Home Page About Us Contribute




Escort, Inc.



Tweets by @CrittendenAuto






By accessing/using The Crittenden Automotive Library/CarsAndRacingStuff.com, you signify your agreement with the Terms of Use on our Legal Information page. Our Privacy Policy is also available there.

Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets in Submitted Ozone Attainment Plan for San Joaquin Valley, California

American Government Special Collections Reference Desk

American Government

Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets in Submitted Ozone Attainment Plan for San Joaquin Valley, California

Deborah Jordan
Environmental Protection Agency
29 June 2017


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 124 (Thursday, June 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29547-29548]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13658]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0345; FRL-9964-02-Region 9]


Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets in Submitted 
Ozone Attainment Plan for San Joaquin Valley, California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Adequacy.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is notifying the 
public that the Agency has found that the motor vehicle emission 
budgets (MVEBs or ``budgets'') for ozone for the years 2018, 2021, 
2024, 2027, 2030, and 2031 in the San Joaquin Valley 2016 Plan for the 
2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard (``2016 Ozone Plan'') are adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes for the 2008 8-hour ozone national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The California Air Resources 
Board (CARB) submitted the 2016 Ozone Plan to the EPA on August 24, 
2016, as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). 
Upon the effective date of this notice of adequacy, the previously-
approved budgets for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards will no longer be 
applicable for transportation conformity purposes, and the metropolitan 
planning organizations in the San Joaquin Valley and the U.S. 
Department of Transportation must use these budgets for future 
transportation conformity determinations.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 14, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action, identified 
by Docket ID Number EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0345. The index to the docket is 
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 
at the EPA Region IX office, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 
California. 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 in either location (e.g., confidential business information). 
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment 
during normal business hours with the contact listed below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Lee, (415) 972-3958, or by email 
at lee.anita@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.
    This notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have 
already made. On June 13, 2017, the Region IX office of the EPA sent a 
letter to CARB stating that the MVEBs in the San Joaquin Valley Unified 
Air Pollution Control District's 2016 Ozone Plan for the reasonable 
further progress milestone years of 2018, 2021, 2024, 2027, and 2030, 
and the attainment year of 2031, are adequate.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See letter from Richard Corey, CARB, to Alexis Strauss, EPA, 
dated August 24, 2016, and letter from Elizabeth Adams, EPA, to 
Richard Corey, CARB dated June 13, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We announced the availability of the budgets on the EPA's adequacy 
review Web page from February 23, 2017, through March 27, 2017.\2\ We 
did not receive any comments on the budgets. The MVEBs are provided in 
the following table:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/state-implementation-plans-sip-submissions-currently-under-epa#Sanjoquin2017.

                                         Adequate MVEBs in the 2016 Plan for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard \a\
                                                             [Tons per summer planning day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    2018              2021              2024              2027              2030              2031
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   County                       ROG      NOX      ROG      NOX      ROG      NOX      ROG      NOX      ROG      NOX      ROG      NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno......................................      8.0     27.7      6.4     22.2      5.4     14.1      4.9     13.2      4.5     12.6      4.3     12.5
Kern \b\....................................      6.6     25.4      5.5     20.4      4.8     12.6      4.5     11.7      4.2     10.9      4.1     10.8
Kings.......................................      1.3      5.1      1.1      4.2      0.9      2.6      0.9      2.5      0.8      2.3      0.8      2.3
Madera......................................      1.9      5.1      1.5      4.1      1.2      2.6      1.1      2.3      0.9      2.0      0.9      2.0
Merced......................................      2.5      9.4      2.0      7.8      1.6      4.8      1.5      4.4      1.3      4.2      1.3      4.1
San Joaquin.................................      5.9     13.0      4.9     10.3      4.2      6.9      3.8      6.2      3.5      5.7      3.3      5.5
Stanislaus..................................      3.8     10.5      3.0      8.3      2.6      5.6      2.3      5.1      2.1      4.7      2.0      4.7
Tulare......................................      3.7      9.5      2.9      7.2      2.4      4.7      2.2      4.1      1.9      3.8      1.9      3.7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ CARB calculated the MVEBs by taking each county's emissions results from EMFAC2014 (short for EMission FACtor 2014 version) and then rounding each
  county's emissions up to the nearest tenth of a ton. The EPA approved EMFAC2014 for use in SIP revisions and transportation conformity at 80 FR 77337
  (December 14, 2015).
\b\ San Joaquin Valley portion.


[[Page 29548]]

    Transportation conformity is required by Clean Air Act section 
176(c). The EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, 
transportation improvement programs, and projects conform to SIPs and 
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not 
they conform. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities 
will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS.
    The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's MVEBs are 
adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), which was promulgated on 
August 15, 1997.\3\ We have further described our process for 
determining the adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs in our final rule dated 
July 1, 2004, and we used the information in these resources in making 
our adequacy determination.\4\ Please note that an adequacy review is 
separate from the EPA's completeness review and should not be used to 
prejudge EPA's ultimate action on the SIP. Even if we find a budget 
adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 62 FR 43780 (August 15, 1997).
    \4\ See 69 FR 40004 (July 1, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e), within 2 years of the effective date 
of this notice, the metropolitan planning organizations in the San 
Joaquin Valley and the U.S. Department of Transportation will need to 
demonstrate conformity to the new MVEBs if the demonstration has not 
already been made.\5\ For demonstrating conformity to the MVEBs in this 
plan, the motor vehicle emissions from implementation of the 
transportation plan should be projected consistently with the budgets 
in this plan, i.e., by taking each county's emissions results from 
EMFAC2014 and then rounding each county's emissions up to the nearest 
tenth of a ton.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 73 FR 4419 (January 24, 2008).

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

    Dated: June 13, 2017.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017-13658 Filed 6-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Connect with The Crittenden Automotive Library

The Crittenden Automotive Library at Google+ The Crittenden Automotive Library on Facebook The Crittenden Automotive Library on Instagram The Crittenden Automotive Library at The Internet Archive The Crittenden Automotive Library on Pinterest The Crittenden Automotive Library on Twitter The Crittenden Automotive Library on Tumblr
 


The Crittenden Automotive Library

Home Page    About Us    Contribute