[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55901-55911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-14617]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0250; FRL-12006-01-R9]


Attainment Date Extension for the San Joaquin Valley, California 
1997 Annual PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
grant a one-year extension of the applicable ``Serious'' attainment 
date for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) San 
Joaquin Valley, California nonattainment area. This action is based on 
the EPA's evaluation of air quality monitoring data and the extension 
request submitted by the State of California on May 23, 2024. The EPA 
is proposing to grant a one-year extension of the Serious attainment 
date from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, in accordance with 
section 172(a)(2)(C) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). We are taking comments 
on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 7, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2024-0250 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at 
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public

[[Page 55902]]

docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written 
comment is considered the official comment and should include 
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary 
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public 
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and 
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. 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: Ashley Graham, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415) 972-3877; email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' 
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. PM2.5 NAAQS
    B. San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 Designations, 
Classifications, and SIP Revisions
    C. CAA Requirements for an Attainment Date Extension
II. The State's Request for an Extension
III. The EPA's Evaluation
    A. Compliance With the Applicable SIP
    B. Air Quality Data
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. The EPA's Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

A. PM2.5 NAAQS

    Under section 109 of the CAA, the EPA has established NAAQS for 
certain pervasive air pollutants (referred to as ``criteria 
pollutants'') and conducts periodic reviews of the NAAQS to determine 
whether the EPA should revise or establish new NAAQS to protect public 
health.
    On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter 
by establishing new NAAQS for particles with an aerodynamic diameter 
less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5).\1\ 
The EPA established primary and secondary annual and 24-hour standards 
for PM2.5.\2\ The EPA set the annual primary and secondary 
standards at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a 
three-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and 
set the 24-hour primary and secondary standards at 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based 
on the three-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 
PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring site within an 
area.\3\ Collectively, we refer herein to the 1997 annual and 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS as the ``1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 38652.
    \2\ For a given air pollutant, ``primary'' NAAQS are those 
determined by the EPA as requisite to protect the public health, 
allowing an adequate margin of safety, and ``secondary'' standards 
are those determined by the EPA as requisite to protect the public 
welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects associated 
with the presence of such air pollutant in the ambient air. See CAA 
section 109(b).
    \3\ 40 CFR 50.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the level of the 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 [mu]g/m\3\,\4\ and on January 15, 2013, 
the EPA revised the level of the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS 
to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\.\5\ On February 7, 2024, the EPA revised the level 
of the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS once more to 9.0 [mu]g/
m\3\.\6\ Even though the EPA lowered the 24-hour and annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS remain 
in effect and the 1997 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS remains in 
effect in areas designated nonattainment for that NAAQS.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 71 FR 61144.
    \5\ 78 FR 3086.
    \6\ 89 FR 16202.
    \7\ 40 CFR 50.13(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA established each of the PM2.5 NAAQS after 
considering substantial evidence from numerous health studies 
demonstrating that serious health effects are associated with exposures 
to PM2.5 concentrations above these levels. Epidemiological 
studies have shown statistically significant correlations between 
elevated PM2.5 levels and premature mortality. Other 
important health effects associated with PM2.5 exposure 
include aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease (as 
indicated by increased hospital admissions, emergency room visits, 
absences from school or work, and restricted activity dates), changes 
in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms, and new evidence 
for more subtle indicators of cardiovascular health. Individuals 
particularly sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include older 
adults, people with heart and lung disease, and children.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ EPA, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, No. EPA/
600/P-99/002aF and EPA/600/P-99/002bF, October 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PM2.5 can be particles emitted by sources directly into 
the atmosphere as a solid or liquid particle (``primary 
PM2.5'' or ``direct PM2.5'') or can be particles 
that form in the atmosphere as a result of various chemical reactions 
from PM2.5 precursor emissions emitted by sources 
(``secondary PM2.5''). The EPA has identified the precursors 
of PM2.5 to be oxides of nitrogen (``NOX''), 
sulfur oxides (``SOX''), volatile organic compounds 
(``VOC''), and ammonia.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For example, see 72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 Designations, Classifications, and SIP 
Revisions

    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is 
required under CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the 
nation as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable for the NAAQS. 
Effective April 5, 2005, the EPA established the initial air quality 
designations for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 
using air quality monitoring data for the three-year periods of 2001-
2003 and 2002-2004.\10\ The EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley as 
nonattainment for both the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (15.0 
[micro]g/m\3\) and the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (65 
[micro]g/m\3\).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005).
    \11\ 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area 
encompasses over 23,000 square miles and includes all or part of eight 
counties: San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, 
Kings, and the valley portion of Kern.\12\ The area is home to four 
million people and is one of the nation's leading agricultural regions. 
Stretching over 250 miles from north to south and averaging 80 miles 
wide, it is partially enclosed by the Coast Mountain range to the west, 
the Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the Sierra Nevada range to 
the east. Under State law, the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 
Control District (SJVUAPCD or ``District'') has primary responsibility 
for developing plans to provide for attainment of the NAAQS in this 
area. The District works cooperatively with the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB) in preparing attainment plans. Authority for 
regulating sources under State jurisdiction in the San Joaquin Valley 
is

[[Page 55903]]

split under State law between the District, which has responsibility 
for regulating stationary and most area sources, and CARB, which has 
responsibility for regulating most mobile sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For a precise description of the geographic boundaries of 
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area, see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the time of the initial designations for the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS, the EPA interpreted the CAA to require 
implementation of the NAAQS under the general nonattainment plan 
requirements of subpart 1.\13\ Under subpart 1, states were required to 
submit nonattainment plan SIP submissions within three years of the 
effective date of designations that, among other things, provided for 
implementation of reasonably available control measures (RACM), 
reasonable further progress (RFP), contingency measures, and a modeled 
attainment demonstration showing attainment of the NAAQS as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years from the 
designation (in this instance, no later than April 5, 2010), unless the 
state justified an attainment date extension of up to five years.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 72 FR 20586.
    \14\ CAA sections 172(a)(2), 172(c)(1), 172(c)(2), and 
172(c)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Between 2007 and 2011, California submitted six nonattainment plan 
and supporting SIP revisions to address nonattainment area planning 
requirements for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin 
Valley,\15\ which we refer to collectively as the ``2008 
PM2.5 Plan.'' On November 9, 2011, the EPA approved the 
portions of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, as revised in 2009 and 
2011, that addressed attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area, except for the attainment 
contingency measures, which we disapproved.\16\ We also granted the 
State's request to extend the attainment deadline for the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley to April 5, 2015.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 76 FR 69896, n. 2 (November 9, 2011).
    \16\ Id. at 69924.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following a January 4, 2013 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals 
for the D.C. Circuit remanding the EPA's 2007 implementation rule for 
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS,\18\ the EPA published a final rule on 
June 2, 2014, classifying the San Joaquin Valley as a ``Moderate'' 
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4, 
part D of title I of the Act.\19\ In that action, the EPA acknowledged 
that states must meet both subpart 1 and subpart 4 requirements in 
nonattainment plan SIP submissions for the 1997 24-hour and annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS and provided states with additional time to 
supplement or withdraw and resubmit any pending nonattainment plan SIP 
submissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d. 428 
(D.C. Cir. 2013) (``NRDC''). In NRDC, the court held that the EPA 
erred in implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS solely 
pursuant to the general implementation requirements of subpart 1, 
without also considering the requirements specific to nonattainment 
areas for particles less than or equal to 10 [micro]m in diameter 
(PM10) in subpart 4, part D of title I of the CAA. The 
court reasoned that the plain meaning of the CAA requires 
implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 
because PM2.5 falls within the statutory definition of 
PM10 and is thus subject to the same statutory 
requirements as PM10. The court remanded the rule, 
without vacatur, and instructed the EPA ``to repromulgate these 
rules pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.''
    \19\ 79 FR 31566.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Effective May 7, 2015, the EPA reclassified the San Joaquin Valley 
as a Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 
based on our determination that the State could not practicably attain 
these NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area by the latest 
statutory Moderate area attainment date, i.e., April 5, 2015.\20\ Upon 
reclassification as a Serious area, the State became subject to the 
requirement of CAA section 188(c)(2) to attain the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than ten years after designation, i.e., by no later than December 31, 
2015. California submitted its Serious area plan for the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley in two submissions 
dated June 25, 2015, and August 13, 2015, including a request under 
section 188(e) to extend the attainment date for the 1997 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS by three years (to December 31, 2018) and to 
extend the attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 
by five years (to December 31, 2020). On February 9, 2016, the EPA 
proposed to approve most of the Serious area plan and to grant the 
State's request for extensions of the December 31, 2015 attainment 
date.\21\ However, on October 6, 2016, after considering public 
comments, the EPA denied California's request for these extensions of 
the attainment dates.\22\ Consequently, on November 23, 2016, the EPA 
determined that the San Joaquin Valley had failed to attain the 1997 
24-hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 2015 
Serious area attainment date.\23\ This determination triggered a 
requirement for California to submit a new SIP submission for the 1997 
24-hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley 
that satisfies the requirements of CAA section 189(d). The statutory 
deadline for this additional SIP submission was December 31, 2016. The 
EPA did not finalize the actions proposed on February 9, 2016, with 
respect to the submitted Serious area plan.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 80 FR 18528 (April 7, 2015).
    \21\ 81 FR 6936. California's request for extension of the 
Serious Area attainment date for the San Joaquin Valley accompanied 
its Serious Area attainment plan for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 
and related motor vehicle emissions budgets, submitted June 25, 
2015, and August 13, 2015, respectively.
    \22\ 81 FR 69396.
    \23\ 81 FR 84481.
    \24\ 81 FR 69396, 69400.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 6, 2018, the EPA determined that California had failed 
to submit a complete section 189(d) attainment plan for the 1997 24-
hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS, among other required SIP 
submissions for the San Joaquin Valley, by the statutory deadlines.\25\ 
This finding, which became effective on January 7, 2019, triggered 
clocks under CAA section 179(a) for the application of emissions offset 
sanctions 18 months after the finding, and highway funding sanctions 6 
months thereafter, unless the EPA affirmatively determined that the 
State made a complete SIP submission addressing the identified failure 
to submit deficiencies.\26\ The finding also triggered the obligation 
under CAA section 110(c) for the EPA to promulgate a federal 
implementation plan no later than two years after the finding, unless 
the State submitted, and the EPA approved, the required SIP 
submission.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 83 FR 62720.
    \26\ Id. at 62723.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 10, 2019, CARB submitted the ``2018 Plan for the 1997, 2006, 
and 2012 PM2.5 Standards,'' adopted by the SJVUAPCD on 
November 15, 2018, and by CARB on January 24, 2019 (``2018 
PM2.5 Plan'').\28\ The 2018 PM2.5 Plan addressed 
the Serious area nonattainment plan and CAA section 189(d) requirements 
for the 1997 24-hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS, among other 
requirements for the 2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. CARB 
clarified in its submittal letter that the 2018 PM2.5 Plan 
superseded past submissions to the EPA that the agency had not yet 
acted on for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including the 2015 
Serious area attainment plan submissions.\29\ On June 24, 2020, the EPA 
issued a letter finding these submissions complete and

[[Page 55904]]

terminating the sanctions clocks under CAA section 179(a).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Letter dated May 9, 2019, from Richard Corey, Executive 
Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
    \29\ The 2015 Serious area attainment plan submissions include 
the ``2015 Plan for the 1997 Standard'' (submitted by CARB on June 
25, 2015) and motor vehicle emissions budgets (submitted by CARB 
August 13, 2015).
    \30\ Letter dated June 24, 2020, from Elizabeth J. Adams, 
Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Richard 
Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, Subject: ``RE: Completeness Finding 
for State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions for San Joaquin 
Valley for the 1997, 2006, and 2012 Fine Particulate Matter 
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 
and Termination of Clean Air Act (CAA) Sanction Clocks.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 28, 2022, the EPA approved those portions of the 2018 
PM2.5 Plan that pertain to the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS, except for the contingency measure element, which the EPA 
disapproved.\31\ As part of that action, the EPA also finalized a 
determination that the San Joaquin Valley attained the 1997 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of December 
31, 2020, and that therefore the requirement for contingency measures 
no longer applies in the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for the 
1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 87 FR 4503 (January 28, 2022).
    \32\ Id. at 4506.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 22, 2021, the EPA proposed to partially approve and 
partially disapprove portions of the 2018 PM2.5 Plan that 
addressed attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 
San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area.\33\ The EPA proposed to approve 
the 2013 base year emissions inventories and disapprove the attainment 
demonstration and related elements, including the comprehensive 
precursor demonstration, five percent annual emissions reductions 
demonstration, best available control measures (BACM) demonstration, 
RFP demonstration, quantitative milestones, and motor vehicle emissions 
budgets established for 2017, 2020, and 2023. We proposed to disapprove 
the attainment demonstration and related elements because certified air 
quality data were available that established that the San Joaquin 
Valley area did not attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by 
December 31, 2020, as projected in the 2018 PM2.5 Plan. On 
November 26, 2021, the EPA finalized the partial approval and partial 
disapproval of the 2018 PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS as proposed.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 86 FR 38652.
    \34\ 86 FR 67329.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the November 26, 2021 disapprovals, California was 
required to develop and submit a revised attainment plan for the San 
Joaquin Valley area that addressed the applicable CAA requirements, 
including the Serious area plan requirements and the requirements of 
CAA section 189(d), for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In 
accordance with sections 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2) of the CAA, the 
revised plan was required to demonstrate attainment of these NAAQS as 
expeditiously as practicable and no later than 5 years from the date of 
the EPA's prior determination that the area failed to attain (i.e., by 
November 23, 2021), except that the EPA could extend the attainment 
date to a date no later than 10 years from the failure to attain 
determination (i.e., to November 23, 2026), ``considering the severity 
of nonattainment and the availability and feasibility of pollution 
control measures.'' \35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 81 FR 84481, 84482 (final EPA action determining that the 
San Joaquin Valley had failed to attain the 1997 PM2.5 
NAAQS by the December 31, 2015, Serious area attainment date).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 8, 2021, CARB submitted the ``Attainment Plan Revision 
for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Standard'' (``15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP 
Revision''), adopted by the SJVUAPCD on August 19, 2021, and adopted by 
CARB on September 23, 2021.\36\ In the letter accompanying the 
submission, CARB clarified that the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision 
amended the 2018 PM2.5 Plan.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Letter dated November 8, 2021, from Richard W. Corey, 
Executive Officer, CARB, to Deborah Jordan, Acting Regional 
Administrator, EPA Region 9. The 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision was 
developed jointly by CARB and the District.
    \37\ Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 14, 2023, the EPA approved the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP 
Revision as a revision to the California SIP, establishing an 
applicable attainment date of December 31, 2023, for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 88 FR 86581. As discussed in the EPA's proposal to approve 
the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision, the attainment date for the 
189(d) plan was established consistent with CAA sections 179(d)(3) 
and 172(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. CAA Requirements for an Attainment Date Extension

    Under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C), the EPA may grant a state's request 
to extend the attainment date established under CAA section 
172(a)(2)(A) if: ``(1) the State has complied with all requirements and 
commitments pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation 
plan, and (2) in accordance with guidance published by the 
Administrator, no more than the minimal number of exceedances of the 
relevant national ambient air quality standard has occurred in the area 
in the year preceding the Extension Year.'' The EPA may grant a second 
1-year extension if these same criteria are met at the end of the first 
extension year. The EPA cannot issue more than two one-year extensions 
under section 172(a)(2)(C) for a single nonattainment area.
    In an August 24, 2016 final rule entitled, ``Fine Particulate 
Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation 
Plan Requirements'' (``PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule''), the 
EPA established regulatory requirements and provided further 
interpretive guidance on the statutory SIP requirements that apply to 
areas designated nonattainment for the PM2.5 NAAQS,\39\ 
including guidance on the extension provisions for particulate matter 
nonattainment areas under CAA section 188. Because CAA section 188(d) 
is nearly identical to CAA section 172(a)(2)(C), the EPA considers the 
guidance pertaining to the one-year extension requirements under CAA 
section 188(d) to persuasively inform the requirements for a one-year 
extension for a particulate matter nonattainment area under CAA section 
172(a)(2)(C). Thus, our assessment of the State's extension request 
will rely on the guidance for one-year extensions under CAA section 
188(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 81 FR 58010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to the first criterion for an extension of the 
attainment date, the EPA clarified in the PM2.5 SIP 
Requirements Rule that a state must show that it has ``submitted the 
necessary attainment plan for the area for the applicable 
PM2.5 NAAQS and is implementing the control measures in the 
submission.'' \40\ The EPA interprets this requirement to mean that a 
state must have adopted and be implementing the control measures and 
commitments in the approved SIP revisions it has submitted to address 
the CAA requirements for the applicable PM2.5 NAAQS.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Id. at 58070.
    \41\ See Delaware Dept. of Nat. Resources and Envtl. Control v. 
EPA, 895 F.3d 90, 101 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (holding that for the 
purposes of an attainment date extension, the CAA requires only that 
an applying state with jurisdiction over a nonattainment area comply 
with the requirements in its applicable SIP, not every requirement 
of the Act); see also Vigil v. Leavitt, 381 F.3d 826, 846 (9th Cir. 
2004). A state may meet this requirement by certifying its 
compliance, and in the absence of such certification, the EPA may 
make a determination as to whether the criterion has been met. See 
Delaware, 895 F.3d, pp. 101-102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to the second criterion, the EPA explains in the 
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule that we interpret that ``a state 
seeking an attainment date extension for an annual PM2.5 
NAAQS would be required to demonstrate that the area had clean data for 
that particular standard . . . in the calendar year prior to the 
applicable attainment date for the area . . .'' \42\ That is, for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, a state

[[Page 55905]]

would need to show that the annual mean value in the year proceeding 
the attainment year (in this case, 2023) did not exceed the 15.0 
[micro]g/m\3\ level of the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 81 FR 58010, 58071.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the EPA finds that a state has satisfied the criteria for an 
extension and grants an extension of the attainment date, the EPA must 
determine whether the area attained the relevant NAAQS following the 
end of the extension year (unless the state requests a second one-year 
extension and the EPA finds that the requirements for such extension 
are satisfied and extends the attainment date by an additional year). 
In the absence of an attainment date extension, upon a determination of 
failure to attain by the EPA, the state would be required to develop a 
revised attainment plan for the area.

II. The State's Request for an Extension

    As discussed in Section I.B of this document, on December 14, 2023, 
the EPA approved California's plan to address the Serious area and CAA 
section 189(d) plan requirements for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS, establishing a December 31, 2023 attainment date. On May 23, 
2024, the State of California transmitted a letter to the EPA 
requesting that the EPA grant a one-year extension under CAA section 
172(a)(2)(C) to the applicable Serious area attainment date for the San 
Joaquin Valley from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024.\43\ In its 
request, the State certified that it has complied with all requirements 
and commitments pertaining to the area in the approved implementation 
plan and that complete, certified monitoring data for the San Joaquin 
Valley for 2023 are below the level of the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Letter dated May 23, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive 
Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 
9, with enclosures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State's May 23, 2024 extension request includes documentation 
in three enclosures in support of its certification that it has 
complied with the requirements for an attainment date extension under 
CAA section 172(a)(2)(C):

    (1) A letter dated May 14, 2024, from Samir Sheikh, Executive 
Director/Air Pollution Control Officer, SJVUAPCD, to Dr. Steven S. 
Cliff, Executive Officer, CARB, Subject: ``RE: Attainment Date 
Extension for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Standard for the San 
Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area;''
    (2) A document titled ``Documentation of CARB Having Met 
Previous State Implementation Plan Obligations for the 15 [micro]g/
m\3\ PM2.5 Standard for the San Joaquin Valley'' (``2024 
CARB Compliance Demonstration''); and
    (3) A letter dated April 29, 2024, from Sylvia Vanderspek, 
Chief, Air Quality Planning Branch, CARB, to Dena Vallano, Manager, 
Monitoring and Analysis Section, EPA Region 9, with enclosures, 
certifying 2023 ambient data collected by State and Local Air 
Monitoring Stations and Special Purpose Monitors operated by CARB in 
the San Joaquin Valley.

    We briefly describe each of these documents in the remainder of 
this section and provide more detail as part of our evaluation in 
Section III.
    The District's May 14, 2024 extension request letter includes a 
discussion of the State's SIP submittals to address CAA requirements, 
including the control measure requirements under CAA sections 189(b) 
and 189(d); the State's submission of quantitative milestone reports 
documenting its progress towards attaining the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS; and the District's amendments to Rule 4901 
(``Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Burning Heaters'') to address 
contingency measure requirements and achieve reductions in 
PM2.5 emissions for purposes of meeting the NAAQS. The 
District's letter also presents certified ambient air monitoring data 
for the San Joaquin Valley for the 2023 calendar year, which show that 
the annual mean concentration was less than 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ (i.e., 
the level of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS) at all monitoring 
sites.
    The 2024 CARB Compliance Demonstration documents how CARB has 
complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the San 
Joaquin Valley for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by addressing 
the requirements in each of the SIP submittals for those NAAQS (i.e., 
the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, the 2015 PM2.5 Plan, the 
2018 PM2.5 Plan, and the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision). For 
each attainment plan submittal, CARB discusses the control measure and 
emissions reductions it committed to in the plan and the actions the 
State has taken to meet those commitments (i.e., by adopting the 
measures identified in the plan or by adopting substitute measures). 
CARB also discusses the measures the State has adopted and submitted to 
the EPA to address contingency measure requirements and submissions it 
has made to meet its obligations to submit quantitative milestone 
reports for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Lastly, in support of the State's assertion that it has met the air 
quality criterion for a one-year attainment date extension for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, CARB included with its extension request 
a letter certifying 2023 ambient data for the San Joaquin Valley 
collected by monitors operated by CARB.

III. The EPA's Evaluation

A. Compliance With the Applicable SIP

    The first requirement for an extension of the attainment date under 
CAA section 172(a)(2)(C) is a showing that the state has complied with 
all requirements and commitments pertaining to that area in the 
implementation plan. As discussed in Section I.C of this document, the 
EPA interprets this requirement to mean that a state must have adopted 
and be implementing the control measures and commitments in the SIP 
revisions it has submitted to address the CAA requirements for the 
applicable PM2.5 NAAQS. For the San Joaquin Valley for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the EPA has approved control 
measure requirements and commitments in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan 
and the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision to the 2018 PM2.5 Plan 
into the California SIP. Therefore, in the remainder of this section, 
we describe the State's and District's implementation of the control 
measures and commitments in those plans.
1. 2008 PM2.5 Plan
    The specific State and District commitments that the EPA approved 
into the California SIP as part of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan are 
as follows:

    (1) A commitment by CARB to propose specific measures identified 
in Appendix B of the ``Progress Report on Implementation of 
PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the South 
Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP 
Revisions,'' dated April 28, 2011 (``2011 Progress Report''), in 
accordance with the timetable specified therein; \44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 40 CFR 52.220(c)(395)(ii)(A)(2), CARB Resolution No. 07-28, 
Attachment B (September 27, 2007), CARB Resolution No. 09-34 (April 
24, 2009), and CARB Resolution No. 11-24 (April 28, 2011); see also 
76 FR 69896, 69921-69922, Table 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) A commitment by the District to ``adopt and implement the 
rules and measures in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan'' in accordance 
with the timetable specified in Table 6-2 of the 2008 
PM2.5 Plan, as amended June 17, 2010, and to submit these 
rules and measures to CARB for transmittal to the EPA as SIP 
revisions; \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 40 CFR 52.220(c)(392)(ii)(A)(2), SJVUAPCD Governing Board 
Resolution No. 08-04-10 (April 30, 2008), and SJVUAPCD Governing 
Board Resolution No. 10-06-18 (June 17, 2010); see also 76 FR 69896 
at 69921, Table 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) A commitment by CARB to achieve a total of 17.1 tons per day 
(tpd) of NOX emissions reductions and 2.3 tpd of direct 
PM2.5 emissions reductions by 2014 as described in CARB 
Resolution No. 07-28, Attachment B, as amended in 2009 and 2011; 
\46\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ 40 CFR 52.220(c)(356)(ii)(B)(2).

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

[[Page 55906]]

    (4) A commitment by the District to achieve a total of 8.97 tpd 
of NOX emissions reductions and 0.92 tpd of 
SOX emissions reductions by 2014, as described in Table 
6-3a, Table 6-3b, and Table 6-3c, respectively, of the 2008 
PM2.5 Plan.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 40 CFR 52.220(c)(392)(ii)(A)(2).

    As of November 9, 2011, the date of the EPA's final action on the 
2008 PM2.5 Plan, CARB and the District had each satisfied 
substantial portions of these control measure and emissions reduction 
commitments. Specifically, CARB had proposed action on six of the seven 
measures it had committed to propose for Board consideration, leaving 
one additional measure that was scheduled for proposal in 2013 (``New 
Emissions Standards for Recreational Boats'').\48\ The District had 
adopted 12 of the 13 measures it had committed to adopt and implement, 
leaving one additional measure that was scheduled for adoption in 2014, 
amendments to Rule 4905 (``National Gas-Fired, Fan-Type Central 
Furnaces'').\49\ Finally, together CARB and the District had achieved 
all of the SOX emissions reduction commitments and 
substantial portions of the direct PM2.5 and NOX 
emissions reductions commitments through implementation of State and 
District control strategy measures, leaving 3.0 tpd of direct 
PM2.5 emissions reductions and 12.9 tpd of NOX 
emissions reductions yet to be achieved by the beginning of 2014.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ 76 FR 69896, 69922, Table 2 (``2007 State Strategy Defined 
Measures Schedule for Consideration and Current Status'').
    \49\ Id. at 69921, Table 1 (``San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution 
Control District 2008 PM2.5 Plan Specific Rule 
Commitments'').
    \50\ Id. at 69923, Table 4 (``Reductions Needed for Attainment 
Remaining as Commitments Based on SIP-Creditable Measures'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequently, CARB submitted a staff report, entitled ``Review of 
San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 State Implementation Plan'' (``2015 
CARB Compliance Demonstration''), that contains CARB's demonstration 
that both CARB and the District had satisfied the commitments in the 
2008 PM2.5 Plan that remained outstanding as of November 9, 
2011.\51\ As discussed in the 2015 CARB Compliance Demonstration, on 
January 22, 2015, the District adopted amendments to Rule 4905 and on 
April 7, 2015, CARB submitted this rule to the EPA as a revision to the 
California SIP.\52\ Second, on February 19, 2015, CARB proposed for 
Board consideration, and the Board adopted, new emissions standards for 
recreational boats entitled ``Evaporative Emissions Control 
Requirements for Spark-Ignition Marine Watercraft.'' \53\ These State 
and District rulemaking actions satisfied the last remaining control 
measure commitments in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan. All of these 
measures have been submitted to the EPA and approved into the 
California SIP.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ CARB, ``Review of San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 State 
Implementation Plan,'' released April 20, 2015 (``2015 CARB 
Compliance Demonstration''), transmitted by email dated February 5, 
2020, from Michael Benjamin, CARB to Meredith Kurpius, EPA Region 
IX, pp. 17-22 and Appendix B.
    \52\ 2015 CARB Compliance Demonstration, p. 19, Table 7, and 
letter dated April 7, 2015, from Richard Corey, Executive Officer, 
CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 
(transmitting air district regulations to the EPA as California SIP 
revisions).
    \53\ 2015 CARB Compliance Demonstration, p. 20, Table 8 and 
CARB, Resolution 15-3, ``Evaporative Emissions Control Requirements 
for Spark-Ignition Marine Watercraft,'' February 19, 2015, available 
at https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2015/simw2015/simw2015.htm.
    \54\ See Technical Support Document, EPA General Evaluation, San 
Joaquin Valley PM2.5 Plan for the 2006 PM2.5 
NAAQS, Table III-A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the remaining emissions reduction commitments, the 
2015 CARB Compliance Demonstration, as amended by CARB's ``Technical 
Clarifications to the 2015 San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 State 
Implementation Plan,'' identified State and District control measures 
that, according to CARB, achieved emissions reductions beyond those 
already credited towards the 2008 PM2.5 Plan and satisfied 
the State's remaining 2014 emissions reduction obligations.\55\ The EPA 
previously determined that the State and District measures identified 
in the State's demonstration achieved a total of 12.97 tpd of 
NOX emissions reductions and 3.0 tpd of direct 
PM2.5 emissions reductions. These reductions had not 
previously been credited as part of the attainment demonstration in the 
2008 PM2.5 Plan and therefore could be credited toward the 
State's outstanding obligation to achieve 12.9 tpd of NOX 
emissions reductions and 3.0 tpd of direct PM2.5 emissions 
reductions by the beginning of 2014.\56\ Therefore, we concluded that 
the State had complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining 
to the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area in the implementation plan 
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ 2015 CARB Compliance Demonstration, pp. 21-22, and CARB, 
``Technical Clarifications to the 2015 San Joaquin Valley 
PM2.5 State Implementation Plan,'' transmitted by email 
dated February 5, 2020, from Michael Benjamin, CARB to Meredith 
Kurpius, EPA Region IX, pp. 1-4.
    \56\ 85 FR 44192 (July 22, 2020). Also see the EPA's proposed 
rulemaking at 85 FR 17382, 17405-17407 (March 27, 2020).
    \57\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision
    The control strategy in the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision was based 
primarily on ongoing emissions reductions from baseline control 
measures (i.e., State and District regulations adopted prior to the 
development of the plan that continue to achieve emissions reductions 
through the projected attainment year and beyond).\58\ However, the 15 
[micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision also identified several additional control 
measures to provide for expeditious attainment of the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS.\59\ These measures include three regulatory 
measures adopted by CARB or the District following development of the 
2018 PM2.5 Plan and a commitment by CARB to adopt and 
implement an additional regulatory measure to meet an enforceable 
commitment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ These baseline control measures include many EPA-approved 
regulations for on-road and non-road mobile sources, as well as 
District measures that limit NOX and PM2.5 
emissions from stationary and area sources. See discussion in the 
EPA's July 14, 2023, proposed approval of the plan (88 FR 45276, 
45297-45299).
    \59\ Id. at 45299-45300.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The three regulatory measures adopted following development of the 
2018 PM2.5 Plan include CARB's ``Lower Opacity Limits for 
Heavy-Duty Vehicles'' regulation,\60\ CARB's ``Amended Warranty 
Requirements for Heavy-Duty Vehicles'' regulation,\61\ and the 
District's 2019 amendments to Rule 4901 (``Wood Burning Fireplaces and 
Wood Burning Heaters'').\62\ As discussed in our July 14, 2023 proposal 
to approve the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision, all three of these 
measures have been adopted by the State and submitted to the EPA for 
SIP approval.\63\ The EPA approved the District's 2019 amendments to 
Rule 4901 on July 22, 2020,\64\ and as part of our final rule approving 
the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision, we credited this measure with annual 
average emissions reductions of 0.2 tpd of direct PM2.5 for 
the purpose of attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by 
December 31, 2023.\65\ The EPA did not credit CARB's Lower Opacity 
Limits for Heavy-Duty Vehicles regulation or the Amended Warranty 
Requirements for Heavy-Duty Vehicles regulation with any particular 
amount of emissions

[[Page 55907]]

reductions toward attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 
for the reasons discussed in our proposal; however, we noted that the 
relatively small quantity of emissions reductions from these measures 
would not materially affect the attainment demonstration for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Initially adopted via CARB Resolution 18-20 (May 25, 2018). 
CARB Resolution 18-20 was repealed on July 26, 2018 via CARB 
Resolution 18-28, which included a modified version of the 
regulation to address public comments. Per direction from CARB 
Resolution 18-28, the regulation was adopted via Executive Order 
R19-001 (March 12, 2019).
    \61\ CARB Resolution 18-24, June 28, 2018.
    \62\ SJVUAPCD Resolution 19-06-22, June 20, 2019.
    \63\ 88 FR 45276, 45299-45300.
    \64\ 85 FR 44206.
    \65\ 88 FR 86581. See also the discussion regarding this measure 
in our July 14, 2023, proposed approval (88 FR 45276, 45299).
    \66\ 88 FR, 45276, 45300.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB's commitment in the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision was to 
achieve aggregate emissions reductions of 3.0 tpd of NOX and 
0.04 tpd of direct PM2.5 (referred to as an ``aggregate 
tonnage commitment'') through adoption of CARB's ``Heavy-Duty Vehicle 
Inspection and Maintenance Program'' (``Heavy-Duty I/M'') (referred to 
as a ``control measure commitment'') and/or substitute measures.\67\ 
CARB adopted the Heavy-Duty I/M measure on December 9, 2021, fulfilling 
CARB's control measure commitment in the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision. 
On December 14, 2022, CARB submitted the measure to the EPA as a 
revision to the California SIP.68 69 Implementation of the 
program began on January 1, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ CARB Resolution 21-21, September 23, 2021, p. 6; and August 
2021 Staff Report, pp. 4-5.
    \68\ Letter dated December 7, 2022, from Steven S. Cliff, Ph.D., 
Executive Officer, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA 
Region IX, with enclosures.
    \69\ At the time that this document was being prepared, the EPA 
had not yet proposed action on the Heavy-Duty I/M measure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the baseline and additional measures discussed 
herein, CARB noted in its ``Staff Report, Proposed SIP Revision for the 
15 ug/m\3\ Annual PM2.5 Standard for the San Joaquin 
Valley,'' (``August 2021 Staff Report'') accompanying the 15 [micro]g/
m\3\ SIP Revision that the ``Accelerated Turnover of Agricultural 
Equipment Incentive Projects'' (``Valley Incentive Measure'') was 
expected to provide for further emissions reductions by the 2023 
attainment year.\70\ The Valley Incentive Measure includes commitments 
by CARB to monitor, assess, and report on emissions reductions, and to 
achieve emissions reductions of 5.1 tpd of NOX and 0.3 tpd 
of direct PM2.5 from the 2025 baseline inventory in the 2018 
PM2.5 Plan by December 31, 2024.\71\ The EPA finalized a 
partial approval of this measure on December 16, 2021, wherein the EPA 
credited 4.83 tpd of NOX and 0.24 tpd of direct 
PM2.5 towards CARB's tonnage commitments for 2024 (for 
attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS).\72\ While the State 
did not take credit for any emissions reductions from this measure in 
the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision, it asserted in the August 2021 Staff 
Report that a large portion of those emissions reductions would in fact 
be achieved by 2023.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ August 2021 Staff Report, pp. 3-4.
    \71\ EPA Region IX ``Technical Support Document for EPA's 
Rulemaking for the California State Implementation Plan California 
Air Resources Board Resolution 19-26 San Joaquin Valley Agricultural 
Equipment Incentive Measure,'' February 2020, pp. 4-5, 24-25, and 
31.
    \72\ 86 FR 73106 (December 27, 2021). The EPA approved the Carl 
Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program (``Carl 
Moyer Program'') and Funding Agricultural Replacement Measures for 
Emission Reductions Program'' (``FARMER Program''). The EPA deferred 
action on the United States Department of Agriculture's Natural 
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Environmental Quality 
Incentive Program (EQIP) portion of the Valley Incentive Measure.
    \73\ CARB's August 2021 Staff Report, p. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address how California has met the outstanding aggregate tonnage 
commitment in the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision, CARB provided updates 
on implementation of the Heavy-Duty I/M program and the Valley 
Incentive Measure in the 2024 CARB Compliance Demonstration. For the 
Heavy-Duty I/M program, CARB provided a summary of the vehicle 
screening, inspections, and citations issued in San Joaquin Valley 
cities in 2023.\74\ CARB notes that these enforcement efforts led to a 
reduction in emissions from heavy-duty vehicles in the San Joaquin 
Valley. However, CARB explains that because of the ``time-sensitive 
nature of documenting that we achieved the CARB emission reduction 
commitment,'' it is relying on the reductions achieved by a substitute 
measure, the Valley Incentive Measure, to demonstrate that it has met 
the aggregate tonnage commitment in the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ 2024 CARB Compliance Demonstration, pp. 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 21, 2024, CARB submitted the ``Amendments to the 15 
[micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision and Agricultural Equipment Incentive Measure 
for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard'' (``15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan 
Amendments'') for parallel processing.\75\ The 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan 
Amendments revises the State's aggregate tonnage commitment in the 15 
[micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision, amends the Valley Incentive Measure, and 
demonstrates that projects implemented under the SIP-approved Valley 
Incentive Measure achieved specified amounts of reductions in emissions 
of NOX and PM2.5 in the San Joaquin Valley area 
in the year 2023. In a separate current action, the EPA is proposing to 
approve the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan Amendments, credit the emissions 
reductions of 5.0 tpd of NOX and 0.27 tpd of direct 
PM2.5 from the Valley Incentive Measure in the year 2023, 
and formally substitute the Valley Incentive Measure for the Heavy-Duty 
I/M measure as the measure satisfying the aggregate tonnage commitment 
for the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision.\76\ In this action, the EPA is 
proposing to find that, upon final approval of the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ 
Plan Amendments, the State will have adequately documented that it has 
complied with its commitment to achieve 3.0 tpd of NOX and 
0.04 tpd of direct PM2.5 emissions reductions by the 
beginning of 2023. Thus, based on the EPA's review of the requirements 
and commitments pertaining to the San Joaquin Valley in the 2008 
PM2.5 Plan and 15 [micro]g/m\3\ SIP Revision, the supporting 
information in the State's extension request, and additional 
information discussed herein, we find that the State has complied with 
all requirements for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 
applicable SIP. We therefore propose to find that the area meets the 
first criterion to qualify for a one-year attainment date extension 
under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ Letter dated June 21, 2024, from Steven S. Cliff, Ph.D., 
Executive Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, 
EPA Region 9, with enclosure.
    \76\ The EPA is proposing to approve the 15 [micro]g/m\3\ Plan 
Amendments in a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Air Quality Data

    As discussed in Section I.C of this document, the second 
requirement for an extension of the attainment date under CAA section 
172(a)(2)(C) is a showing that the area had clean data for the relevant 
standard in the calendar year preceding the applicable attainment date. 
Such determination is typically based upon complete, quality-assured 
data gathered at established State and Local Air Monitoring Stations 
(SLAMS) in a nonattainment area and entered into the EPA's Air Quality 
System (AQS) database. Data from ambient air monitors operated by 
state/local agencies in compliance with the EPA monitoring requirements 
must be submitted to AQS. Monitoring agencies annually certify that 
these data are accurate to the best of their knowledge. Accordingly, 
the EPA relies primarily on data in AQS when determining compliance 
with the NAAQS.\77\ The EPA reviews all data to determine the area's 
air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N. Under 
EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.7 and in accordance with Appendix N, the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS are met when the annual arithmetic 
mean concentration, as determined in accordance with the rounding 
conventions in 40 CFR part 50,

[[Page 55908]]

Appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ at each 
eligible monitoring site within the area. Data completeness 
requirements for a given year are met when at least 75 percent of the 
scheduled sampling days for each quarter have valid data.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ See 40 CFR 50.7; 40 CFR part 50, Appendix L; 40 CFR part 
53; 40 CFR part 58, and 40 CFR part 58, appendices A, C, D, and E.
    \78\ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, section 4.1(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 110(a)(2)(B)(i) of the CAA requires states to establish and 
operate air monitoring networks to compile data on ambient air quality 
for all criteria pollutants. The monitoring requirements are specified 
in 40 CFR part 58. These requirements are applicable to state, and 
where delegated, local air monitoring agencies that operate criteria 
pollutant monitors. The regulations in 40 CFR part 58 establish 
specific requirements for operating air quality surveillance networks 
to measure ambient concentrations of PM2.5, including 
requirements for measurement methods, network design, quality assurance 
procedures, and, in the case of large urban areas, the minimum number 
of monitoring sites designated as SLAMS.
    In section 4.7 of Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58, the EPA specifies 
minimum monitoring requirements for PM2.5 to operate at 
SLAMS. SLAMS produce data comparable to the NAAQS, and therefore, the 
monitor must be an approved federal reference method (FRM) or federal 
equivalent method (FEM). The minimum number of SLAMS required is 
described in section 4.7.1 and can be met by either filter-based or 
continuous FRMs or FEMs. The monitoring regulations also provide that 
each core-based statistical area must operate a minimum number of 
PM2.5 continuous monitors; \79\ however, this requirement 
can be met by either an FEM or a non-FEM continuous monitor, and the 
continuous monitors can be located with other SLAMS or at a different 
location. Consequently, the monitoring requirements for 
PM2.5 can be met with filter-based FRMs/FEMs, continuous 
FEMs, continuous non-FEMs, or a combination of monitors at each 
required SLAMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ 40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, section 4.7.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During 2023, ambient PM2.5 concentration data were 
collected at a total of 18 sites within the San Joaquin Valley: 5 sites 
in Fresno County; 3 sites in Kern County; 2 sites each in Kings, 
Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus counties; and 1 site each in Madera 
and Tulare counties. The District operates 12 of these sites while CARB 
operates 6 of these sites. All of the sites are designated SLAMS for 
PM2.5.\80\ The primary monitors are FRMs at 1 of the 18 
sites and beta attenuation monitor FEMs at 17 of the 18 sites. Overall, 
the District's PM2.5 monitoring network meets, and in 
several metropolitan statistical areas exceeds, the PM2.5 
minimum monitoring requirements for the San Joaquin Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ There are a number of other PM2.5 monitoring 
sites within the valley, including other sites operated by the 
District, the National Park Service, and certain Indian tribes, but 
the data collected from these sites are non-regulatory and not 
eligible for comparison with the PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our review of the PM2.5 monitoring network as 
summarized above, we find that the monitoring network in the San 
Joaquin Valley is adequate for the purpose of collecting ambient 
PM2.5 concentration data for use in determining whether the 
San Joaquin Valley had clean data for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS during the 2023 calendar year.
    Under 40 CFR 58.10, states are required to submit annual monitoring 
network plans to the EPA.\81\ Within the San Joaquin Valley, CARB and 
the District are the agencies responsible for assuring that the area 
meets air quality monitoring requirements. CARB and SJVUAPCD submit 
monitoring network plans to the EPA annually. These plans describe and 
discuss the status of the air monitoring network, as required under 40 
CFR 58.10. The EPA reviews these annual network plans for compliance 
with the applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 58. With 
respect to PM2.5, we have found that the CARB and SJVUAPCD 
annual network plans meet the applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 
58.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ 40 CFR 58.10(a)(1).
    \82\ Letter dated October 30, 2023, from Dena Vallano, Manager, 
Monitoring and Analysis Section, EPA Region IX, to Sylvia 
Vanderspek, Manager, Air Quality Planning Branch, CARB; and letter 
dated October 31, 2023, from Dena Vallano, Manager, Monitoring and 
Analysis Section, EPA Region IX, to Jon Klassen, Director, Air 
Quality Science, SJVUAPCD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under 40 CFR 58.15, monitoring agencies must certify, on an annual 
basis, that data collected at all SLAMS and at all FRM and FEM special 
purpose monitor stations meet the EPA's quality assurance requirements. 
In doing so, monitoring agencies must certify that the previous year of 
ambient concentration and quality assurance data are submitted to AQS 
and that the ambient concentration data are accurate. CARB annually 
certifies that the data the agency submits to AQS are quality assured, 
including the data collected at monitoring sites in the San Joaquin 
Valley.\83\ SJVUAPCD does the same for data submitted to AQS from 
monitoring sites operated by the District.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ For example, see letter dated April 29, 2024, from Sylvia 
Vanderspek, Chief, Air Quality Planning Branch, CARB, to Dena 
Vallano, Manager, Monitoring and Analysis Section, EPA Region 9, 
with enclosures, certifying calendar year 2023 ambient air quality 
data and quality assurance data.
    \84\ For example, see letter dated April 23, 2024, from Robert 
Gilles, Program Manager, SJVUAPCD, to Matt Lakin, Director, Air and 
Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, with attachments, certifying 
calendar year 2023 ambient air quality data and quality assurance 
data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to data completeness, we determined that the data 
collected by CARB and the District meet the quarterly completeness 
criterion for all four quarters of 2023 at most of the PM2.5 
monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley. More specifically, among 
the 18 PM2.5 monitoring sites from which regulatory data are 
available, only the data from Stockton-University (AQS ID: 06-077-1003) 
did not meet the 75 percent completeness criterion for one quarter; 
\85\ however, the data from the site are sufficient nonetheless to 
produce a valid design value for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 
pursuant to the rules governing design value validity in 40 CFR part 
50, Appendix N, section 4.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ EPA AQS Combined Site Sample Values, AMP355, accessed May 
17, 2024 (User ID: STSAI, Report Request ID: 2193827).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA evaluated data from calendar year 2023 to determine whether 
the San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area met the air 
quality criterion for granting a one-year extension of the applicable 
attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 
December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, under CAA section 
172(a)(2)(C). Table 1 shows the PM2.5 annual mean at each of 
the 18 SLAMS monitoring sites for 2023.

                  Table 1--2023 PM2.5 Annual Mean for the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Annual mean
                    County                                  Site name              Site (AQS ID)    ([micro]g/
                                                                                                       m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fresno........................................  Fresno-Garland..................     06-019-0011            10.5
Fresno........................................  Tranquillity....................     06-019-2009             4.8
Fresno........................................  Fresno-Foundry..................     06-019-2016            12.5

[[Page 55909]]

 
Fresno........................................  Clovis-Villa....................     06-019-5001             8.6
Fresno........................................  Fresno-Pacific..................     06-019-5025            12.6
Kern..........................................  Bakersfield-Golden/M-St.........     06-029-0010            13.7
Kern..........................................  Bakersfield-California..........     06-029-0014            12.0
Kern..........................................  Bakersfield-Airport (Planz).....     06-029-0016            12.5
Kings.........................................  Corcoran-Patterson..............     06-031-0004            10.1
Kings.........................................  Hanford-Irwin...................     06-031-1004            12.5
Merced........................................  Merced-M St.....................     06-047-2510             9.6
Merced........................................  Merced-Coffee...................     06-047-0003             8.4
San Joaquin...................................  Stockton-University Park........     06-077-1003         \a\10.8
San Joaquin...................................  Manteca.........................     06-077-2010             7.9
Stanislaus....................................  Modesto-14th Street.............     06-099-0005            10.5
Stanislaus....................................  Turlock.........................     06-099-0006            10.1
Madera........................................  Madera-City.....................     06-039-2010             9.9
Tulare........................................  Visalia-W Ashland Avenue........     06-107-2003            11.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Quarter 2 does not meet completeness criteria.
Source: EPA AQS Design Value Report, AMP480, accessed May 17, 2024 (User ID: STSAI, Report Request ID: 2193813).

    Table 1 shows that the annual mean for the 2023 calendar year was 
less than 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ (i.e., the level of the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS) at each of the 18 SLAMS monitoring sites in the 
San Joaquin Valley. Thus, the EPA proposes to find that the area meets 
the air quality criterion to qualify for a one-year attainment date 
extension under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C).

IV. Environmental Justice Considerations

    Executive Order 12898 requires that federal agencies, to the 
greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, identify and address 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations.\86\ 
Additionally, Executive Order 13985 directs federal government agencies 
to assess whether, and to what extent, their programs and policies 
perpetuate systemic barriers to opportunities and benefits for people 
of color and other underserved groups,\87\ and Executive Order 14008 
directs federal agencies to develop programs, policies, and activities 
to address the disproportionate health, environmental, economic, and 
climate impacts on disadvantaged communities.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \86\ 59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994).
    \87\ 86 FR 7009 (January 25, 2021).
    \88\ 86 FR 7619 (February 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAA gives the EPA the discretion to extend an area's applicable 
attainment date by one year upon application by a state if the state 
has met the two criteria under CAA section 172(a)(2)(C) (see Section 
I.C of this document). To identify environmental burdens and 
susceptible populations in underserved communities in the San Joaquin 
Valley nonattainment area and to better understand the context of our 
proposed action on these communities, we rely on the EPA's August 2022 
screening-level analysis for PM2.5 in the San Joaquin Valley 
using the EPA's environmental justice (EJ) screening and mapping tool 
(``EJSCREEN''). 89 90 The results of this analysis are being 
provided for informational and transparency purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \89\ EJSCREEN provides a nationally consistent dataset and 
approach for combining environmental and demographic indicators. 
EJSCREEN is available at https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen/what-ejscreen. 
The EPA used EJSCREEN to obtain environmental and demographic 
indicators representing each of the eight counties in the San 
Joaquin Valley. We note that the indicators for Kern County are for 
the entire county. While the indicators might have slightly 
different numbers for the San Joaquin Valley portion of the county, 
most of the county's population is in the San Joaquin Valley 
portion, and thus the differences would be small. These indicators 
are included in EJSCREEN reports that are available in the 
rulemaking docket for this action.
    \90\ EPA Region IX, ``EJSCREEN Analysis for the Eight Counties 
of the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area,'' August 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our screening-level analysis indicates that the ``Demographic 
Index'' for each of the eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley is 
above the national average, ranging from 48 percent in Stanislaus 
County to 61 percent in Tulare County, compared to 36 percent 
nationally. The Demographic Index is the average of an area's percent 
minority and percent low-income populations, i.e., the two populations 
explicitly named in Executive Order 12898.\91\ All eight counties are 
above the national average for demographic indices of ``Linguistically 
Isolated Population'' and ``Population with Less than High School 
Education.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ EJSCREEN reports environmental indicators (e.g., air toxics 
cancer risk, Pb paint exposure, and traffic proximity and volume) 
and demographic indicators (e.g., people of color, low income, and 
linguistically isolated populations). The value for a particular 
indicator measures how the community of interest compares with the 
state, the EPA region, or the national average. For example, if a 
given location is at the 95th percentile nationwide, this means that 
only 5 percent of the U.S. population has a higher value than the 
average person in the location being analyzed. EJSCREEN also reports 
EJ indexes, which are combinations of a single environmental 
indicator with the EJSCREEN Demographic Index. For additional 
information about environmental and demographic indicators and EJ 
indexes reported by EJSCREEN, see EPA, ``EJSCREEN Environmental 
Justice Mapping and Screening Tool--EJSCREEN Technical 
Documentation,'' Section 2 (September 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to pollution, all eight counties are at or above the 
97th percentile nationally for the PM2.5 index and seven of 
the eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley are at or above the 90th 
percentile nationally for the PM2.5 EJ index, which is a 
combination of the Demographic Index and the PM2.5 index. 
Most counties are also above the 80th percentile for each of 11 
additional EJ indices included in the EPA's EJSCREEN analysis. In 
addition, several counties are above the 90th percentile for certain EJ 
indices, including, for example, the Ozone EJ Index (Fresno, Kern, 
Madera, Merced, and Tulare counties), the National Air Toxics 
Assessment (NATA) Respiratory Hazard EJ Index (Madera and Tulare 
counties), and the Wastewater Discharge Indicator EJ Index (Merced, San 
Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare counties).\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ Notably, Tulare County is above the 90th percentile for 6 
of the 12 EJ indices in the EPA's EJSCREEN analysis, including the 
PM2.5 EJ Index, which is the highest value among all San 
Joaquin Valley counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed action would grant an extension of attainment date 
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Information on the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS and its relationship to negative health 
impacts can be found at 62 FR 38652

[[Page 55910]]

(July 18, 1997). We expect that this action will generally have neutral 
environmental and health impacts on all populations in the San Joaquin 
Valley, including people of color and low-income populations. This 
action would not worsen existing air quality and there is no 
information in the record indicating that this action is expected to 
have disproportionately high or adverse human health or environmental 
effects on a particular group of people.

V. The EPA's Proposed Action

    In response to a request from the State of California on May 23, 
2024, the EPA is proposing to grant a one-year extension to the 
applicable Serious area attainment date for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area. 
The proposed action to extend the applicable Serious attainment date 
for this nonattainment area is based on the EPA's evaluation of air 
quality monitoring data and the extension request submitted by the 
State of California and our determination that the State has satisfied 
the two statutory criteria for a 1-year extension under CAA section 
172(a)(2)(C).
    If finalized, this action would extend the applicable Serious area 
attainment date for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area from 
December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024. If we finalize this proposal, 
consistent with CAA section 172(a)(2)(C), the area will remain a 
Serious PM2.5 nonattainment area with an applicable Serious 
area attainment date of December 31, 2024. Consistent with CAA section 
172(a)(2)(C), the EPA will determine whether the area attained the 
standard within six months following the applicable attainment date.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review. This action merely proposes to approve a state request as 
meeting federal requirements and imposes no new requirements.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA. This action merely proposes to approve a state request for an 
attainment date extension, and this action does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those 
imposed by state law. Approval of a state's request for an attainment 
date extension does not create any new requirements and does not 
directly regulate any entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements 
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to 
state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will 
result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will 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. Pursuant 
to the CAA, this action merely proposes to approve a state request for 
an attainment date extension.

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175, because 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, and it will not 
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal 
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. Therefore, this action is not 
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it merely proposes to approve 
a state request for an attainment date extension as meeting federal 
requirements. Furthermore, the EPA's Policy on Children's Health does 
not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA 
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be 
inconsistent with the CAA.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address 
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income 
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. 
The EPA defines EJ as ``the fair treatment and meaningful involvement 
of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income 
with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of 
environmental laws, regulations, and policies.'' The EPA further 
defines the term fair treatment to mean that ``no group of people 
should bear a disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks, 
including those resulting from the negative environmental consequences 
of industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or programs and 
policies.''
    Under the CAA, an extension of the attainment date under section

[[Page 55911]]

172(a)(2)(C) does not impose any additional regulatory requirements on 
sources beyond those imposed by state law. The State did not evaluate 
EJ considerations as part of its documentation supporting its request 
for an attainment date extension; the CAA and applicable implementing 
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA 
performed an EJ analysis, as is described above in the section titled, 
``Environmental Justice Considerations.'' The analysis was included in 
this document for the purpose of providing additional context and 
information about this rulemaking to the public, not as a basis of the 
action. Due to the nature of the action being taken here, this action 
is expected to have a neutral impact on the air quality of the affected 
area. In addition, there is no information in the record upon which 
this decision is based inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 
of achieving EJ for people of color, low-income populations, and 
Indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 27, 2024.
Cheree Peterson,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-14617 Filed 7-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P