[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 51 (Friday, March 15, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11633-11635]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-6271]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA072-FOA, FRL-7158-1]


Proposed Finding of Failure To Attain; State of California, San 
Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is today proposing to find that the San Joaquin Valley did 
not attain the 24-hour and annual particulate matter (PM-10) National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by the deadline mandated in the 
Clean Air Act (CAA), December 31, 2001. This proposed finding is based 
on monitored air quality data for the PM-10 NAAQS from 1999 through 
September 2001.
    If EPA finalizes, after public notice and comment, the failure to 
attain finding, the San Joaquin Valley must submit by December 31, 
2002, plan provisions that provide for attainment of the PM-10 air 
quality standards and that achieve percent annual reductions in PM-10 
or PM-10 precursor emissions as required by CAA section 189(d).

DATES: Comments on the proposed action must be received on or before 
April 15, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Celia Bloomfield, Planning 
Office, (AIR-2), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901; or to 
[email protected].
    A copy of this proposed rule and related information are available 
in the air programs section of EPA Region 9's Web site, http://www.epa.gov/region09/air. The docket for this rulemaking is available 
for inspection during normal business hours at EPA Region 9, Planning 
Office, Air Division, 17th Floor, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying parts of 
the docket. Please call (415) 947-4148 for assistance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Celia Bloomfield (415) 947-4148, 
Planning Office (AIR-2), Air Division, EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 1, 1987 EPA revised the health-based national ambient air 
quality standards (NAAQS) (52 FR 24672), replacing standards for total 
suspended particulates with new standards applying only to particulate 
matter up to 10 microns in diameter (PM-10). At that time, EPA 
established two PM-10 standards. The annual PM-10 standard is attained 
when the expected annual arithmetic average of the 24-hour samples for 
a period of one year does not exceed 50 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/
m3). The 24-hour PM-10 standard of 150 ug/m3 is 
attained if samples taken for 24-hour periods have no more than one 
expected exceedance per year, averaged over 3 years. See 40 CFR 50.6 
and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K.
    Breathing particulate matter can cause significant health effects, 
including an increase in respiratory illness and premature death.
    The San Joaquin Valley, which is made up of 8 counties (Stockton 
County, Stanislaus County, Merced County, Madera County, Fresno County, 
Kings County, Tulare County, and Kern County), has had a PM-10 problem 
for more than a decade. The area violates both the 24-hour and annual 
PM-10 standards. Exceedances are recorded throughout the Valley but 
tend to peek in the fall and winter. (See Tables 1 and 2 below in 
Section II.B). The violations are caused by both primary particulates 
(dust) and secondary particulates (other pollutants that react in the 
atmosphere to form particulate matter).
    On the date of enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA 
or Act), PM-10 areas, including the San Joaquin Valley planning area, 
meeting the qualifications of section 107(d)(4)(B) of the amended Act, 
were designated nonattainment by operation of law. See 56 FR 11101 
(March 15, 1991). EPA

[[Page 11634]]

codified the boundaries of the San Joaquin Valley PM-10 nonattainment 
area at 40 CFR 81.305.
    Once an area is designated nonattainment for PM-10, section 188 of 
the CAA outlines the process for classifying the area and establishing 
the area's attainment deadline. In accordance with section 188(a), at 
the time of designation, all PM-10 nonattainment areas, including the 
San Joaquin Valley, were initially classified as moderate.
    Section 188(b)(1) of the Act provides that moderate areas can 
subsequently be reclassified as serious before the applicable moderate 
area attainment date if at any time EPA determines that the area cannot 
``practicably'' attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the moderate area attainment 
deadline, December 31, 1994. On January 8, 1993 (58 FR 3334, 3337), EPA 
made such a determination and reclassified the San Joaquin Valley 
nonattainment area as serious. As a serious PM-10 nonattainment area, 
the San Joaquin Valley acquired a new attainment deadline of December 
31, 2001 (CAA section 188(c)(2)).

II. Proposed Finding of Failure To Attain

A. Clean Air Act Requirements for Attainment Findings

    EPA has the responsibility, pursuant to sections 179(c) and 
188(b)(2) of the Act, of determining within 6 months of the applicable 
attainment date (i.e., June 30, 2002), whether the San Joaquin Valley 
PM-10 nonattainment area has attained the annual and 24-hour NAAQS. 
Section 179(c)(1) of the Act provides that these determinations are to 
be based upon an area's ``air quality as of the attainment date,'' and 
section 188(b)(2) is consistent with this requirement. EPA determines 
whether an area's air quality is meeting the PM-10 NAAQS based upon air 
quality data gathered at monitoring sites in the nonattainment area and 
entered into EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). 
These data are reviewed to determine the area's air quality status in 
accordance with EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, appendix K.
    Pursuant to appendix K, attainment of the annual PM-10 NAAQS is 
achieved when the expected annual arithmetic mean PM-10 concentration 
is less than or equal to the level of the standard (50 g/
m3). Attainment of the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS is achieved when 
the expected number of exceedances of the 24-hour NAAQS (150 
g/m3) per year at each monitoring site is less than 
or equal to one. A total of three consecutive years of clean air 
quality data is generally necessary to show attainment of the annual 
and 24-hour standards for PM-10. A complete year of air quality data, 
as referred to in 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, is comprised of all four 
calendar quarters with each quarter containing data from at least 75 
percent of the scheduled sampling days.

B. Ambient Air Monitoring Data

1. Annual PM-10 Standard
    According to data currently in AIRS, three monitoring sites in the 
San Joaquin Valley are in violation of the annual PM-10 NAAQS. These 
data cover the period 1999 through September 30, 2001. While the 
nonattainment status of the Corcoran and Visalia monitors could still 
be affected by end of year data, even under the best case scenario 
(using values of 0.0 g/m3 for the sampling days in 
the last quarter of 2001), the Bakersfield Golden State Highway site 
would still register an annual arithmetic mean of 53 g/
m3, which violates the annual NAAQS.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The expected annual arithmetic mean is determined by 
averaging the annual arithmetic mean PM-10 concentration for the 
past three calendar years. The procedure for calculating the annual 
arithmetic mean is discussed in 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, 
Sec. 4.0.

  Table 1.--San Joaquin Valley Monitoring Sites That Violate the Annual
                        PM10 NAAQS (1999-2001 *)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                3 year
                                                                annual
                         Site name                             mean **
                                                             g/
                                                                  m3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bakersfield--Golden State..................................      *** 58
Corcoran...................................................          51
Visalia....................................................         51
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* 2001 data available through September 30, 2001.
** The annual mean reported here is based on data through September 30,
  2001. The actual 3 year mean could change based on a complete data set
  for calendar year 2001.
*** 3rd quarter 2001 data do not meet EPA data completeness
  requirements.

2. 24-Hour PM-10 Standard
    According to 40 CFR part 50, the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS is attained 
when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour 
average above 150 g/m3 is equal to or less than 
one. In the simplest case, the number of expected exceedances at a site 
is determined by recording the number exceedances in each calendar year 
and then averaging them over the past three calendar years. This means 
that if a monitoring site has four or more observed or estimated 
exceedances in a three-year period then it is in violation of the 24-
hour PM-10 NAAQS. Generally, if PM-10 sampling is scheduled less than 
every day, EPA requires the adjustment of observed exceedances to 
account for incomplete sampling. The method for adjusting the observed 
exceedances is described in 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, Sec. 3.1.
    In spite of the lack of data for the fourth quarter in 2001, there 
are ten monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley that are in 
violation of the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS. The following table shows the 
number of estimated exceedances at the 10 sites after adjusting for 
incomplete sampling. All of the sites listed in Table 2 operate on a 
one in six day schedule. Table 2 lists the number of days over the 
standard in all three years as well as the three-year average. For each 
of these sites, the average number of exceedance days per year over the 
three-year period 1999-2001 exceeds one.

         Table 2.--24-Hour PM-10 Air Quality in the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area (1999-2001) *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Average number
                                                    Estimated       Estimated       Estimated      of expected
               Monitoring station                  exceedance      exceedance      exceedance    exceedance days
                                                    days 1999       days 2000       days 2001     per year 1999-
                                                                                                       2001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno East Drummond...........................               8               0               6              4.7
Fresno First St................................               0               0               6              2

[[Page 11635]]

 
Clovis.........................................               0               0               6              2
Bakersfield Golden State.......................               6               0              12              6
Bakersfield California Ave.....................               0               0               9              3
Oildale........................................               3               0               6              3
Corcoran.......................................               6               0               6              4
Hanford........................................               0               0               6              2
Turlock........................................              11               0               0              3.7
Modesto........................................               0               0               6             2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Data available through September 2001.

III. Summary of Proposed Action

A. Proposed Finding of Failure to Attain

    EPA is proposing a finding that the San Joaquin Valley did not 
attain the annual or 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS by the December 31, 2001 
attainment deadline as discussed above in Section II.

B. SIP Consequences

    Under section 189(d) of the Act, serious PM-10 nonattainment areas 
that fail to attain are required to submit within 12 months of the 
applicable attainment date, ``plan revisions which provide for 
attainment of the PM-10 air quality standards and, from the date of 
such submission until attainment, for an annual reduction in PM-10 or 
PM-10 precursor emissions within the area of not less than 5 percent of 
the amount of such emissions as reported in the most recent inventory 
prepared for such area.'' Since the applicable attainment date was 
December 31, 2001, the deadline for the 5 percent plan will be December 
31, 2002 if EPA's proposed finding of failure to attain is finalized.

IV. Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this proposed action is also not subject to 
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed action in and of itself establishes 
no new requirements, it merely notes that the air quality in the San 
Joaquin Valley did not meet the federal health standards for PM-10 by 
the CAA deadline. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this 
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this proposed rule does not in and 
of itself establish new requirements, EPA believes that it is 
questionable whether a requirement to submit a SIP revision constitutes 
a federal mandate. The obligation for a State to revise its SIP arises 
out of sections 110(a), 179(d), and 189(d) of the CAA and is not 
legally enforceable by a court of law, and at most is a condition for 
continued receipt of highway funds. Therefore, it is possible to view 
an action requiring such a submittal as not creating any enforceable 
duty within the meaning of section 421(5)(9a)(I) of UMRA (2 U.S.C. 
658(a)(I)). Even if it did, the duty could be viewed as falling within 
the exception for the condition of Federal assistance under section 
421(5)(a)(i)(I) of UMRA (2 U.S.C. 658(5)(a)(i)(I)). Therefore, today's 
proposed action does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly 
or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action does not in and of itself 
create any new requirements and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant. Because this proposed finding of failure to attain is a 
factual determination based on air quality considerations, the 
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This 
proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate 
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic 
compounds.

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

    Dated: February 28, 2002.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region 9.
[FR Doc. 02-6271 Filed 3-14-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P