[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 137 (Monday, July 18, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46608-46612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16792]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0164; FRL-9949-07-Region 9]


Determination of Attainment of the 1-Hour Ozone National Ambient 
Air Quality Standard in the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area in 
California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

[[Page 46609]]

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is determining that 
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area has attained the 1-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard. This determination is based on 
sufficient, quality-assured, and certified data for the 2012-2014 
period. Ozone data collected in 2015 show continued attainment of the 
standard in the San Joaquin Valley.

DATES: This final rule is effective on August 17, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action, identified 
by Docket ID Number EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0164. 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 [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Public Comments
III. The EPA's Responses to Comments
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On May 18, 2016, the EPA proposed to determine that the San Joaquin 
Valley (``Valley'') 1-hour ozone nonattainment area had attained the 1-
hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or 
``standard'') based on sufficient, quality-assured, and certified data 
from the most recent three-year period (2012-2014).\1\ We noted that 
preliminary data for 2015 were consistent with continued attainment in 
the San Joaquin Valley. The Valley covers approximately 23,000 square 
miles and includes all of Fresno, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, 
Stanislaus, and Tulare counties, as well as the western half of Kern 
County.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 81 FR 31206 (May 18, 2016).
    \2\ See 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our proposed rule, we provided background information on the 1-
hour ozone standard, the designations and classifications of the San 
Joaquin Valley under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') for the 1-hour 
ozone standard, and the EPA's prior actions related to the 1-hour ozone 
standard in the Valley.\3\ We also described how we determine whether 
an area's air quality meets the 1-hour ozone standard, and identified 
the relevant air monitoring agencies in the San Joaquin Valley and 
their respective ozone monitoring networks, network plans, and annual 
certifications of ambient air monitoring data.\4\ In our proposed rule, 
we also discussed the requests, and associated analyses, submitted by 
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the San Joaquin Valley 
Air Pollution Control District (``District''), that the EPA find that 
the Valley has attained the 1-hour ozone standard.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 81 FR 31206 at 31207 (May 18, 2016).
    \4\ Id. at 31208-31210.
    \5\ Id. at 31208.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in our proposed rule, an area attains the 1-hour ozone 
standard if the highest three-year average of expected exceedances is 
less than or equal to 1 expected exceedance. Table 1 in our proposed 
rule summarized the expected 1-hour ozone exceedances, per year and as 
an average over the 2012-2014 period, at the regulatory monitoring 
sites in the San Joaquin Valley. During the 2012-2014 period, the 
highest three-year average of expected exceedances at any site in the 
Valley was 0.7 expected exceedances at Fresno--Sierra Skypark in Fresno 
County. At the time of our proposed determination, preliminary data for 
2015 was available but not yet certified. We provided preliminary data 
for 2015 that showed continued attainment of the 1-hour ozone 
standard.\6\ All three agencies operating regulatory monitoring sites 
in the San Joaquin Valley submitted their 2015 data certifications to 
the EPA by May 10, 2016, shortly following the release of our proposed 
rule.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id. at 31209, Table 1, footnote 1 citing to Quicklook 
Reports providing ambient air quality data from 2012-2015 in the 
docket for this action.
    \7\ The Regional Administrator for the EPA Region 9 office 
signed the proposed rule on May 3, 2016, and it was published in the 
Federal Register on May 18, 2016. The California Air Resources 
Board, the District, and the National Park Service all submitted 
their 2015 data certifications by May 10, 2016. See (1) letter from 
Ravi Ramalingam, Chief, Consumer Products and Air Quality Assessment 
Branch, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, to 
Elizabeth Adams, Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, 
certifying calendar year 2015 ambient air quality data and quality 
assurance data, dated May 10, 2016; (2) letter from Jon Klassen, 
Program Manager, SJVAPCD, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, 
EPA Region IX, certifying calendar year 2015 ambient air quality 
data and quality assurance data, dated May 9, 2016; and (3) letter 
from Barkley Sive, Program Manager, NPS, to Lew Weinstock, EPA, 
certifying 2015 ozone data, dated April 27, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this final action, we have repeated our review of the 2015 data 
now that the data have been certified to confirm that the data are 
consistent with continued attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard in 
the San Joaquin Valley. In Table 1 below, we supplement the 
corresponding table from our proposed rule with 2015 data. As shown in 
Table 1 below, the highest three-year average of expected exceedances 
at any site in the Valley for 2013-2015 was 0.4, at Fresno--Sierra 
Skypark in Fresno County. Based on complete, quality-assured, and 
certified data, the expected exceedances in Table 1 indicate continued 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard in the SJV over 2013-2015.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As discussed in our proposed rule, a ``complete'' data set 
for determining attainment of the ozone standard is generally one 
that includes three years of data with an average percent of days 
with valid monitoring data greater than 90 percent with no single 
year less than 75 percent. The 2013-2015 data summarized in Table 1 
from all of the regulatory sites meet this criterion. See June 20, 
2016 spreadsheet titled ``20160620_QLRpt_SJV_1hrO3_2012-2015.xlsx,'' 
in the docket for this final action.

                              Table 1--One-Hour Ozone Data for the San Joaquin Valley One-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area\1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Expected exceedances by year                      Expected exceedances 3-yr
                                                         ----------------------------------------------------------------             average
                      Site (AQS ID)                                                                                      -------------------------------
                                                               2012            2013            2014            2015          2012-2014       2013-2015
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRESNO COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clovis--Villa (06-019-5001).............................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 46610]]

 
Fresno--Drummond Street (06-019-0007)...................             1.0             0.0             0.0             1.0             0.3             0.3
Fresno--Garland (06-019-0011)...........................             1.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.3             0.0
Fresno--Sierra Skypark (06-019-0242)....................             1.0             0.0             1.1             0.0             0.7             0.4
Parlier (06-019-4001)...................................             1.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.3             0.0
Tranquility (06-019-2009)...............................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KERN COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arvin--Di Giorgio (06-029-5002).........................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
Bakersfield--Muni (06-029-2012).........................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0         \2\ 0.0             0.0
Bakersfield--California (06-029-0014)...................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
Edison (06-029-0007)....................................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
Maricopa (06-029-0008)..................................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
Oildale (06-029-0232)...................................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
Shafter (06-029-6001)...................................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KINGS COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hanford--Irwin (06-031-1004)............................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MADERA COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Madera--Pump Yard (06-039-0004).........................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Madera--City (06-039-2010)..............................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MERCED COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Merced--Coffee (06-047-0003)............................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stockton--Hazelton (06-077-1002)........................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tracy--Airport (06-077-3005)............................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STANISLAUS COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modesto--14th Street (06-099-0005)......................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Turlock (06-099-0006)...................................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TULARE COUNTY:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Porterville (06-107-2010)...............................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
Sequoia National Park--Ash Mountain (06-107-0009).......             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
Visalia--Church Street (06-107-2002)....................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Source: Quicklook Report, ``20160620_QLRpt_SJV_1hrO3_2012-2015.pdf,'' June 20, 2016; and ``20160620_QLRpt_SJV_1hrO3_2012-2015.xlsx,'' June 20, 2016
  (in the docket for this final action).
\2\ Based on CARB's missing data analysis for this site, at most one exceedance could have been recorded during the first half of 2012 if the site had
  been operational during that period. Assuming such an exceedance had occurred, the 3-year average of expected exceedances for the 2012-2014 period at
  the Bakersfield-Municipal Airport site would have been 0.3, which is less than the corresponding value at Fresno--Sierra Skypark (0.7) and less than
  the NAAQS.

    We proposed to determine that the San Joaquin Valley has attained 
the 1-hour ozone standard based on our analysis of the ambient air 
quality data, as well as our review of 1-hour ozone trends in the 
Valley, data completeness, and the adequacy of the ozone monitoring 
network.\9\ We noted that if we finalize the proposed determination, to 
the extent not already fulfilled, the requirements for the state to 
submit attainment demonstrations and associated reasonably available 
control measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency 
measures for failure to attain or make reasonable progress and other 
plans related to attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard for San 
Joaquin Valley shall be suspended until such time as the area is 
redesignated as attainment for the current ozone NAAQS or a 
redesignation substitute for the 1-hour ozone standard is approved, at 
which time the requirements no

[[Page 46611]]

longer apply.\10\ If, however, prior to such redesignation or approval 
of such redesignation substitute, the EPA determines that San Joaquin 
Valley has violated the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, then the area is again 
required to submit such attainment-related plans.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 81 FR 31206, at 31208-31211 (May 18, 2016).
    \10\ See 40 CFR 51.1118.
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Public Comments

    We solicited comment on the proposed determination of attainment 
and opened a 30-day public comment period. The comment period closed on 
June 17, 2016. During the comment period, we received a comment from a 
member of the public in support of the proposal, and a comment letter 
from the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA). WSPA also 
expressed support for the proposed attainment determination but 
recommended concurrent revocation of the District's penalty fee rule 
based on the District's demonstration that the attainment of the 1-hour 
ozone standard is due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions 
and based on the sunset clause in the penalty fee rule itself. We 
respond to WSPA's comment in the following section of this document.

III. The EPA's Responses to Public Comments

    In our proposed rule, we noted that in addition to the request for 
a clean data determination, the District provided documentation in its 
staff report intending to support a finding that attainment of the 1-
hour ozone standard is due to permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions. As discussed in our proposed rule, the EPA's final 
implementation rule for the 2008 ozone standard established a 
mechanism, referred to as a ``redesignation substitute,'' through which 
an area may shift to contingency status those requirements, such as 
penalty fee program requirements under CAA section 185, to which an 
area had remained subject under the EPA's anti-backsliding regulations 
governing the transition from revoked ozone standards (such as the 1-
hour ozone standard) to current ozone standards.
    To invoke the redesignation substitute, a state must submit two 
things: (1) A demonstration that the area has attained the revoked 
ozone NAAQS due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions, and 
(2) a demonstration that the area will maintain the revoked NAAQS for 
10 years from the date of the EPA's approval of this showing.\12\ The 
District submitted the first required demonstration to the EPA but did 
not submit the second required component of the redesignation 
substitute mechanism, i.e., the demonstration that the area will 
maintain the 1-hour ozone standard for 10 years. Because neither the 
state nor the District has submitted a complete demonstration required 
to invoke the redesignation substitute mechanism, we stated in our 
proposed rule that action on a single element (i.e., the demonstration 
of attainment due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions) 
was not appropriate without the second required element (i.e., the 10-
year maintenance demonstration). When the state submits a demonstration 
that the San Joaquin Valley will maintain the 1-hour ozone standard for 
10 years, we will review and consider whether both demonstrations 
together meet the requirements of the redesignation substitute 
mechanism for the 1-hour ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 40 CFR 51.1105(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, we note that the District's penalty fee rule does not 
automatically sunset upon the EPA's final determination of attainment 
for the 1-hour ozone standard. The penalty fee rule (i.e., District 
Rule 3170 (``Federally Mandated Ozone Nonattainment Fee'') provides, in 
relevant part:

    ``The fees established by this rule shall cease to be applicable 
when the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) has met the revoked 
federal one-hour ambient air quality standard for ozone.
    For the purposes of this rule, the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin 
shall have met the revoked federal one-hour ambient air quality 
standard for ozone upon EPA's determination, through notice-and-
comment rulemaking, of concurrence with a demonstration by the APCO 
and the California Air Resources Board that the average number of 
days per calendar year with maximum hourly average concentration 
above 0.12 ppm is less than or equal to one (1), for each monitor. 
To make this demonstration, the APCO will, using all available 
quality assured monitoring data, calculate at each monitor the 
average number of days over the standard per year during a three-
year period according to the procedures found in 40 CFR part 50 
Appendix H, and show that the improvement in air quality is due to 
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions.''

    Thus, under the terms of the penalty fee rule, the fee provisions 
do not sunset simply upon the EPA's determination of attainment of the 
1-hour ozone standard. The EPA's concurrence on the demonstration that 
attainment of the standard is due to permanent and enforceable 
emissions reductions is also a prerequisite to triggering the sunset 
clause. While the District has submitted such a demonstration, we 
indicated in our proposed rule and reiterate above that we are taking 
no action on the District's demonstration at this time. We will 
consider the District's demonstration in a separate rulemaking if and 
when it is supplemented with the 10-year maintenance demonstration 
element also needed to invoke the redesignation substitute mechanism in 
40 CFR 51.1105(b).

IV. Final Action

    Based on the analyses in our proposed rule of ambient air quality 
data, 1-hour ozone trends in the Valley, and the adequacy of the 
monitoring network in the Valley, as well as our review of 2015 data in 
this final rule indicating continued attainment of the standard, we are 
taking final action to determine that the San Joaquin Valley 
nonattainment area has attained the 1-hour ozone standard. This 
determination is based on sufficient, quality-assured, and certified 
data for the period 2012-2014.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action finalizes a determination based on air quality data and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this final action:
     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);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     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.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     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

[[Page 46612]]

application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; 
and,
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority 
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or 
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible 
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this final clean data determination does not have 
tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000) because the SIP obligations discussed herein do not 
apply to Indian Tribes, and thus will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 16, 2016. 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 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, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 30, 2016.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
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. Section 52.282 is amended by adding paragraph (h) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.282  Control strategy and regulations: Ozone

* * * * *
    (h) Determination of attainment. EPA has determined that, as of 
August 17, 2016, the San Joaquin Valley 1-hour ozone nonattainment area 
has attained the 1-hour ozone standard, based upon sufficient, quality-
assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for 2012-
2014.
[FR Doc. 2016-16792 Filed 7-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P