Proposed Rule2025-11413
Air Plan Approval; California; San Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone Area; Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 23, 2025
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the "2023 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Revoked 1-Hour Ozone Standard" ("San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan" or "Plan") as a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) for the State of California. The San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan includes, among other elements, an emissions inventory consistent with attainment and contingency provisions. The EPA is also proposing to find that the State of California's request to redesignate the San Joaquin Valley area from nonattainment to attainment for the revoked 1979 1-hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or "standard") for ozone ("1979 ozone NAAQS," "1-hour ozone NAAQS," or "1-hour ozone standard") meets all the Clean Air Act (CAA or "the Act") criteria for redesignation. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to terminate all anti-backsliding obligations for the San Joaquin Valley area for the revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 118 (Monday, June 23, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 118 (Monday, June 23, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26469-26482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-11413]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0611; FRL-12521-01-R9]
Air Plan Approval; California; San Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone
Area; Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the ``2023 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the
Revoked
[[Page 26470]]
1-Hour Ozone Standard'' (``San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan'' or
``Plan'') as a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) for the
State of California. The San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan includes,
among other elements, an emissions inventory consistent with attainment
and contingency provisions. The EPA is also proposing to find that the
State of California's request to redesignate the San Joaquin Valley
area from nonattainment to attainment for the revoked 1979 1-hour
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or ``standard'') for ozone
(``1979 ozone NAAQS,'' ``1-hour ozone NAAQS,'' or ``1-hour ozone
standard'') meets all the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act'') criteria
for redesignation. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to terminate all
anti-backsliding obligations for the San Joaquin Valley area for the
revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
DATES: Written comments must arrive on or before July 23, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2024-0611at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. For comments submitted at
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
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 <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>. 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: Andrew Ledezma, Air Planning Section
(AIR 2-1), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,
(415) 972-3985, or by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0f436a6b6a75626e214e616b7d6a784f6a7f6e21686079"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="430f262726392e226d022d27312634032633226d242c35">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. The 1979 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
B. The San Joaquin Valley Area and Regulatory Actions
C. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Redesignations and
Maintenance Plans
II. Submissions from the State of California to Redesignate the San
Joaquin Valley Area to Attainment of the 1979 Ozone NAAQS
A. Summary of State Submissions
B. CAA Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submission of
SIP Revisions
III. Evaluation of the Redesignation Criteria for the San Joaquin
Valley Area
A. Evaluation of Whether the San Joaquin Valley Area Has
Attained the 1979 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS
B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Meeting the
Requirements Applicable for the Purposes of Redesignation Under
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
C. The Area Must Show that the Improvement in Air Quality is Due
to Permanent and Enforceable Emissions Reductions
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under
CAA Section 175A
IV. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
V. Statutory and Executive Order Review
I. Background
A. The 1979 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
The EPA sets the NAAQS for certain ambient air pollutants at levels
required to protect human health and the environment. Ground-level
ozone pollution is formed from the reaction of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NO<INF>X</INF>) in the
presence of sunlight.\1\ These two pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of sources, including on- and
off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and industrial
facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden equipment
and paints.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The State of California refers to reactive organic gases
(ROG) in some of its ozone-related SIP submissions. As a practical
matter, ROG and VOC refer to the same set of chemical constituents,
and for the sake of simplicity, we refer to this set of gases as VOC
in this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public health effects
occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in children and adults
with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung
function and inflame airways, which can increase respiratory symptoms
and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Fact Sheet--Final Revisions to the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Ozone,'' dated March 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 109 of the CAA, the EPA promulgates NAAQS for
pervasive air pollutants, such as ozone. Following promulgation of a
new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires the EPA to designate areas
throughout the nation as either attaining or not attaining the
standards.
On February 8, 1979, the EPA established primary and secondary
NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 parts per million (ppm) averaged over a 1-hour
period.\3\ On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the primary and secondary
standards for ozone to 0.08 ppm averaged over an 8-hour period (``1997
ozone NAAQS'').\4\ In 2004, the EPA published the 1997 ozone NAAQS
designations and classifications \5\ and a rule governing certain
facets of implementation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS (``Phase 1 Rule'').\6\
The Phase 1 Rule established the revocation of the 1979 ozone NAAQS one
year following the effective date of the designations for the 1997
ozone NAAQS and set anti-backsliding provisions for the transition from
the 1-hour to the 1997 8-hour standard. Anti- backsliding provisions
provide for controls that are not less stringent than the controls
applicable to areas that were listed as nonattainment for the revoked
ozone standards when the standards and designations were revoked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979).
\4\ See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).
\5\ 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004).
\6\ 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Phase 1 Rule and its subsequent revision did not include
contingency measures, new source review (NSR) requirements, conformity
determinations, or the section 185 fee program among the measures
retained as 1-hour ozone standard anti-backsliding requirements.\7\
However, on December 23, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit determined that the EPA should not have
excluded these requirements from its anti-backsliding requirements.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See id. and 70 FR 30592, 30599 (May 26, 2005).
\8\ South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, 472 F.3d
882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) reh'g denied 489 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2007)
(clarifying that the vacatur was limited to the issues on which the
court granted the petitions for review) (``South Coast I'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2015, the EPA revoked the 1997 ozone NAAQS, established anti-
backsliding requirements for the revoked 1997 ozone NAAQS, and
[[Page 26471]]
revised the anti-backsliding requirements for the revoked 1-hour ozone
standard as a part of the final rule for implementing the 2008 ozone 8-
hour NAAQS (``2008 NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule'').\9\ The EPA
considered the South Coast I decision on the Phase 1 Rule in developing
the 2008 NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard
(``2008 ozone NAAQS'').\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 40 CFR 51.1100-51.1119 and 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
\10\ The anti-backsliding requirements for the revoked 1979 and
1997 ozone NAAQS are listed in 40 CFR 51.1100(o). See 40 CFR
50.1105(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2008 NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule provided that an area will be
subject to the anti-backsliding obligations for a revoked NAAQS until
the EPA approves either (1) a redesignation to attainment for the area
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS or (2) a ``redesignation substitute'' for a
revoked NAAQS, which required an area to demonstrate that it had
attained the revoked NAAQS due to permanent and enforceable measures
and would maintain that standard for ten years.\11\ In the 2008 NAAQS
SIP Requirements Rule, the EPA created the redesignation substitute
procedure because it believed it did not have the authority under the
CAA to change the designations of areas under a revoked NAAQS but
wanted to establish a means to terminate anti-backsliding requirements
for an area that would otherwise be eligible for a redesignation had
the standard not been revoked.\12\ Though the EPA created the
redesignation substitute based on the CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)
redesignation criteria, the procedure did not require states to
demonstrate satisfaction of all five criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 40 CFR 51.1105(b)(1).
\12\ 80 FR 12264, 12304-05 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 16, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit vacated certain parts of the 2008 NAAQS SIP
Requirements Rule, including the redesignation substitute provision,
based on the court's conclusion that those provisions were not
consistent with CAA requirements.\13\ In South Coast II, the Court held
that the redesignation substitute tool was not consistent with CAA
requirements because it failed to satisfy all five of the statutory
requirements set forth in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), which governs
redesignations from nonattainment to attainment.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, 882
F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (``South Coast II'').
\14\ Id. at 1152.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The San Joaquin Valley Area and Regulatory Actions
The San Joaquin Valley 1979 ozone area encompasses over 23,000
square miles and includes eight counties: San Joaquin, Stanislaus,
Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and Kern.\15\ 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 the ``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 split under state law between the District, which
generally has responsibility for regulating stationary and area
sources, and CARB, which generally has responsibility for regulating
mobile sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ In 2001, the EPA approved a request to revise the boundary
of the San Joaquin Valley to exclude eastern Kern County. 66 FR
56476 (November 8, 2001). For a precise description of the
geographic boundaries of the San Joaquin Valley area, see 40 CFR
81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CAA, as amended in 1977, required states to submit SIP
revisions for nonattainment areas that, among other requirements,
provided for attainment of the 1979 ozone NAAQS no later than 1987;
however, like many areas of the country, the San Joaquin Valley failed
to attain the 1979 ozone NAAQS by 1987. In the 1990 CAA Amendments,
Congress established a classification system for ozone nonattainment
areas under which areas with more severe ozone problems were given a
higher classification and more time to attain the standard but were
subject to a greater number of, and more stringent, SIP requirements.
The classifications include ``Marginal,'' ``Moderate,'' ``Serious,''
``Severe,'' and ``Extreme.'' \16\ Effective January 22, 1992, the EPA
established the initial air quality designations for most areas in the
United States for the 1979 ozone NAAQS.\17\ The EPA designated the San
Joaquin Valley area as Serious nonattainment based on monitoring data
from 1987 to 1989.\18\ Areas classified as Serious were required to
attain the NAAQS by November 15, 1999.\19\ In response, in 1994, CARB
submitted The California Ozone State Implementation Plan (``1994
California Ozone Plan''), a comprehensive ozone plan for the State of
California that included a state strategy as well as certain regional
ozone plans, such as the regional plan for the San Joaquin Valley. On
January 8, 1997, the EPA approved the 1994 California Ozone Plan, which
projected attainment by November 15, 1999.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See CAA section 181(a)(1).
\17\ 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).
\18\ Id. at 56697.
\19\ CAA section 181(a)(1).
\20\ 62 FR 1150 (January 8, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 8, 2001, the EPA found that the San Joaquin Valley area
did not attain the 1979 ozone NAAQS by the November 15, 1999 deadline,
and the San Joaquin Valley area was reclassified by operation of law as
``Severe-15'' \21\ nonattainment based on monitoring data from 1997 to
1999.\22\ As a result, the State of California was required to submit a
Severe area ozone nonattainment plan by May 31, 2002, that provided for
attainment as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than November
15, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The CAA provides that Severe 1979 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas must have attained the NAAQS as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than 15 years after enactment of the 1990
CAA Amendments, or November 15, 2005. CAA section 181(a)(2) also
establishes a ``Severe-17'' classification for areas with a 1988
ozone design value between 0.190 parts per million (ppm) and 0.280
ppm.
\22\ 66 FR 56476, 65 FR 37926 (June 19, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 16, 2004, the EPA granted a request by the State of
California to voluntarily change the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment
area's classification for the 1979 ozone NAAQS from Severe to Extreme
and required the State to submit an Extreme area plan by November 15,
2004, that provided for attainment as expeditiously as practicable, but
no later than November 15, 2010.\23\ CARB submitted an Extreme area
plan on November 15, 2004 (``2004 Ozone Plan''). CARB subsequently
amended it and resubmitted it on March 6, 2006. On March 8, 2010, the
EPA approved California's 2004 Ozone Plan as amended and clarified.\24\
Our approval of the 2004 Ozone Plan was challenged, and the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit remanded the approval of the plan to
the EPA based on its conclusion that the EPA had not adequately
considered and addressed the implications of recent emissions data
(``Sierra Club'').\25\ In response to the Sierra Club decision, the EPA
[[Page 26472]]
withdrew its approval of the 2004 Ozone Plan.\26\ Because of
approvability concerns raised in the Sierra Club decision, CARB
withdrew the plan effective at the time the EPA finalized its
withdrawal of approval. Consequently, the EPA also issued a finding of
failure to submit required SIP revisions to provide for attainment of
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 69 FR 20550 (April 16, 2004).
\24\ 75 FR 10420 (March 8, 2010).
\25\ Sierra Club v. EPA, 671 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2012). For
further background on this court decision, see 77 FR 58078
(September 19, 2012).
\26\ 77 FR 70376 (November 26, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile, as noted in section I.A. of this document, in 1997, the
EPA established an 8-hour ozone standard to replace the 1-hour ozone
standard, and in 2004, the EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley as a
Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.\27\ In
2010, the EPA approved a request by CARB to reclassify the San Joaquin
Valley as Extreme for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 69 FR 23858.
\28\ 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 30, 2011, the EPA determined that the San Joaquin
Valley did not attain the 1-hour ozone standard by the November 15,
2010 attainment date based on monitoring data from 2008 to 2010.\29\ In
November 2012, the EPA established November 26, 2017, as the new
attainment deadline for the San Joaquin Valley for the 1979 ozone
NAAQS.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 76 FR 82133 (December 30, 2011).
\30\ 77 FR 70376. Application of the attainment date formulation
in CAA section 172(a)(2) means that the state was required to submit
a revised attainment plan for the 1-hour ozone standard as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years from the
effective date of the findings of failure to submit, which in this
case is no later than November 26, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 20, 2013, California submitted the 2013 Plan for the
Revoked 1-Hour Standard (``2013 Ozone Plan''). On April 5, 2016, the
EPA approved the following elements of the 2013 Ozone Plan: the base
year and projected future year emissions inventories, reasonably
available control measures (RACM) demonstration, rate of progress (ROP)
demonstration, attainment demonstration, Clean Fuel for Boilers (CFB)
rule adoption, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) offset requirement, and
contingency measures for failure to meet ROP milestones for the
area.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 81 FR 19492 (April 5, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 18, 2016, the EPA determined that the San Joaquin Valley
area attained the 1979 ozone NAAQS based on three years of complete,
quality-assured, and certified data for the 2012-2014 time period, and
we issued a ``clean data determination.'' \32\ Citing 40 CFR 51.1118,
the EPA also stated that, to the extent such requirements were not
already fulfilled, the clean data determination would suspend
requirements to submit attainment demonstrations and associated RACM,
reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures for failure to
attain or make reasonable progress, and other requirements related to
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard for so long as the area
continues to attain the standard, or 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 longer apply.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ 81 FR 46608 (July 18, 2016).
\33\ Id. at 46610-11. See also 81 FR 31206, 31211 (May 18,
2016). (At the time the EPA issued its clean data determination for
the area, the redesignation substitute mechanism had not yet been
vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit in South Coast II.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for Redesignations and Maintenance
Plans
The CAA establishes the criteria that must be met for the EPA to
redesignate a nonattainment area to attainment for a given NAAQS.
Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) sets forth the following criteria:
(1) the EPA must determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS; (2) the EPA must have fully approved the applicable SIP for the
area under CAA section 100(k); (3) the EPA must determine that the
improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions; (4) the EPA must have fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 175A; and, (5) the state must have met all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and title I, part D, (``part
D'') of the CAA. Section 110 identifies a comprehensive list of
elements that must be included in SIPs, and part D establishes the SIP
requirements for nonattainment areas. Part D is divided into six
subparts. The generally applicable SIP requirements for nonattainment
areas are found in subpart 1 of part D, and the ozone-specific SIP
requirements are found in subpart 2 of part D. The EPA provided
guidance on redesignations in a document titled ``State Implementation
Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' published in the Federal Register on
April 16, 1992,\34\ and supplemented on April 28, 1992 (collectively
referred to herein as the ``General Preamble'').\35\ The EPA issued
additional guidance in two memoranda: a September 4, 1992 memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director of the EPA's Air Quality Management
Division in the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, titled
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment'' (referred to herein as the ``Calcagni memo'') and a 1995
memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, titled ``Part D New Source Review
(part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment'' (``Nichols memo'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992).
\35\ 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's approval of a state's maintenance plan is one of the CAA
prerequisites for redesignation of a nonattainment area to attainment
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). Section 175A of the CAA provides the
general framework for a state's maintenance plans. A state's initial
10-year maintenance plan must provide for maintenance of the NAAQS for
at least 10 years after redesignation and include any additional
control measures necessary to ensure such maintenance. In addition,
maintenance plans must contain contingency provisions necessary to
assure the prompt correction of a violation of the NAAQS during the
maintenance period. At a minimum, these contingency provisions must
include a requirement that a state will implement all control measures
contained in the nonattainment SIP prior to redesignation. Because a
state's maintenance plan submittals are SIP revisions, the EPA is
obligated under CAA section 110(k) to approve them or disapprove them
depending on whether they meet the applicable CAA requirements for such
plans outlined above.
For the reasons described in section III of this proposal, the EPA
is proposing to find that California's submittal meets all five
criteria in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The
EPA is also proposing to approve the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance
Plan for the 1979 ozone NAAQS as consistent with CAA section 175A.
Although CAA section 107(d)(3) applies explicitly only to revisions of
area designations and the designations for this area have been revoked
along with the NAAQS, the EPA's view is that, consistent with the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's findings in
South Coast II, satisfaction of the statutory redesignation criteria
permits the termination of any remaining anti-backsliding obligations
for the San Joaquin Valley area as to the revoked 1979 ozone NAAQS. The
EPA is therefore proposing to terminate the
[[Page 26473]]
anti-backsliding obligations for the San Joaquin Valley area associated
with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and to revise the table in 40 CFR part 81
to reflect that the San Joaquin Valley area has attained the revoked
1979 ozone NAAQS and that all anti-backsliding obligations for that
NAAQS are terminated.
II. Submissions From the State of California To Redesignate the San
Joaquin Valley Area to Attainment for the 1979 Ozone NAAQS
A. Summary of State Submissions
On July 21, 2023, CARB submitted to the EPA its redesignation
request and maintenance plan for the San Joaquin Valley area for the
1979 ozone NAAQS as a revision to the California SIP.\36\ This document
addresses all of the CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) redesignation criteria
and includes the required maintenance plan elements. The San Joaquin
Valley Maintenance Plan is organized into seven chapters and two
appendices. The first appendix (Appendix A) provides the emissions
inventory, and the second appendix (Appendix B) provides support for
meteorological conditions affecting ozone levels in the San Joaquin
Valley. On February 27, 2024, SJVUAPCD submitted information clarifying
the contingency plan in section F.5 of the San Joaquin Valley
Maintenance Plan; \37\ on July 1, 2024, CARB submitted information
supplementing the emissions inventory in Appendix A; \38\ and on August
22, 2024, CARB submitted information amending the maintenance
demonstration in section F.2 of the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance
Plan.\39\ Collectively, we refer to this as the ``San Joaquin Valley
Maintenance Plan'' or ``Plan.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Letter dated July 21, 2023, from Steven S. Cliff, Executive
Officer, CARB, to Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region
IX.
\37\ Email dated February 27, 2024, from Emily Kneeland,
SJVUAPCD, to Karina O'Connor, EPA, Subject: ``Clarification for San
Joaquin Valley 1-hr Ozone Maintenance Plan and Redesignation
Request.''
\38\ Email dated July 1, 2024, from Sylvia Vanderspek, CARB, to
Andrew Ledezma, EPA, Subject: ``RE: Follow-up 6/25/24 Meeting--1979
1-Hour RRMP EI Appendix.''
\39\ Email dated August 22, 2024, from Sylvia Vanderspek, CARB,
to Andrew Ledezma, EPA, Subject: ``SIP Mobile Source Measure
table.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. CAA Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submission of SIP
Revisions
CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) require states to provide reasonable
public notice and opportunity for public hearing prior to adoption and
submission of a SIP or SIP revision. To meet these procedural
requirements, every SIP submission should include evidence that the
state provided adequate public notice and an opportunity for a public
hearing, consistent with the EPA's implementing regulations in 40 CFR
51.102.
CARB's July 21, 2023 SIP submittal package includes documentation
of the public process used by the District to adopt the San Joaquin
Valley Maintenance Plan.\40\ On May 16, 2023, SJVUAPCD released a draft
version of the Plan for public review and published a notice of public
meeting to be held on June 15, 2023, to consider adoption of the San
Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan. As documented in SJVUAPCD Resolution
No. 2023-6-9, included in the SIP submittal package, the Governing
Board of the SJVUAPCD adopted the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan
on June 15, 2023, following a public hearing.\41\ As evidenced by CARB
Executive Order S-23-013, CARB adopted the San Joaquin Valley
Maintenance Plan on July 19, 2023.\42\ Based on the documentation in
the July 21, 2023 SIP submittal package, SJVUAPCD has satisfied the
applicable statutory and regulatory requirements for reasonable public
notice and hearing prior to adoption and submission of the Plan.
Therefore, the submission of the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan
meets the procedural requirements for public notice and hearing in CAA
sections 110(a) and 110(l) and in 40 CFR 51.102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ In this package, CARB submitted a signed version of
SJVUAPCD's ``Notice of Public Hearing'' to ``Adopt 2023 Maintenance
Plan and Redesignation Request for the Revoked 1-Hour Ozone
Standard'' published on the SJVUAPCD website on May 16, 2023.
\41\ Memorandum dated June 15, 2023, from Samir Sheikh,
Executive Director/APCO, SJVUAPCD and Jonathan Klassen, Project
Coordinator, SJVUAPCD, Subject: ``Item Number 9: Adopt 2023
Maintenance Plan and Redesignation request for the Revoked 1-Hour
Ozone Standard.''
\42\ CARB Executive Order S-23-013 titled, ``Submittal of the
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2023 Maintenance
Plan and Redesignation Request for the Revoked 1-Hour Standard.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 21, 2024, the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan
submittal became complete by operation of law pursuant to CAA section
110(k)(1)(B).
III. Evaluation of the Redesignation Criteria for the San Joaquin
Valley Area \43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ As noted, the statutory redesignation requirements do not
directly apply to the EPA's evaluation because the San Joaquin
Valley is no longer a nonattainment area; however, for purposes of
the EPA's evaluation for this revoked NAAQS we look to those
statutory criteria and the EPA's interpretations of and guidance for
those criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Evaluation of Whether the San Joaquin Valley Area Has Attained the
1979 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA, for a nonattainment
area to be redesignated to attainment, the EPA must determine that the
area has attained the relevant NAAQS. The EPA interprets this
requirement to mean that the area must have an attaining design value
based on the most recently available and quality-assured air quality
monitoring data, collected in accordance with the requirements of 40
CFR part 58.\44\ These requirements include quality assurance
procedures for monitor operation and data handling, siting parameters
for instruments or instrument probes, and minimum ambient air quality
monitoring network requirements.\45\ State, local, or tribal agencies
that operate air monitoring sites in accordance with 40 CFR part 58
must enter the ambient air quality data from these sites in the EPA Air
Quality System (AQS) database.\46\ These monitoring agencies certify
annually that these data are accurate to the best of their knowledge,
taking into consideration the quality assurance findings.\47\
Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily on AQS data when determining the
attainment status of an area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 57 FR 13498, 13563.
\45\ 40 CFR 58.2(a).
\46\ 40 CFR 58.16(a). AQS is the EPA's national repository of
ambient air quality data.
\47\ 40 CFR 58.15(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 40 CFR part 50, appendix H,
generally, the EPA's finding of attainment for the 1979 ozone NAAQS
must be based upon complete, quality-assured, certified data gathered
at eligible monitoring sites in the nonattainment area in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58 and entered into AQS.\48\ Under 40 CFR 50.9 and in
accordance with part 50, appendix H, an area meets the 1979 ozone NAAQS
when the expected number of days per calendar year with maximum hourly
average
[[Page 26474]]
concentrations above 0.12 ppm is equal to or less than 1, averaged over
a three year period.\49\ A daily maximum ozone value is considered
valid if 75 percent of the hours from 9:01 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. were
measured or if the highest hour is greater than the level of the
standard.\50\ A missing daily maximum ozone value may be assumed to be
less than the level of the standard if the valid daily maxima on both
the preceding day and the following day do not exceed 75 percent of the
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 40 CFR part 58 and 40 CFR part 50, appendix H.
\49\ A violation occurs when the ambient ozone air quality
monitoring data show greater than one (1.0) ``expected number'' of
exceedances per year at any site in the area, when averaged over
three consecutive calendar years. An ``expected number'' of
exceedances is a statistical term that refers to an arithmetic
average. An ``expected number'' of exceedances may be equivalent to
the number of observed exceedances plus an increment that accounts
for incomplete sampling. An exceedance occurs when the maximum
hourly ozone concentration during any day exceeds 0.124 ppm. See 40
CFR part 50, appendix H.
\50\ 40 CFR part 50, appendix H, Sec. 3.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Monitoring Network Review, Quality Assurance, and Data Completeness
SJVUAPCD is the governmental agency with the authority and
responsibilities under state law for collecting ambient air quality
data in the San Joaquin Valley area. The ambient air monitoring network
in the San Joaquin Valley area also includes air monitoring stations
that are managed and operated by CARB and the National Park Service
(NPS). As a result, SJVUAPCD submits annual monitoring network plans to
the EPA.\51\ These plans document the status of SJVUAPCD's air
monitoring network including the CARB and NPS air monitoring stations,
as required under 40 CFR 58.10. The EPA reviews these annual network
plans for compliance with the specific requirements in 40 CFR part 58.
With respect to ozone, we have found that the annual network plans
submitted by SJVUAPCD meet these requirements under 40 CFR part 58,
including the minimum monitoring requirements.\52\ See Table 1 for a
summary of air quality ozone monitors in the San Joaquin Valley
area.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ The docket for this action includes documentation of our
review of SJVUAPCD's annual network plan.
\52\ See, e.g., ``San Joaquin Valley Air Monitoring Network Plan
for the Year 2024,'' Table 8, ``Ozone Monitoring Requirements for
the Valley.''
\53\ See San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, Table 1.
Table 1--Summary of Ambient Air Quality Monitors in the San Joaquin
Valley Area a b
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AQS site ID County Site name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
06-029-0007................... Kern............. Edison.
06-029-0008................... Kern............. Maricopa.
06-029-0014................... Kern............. Bakersfield-
California.
06-029-0232................... Kern............. Oildale.
06-029-2012................... Kern............. Bakersfield-Muni.
06-029-5002................... Kern............. Arvin-Di Giorgio.
06-029-6001................... Kern............. Shafter.
06-019-0007................... Fresno........... Fresno-Drummond.
06-019-0011................... Fresno........... Fresno-Garland.
06-019-0242................... Fresno........... Fresno-Sierra Sky
Park.
06-019-2009................... Fresno........... Tranquility.
06-019-4001................... Fresno........... Parlier.
06-019-5001................... Fresno........... Clovis-Villa.
06-031-1004................... Kings............ Hanford.
06-039-0004................... Madera........... Madera-Pump Yard.
06-039-2010................... Madera........... Madera-City.
06-047-0003................... Merced........... Merced-Coffee.
06-099-0005................... Modesto.......... Modesto-14th Street.
06-099-0006................... Stanislaus....... Turlock.
06-077-1003................... Stockton......... Stockton-University
Park.
06-077-3005................... San Joaquin...... Tracy-Airport.
06-107-0009................... Tulare........... Sequoia-Ash Mountain.
06-107-2003................... Tulare........... Visalia-W. Ashland
Ave.
06-107-2010................... Tulare........... Porterville.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ CARB operates and certifies data for the Fresno-Garland (AQS ID: 06-
019-0011), Edison (AQS ID: 06-029-0007), Bakersfield-California (AQS
ID: 06-029-0014), Oildale (AQS ID: 06-029-0232), Arvin-Di Giorgio (AQS
ID: 06-029-5002), Shafter (AQS ID: 06-029-6001), Stockton (AQS ID: 06-
077-1003), Modesto-14th St. (AQS ID: 06-099-0005), and Visalia W.
Ashland Ave (AQS ID: 06-107-2003) monitors.
\b\ The National Park Service operates and certifies data for the
Sequoia-Ash Mountain (AQS ID: 06-107-0009) monitor.
In accordance with 40 CFR 58.15, SJVUAPCD, CARB, and the NPS
certify annually that the previous calendar year's ambient
concentration and quality assurance data are completely submitted to
AQS and that the ambient concentration data are accurate, taking into
consideration the quality assurance findings.\54\ Along with the
certification letters, SJVUAPCD, CARB, and the NPS submit a summary of
the precision and accuracy data for all ambient air quality data.\55\
The EPA's evaluations of the relevant quality assurance data are
reflected in the associated AQS certification evaluation and
concurrence reports.\56\ For the purposes of this proposal, we reviewed
the data for the 2021-2023 period for completeness and determined that
the ozone ambient concentration data collected in the San Joaquin
Valley area met the completeness criterion at all ozone monitoring
sites except for those specified in Table 2.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ We have included in our docket SJVUAPCD's annual data
certifications for 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, for monitors operated
by SJVUAPCD, CARB, and NPS. Annual data certification requirements
can be found at 40 CFR 58.15.
\55\ See 40 CFR 58.15(c).
\56\ We have included in our docket SJVUAPCD's annual data
certifications for 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, for monitors operated
by SJVUAPCD, CARB, and NPS. Annual data certification requirements
can be found at 40 CFR 58.15.
\57\ Generally, a ``complete'' data set for determining
attainment of the ozone standard is 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.
See 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the EPA conducts regular technical systems audits (TSAs)
where
[[Page 26475]]
we review and inspect state and local ambient air monitoring programs
to assess compliance with applicable regulations concerning the
collection, analysis, validation, and reporting of ambient air quality
data. For the purposes of this proposal, we reviewed the findings from
EPA's 2022 TSAs of CARB and SJVUAPCD's ambient air monitoring
programs.\58\ The results of these TSAs do not preclude the EPA from
determining that the area has attained the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ Technical Systems Audit of the Ambient Air Monitoring
Program California Air Resources Board, December 2021-August 2022;
Final Report dated March 2024 (``2022 TSA''). The 2022 TSA is
attached to its transmittal letter dated March 14, 2024, from
Matthew Lakin, EPA Region IX, to Edie Chang, CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To summarize, based on the EPA's review of the 2021-2023 certified
data available in AQS, relevant monitoring network plans,
certifications, quality assurance data, and the 2022 TSAs, we propose
to find that the ozone data collected in the San Joaquin Valley area
are suitable for determining whether the area has attained the 1979 1-
hour ozone NAAQS.
3. Evaluation of Attainment
In 2016, the EPA determined that the San Joaquin Valley area
attained the 1979 ozone NAAQS based on monitoring data from 2012-
2014.\59\ The San Joaquin Valley continues to attain the NAAQS. Table 2
shows the calculated 1979 1-hour ozone design values at all monitoring
sites in the San Joaquin Valley area for the 2020-2022 and 2021-2023
periods.\60\ The data show that all of the monitoring sites in the San
Joaquin Valley area met the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the 2020-2022 and
2021-2023 periods, based on the average expected exceedances at all
monitoring sites being less than or equal to 1 exceedance per year.
Preliminary data available in AQS for 2024 indicate that the San
Joaquin Valley area continues to show concentrations below the level of
the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ 81 FR 46608.
\60\ SJVUAPCD calculated the design value for the 2020-2022
period as the expected number of days per calendar year with maximum
hourly average concentrations above 0.124 ppm. The EPA evaluated the
design value for the 2021-2023 period as the most recent certified
air quality monitoring data available at the time of this proposed
notice.
\61\ See ``AQS 2024 Quicklook Report,'' dated November 21, 2024,
available in the docket for this proposed rule. The report includes
preliminary data from all monitors in the San Joaquin Valley area
from the first, second, and third quarter of the year (January
through September, as available). Preliminary data available in AQS
for 2024 indicate that the area continues to attain the 1979 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.
Table 2--San Joaquin Valley Area 2020-2022 and 2021-2023 Design Values for the 1979 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS
[# of Expected Exceedances] \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expected exceedances by year 2020-2022 design value 2021-2023 design value
AQS site ID Site name -------------------------------------------- (average expected (average expected
2020 2021 2022 2023 exceedances) \b\ exceedances) \b\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
06-029-0007......................... Edison................ 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0................... 0.3.
06-029-0008......................... Maricopa.............. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Invalid \c\........... 0.0.
06-029-0014......................... Bakersfield-California 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-029-0232......................... Oildale............... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-029-2012......................... Bakersfield-Muni...... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-029-5002......................... Arvin-Di Giorgio...... \d\ 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Invalid \c\........... 0.0.
06-029-6001......................... Shafter............... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-019-0007......................... Fresno-Drummond....... 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.3................... 0.3.
06-019-0011......................... Fresno-Garland........ 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-019-0242......................... Fresno-Sierra Sky Park 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-019-2009......................... Tranquility........... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-019-4001......................... Parlier............... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-019-5001......................... Clovis-Villa.......... 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7................... 0.0.
06-031-1004......................... Hanford............... 0.0 0.0 0.0 \d\ 0.0 0.0................... Invalid.\c\
06-039-0004......................... Madera-Pump Yard...... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-039-2010......................... Madera-City........... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-047-0003......................... Merced-Coffee......... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-099-0005......................... Modesto-14th Street... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-099-0006......................... Turlock............... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
06-077-1003......................... Stockton-University 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.3................... 0.3.
Park.
06-077-3005......................... Tracy-Airport......... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0
06-107-2002......................... Visalia-W. Ashland Ave 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3................... 0.0.
06-107-0009......................... Sequoia-Ash Mountain.. 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3................... 0.0.
06-107-2010......................... Porterville........... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0................... 0.0.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: AQS, 2020-2023 Quicklook Report, dated October 9, 2024.
\b\ The EPA has identified calculation procedures or calculating the expected number of exceedances in 40 CFR 50 appendix H. The average number of
exceedances for three consecutive years is generally based on summing the number of expected exceedances each year and dividing by three.
\c\ The 2022 design values for Maricopa and Arvin-DiGiorgio are invalid and the 2023 design value for Hanford is invalid.
\d\ The annual completeness criterion was not met in 2020 at Arvin-DiGiorgio and in 2023 at Hanford.
As indicated in Table 2, the 2022 design values for Maricopa and
Arvin-DiGiorgio are invalid and the 2023 design value for Hanford is
invalid. For the 2022 design value period, the Maricopa site did not
meet the 3-year completeness criterion of 90%. Also, for the 2022
design value period, the Arvin-DiGiorgio site did not meet the 3-year
completeness criterion of 90% and calendar year 2020 did not meet the
annual completeness criterion of 75%. For the 2023 design value period,
the Hanford site did not meet the 3-year completeness criterion of 90%
and calendar year 2023 did not meet the annual completeness criterion
of 75%. While these design values were invalid, these sites were not
historically the highest design value sites in the San Joaquin Valley
area.\62\ Thus, we find that invalid design values from the Maricopa,
Arvin-DiGiorgio, and Hanford sites do not preclude an attainment
determination for the San Joaquin Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ See memorandum dated December 23, 2024, from Jennifer
Williams, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, Subject:
``Invalid Design Values for the 1979 1-hour Ozone NAAQS in San
Joaquin Valley, CA Nonattainment Area,'' included in the docket for
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consequently, based upon three years of complete, quality-assured,
and
[[Page 26476]]
certified data from 2021-2023, the EPA proposes to determine that the
San Joaquin Valley area has attained and continues to attain the 1979
ozone NAAQS.
B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Meeting the Requirements
Applicable for the Purposes of Redesignation Under Section 110 and Part
D of the CAA
Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) of the CAA require the state to
have met all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D and
the EPA to have fully approved that applicable SIP under CAA section
110(k).
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA contains the general requirements for
a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the SIP must have been adopted
by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and that,
among other things, it must: (1) include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures, means or techniques necessary
to meet the requirements of the CAA; (2) provide for establishment and
operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems and procedures
necessary to monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide for
implementation of a source permit program to regulate the modification
and construction of stationary sources within the areas covered by the
plan; (4) include provisions for the implementation of part C
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and part D new source
review (NSR) permit programs; (5) include provisions for stationary
source emission control measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6)
include provisions for air quality modeling; and, (7) provide for
public planning and emission control rule development.
Part D of the Clean Air Act establishes the plan requirements for
nonattainment areas. Section 172(c) sets forth the basic requirements
of air quality plans for states with nonattainment areas that are
required to submit plans on a schedule pursuant to section 172(b).
Subpart 2 of part D, which includes section 182 of the CAA, establishes
specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas depending on the
areas' nonattainment classifications. The San Joaquin Valley area was
classified as Extreme under the 1979 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the area
is subject to the subpart 1 requirements contained in section 172(c)
and section 176. The area is also subject to the subpart 2 requirements
contained in section 182(e) (Extreme nonattainment area requirements).
A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in section 172(c)
and 182 can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of
Title I.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ 57 FR 13498.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since Congress passed the CAA amendments in 1990, the EPA has
consistently held the position that not every requirement that an area
is subject to is applicable for purposes of redesignation.\64\ For
example, some of the part D requirements, such as demonstrations of
reasonable further progress, are designed to ensure that nonattainment
areas continue to make progress toward attainment. The EPA has
interpreted these requirements as not ``applicable'' for purposes of
redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) because areas
that are applying for redesignation to attainment are by definition
already attaining the standard. Similarly, the EPA has long held that
CAA provisions that are not relevant to an area's designation and
classification as a nonattainment area are not ``applicable'' for
purposes of redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v).
For this reason, SIP revisions that apply regardless of whether an area
is designated nonattainment or attainment, such as good neighbor plans
required under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), have not been considered
``applicable'' for purposes of redesignation. Finally, some
requirements may not be applicable in this action given that both of
the NAAQS at issue in this notice were revoked for all purposes, and,
post-revocation, the San Joaquin Valley area remained subject only to
the anti-backsliding requirements identified by the EPA in
regulation.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ See, e.g., Calcagni memo, 6.
\65\ See 40 CFR 51.1100(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, for the revoked ozone standard at issue here, over the
past three decades the State has submitted numerous SIPs for the San
Joaquin Valley area to implement the standard, improve air quality with
respect to the standard, and to address anti-backsliding requirements
for the standard. Therefore, even though some of the San Joaquin Valley
area's SIP-approved elements address criteria that are not requirements
``applicable'' for purposes of redesignation under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v), such as CAA section 182(b) reasonable further
progress, or address requirements that were not retained for anti-
backsliding, such as section 182(a) emissions inventories, we provide a
list of elements the State has adopted and the EPA has fully approved
for the San Joaquin Valley area with respect to the revoked 1-hour
ozone standard. These include: (1) emissions inventories, (2) a RACM
demonstration, (3) an attainment demonstration, (4) a rate of progress
demonstration, (5) contingency measures for failure to meet rate of
progress milestones, (6) advanced technology or clean fuels for
boilers, (7) VMT offset demonstration and transportation control
measures,\66\ (8) reasonably available control technology (RACT),\67\
(9) both basic and enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance
programs,\68\ (10) nonattainment new source review (NSR) programs with
NSR offset requirements,\69\ and (11) a CAA section 185 fee
program.\70\ Because the requirements for infrastructure SIPs in
section 110(a)(2) were not part of the CAA until the 1990 amendments,
SJVUAPCD has not submitted SIPs addressing section 110(a)(2) elements
for the 1979 ozone NAAQS.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ 81 FR 19492.
\67\ We addressed the SIP requirements related to implementation
of RACT for the 1-hour ozone standard in separate rulemakings. See,
e.g.,77 FR 1417 (January 10, 2012) (final partial approval and
partial disapproval of the San Joaquin Valley RACT SIP).
\68\ 75 FR 38023 (July 1, 2010) and 40 CFR 52.241.
\69\ 88 FR 43434 (July 10, 2023) and 79 FR 55637 (September 17,
2014).
\70\ 77 FR 50021 (August 20, 2012).
\71\ Approval of the section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIPs is
not required for purposes of redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, we are proposing to find That the San Joaquin Valley
area has met all requirements under CAA section 110 and part D and that
the Plan satisfies CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v).
C. The Area Must Show That the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Emissions Reductions
To approve a request for redesignation to attainment, CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires the EPA to determine that the improvement in
air quality is due to emission reductions that are permanent and
enforceable and that the improvement results from the implementation of
the applicable SIP, applicable Federal air pollution control
regulations, and other permanent and enforceable regulations. Under
this criterion, a state must be able to reasonably attribute the
improvement in air quality to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions. Attainment resulting from temporary reductions in emission
rates (e.g., reduced production or shutdown due to temporary adverse
economic conditions) or unusually favorable meteorology would not
qualify as an air quality improvement due to permanent and enforceable
emission reductions.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ Calcagni memo, 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26477]]
Table 3 shows a summary of current and historic NO<INF>X</INF> and
VOC emissions in the San Joaquin Valley 1979 1-hour ozone area.
Table 3--Summary of Emissions for the San Joaquin Valley 1979 1-Hour Ozone Area
[tons per day (tpd), Average Summer Day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source type 2013 VOC 2020 VOC 2013 NOX 2020 NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary...................................... 81.61 83.61 41.06 23.14
Area-Wide....................................... 147.59 157.91 4.46 7.37
On-Road......................................... 44.68 26.21 144.2 61.28
Other Mobile.................................... 62.3 49.32 107.61 89.5
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 336.18 317.05 297.33 181.29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, Appendix A, A-1, A-4.
VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions are expected to continue to
decrease in the next several decades, despite population increases, due
to continued replacement of older vehicles and engines subject to
California and Federal emission control requirements.
As explained in this document, the EPA finds that the State has
demonstrated that the observed air quality improvements in the San
Joaquin Valley area with respect to the 1979 1-hour ozone standard are
due to enforceable emissions reductions though the implementation of
state and District emission controls contained in the SIP and not due
to favorable meteorology or temporary reductions in emission rates,
such as temporary adverse economic conditions. Within the San Joaquin
Valley area, District regulations and State mobile and area source
measures have been the primary measures contributing to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions, leading to attainment of the
NAAQS.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ See San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, 13-24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. District's Adopted Regulations Achieving Permanent and Enforceable
Emission Reductions
SJVUAPCD has adopted, implemented, and submitted for EPA approval
stationary source rules that achieve NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC emissions
reductions and have thus helped reduce ozone levels. Table 4 in this
document summarizes the local air district rules adopted and the status
of those rules in the California SIP.
Table 4--San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Rules Adopted and Submitted or Approved Into
the California State Implementation Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date rule
adopted/ Federal Register
Rule No. Rule amended by the EPA approval date citation
District
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4103.......................... Open Burning.......... 6/17/2021 6/16/2022........ 87 FR 36222.
4106.......................... Prescribed Burning and 6/21/2001 2/27/2002........ 67 FR 8894.
Hazard Reduction
Burning.
4306.......................... Boilers, Steam 12/17/2020 Pending.......... N/A.
Generators, and
Process Heaters Phase
3.
4307.......................... Boilers, Steam 4/21/2016 8/14/2017........ 82 FR 37817.
Generators, and
Process Heaters 2.0
Metric Million
British Thermal Unit
(MMBtu)/hr to 5.0
MMBtu/hr.
4308.......................... Boilers, Steam 11/14/2013 2/12/2015........ 80 FR 7803.
Generators, and
Process Heaters 0.075
MMBtu/hr to less than
2.0 MMBtu/hr.
4309.......................... Dryers, Dehydrators, 12/15/2005 5/30/2007........ 72 FR 29886.
and Ovens.
4311.......................... Flares................ 12/17/2020 12/28/2022....... 87 FR 79806.
4320.......................... Advanced Emission 12/17/2020 Pending.......... N/A.
Reduction Options for
Boilers, Steam
Generators, and
Process Heaters
Greater than 5.0
MMBtu/hr.
4352.......................... Solid Fuel Fired 12/16/2021 Pending.......... N/A.
Boilers, Steam
Generators and
Process Heaters.
4354.......................... Glass Melting Furnaces 12/16/2021 Pending.......... N/A.
4656.......................... Biosolids, Animal 3/15/2007 1/17/2012........ 77 FR 2228.
Manure, and Poultry
Litter Operations.
4566.......................... Organic Material 8/18/2011 11/29/2012....... 77 FR 71129.
Composting Operations.
4570.......................... Confined Animal 10/21/2010 1/17/2012........ 77 FR 2228.
Facilities.
4601.......................... Architectural Coatings 4/16/2020 12/22/2022....... 87 FR 78544.
4603.......................... Surface Coating of 9/17/2009 11/1/2011........ 76 FR 67369.
Metal Parts and
Products Plastic
Parts and Products,
and Pleasure Crafts.
4604.......................... Can and Coil Coating 9/20/2007 1/19/2010........ 75 FR 2796.
Operations.
4605.......................... Aerospace Assembly and 6/16/2011 11/16/2011....... 76 FR 70886.
Component Coating
Operations.
4606.......................... Wood Products and Flat 10/16/2008 10/15/2009....... 74 FR 52894.
Wood Paneling
Products Coating
Operations.
4607.......................... Graphic Arts and 12/18/2008 10/15/2009....... 74 FR 52894.
Paper, Film, Foil,
and Fabric Coatings.
4612.......................... Motor Vehicle and 10/21/2010 2/13/2012........ 77 FR 7536.
Mobile Equipment
Coating Operations.
4621.......................... Gasoline Transfer into 12/19/2013 2/10/2015........ 80 FR 7345.
Stationary Storage
Containers, Delivery
Vessels, and Bulk
Plants.
4622.......................... Gasoline Transfer into 12/19/2013 2/10/2015........ 80 FR 7345.
Motor Vehicle Fuel
Tanks.
4624.......................... Transfer of Organic 12/20/2007 10/15/2009....... 74 FR 52894.
Liquid.
4653.......................... Adhesives and Sealants 9/16/2010 2/13/2012........ 77 FR 7536.
4661.......................... Organic Solvents...... 9/20/2007 5/5/2010......... 75 FR 24406.
4662.......................... Organic Solvent 9/20/2007 7/30/2009........ 74 FR 37948.
Degreasing Operations.
[[Page 26478]]
4663.......................... Organic Solvent 9/20/2007 7/30/2009........ 74 FR 37948.
Cleaning, Storage,
and Disposal.
4682.......................... Polystyrene, 12/15/2011 9/20/2012........ 77 FR 58312.
Polyethylene, and
Polypropylene
Products
Manufacturing.
4684.......................... Polyester Resin 8/18/2011 2/6/2012......... 77 FR 5709.
Operations.
4692.......................... Commercial 6/21/2018 9/14/2020........ 85 FR 56521.
Charbroiling.
4694.......................... Wine Fermentation and 12/15/2005 11/29/2012....... 77 FR 71109.
Storage Tanks.
4695.......................... Brandy Aging and Wine 9/17/2009 8/4/2011......... 76 FR 47076.
Aging Operations.
4702.......................... Internal Combustion 8/19/2021 Pending.......... N/A.
Engines.
4703.......................... Stationary Gas 9/20/2007 10/21/2009....... 74 FR 53888.
Turbines.
4902.......................... Residential Water 3/19/2009 5/5/2010......... 75 FR 24408.
Heaters.
4905.......................... Natural Gas-Fired, Fan- 12/16/2021 Pending.......... N/A.
Type Residential
Central Furnaces.
9310.......................... School Bus Fleets..... 9/21/2006 3/8/2010......... 75 FR 10420.
9410.......................... Employer-Based Trip 12/17/2009 2/9/2016......... 81 FR 6761.
Reduction.
9510.......................... Indirect Source Review 12/21/2017 6/25/2021........ 86 FR 33542.
(ISR).
9610.......................... SIP Credit for 6/20/2013 4/9/2015......... 80 FR 19020.
Emission Reductions
Generated Through
Incentive Programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. California State Measures Achieving Permanent and Enforceable
Emission Reductions
Source categories that CARB has primary responsibility for reducing
emissions in California include most new and existing on- and off-road
engines and vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and consumer products. In
addition, California has unique authority under CAA section 209
(subject to waiver by the EPA) to adopt and implement new emission
standards for many categories of on-road vehicles and engines and new
and in-use off-road vehicles and engines. California has been a leader
in the development of some of the most stringent control measures
nationwide for on-road and off-road mobile sources and the fuels that
power them. These measures have helped reduce ozone levels in the San
Joaquin Valley area and throughout the State.
The San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan provides a summary of
recent measures adopted and implemented by the State.\74\ According to
this summary, from 2008 to the present, the State has taken more than
100 rulemaking actions that have achieved significant emission
reductions needed for the State's nonattainment areas, including the
San Joaquin Valley area. These measures include new emissions standards
and in-use requirements and have resulted in significant reductions in
VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from categories such as passenger
cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, locomotives, lawn and garden
equipment, and consumer products.\75\ The EPA has approved many of the
State's measures to strengthen emissions controls for mobile sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, 15-24.
\75\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Improvements Are Not Due to Favorable Meteorology or Temporary
Emissions Reductions.
In the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, SJVUAPCD provided
documentation that the improvement in air quality in the San Joaquin
Valley area is not due to favorable meteorology or temporary emissions
reductions from unfavorable economic conditions.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, 25-36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD showed that weather patterns in the last decade have not
been unusually favorable. For example, looking at days equal to or over
95 degrees Fahrenheit (``high temperature days'') in each of the last
seven years (2012 to 2019) as an indicator of conditions conducive to
ozone formation, the area had an annual average of 82 high temperature
days, while in the last three years (2020 to 2022) had an annual
average of 89 high temperature days.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ Id. at 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD provided documentation showing that the improvement in air
quality leading to attainment for the 1979 ozone NAAQS in the San
Joaquin Valley area is not due to unfavorable economic conditions. As
an indicator of economic activity, this analysis presented information
on gasoline and diesel sales and VMT in California from 2013 to 2022.
Fuel sales are an indicator of economic activity and represent an
indicator of emissions trends of both VOCs and NO<INF>X</INF> as well.
The San Joaquin Valley area's emissions inventory is dominated by
mobile sources.\78\ Although gasoline sales and gasoline VMT decreased
in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we note that diesel sales and
diesel VMT continued at a steady rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ See Table 3, and the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan,
Appendix A, Table A-1 and Table A-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA concludes that the improvement in air quality in the San
Joaquin Valley area is not due to favorable meteorology or temporary
emissions reductions from unfavorable economic conditions.
4. Conclusion
Based on the analysis in Section III.C. of this document, the EPA
concludes that permanent and enforceable emission reduction measures
adopted and implemented by the State have been effective in reaching
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard and that the improvement in the
San Joaquin Valley Area's air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions.
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under CAA
Section 175A
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA requires that the Administrator
has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the
requirements of section 175A of the Act. The maintenance plan is a SIP
revision that provides for maintenance of the relevant NAAQS in the
area for at least 10 years after redesignation. The Calcagni memo,
dated September 4, 1992, provides additional guidance on the required
content of a maintenance plan.
As with all maintenance plans, a maintenance plan for the 1979
ozone
[[Page 26479]]
NAAQS should address the following five areas: an attainment emissions
inventory, a maintenance demonstration, a commitment to maintain an air
quality monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. The attainment emissions inventory identifies the
emissions level in the area that is sufficient to attain the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS, based on emissions over a three-year period when no
monitored violations occurred. Provisions for continued operation of an
appropriate air quality monitoring network are to be included in the
maintenance plan. The state must show how it will track and verify the
progress of the maintenance plan. Finally, the maintenance plan should
include contingency provisions that will ensure prompt correction of
any violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Based on our review and evaluation of the San Joaquin Valley
Maintenance Plan, we are proposing to approve the Plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 175A.
1. Attainment Inventory
A maintenance plan for the 1979 ozone NAAQS should include an
``attainment emissions inventory'' of ozone precursors in the area to
identify a level of emissions sufficient to attain the 1979 ozone
NAAQS.\79\ The attainment emissions inventory should be consistent with
the EPA's most recent guidance on emissions inventories for
nonattainment areas available at the time it was developed and should
represent emissions during the timeframe associated with the ambient
air quality monitoring data showing attainment of the NAAQS. The
inventory must also be comprehensive, including emissions from
stationary, area, nonroad mobile, and on-road mobile sources, and it
must be based on actual ``ozone season data'' (i.e., summertime)
emissions. The EPA has provided guidance for developing ozone emissions
inventories in ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of
Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations'' (May 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ See Calcagni memo, 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB and SJVUAPCD produced a projected attainment inventory for
2020 based on the actual summertime emissions from 2017 National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) data, utilizing the California Emission
Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM) 2022, San Joaquin Valley
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area--Version 1.00. Although the
attainment inventory is typically an inventory of actual emissions from
the time period the area attained the standard, CARB and SJVUAPCD used
projected emissions for 2020 \80\ rather than using the 2020 NEI due to
atypical industrial activity during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and
large wildfires in the San Joaquin Valley area in 2020 and 2021. The
EPA agrees with this rationale and agrees that the selection of a
projected attainment inventory for 2020 based on the actual summertime
emissions from 2017 is acceptable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ The NEI is a comprehensive and detailed estimate of air
emissions of criteria pollutants, criteria precursors, and hazardous
air pollutants from air emissions sources. The NEI is released every
three years based primarily upon data provided by State, local, and
Tribal air agencies for sources in their jurisdictions and
supplemented by data developed by the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan projects 2020 summer day
average emissions of 317.05 tpd of VOC and 181.29 tpd of
NO<INF>X</INF>.
CARB's July 1, 2024 supplement to appendix A contains source-
specific descriptions of emissions calculation procedures and sources
of input data.\81\ Anthropogenic emissions are reported under
stationary point and stationary aggregate, area-wide, on-road mobile,
and off-road mobile source categories. Natural emissions from biogenic
and geogenic sources and wildfires are reported separately. The
stationary source inventory is composed of stationary point and
stationary aggregated sources, which include large industrial point
sources and smaller point sources, such as gasoline dispensing
facilities and laundering.\82\ CARB and SJVUAPCD based the 2017
inventory estimates on actual emissions data reported by facilities to
reflect a typical ozone season day at each emissions unit within the
source facilities. Area-wide sources include categories where emissions
take place over a wide geographic area, such as consumer products. CARB
and SJVUAPCD's estimation methods for area-wide sources include source
testing, direct measurement by continuous emissions monitoring systems,
or engineering calculations.\83\ On-road and off-road mobile source
emissions are estimated using various modeling methods, which account
for adopted regulations, technology types, fleet turnover, and seasonal
conditions.\84\ For on-road mobile sources, the EMFAC2021 model is the
currently approved on-road emissions model in California,\85\ and it
estimates on-road emissions using travel activity and data on
California's car and truck fleets. Off-road mobile sources include in-
use off-road equipment, ocean-going vessels, recreational vehicles, and
small off-road vehicles.\86\ Off-road mobile sources were estimated
using a suite of category-specific models or, where a model was not
available, the OFFROAD2007 model.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ Email dated July 1, 2024, from Sylvia Vanderspek, CARB, to
Andrew Ledezma, EPA, Subject: ``RE: Follow-up 6/25/24 Meeting--1979
1-Hour RRMP EI Appendix'' (``Emissions Inventory Supplement'').
\82\ Emissions Inventory Supplement, B-12.
\83\ Emissions Inventory Supplement, B-17.
\84\ Emissions Inventory Supplement, B-5.
\85\ 87 FR 68483 (November 15, 2022).
\86\ Emissions Inventory Supplement, B-6.
\87\ Id. For information regarding models used for specific
source categories, see the Emissions Inventory Supplement, B-6 to B-
12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has reviewed the emissions inventory in the Plan and
proposes to conclude that it is based on reasonable assumptions and
methodologies and that it is comprehensive, current, accurate, and
consistent with applicable CAA provisions and the Calcagni memo.
Therefore, we are proposing that the inventory is acceptable for use in
demonstrating maintenance of the 1979 ozone NAAQS.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
Section 175A(a) of the CAA requires that the maintenance plan
``provide for the maintenance of the national primary ambient air
quality standard for such air pollutant in the area concerned for at
least 10 years after the redesignation.'' A state may generally
demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by either showing that future
emissions of a pollutant or its precursors will not exceed the level of
the attainment inventory or by conducting modeling that shows that the
future mix of sources and emissions rates will not cause a violation of
the NAAQS.\88\ Assumptions concerning emissions rates in maintenance
demonstrations should generally reflect permanent, enforceable
measures.\89\ Therefore, the analysis should assume that sources are
operating at permitted levels (or historic peak levels), unless
evidence is presented that such an assumption is unrealistic.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ Calcagni memo, 9.
\89\ Id. at 10.
\90\ Id. at 4. See also memorandum dated November 30, 1993, from
Kent D. Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division,
Subject: ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB and SJVUAPCD use 2017 NEI data, projected to 2020 in CEPAM, as
the baseline to develop growth factors for stationary, area-wide, on-
road, and other mobile sources. For stationary and
[[Page 26480]]
area-wide sources, CARB and SJVUAPCD used growth profiles that
incorporate historical trends to the base year or beyond. The projected
emissions inventory reflects emissions reductions from point and area-
wide sources subject to District rules and CARB regulations.\91\ For
other mobile sources, projected emissions were estimated using a suite
of category-specific models \92\ or, where a model was not available,
the OFFROAD2007 model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ For information regarding growth profiles for a specific
stationary or area-wide source, see the Emissions Inventory
Supplement, Table B-1.
\92\ For information regarding models used for specific source
categories, see the Emissions Inventory Supplement, B-6 to B-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For mobile on-road sources, EMFAC2021 was used to project base year
emissions inventory values with external adjustments to account for
certain CARB on-road mobile regulations.\93\ With regards to mobile on-
road source and small off-road engines, CARB and SJVUAPCD provided
initial emissions estimates in the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance
Plan.\94\ On August 22, 2024, CARB provided a supplement to the
maintenance demonstration, providing updated estimates to mobile on-
road and small off-road engine emissions projections.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\93\ Emissions Inventory Supplement, B-5 to B-6, and Table B-3.
\94\ San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, 40 CFR and appendix A.
\95\ Email dated August 22, 2024, from Sylvia Vanderspek, CARB,
to Andrew Ledezma, EPA, Subject: ``SIP Mobile Source Measure
table,'' (``Maintenance Plan Supplement''), included in the docket
as SJV 1hr ozone MP.xlsx. In the Maintenance Plan Supplement, CARB
revised the maintenance demonstration in order to remove certain
projected emissions benefits. Specifically, the emissions benefits
removed included CARB's Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Omnibus,
Advanced Clean Trucks, Innovative Clean Transit, Advanced Clean Cars
II, Heavy Duty Inspection and Maintenance, and Small Off-Road
Engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5 compares the VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions estimated for
the San Joaquin Valley 1979 ozone area for 2020 with those projected
for 2031 and 2036 by source category. The projected VOC and
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions show that VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions
will remain below the attainment levels throughout the 10-year period
following redesignation.
Table 5--San Joaquin Valley 2020 and Projected 2031 and 2036 VOC and NOX Emissions Total Daily Emissions
[tpd, average summer day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020 2031 2036
Emissions source -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary.............................................. 23.14 83.61 16.63 86.87 16.23 91.61
Area-Wide............................................... 7.37 157.91 3.98 167.84 3.77 170.19
On-Road................................................. 61.28 26.21 36.62 15.32 37.08 13.59
Other Mobile............................................ 89.50 49.32 57.83 33.34 49.39 30.29
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 181.29 317.05 115.07 303.36 106.47 305.68
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, Appendix A, Table A-1, A-2, and Maintenance Plan Supplement.
Based on our review, we find that SJVUAPCD and CARB have
sufficiently demonstrated that the San Joaquin Valley area will
maintain the 1979 ozone standard throughout the period from
redesignation through 2036. Therefore, we propose to find that the San
Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan adequately demonstrates maintenance of
the 1979 ozone NAAQS through 2035.
3. Monitoring Network
Once an area has been redesignated, the state should continue to
operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network, in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the attainment status of the area.\96\
Data collected by the monitoring network are also needed to implement,
if triggered, the contingency provisions of the maintenance plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ Calcagni memo, 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, SJVUAPCD states that it
will continue to operate its air quality monitoring network to verify
continued attainment of the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS to meet the
provisions of 40 CFR part 58.\97\ SJVUAPCD details its state or local
air monitoring stations (SLAMS) air quality network in the 2024 Air
Monitoring Network Plan, which was the most recent information at the
time SJVUAPCD adopted the Maintenance Plan.\98\ SJVUAPCD currently
operates ozone monitors at 14 sites, along with 9 sites operated by
CARB, and 1 site operated by the NPS, within the San Joaquin Valley
area.\99\ We find SJVUAPCD's commitment for continued ambient ozone
monitoring set forth in the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan to be
acceptable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, 41. Although the San
Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan is not explicit in this regard, we
understand the Plan to reflect SJVUAPCD's intention to continue
operation of its monitoring network consistent with the EPA's
monitoring requirements in 40 CFR part 58 (``Ambient Air Quality
Surveillance'').
\98\ The EPA's requirements for annual submission and review of
monitoring network plans are described in 40 CFR 58.10.
\99\ San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, Table 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
SJVUAPCD has the legal authority to implement and enforce the
requirements of the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan under the
California Health and Safety Code sections 40150 to 40161. These
provisions include authority to adopt, implement, and enforce any
emissions control contingency measures determined to be necessary to
correct 1979 ozone NAAQS violations. To verify continued attainment,
SJVUAPCD committed to the continued operation of an ozone monitoring
network that meets the EPA ambient air quality surveillance
requirements.\100\ In addition, SJVUAPCD committed to track the
progress of the San Joaquin Valley's maintenance of the 1979 ozone
NAAQS through continued review, development, and submission of periodic
emissions inventories to the EPA.\101\ The EPA finds these methods
sufficient for the purpose of verifying continued attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan, 45.
\101\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Contingency Provisions
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that maintenance plans contain
contingency provisions, as the EPA deems necessary, to promptly correct
any violations of the NAAQS that occur during the maintenance period.
Such provisions must include a requirement
[[Page 26481]]
that the state will implement all measures with respect to the control
of the air pollutant concerned that were contained in the SIP prior to
the maintenance period. These contingency provisions are distinguished
from contingency measures required for nonattainment areas under CAA
section 172(c)(9) in that they are not required to be fully adopted
measures that will take effect without further action by the state for
the maintenance plan to be approved. The contingency provisions of a
maintenance plan are, however, an enforceable part of the SIP and
should ensure that contingency measures are adopted expeditiously once
the plan's contingency provisions are triggered by a specified event.
Thus, a state should identify the specific indicators or triggers that
will be used to determine when the contingency measures need to be
implemented. Next, the maintenance plan should clearly identify the
measures to be adopted, include a schedule and procedure for adoption
and implementation of the measures, and contain a specific timeline for
action by a state.
As required by section 175A of the CAA, SJVUAPCD's Plan includes a
contingency plan to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that
occurs after redesignation of the area. In addition, SJVUAPCD provided
a clarification of the timeline for implementation of the contingency
plan, if triggered.\102\ We refer to the contingency plan in the Plan
and the clarification collectively as the ``Contingency Plan.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ SJVUAPCD Maintenance Plan, 45-47 and email dated February
27, 2024, from Emily Kneeland, SJVUAPCD, to Karina O'Connor, EPA,
Subject: ``Clarification for San Joaquin Valley 1-hr Ozone
Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under SJVUAPCD's Contingency Plan, the trigger for contingency
provisions is a violation of the 1979 ozone NAAQS. SJVUAPCD commits to
evaluate an exceedance contributing to a violation within 90 days of
certification of the air monitoring data. If SJVUAPCD's evaluation
concludes that the ozone exceedances leading to a violation of the 1-
hour ozone standard were due to exceptional events, the District will
follow the EPA's Exceptional Events Initial Notification \103\
procedures to initiate the process for determining what documentation
should be prepared for EPA review and approval.\104\ If the EPA's
response to the Initial Notification indicates that the District should
prepare a contingency provision trigger calculation exceedance
exclusion request, the District will prepare this documentation within
18 months of the EPA's response. We note that should the District
exclude an exceedance from the contingency trigger calculation using
this process, it would not constitute the EPA's concurrence that the
exceedance was caused by an exceptional event. The exceedance will
therefore continue to be included in design value calculations for the
San Joaquin Valley Planning Area unless CARB, following opportunity for
public comment, submits a request for the EPA to concur on the
exceedance as an exceptional event pursuant to 40 CFR 50.14 and the EPA
reviews the submittal and formally concurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ See generally 81 FR 68216 (October 3, 2016) (describing
the EPA's exceptional events rule).
\104\ This exceedance exclusion request must contain detailed
information for each exceedance that SJVUAPCD wishes to exclude.
This detailed information will differ depending on the type of
exceedance event. Information may include, but is not limited, to
specific named fires and fire locations for wildfire influenced
events, description of surface and meteorological conditions during
the event, evidence of the impact on ozone, evidence of transport,
and issuance of National Weather Service advisories or warnings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the EPA determines that the documentation submitted requesting
exclusion of monitoring data identified in the Initial Notification
indicates that the area's violation of the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS was
due to circumstances not influenced by exceptional events, the
Contingency Plan will be triggered. The District's Contingency Plan
states that, within 18 months of the EPA's determination, the District
and CARB commit to evaluating whether the exceedance can be addressed
through existing District and CARB rules and regulations and, if
necessary, evaluating and adopting amendments to rules to achieve the
emission reductions necessary to meet the NAAQS as technologically and
economically feasible.
The Contingency Plan identifies a list of District and CARB rules
that SJVUAPCD may evaluate for amendment to address the NAAQS
violation. These rules include District Rule 4306/4320, ``Boiler, Steam
Generators, and Process Heaters > 5 MMBtu/hr;'' District Rule 4309,
``Dryers, Dehydrators, and Ovens;'' District Rule 4311, ``Flares;''
District Rule 4902, ``Residential Water Heaters;'' and CARB Measures
from the 2022 State SIP Strategy such as the Advanced Clean Fleets
Regulation, Clean Miles Standard, Spark-Ignition Marine Engine
Standards, and In-Use Locomotive Regulation, among others. SJVUAPCD
states the identification of specific detailed measures is not
practical because implementation of potential contingency measures
would not be expected to take place until well into the future, and the
most appropriate contingency measures at the time of implementation of
the Contingency Plan may be significantly different from any possible
contingency measures that could be identified now due to changes in
technological, economic, and other factors in the future.
Upon our review of the Contingency Plan, we find that the Plan's
commitment to determine if exceedances are due to exceptional events is
appropriate for the revoked 1979 ozone standard of 0.12 ppm averaged
over a 1-hour period. We note that the design values for the 2021 to
2023 time period attain the 1979 ozone NAAQS. Importantly, in proposing
to approve the Plan as adequate to assure that potential future
violations of the 1979 ozone NAAQS will be promptly corrected, we find
that the continued implementation of subsequent, more stringent ozone
NAAQS (specifically, the 1997 standard of 0.08 ppm averaged over an 8-
hour period, the 2008 standard of 0.075 ppm averaged over an 8-hour
period, and the 2015 standard of 0.070 ppm averaged over an 8-hour
period) obligate CARB and the District to regulate stationary and
mobile sources beyond what is necessary to attain and maintain the 1979
ozone NAAQS. In addition, monitoring ozone concentrations for the more
stringent NAAQS to assess progress with attainment and steps necessary
for attainment of those more stringent NAAQS will effectively signal
whether there is any need for measures for the 1979 ozone NAAQS, likely
far in advance of any violations of such NAAQS. We also find that the
Contingency Plan contains a triggering mechanism to determine when
contingency provisions are needed that is appropriate for the revoked
1-hour ozone standard. Different triggering mechanisms and timelines
may be more appropriate for other NAAQS.
The EPA finds that the Plan's list of rules to be evaluated for
amendment as contingency measures is sufficient for this Plan because
the 1979 1-hour ozone standard is revoked. Additionally, SJVUAPCD and
CARB will be adopting measures that involve further reductions for
mobile and stationary sources for the ongoing implementation of the
1997,\105\
[[Page 26482]]
2008,\106\ and 2015 \107\ 8-hour ozone NAAQS that would be potential
contingency measures for the 1-hour ozone standard. Due to these
reasons, the EPA finds the Contingency Plan sufficient; however, the
EPA disagrees with SJVUAPCD's rationale that future changes in
economic, technological, and other factors is an adequate reason to
omit specific contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ 77 FR 12652 (March 1, 2012), 81 FR 19492.
\106\ 84 FR 3302 (February 12, 2019). On October 3, 2022, the
EPA took final action to withdraw a portion of the 2019 final action
conditionally approving the contingency measure requirements for the
2008 ozone NAAQS and took action to partially approve and partially
disapprove the SIP submission. 87 FR 59688.
\107\ On February 23, 2023, CARB submitted the Extreme area
attainment plan for the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the San Joaquin Valley.
This attainment plan can be found at: <a href="https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/q55posm0/0000-2022-plan-for-the-2015-8-hour-ozone-standard.pdf">https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/q55posm0/0000-2022-plan-for-the-2015-8-hour-ozone-standard.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Contingency Plan in the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan
contains tracking and triggering mechanisms to determine when
contingency provisions are needed, a description of the process of
recommending and implementing contingency measures, specific timelines
for action, and contingency provisions. The EPA is also considering the
adequacy of the Plan in the context of maintenance of the revoked 1979
ozone NAAQS for an area that continues to be subject to three more
stringent ozone standards. Thus, we propose to conclude that the
Contingency Plan of the San Joaquin Valley Maintenance Plan is adequate
to ensure prompt correction of a violation of the 1979 1-hour ozone
standard and therefore complies with section 175A(d) of the Act and
satisfies section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the Act.
IV. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
Under CAA section 110(k)(3), and for the reasons presented in this
document, the EPA is proposing to find that the San Joaquin Valley
Maintenance Plan submitted by SJVUAPCD on July 21, 2023, as a revision
to the California SIP meets all five criteria in CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. In doing so, we are proposing
to approve the maintenance demonstration and contingency provision,
among other elements, as meeting all of the applicable requirements in
CAA section 175A.
In addition, we are proposing to terminate all anti-backsliding
obligations for the San Joaquin Valley area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
We are doing so based on our conclusion that the State has met all the
criteria for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E).
Specifically, we propose to make the following findings:
<bullet> The San Joaquin Valley area has attained the 1979 ozone
NAAQS based on the most recent three-year period (2021-2023) of
quality-assured, certified, and complete ozone data;
<bullet> The applicable portions of the California SIP are fully
approved;
<bullet> The improvement in the San Joaquin Valley area ambient air
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in precursor
ozone emissions;
<bullet> If this action is finalized, the EPA will have fully
approved the state's maintenance plan as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 175A; and
<bullet> California met all requirements applicable to the San
Joaquin Valley area with respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA.
We are soliciting comments on these proposed actions. We will
accept comments from the public for 30 days following publication of
this proposal in the Federal Register and will consider any relevant
comments before taking final action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Review
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law
as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 14192 (90 FR 9065,
February 6, 2025) because SIP actions are exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866:
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
<bullet> Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
<bullet> Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian Tribe
has demonstrated that a Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have Tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
(Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.)
Dated: June 2, 2025.
Joshua F.W. Cook,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2025-11413 Filed 6-20-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 23, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.