The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a Notice of Findings in
the Federal Register (62720 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 234 / Thursday,
December 6, 2018) on Thursday that the
PM 2.5 Attainment Plan for the Central Valley is overdue and that if it not
completed and incorporated into the State Implementation Plan within 18 months-sanctions
will be imposed that could impact Federal Highway Funds, Offsets and eventually
could require a Federal Implementation Program (“FIP”).
This Notice was issued despite the fact that the San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District working alongside the California Air Resources
Control Board has approved its PM 2.5 Plan, and it is pending before CARB for
approval.
CARB is scheduled to vote on the plan in January. Until
then, the EPA said, "the state shall be treated as not having made the
submission… "We note, however, that CARB's submission represents a
significant step in the state's and district's multiyear effort to address the
act's attainment planning requirements," the EPA said.
The section in the Federal Register regarding sanctions and
a portion of the relevant Clean Air Act Section is set out below:
II.
Consequences of Findings
of Failure
To
Submit Complete SIPs
Under section 110(k)(1)(C) of the
Act, here the EPA determines that a SIP submission (or part thereof) does not
meet the EPA’s minimum completeness
criteria established in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, the state shall be treated
as not
having made the submission (or part thereof). Sections 179(a) and 110(c) of
the CAA establish specific
consequences for failure to submit complete SIP submissions or SIP
elements required under part D of
title I of the Act, including the eventual imposition of
mandatory sanctions in the affected
area.
In accordance with the EPA’s sanctions sequencing rule in 40 CFR 52.31, the offset sanction identified in CAA section 179(b)(2) would apply in the
San Joaquin Valley
area 18 months after the effective date of these findings,
if the EPA has not affirmatively
determined by that date that the State has submitted a complete
SIP addressing the deficiency that is the basis for these findings. If, within 6 months
after the offset
sanction applies, the EPA still has not affirmatively determined that the State has submitted a complete SIP addressing the deficiency that is the basis for the findings, the highway
funding sanction
identified in CAA section 179(b)(1) would also apply in the San Joaquin
Valley. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(5), neither sanction
would apply if the EPA determines within 18 months after the effective date of these findings that the
State has submitted a complete
SIP submission addressing the deficiency
that is the basis for these findings.
Additionally, a finding of failure to submit a complete SIP submission
triggers an obligation under CAA section 110(c) for the EPA to promulgate
a FIP no later than 2 years after
the finding, unless the state has submitted,
and the EPA has approved, the required SIP submittal. Thus, the EPA would be required to promulgate a PM2.5 FIP for the San Joaquin Valley,
in relevant part, if
California does not submit and the
EPA does not approve all of the necessary SIP submissions within
2 years after the effective date of these findings.
Clean Air Act
179(b)(2)
(b) Sanctions
The sanctions
available to the Administrator as provided in subsection (a) of this section
are as follows:
(1) Highway
sanctions
(A) The
Administrator may impose a prohibition, applicable to a nonattainment area, on
the approval by the Secretary of Transportation of any projects or the awarding
by the Secretary of any grants, under title 23 other than projects or grants
for safety where the Secretary determines, based on accident or other
appropriate data submitted by the State, that the principal purpose of the
project is an improvement in safety to resolve a demonstrated safety problem
and likely will result in a significant reduction in, or avoidance of, accidents.
Such prohibition shall become effective upon the selection by the Administrator
of this sanction.
(B) In addition
to safety, projects or grants that may be approved by the Secretary,
notwithstanding the prohibition in subparagraph (A), are the following—
(i) capital
programs for public transit;
(ii)
construction or restriction of certain roads or lanes solely for the use of
passenger buses or high occupancy vehicles;
(iii) planning
for requirements for employers to reduce employee work-trip-related vehicle
emissions;
(iv) highway
ramp metering, traffic signalization, and related programs that improve traffic
flow and achieve a net emission reduction;
(v) fringe and
transportation corridor parking facilities serving multiple occupancy vehicle
programs or transit operations;
(vi) programs to
limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas or other areas of emission
concentration particularly during periods of peak use, through road use
charges, tolls, parking surcharges, or other pricing mechanisms, vehicle
restricted zones or periods, or vehicle registration programs;
(vii) programs
for breakdown and accident scene management, nonrecurring congestion, and
vehicle information systems, to reduce congestion and emissions; and
(viii) such other transportation-related programs as the
Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, finds
would improve air quality and would not encourage single occupancy vehicle
capacity.
In considering
such measures, the State should seek to ensure adequate access to downtown,
other commercial, and residential areas, and avoid increasing or relocating
emissions and congestion rather than reducing them.
(2) Offsets
In applying the
emissions offset requirements of section 7503 of this title to new or modified
sources or emissions units for which a permit is required under this part, the
ratio of emission reductions to increased emissions shall be at least 2 to 1.
No comments:
Post a Comment