Rule2026-18748
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; San Joaquin Valley, Revisions to Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Ozone
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 14, 2026
Effective
October 14, 2026
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or "Agency") is taking final action to approve a revision to the State of California's state implementation plan (SIP) for the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) area. The revision includes an update to the SJV area's motor vehicle emissions budgets ("budgets") for nitrogen oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) for the 2008 8- hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or "standards"). These updated budgets for 2026, 2029, and 2031 were developed with the latest modeling method approved for California. These updated budgets apply to all subareas within the SJV. Upon the effective date of this rule, the updated budgets will supersede the existing approved SJV subarea budgets for the 2008 ozone NAAQS that were based on an earlier emissions model. The EPA is approving the updated SJV ozone budgets in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or "Act") and the EPA's regulations.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 176 (Monday, September 14, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 176 (Monday, September 14, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58023-58027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-18748]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2026-3400; FRL-13355-02-R9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California;
San Joaquin Valley, Revisions to Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
Ozone
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or ``Agency'')
is taking final action to approve a revision to the State of
California's state implementation plan (SIP) for the San Joaquin Valley
(SJV) area. The revision includes an update to the SJV area's motor
vehicle emissions budgets (``budgets'') for nitrogen oxides
(NO<INF>X</INF>) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) for the 2008 8-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
``standards''). These updated budgets for 2026, 2029, and 2031 were
developed with the latest modeling method approved for California.
These updated budgets apply to all subareas within the SJV. Upon the
effective date of this rule, the updated budgets will supersede the
existing approved SJV subarea budgets for the 2008 ozone NAAQS that
were based on an earlier
[[Page 58024]]
emissions model. The EPA is approving the updated SJV ozone budgets in
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'')
and the EPA's regulations.
DATES: This rule is effective October 14, 2026.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2026-3400. All documents in the docket are
listed on the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance
in a language other than English or if you are a person with a
disability who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you,
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lindsay Wickersham, Air Planning
Office (ARD-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105, telephone number: (415) 947-4192, or by email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#afd8c6ccc4cadddcc7cec281c3c6c1cbdcced6efcadfce81c8c0d9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a0d7c9c3cbc5d2d3c8c1cd8eccc9cec4d3c1d9e0c5d0c18ec7cfd6">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the use of ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is intended to refer to the EPA. We use multiple
abbreviations and terms in this final rule. While this list may not be
exhaustive, for ease of reading and for reference purposes, the EPA
defines the following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBI Confidential Business Information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
EMFAC EMission FACtor
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FCOG Fresno Council of Governments
FR Federal Register
KCAG Kings County Association of Governments
KCOG Kern Council of Governments
MCAG Merced County Association of Governments
MCTC Madera County Transportation Commission
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NO<INF>X</INF> Nitrogen Oxides
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Particulate matter less than 2.5 [micro]m in
diameter
RFP Reasonable Further Progress
SIP State Implementation Plan
SJCOG San Joaquin Council of Governments
SJV San Joaquin Valley
StanCOG Stanislaus Council of Governments
TCAG Tulare County Association of Governments
TIP Transportation Improvement Program
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. What action is the EPA taking?
B. What is the legal authority and what are the requirements?
II. Background and Proposed Action
III. Public Comments
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Executive Summary
A. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is taking final action to approve a revision to the SJV
portion of the California SIP for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
revision includes an update to the SJV subarea budgets for
NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Upon the
effective date of the EPA's approval, the revised budgets will
supersede the existing approved SJV subarea budgets for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS that were based on an earlier emissions model.
B. What is the legal authority and what are the requirements?
The EPA has legal authority to approve, disapprove, or
conditionally approve, in whole or in part, submissions of SIPs and SIP
revisions under CAA section 110(k). The applicable requirements for
this type of action include those in CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2),
CAA section 110(l), 40 CFR 51.102, and 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 40 CFR 51.102 establish certain
procedural requirements on States for adoption and submittal of SIPs
and SIP revisions to the EPA to meet CAA requirements. CAA section
110(l) prohibits the EPA from approving SIP revisions that would
interfere with any applicable requirements concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement
of the Act.
Generally, the EPA reviews budgets for approval in the context of
the Agency's review of a control strategy. A State may revise the motor
vehicle emissions inventories and related budgets without revising its
entire SIP, consistent with CAA section 110(l), if: (1) the SIP
continues to meet applicable requirements when the previous motor
vehicle emissions inventories are replaced with new base year and
milestone, attainment, or maintenance year inventories based on a more
recent emissions model; and (2) the State can document that growth and
control strategy assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources continue to
be valid and any minor updates do not change the overall conclusions of
the SIP.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See examples of EPA rules involving replacement of budgets
in response to an emissions model update, e.g., Allentown-Bethlehem-
Easton (79 FR 28435, May 16, 2014) and Beaumont/Port Arthur (78 FR
7672, Feb. 4, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), the EPA specifies certain other minimum
requirements for budgets to be found adequate or approved.
II. Background and Proposed Action
On July 9, 2026, the EPA proposed,\2\ under CAA section 110(k)(3),
to approve a revision to the California SIP submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) on April 30, 2026.\3\ The SIP submittal
revises budgets applicable to control strategy plans for the SJV for
the 2008 ozone standards.\4\ CARB developed the revised budgets using
EMFAC2021,\5\ with off-model adjustment factors approved by the EPA in
November 2025 (``November 2025 Adjustment Factors''),\6\ and travel
activity projections provided by the SJV Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs) consistent with the 2025 Federal Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP).\7\ As such, the revised
[[Page 58025]]
budgets reflect the most recent planning forecasts and are based on the
most recent emission factor data and approved calculation methods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 91 FR 42399 (July 9, 2026).
\3\ ``2026 Updates to Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the
San Joaquin Valley 75 parts per billion Ozone State Implementation
Plan (Feb. 13, 2026) (``2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update'').
\4\ The SJV nonattainment area includes all of seven counties,
including Fresno, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus,
and Tulare counties, and the western half of Kern County. See the
NAAQS-specific tables in 40 CFR 81.305.
\5\ The EMFAC model (short for EMission FACtor) is a computer
model developed by CARB. EMFAC is used to calculate current and
future on-road inventories. The EPA approved EMFAC2021 for use in
SIP revisions and transportation conformity determinations in
California in November 2022 (see 87 FR 68483).
\6\ Letter dated November 21, 2025, titled ``EPA Region 9 letter
approving EMFAC2021 Adjustment Factors that remove the emissions
benefits of the Advanced Clean Trucks, Heavy-Duty Omnibus, and other
regulations,'' from Anita Lee, Acting Director, Air and Radiation
Division, EPA Region IX, to Edie Chang, Deputy Executive Officer,
CARB, A copy of this letter can be found on the EPA's Policy and
Technical Guidance for State and Local Transportation site, <a href="https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/policy-and-technical-guidance-state-and-local-transportation">https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/policy-and-technical-guidance-state-and-local-transportation</a>.
\7\ More information on each of the SJV MPO's 2025 Federal TIP
can be found on their respective websites. See websites for the
Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG), Kern Council of Governments
(KCOG), Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG), Madera
County Transportation Commission (MCTC), Merced County Association
of Governments (MCAG), San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG),
Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG), and the Tulare County
Association of Governments (TCAG).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA previously approved budgets for the 2008 ozone standards
for the SJV nonattainment area. The ozone precursor budgets were
included as part of the EPA's approval of three SIP revisions submitted
by CARB to address the nonattainment planning requirements for the SJV
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, including the RFP and attainment
demonstrations. These SIP revisions include the ``San Joaquin Valley
2016 Plan for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard'' (``2016 Ozone Plan'')
and the portions of the ``Revised Proposed 2016 State Strategy for the
State Implementation Plan'' (``2016 State SIP Strategy'') and ``2018
Updates to the California State Implementation Plan'' (``2018 SIP
Update'') that pertain to the SJV for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\8\
Collectively, we refer to the approved SIP revisions for SJV for the
2008 ozone NAAQS as the ``2016 SJV Ozone SIP.'' The previously approved
ozone budgets were developed using EMFAC2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ We approved portions of the 2016 Ozone Plan and 2016 State
SIP Strategy as meeting certain requirements, including the
attainment demonstration, at 84 FR 3302 (Feb. 12, 2019). We approved
portions of the 2016 Ozone Plan and the 2018 SIP Update as meeting
certain other requirements, including the RFP demonstration at 84 FR
11198 (Mar. 25, 2019), as corrected at 84 FR 19680 (May 3, 2019). We
approved the budgets contained in the 2018 SIP Update as part of our
approval published at 84 FR 11198 (Mar. 25, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In our July 9, 2026 proposed rule, we reviewed the revised budgets
in the April 30, 2026 submittal, evaluated them for compliance with
statutory and regulatory requirements, and concluded that they meet all
applicable requirements. More specifically, we found that the 2016 SJV
Ozone Plan will continue to meet applicable requirements for RFP and
attainment when the existing approved, EMFAC2014-based budgets are
replaced with the revised budgets based on EMFAC2021 with the November
2025 adjustment factors, and that the changes in the growth and control
strategy assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources do not change the
overall conclusions of the 2016 SJV Ozone SIP.
As such, we found that approval of the revised NO<INF>X</INF> and
VOC budgets from the 2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update for 2026, 2029,
and 2031 as shown in Table 1 would not interfere with attainment or RFP
or any other requirement of the Act and would thereby comply with CAA
section 110(l). We proposed to approve the revised budgets on that
basis.
Table 1--San Joaquin Valley Revised Budgets Developed Using EMFAC2021 With November 2025 Adjustment Factors \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 8-hour ozone standards
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX (tons per average summer day) VOC (tons per average summer day)
County subarea -----------------------------------
------------------------------------
2026 2029 2031 2026 2029 2031
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno.................................. 8.4 7.8 7.6 4.4 3.9 3.6
Kern (SJV).............................. 10.6 10.3 10.3 3.7 3.3 3.1
Kings................................... 2.1 2.1 2.1 0.8 0.7 0.7
Madera.................................. 1.9 1.7 1.6 0.9 0.8 0.8
Merced.................................. 4.6 4.3 4.3 1.5 1.3 1.2
San Joaquin............................. 6.0 5.5 5.2 3.5 3.1 2.8
Stanislaus.............................. 3.9 3.5 3.3 2.4 2.1 1.9
Tulare.................................. 3.6 3.2 3.1 2.2 1.9 1.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The county-specific budgets are set forth in Table III-1 of the 2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update. CARB
rounded up each of the subarea budgets calculated using EMFAC2021 with the off-model adjustment factors
approved by the EPA in November 2025 to the nearest tenth of a ton.
In our proposed rule, the EPA also proposed to limit the duration
of the approval of the budgets in the 2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update.
We did so in light of CARB's request to limit the duration of the
revised budgets and CARB's explanation for why the budgets in the 2026
Valley Ozone Budget Update may become outdated and should be replaced
upon an EPA adequacy finding for further revised budgets. In short,
CARB has requested that we limit the duration of the approval of the
budgets because CARB expects the next version of EMFAC to estimate
higher emissions for certain onroad motor vehicle categories and for
certain areas of the State, necessitating updates to the budgets once
the next version of EMFAC is submitted to and approved by the EPA.
If the EPA approves the future EMFAC model version, CARB explains
that the budgets from the 2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update, for which we
are finalizing approval in this action, may become outdated and will
need to be revised. In addition, CARB states that, without the ability
to replace the budgets using the budget adequacy process, the benefits
of using the updated data may not be realized for a year or more after
the updated SIP (with the future budgets) is submitted, due to the
length of the SIP approval process.
Please see our July 9, 2026 proposed rule for more information
concerning the background for this action and for a more detailed
discussion of the rationale for approval of the revised budgets.
III. Public Comments
Our July 9, 2026 proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment
period, which closed on August 10, 2026. During this period, we
received comments from five commenters. Two of the commenters refer to
air pollution generally, but their comments are not germane to the
proposed action. The three other commenters generally support the
proposed action, but express certain potential objections, make certain
recommendations or request clarification of certain statements in the
proposed rule.\9\ In the following paragraphs, we present the comments
verbatim and provide our responses. The comment submissions are
included in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ One of these commenters submitted their germane, supportive
comment in duplicate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 1. ``It is important to note that the revised VOC budgets
slightly increase in Stanislaus County across the three covered years,
as well as in Tulare County during '26 and '29. The updated non-road
emissions are also greater than prior estimates. Although reductions
[[Page 58026]]
elsewhere in the proposal offset these increases, considering regional
totals alone may conceal more local yet nevertheless important
changes.''
Response 1. VOCs are precursors to formation of ambient ozone and
particulate matter less than 2.5 [micro]m in diameter
(PM<INF>2.5</INF>), but the associated impact on ambient concentrations
occurs well downwind of the source of VOCs, rather than in the locality
of the source, and impact depends upon the amount of sunlight present
and atmospheric mixing as well as other meteorological and topographic
factors. In addition, motor vehicle emissions are distributed
throughout the road network of a given county, as well as the
nonattainment area. For these reasons, we expect that the slight
increases in VOCs in certain counties relative to the budgets that were
previously approved would not have an adverse local effect.
Comment 2. ``Additionally, it is my stance that prior to approving
future replacements via an adequacy finding, the EPA should public
comparisons at both the county and regional level, as well as explain
any material increases. The agency should also confirm that any new
budgets remain consistent with reasonable progress and attainment
requirements.''
Response 2. The EPA's process for determining adequacy of a budget
consists of three steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP
submission, (2) providing the public the opportunity to comment on the
budget during a public comment period, and, (3) making a finding of
adequacy or inadequacy.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would expect the SIP revision containing the future budget
replacements to compare the approved budgets with the submitted
budgets, both on a county-level basis as well as a regional basis,
similar to the types of comparisons CARB has provided in the 2026
Valley Ozone Budget Update.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update, Tables III-2 and III-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the EPA to find budgets adequate, the budgets must meet, at a
minimum, the EPA's adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). To meet
these requirements, the budgets must be consistent with the attainment
and RFP requirements and reflect all of the motor vehicle control
measures contained in the attainment and RFP demonstrations.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iii), (iv) and (v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As such, an EPA finding of adequacy for any replacement budgets
relies upon both analysis of public comments on the submitted budgets
and on the information included by CARB in support of the submitted
budgets and is based on EPA's determination that the submitted budgets
are consistent with the RFP and attainment demonstration requirements
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley.
Comment 3. ``The updated model generally lowers the total
NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC emissions budgets, which seems like a step in
the right direction. However, some individual counties may still see
small increases in certain categories. I think the EPA should clearly
explain why those increases happen so residents can understand whether
they come from changes in traffic, updated data, or the model itself.''
Response 3. In 2021, California released a new version of its motor
vehicle emissions model, EMFAC2021. CARB notes that, due to updated
data and methodologies, EMFAC2021 estimates higher overall emissions
from the on-road vehicle population in many areas of the State compared
to prior versions of the model.\13\ With respect to the SJV, motor
vehicle projections made using EMFAC2021 are higher in certain counties
for VOC as compared with the corresponding estimates made using
EMFAC2014 but lower for all the counties for NO<INF>X</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update, page 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Final Action
For the reasons discussed in the July 9, 2026 proposed rule and
summarized in this final rule, the EPA is approving the 2026 Valley
Ozone Budget Update submitted by CARB on April 30, 2026, and all the
revised subarea motor vehicle emissions budgets contained therein for
the SJV area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS as a revision to the California
SIP. More specifically, the EPA is approving, under CAA section
110(k)(3), the 2026 Valley Ozone Budget Update and the revised VOC and
NO<INF>X</INF> budgets shown in Table 1 of this final rule for 2026,
2029, and 2031 for the 2008 ozone standards.
With our final approval, we are also limiting the duration of the
approval of the budgets to last only until the effective date of an
adequacy finding by the EPA for any subsequently submitted budgets for
the same CAA purpose and years. We are doing so at CARB's request
consistent with 40 CFR 93.118(e)(1).
Lastly, on the effective date of this action, the previously
approved budgets for the 2008 ozone standard will no longer be
applicable for transportation conformity purposes, and the SJV MPOs and
the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) must use the revised
budgets for future transportation conformity determinations.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves a State plan as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
<bullet> Is not an Executive Order 14192 (90 FR 9065, February 6,
2025) regulatory action because this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866;
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
<bullet> Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a State program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
<bullet> Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA.
In addition, 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. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have Tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal
law as
[[Page 58027]]
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 13, 2026. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review, nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and it 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 in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 2, 2026.
Michael Martucci,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 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.
Subpart F--California
0
2. In Sec. 52.220a, in paragraph (e), amend table 8 by adding an entry
for ``2026 Updates to Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the San
Joaquin Valley 75 parts per billion Ozone State Implementation Plan
(February 13, 2026)'' after the entry for ``SJVUAPCD's commitments to
adopt, submit, and implement substitute rules that will achieve
equivalent reductions in emissions of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> or
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors in the same adoption and implementation
timeframes or in the timeframes needed to meet CAA milestones, as
stated on p. 4 of San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Resolution 2012-12-
19, dated December 20, 2012 were revised by California Air Resources
Board Resolution 20-15, dated May 28, 2020, in paragraph
(c)(539)(ii)(A)(2) of this section'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220a Identification of plan--in part.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2026 Updates to Motor Vehicle San Joaquin Valley..................... April 30, 2026................. 9/14/2026, 91 FR Adopted by CARB on
Emissions Budgets for the San [INSERT FEDERAL March 26, 2026
Joaquin Valley 75 parts per REGISTER PAGE WHERE through Resolution
billion Ozone State THE DOCUMENT 26-2. Submitted
Implementation Plan (February 13, BEGINS]. electronically on
2026). April 30, 2026 as
an attachment to a
letter of the same
date.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
3. Section 52.244 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(14) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.244 Motor vehicle emissions budgets.
(a) * * *
(14) San Joaquin Valley, for the 2008 ozone NAAQS only (years 2026,
2029 and 2031 budgets only), approved October 14, 2026.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-18748 Filed 9-11-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 14, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.