammonia as PM2.5
attainment plan precursors, consistent with the EPA presumption in the
PM2.5 implementation rule.
    EPA's presumption in the PM2.5 implementation rule is
that VOC need not be an attainment plan precursor. 40 CFR
51.1002(c)(3). As explained in the preamble to the rule, this
presumption may not be technically justified for a particular
nonattainment area, i.e., this presumption may be incorrect where
emissions of VOC significantly contribute to PM2.5
concentrations in the nonattainment area. 72 FR 20586 at 20590-93,
20596-97. States or EPA may conduct a technical demonstration to
reverse the presumptive exclusion of VOC as a PM2.5
attainment plan precursor based on the weight of evidence of available
technical and scientific information. Id.
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan contains substantial information
indicating that, for the SJV nonattainment area, VOC should be
considered as a potential PM2.5 attainment plan precursor.
On an annual basis, Table 2 in Appendix G (p. G-21,) gives an organic
carbon range of 38-49 percent of the total PM2.5. This
organic PM2.5 can be further divided into vegetative burning
(9-19 percent of total annual PM2.5), direct VOC
PM2.5 emissions (also 9-19 percent of total annual
PM2.5), and secondary organic

aerosols (SOA) (2-5 percent of total annual PM2.5). RMD at
19. This SOA contribution to overall PM2.5 levels appears to
be non-negligible.
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan states: ``Secondary organic aerosols
(SOA) contribute to a significant fraction of PM2.5. SOA is
organic carbon particulate formed in the photochemical oxidation of
anthropogenic and biogenic VOC precursor gases. Aromatic compounds are
believed to be efficient SOA producers contributing to this secondary
particulate.'' 2008 PM2.5 Plan, p.3-8. On a 24-hour episodic
basis, the contribution of SOA could be higher than the annual 2-5
percent, though it is likely lower for the winter episodes of most
concern in the SJV, due to decreased photochemical activity when fog
and clouds (typical for the SJV in the winter) partially block
sunlight. The chemistry of SOA is less well understood than the
chemistry of other chemical species, so overall these considerations
are not enough to overcome the negative presumption for VOC.
    But as noted in the preamble to the PM2.5 implementation
rule at pp. 20592--20593, the lightest organic molecules can
participate in atmospheric chemistry processes that result in the
formation of ozone and certain free radical compounds (such as the
hydroxyl radical [OH]) and these in turn participate in oxidation
reactions to form secondary organic aerosols, sulfates, and nitrates.
That is, VOC may be a PM2.5 precursor not just via formation
of SOA, but also via its participation in the oxidant chemistry that
leads to nitrate formation, a necessary step in the formation of
ammonium nitrate PM2.5. NOX emissions must be
oxidized to nitric acid before they form particulate ammonium nitrate.
Two pathways for this to occur are 1) daytime oxidation by OH, which
VOC radicals help create, and 2) nighttime oxidation by ozone.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Lurmann, F. et. al., 2006, op cit., p. 1688.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The discussion in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan regarding ammonium
nitrate (at p. 3-10, quoted above) also refers to VOC, which is
identified as one of the controlling factors in NOX
oxidation (which as noted above is a key process in the formation of
nitrate and ammonium nitrate PM2.5): ``Reductions in VOC
emissions will reduce secondary organic aerosol concentrations and may
reduce ammonium nitrate.'' The Plan also states: ``Relatively low non-
methane organic compounds/nitrogen oxide ratios indicate the daytime
photochemistry is VOC, sunlight, and background-ozone limited in
winter.'' Id. If nitrate formation is VOC-limited under some
circumstances, then VOC emission reductions could lead to ambient
PM2.5 reductions.
    Finally, the RMD at page 82 contains sensitivity analyses for VOC,
similar to the ones described above for NOX and ammonia.
According to the sensitivity analysis, a 50 percent reduction in VOC
emissions was predicted to reduce PM2.5 levels by 1.3 [mu]g/
m\3\ annually and 8.7 [mu]g/m\3\ for the winter episode. When compared
to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 [mu]g/m\3\ and 24-hour
NAAQS of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, these projected reductions appear significant.
The 2014 RMD concludes: ``Finding: VOC reduction is effective for the
annual standard and the winter episode for reduction of total carbon
secondary particulates.''
    In response to comments submitted during the District's public
comment period on the VOC issue, the Plan states that the ``modeling
has shown that VOC reductions are not as effective in reducing
secondary PM2.5 as NOX or SO2
reductions'' and that ``[a]ll of the technical evaluations for CRPAQS
and prior assessments of regional particulate models have indicated
that NOX is the dominant factor and VOC and ammonia are
not.'' 2008 PM2.5 Plan, pp.J-9 and p.J-19. These statements
about VOC may be true, but they state only the relative effectiveness
of controlling VOC compared to other precursors, do not cite any
supporting modeling or technical evaluations, and do not address the
substantial information in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan indicating
that VOC may contribute significantly to ambient PM2.5
levels in the SJV.
    As explained above, although EPA's presumption in the
PM2.5 implementation rule is that VOC need not be a
PM2.5 attainment plan precursor, this presumption may not be
technically justified for certain nonattainment areas. Indeed,
technical information in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan strongly
suggests that VOC reductions can significantly reduce ambient
PM2.5 concentrations and contribute to expeditious
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV.
    Other statements in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan clearly indicate
the State did not intend to reverse the presumption for VOC.
Nevertheless, the technical information we have identified is part of
the administrative record related to development of the SIP provides
evidence that the VOC presumption may not be technically justified in
the SJV. It also indicates that the State should submit a demonstration
to either support or reverse the presumption under the PM2.5
implementation rule that VOC is not an attainment plan precursor. 40
CFR 51.1002(c)(5).
    In the absence of a technical demonstration by the State, EPA
reviewed the results of several modeling and monitoring studies of
PM2.5 in the San Joaquin Valley. Some of these documents are
available on the ``Central California Air Quality Studies'' Web site
(at http://www.arb.ca.gov/airways) and/or are cited in the Plan and are
reports from contractors involved in CRPAQS. Others are papers from
peer-reviewed journals and are analyses using CRPAQS data or data from
the earlier 1995 Integrated Monitoring Study (IMS95 study). We found
that four monitoring studies and six modeling studies were relevant to
the VOC precursor issue.\19\ Further information on these studies as
well as excerpts from these studies are provided in the TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ These studies are:
    Kleeman, M.K., Ying, Q., and Kaduwela, A., 2005, ``Control
strategies for the reduction of airborne particulate nitrate in
California's San Joaquin Valley'', Atmospheric Environment, 39:
5325-5341 September 2005.
    Livingstone, P.L., et. al., 2009, ``Simulating PM Concentrations
During a Winter Episode in a Subtropical Valley and Sensitivity
Simulations and Evaluation methods'', Atmospheric Environment, 43:
5971-5977.
    Lurmann, F.W., Brown, S.G., McCarthy, M.C., and Roberts P.T.,
2006, ``Processes Influencing Secondary Aerosol Formation in the San
Joaquin Valley During Winter'', Journal of the Air & Waste
Management Association, 56: 1679-1693.
    McCarthy, M., 2005, ``The Role of Nighttime Chemistry in Winter
Ammonium Nitrate Formation in the San Joaquin Valley'', presented at
the American Association for Aerosol Research (AAAR), Supersites
Conference, February 2005, Atlanta, GA.
    Pun, B.K. and Seigneur, C., 1998, ``Conceptual Model of
Particulate Matter Pollution in the California San Joaquin Valley'',
prepared by Atmospheric and Environmental Research for Pacific Gas &
Electric, Document Number CP045-1-98, 8 September 1998.
    Pun, B.K. and Seigneur, C., 2001, ``Sensitivity of Particulate
Matter Nitrate Formation to Precursor Emissions in the California
San Joaquin Valley'', Environmental Science and Technology, 35:
2979-2987.
    Pun, B., 2004, ``CRPAQS Task 2.7 When and Where Does High O3
Correspond to High PM2.5? How Much PM2.5
Corresponds to Photochemical End Products?'', prepared by
Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc. for the San Joaquin
Valleywide Air Pollution Study Agency.
    Pun, B.K., Balmori R.T.F, and Seigneur, C., 2009, ``Modeling
Wintertime Particulate Matter Formation in Central California'',
Atmospheric Environment, 43: 402-409.
    Stockwell, W.R., Watson, J.G., Robinson, N.F., Steiner, W., and
Sylte, W.W., 2000, ``The Ammonium Nitrate Particle Equivalent of
NOX Emissions for Continental Wintertime Conditions'',
Atmospheric Environment, 34: 4711-4717.
    Ying, Q., Lu, J., and Kleeman, M., 2009, ``Modeling air quality
during the California Regional PM10/PM2.5 Air
Quality Study (CPRAQS) using the UCD/CIT source-oriented air quality
model--Part III. Regional source apportionment of secondary and
total airborne particulate matter'', Atmospheric Environment, 43:
419-430, January 2009.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The monitoring studies all contain evidence that the VOC pathway
for nitrate creation is important at least some of the time but differ
as to how important it is relative to other pathways such as the
nighttime ozone pathway, and are not conclusive on the efficacy of VOC
controls. Unlike the monitoring studies, most of the modeling studies
explicitly assessed the relative effectiveness of precursor controls,
simulating the effect of 50 percent reductions in NOX,
ammonia, and VOC. (One study does not explicitly address the issue, but
states that background ozone is the most important oxidant, implying
that VOC control would have little effect.) The two earliest modeling
studies are based on photochemical box modeling and differ on whether
VOC controls would significantly affect PM2.5. Three later
studies use more sophisticated photochemical grid models and find VOC
control to be effective, though generally less so than NOX
control. One study predicts VOC control to be about two-thirds as
effective as NOX control. The second study predicted VOC
control to be effective, though only by a relatively small amount, at
most 10 percent for a 50 percent reduction in VOC emissions, or only on
certain days. The third grid modeling study predicts VOC control to
give slightly more benefit than NOX control. While the
models, input data, and results differ between these studies, they
provide ample evidence that control of VOC can significantly reduce
PM2.5 concentrations in the SJV. EPA is, therefore,
proposing to find that these studies constitute a technical
demonstration that VOC is a PM2.5 attainment plan precursor,
necessitating the evaluation of controls for VOC for PM2.5
attainment in the SJV.
    EPA proposes to concur with the evaluation in the 2008
PM2.5 Plan that, at this time, ammonia does not need to be
considered an attainment plan precursor for purposes of attaining the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV.\20\ However, because the Plan
and independent scientific studies contain substantial information
indicating that VOC significantly contributes to PM2.5
concentrations in the SJV, EPA is proposing to find that VOC is a
PM2.5 attainment plan precursor for the SJV PM2.5
nonattainment area under 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(3) and thus must be
evaluated for emissions reductions measures.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ EPA's proposed concurrence on excluding ammonia as an
attainment plan precursor is limited to the attainment of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA revised the 24-hour PM2.5
standards in 2006 to lower them to 35 [micro]g/m\3\ and is currently
reviewing both the annual and 24-hour standards to determine if they
should be further revised to protect public health. See EPA, Policy
Assessment for the Review of the Particulate Matter NAAQS, Second
External Review Draft, June 2010. Evaluation of ammonia controls for
the attainment of the 2006 standards and any future revised
standards may show that such controls would significantly contribute
to lower PM2.5 levels in the Valley.
    \21\ In its approval of the SJV 2003 PM10 plan, EPA
determined that for the purposes of section 189(b)(1)(B) and (e) and
in the absence of final data from CRPAQS, VOC does not contribute
significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the standards
in the SJV. See 69 FR 30006, 30011 (May 26, 2004). In that
determination, EPA relied on the criteria that VOC control was not
shown to be absolutely necessary for PM10 attainment and
that it had a lower effectiveness than NOX control in
reduction PM10. In addition, EPA noted in its 2004 final
rule the District's intention to re-examine the VOC issue when
CRPAQS results were available. 69 FR 30010.
    Since its 2004 finding, EPA promulgated the PM2.5
implementation rule, which has an explicit criterion for determining
which PM2.5 precursors must be evaluated for controls,
namely, that a significant change in emissions of the precursor
would be projected to provide a significant change in
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area. See 72 FR
20586 at 20590 and 40 CFR 51.1000. This is a different criterion
than the one relied on in the 2004 determination. Data and analyses
from CRPAQS have also become available. These developments since
2004 support a finding different from our 2004 one.
    We also note that the 2004 finding was made for the
PM10 standards rather than the PM2.5
standards. The levels of the 24-hour and annual PM2.5
NAAQS (65 [micro]g/m\3\ and 15 [micro]g/m\3\) are much lower than
those for the 24-hour and (revoked) annual PM10 standards
(150 [micro]g/m\3\ and 50 [micro]g/m\3\). A given concentration
change is therefore likely to be more significant for the
PM2.5 standards than for the PM10 standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Extension of the Attainment Date
    CAA section 172(a)(2) provides that an area's attainment date
``shall be the date by which attainment can be achieved as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years from the date
such area was designated nonattainment * * *, except that the
Administrator may extend the attainment date to the extent the
Administrator determines appropriate, for a period no greater than 10
years from the date of designation as nonattainment considering the
severity of nonattainment and the availability and feasibility of
pollution control measures.''
    Because the effective date of designations for the 1997
PM2.5 standards is April 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), the initial
attainment date for PM2.5 nonattainment areas is as
expeditiously as practicable but not later than April 5, 2010. For any
areas that are granted a full five-year attainment date extension under
section 172, the attainment date would be not later than April 5, 2015.
    Section 51.1004 of the PM2.5 implementation rule
addresses the attainment date requirement. Section 51.1004(b) requires
a state to submit an attainment demonstration justifying its proposed
attainment date and provides that EPA will approve an attainment date
when we approve that demonstration. Thus, our approval of an extended
attainment date is dependent upon a demonstration showing expeditious
attainment and likewise, dependent upon proper evaluation of what
constitutes RACM/RACT level controls in the area.
    States that request an extension of the attainment date under CAA
section 172(a)(2) must provide sufficient information to show that
attainment by April 5, 2010 is impracticable due to the severity of the
nonattainment problem in the area and the lack of available and
feasible control measures to provide for faster attainment. 40 CFR
51.1004(b). States must also demonstrate that all RACM and RACT for the
area are being implemented to bring about attainment of the standard by
the most expeditious alternative date practicable for the area. 72 FR
20586 at 20601. Thus, the proper evaluation of RACM/RACT controls is an
integral part of justifying an extension of the attainment date.
    The 2008 PM2.5 Plan includes a demonstration that the
attainment date for the SJV should be April 5, 2015, i.e., that the
area qualifies for the full five-year extension of the attainment date
allowable under section 172(a)(1). This demonstration is found in
Chapter 9 of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan and is derived from the air
quality modeling in the Plan.
    SJV's degree of PM2.5 nonattainment can fairly be
characterized as severe. The area typically records the highest ambient
PM2.5 levels in the nation, with 2007-2009 design values for
the annual and 24-hour PM2.5 levels in urban Bakersfield
area of 22.6 [micro]g/m\3\ and 70 [micro]g/m\3\, respectively. See EPA,
Air Quality System, Design Value Report, August 9, 2010. The
PM2.5 problem in the San Joaquin Valley is complex, caused
by both direct and secondary PM2.5 and compounded by the
area's topographical and meteorological conditions that are
particularly conducive to the formation and concentration of
PM2.5 particles. See 2008 PM2.5 plan, Chapter 3.
    As discussed in section IV.C.2.a. above, the District's strategy
for attaining the PM2.5 standard relies on reductions of
direct PM2.5 as well as the PM2.5 precursor
pollutants NOX and SO2. The SJV needs significant
reductions in PM2.5 and NOX to demonstrate
attainment. EPA believes that further reduction of these pollutants is
challenging because the State and local air pollution regulations
already in place include most of the

readily available PM2.5 and NOX, control
measures. Moreover, attainment in the SJV depends upon emissions
reductions that offset the emissions increases associated with the
projected increases in population and emissions levels for this high-
growth area.
    Reductions of direct PM2.5 are achieved primarily from
open burning, commercial charbroiling, and residential wood combustion
control measures. These types of control measures present special
implementation challenges (e.g., the large number of individuals
subject to regulation and the difficulty of applying conventional
technological control solutions). NOX reductions come
largely from District rules for fuel combustion sources and from the
State's mobile source rules.
    Because of the necessity of obtaining additional emissions
reductions from these source categories in the SJV and the need to
conduct significant public outreach if applicable control approaches
are to be effective, EPA agrees with the District and CARB that the
2008 PM2.5 Plan reflects expeditious implementation of the
available control programs during the 2008-2014 time frame. EPA also
agrees that the implementation schedule for enhanced stationary source
controls is expeditious, taking into account the time necessary for
purchase and installation of the required control technologies.
Finally, we believe that it is not feasible at this time to accelerate
the emission reduction schedule for the State and Federal mobile source
requirements which must rely on fleet turnover over the years to
ultimately deliver the anticipated emission reductions. The District's
control strategies are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 6 of the
2008 PM2.5 Plan, and in section IV.C.2.a. above.
    In addition, the State has adopted standards for many categories of
on-road and off-road vehicles and engines, and gasoline and diesel
fuels, and included commitments to develop rules for Smog Check
Improvements, Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks, and Cleaner In-Use Off-
Road Equipment.
    EPA believes that the District and State are implementing these
rules and programs as expeditiously as practicable. We anticipate,
however, that the District and CARB will reevaluate this conclusion
after completion of the mid-course review of the PM2.5
attainment SIP for this area, due in April 2011. EPA also expects that
the District and CARB will continue to investigate opportunities to
accelerate progress toward attainment as new control opportunities
arise, and that the agencies will promptly adopt and expeditiously
implement any new measures found to be feasible in the future.
    As discussed in section IV.D.2. above, we are proposing to
disapprove the air quality modeling in the 2008 PM2.5 plan
because it is insufficiently documented for us to evaluate its
adequacy. Without adequate air quality modeling, it is not possible to
determine the reductions needed to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS in
the SJV and, in turn, to evaluate, as required by CAA section
172(a)(2), the availability and feasibility of controls needed to
attain.
    As discussed in section IV.C.3. above, we are also proposing to
disapprove the RACM/RACT demonstration in the SJV 2008 PM2.5
Plan in part because it does not consider RACM/RACT for VOC sources. As
stated in the PM2.5 implementation rule (72 FR 20586 at
20601), EPA cannot grant an extension of the attainment date beyond the
initial five years provided by section 172(a)(2)(A) if the state has
not adequately considered and evaluated the implementation of RACM and
RACT in the area. By definition, RACM/RACT are those controls that are
necessary to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable and
to meet any RFP requirements. 40 CFR 51.1010(a). Without an adequate
evaluation of potential RACM/RACT controls for VOC sources, EPA is
unable to determine whether the State's requested attainment date is as
expeditious as practicable in accordance with CAA 172(a)(2).
    For these reasons, EPA is proposing to not grant California's
request for an attainment date extension to April 5, 2015 for the San
Joaquin Valley. Given the severity of the PM2.5
nonattainment problem in the SJV, an extension of the attainment date
would most likely be appropriate and approvable if it were supported by
the necessary analysis and part of an attainment plan that meets the
applicable statutory and regulatory requirements including RACM/RACT
and an expeditious attainment demonstration.
5. Attainment Demonstration
    Table 7 below summarizes the reductions that are relied upon in the
2008 PM2.5 Plan to demonstrate attainment by April 5, 2015.
The attainment target numbers in this table should be considered
preliminary because they are derived from the Plan's air quality
modeling analysis, which we are proposing to disapprove.

                 Table 7--Summary of Reductions Needed for SJV's PM2.5 Attainment Demonstration
                                          (tons per average annual day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       PM2.5            NOX             SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. 2005 emissions level.........................................            86.0           575.4            26.4
B. 2014 attainment target.......................................            63.3           291.2            24.6
C. Total reductions needed by 2014 (A-B)........................            22.7           284.2             1.8
D. Reductions from baseline (pre-2007) measures.................            11.0           199.2             0.9
    Percent of total reductions from baseline measures..........           49.5%           70.8%             50%
E. Reductions needed from new measures (C-D)....................            11.7            85.0             0.9
    Percent of total reductions needed from new measures........           50.5%           29.2%             50%
New District reductions.........................................             6.7             9.0             0.9
    Percent of total reductions needed from new District                   28.5%            3.2%             50%
     measures...................................................
New State reductions............................................             5.0            76.0             0.0
    Percent of total reductions needed from new State measures..           22.0%           26.7%              0%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2008 PM2.5 Plan, pp. 8-2 and 9-3.

    As shown in this table, the majority of reductions that the State
projects are needed for PM2.5 attainment in the SJV by 2015
come from baseline reductions, i.e., from adopted measures that have
generally been approved by EPA either through the SIP or the CAA
section 209 waiver process. See Appendices A and B of the TSD. The
remaining reductions needed for attainment are to be achieved through
the District's and CARB's commitments to reduce emissions in the

SJV. Since the submittal of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan and 2007
State Strategy, SJVAPCD has already adopted measures (summarized in
Table 8 below) that can be credited toward reducing its aggregate