[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 20, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2993-3001]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00739]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0636; FRL-9940-83-Region 9]

Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes;
California; San Joaquin Valley; Reclassification as Serious
Nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to reclassify the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) Moderate
nonattainment area, including areas of Indian country within it, as a
Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5 national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), based on the EPA's determination
that the area cannot practicably attain these NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date of December 31, 2015. As a consequence of this
reclassification, California must submit, no later than 18 months from
the effective date of this reclassification, a Serious area attainment
plan including a demonstration that the plan provides for attainment of
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards in the SJV area as
expeditiously as practicable and no later than December 31, 2019. The
State must also submit, no later than 12 months after the effective
date of this reclassification, nonattainment new source review (NNSR)
SIP revisions to implement the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV
area, to the extent those requirements have not previously been met.

DATES: This rule is effective on February 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0636
for this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-
3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at http://www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at
the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multi-
volume reports), and some may not be publicly available in either
location (e.g., confidential business information (CBI)). To inspect
the docket materials in person, please schedule an appointment during
normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Action
II. Summary of Final Action
III. Public Comments and EPA Responses
IV. Final Action
    A. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable
Attainment Dates
    B. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country
    C. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Action

    On January 13, 2015 (80 FR 1816), the EPA proposed to approve
portions of California's Moderate area plan to address the 2006 primary
and secondary 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV and to
reclassify the SJV nonattainment area, including areas of Indian
country within it, from Moderate nonattainment to Serious nonattainment
for these standards, based on the EPA's determination that the area
cannot practicably attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date
of December 31, 2015.\1\ Under section 188(b)(1) of the CAA, prior to
an area's attainment date, the EPA has discretionary authority to
reclassify as a Serious nonattainment area ``any area that the
Administrator determines cannot practicably attain'' the
PM2.5 NAAQS by the Moderate area attainment date.\2\ On
March 4, 2013, the State submitted a Moderate area attainment plan
demonstrating that the SJV area cannot practicably attain the 2006
PM2.5 standards by the applicable Moderate area attainment
date of December 31, 2015. The EPA's proposed reclassification of the
SJV area was based upon our evaluation of the State's submission and
ambient air quality data for the 2013-2014 period indicating that it is
not practicable for certain monitoring sites within the SJV area to
show PM2.5 design values at or below the level of the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS by December 31, 2015.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See proposed rule at 80 FR 1816 (January 13, 2015) for a
more detailed discussion of the background for this action,
including the history of the PM2.5 NAAQS established in
2006, health effects and sources of PM2.5, designation of
the SJV as nonattainment for the PM2.5 standards, and the
EPA's actions on the submittals from the state of California to
address the nonattainment area planning requirements for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV.
    \2\ Section 188(b)(1) of the Act is a general expression of
delegated rulemaking authority. See ``State Implementation Plans;
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) (hereafter
``General Preamble'') at 13537, n. 15. Although subparagraphs (A)
and (B) of section 188(b)(1) contain specific timeframes for the EPA
to reclassify any areas that it determines cannot practicably attain
the PM2.5 standards by the applicable attainment date,
these subparagraphs do not restrict the general authority to
reclassify an area, as appropriate, at any time before the
attainment date but simply specify that, at a minimum, the EPA's
authority must be exercised at certain times. See id.
    \3\ The PM2.5 monitoring data that EPA reviewed
indicate that 24-hour PM2.5 design values are at 65 ug/m3
in the SJV, which is well above the level of the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS (35 ug/m3). EPA also calculated ``maximum
allowed'' 2015 concentrations that would enable the area to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the end of 2015 and found
that all monitoring sites examined--Bakersfield-California Ave,
Bakersfield-Planz Rd., Fresno-Garland, Fresno-Pacific, and Hanford--
would have to record negative PM2.5 concentrations in
2015 to show PM2.5 design values at or below the level of
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 80 FR 1816, 1834 and n. 69
(January 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our proposed rule, we explained that, under section 188(c)(2) of
the Act, the attainment date for a Serious area ``shall be as
expeditiously as practicable but no later than the end of the tenth
calendar year beginning after the area's designation as nonattainment .
. .'' The SJV was designated nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS effective December 14, 2009.\4\ Therefore, as a
result of our reclassification of the SJV area as a Serious
nonattainment area, the attainment date under section 188(c)(2) of the
Act for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is as
expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our proposed rule also identified the additional Serious area
attainment plan elements that California would, upon reclassification,
have to submit to satisfy the statutory requirements that apply to
Serious areas, including the requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title
I of the Act.\5\ The EPA explained that, under section 189(b)(2) of the
Act, the State must submit the required provisions to implement best
available control measures (BACM), including best available control
technology (BACT), no later than 18 months after reclassification and
must submit the required attainment demonstration no later than 4 years
after reclassification. Given the December 31, 2019, Serious area
attainment date applicable to this area under CAA section 188(c)(2),
however, we noted that we expect the State to adopt and submit a
Serious area plan for these NAAQS well before the statutory SIP
submittal deadline in CAA section 189(b)(2).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See proposed rule at 80 FR 1842 (January 13, 2015).
    \6\ Id. at 1843.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program
revisions to establish appropriate ``major stationary source''
thresholds for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors
in accordance with CAA section 189(b)(3), the EPA proposed to require
the State to submit these NNSR SIP revisions no later than 12 months
after the effective date of final reclassification, and requested
comment on this proposed 12-month timeframe.

II. Summary of Final Action

    Today we are finalizing only our proposal to reclassify the SJV
area as a Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS. We are not taking final action at this time on our proposal to
approve elements of California's Moderate area plan for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV and will complete that action at a
later time.
    As a consequence of our reclassification of the SJV area as Serious
nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, California is
required to submit additional SIP revisions to satisfy the statutory
requirements that apply to Serious areas, including the requirements of
subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act. For the reasons provided in
Section III of this preamble, the EPA is requiring the State to adopt
and submit all required components of the Serious Area attainment plan
for the SJV no later than 18 months after the effective date of this
reclassification.
    We are finalizing our proposal to require that California adopt and
submit NNSR SIP revisions to implement subpart 4 requirements for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV area no later than 12 months
after the effective date of this reclassification, to the extent those
requirements have not already been met by the NNSR SIP revisions due
May 7, 2016 for purposes of implementing the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 (April 7, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The attainment date under section 188(c)(2) of the Act for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in this area is as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than December 31, 2019.

III. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA received two comment letters on our proposed actions.
Comment letters were submitted by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District (``SJVAPCD'' or ``District''), and by Earthjustice on
behalf of the Central Valley Air Quality Coalition, Greenaction, the
Association of Irritated Residents, the Sierra Club--Tehipite Chapter,
and Global Community Monitor, (``Earthjustice'') on

February 27, 2015, prior to the close of the comment period on our
proposal.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See letter dated February 27, 2015, from Sheraz Gill,
Director of Strategies and Incentives at SJVAPCD, to Wienke Tax, EPA
Region 9, ``Re: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0636, Comments on
Proposed Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans;
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California;
San Joaquin Valley Moderate Area Plan and Reclassification as
Serious Nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,'' and
letter dated February 27, 2015 from Paul Cort and Adenike Adeyeye,
Earthjustice, to Ms. Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office, USEPA Region
9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because we are finalizing only our proposal to reclassify the SJV
area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, we
are responding only to comments pertaining to the reclassification and
its consequences. We summarize and respond to the relevant comments
below. In a separate rulemaking, we will take final action on
California's submitted Moderate area plan for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS in the SJV and will respond to comments pertaining to our
proposed action on the submitted plan at that time.
    Comment 1: The SJVAPCD supports the EPA's proposal to require the
state to submit a revised Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) rule
within twelve months of the EPA's serious nonattainment
reclassification. However, the District asks for the EPA to clarify
that this submission will not be required before the EPA can grant an
extension of the attainment deadline for the 1997 PM2.5
standards under CAA section 188(e). The District comments that the EPA
has provided ``no valid justification'' for requiring the revised NNSR
rule to be submitted before the EPA can approve the attainment deadline
extension, and argues that CAA section 188(e) contains ``no mention of
NSR, either directly or by implication, that would lead one to believe
that the updated NSR rule is required prior to approval of the
attainment deadline extension.'' The District asserts that the EPA is
asking it to begin an expedited process to adopt a serious area NSR
rule before the area has been reclassified as serious nonattainment and
without implementation rules or guidance.
    Response 1: We are finalizing our proposal to require that
California adopt and submit NNSR SIP revisions to implement subpart 4
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV area no
later than 12 months after the effective date of this reclassification.
We note that California is required to submit NNSR SIP revisions
addressing the requirements for Serious PM2.5 nonattainment
areas under subpart 4 by May 7, 2016, as a result of our previous
reclassification of the SJV as Serious nonattainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS.\9\ Nonattainment NSR SIP revisions that satisfy
the Serious Area requirements of CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e) for
purposes of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS may also satisfy these
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 (April 7, 2015).
We are making minor clarifications to the regulatory text in 40 CFR
52.245(c) to indicate that the May 7, 2016 deadline therein pertains
only to NNSR SIP revisions necessary to implement the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The District's comments about the criteria for an extension of the
attainment date for the 1997 PM2.5 standards under CAA
section 188(e) are not relevant to this action, which pertains only to
the SJV area's classification for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and
related SIP submission deadlines. This reclassification action does not
affect the State's obligations with respect to the 1997
PM2.5 standards or any other NAAQS. We previously responded
to the District's comments concerning the relevance of NNSR SIP
revisions to the section 188(e) criteria for an extension of the
attainment date for the 1997 PM2.5 standards, as part of our
final action reclassifying the SJV area as a Serious nonattainment area
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (see 80 FR 18528, April 7, 2015).
    Comment 2: Earthjustice supports the EPA's proposed
reclassification of the SJV to serious nonattainment, but comments that
the agency should impose earlier deadlines for the submission of BACM
measures and the serious area attainment demonstration. Earthjustice
states that CAA section 189(b)(2) requires a state to submit an
attainment demonstration for an area within 4 years after the area is
reclassified to serious nonattainment and a BACM plan within 18 months
after the area is reclassified. Earthjustice argues that, had the EPA
applied the requirements of subpart 4 at the time, the EPA would have
had to reclassify the SJV area as Serious within 18 months after the
required date for the area's Moderate area plan, i.e., by December 14,
2012, and that the SIP submission deadlines should therefore be
measured from this date. According to Earthjustice, this would mean
that the BACM measures were due June 14, 2014, and that the serious
area attainment demonstration is due December 14, 2016. For this
reason, Earthjustice asserts that the EPA should declare the BACM
submission already overdue (triggering a sanctions clock), and should
require the state to submit its attainment demonstration by no later
than December 14, 2016. Earthjustice contends that the EPA's failure to
apply these deadlines will ``serve to perpetuate EPA's error'' in not
initially applying subpart 4 requirements to implementation of the
PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Earthjustice further argues that although the EPA did not interpret
the schedules in section 189(b)(2) to apply to PM2.5 plans
prior to the D.C. Circuit's decision in Natural Res. Def. Council v.
EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (``NRDC''), the agency's decision to
apply these deadlines would not represent improper retroactive
application of the statute. In support, Earthjustice cites the U.S.
Supreme Court in Rivers v. Roadway Express, Inc., 511 U.S. 298 (1994)
for the proposition that judicial construction of a statute interprets
the statute's meaning ``continuously since the date when it became
law,'' ``before as well as after'' the court's decision.
Notwithstanding disagreements about what constitutes retroactive
application of subpart 4 deadlines, however, Earthjustice argues that
the EPA should exercise its discretion, as it has done for the NSR SIP
deadline, to set a December 14, 2016 deadline for submission of the
serious area attainment demonstration.
    Response 2: We disagree with the commenter's assertion that the
deadlines in CAA section 189(b)(2) for submission of the State's BACM
plan and Serious Area attainment plan should be measured from December
14, 2012. Section 189(b)(1) of the Act requires that ``each State in
which all or part of a Serious Area is located'' submit a Serious Area
attainment demonstration and BACM provisions. Section 189(b)(2)
requires the State to submit the Serious Area attainment demonstration
``no later than 4 years after reclassification of the area to Serious''
and to submit the BACM provisions ``no later than 18 months after
reclassification of the area as a Serious Area.'' These provisions of
the Act plainly require that states submit Serious Area SIP elements
only for PM2.5 nonattainment areas that have been
reclassified as Serious under subpart 4.
    Prior to this reclassification action, the SJV area was classified
as a Moderate Area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and therefore
was not subject to the requirements for Serious Area plans in CAA
section 189(b) for these NAAQS. Because the EPA did not reclassify the
SJV area as a Serious Area effective December 14, 2012, it is not
appropriate to establish SIP submission deadlines under section
189(b)(2) based on a December 14, 2012 reclassification date. Moreover,
to do so in this instance would mean that the BACM provisions

are overdue (as of June 14, 2014) and that the Serious Area attainment
demonstration is due December 14, 2016, less than one year after the
effective date of this final reclassification action. We do not believe
that the NRDC court's January 4, 2013 decision should be interpreted so
as to retroactively impose on the State subpart 4 requirements and
deadlines of which it had no notice.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In rulemakings for individual areas subsequent to the NRDC
decision, the EPA has explained in detail its view that the
requirements of the CAA should not be implemented retroactively
based upon the court's decision. See, e.g., 78 FR 41698 (July 11,
2013) (final redesignation of Indianapolis to attainment for 1997
annual PM2.5 standard). The U.S. District Court for the
District of Colorado recently agreed with the EPA's position that
the court's decision in NRDC does not require retroactive
application of Subpart 4 requirements. See WildEarth Guardians v.
Gina McCarthy, Case No. 13-CV-1275-WJM-KMT (D. Colo., March 11,
2014) (dismissing plaintiff's claim that the EPA missed a non-
discretionary deadline based on retroactive application of Subpart
4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also disagree with the commenter's argument that, had the EPA
applied subpart 4, the EPA would have had to reclassify the SJV area by
December 14, 2012. The commenter contends that the EPA's authority to
reclassify a Moderate area as Serious under CAA section 188(b)(1) is
available only within the timeframe specified in section 188(b)(1)(B),
i.e., within 18 months after the due date for the State's Moderate area
SIP. As explained in the 1992 General Preamble, however, ``[u]nder the
plain meaning of the terms of section 188(b)(1), EPA has general
discretion to reclassify at any time before the applicable attainment
date any area EPA determines cannot practicably attain the standards by
such date'' (emphases added).\11\ With respect to the dates specified
in subsections (A) and (B) of section 188(b)(1), the EPA specifically
explained in the General Preamble that ``[t]hese subparagraphs do not
restrict the general authority [in section 188(b)(1)] but simply
specify that, at a minimum, it must be exercised at certain times.''
\12\ This interpretation of section 188(b)(1) as allowing the EPA to
reclassify moderate areas as serious ``at any time EPA determines that
an area cannot practicably attain the standards by the applicable
attainment date'' facilitates the statutory objective of attaining the
PM-10 standards--e.g., by ensuring that additional control measures
such as BACM are implemented sooner and by expediting the application
of more stringent new source review requirements.\13\ The EPA
reiterated this interpretation of section 188(b)(1) in the 1994 PM-10
Addendum \14\ and in several discretionary reclassification actions
subsequent to the 1990 CAA Amendments.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537 at n. 15 (April 16,
1992).
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537.
    \14\ ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10
Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10
Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990,'' 59 FR 41998, 41999 (August 16, 1994) (the ``PM-10
Addendum'').
    \15\ See 58 FR 3334, 3336 (Jan. 8, 1993) (discharging EPA's
statutory duty under section 188(b)(1)(A) to ``reclassify
appropriate initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas as serious by
December 31, 1991'' but noting EPA's broad discretion under section
188(b)(1) to reclassify additional areas at a later date); see also
80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015) (final discretionary reclassification of
San Joaquin Valley for 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS signed March 27,
2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, with respect to areas designated nonattainment by
operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments (i.e.,
``initial'' PM-10 nonattainment areas), the EPA's longstanding
interpretation of section 188(b)(1)(A) has been that ``the amended Act
specifies certain dates by which EPA must propose to reclassify
appropriate moderate areas as serious. . . and take final action,''
where the EPA determines that the area cannot ``practicably'' attain
the PM-10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994.\16\ The EPA further explained,
however, that ``EPA also has discretionary authority under section
188(b)(1) to reclassify any of these areas as serious at any time, if
EPA determines they cannot practicably attain the PM-10 NAAQS by
December 31, 1994,'' \17\ and provided examples of the circumstances
that may warrant such discretionary reclassification at a later date--
i.e., after the December 31, 1991 date specified in section
188(b)(1)(A).\18\ In the PM-10 Addendum, the EPA stated that
``[s]ection 188(b)(1)(A) provides an accelerated schedule by which EPA
is to reclassify appropriate initial PM-10 nonattainment areas'' but
reiterated the Agency's interpretation of section 188(b)(1) as a
general grant of authority to also reclassify initial PM-10 areas at
later points in time before the attainment date.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537. Under section
188(c)(1) of the Act, December 31, 1994 was the latest permissible
Moderate area attainment date for an area designated nonattainment
for PM-10 by operation of law under the 1990 CAA Amendments.
    \17\ General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13537.
    \18\ Id. (``The EPA may exercise this discretion where, for
example, EPA originally believed an area could attain the PM-10
NAAQS by December 31, 1994 but later determines that it cannot
attain''); see also 56 FR 58656, 58657 (Nov. 21, 1991) (noting that
``EPA also has discretion to reclassify any of these areas as
serious after December 31, 1991 (e.g., after reviewing the State's
PM-10 SIP), if EPA determines they cannot practicably attain the PM-
10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994'') and 58 FR 3334, 3336 (Jan. 8, 1993)
(noting that EPA may in the future reclassify additional PM-10
nonattainment areas using its discretionary authority in section
188(b)(1)).
    \19\ PM-10 Addendum, 59 FR 41998, 41999 (August 16, 1994) (``In
the future, EPA anticipates that, generally, any decision to
reclassify an initial PM-10 nonattainment area before the attainment
date will be based on specific facts or circumstances demonstrating
that the NAAQS cannot practicably be attained by December 31, 1994*
* *'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Likewise, the EPA has long interpreted section 188(b)(1)(B) as
establishing a ``timeframe within which EPA is to reclassify
appropriate areas designated nonattainment for PM-10 subsequent to
enactment of the 1990 Amendments'' but not as a limitation on EPA's
general authority to reclassify such areas at any time before the
applicable attainment date.\20\ In the PM-10 Addendum, the EPA
reiterated its view that the directive in section 188(b)(1)(B) ``does
not restrict EPA's general authority, but simply specifies that it is
to be exercised, as appropriate, in accordance with certain dates.''
\21\ The EPA recently finalized a discretionary reclassification action
for the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area shortly before the
applicable attainment date, consistent with this interpretation of CAA
section 188(b)(1).\22\ In light of the EPA's longstanding and
consistent interpretation of section 188(b)(1) as a general grant of
discretionary authority to reclassify any Moderate area as a Serious
area at any time before the applicable attainment date, based on a
determination that the area cannot practicably attain the NAAQS by that
date, we disagree with the commenter's claim that the EPA should have
reclassified the SJV area as Serious by December 14, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ General Preamble, 57 FR at 13537 and PM-10 Addendum, 59 FR
at 41999.
    \21\ PM-10 Addendum, 59 FR 41998, 41999 at n. 4 (August 16,
1994).
    \22\ See 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015) (final discretionary
reclassification of San Joaquin Valley for 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS signed March 27, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon further consideration and in light of the specific
circumstances in the SJV PM2.5 nonattainment area, however,
the EPA is exercising its discretion to establish a deadline of 18
months from the effective date of this final reclassification action
for the State to submit all required components of the Serious Area
attainment plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV. An 18-
month deadline for submission of these SIP elements is appropriate in
this instance because it both enables the EPA to evaluate the required
attainment plan well before the outermost attainment date applicable to
the area under CAA section 188(c)(2) and enables the State to develop
its strategy

for attaining the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in conjunction with its
development of a plan to provide for attainment of the 2012 primary
annual PM2.5 NAAQS in this same area, which is due October
15, 2016.\23\ Although the State's obligations with respect to
implementation of a Moderate area plan for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS are separate and distinct from its obligations with respect to
implementation of a Serious area plan for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, it is reasonable in this instance to require the State to
develop its control strategies for both PM2.5 NAAQS in the
SJV area in a similar timeframe, considering the benefits of
streamlining these planning processes to the extent possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The EPA designated and classified the SJV as Moderate
nonattainment for the 2012 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS
effective April 15, 2015. 80 FR 2206, 2215-16 (January 15, 2015).
Under CAA section 189(a)(2)(B), California is required to adopt and
submit a plan to provide for attainment of these NAAQS within 18
months after the nonattainment designation, i.e., by October 15,
2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, an 18-month deadline for submission of the Serious
area plan is consistent with both the timeframe for initial Moderate
area plan submissions upon designation of an area as nonattainment and
the timeframe for Serious area plan submissions following an EPA
determination of failure to attain and reclassification by operation of
law under CAA section 188(b)(2).\24\ It is reasonable for the EPA to
exercise its discretion to establish a similar SIP submission deadline
in this instance, given the proximity of this action to the Moderate
area attainment date (December 31, 2015) and the likelihood that,
should the attainment date pass, the EPA would have to determine under
section 188(b)(2) that the SJV area failed to attain the
PM2.5 NAAQS by that date. Although CAA section 189(b)(2)
generally provides for up to 4 years after a discretionary
reclassification for the State to submit the required attainment
demonstration, we find it appropriate in this case to establish an
earlier SIP submission deadline to assure timely implementation of the
statutory requirements.\25\ Furthermore, the 18-month SIP submission
deadline that we are finalizing in this action requires California to
submit its Serious Area plan for the SJV area before the statutory SIP
submission deadline that would apply upon reclassification by operation
of law under section 188(b)(2).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ CAA sections 189(a)(2)(B) and 189(b)(2).
    \25\ Section 189(b)(2) establishes outer bounds on the SIP
submission deadlines and does not preclude the EPA's establishment
of earlier deadlines as necessary or appropriate to assure
consistency among the required submissions and to implement the
statutory requirements, including the requirement that attainment be
as expeditious as practicable.
    \26\ Under CAA section 188(b)(2), the EPA must determine within
6 months after the applicable attainment date whether the area
attained the NAAQS by that date. If the EPA determines that a
Moderate Area is not in attainment after the applicable attainment
date, the area is reclassified by operation of law as a Serious
Area, and the Serious Area attainment plan is due within 18 months
after such reclassification. CAA sections 188(b)(2) and 189(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the EPA is requiring California to submit revised
nonattainment NSR program requirements no later than 12 months after
final reclassification, to the extent those requirements have not
already been met by the NNSR revisions due May 7, 2016 for purposes of
implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV.\27\ The Act
does not specify a deadline for the State's submission of SIP revisions
to meet NNSR program requirements to lower the ``major stationary
source'' threshold from 100 tons per year (tpy) to 70 tpy (CAA section
189(b)(3)) and to address the control requirements for major stationary
sources of PM2.5 precursors (CAA section 189(e)) \28\
following reclassification of a Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment
area as Serious nonattainment under subpart 4. Pursuant to the EPA's
gap-filling authority in CAA section 301(a) and to effectuate the
statutory control requirements in section 189 of the Act, the EPA is
requiring the State to submit these NNSR SIP revisions, as well as any
necessary analysis of and additional control requirements for major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, no later than 12
months after the effective date of final reclassification of the SJV
area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 (April 7,
2015).
    \28\ Section 189(e) requires that the control requirements
applicable to major stationary sources of PM2.5 also
apply to major stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors,
except where the state demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that
such sources do not contribute significantly to PM2.5
levels that exceed the standard in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

A. Reclassification as Serious Nonattainment and Applicable Attainment
Date

    In accordance with section 188(b)(1) of the Act, the EPA is taking
final action to reclassify the SJV area from Moderate to Serious
nonattainment for the 2006 primary and secondary 24-hour
PM2.5 standards of 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based on the EPA's
determination that the SJV area cannot practicably attain these
standards by the applicable attainment date of December 31, 2015.
    Under section 188(c)(2) of the Act, the attainment date for a
Serious area ``shall be as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than the end of the tenth calendar year beginning after the area's
designation as nonattainment. . . .'' The SJV area was designated
nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS effective December
14, 2009.\29\ Therefore, as a result of our reclassification of the SJV
area as a Serious nonattainment area, the attainment date under section
188(c)(2) of the Act for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area
is as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Reclassification of Reservation Areas of Indian Country

    Eight Indian tribes are located within the boundaries of the San
Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area: The Big Sandy
Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, the Cold Springs Rancheria of
Mono Indians of California, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of
California, the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California,
the Santa Rosa Rancheria of the Tachi Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain
Rancheria of California, the Tejon Indian Tribe, and the Tule River
Indian Tribe of the Tule River Reservation.
    We have considered the relevance of our final action to reclassify
the SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 standards to each tribe located within the SJV area.
As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, we believe that the
same facts and circumstances that support the reclassification for the
non-Indian country lands also support reclassification for reservation
areas of Indian country \30\ and any other areas of Indian country
where the EPA or a tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has
jurisdiction located within the SJV nonattainment area.\31\ In this
final action, the EPA is therefore exercising our authority under CAA
section 188(b)(1) to reclassify reservation areas of Indian country and
any other areas of Indian country where the EPA or a tribe

has demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction geographically located
in the SJV nonattainment area. Section 188(b)(1) broadly authorizes the
EPA to reclassify a nonattainment area--including any such area of
Indian country located within such area--that the EPA determines cannot
practicably attain the relevant standards by the applicable attainment
date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ ``Indian country'' as defined at 18 U.S.C. 1151 refers to:
``(a) All land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the
issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through
the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the
borders of the United States whether within the original or
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or
without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the
Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-
of-way running through the same.''
    \31\ See 80 FR 1816, at 1843, 1844 (January 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the considerations outlined above and in our proposed
rulemaking that support retention of a uniformly-classified
PM2.5 nonattainment area, and our finding that it is
impracticable for the area to attain by the applicable attainment date,
we are finalizing our reclassification of the reservation areas of
Indian country and any other areas of Indian country where the EPA or a
tribe has demonstrated that the tribe has jurisdiction within the San
Joaquin Valley nonattainment area to Serious for the 2006
PM2.5 standards.
    The effect of reclassification would be to lower the applicable
``major stationary source'' emissions thresholds for direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors for purposes of the
NNSR program and the Title V operating permit program (CAA sections
189(b)(3) and 501(2)(B)), thus subjecting more new or modified
stationary sources to these requirements. The reclassification may also
lower the de minimis threshold under the CAA's General Conformity
requirements (40 CFR part 93, subpart B) from 100 tpy to 70 tpy. Under
the General Conformity requirements (40 CFR part 93, subpart B),
federal agencies bear the responsibility of determining conformity of
actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas that require federal
permits, approvals, or funding. Such permits, approvals or funding by
federal agencies for projects in these areas of Indian country may be
more difficult to obtain because of the lower de minimis thresholds.
    Given the potential implications of the reclassification, the EPA
contacted tribal officials early in the process of developing this
action to permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its
development. The EPA invited tribal officials to consult during the
development of the proposed rule and following signature of the
proposed rule.\32\ On February 17, 2015, the EPA received a letter
dated January 30, 2015 from the Tejon Tribe requesting information
about the proposed reclassification. The EPA subsequently invited the
Tejon Tribe several times to participate in a conference call but
received no response from the Tribe. No other Indian tribe has
expressed an interest in discussing this action with the EPA. We
continue to invite Indian tribes in the SJV to contact the EPA with any
questions about the effects of this reclassification on tribal
interests and air quality. We note that although eligible tribes may
opt to seek EPA approval of relevant tribal programs under the CAA,
none of the affected tribes will be required to submit an
implementation plan to address this reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ As discussed in more detail in our proposed rule, the EPA
sent letters to tribal officials inviting government-to-government
consultation. The letters can be found in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. PM2.5 Serious Area SIP Requirements

    As a consequence of our reclassification of the SJV area as a
Serious nonattainment area for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
California is required to submit additional SIP revisions to satisfy
the statutory requirements that apply to Serious areas, including the
requirements of subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act.
    The Serious area SIP elements that California must submit are as
follows:
    1. Provisions to assure that BACM, including BACT for stationary
sources, for the control of direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors shall be implemented no later than 4 years
after the area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B));
    2. A demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than December 31, 2019, or where the State is seeking an extension of
the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration that
attainment by December 31, 2019 is impracticable and that the plan
provides for attainment by the most expeditious alternative date
practicable (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A));
    3. Plan provisions that require reasonable further progress (RFP)
(CAA section 172(c)(2));
    4. Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 years
until the area is redesignated attainment and which demonstrate RFP
toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
    5. Provisions to assure that control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of direct PM2.5 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, except where the
State demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
standard in the area (CAA section 189(e));
    6. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5
precursors in the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
    7. Contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet
RFP or to attain by the applicable attainment date (CAA section
172(c)(9)); and
    8. A revision to the NNSR program to establish appropriate ``major
stationary source'' \33\ thresholds for direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ For any Serious area, the terms ``major source'' and
``major stationary source'' include any stationary source that emits
or has the potential to emit at least 70 tons per year of
PM10 (CAA section 189(b)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 189(b)(2) states, in relevant part, that the State must
submit the required BACM provisions ``no later than 18 months after
reclassification of the area as a Serious Area'' and must submit the
required attainment demonstration ``no later than 4 years after
reclassification of the area to Serious.'' For the reasons provided in
Section III of this preamble (Public Comments and EPA Responses), the
EPA is requiring the State to adopt and submit all components of the
Serious area attainment plan for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the
SJV no later than 18 months after the effective date of
reclassification.
    Finally, for the reasons provided in our proposed rule \34\ and in
our response to comments above, we are finalizing our proposal to
require the State to submit NNSR SIP revisions to implement subpart 4
Serious Area requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the
SJV area no later than 12 months after the effective date of this
reclassification, to the extent those requirements have not already
been met by the NNSR revisions due May 7, 2016 for purposes of
implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the SJV.\35\
Nonattainment NSR SIP revisions that satisfy the Serious Area
requirements of CAA sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e) for purposes of the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS may also satisfy these requirements for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 80 FR 1816, at 1843. (January 13, 2015).
    \35\ See 40 CFR 52.245(c) and 80 FR 18528, 18533 (April 7,
2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. 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 exempt from review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) because it relates to a designation of an area for air
quality purposes and will reclassify the SJV from its current air
quality designation of Moderate nonattainment to Serious nonattainment
for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. This action does not contain any information collection
activities.

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. The final
rule requires the state to adopt and submit SIP revisions to satisfy
the statutory requirements that apply to Serious areas, and would not
itself directly regulate any small entities (see section III.C of this
final rule).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more and does not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538). This action
itself imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal
governments, or the private sector. The final action reclassifies the
SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, which triggers existing statutory duties for
the state to submit SIP revisions. Such a reclassification in and of
itself does not impose any federal intergovernmental mandate. The final
action does not require any tribes to submit implementation plans.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications.

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action may have tribal implications. However, it will neither
impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized
tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Eight Indian tribes are
located within the boundaries of the SJV nonattainment area for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: The Big Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of
California, the Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians of California,
the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians of California, the Picayune
Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California, the Santa Rosa Rancheria
of the Tachi Yokut Tribe, the Table Mountain Rancheria of California,
the Tejon Indian Tribe, and the Tule River Indian Tribe of the Tule
River Reservation. We note that none of the tribes located in the SJV
nonattainment area has requested eligibility to administer programs
under the Clean Air Act. This final action affects the EPA's
implementation of the new source review program because of the lower
``major stationary source'' threshold triggered by reclassification
(CAA 189(b)(3)). The final action may also affect new or modified
stationary sources proposed in these areas that require federal
permits, approvals, or funding. Such projects are subject to the
requirements of the EPA's General Conformity rule, and federal permits,
approvals, or funding for the projects may be more difficult to obtain
because of the lower de minimis thresholds triggered by
reclassification.
    Given these potential implications, consistent with the EPA Policy
on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes, the EPA contacted
tribal officials early in the process of developing this action to
permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development.
The EPA invited tribal officials to consult during the development of
the proposed rule and following signature of the proposed rule. As
discussed in more detail in our proposed action, we sent letters to
leaders of the tribes with areas of Indian country in the SJV
nonattainment area inviting government-to-government consultation on
the rulemaking effort. On February 17, 2015, the EPA received a letter
dated January 30, 2015 from the Tejon Tribe requesting information
about the proposed reclassification. The EPA subsequently invited the
Tejon Tribe several times to participate in a conference call but
received no response from the Tribe. No other Indian tribe has
expressed an interest in discussing this action with the EPA. We
continue to invite Indian tribes in the SJV to contact the EPA with any
questions about the effects of this reclassification on tribal
interests and air quality.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) 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 reclassifies
the SJV nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, which triggers additional Serious area planning
requirements under the CAA. This action does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

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

    This final 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

    This action is not subject to the requirements of Section 12(d) of
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) because it does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income
or indigenous populations. This action reclassifies the SJV
nonattainment area as Serious nonattainment for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, which triggers additional Serious area planning
requirements under the CAA.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal

Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is
published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be effective on February
19, 2016.

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 21, 2016. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: December 22, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. Section 52.245 is amended by revising paragraph (c) and adding
paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.245  New Source Review rules.

* * * * *
    (c) By May 7, 2016, the New Source Review rules for
PM2.5 for the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District must be revised and submitted as a SIP revision. The
rules must satisfy the requirements of sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e)
and all other applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act for
implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
* * * * *
    (e) By February 21, 2017, the New Source Review rules for
PM2.5 for the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District must be revised and submitted as a SIP revision. The
rules must satisfy the requirements of sections 189(b)(3) and 189(e)
and all other applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act for
implementation of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

0
3. Section 52.247 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.247  Control Strategy and regulations: Fine Particle Matter.

* * * * *
    (e) By August 21, 2017, California must adopt and submit a Serious
Area plan to provide for attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
in the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area. The
Serious Area plan must include emissions inventories, an attainment
demonstration, best available control measures, a reasonable further
progress plan, quantitative milestones, contingency measures, and such
other measures as may be necessary or appropriate to provide for
attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date, in accordance with the requirements of subparts 1 and
4 of part D, title I of the Clean Air Act.

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
5. Section 81.305 is amended in the table titled ``California--2006 24-
Hour PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary],'' by revising the
entries under ``San Joaquin Valley, CA'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.305  California.

* * * * *

                                      California--2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Designation \a\                         Classification
         Designated area          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Date \1\              Type             Date \2\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
San Joaquin Valley, CA:
    Fresno County................                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.
    Kern County (part)...........                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.

        That portion of Kern
         County which lies west
         and north of a line
         described as follows:
         Beginning at the Kern-
         Los Angeles County
         boundary and running
         north and east along the
         northwest boundary of
         the Rancho La Libre Land
         Grant to the point of
         intersection with the
         range line common to R.
         16 W. and R. 17 W., San
         Bernardino Base and
         Meridian; north along
         the range line to the
         point of intersection
         with the Rancho El Tejon
         Land Grant boundary;
         then southeast,
         northeast, and northwest
         along the boundary of
         the Rancho El Tejon Land
         Grant to the northwest
         corner of S. 3, T. 11
         N., R. 17 W.; then west
         1.2 miles; then north to
         the Rancho El Tejon Land
         Grant boundary; then
         northwest along the
         Rancho El Tejon line to
         the southeast corner of
         S. 34, T. 32 S., R. 30
         E., Mount Diablo Base
         and Meridian; then north
         to the northwest corner
         of S. 35, T. 31 S., R.
         30 E.; then northeast
         along the boundary of
         the Rancho El Tejon Land
         Grant to the southwest
         corner of S. 18, T. 31
         S., R. 31 E.; then east
         to the southeast corner
         of S. 13, T. 31 S., R.
         31 E.; then north along
         the range line common to
         R. 31 E. and R. 32 E.,
         Mount Diablo Base and
         Meridian, to the
         northwest corner of S.
         6, T. 29 S., R. 32 E.;
         then east to the
         southwest corner of S.
         31, T. 28 S., R. 32 E.;
         then north along the
         range line common to R.
         31 E. and R. 32 E. to
         the northwest corner of
         S. 6, T. 28 S., R. 32
         E., then west to the
         southeast corner of S.
         36, T. 27 S., R. 31 E.,
         then north along the
         range line common to R.
         31 E. and R. 32 E. to
         the Kern-Tulare County
         boundary.
    Kings County.................                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.
    Madera County................                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.
    Merced County................                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.
    San Joaquin County...........                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.
    Stanislaus County............                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.
    Tulare County................                      Nonattainment....  February 19, 2016.  Serious.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-00739 Filed 1-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 200)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 53409-53410]
[DOCID:fr19oc09-11]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0916]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Blackwater River, Milton, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, has issued a

temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
CSX Transportation Railroad swing bridge across the Blackwater River,
mile 2.80, at Milton, Florida. The deviation is necessary to replace
the center pivot bearing of the swing span and will allow the bridge to
remain closed to navigation for two consecutive days.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on November 5, 2009
through 5 p.m. on November 6, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0916 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-0916 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Lindsey Middleton, Bridge Administration Branch;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CSX Transportation has requested a temporary
deviation for their railroad swing span bridge across the Blackwater
River, mile 2.80, in Milton, Florida. The vertical clearance of the
bridge in the closed-to-navigation position is 5.5 feet above mean sea
level and 7.0 feet above mean low water. Currently, according to 33 CFR
117.271, the draw of the CSX Transportation Railroad bridge, mile 2.8
at Milton, shall open on signal; except that, from 8 p.m. to 4 a.m.,
the draw shall open on signal if at least eight hours notice is given.
The deviation period will be in effect from 7 a.m. on November 5, 2009
until 5 p.m. on November 6, 2009. During this time the swing span
bridge will be closed to navigation for the center pivot bearing of the
swing span to be replaced. This work is essential for the continued
operation of the draw span. Primary users of this waterway are
recreational boaters. The Coast Guard will inform these users through
the Local Notice to Mariners. There are no alternate routes available
and this bridge cannot be open for emergencies.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: October 6, 2009.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-25021 Filed 10-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20435-20436]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8529]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Approval of the Supplemental Finding of No Significant
Impact and Record of Decision for the Supplemental Environmental
Assessment (EA) for Proposed Changes to the Construction of a New Land-
Based Airport in Akutan, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of approval of the Supplemental Finding of No
Significant Impact/Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is announcing the approval
of the Supplemental Finding

of No Significant Impact/Record of Decision (FONSI/ROD) for the
Supplemental Environmental Assessment (EA) for changes proposed to the
construction of a new land-based airport in Akutan, AK. The
Supplemental FONSI/ROD provides final agency determinations and
approvals for the proposed development.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patti Sullivan, Environmental Program
Manager, Federal Aviation Administration, Alaskan Region, Airports
Division, 222 W. 7th Avenue 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7504. Ms.
Sullivan may be contacted during business hours at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(phone) and<PHONE_NUMBER> (facsimile).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Supplemental FONSI/ROD is for the
approval of actions for proposed changes to the construction of an
airport not previously addressed in the December 2007 environmental
assessment FONSI/ROD. The proposed changes include realignment of the
runway; expansion of the seaplane ramp in Akutan Harbor; realignment of
Stream number 1; and temporary construction facilities including a
barge landing and construction access road along Surf Bay, fuel storage
facility, and a personnel camp. On December 26, 2007, the FAA approved
a FONSI/ROD for the construction of a new land based airport including
a runway, a runway safety area, connecting taxiway, an apron, and a
snow removal equipment and maintenance facility; an airport access
road; two hovercraft landing pads; a hovercraft storage and maintenance
facility; and acquisition of a hovercraft The Supplemental FONSI/ROD
provides the final agency determinations and approvals for Federal
actions by the FAA related to the selection of alternatives to meet the
purpose and need for the action. The Supplemental FONSI/ROD also
includes required mitigation measures and conditions of approval. The
Supplemental FONSI/ROD indicates that the selected actions are
consistent with existing environmental policies and objectives set
forth in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as
amended, as well as other federal and state statutes, and that the
actions will not significantly affect the quality of the environment.
    The FAA's decision is based upon information contained in the
Supplemental EA, issued in March 3, 2011, and on all other applicable
documents available to the agency and considered by it, which
constitutes the administrative record.
    The FAA's determinations are discussed in the Supplemental FONSI/
ROD, which was approved on March 7, 2011.

FONSI/ROD Availability

    The FONSI/ROD may be viewed at the following Web site http://www.faa.gov/airports/alaskan/environmental/.

    Issued in Anchorage, Alaska on March 30, 2011.
Byron K. Huffman,
Manager, Airports Division, Alaskan Region.
[FR Doc. 2011-8529 Filed 4-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4913-13-M


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on October 29, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-16418

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  Alitalia Express S.p.A.					Date Filed:  October 29, 2003

Relief requested: Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to the extent
necessary for underlying authority to permit Alitalia Express to display
the airline designator code of Delta Air Lines, Inc. (“DL”) on
intra-European regional routes served by Alitalia Express.

Date and citation of last action:  Alitalia Express most recently held
this authority during the period

October 26, 2001-October 26, 2003.  See Notice of Action Taken, dated
October 26, 2001, in Docket

OST-2001-10534.

Applicant representative:  Richard D. Mathias<PHONE_NUMBER>

DOT Analyst:  Gordon H. Bingham<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None filed

DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved							Action date:  October 29, 2003

(We acted on this application without awaiting expiration of the 15-day
answer period with the consent of all parties served.)

Effective dates of authority granted:  October 29, 2003-October 29, 2005

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  U.S.-Italy Air
Transport Agreement

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

X  Standard exemption conditions (Attached)

X  Statement of authorization to conduct code share operations granted
to, among others, Delta Air Lines and Alitalia Express, dated October
26, 2001, in Docket OST-2001-10417, and conditions therein.

Action taken by:  Paul L. Gretch, Director

		     Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant was qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the

authority would not constitute a major regulatory action under the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.  To the extent not
granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

			Attachment

Foreign Carrier Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its
plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security Administration
has determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be
served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.