[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 158 (Friday, August 15, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48848-48851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20894]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[CA087-DESIG; FRL-7544-8]
Clean Air Act Area Designations; California
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make minor changes in the boundaries
between areas in Southern California established under the Clean Air
Act for purposes of addressing the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for 1-hour ozone, particulate matter (PM-10), carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and sulfur dioxide
(SO2), and the prior NAAQS for total suspended particulate
matter (TSP).
We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a
final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by September 15, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Please address your comments to: Dave Jesson, Air Planning
Office (AIR-2), Air Division, EPA, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105-3901, or to [email protected].
A copy of the State's submittal is available for public inspection
during normal business hours at EPA's Region IX office. Please contact
Dave Jesson if you wish to schedule a visit. A copy of the submittal is
also available at the following location: California Air Resources
Board, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Jesson, EPA Region IX, at (415)
972-3957, or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
A. Current Area Boundaries, Designations, and Classifications
Areas of the country were originally designated as attainment,
nonattainment, or unclassifiable following enactment of 1977 Amendments
to the Clean Air Act (``CAA'' or ``the Act''). 43 FR 8962 (March 3,
1978). These designations were generally based on monitored air quality
values compared to the applicable NAAQS.
On November 15, 1990, the date of enactment of the 1990 CAA
Amendments, each ozone and CO area designated nonattainment,
attainment, or unclassifiable immediately before enactment of the
Amendments was designated, by operation of law, as a nonattainment,
attainment, or unclassifiable area, respectively. CAA section
107(d)(1)(C). The specific boundaries of the areas were determined
subsequently based on requests by each state and final determinations
by EPA. 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). Ozone and CO nonattainment
areas were also given classifications according to the design values
prescribed in the 1990 Amendments. CAA sections 181(a)(1) and
186(a)(1), respectively.
PM-10 areas meeting the requirements of either (i) or (ii) of CAA
section 107(d)(4)(B) were designated nonattainment for PM-10 by
operation of law and classified ``moderate'' at the time of enactment
of the 1990 CAA Amendments. EPA later designated additional PM-10
nonattainment areas (see, for example, 58 FR 67335, December 21, 1993)
and amended the initial classifications in accordance with CAA section
188(b).
SO2 and NO2 areas designated as nonattainment
or attainment/unclassified before enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments
retained those designations by operation of law. CAA section
107(d)(1)(C)(i) and (ii), respectively.
Area boundaries and (for ozone, CO, and PM-10) area classifications
have been amended over the years under the
[[Page 48849]]
applicable CAA provisions, either by request of each state, by
operation of law, or by EPA initiative. For the State of California,
the current area designations and classifications are codified at 40
CFR 81.305. For historical reference, this regulatory section also
includes designations for TSP, a NAAQS which was replaced in 1987 when
we promulgated the PM-10 NAAQS.
B. California's Request for Area Changes
Under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), the Governor of any state, on the
Governor's own motion, is authorized to submit to the Administrator a
revised designation of any nonattainment area or portions thereof
within the State.\1\ On November 18, 2002, the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) submitted to EPA a request under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D)
to revise the boundaries of the Los-Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area
(``South Coast Air Basin'') and the Southeast Desert Air Basin.\2\ The
purposes of CARB's request are to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Boundary changes are an inherent part of a designation or
redesignation of an area under the CAA. See CAA section
107(d)(1)(B)(ii).
\2\ The Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area includes all of
Orange County and the more populated portions of Los Angeles, San
Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. The Southeast Desert Air Basin
includes portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside
Counties. For a description of the current boundaries of the basins
and subareas, see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Enlarge the South Coast Air Basin to include the Banning Pass
area, thereby excluding the area from the Southeast Desert;
(2) harmonize the PM-10 and ozone boundaries of the Coachella
Valley area \3\ by changing the ozone area boundaries to match the PM-
10 area boundaries; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Coachella Valley area is part of the Southeast Desert
nonattainment area for ozone and is its own PM-10 nonattainment
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) correct the eastern boundary of the South Coast Air Basin with
respect to CO.
II. EPA Review of the State's Request
A. Applicable Criteria
In determining whether to approve or deny a state's request for a
revision to the designation of an area under section 107(d)(3)(D), we
use the same factors Congress directed us to consider when we initiate
a revision to a designation of an area on our own motion under section
107(d)(3)(A). These factors include ``air quality data, planning and
control considerations, or any other air quality-related considerations
the Administrator deems appropriate.''
B. Expansion of the South Coast Air Basin to Include the Banning Pass
The Banning Pass area in Riverside County is also known as the San
Gorgonio Pass area. The area is a mountain saddle about 15 miles long
by 5 miles wide in northwestern Riverside County. There are only 4
communities in this area: Banning, Beaumont, Cabazon, and Cherry
Valley. This area is currently part of the Southeast Desert severe-17
ozone nonattainment area and the Coachella Valley serious PM-10
nonattainment area, and the area has been designated as attainment or
unclassifiable with respect to CO, NO2, SO2, and
TSP.\4\ The populated portion of the Southeast Desert-Coachella Valley
area is primarily low desert. Palm Springs is the largest community,
and tourism and agriculture are the major industries in the Coachella
Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ CAA sections 181(a)(1) and (2) establish an ozone
classification scheme based on 1-hour ozone design values, and set
attainment deadlines for each classification. CAA section 182 then
provides progressively more stringent requirements for the State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) depending upon an area's classification.
The 1-hour ozone classifications are marginal, moderate, serious,
severe, and extreme, and the severe classification is divided into
those areas with attainment deadlines 15 years after enactment of
the 1990 CAA Amendments and those areas with deadlines 17 years
after enactment. Similarly, the CAA sets moderate and serious
classifications for CO (in section 186(a)(1)) and for PM-10 (in
sections 188(a) and (b)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has local
jurisdiction over the South Coast Air Basin, the Banning Pass area, and
the Coachella Valley portion of the Southeast Desert. Both CARB and
SCAQMD conclude that the Banning Pass area is more similar to the South
Coast Air Basin in climate and topography and measured air quality, and
that air pollution levels within the Banning Pass area are far more
heavily influenced by emissions originating in the South Coast Air
Basin than in the Southeast Desert-Coachella Valley.
The climate of the Banning Pass area closely resembles the
``steppe'' (semi-arid) climate of the South Coast Air Basin in terms of
rainfall and temperature. Precipitation levels recorded in the Banning
Pass are much higher than those of the Coachella Valley, which has a
``desert'' (arid) climate classification. For example, the annual
average rainfall is 17 inches in Beaumont, and only 5.2 inches in Palm
Springs. On average, summer temperatures in the Coachella Valley are
10-15 degrees F warmer than those recorded at the Banning Pass and in
the central South Coast Air Basin. The mean temperature in Palm Springs
for July is 92 degrees F, compared to 77 degrees F in Beaumont.
Pollution from western and central portions of the South Coast Air
Basin is typically transported eastward by prevailing ocean breezes.
This results in high ozone concentrations measured in mountain sites at
the eastern boundary of the basin, including Banning (elevation 2300
feet), which recorded a total of 25 exceedances with a design value of
0.143 parts per million (ppm) during the period 1999 to 2001. During
this same period, Palm Springs (elevation 200 feet) recorded only 7
exceedances, with a design value of 0.128 ppm. Similarly, the Banning
Pass is much more closely linked to the South Coast Air Basin than to
the Southeast Desert with respect to emissions and ambient
concentrations for the other pollutants, such as NO2 and
SO2.
In terms of ozone generation, the South Coast Air Basin has far
greater emissions than the Southeast Desert generally and the Coachella
Valley specifically, and the easterly direction of the prevailing winds
also ensures that elevated pollution levels in Banning Pass are a
consequence of the air mass shared with the western and central
portions of the South Coast Air Basin, and are not associated with the
Coachella Valley or other portions of the Southeast Desert.
For these reasons, the Banning Pass area was moved to the South
Coast Air Basin under State law in 1996. CARB and SCAQMD therefore
request that the Federal boundaries be adjusted to match the boundaries
used for State air quality purposes, by moving the Banning Pass area
from the Southeast Desert-Coachella Valley area to the South Coast Air
Basin.
The table below labeled ``Banning Pass Area'' shows the current
federal designations and classifications of this area, and the changes
that would result from approval of the State's proposed revision.
[[Page 48850]]
Banning Pass Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone CO PM-10 NO2 SO2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification Designation Classification Designation Classification Designation Designation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current......... Non-attainment Severe 17...... Unclassifiable/ N/A............ Non-attainment Serious........ Cannot be Cannot be
(area is part Attainment (part of classified or classified
of SE Desert (part of SE Riverside better than (part of SE
Modified AQMA Desert Air County, national Desert Air
Area). Basin, Coachella standards Basin,
Riverside Valley (part of excluding
County, AQMA planning area). Riverside Imperial
portion). County, non- County).
AQMA portion).
Proposed........ Non-attainment Extreme........ Non-attainment Serious........ Non-attainment Serious........ Cannot be Cannot be
(area becomes (area becomes (area becomes classified or classified
part of South part of South part of South better than (area becomes
Coast Air Coast Air Coast Air national part of South
Basin). Basin). Basin). standards Coast Air
(area becomes Basin).
part of South
Coast Air
Basin).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe that Banning is more similar to the South Coast than the
Coachella area, and that it would support efficient planning and
control to move the federal boundary of the South Coast Air Basin
eastward to encompass the Banning Pass area.
C. Revision to the Southeast Desert Ozone Nonattainment Boundary to
Align It's Eastern Border With the Coachella Valley PM-10 Nonattainment
Boundary
At present, the boundary of the Coachella Valley portion of the
Southeast Desert ozone nonattainment area is different from the
boundary of the Coachella Valley nonattainment area for PM-10. The
existing ozone nonattainment area boundary differs from the Riverside
portion of the Southeast Desert Air Basin boundary by: (1) Excluding a
sparsely populated, 550 square mile portion of the Coachella Valley
area, and (2) including a tiny portion of the Southeast Desert Air
Basin. The State has proposed to align the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area boundaries by using for all pollutants the boundary
of the Coachella Valley nonattainment area for PM-10. This boundary
tracks the mountain ridge line that separates the air basins and thus
reflects air quality considerations. The change will simplify and make
more consistent the planning activities for ozone and PM-10, and will
reconcile boundaries for Federal and State planning purposes. As a
result of the change, a sparsely-populated mountainous area above the
Coachella Valley would shift from an ozone attainment area to a
nonattainment area, with a severe-17 classification.
We agree with the State's argument that it is appropriate to align
the federal boundaries of the Coachella Valley portion of the Southeast
Desert Air Basin ozone nonattainment area to match the Coachella Valley
PM-10 nonattainment area.
D. Typographical Correction to the Boundaries of the South Coast Air
Basin for Carbon Monoxide
The CO boundaries of the South Coast Air Basin in 40 CFR 81.305 are
incorrect because they mistakenly incorporate the following phrase:
``and that portion of San Bernardino County which lies south and west
of a line described as follows: 3. latitude 35 degrees, 10 minutes
north and longitude 115 degrees, 45 minutes west.'' Neither EPA nor
CARB intended the South Coast CO nonattainment area to include this
portion of San Bernardino County, which was inadvertently incorporated
in the designations promulgated on November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56724).
California requests that we correct this typographical mistake in the
original designation by deleting the portion of the boundary
description quoted above. Correction of this error will result in the
CO boundaries conforming to the 1-hour ozone boundaries for the South
Coast Air Basin. We agree that this correction is appropriate.
III. Summary of Proposed Action and Request for Comment
EPA is proposing to take the following actions:
(1) Approve the State's request to revise the boundary of the South
Coast Air Basin to incorporate the Banning Pass;
(2) Approve the State's request to amend the 1-hour ozone boundary
of the Coachella Valley area (Riverside County portion of the Southeast
Desert Air Basin to correspond to the PM-10 boundary; and
(3) Approve the State's request to make a typographical correction
to the boundary of the South Coast Air Basin with respect to CO.
Because EPA believes the proposed boundary revisions,
reorganizations, and corrections are consistent with relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them under CAA section
107(d)(3)(D). We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new information
during the comment period, we intend to publish a final approval of the
designation changes.
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 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 merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. 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 rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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).
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not
[[Page 48851]]
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 merely proposes to approve a
state rule implementing a Federal standard, 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.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, 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 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: August 6, 2003.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 03-20894 Filed 8-14-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U