[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 1, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75764-75780]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26376]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0244; FRL-9954-76-Region 9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
California; Coachella Valley; Attainment Plan for 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of California to provide for attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards in the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area. The EPA is proposing to find the emissions
inventories to be acceptable and to approve the reasonably available
control measures, transportation control strategies and measures, rate
of progress and reasonable further progress demonstrations, attainment
demonstration, vehicle miles traveled offset demonstration and the
transportation conformity motor vehicle emission budgets.

DATES: Any comments must be submitted by December 1, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2016-0244 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any

comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically on the www.regulations.gov Web site and in hard copy at
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105.
While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some
information 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Kelly, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the Coachella Valley Nonattainment
Area
    A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone Standards
    B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment SIPs
III. CARB's SIP Submittals to Address the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards in the Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area
    A. CARB's SIP Submittals
    B. CAA Procedural and Administrative Requirements for SIP
Submittals
IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
    A. Emissions Inventories
    B. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and
Adopted Control Strategy
    C. Attainment Demonstration
    D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further Progress
Demonstrations
    E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity
    F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions Offset Demonstration
V. The EPA's Proposed Actions
    A. The EPA's Proposed Approvals
    B. Request for Public Comments
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The 8-Hour Ozone Standards and the Coachella Valley Nonattainment
Area

A. Background on the 8-Hour Ozone Standards

    Ground-level ozone is formed when oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight.\1\ These two pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution sources, including
on- and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden
equipment and paints.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ California plans use the term Reactive Organic Gases (ROG)
for VOC. These terms are essentially synonymous. For simplicity, we
use the term VOC herein to mean either VOC or ROG.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public health effects
occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in children and adults
with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung
function and inflame airways, which can increase respiratory symptoms
and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases. Ozone exposure also has
been associated with increased susceptibility to respiratory
infections, medication use, doctor visits, as well as emergency
department visits and hospital admissions for individuals with lung
disease. Ozone exposure also increases the risk of premature death from
heart or lung disease. Children are at increased risk from exposure to
ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are more likely
to be active outdoors, which increases their exposure. See ``Fact
Sheet, Proposal to Revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone'' (January 6, 2010); 75 FR 2938 (January 19, 2010).
    In 1979, under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA
established primary and secondary national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or standards) for ozone at 0.12 parts per million
(ppm) averaged over a 1-hour period. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979).
    On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the primary and secondary
standards for ozone to set the acceptable level of ozone in the ambient
air at 0.08 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period (``1997 8-hour ozone
standards''). See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997). The EPA set the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard based on scientific evidence demonstrating that
ozone causes adverse health effects at lower concentrations and over
longer periods of time than was understood when the previous 1-hour
ozone standards were set. The EPA determined that the 1997 8-hour
standards would be more protective of human health, especially for
children and adults who are active outdoors, and individuals with a
pre-existing respiratory disease, such as asthma.\2\ In 2008, the EPA
revised and strengthened the NAAQS for ozone by setting the acceptable
level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.075 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour
period. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). In 2015, the EPA further
tightened the 8-hour ozone standards to 0.070 ppm. 80 FR 65292 (October
26, 2015). While the 1979 1-hour ozone standards and the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards have been revoked, certain requirements that had
applied under the revoked standards continue to apply under the anti-
backsliding provisions of CAA section 172(e), including an approved
attainment plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ On March 27, 2008, the EPA revised and further strengthened
the primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone by setting the acceptable
level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.075 ppm, averaged over an 8-
hour period (``2008 8-hour ozone standards''). See 73 FR 16436. On
May 21, 2012, the EPA designated areas of the country with respect
to the 2008 8-hour ozone standards. See 77 FR 30088 and 40 CFR
81.330. On October 1, 2015, the EPA again strengthened the primary
and secondary NAAQS for ozone in ambient air to 0.070 ppm averaged
over 8 hours. See 80 FR 65292. For nonattainment areas classified as
``serious'' under the 2008 ozone standards, such as the Coachella
Valley, attainment SIPs were due on July 21, 2016. We will evaluate
the 2008 attainment SIPs in the timeframes specified by the CAA. We
have not yet set SIP submittal dates for the 2015 8-hour ozone
standards. Today's action applies only to the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards and does not address requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8-
hour ozone standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The Coachella Valley 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area

    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as
attaining or not attaining the standards. Effective June 15, 2004, we
designated nonattainment areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. See
69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). The designations and classifications for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards for California areas are codified at 40
CFR 81.305. In a rule governing certain facets of implementation of the
8-hour ozone

standards (the Phase 1 Rule), the EPA classified the Coachella Valley
as ``Serious'' for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, with an attainment
date no later than June 15, 2013. See 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). On
November 28, 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB or State)
requested that the EPA reclassify the Coachella Valley 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area from ``Serious'' to ``Severe-15.'' The EPA granted
the reclassification, effective June 4, 2010, with an attainment date
of not later than June 15, 2019. See 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010).
    The Coachella Valley area is located within Riverside County. For a
precise description of the geographic boundaries of the area, see 40
CFR 81.305. The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or District). The
District and CARB are responsible for adopting and submitting a state
implementation plan (SIP) to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standards for
nonattainment areas in their jurisdiction.
    Air quality in the Coachella Valley has steadily improved in recent
years. Design values have declined from 0.108 ppm in 2003 to 0.088 ppm
in 2015.\3\ Design values are used to designate and classify
nonattainment areas, as well as to assess progress towards meeting the
air quality standards.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Design values for 2000 to 2006 are contained in Figure 8-5
of the 2007 AQMP. Design values for 2005 to 2015 are contained in
the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) Preliminary Design Value Report for
the Coachella Valley and Western Mojave Desert (September 7, 2016).
These documents are in the docket for today's action.
    \4\ For more information about ozone design values, see 40 CFR
50, Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Coachella Valley is downwind from the South Coast Air Basin,
which is also regulated by the SCAQMD. The South Coast Air Basin's
continued progress toward meeting the 1997 Ozone standards is critical
to the Coachella Valley attaining the 1997 ozone standards. The
SCAQMD's Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (2007 AQMP) states,
``pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin to the Coachella
Valley is the primary cause of its ozone nonattainment status.'' \5\
The 2007 AQMP cites several studies that confirm the transport between
the two air basins.\6\ It also describes the late daily peak in ozone
concentrations, 6:00 p.m. for Palm Springs, as indicative of pollution
that has been transported. The 2007 AQMP states, ``if this peak [in
ozone concentrations] were locally generated, it would be occurring
near mid-day and not in the late afternoon or early evening.'' \7\ The
2007 AQMP also compares the relative magnitudes of VOC and
NOX emissions in the Coachella Valley and the South Coast
Air Basin, showing average annual VOC emissions to be 30-40 times
greater in the South Coast Air Basin than in the Coachella Valley, and
average annual NOX emissions to be more than 20 times
greater in the South Coast Air Basin.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,'' South Coast Air
Quality Management District, June 2007, see page 8-1.
    \6\ 2007 AQMP at 8-4 (citing R.W. Keith (SCAQMD) A
Climatological/Air Quality Profile, California South Coast Air
Basin, 1980; E.K. Kauper (Pollution Res. & Control Corp.), Coachella
Valley Air Quality Study, Final Report, (County Contract & U.S.
Public Health Service Grant No. 69-A-0610), 1971; P.J. Drivas and
F.H. Shair, A Tracer Study of Pollutant Transport in the Los Angeles
Area, Atmos. Environ. 8: 1155-1163. 4, 1974; T.B. Smith et al. (ARB
Contract to MRI/Caltech), ``The Impact of Transport from the South
Coast Air Basin on Ozone Levels in the Southeast Desert Air Basin,''
1983).
    \7\ 2007 AQMP at 8-4.
    \8\ 2007 AQMP at 8-4, Table 8-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment SIPs

    States must implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standards under Title
1, Part D of the CAA, which includes section 172, ``Nonattainment plan
provisions,'' and subpart 2, ``Additional Provisions for Ozone
Nonattainment Areas'' (sections 181-185).
    In order to assist states in developing effective plans to address
ozone nonattainment problems, the EPA issued an implementation rule for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards (``1997 Ozone Implementation Rule'').
This rule was finalized in two phases. The first phase of the rule
addressed classifications for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards,
applicable attainment dates for the various classifications, and the
timing of emissions reductions needed for attainment. See 69 FR 23951
(April 30, 2004). The second phase addressed SIP submittal dates and
the requirements for reasonably available control technology and
measures (RACT and RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP), modeling
and attainment demonstrations, contingency measures, and new source
review. See 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). The rule was codified at
40 CFR part 51, subpart X.
    The EPA announced the revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and
the anti-backsliding requirements that apply upon revocation, in a
rulemaking that established final implementation rules for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). Consistent with the
anti-backsliding provisions in CAA section 172(e), the EPA included
anti-backsliding requirements that apply upon revocation of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. Notwithstanding revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, areas that were designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS at the time the standards were revoked continue to be
subject to certain SIP requirements that had previously applied based
on area classifications for the standards. Id. at 12296; 40 CFR 51.1105
and 51.1100(o). Thus, in general, the Coachella Valley remains subject
to the requirements of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS applicable to
``Severe'' nonattainment areas.
    We discuss the CAA and regulatory requirements for 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment plans in more detail below.

III. CARB's SIP Submittals To Address the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards
in the Coachella Valley Nonattainment Area

A. CARB's SIP Submittals

    Designation of an area as nonattainment starts the process for a
state to develop and submit to the EPA a SIP providing for attainment
of the NAAQS under title 1, part D of the CAA. For areas designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS effective June 15, 2004,
this attainment SIP was due by June 15, 2007. See CAA section 172(b).
CARB made the following five SIP submittals to address the CAA planning
requirements for attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
Coachella Valley (and other areas as noted):
     ``Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,'' South Coast
Air Quality Management District, June 2007 (2007 AQMP); \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB,
to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, November 28,
2007 with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     ``2007 State Strategy for the California State
Implementation Plan,'' Release Date April 26, 2007 and Appendices A--G,
CARB, Release Date May 7, 2007 (2007 State Strategy); \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer,
CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9,
November 16, 2007 with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     ``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,'' CARB, Release
Date: March 24, 2009 (2009 State Strategy Status Report);
     ``Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5
State

Implementation Plans (SIP) for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley
Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions,'' CARB, Release Date March 29,
2011 (2011 State Strategy Progress Report); and
     ``Staff Report, Proposed Updates to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standard, State Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley and Western
Mojave Desert,'' CARB, Release Date: September 22, 2014 (2014 SIP
Update).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See letter from Richard Corey, Executive Officer CARB, to
Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, dated November
6, 2014 with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, on March 24, 2008, CARB submitted an Ozone Early
Progress Plan \12\ for several areas, including the Coachella Valley.
The plan consisted of motor vehicle emissions budgets for
transportation conformity. The EPA found the Coachella Valley
NOX and VOC budgets adequate for the 1997 ozone standards,
effective May 22, 2008. See 73 FR 25694 (May 7, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress Toward
Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality Standards for Ozone and
Setting Transportation Conformity Budgets for Ventura County,
Antelope Valley--Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, Eastern
Kern County, and Imperial County'' (revised), CARB (February 27,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In today's proposal, we refer to the portions of these documents
relevant to the Coachella Valley collectively as the ``Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan'' or ``the Plan.'' EPA has already approved portions of
these documents in actions for other nonattainment areas.\13\
Similarly, in today's proposal, we are evaluating and proposing action
on only those portions of the 2007 AQMP that are relevant to attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Coachella Valley. Below is a
description of the portions that are relevant to the Coachella Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For example, portions of the 2007 AQMP, 2007 State
Strategy, and the 2011 State Strategy Progress Report were approved
in EPA actions on the SCAQMD Attainment Plan for the 1997 8-hour
Ozone Standards. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012) and 79 FR 52539
(September 3, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2007 AQMP
    The 2007 AQMP discusses attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for both
the South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley, and the 1997 p.m.2.5
NAAQS for the South Coast Air Basin. We are only acting on the ozone
portions of the 2007 AQMP, and only on the portions applicable to the
Coachella Valley, which includes the following sections of the 2007
AQMP: the emissions estimates, RFP demonstrations, and motor vehicle
emission budgets for the Coachella Valley in Chapter 8; the detailed
base and future emission inventories in Appendix III; the modeling for
the attainment demonstration in Chapter 5 and Appendix V; the control
strategy in Chapters 4 and 7; and the RACM discussion in Chapter 6 and
Appendix VI.
State Strategy
    The 2007 State Strategy, as amended by the 2009 State Strategy
Status Report and 2011 State Strategy Progress Report, provides a RACM
demonstration for mobile sources. The relevant portions of the 2007
State Strategy include Chapter 3, which describes California's SIP
commitments, and Chapter 5, which lists individual measures in more
detail, as part of the State's submittal. We note, however, that other
portions of the 2007 State Strategy contain additional information
relevant to Coachella Valley, such as emissions reductions from the
Strategy contained in Appendix A. Appendix F of the 2011 State Strategy
Progress Report provides revised control measure commitments and a
revised rule implementation schedule for the 2007 AQMP.
2014 SIP Update
    The 2014 SIP Update, which covers both the Coachella Valley and
Western Mojave Desert 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas, updates
the following sections of the 2007 AQMP: emissions inventories; RFP
demonstration, and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) offset demonstration.
The 2014 SIP Update also updates the motor vehicle emissions budgets in
the Ozone Early Progress Plan mentioned above. It also revises the
attainment targets for NOX and VOC emissions, using the same
percentage reduction from the 2002 baseline as planned in the 2007
AQMP. Finally, the 2014 SIP Update (and 2007 AQMP) also contain
contingency measures to be implemented in the event the area fails to
meet an RFP milestone or fails to attain by the applicable date, as
required by CAA section 172(c)(9). We are not proposing action on these
contingency measures at this time. Contingency measures are a distinct
provision of the Clean Air Act that we may act on separately from the
attainment requirements.

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 an opportunity for a public
hearing was provided consistent with the EPA's implementing regulations
in 40 CFR 51.102.
    The SCAQMD and CARB provided public notice and an opportunity for
public comment through public comment periods, and held public hearings
prior to adopting the components of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan.
Hearing and adoption dates are shown in Table 1. The SCAQMD's and
CARB's submittals both include proof of publication for notices of the
District's and CARB's public hearings, as evidence that all hearings
were properly noticed. Therefore, we find the submittals meet the
procedural requirements of CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l).

   Table 1--Agencies and Adoption Dates for the Coachella Valley Attainment Plan for the 1997 Ozone Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Hearing and adoption        Board
          Agency/Submittal                  Start of public notice                dates             resolution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD/2007 AQMP....................  March 2, 2007....................  June 1, 2007...........            07-9
CARB/2007 State Strategy............  May 7, 2007......................  June 21 and 22, 2007,             07-28
                                                                          and July 27, 2007.
CARB/2007 AQMP......................  August 10, 2007..................  September 27, 2007.....           07-41
CARB/2009 State Strategy Status       March 24, 2009...................  April 23, 2009.........           09-34
 Report.
CARB/2011 State Strategy Progress     March 29, 2011...................  April 28, 2011.........           11-24
 Report.
CARB/2014 SIP Update................  September 22, 2014...............  October 24, 2014.......           14-29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires that the EPA determine whether a
SIP submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section of
the CAA also provides that any plan that the EPA has not affirmatively
determined to be complete or incomplete will be deemed complete by
operation of law six months after the date of submittal. The EPA's SIP
completeness criteria are found at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. The
EPA's completeness determinations for each submittal are shown in Table
2.

  Table 2--Submittals and Completeness Determinations for the Coachella
                            Valley Ozone Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Submittal               Submittal date     Completeness date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 State Strategy.............  November 16, 2007.  May 14, 2008.
2007 AQMP.......................  November 28, 2007.  May 26, 2008.
2009 State Strategy Status        August 12, 2009...  February 8, 2010.
 Report.
2011 State Strategy Progress      July 29, 2011.....  January 25 2012.
 Report.
2014 SIP Update.................  November 6, 2014..  May 5, 2015.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Review of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan

A. Emissions Inventories

1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
    CAA section 182(a)(1) requires each state with an ozone
nonattainment area classified under subpart 2 to submit a
``comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from
all sources'' of the relevant pollutants in accordance with guidance
provided by the Administrator. While this inventory is not a specific
requirement under the anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 51.1105 and
51.1100(o), it provides support for demonstrations required under these
anti-backsliding rules. Additionally, a baseline emissions inventory is
needed for the attainment demonstration and for meeting RFP
requirements. EPA's 1997 Ozone Implementation Rule identifies 2002 as
the baseline year for the SIP planning emissions inventory. See 69 FR
23980 (October 27, 2004). EPA emissions inventory guidance sets
specific planning requirements pertaining to future milestone years for
reporting RFP and to attainment demonstration years.\14\ Key RFP
analysis years in the RFP demonstration include 2008 and every
subsequent 3 years until the attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ ``Emission Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations'' (EPA-454/R-05-001, August
2005, updated November 2005) and ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-
Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards--Phase 2'' (70 FR
71612).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have evaluated the emissions inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan to determine if they are consistent with EPA guidance and
adequate to support the Plan's RACM, RFP, rate of progress (ROP) and
attainment demonstrations.
2. Emissions Inventories in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
    Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update contains detailed emissions
inventories for the Coachella Valley. A partial summary of this
information is contained in Table 3. The average summer weekday
emissions typical of the ozone season are used for the 2002 base year
planning inventory and the 2018 attainment year.\15\ These inventories
incorporate reductions from federal, state, and district control
measures received by CARB through September 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ ``Attainment year'' refers to the ozone season immediately
preceding a nonattainment area's attainment date. In the case of the
Coachella Valley, the applicable attainment date is June 15, 2019,
and the ozone season immediately preceding that date will occur in
year 2018.

 Table 3--Coachella Valley NOX and VOC Emissions Inventory Summaries for the 2002 Base Year and 2018 Attainment
                                                      Year
                             [Average summer weekday emissions in tons per day] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                NOX                             VOC
                    Category                     ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2002            2018            2002            2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Sources..............................           0.875           0.851           3.067           4.182
Area Sources....................................           0.492           0.305           5.061           3.863
On-Road Mobile Sources..........................          33.009          10.558           9.294           2.897
Other Mobile Sources............................           8.912           5.109           5.287           3.919
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals \b\..................................          43.287          16.823          22.709          14.861
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix A, Table A-1.
\b\ Because of rounding conventions, source categories may not add to the exact emission totals.

    The on-road motor vehicles inventory category consists of trucks,
automobiles, buses, and motorcycles. California's model for estimating
emissions from on-road motor vehicles operating in California is
referred to as ``EMFAC'' (short for EMission FACtor). EMFAC has
undergone many revisions over the years. At the time the 2014 SIP
Update was submitted, EMFAC2011 was the model approved by the EPA for
estimating on-road motor source emissions in California.\16\ See 78 FR
14533 (March 6, 2013). Appendix D of the 2014 SIP Update contains the
latest on-road motor vehicle summer planning VOC and NOX
inventories, vehicle population, VMT and trips for each

EMFAC vehicle class category for the Coachella Valley. The motor
vehicle emissions in the Plan are based on CARB's EMFAC2011 emission
factor model and the latest planning assumptions from Southern
California Association of Government's (SCAG's) 2012-2035 Regional
Transportation Plan.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ EMFAC2011's approval is granted in 78 FR 14533. More
recently, the EPA approved EMFAC2014 as the model for estimating on-
road emissions. That approval allowed the continued use of EMFAC2011
until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR 77337.
    \17\ SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan 2012-2035, including
Amendment #1 and #2 and the Air Quality Conformity Analysis. April
2012. Federal Highway Administration approval July 15, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2014 SIP Update contains off-road VOC and NOX
inventories developed by CARB using category-specific methods and
models.\18\ The off-road mobile source category includes aircraft,
trains, ships, and off-road vehicles and equipment used for
construction, farming, commercial, industrial, and recreational
activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Detailed information on CARB's off-road motor vehicle
emissions inventory methodologies is found at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The stationary source category of the emissions inventory includes
non-mobile, fixed sources of air pollution comprised of individual
industrial, manufacturing, and commercial facilities. Examples of
stationary sources (a.k.a., point sources) include fuel combustion
(e.g., electric utilities), waste disposal (e.g., landfills), cleaning
and surface coatings (e.g., printing), petroleum production and
marketing, and industrial processes (e.g., chemical). Stationary source
operators report to the District the process and emissions data used to
calculate emissions from point sources. The District then enters the
information reported by emission sources into the California Emission
Inventory Development and Reporting System (CEIDARS) database.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The CEIDARS database consists of two categories of
information: source information and utility information. Source
information includes the basic inventory information generated and
collected on all point and area sources. Utility information
generally includes auxiliary data, which helps categorize and
further define the source information. Used together, CEIDARS is
capable of generating complex reports based on a multitude of
category and source selection criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The area sources category includes aggregated emissions data from
processes that are individually small and widespread or not well-
defined point sources. The area source subcategories include solvent
evaporation (e.g., consumer products and architectural coatings) and
miscellaneous processes (e.g., residential fuel combustion and farming
operations). Emissions from these sources are calculated from product
sales, population, employment data, and other parameters for a wide
range of activities that generate air pollution in the Coachella
Valley.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Detailed information on the area-wide source category
emissions is found on the CARB Web site: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The emission inventories in the 2014 SIP Update use the California
Emission Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM).\21\ The CEPAM model used in
the 2014 SIP Update is based on a 2008 baseline inventory developed
using the methods and databases described above (e.g., EMFAC2011;
CEIDARS; and CARB modular off-road equipment updates such as the 2011
In-Use Off-Road Equipment model, Transportation Refrigeration Units
model, and Cargo Handling Equipment model.). The inventory was
calibrated to 2008 emissions and activity levels, and inventories for
other years are back-cast (e.g., 2002) or forecast (e.g., 2018) using
CEPAM from that base inventory.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Appendix A of the 2014 SIP Update contains the estimated
VOC and NOX stationary, area-wide and off-road forecast
summaries by Emission Inventory Code categories for the Coachella
Valley from CEPAM. A CEPAM inventory tool was created to support the
development of the 2012 PM2.5 SIPs due at that time. The
tool was designed to support all of the modeling, planning, and
reporting requirements due at that time and includes updates for all
the pollutants (e.g., NOX and VOC). Modeling results,
which are summarized in Appendix A, are available separately in
electronic file format.
    \22\ 2014 SIP Update, page A-1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Proposed Action on the Emissions Inventories
    We have reviewed the emissions inventories in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan and the inventory methodologies used by the District and
CARB for consistency with CAA section 182(a)(1) and EPA guidance. We
find that the base year and projected attainment year inventories are
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventories of actual and
projected emissions of NOX and VOC in the Coachella Valley
as of the date of the submittal. Accordingly, we propose to find that
these inventories provide an appropriate basis for the various other
elements of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, including the RACM, ROP,
RFP, and attainment demonstrations.

B. Reasonably Available Control Measures Demonstration and Adopted
Control Strategy

1. RACM Requirements
    CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that each attainment plan provide
for the implementation of all reasonable available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
The RACM demonstration requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
    The EPA has previously provided guidance interpreting the RACM
requirement in the ``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (``General Preamble'') \23\
and in a memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM) Requirements and Attainment Demonstration Submissions
for the Ozone NAAQS,'' John Seitz, November 30, 1999 (Seitz memo).\24\
In summary, EPA guidance provides that to address the requirement to
adopt all RACM, states should consider all potentially reasonable
control measures for source categories in the nonattainment area to
determine whether they are reasonably available for implementation in
that area and whether they would, if implemented individually or
collectively, advance the area's attainment date by one year or
more.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See 57 FR 13498, 13560. The General Preamble describes the
EPA's preliminary view on how we would interpret various SIP
planning provisions in title I of the CAA as amended in 1990,
including those planning provisions applicable to the 1-hour ozone
standards. The EPA continues to rely on certain guidance in the
General Preamble to implement the 8-hour ozone standards under title
I.
    \24\ Available at www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
    \25\ See Seitz memo and General Preamble at 13560; see also
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for Proposed
Rulemaking on Approval of Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas,''
44 FR 20372 (April 4, 1979) and Memorandum dated December 14, 2000,
from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, ``Additional Submission on RACM from States with Severe
One-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area SIPs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any measures that are necessary to meet these requirements that 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. CAA section 172(c)(6)
requires nonattainment plans to include enforceable emission
limitations, and such other control measures, means or techniques
(including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and
auctions of emission rights), as well as schedules and timetables for
compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to provide for
attainment of such standards in such area by the applicable attainment
date. See also CAA section 110(a)(2)(A).
    The purpose of the RACM analysis is to determine whether or not
control measures exist that are economically and technically reasonable
and that provide emissions reductions that

would advance the attainment date for nonattainment areas. The EPA
defines RACM as any potential control measure for application to point,
area, on-road and non-road emission source categories that: (1) Is
technologically feasible; (2) is economically feasible; (3) does not
cause ``substantial widespread and long-term adverse impacts''; (4) is
not ``absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable''; and (5) can advance
the attainment date by at least one year. General Preamble at 13560.
    For ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above, CAA
section 182(b)(2) also requires implementation of RACT for all major
sources of VOC and for each VOC source category for which the EPA has
issued a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document. CAA section
182(f) requires that RACT under section 182(b)(2) also apply to major
stationary sources of NOX. In Severe areas, a major source
is a stationary source that emits or has the potential to emit at least
25 tons of VOC or NOX per year. CAA section 182(d). Under
the 8-hour ozone implementation rule, states were required to submit
SIP revisions meeting the RACT requirements of CAA sections 182(b)(2)
and 182(f) no later than 27 months after designation for the 8-hour
ozone standards (September 15, 2006, for areas designated in April
2004) and to implement the required RACT measures no later than 30
months after that submittal deadline. See 40 CFR 51.912(a). The EPA has
approved the RACT SIP for the SCAQMD for the 1997 ozone standards,
which included rules applicable to the Coachella Valley. See 73 FR
76947 (December 18, 2008).
2. Control Strategy and RACM Demonstration in the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan
a. The District's RACM Demonstration
    Appendix VI of the 2007 AQMP includes a RACM demonstration covering
both the South Coast Air Basin and the Coachella Valley, which focuses
on control measures for stationary and area sources. The process to
identify RACM involved public meetings to solicit input, evaluation of
the EPA's suggested RACM, and evaluation of air emissions rules in
other areas (including the San Joaquin Valley, the San Francisco Bay
Area, Sacramento, Ventura, Dallas-Fort Worth, the Houston-Galveston
area and the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium). The District also
reevaluated all 82 of its existing rules and regulations. The RACM
evaluation process included a summit where CARB technical experts,
local government representatives and the public suggested alternative
ways to attain air quality standards. More than 200 potential control
measures were identified. The District then screened the identified
measures and rejected those that would not individually or collectively
advance attainment in the area by at least one year, had already been
adopted as rules, or were in the process of being adopted. The
remaining measures were evaluated by taking into account baseline
inventories, available control technologies, and potential emission
reductions as well as whether the measure could be implemented on a
schedule that would advance attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards by at least a year.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 2007 AQMP, Appendix VI, page VI-1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on this analysis, SCAQMD scheduled 16 new or revised
stationary source control measures for development and adoption,
including revisions to make SCAQMD rules at least as stringent as other
California districts' rules and several innovative measures. Since
submission of the AQMP in 2007, the SCAQMD has adopted 12 of these
rules and submitted them to the EPA for approval into the SIP. Table 4
lists the measures identified in the 2007 AQMP,\27\ with citations to
the Federal Register notice that incorporates each measure into the
SIP, where applicable. These rules are part of the District's
enforceable commitment to achieve emissions reductions. However, the
District acknowledged that its commitment to adopt any given rule might
prove to be infeasible, meaning the control technology may not be
available or achievement of the emissions reductions may not be cost
effective. In adopting the 2007 AQMP, the SCAQMD Board committed to
``substitute any other measures as necessary to make up any emissions
reduction shortfall.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 2007 AQMP, Tables 4-1, 4-2A and 4-2B.
    \28\ Attachment A of the 2007 AQMP, SCAQMD Board Resolution 07-
9, dated June 1, 2007.

                          Table 4--Status of RACM Rules Identified in SCAQMD 2007 AQMP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Federal Register
                                                                            Ozone precursor      notice adopting
 Control measure             Rule No.                    Title                controlled          rule into the
                                                                                SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTS-01...........  1144........................  Metalworking fluids    VOC...................  76 FR 70888, 11/
                                                  and direct-contact                             16/2011.
                                                  lubricants.
CTS-04...........  1143........................  Consumer Paint         VOC...................  76 FR 70888, 11/
                                                  Thinners and Multi-                            16/2011.
                                                  Purpose Solvents.
CMB-01...........  1147........................  NOX reductions from    NOX...................  75 FR 46845, 08/
                                                  miscellaneous                                  04/2010.
                                                  sources.
CMB-03...........  1111........................  Further NOX            NOX...................  75 FR 46845, 08/
                                                  reductions from                                04/2010.
                                                  space heaters.
FUG-02...........  461.........................  Gasoline transfer and  VOC...................  78 FR 21543, 04/
                                                  dispensing (VOC).                              11/2013.
FUG-04...........  1149........................  Storage Tank and       VOC...................  74 FR 67821, 12/
                                                  Pipeline Cleaning                              21/2009.
                                                  and Degassing.
MCS-01...........  1110.2......................  Liquid and gaseous     NOX and VOC...........  74 FR 18995,
                                                  fuels--stationary                              April 27, 2009.
                                                  ICEs (NOX and VOC).
MCS-01...........  1146........................  NOX from industrial,   NOX...................  79 FR 57442, 09/
                                                  institutional,                                 25/2014.
                                                  commercial boilers,
                                                  steam generators,
                                                  and process heaters.
MCS-01...........  1146.1......................  NOX from small ind,    NOX...................  79 FR 57442, 09/
                                                  inst, & commercial                             25/2014.
                                                  boilers, steam gens,
                                                  and process heaters.
MCS-05...........  1127........................  Livestock waste (VOC)  VOC...................  78 FR 30768, 05/
                                                                                23/2013.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Measures not yet adopted or not approved in the SIP by EPA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGM-01...........  2301........................  Emissions reductions   NOX and VOC...........  No rule
                   (proposed)..................   from new or                                    associated with
                                                  redevelopment                                  this
                                                  projects (Indirect                             measure.\a\
                                                  Sources).
FLX-02...........  n/a.........................  Refinery pilot         VOC...................  No rule
                                                  program (VOC).                                 associated with
                                                                                this measure.
MOB-05...........  Title 13 Cal. Code of         AB923 LDV high         NOX and VOC...........  n/a.\b\
                    Regulations Sec.   2622.      emitter program.

MOB-06...........  Title 13 Cal. Code of         AB923 MDV high         NOX and VOC...........  n/a.\b\
                    Regulations Sec.   2622.      emitter program.
n/a..............  2449........................  SOON program.........  NOX...................  (proposed
                                                                                approval) 81 FR
                                                                                12637, 03/10/
                                                                                2016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The District has not finalized Rule 2301.
\b\ SCAQMD implements this program through CARB's Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program.
n/a = not applicable.

    The EPA determined that the 2007 AQMP met the RACM requirement for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR
12674 (March 1, 2012).\29\ CARB submitted a 2012 Air Quality Management
Plan (2012 AQMP), developed by the SCAQMD, in February 2013 with
additional information about the Coachella Valley, including data and
discussion on air quality, pollutant transport, emissions inventories,
attainment demonstration, and projections of future air quality.\30\
For the 2012 AQMP, the SCAQMD followed a process similar to that used
for the 2007 AQMP, which included public meetings to solicit input,
evaluation of EPA's suggested RACM, and evaluation of other air
agencies' regulations. See Appendix VI of the 2012 AQMP. The District
states in the 2012 AQMP that ``the 2007 AQMP adequately addressed and
satisfied the CAA planning requirements for ozone in the Coachella
Valley, and this chapter [Chapter 7: Current & Future Air Quality--
Desert Nonattainment Areas] is for information only.'' The 2012 AQMP
does, however, include a new RACM demonstration. See Appendix VI of the
2012 AQMP. It includes new and revised rules for the District since the
adoption of the 2007 AQMP. The EPA approved the RACM demonstration in
the 2012 AQMP as a revision to the SIP for both the 1-hour and 1997 8-
hour ozone standards for the South Coast Air Basin. See 79 FR 52526
(September 3, 2014). Many of the new rules have been incorporated into
the SIP,\31\ some have been proposed by the District but not
incorporated into the SIP,\32\ and others have yet to be proposed
locally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ More recently, the EPA determined that the South Coast
RECLAIM program did not meet RACM for PM2.5 because it
allowed facilities to delay installation of selective catalytic
reduction (SCR) to control NOX emissions. See 81 FR 22025
(April 14, 2016). Only two facilities in Coachella Valley are part
of the RECLAIM program and both facilities have an oxidation
catalyst and SCR on each gas turbine. The Title V Permits for these
facilities are included in the administrative record for this
action. Additionally, SCAQMD Rule 2005 requires all emissions
sources at any new or relocated RECLAIM facility to apply the best
available control technology.
    \30\ Final Air Quality Management Plan, February 2013, South
Coast Air Quality Management District.
    \31\ For example, CMB-03: Reductions from Commercial Space
Heating (Rule 1111) and FUG-02: Emission Reduction from LPG Transfer
and Dispensing--Phase II (Rule 1177).
    \32\ For example, CMB-01: Further NOX Reductions from
RECLAIM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Local Jurisdiction RACM Demonstration
    With respect to on-road mobile sources, we note that SCAG is the
designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for a large portion
of southern California, including Coachella Valley, and SCAG's
membership includes local jurisdictions within the Coachella Valley.
For the 2007 AQMP, SCAG evaluated a list of possible transportation
control measures (TCMs) as one element of the larger RACM evaluation
for the plan. TCMs are, in general, measures designed to reduce
emissions from on-road motor vehicles through reductions in VMT or
traffic congestion. SCAG's TCM development process is described in
Appendix IV-C (``Regional Transportation Strategy and Control
Measures'') of the 2007 AQMP, pages 49 to 55.
    In our final action on the 2007 AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin,
we concluded that the evaluation processes undertaken by SCAG were
consistent with the EPA's RACM guidance and found that there were no
additional RACM, including no additional TCMs that would advance
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards in the South Coast Air
Basin. See 76 FR 57872, at 57883 (September 16, 2011) (proposed rule);
77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012) (final rule). More recently, we came to the
same conclusion with respect to RACM and TCMs for the South Coast in
our action on the ozone portion of the 2012 AQMP. See 79 FR 29712, at
29720 (May 23, 2014) (proposed rule); 79 FR 52526 (September 3, 2014)
(final rule).
    While TCMs are being implemented in the upwind South Coast Air
Basin area to meet CAA requirements, neither the SCAQMD nor CARB rely
on implementation of any TCMs in the Coachella Valley to demonstrate
implementation of RACM in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan. The SCAQMD
and CARB justify the absence of TCMs in the Coachella Valley by
reference to the significant influence of pollutant transport from the
South Coast Air Basin on ozone conditions in the Coachella Valley. We
agree that pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin is
significant, and find that, given the influence of such transport and
the minimal and diminishing emissions benefit generally associated with
TCMs, no TCM or combination of TCMs implemented in the Coachella Valley
would advance the attainment date in the Coachella Valley, and thus, no
TCMs are reasonably available for implementation in the Coachella
Valley for the purposes of meeting the RACM requirement. Lastly, we
note that, while not required for CAA purposes, SCAG's most recent
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)
(April 2016) includes a list of projects for the Coachella Valley, some
of which represent the types of projects often identified as TCMs, such
as traffic signalization projects and bike lane projects. See the
transportation system project list for Riverside County, attached as an
appendix to SCAG's 2016-2014 RTP/SCS (April 2016), available at http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS_ProjectList.pdf.
d. The State Strategy RACM Demonstration
    CARB has primary responsibility for reducing emissions in
California from new and existing on-road and off-road engines and
vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and consumer products. Given the need
for significant emissions reductions from mobile sources to meet the
ozone standards in California nonattainment areas, CARB has been a
leader in the development of stringent control measures for on-road and
off-road mobile sources, fuels and

consumer products. Because of this role, the 2007 AQMP identifies
CARB's 2007 State Strategy as a key component of the control strategy
necessary to attain the 1997 ozone standards. The 2007 State Strategy
includes measures to reduce emissions from multiple sectors, including
in-use heavy duty trucks, smog check improvements, reformulated
gasoline, cleaner off-road equipment, cleaner consumer products, ships,
harbor craft and port trucks. See 2007 State Strategy, Chapter 5.
    CARB developed its 2007 State Strategy after an extensive public
consultation process to identify potential SIP measures. 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 have been adopted or 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.
    In adopting the 2007 State Strategy, CARB committed to reducing
Coachella Valley NOX emissions by 7 tons per day (tpd) and
VOC emissions by 2 tpd through the implementation of measures
identified in the 2007 State Strategy.\33\ However, this proposed
action does not rely on the NOX and VOC commitments in the
2007 State Strategy, because the 2014 SIP Update shows that the
Coachella Valley would meet the NOX and VOC attainment and
RFP goals, under existing rules received through September 2012.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Board Resolution 07-28, CARB, September 27, 2007, page 7,
Attachment B.
    \34\ 2014 SIP Update, page A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB adopted the 2009 State Strategy Status Report in April 2009.
This submittal updated the 2007 State Strategy to reflect its
implementation during 2007 and 2008, and also to reflect changes
resulting from the adoption of the scoping plan mandated by Assembly
Bill 32 that will help reduce ozone during SIP implementation.\35\ The
update also changes assumptions about economic conditions and the
availability of incentive funds.\36\ Finally, the 2007 State Strategy
was revised to address approvability issues brought up by the EPA.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v.
    \36\ 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page v.
    \37\ 2009 State Strategy Status Report, page 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB again revised the state strategy in the 2011 State Strategy
Progress Report. While the changes primarily address attainment of the
1997 PM2.5 standards, the 2011 State Strategy Progress
Report also includes an appendix that updates the control measure
adoption schedule and revises the emissions estimates to reflect
changes made by CARB to the on-road truck and off-road equipment rules
in 2010.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 2011 State Strategy Progress Report at Appendix F
(``Revisions to 2007 P.M.2.5 and Ozone State
Implementation Plan for South Coast Air Basin and Coachella
Valley'') (March 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have previously determined that CARB's mobile source control
programs constituted RACM for the attainment plan for the 1997 Ozone
NAAQS in the South Coast Air Basin. See 77 FR 12674 (March 1, 2012).
Since then, CARB has adopted additional mobile source control measures
including the Advanced Clean Cars program (also known as the Low
Emission Vehicle Program III or LEV-III), heavy-duty vehicle idling
rules, revisions to CARB's in-use rules for on-road and non-road diesel
vehicles, and emissions standards for non-road equipment, cargo
handling equipment, and recreational vehicles. See 81 FR 39424 (June
18, 2016).
3. The EPA's Evaluation of the Control Strategy and RACM
    For the Coachella Valley in 2017 (the year prior to the attainment
year), the emissions inventory shows that nearly all of the locally
generated NOX emissions (93%) and nearly half of the VOC
emissions (48%) derive from mobile sources.\39\ Mobile source emissions
are well controlled throughout California because of stringent control
measures in place for on-road and off-road mobile sources and fuels.
See, e.g., 2007 State Strategy, p. 37. Additionally, as noted above,
the EPA has already determined CARB's rules in the 2007 State Strategy,
as revised in 2009 and 2011, meet RACM, and CARB continues to adopt new
and more stringent mobile source rules. In view of the transport of
pollutants into the Coachella Valley from the South Coast Air Basin
(see discussion at section I.B above) and the extensive control of
mobile sources by CARB, we propose to find that the Coachella Valley
Ozone Plan provides for implementation of all RACM necessary to
demonstrate expeditious attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standards
in the Coachella Valley, consistent with the applicable requirements of
CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Based on data from Tables A-1 and A-2 of the 2014 SIP
Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Attainment Demonstration

1. Requirements for Attainment Demonstrations
    CAA section 182(c)(2)(A) requires states with ozone nonattainment
areas classified as ``Serious'' or above to submit plans that
demonstrate attainment of the ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than the specified attainment date. For any
ozone nonattainment area classified as serious or above, section
182(c)(2)(A) of the CAA specifically requires the State to submit a
modeled attainment demonstration based on a photochemical grid modeling
evaluation or any other analytical method determined by the
Administrator to be at least as effective as photochemical modeling.
The attainment demonstration requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12).
    For more detail on the requirements for modeling an 8-hour ozone
attainment demonstration, see the Technical Support Document (TSD) for
today's proposal. The modeling section of the TSD includes a complete
list of applicable modeling guidance documents. These documents
describe the components of the attainment demonstration, explain how
the modeling and other analyses should be conducted, and provide
overall guidance on the technical analyses for attainment
demonstrations.
    As with any predictive tool, inherent uncertainties are associated
with photochemical grid modeling. The EPA's guidance recognizes these
limitations and provides recommended approaches for considering other
analytical evidence to help assess whether attainment of the NAAQS is
likely. This process is called a weight of evidence (WOE) analysis.
    The EPA's modeling guidance (updated in 1996, 1999, and 2002)
discusses various WOE analyses. This guidance was updated again in 2005
and 2007 for the 1997 8-hour attainment demonstration procedures to
include a WOE analysis as an integral part of any attainment
demonstration. This guidance strongly recommends that all attainment
demonstrations include supplemental analyses beyond the recommended
modeling. These supplemental analyses can provide

additional information such as data analyses, and emissions and air
quality trends, which can help strengthen the conclusion based on the
photochemical grid modeling.
2. 8-Hour Attainment Demonstration Modeling and Weight of Evidence
Analysis in the South Coast 2007 AQMP
a. Photochemical Grid Modeling Attainment Demonstration Results
i. Photochemical Grid Model
    The model selected for the 2007 AQMP attainment demonstrations is
the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx), version 4.4
(Environ, 2006), using Statewide Air Pollution Research Center-99
(SAPRC-99) gas phase mechanisms (Carter, 2000).\40\ The modeling system
(including the photochemical model, meteorological inputs, and chemical
mechanism) is consistent with the previous advice of outside peer
reviewers. CAMx is a state-of-the-art air quality model that can
simulate ozone and PM2.5 concentrations together in a ``one-
atmosphere'' approach for attainment demonstrations. CAMx is designed
to integrate the output from both prognostic and diagnostic
meteorological models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Carter, W.P.L., May 8, 2000a. Documentation of the SAPRC-99
chemical mechanism for VOC reactivity assessment. Report to the
California Air Resources Board, Contracts 92-329 and 95-308.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ii. Episode Selection
    Six meteorological episodes from three years are used as the basis
for the plan. An earlier modeling effort, contained in SCAQMD's 2003
Air Quality Management Plan, benefited from the intensive monitoring
conducted under the 1997 Southern California Ozone Study (SCOS 1997)
where the August 4-7, 1997, episode was the cornerstone of the modeling
analysis. One of the primary modeling episodes used in the earlier
modeling from August 5-6, 1997, was also selected for this plan. In
addition, five episodes that occurred during the Multiple Air Toxics
Exposure Study III (MATES-III) sampling program in 2004 (August 7-8)
and 2005 (May 21-22, July 15-19, August 4-6, and August 27-28) were
selected.\41\ The TSD for today's proposal provides further
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Final Report, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the
South Coast Air Basin (MATES-III), SCAQMD, September 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iii. Model Performance
    The modeling for the Coachella Valley attainment demonstration uses
the same approach used for the South Coast Air Basin attainment
demonstration, which was based on an air quality modeling domain that
covers the entire South Coast Air Basin, the Coachella Valley, and much
of southern California. Model performance was evaluated in three zones
in the South Coast Basin: The San Fernando Valley; the eastern San
Gabriel, Riverside and San Bernardino Valleys; and Los Angeles and
Orange County. Normalized Gross Bias, Normalized Gross Error, and Peak
Prediction Accuracy were determined for each area. Although not a
requirement for determining acceptable model performance, the
performance statistics were compared to the EPA performance goals
presented in guidance documents. The performance goals for Normalized
Gross Error and Peak Prediction Accuracy were met in the eastern San
Gabriel, Riverside and San Bernardino Valleys. In general, the
statistic for bias (Normalized Gross Bias) tends to be negative,
indicating that the model tends to slightly under-predict ozone. Based
on the analysis, the SCAQMD concludes that model performance is
acceptable for this application.
b. Modeling Approaches for the Coachella Valley Attainment
Demonstration
    CAMx simulations were conducted for the base year 2002, and future-
year 2017 baseline and controlled emissions.\42\ The ozone attainment
demonstration relies on the use of site-specific relative response
factors (RRFs) being applied to the 2002 weighted design values. The
RRFs are determined from the future year controlled and the 2002 base
year simulations. The initial screening for station days to be included
in the attainment demonstration included the following criteria: (1)
Having an observed concentration equaling or exceeding 85 parts per
billion (ppb), and (2) a simulation predicted base year (1997, 2004 or
2005) concentration over 60 ppb. Additional criteria were added to the
selection process as the simulations were evaluated. A minimum of five
episode days are recommended to determine the site specific RRF. The
TSD for today's action has more information regarding the rationale for
our proposed approval of the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan modeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Future year controlled emissions were estimated from the
baseline emissions using the CEPA control factors for the
simulations, are given in Table V-4-4 of the 2007 South Coast AQMP,
Appendix V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Results of Modeling
    The attainment demonstration included in the 2007 AQMP indicates
that the Coachella Valley will attain the federal 1997 8-hour ozone
standards by the proposed attainment date of June 15, 2019. The 2007
AQMP projects the Coachella Valley air monitoring stations of Palm
Springs and Indio to have 8-hour ozone design values of 75.9 ppb and
66.2 ppb respectively in the year 2017.\43\ More recent modeling in the
2012 AQMP, as well as recent monitoring data, shows attainment by the
2018 attainment year. See the TSD for this action for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 2007 AQMP, Appendix V, page V-4-52, Table V-4-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Transport From the South Coast Air Basin
    The South Coast Air Basin's continued progress toward meeting the
1997 ozone NAAQS is critical to the Coachella Valley's ability to
attain the 1997 ozone standards. The Coachella Valley is downwind of
the South Coast Air Basin, which is regulated by the SCAQMD. The 2007
AQMP states, ``pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin to
the Coachella Valley is the primary cause of its ozone nonattainment
status.'' The plan cites several studies that confirm the transport
between the two air basins.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See footnote 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Conclusions on the Modeling
Demonstration
    We are proposing to approve an attainment date of June 15, 2019,
which reflects a 2018 attainment year. This is based on our evaluation
of the air quality modeling analyses in the 2007 AQMP and our WOE
analysis. The WOE analysis considered the attainment demonstration from
the 2012 AQMP and more recent ambient air quality monitoring data that
were not available at the time SCAQMD performed the attainment
modeling. The basis for our proposed approval is discussed in more
detail in the TSD. The modeling shows significant reductions in ozone
from the base period. The most recent ambient air quality data that we
have reviewed indicate that the area is on track to attain the 1997 8-
hour ozone standards by 2018.
    Based on the analysis above and in the TSD, the EPA proposes to
find that the air quality modeling in the 2007 AQMP provides an
adequate basis for the RACM, RFP and attainment demonstrations in the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan, and is consistent with the applicable
requirements of CAA section 182(c)(2)(a) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(12).

D. Rate of Progress and Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

1. Rate of Progress
a. Requirements
    For areas classified as moderate or above, Section 182(b)(1)
requires a SIP revision providing for rate of progress (ROP), defined
as a one time, 15% actual VOC emission reduction during the six years
following the baseline year 1990, or an average of 3% per year. For
areas designated serious nonattainment or above, no further action is
necessary if the area fulfilled its ROP requirement for the 1-hour
standards (from 1990-1996). As the EPA explained in the 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule, 69 FR 23980 (October 27, 2004), for areas that did
not meet the 15% ROP reduction for the 1-hour ozone standards, a state
may notify the EPA that it wishes to rely on a previously submitted SIP
(for the 1-hour ozone standards), or it may elect to submit a new or
revised SIP (for the 1997 ozone standards) addressing the 15% ROP
reduction. The ROP demonstration requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
    The CAA outlines and EPA guidance details the method for
calculating the requirements for the 1990-1996 period. Section
182(b)(1) requires that reductions: (1) Be in addition to those needed
to offset any growth in emissions between the base year and the
milestone year; (2) exclude emission reductions from four prescribed
federal programs (i.e., the federal motor vehicle control program, the
federal Reid vapor pressure (RVP) requirements, any RACT corrections
previously specified by the EPA, and any inspection and maintenance (I/
M) program corrections necessary to meet the basic I/M level); and (3)
be calculated from an ``adjusted'' baseline relative to the year for
which the reduction is applicable.
    The adjusted base year inventory excludes the emission reductions
from fleet turnover between 1990 and 1996 and from federal RVP
regulations promulgated by November 15, 1990, or required under section
211(h) of the Act. The net effect of these adjustments is that states
are not able to take credit for emissions reductions that would result
from fleet turnover of current federal standard cars and trucks, or
from already existing federal fuel regulations. However, the SIP can
take full credit for the benefits of any new (i.e., post-1990) vehicle
emissions standards, as well as any other new federal or state motor
vehicle or fuel program that will be implemented in the nonattainment
area, including Tier 1 exhaust standards, new evaporative emissions
standards, reformulated gasoline, enhanced I/M, California low
emissions vehicle program, transportation control measures, etc.
    While a SIP revision for attainment of the 1-hour ozone standards
was submitted for the Southeast Desert area (i.e., the Coachella Valley
and Western Mojave Desert areas), we have not approved the ROP plan for
the reduction of VOCs. We provided notice that the Southeast Desert has
attained the 1-hour standards on April 15, 2015. See 80 FR 20166 (April
15, 2015). Per 40 CFR 51.1118, the RFP requirement (including the 15%
ROP requirement for VOCs) no longer applies to the 1-hour ozone
standards for the Southeast Desert area. Although the ROP provision is
a one-time requirement, it remains in effect for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards. Therefore, the Coachella Valley SIP must demonstrate a 15%
ROP for VOC reductions by 2008, from the 2002 baseline.
b. ROP Demonstration in the State Submittal
    The 2014 SIP Update incorporates the ROP demonstration as an
element of the RFP demonstration. We note that this approach is valid,
but different from the organization of this notice, where we first, and
separately, assess the ROP demonstration and then assess the RFP
demonstration. See section IV.D.2 for the RFP assessment. VOC emissions
from the RFP tables for the Coachella Valley (see Table C-1 in the 2014
SIP Update), were used to create Table 5 below. The revised 15% ROP VOC
demonstration uses a 2002 average summer weekday emissions inventory as
the base year inventory and addresses 2002-2008. Based on the progress
of the VOC emissions reductions from 2002 to 2008, the State concluded
the Coachella Valley met the ROP requirement for the 15% VOC reduction.

  Table 5--15% Rate-of-Progress Demonstration for VOC Emissions in the
                           Coachella Valley a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Coachella
                      VOC Emissions                           (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 2002 baseline inventory..............................            22.7
2. 2008 remaining emissions.............................            17.6
3. 2008 goal (remaining emissions after 15% ROP                     19.3
 Reduction required from 2002 baseline).................
4. ROP reduction achieved by 2008 (Compare Line 2 to                 Yes
 Line 7)................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Table C-1.

2. Reasonable Further Progress
a. Requirements
    CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1) require plans for
nonattainment areas to provide for RFP. RFP is defined in section
171(1) as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the
relevant air pollutant as are required by this part or may reasonably
be required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment
of the applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable date.'' CAA section
182(c)(2)(B) requires ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious
or higher to submit no later than 3 years after designation for the 8-
hour ozone standards an RFP SIP providing for an average of 3% per year
of VOC and/or NOX emissions reductions for (1) the 6-year
period immediately following the baseline year; and (2) all remaining
3-year periods after the first 6-year period out to the area's
attainment date. The RFP requirement is a continuing applicable
requirement for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding
rules that apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR
51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(4).
    CAA section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for the substitution of
NOX emission reductions in place of VOC reductions to meet
the RFP requirements. According to the EPA's NOX
Substitution Guidance,\45\ the substitution of NOX
reductions for VOC reductions must be done on a percentage basis,
rather than a straight ton-for-ton exchange. There are two steps for
substituting NOX for VOC. First, an equivalency
demonstration

must show that the cumulative RFP emission reductions are consistent
with the NOX and VOC emission reductions determined in the
ozone attainment modeling demonstration. Second, specified reductions
in NOX and VOC emissions should be accomplished in the
interim period between the 2002 base year and the attainment date,
consistent with the continuous RFP emission reduction requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
``NOX Substitution Guidance,'' December 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. RFP Demonstration in the State Submittal
    The 2014 SIP Update contains emissions estimates for the baseline,
milestone and attainment years, and additional discussion of the RFP
demonstration. See page 5 and Table C-1 in Appendix C. Table 6 below
shows data from the RFP demonstration, with additional rows based on
information provided by CARB. The 2014 SIP Update uses NOX
substitution beginning in milestone year 2014 to meet VOC emission
targets. For the Coachella Valley, the State concluded that RFP
demonstration meets the applicable requirements for each milestone year
as well as the attainment year.

                                            Table 6--Calculation of RFP Demonstrations for Coachella Valley a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             VOC Emission calculations (tpd)                   2002            2008            2011            2014            2017            2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 2002 Baseline VOC....................................            22.7             n/a             n/a             n/a             n/a             n/a
2. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments...............             n/a             1.1             1.5             1.8             1.9             2.0
3. RACT Corrections.....................................               0               0               0               0               0               0
4. Adjusted 2002 baseline VOC inventory (2002 Baseline               n/a            21.6            21.2            20.9            20.8            20.7
 VOC-Line 2-Line 3).....................................
5. RFP Commitment for VOC reductions from new measures..             n/a               0               0               0               0               0
6. Future Year VOC with existing and proposed measures..             n/a            17.6            15.0            15.8            15.8            15.9
7. Required VOC % change since previous milestone year,              n/a             15%              9%              9%              9%              3%
 relative to 2002.......................................
8. Required VOC reduction from 2002 adjusted baseline...             n/a             15%             24%             33%             42%             45%
9. Target VOC Levels \b\................................             n/a            18.4            16.4            14.7            13.3            12.8
10. Apparent VOC Shortfall (Line 6-Line 9)..............             n/a            -0.8            -1.3             1.2             2.6             3.2
11. Apparent % VOC shortfall (Line 10 / Line 4..........             n/a           -3.7%           -6.4%            5.6%           12.7%           15.3%
12. VOC shortfall previously provided by NOX                         n/a               0               0               0            5.6%           12.7%
 substitution % (Line 13 of prior milestone year, or 0
 if negative)...........................................
13. Actual VOC shortfall (Line 11-Line 12)..............             n/a           -3.7%           -6.4%            5.6%            7.1%            2.5%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             NOX Emission calculations (tpd)                   2002            2008            2011            2014            2017            2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Baseline NOX inventory..............................            43.3            31.0            23.8        \c\ 22.0        \c\ 18.9        \c\ 17.8
16. Non-creditable CA MVCP/RVP adjustments..............             n/a             1.6             2.0             2.2             2.3             2.3
17. Adjusted 2002 baseline NOX inventory (Line 15 2002               n/a            41.7            41.3            41.1            41.0            40.9
 baseline-Line 16)......................................
18. RFP commitment for NOX reductions from new measures.             n/a               0               0               0               0               0
19. Calculated NOX creditable reductions since 2002                  n/a            41.7            41.3            41.1            41.0            40.9
 (Line 17-Line 18)......................................
20. Change in NOX since 2002 (Line 19-Line 15)..........             n/a            10.6            17.5            19.1            22.1            23.1
21. Calculated % NOX reductions since 2002 (Line 20 /                n/a           25.6%           42.3%           46.5%           53.9%           56.5%
 Line 19)...............................................
22. NOX previously used for VOC shortfall by NOX                     n/a               0               0               0            5.6%           12.7%
 substitution % (from Line 12)..........................
23. NOX substitution needed for VOC shortfall % (Same as             n/a            0.0%            0.0%            5.6%            7.1%            2.5%
 Line 13, or 0 if Line 9 < 0)...........................
24. Forecasted % NOX reduction surplus (Line 21-Line 22-             n/a           25.6%           42.3%           40.9%           41.2%           41.3%
 Line 23)...............................................
25. RFP achieved?.......................................             n/a             Yes             Yes             Yes             Yes             Yes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Table C-1.
\b\ Target VOC levels for 2008 = (1-Line 8) x (Line 4). In subsequent years, Target VOC = [(prior year Line 9 + prior year Line 2-current year line 2) x
  (1-current year line 7)].
\c\ Estimated emissions include an additional 1 tpd safety margin for transportation conformity budget.
Note: Because of rounding conventions, values in table may not reflect the exact calculated quantity from the underlying numbers.

3. Proposed Action on the ROP and RFP Demonstrations
    Based on our review of the ROP calculations in the 2014 SIP Update,
summarized in Table 5 above, we conclude that the state has
demonstrated that sufficient emission reductions have been achieved to
meet the ROP requirements in 2008. And as shown in Table 6, the South
Coast 2007 8-hour Ozone SIP provides for RFP in each milestone year,
consistent with applicable CAA requirements and EPA guidance. We
therefore propose to approve the ROP and RFP demonstrations under
sections 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1)
and 51.1100(o)(4).

E. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity

1. Requirements for Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
    CAA section 176(c) requires federal actions in nonattainment and
maintenance areas to conform to the goals of SIPs. This means that such
actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute to violations of a NAAQS, (2)
worsen the severity of an existing violation, or (3) delay timely
attainment of any NAAQS or any interim milestone.
    Actions that involve Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subject to
the EPA's transportation conformity rule, which is codified in 40 CFR
part 93, subpart A. Under this rule, metropolitan planning
organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate
with state and local air quality and transportation agencies, the EPA,
FHWA, and FTA to demonstrate that an area's RTP and transportation
improvement programs (TIP) conform to the applicable SIP. This
demonstration is typically done by showing that estimated emissions
from existing and planned highway and transit systems are less than or
equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs or budgets)
contained in the SIP. An attainment, RFP, or maintenance SIP
establishes MVEBs for the attainment year, each required RFP year or
last year of the maintenance plan, as appropriate. MVEBs are generally
established for specific years and specific pollutants or precursors.
Ozone attainment and RFP plans establish MVEBs for NOX and
VOC. See 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(i).
    Before an MPO may use MVEBs in a submitted SIP, the EPA must first
either determine that the MVEBs are adequate or approve the MVEBs. In
order for us to find the MVEBs adequate and approvable, the submittal
must meet the conformity adequacy requirements of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)
and (5) and be approvable under all pertinent SIP requirements. To meet
these requirements, the MVEBs must be consistent with the approvable
attainment and RFP demonstrations and reflect all of the motor vehicle
control measures contained in the attainment and RFP demonstrations.
See 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v). For more information on the
transportation conformity requirements and applicable policies on
MVEBs, please visit our transportation conformity Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation.
    The EPA's process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of
four basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP
submission; (2) providing the public the opportunity to comment on the
MVEB during a public comment period and responding to any comments that
are submitted; (3) reviewing the submitted SIP to determine if it meets
the adequacy criteria; and, (4) making a finding of adequacy or
inadequacy. See 40 CFR 93.118.
2. MVEBs in the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan
    The 2007 AQMP did not propose budgets for transportation conformity
for the Coachella Valley. CARB submitted the 2008 Early Progress Plan,
an amendment to the SIP, to establish MVEBs for many areas of
California including the Coachella Valley.\46\ Using EMFAC2007 (the
2007 version of the EMissions FACtor model), CARB set the 2012 MVEBs at
7 tpd for VOCs and 26 tpd for NOX. We found the MVEB in the
2008 Early Progress Plan for the Coachella Valley to be adequate for
transportation conformity purposes.\47\ See 73 FR 25694 (April 16,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress Toward
Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality Standards for Ozone and
Setting Transportation Conformity Budgets for Ventura County,
Antelope Valley--Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, Eastern
Kern County, Imperial County, Revised: February 27, 2008, Release
Date: February 27, 2008.
    \47\ Letter dated April 16, 2008 from Deborah Jordan to James
Goldstene, California Air Resources Board, RE: Adequacy Status of
Coachella Valley 8-hour Ozone Early Progress Plan Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2014 SIP Update includes updated MVEBs.\48\ As noted in Section
IV.B.2 of this notice, the MVEBs were estimated using EMFAC2011, and
the latest planning assumptions from SCAG, including Amendment No. 1 to
the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan and Amendment No. 13-4 to
the Federal Transportation Improvement Program.\49\ The emissions
estimate also includes off-model adjustments to EMFAC2011 to account
for the Advanced Clean Car regulations adopted by CARB and included in
the SIP. See 81 FR 39424 (June 16, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ 2014 SIP Update, Table D-1.
    \49\ See http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/Amendment-1.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MVEBs are the projected on-road mobile source VOC and
NOX emissions in the Coachella Valley for baseline,
milestone and attainment years. These budgets, shown in Table 7,
include a 1 tpd safety margin, as allowed by the conformity rule. See
40 CFR 93.124(a).

                                    Table 7--Coachella Valley Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the 2014 SIP Update
                                                            [tpd, average summer weekday] \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                NOX                                             VOC
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2014            2017            2018            2014            2017            2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-Road Inventory.......................................           14.79           11.39           10.74            3.72            3.07            2.93
Safety Margin...........................................               1               1               1               1               1               1
MVEBs \b\...............................................              16              13              12               5               5               4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix D, Table D-1.
\b\ Rounded up to the nearest ton.

3. Proposed Action on the Budgets
    As part of our review of the budgets' approvability, we have
evaluated the revised budgets using our adequacy criteria in 40 CFR
93.318(e)(4) and (5). We found that the 2017 and 2018 budgets meet each
adequacy criterion. We have completed our review of the 2014 SIP Update
and are proposing to approve the SIP's attainment and RFP
demonstrations. We have also reviewed the proposed budgets submitted
with the 2014 SIP Update and have found that the 2017 and 2018 budgets
are consistent with the attainment and RFP demonstrations, were based
on control measures that have already been adopted and implemented, and
meet all other applicable statutory and regulatory requirements
including the adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5).
Therefore, we are proposing to approve the 2017 and 2018 budgets as
shown in Table 7.\50\ Once these budgets are found adequate or are
approved, the budgets for the 2008 early progress plan for 2012 will no
longer be used in transportation conformity determinations. If
finalized as proposed, the U.S. Department of Transportation and SCAG
(the metropolitan planning organization for the area) would be required
to use the new budgets in transportation conformity determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Although the 2014 SIP Update contained MVEBs for 2014,
2017, and 2018, MVEBs for 2014 are no longer relevant for conformity
analyses since that year has passed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Vehicle Miles Travelled Emissions Offset Demonstration

1. Requirements for a VMT Emissions Offset Demonstration
    CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires a state with areas classified as
``Severe'' or ``Extreme'' to ``submit a revision that identifies and
adopts specific enforceable transportation control strategies (TCSs)
and TCMs to offset any growth in emissions from growth in VMT or
numbers of vehicle trips in such area.'' Herein, we refer to the SIP
requirement as the ``VMT emissions offset requirement,'' and the SIP
revision intended to demonstrate compliance with the VMT emissions
offset requirement as the ``VMT emissions offset demonstration.'' The
VMT emissions offset requirement is a continuing applicable requirement
for the Coachella Valley under the EPA's anti-backsliding rules that
apply once a standard has been revoked. See 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(10).
    CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) also includes two additional elements
requiring that the SIP include: (1) TCSs and TCMs as necessary to
provide (along with other measures) the reductions needed to meet the
applicable RFP requirement, and (2) include strategies and measures to
the extent needed to demonstrate attainment. As noted above, the first
element of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires that areas classified as
``Severe'' or ``Extreme'' submit a SIP revision that identifies and
adopts TCSs and TCMs sufficient to offset any growth in emissions from
growth in VMT or the number of vehicle trips.
    In response to the Court's decision in Association of Irritated
Residents v. EPA,\51\ we issued a memorandum titled Guidance on
Implementing Clean Air Act Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control
Measures and Transportation Control Strategies to Offset Growth in
Emissions Due to Growth in Vehicle Miles Travelled (August 2012
Guidance).\52\ The August 2012 Guidance discusses the meaning of the
terms TCSs and TCMs, and recommends that both TCSs and TCMs be included
in the calculations made for the purpose of determining the degree to
which any hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT should
be offset. Generally, TCS is a broad term that encompasses many types
of controls including, for example, motor vehicle emission limitations,
I/M programs, alternative fuel programs, other technology-based
measures, and TCMs, that would fit within the regulatory definition of
``control strategy.'' See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.100(n). TCM is defined at 40
CFR 51.100(r) to mean ``any measure that is directed toward reducing
emissions of air pollutants from transportation sources,'' including,
but not limited to, measures listed in CAA section 108(f), and
generally refers to programs intended to reduce the VMT, the number of
vehicle trips, or traffic congestion, such as programs for improved
public transit, designation of certain lanes for passenger buses and
high-occupancy vehicles, trip reduction ordinances, and similar
measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ 632 F.3d. 584, at 596-597 (9th Cir. 2011), reprinted as
amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d 668, further amended February
13, 2012 (ruling additional TCMs are required whenever vehicle
emissions are projected to be higher than they would have been had
VMT not increased, even when aggregate vehicle emissions are
actually decreasing).
    \52\ Memorandum dated August 30 2012 from Karl Simon, Director,
Transportation and Climate Division, Office of Transportation and
Air Quality, to Carl Edlund, Director, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, and Deborah Jordan, Director, Air
Division, EPA Region 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The August 2012 guidance also explains how states may demonstrate
that the VMT emissions offset requirement is satisfied in conformance
with the Court's ruling. It recommends states estimate emissions for
the nonattainment area's base year and the attainment year. One
emission inventory is developed for the base year, and three different
emissions inventory scenarios are developed for the attainment year.
Two of these scenarios would represent hypothetical emissions scenarios
that would provide the basis to identify the ``growth in emissions''
due solely to the growth in VMT, and one that would represent projected
actual motor vehicle emissions after fully accounting for projected VMT
growth and offsetting emissions reductions obtained by all creditable
TCSs and TCMs. The August 2012 guidance contains specific details on
how states might conduct the calculations.
    The base year on-road VOC emissions inventory should be based on
VMT in that year and it should reflect all enforceable TCSs and TCMs in
place in the base year. This would include vehicle emissions standards,
state and local control programs such as I/M programs or fuel rules,
and any additional implemented TCSs and TCMs that were already required
by or credited in the SIP as of the base year.
    The first of the emissions calculations for the attainment year
would be based on the projected VMT and trips for that year, and assume
that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond those already credited in the base year
inventory have been put in place since the base year. This calculation
demonstrates how emissions would hypothetically change if no new TCSs
or TCMs were implemented, and VMT and trips were allowed to grow at the
projected rate from the base year. This estimate would show the
potential for an increase in emissions due solely to growth in VMT and
trips, representing a no-action scenario. Emissions in the attainment
year in this scenario may be lower than those in the base year due to
fleet turnover to lower-emitting vehicles. Emissions may also be higher
if VMT and/or vehicle trips are projected to sufficiently increase in
the attainment year.
    The second of the attainment year emissions calculations would also
assume that no new TCSs or TCMs beyond those already credited have been
put in place since the base year, but would also assume no growth in
VMT and trips between the base year and attainment year. Like the no-
action attainment year estimate described above, emissions in the
attainment year may be lower than those in the base year due to fleet
turnover, but the emissions would not be influenced by any growth

in VMT or trips. This emissions estimate, the VMT offset ceiling
scenario, would reflect the maximum attainment emissions that should be
allowed to occur under the statute as interpreted by the Court because
it shows what would happen under a scenario in which no offsetting TCSs
or TCMs have yet been put in place and VMT and trips are held constant
during the period from the area's base year to its attainment year.
    These two hypothetical status quo estimates are necessary steps in
identifying target emission levels. These levels determine whether
further TCMs or TCSs beyond those that have been adopted and
implemented are needed to fully offset any increase in emissions due
solely to VMT and vehicle trips identified in the no action scenario.
    The third calculation incorporates the emissions that are actually
expected to occur in the area's attainment year after taking into
account reductions from all enforceable TCSs and TCMs that in reality
were put in place after the baseline year. This estimate would be based
on the VMT and trip levels expected to occur in the attainment year
(i.e., the VMT and trip levels from the first estimate) and all of the
TCSs and TCMs expected to be in place and for which the SIP will take
credit in the area's attainment year, including any TCMs and TCSs put
in place since the base year. This represents the projected actual
(attainment year) scenario. If this emissions estimate is less than or
equal to the emissions ceiling that was established in the second of
the attainment year calculations, the TCSs or TCMs for the attainment
year would be sufficient to fully offset the identified hypothetical
growth in emissions.
    If the projected actual attainment year emissions are greater than
the VMT offset ceiling established in the second of the attainment year
emissions calculations even after accounting for post-baseline year
TCSs and TCMs, the state would need to adopt and implement additional
TCSs or TCMs. To meet the VMT offset requirement of section
182(d)(1)(A) as interpreted by the Court, the additional TCSs or TCMs
would need to offset the growth in emissions and bring the actual
emissions down to at least the same level as the attainment year VMT
offset ceiling estimate.
2. The Coachella Valley VMT Emissions Offset Demonstration
    The Coachella Valley VMT Offset demonstration is contained in
Appendix E of the 2014 SIP Update. The State used EMFAC2011,\53\ an
EPA-approved motor vehicle emissions model for California, to estimate
on-road emissions. The model calculates emissions from two combustion
processes (i.e., running exhaust and start exhaust) and four
evaporative processes (i.e., hot soak, running losses, diurnal losses,
and resting losses). It combines trip-based VMT data from the regional
transportation planning agencies (i.e., SCAG), starts data based on
household travel surveys, and vehicle population data from the
California Department of Motor Vehicles. These sets of data are
combined with corresponding emission rates to calculate emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ More recently, the EPA approved EMFAC2014 as the model for
estimating on-road emissions; however, that approval allowed the
continued use of EMFAC2011 until December 14, 2017. See 80 FR 77337.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Emissions from running exhaust, start exhaust, hot soak, and
running losses are a function of how much a vehicle is driven. As such,
emissions from these processes are directly related to VMT and vehicle
trips, and the State included emissions from them in the calculations
that provide the basis for the revised Coachella Valley VMT emissions
offset demonstration. The 2014 SIP Update (see page E-3) did not
include emissions from resting loss and diurnal loss processes in the
analysis because such emissions are related to vehicle population,
rather than VMT or vehicle trips, and thus are not part of ``any growth
in emissions from growth in vehicle miles traveled or numbers of
vehicle trips in such area'' (emphasis added) under CAA section
182(d)(1)(A).
    The VMT emissions offset demonstration also includes the previously
described three different attainment year scenarios (i.e., no action,
VMT offset ceiling, and projected actual) for 2018. The State's
selection of 2018 is appropriate given that the 2014 SIP Update
demonstrates attainment by the applicable attainment date of June 15,
2019 based on the 2018 controlled emissions inventory. Table 8
summarizes the emissions estimate for the base year and the three
scenarios discussed in Section IV.G.1.b.

                            Table 8--VMT Emissions Offset Inventory Scenarios and Results for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        VMT                           Starts                 Controls      VOC Emissions
                        Scenario                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Year       1000 miles/day       Year          1000/day          Year             tpd
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Year...............................................            2002          10,293            2002           1,248            2002               8
No Action...............................................            2018          14,329            2018          10,640            2002               4
VMT Offset Ceiling......................................            2002          14,329            2002           7,935            2002               3
Projected Actual........................................            2018          64,709            2018          10,640            2018               2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: 2014 SIP Update, Appendix E.

    For the base year scenario, CARB ran the EMFAC2011 model for the
2002 base year using VMT and starts data corresponding to those years.
As shown in Table 8, the 2014 SIP Update estimates Coachella Valley VOC
emissions to be 8 tpd in 2002.
    For the no-action scenario, the State first identified the on-road
motor vehicle control programs (i.e., TCSs or TCMs) put in place since
the base year and incorporated into EMFAC2011. Then, CARB ran EMFAC2011
with the VMT and starts data corresponding to the applicable attainment
year (i.e., 2018 for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards) without the
emissions reductions from the on-road motor vehicle control programs
put in place after the base year. Thus, the no action scenario reflects
the hypothetical VOC

emissions that would occur in the attainment year in the nonattainment
area if CARB had not put in place any additional TCSs or TCMs after
2002. As shown in Table 8, CARB estimates no action VOC emissions for
Coachella Valley to be 4 tpd in 2018.
    For the VMT offset ceiling scenario, the State ran the EMFAC2011
model for the attainment year but with VMT and starts data
corresponding to base year values. Like the no- action scenario, the
EMFAC2011 model was adjusted to reflect VOC emissions levels in the
attainment year without the benefits of the on-road motor vehicle
control programs implemented after the base year. Thus, the VMT offset
ceiling scenario reflects hypothetical VOC emissions if the State had
not put in place any TCSs or TCMs after the base year and if there had
been no growth in VMT or vehicle trips between the base year and the
attainment year. As shown in Table 8, CARB estimates VMT offset ceiling
VOC emissions to be 3 tpd in 2018.
    The hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT and trips
can be determined from the difference between the VOC emissions
estimates under the no action scenario and the corresponding estimate
for the VMT offset ceiling scenario. Based on the values in Table 9,
the hypothetical growth in emissions due to growth in VMT and trips in
the Coachella Valley would have been 1 tpd (i.e., 4 tpd minus 3 tpd)
for the purposes of the revised VMT emissions offset demonstration for
the 8-hour ozone standards. This hypothetical difference establishes
the level of emissions caused by growth in VMT that need to be offset
by the combination of post-baseline year TCMs and TCSs and any
necessary additional TCMs and TCSs.
    For the projected actual scenario calculation, the State included
the emissions benefits from TCSs and TCMs \54\ put in place since the
base year. The most significant State on-road and fuels measures
providing reductions during the 2002 to 2018 timeframe and relied upon
for the VMT emissions offset demonstration include Low Emission
Vehicles II and Zero Emissions Vehicle standards, California
Reformulated Gasoline Phase 3, and Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks.
Some of these measures were adopted prior to 2002, but all or part of
the implementation occurred after 2002.\55\ State measures adopted
since 2007, as part of the 2009 State Strategy Status Report, and the
associated reductions are also described in the IV.B.2.d of this
notice. The 2014 SIP Update provides a list of CARB rules for mobile
sources, since 1990 through the plan's development, in Table E-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ The 2014 SIP Update states, ``there are no TCMs in the SIP
for the Coachella Valley and Western Mojave Desert because upwind
emissions from the South Coast Air Basin and Ventura County largely
influence air quality in both the Coachella Valley and Western
Mojave Desert. TCMs have been implemented by the SCAG in those
upwind areas.'' (Appendix E, p. E-3)
    \55\ Appendix E of the SIP Update contains a full list of the
TCSs adopted by the state since 1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. The EPA's Evaluation of the VMT Emissions Offset Demonstration
    The Coachella Valley VMT emissions offset demonstrations
established 2002 as the base year for the purpose of the VMT emissions
offset demonstration for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. The base year
for VMT emissions offset demonstration purposes should generally be the
same base year used for nonattainment planning purposes. In today's
action, the EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base year inventory
for Coachella Valley for the purposes of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standards. Thus, CARB's selection of 2002 as the base year for the VMT
emissions offset demonstration for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards is
appropriate.
    As shown in Table 8, the results from these calculations establish
projected actual attainment-year VOC emissions of 2 tpd in the
Coachella Valley for the 1997 8-hour standards demonstration. By
comparing these values against the corresponding VMT offset ceiling
value, we can determine whether additional TCMs or TCSs would need to
be adopted and implemented to offset any increase in emissions due
solely to VMT and trips. Because the projected actual emissions are
less than the corresponding VMT offset ceiling emissions, the State's
demonstration shows compliance with the VMT emissions offset
requirement. This means that the adopted TCSs and TCMs are sufficient
to offset the growth in emissions from the growth in VMT and vehicle
trips in Coachella Valley for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Taking
into account the creditable post-baseline year TCMs and TCSs, the
demonstration shows Coachella Valley offset hypothetical growth in
emissions due to growth in VMT by 2 tpd of VOC, which is more than the
required 1 tpd offset.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ The offsetting VOC emissions reductions from the TCSs and
TCMs put in place after the base year can be determined by
subtracting the ``projected actual'' emissions estimates from the
``no action'' emissions estimates in table 8. For the purposes of
the 8-hour ozone demonstration, the offsetting emissions reductions,
2 tpd (4 tpd minus 2 tpd), exceed the growth in emissions from
growth in VMT and vehicle trips (1 tpd).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our review of the 2014 SIP Update, we find the State's
analysis to be acceptable and agree that the State has adopted
sufficient TCSs and TCMs to offset the growth in emissions from growth
in VMT and vehicle trips in the Coachella Valley for the purposes of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Thus we find that the VMT emissions
offset demonstration for this area complies with the VMT emissions
offset requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A), consistent with 40 CFR
40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10). Therefore, we propose approval
of the revised VMT emissions offset demonstration for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standards, contained in the 2014 SIP Update, as a revision to the
California SIP.

V. The EPA's Proposed Actions

A. The EPA's Proposed Approvals

    For the reasons discussed above, the EPA is proposing to approve
the Coachella Valley Ozone Plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
Plan includes the relevant portions of the following documents: (1)
``Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan,'' South Coast Air Quality
Management District, June 2007; (2) CARB's ``2007 State Strategy for
the California State Implementation Plan,'' Release Date April 26, 2007
and Appendices A-G, Release Date May 7, 2007; (3) CARB's ``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,'' Release Date: March 24, 2009; (4) CARB's
``Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State
Implementation Plans (SIP) for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley
Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions,'' Release Date March 29, 2011;
and (5) CARB's ``Staff Report, Proposed Updates to the 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standard, State Implementation Plans; Coachella Valley and
Western Mojave Desert,'' Release Date: September 22, 2014.
    The EPA is proposing to approve the following elements of the
Coachella Valley Ozone Plan under CAA section 110(k)(3):
    1. The RACM demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(17);
    2. The ROP and RFP demonstrations as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and
51.1100(o)(4);
    3. The attainment demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(12);

    4. The demonstration that the SIP provides for transportation
control strategies and measures sufficient to offset any growth in
emissions from growth in VMT or the number of vehicle trips, and to
provide for RFP and attainment, as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 182(d)(1)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1) and 51.1100(o)(10).
    We are also approving the revised MVEBs for RFP for 2017 and for
the attainment year of 2018, because they are derived from approvable
RFP and attainment demonstrations and meet the requirements of CAA
sections 176(c) and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.

B. Request for Public Comments

    The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document or on other relevant matters. We will accept comments
from the public on this proposal for the next 30 days. We will consider
these comments before taking final action.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those
imposed by state law.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP is not approved to apply on any
Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: October 19, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016-26376 Filed 10-31-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P