Rule2025-17060
Extension of the Attainment Date of the Coachella Valley Extreme Nonattainment Area Under the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
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
September 5, 2025
Effective
October 6, 2025
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a one- year extension of the "Extreme" attainment date from June 15, 2024 to June 15, 2025, for the 1997 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) to the Riverside County (Coachella Valley), California ozone nonattainment area ("Coachella Valley"). The EPA is also taking final action on the exceptional event request submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on October 11, 2024. This action is based on the EPA's concurrence on the exceptional events demonstration, which removed from the design value (DV) calculation the wildfire-influenced data recorded at the Palm Springs--Fire Station monitor (AQS Site ID #060655001) on July 14-15, 2023, and the extension request submitted by the State of California.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 170 (Friday, September 5, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 170 (Friday, September 5, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42844-42850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-17060]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0570; FRL-12518-02-R9]
Extension of the Attainment Date of the Coachella Valley Extreme
Nonattainment Area Under the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42845]]
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a one-
year extension of the ``Extreme'' attainment date from June 15, 2024 to
June 15, 2025, for the 1997 ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) to the Riverside County (Coachella Valley),
California ozone nonattainment area (``Coachella Valley''). The EPA is
also taking final action on the exceptional event request submitted by
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on October 11, 2024. This
action is based on the EPA's concurrence on the exceptional events
demonstration, which removed from the design value (DV) calculation the
wildfire-influenced data recorded at the Palm Springs--Fire Station
monitor (AQS Site ID #060655001) on July 14-15, 2023, and the extension
request submitted by the State of California.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2025.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0570. All documents in the docket are
listed on the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Tom Kelly, Geographic Strategies and Modeling Section (AIR-2-2), EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415)
972-3856; or email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0a616f666673247e6265676b797a4a6f7a6b246d657c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c0aba5acacb9eeb4a8afada1b3b080a5b0a1eea7afb6">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and the EPA's Responses
III. The EPA's Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On March 17, 2025,\1\ the EPA proposed to grant California's
request for a one-year extension of the Extreme attainment date for the
1997 ozone NAAQS, from June 15, 2024, to June 15, 2025, for the
Coachella Valley. The proposed action was based on the EPA's evaluation
of air quality monitoring data, and our determination that the State
has satisfied the two statutory criteria for a one-year extension under
CAA section 181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.907. For details regarding the
EPA's reasons for proposing to grant the one-year extension, please see
the March 17, 2025, proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 90 FR 12239, March 17, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Public Comments and the EPA's Responses
The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period.
During this period, we received comments from Amber R, Air Law for All
(ALFA), and Colin Williams. All the comments, which were received on
April 16, 2025, are summarized and addressed below. The comments from
Amber R and Colin Williams have been combined.
Comment 1: One commenter acknowledged the potential for wildfires
to affect ozone levels but questioned their use to justify another
extension. The commenter emphasized the need for bold action by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and CARB to
``accelerate efforts to reduce ozone forming emissions.'' Another
commenter was concerned that the EPA was prolonging exposure to
respiratory illnesses, such as emphysema and bronchitis. The commenter
recommended immediate aggressive response to reduce emissions, improve
air quality, more stringently enforce existing regulations, develop a
more robust system to monitor air quality, and adopt cleaner
technologies.
Response 1: As discussed in the proposal to grant the one-year
extension of the attainment date, the EPA reviewed 2023 annual mean
concentrations at each of the regulatory monitoring sites in the
Coachella Valley. We determined that such data indicate that ozone
concentrations were at or below 0.084 parts per million (ppm),\2\ which
is one of two minimum criteria necessary to grant an extension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The 1997 ozone standard was set at a level of 0.08 ppm,
which is equivalent to 0.084 ppm using standard rounding
conventions. For more information, see 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our determination relied on the exclusion of certain air quality
monitoring data based on our December 10, 2024, concurrence on the
State's exceptional events demonstration. As described in our proposal,
Congress provided the statutory authority for the exclusion of data
influenced by ``exceptional events'' meeting specific criteria by
adding section 319(b) to the CAA and granted the EPA with the authority
to propose regulations to review and manage air quality monitoring data
influenced by exceptional events. As stated in CAA section 319(b), an
exceptional event is an event that ``(1) affects air quality, (2) is
not reasonably controllable or preventable, (3) is caused by human
activity that is unlikely to recur at a particular location or was a
natural event, and (4) is determined by the Administrator through a
process established in regulations to be an exceptional event.'' For
EPA to concur on an exceptional event demonstration, the exclusion of
data showing an exceedance or violation of the NAAQS must have
regulatory significance. Here, the Highland, Rabbit, and Reche
wildfires had regulatory significance to qualify the area for an
attainment date extension, pursuant to 40 CFR 50.14(1)(i)(D).
Furthermore, under the EPA's regulations implementing CAA section
319(b) for wildfires, the EPA is required to exclude exceptional events
from wildfires ``where a State demonstrates to the Administrator's
satisfaction that emissions from wildfires caused a specific air
pollution concentration in excess of one or more national ambient air
quality standard at a particular air quality monitoring location.'' \3\
Because we found that the State's demonstration satisfied the
regulatory requirements and concurred on the demonstration, the
excluded days were not considered in our evaluation of the air quality
criteria for a one-year extension, as required by our regulations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 40 CFR 50.14(b)(4).
\4\ The State's exceptional event demonstration is included in
the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite the extension, the area will remain subject to Extreme
classification requirements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The area is not
relieved of any planning obligations under the CAA as a result of the
extension. Within six months of the June 15, 2025 attainment date, the
CAA and EPA's implementing regulations obligate the EPA to publish, in
the Federal Register, a determination of whether the area has attained
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. If the area has met the NAAQS, the EPA will
publish a determination that the area attained by its attainment date.
If the State does not demonstrate attainment with the 1997 ozone NAAQS
based on the 2024 design value and is not eligible for a second one-
year extension, the EPA will issue a finding of failure to attain and
the State will become subject to additional CAA requirements to achieve
attainment of the 1997 annual ozone
[[Page 42846]]
NAAQS in the Coachella Valley.\5\ Furthermore, the nonattainment area
remains subject to more stringent air quality standards under the 2008
and 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The EPA notes that the certified data in a design value
report for the Palm Springs monitor, the only monitor in the
Coachella Valley that did not attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS, indicates
the monitor has attained the NAAQS based on the 2024 design value.
Air Quality Systems, 2024 Design Value Report, U.S. EPA, dated May
7, 2025, has been added to the docket for the rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding air quality monitoring, the SCAQMD has established a
monitoring network consistent with the EPA's requirements at 40 CFR
part 58, which is documented in our review of the District's annual
monitoring network plans and technical systems audits. The docket for
the rulemaking contains the District's annual monitoring plans for 2023
and 2024, the EPA's approval letters, and the findings from the EPA's
technical systems audit. More information on the nonattainment area's
monitoring network can be found in section II.B.2 of the proposed rule
(90 FR 12239, March 17, 2025).
Comment 2.A: Commenters assert that the EPA's proposal did not
explain whether the EPA has previously granted any one-year extensions
for the Coachella Valley nonattainment area pursuant to CAA section
181(a)(5). In a footnote, commenters argue that a plain language
reading of CAA section 181(a)(5) indicates that the statutory
limitation of two one-year extensions applies to any extension for any
ozone standard for a nonattainment area. They claim that omitting
additional information regarding other one-year extensions from the
proposal constitutes inadequate notice. Moreover, commenters argue that
proper notice requires a statement of the legal effects of the
proposal, which includes an indication of how many one-year extensions
the nonattainment area has remaining.
Response 2.A: The EPA disagrees with commenters that CAA section
181(a)(5) can be read to limit a nonattainment area to two cumulative
one-year extensions for all ozone NAAQS. As a result, the EPA believes
it provided adequate notice in the proposed approval.
First, the best reading of the statute does not suggest such a
strong limitation of the extension authority. CAA section 181, under
subpart 2 of part D of title I, was written for a single ozone
standard, the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\6\ Likewise, the analogous
provision under subpart 1, CAA section 172(a), governs classifications
and attainment dates pertaining to a single NAAQS at a time.\7\
Subparts 3 and 4 also guide a state through the steps of classification
and attainment dates for carbon monoxide and particulate matter
nonattainment areas, respectively, for a single NAAQS at a time.\8\
With this context, it would be unreasonable to conclude that Congress
intended the prohibition on the number of one-year extensions to apply
to all NAAQS for a particular pollutant. This interpretation would lead
to the undesirable outcome that a nonattainment area would not be able
to avail itself of a one-year extension for a much more stringent ozone
NAAQS decades in the future because they were granted two one-year
extensions prior to attaining the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Later ozone NAAQS have relied on subpart 2 to guide
implementation. See 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004) (implementing the
8-hour ozone NAAQS in accordance with subpart 1 and subpart 2); see
also 62 FR 38885 (July 18, 1997) (``These [Subpart 2] provisions do
not lead to the conclusion that because Congress established them
for the O<INF>3</INF> standard in effect at the time of the 1990
amendments, Congress meant that EPA could not revise that standard
in order to appropriately protect public health.'').
\7\ CAA section 172(a)(2)(A) (``The attainment date for an area
designated nonattainment with respect to a national primary ambient
air quality standard. . .'').
\8\ Both subparts contain the same two one-year extension
limitation as in subparts 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, in the general preamble to the 1990 CAA amendments, the EPA
described situations where an ozone nonattainment area would ``receive
one or two extensions (under section 181(a)(5)) for the 1979 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.'' \9\ But at no point in the general preamble's discussion
of CAA section 181(a)(5) does the EPA caution states or nonattainment
areas that these extensions, if granted, would be the only two one-year
extensions they could ever receive for any ozone NAAQS. Nor does the
EPA acknowledge this sort of limitation in the agency's subsequent
implementation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Both the 2008 and 2015 ozone
NAAQS implementation rules include their own unique provision
referencing CAA section 181(a)(5), 40 CFR 51.1107 (2008 ozone NAAQS)
and 40 CFR 51.1307 (2015 ozone NAAQS). Neither regulatory provision
references a limitation on one-year extensions from previously granted
extensions from other NAAQS (or from earlier classifications of the
same NAAQS).\10\ Thus, the EPA's historical interpretation of CAA
section 181(a)(5) also supports the EPA's conclusion in this final
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 57 FR 13507 (April 16, 1992).
\10\ Under 40 CFR 51.1119, the provisions in 40 CFR part 51
subpart AA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS apply to the revoked 1997 ozone
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because CAA section 181(a)(5) applies to a specific NAAQS, our
proposal adequately explains the history of attainment dates for the
Coachella Valley nonattainment area for the purposes of providing
adequate notice of the legal effects for a one-year extension of the
attainment date for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. As described in our proposal,
following initial classification as ``Serious'' nonattainment for the
1997 ozone NAAQS, the EPA set the Coachella Valley nonattainment area's
attainment date as no later than June 15, 2013.\11\ Effective June 4,
2010, the EPA granted a reclassification request from Serious to
``Severe-15'' and set the attainment date as no later than June 15,
2019.\12\ The EPA again approved a reclassification request on July 10,
2019, to reclassify the nonattainment area from Severe-15 to Extreme
and set the attainment date as June 15, 2024.\13\ The EPA's proposed
approval of a one-year extension concerns the extension of the June 15,
2024 attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004).
\12\ 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010).
\13\ 84 FR 32841 (July 10, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, as demonstrated in our proposal, the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area has never requested and the EPA has never acted on a
request from California for a one-year extension of the attainment date
for the Coachella Valley nonattainment area for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS.\14\ Upon finalizing this one-year extension, the Coachella
Valley will be entitled to one additional one-year extension of the
applicable attainment date for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, provided the
nonattainment area meets the requirements of CAA section 181(a)(5).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For informational purposes, for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the
EPA designated and classified the Coachella Valley nonattainment
area as Severe-15 and set the attainment date as no later than July,
20, 2027. 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). Effective April 7, 2023, the
EPA granted the Coachella Valley's voluntary reclassification
request from Severe-15 to Extreme and set the attainment date as no
later than July 20, 2032. 88 FR 14291 (March 8, 2023). For the 2015
ozone NAAQS, the EPA designated and classified the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area as Severe and set the attainment date for no
later than August 3, 2033. 83 FR 10376 (March 9, 2018). Thus, no
one-year extensions have been granted for these NAAQS.
\15\ The EPA notes that, given the certified air quality levels
in Coachella Valley from 2022 and 2023, a 2024 4th highest value
that is below the NAAQS would put the 3-year design value below the
standard, and thus, the area would demonstrate attainment with the
1997 ozone NAAQS. In other words, if the Coachella Valley satisfies
the criteria for a second one-year extension, it will also be able
to demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS, and an extension will be
unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 2.B: Commenters argue that under CAA section 181(a)(5)(A),
a state
[[Page 42847]]
must demonstrate that it has complied with all requirements and
commitments pertaining to the applicable implementation plan, which
includes any Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) governing the
nonattainment area in question. Commenters then argue that because
South Coast is a delegated authority to implement EPA's federal
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) regulations, which
constitute a FIP, the District is required to certify that it is
complying with the EPA's PSD regulations.
The commenters note that the nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR)
permit program applies to Coachella Valley, but they argue that sources
outside the area will impact ozone levels within the nonattainment
area, and therefore, PSD regulations ``pertain to the area'' within the
meaning of CAA section 181(a)(5).
Response 2.B: The EPA disagrees with commenters that a
determination of California's compliance with Federal PSD regulations
is necessary for granting a one-year extension under CAA section
181(a)(5) for the Coachella Valley nonattainment area for the 1997
ozone NAAQS, given the area's status under that NAAQS as Extreme and
the NNSR permitting requirements that are therefore applicable to that
area.
Under the CAA, a PSD permitting program applies to areas designated
as attainment/unclassifiable.\16\ As commenters acknowledge, the
nonattainment area's NNSR permit program applies for sources of ozone
precursors within the Coachella Valley because the area is subject to
nonattainment area requirements for all ozone NAAQS, including the 1997
ozone NAAQS. Indeed, there are no PSD permits within the Coachella
Valley nonattainment area for sources of ozone precursors.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 89 FR 84286 (October 22, 2024) (The PSD ``program sets
forth procedures for the preconstruction review and permitting of
new and modified stationary sources of air pollution located in
areas meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
(``attainment'' areas) and areas for which there is insufficient
information to classify an area as either attainment or
nonattainment (``unclassifiable'' areas).''); 40 CFR 52.21(a)(1)
(``The provisions of this section are applicable to any State
implementation plan which has been disapproved with respect to
prevention of significant deterioration of air quality in any
portion of any State where the existing air quality is better than
the national ambient air quality standards.'').
\17\ Email dated May 5, 2025, from Sang-Mi Lee (SCAQMD) to
Thomas Kelly (EPA), Subject: ``PSD Permits in Coachella Valley?''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The commenters appear to argue that because there may be PSD
permitted sources outside of the Coachella Valley nonattainment area
that impact ozone levels within the nonattainment area, PSD regulations
would nonetheless apply as requirements ``pertaining to the area''
within the meaning of CAA section181(a)(5). The EPA does not believe
there is any legal basis to this interpretation of the CAA, and the
commenters do not cite to any authority to support their theory. The
CAA section 181(a)(5)(A) requires that ``the State has complied with
all requirements and commitments pertaining to the area in the
applicable implementation plan.'' The better reading of that provision
is that it is limited to whether a state is complying with a
requirement or commitment that actually applies to the area, not a
requirement or commitment that could theoretically have some
unspecified impact on the area. With respect to permitting
requirements, the Coachella Valley SIP includes requirements for the
NNSR permitting program that is applicable for new and modified sources
within Coachella Valley.\18\ Further, the commenter asserts with no
support that sources outside the area ``will impact'' ozone levels
within the area and thus the PSD requirements qualify as requirements
``pertaining to'' the area. The commenter does not provide any factual
basis for how the construction or modification of sources under the PSD
program, outside of the Coachella Valley area, will have any such
impact on the air quality in the area. There is no legal or factual
basis for the commenter's interpretation of CAA section 181(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See ``Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for the 1997 Ozone
Standard,'' p. 6-31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 2.C: Commenters argue that the EPA improperly ignored its
discretion in granting the one-year extension. They argue that the
EPA's proposal approached the statutory language as though it required
the EPA to grant the extension, instead of the correct reading of the
statutory language, which permits but does not require the EPA to grant
the extension. They further argue that as a result, the EPA did not
evaluate additional context regarding the nonattainment area, including
the area's history of nonattainment, and its decision to grant the
extension is therefore arbitrary and capricious.
Response 2.C: The EPA disagrees with commenters that it is
improperly exercising its discretion in approving the one-year
extension. The EPA does not dispute that CAA section 181(a)(5) grants
the EPA the discretion to disapprove a state application for a one-year
extension of the applicable attainment date, even if the area were to
satisfy the two statutory requirements under CAA 181(a)(5). But the EPA
disagrees with commenters' characterization of that discretion, which
turns the EPA's authority from CAA section 181(a)(5) inside-out, as
well as the notion that the EPA, in responding to commenters, is now
advancing a post-hoc explanation of its proposal.
First, the CAA and the EPA's associated regulations regarding one-
year extensions for ozone nonattainment areas provide a clear framework
for states and the EPA to evaluate whether a state qualifies for a one-
year extension. To grant an extension, the EPA must determine that (1)
the State has complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining
to the area in the applicable implementation plan; and (2) no more than
one exceedance of the NAAQS level for ozone has occurred in the area in
the year preceding the Extension Year. These are the elements Congress
determined would indicate that an area is nearing attainment and that
some flexibility may provide adequate time for the area to attain
without requiring a new planning cycle. If the EPA determines that both
criteria are satisfied, and the nonattainment area has not already been
granted the two allowable one-year extensions for that NAAQS, the EPA
may approve the one-year extension--the statute does not identify any
other criteria the EPA must evaluate to do so.
Nonetheless, there are instances where the EPA may look beyond
those two criteria and may even ultimately disapprove an application
for a one-year extension on grounds not explicitly identified under the
two statutory criteria. For example, the commenters point to guidance
concerning procedures for processing bump-ups and extension requests
for ``Marginal'' ozone nonattainment areas, including additional
considerations for granting extensions to Marginal ozone nonattainment
areas under CAA section 181(a)(5).\19\ But this guidance is
illustrative of the reasons those considerations for Marginal ozone
nonattainment areas are not applicable to the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, and thus, EPA's proposal
adequately
[[Page 42848]]
explained its rationale for approving the extension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Commenters also cite to a recent example in Uinta Basin
regarding a one-year extension of a Marginal ozone nonattainment
area. The EPA is currently reconsidering our final action on that
extension. But the EPA's rationale in this final action regarding
guidance for Marginal ozone nonattainment areas would apply equally
to distinguishing Coachella Valley with the unique circumstances in
the Uinta Basin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's guidance cited by commenters encourages that, given the
``very tight timeframes to implement the new SIP requirements [if a
Marginal area ultimately fails to attain], in addition to achieving the
reductions to meet the new attainment date,'' Marginal nonattainment
areas applying for a one-year extension should start preparing for the
potential that the area may be required to implement the next highest
classification nonattainment area requirements.\20\ To do so, the EPA
suggested the State submit with their extension application: (1)
documentation that the State has planned or begun the necessary
monitoring activities to develop information for the modeling analysis
that will be required for the new classification; (2) documentation
that the State has examined its legislative authority and regulatory
procedures to determine whether or not it can quickly adopt and
implement the emissions controls needed to meet the new attainment
date; and/or (3) a plan to meet the SIP submittals and attainment date
required by the higher classification.\21\ With this guidance, the EPA
leaves open, but does not commit the agency to, the possibility that
the agency may find a one-year extension for a Marginal nonattainment
area inappropriate if the area does not appear prepared for a bump-up
or is otherwise not nearing attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director,
``Procedures for Processing Bump Ups and Extension Requests for
Marginal Ozone Nonattainment Areas'' (February 3, 1994).
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notably, Marginal ozone nonattainment areas are not required to
prepare reasonable further progress demonstrations, attainment
demonstrations, or implement ``reasonable available control measures''
as a part of their SIP planning process. The lack of these planning
obligations--and associated modeling--for Marginal ozone nonattainment
areas makes it all the more important that the State has the planning
capacity in place if they do not have an attaining design value by the
Marginal attainment date, even if they qualify for the criteria for a
one-year extension. Because higher ozone nonattainment classifications,
like Extreme nonattainment, are required to model attainment and
implement stricter control measures, they have already undergone
significant nonattainment planning and much of the information lacking
from a Marginal nonattainment area's one-year extension request is
already available for the EPA to fully evaluate the nonattainment
area's control measure strategy for higher classifications or the
likelihood that a one-year extension will lead to attainment by the
extended attainment date.
Effective July 12, 2024, the EPA approved portions of the Coachella
Valley's Extreme nonattainment SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
specifically the area's RACM demonstration and attainment demonstration
as well as other CAA requirements.\22\ Our final action approved a
determination that ``the District's control strategy [is] acceptable
for purposes of attaining the 1997 ozone standards in the Coachella
Valley'' and that the attainment demonstration ``shows the area
attaining the 1997 ozone standards by the outermost statutory
attainment date of June 15, 2024.'' \23\ With this context, the EPA's
proposed approval of a one-year extension for the Coachella Valley
nonattainment area evaluated the state's progress towards implementing
the control measures from the applicable SIP as well as the relevant
air quality data for the nonattainment area. Based on our evaluation,
we found that the area was complying with its SIP's implementation
schedule and the area's air quality is nearing attainment of the NAAQS,
with the area's air quality below the standard in 2023.\24\ We
therefore determined that the application was adequate to grant the
one-year extension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 89 FR 26817 (April 16, 2024).
\23\ 89 FR 26817 (June 15, 2024); 89 FR 49815 (June 12, 2024).
\24\ The 2023 design value for Coachella Valley is 0.085 ppm,
based on data from 2021 to 2023, which is down from 0.108 ppm in
2003. See Coachella Valley Extreme Area Plan for the 1997 Ozone
Standard, p. 5-2. The EPA also notes that the certified data in a
preliminary design value report for the Palm Springs monitor, the
only monitor in the Coachella Valley that did not attain the 1997
ozone NAAQS, indicates the monitor has attained the NAAQS based on
the 2024 design value. Air Quality Systems, Preliminary Design Value
Report, U.S. EPA, dated May 7, 2025, has been added to the docket
for the rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenters do not point to any specific characteristics of the
Coachella Valley, the nonattainment area's control strategy, or its
recent air quality that would weigh in favor of the EPA exercising its
discretion to reject a nonattainment area's application that satisfies
the statutory criteria. Nor do they identify any reason why rejecting
the extension request and finding the area failed to attain would
expedite attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The only specific detail
commenters identify regarding the nonattainment area is that it has not
yet attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The EPA acknowledges that the
Coachella Valley nonattainment area has historically struggled to
attain this NAAQS and did not have an attaining design value by the
applicable attainment date. But absent any other supporting
justifications for rejecting California's application, these facts
alone are not factors Congress instructed us to consider.\25\ The very
purpose of a one-year extension is to provide flexibility for areas
that are not yet in attainment. Thus, based on our evaluation of air
quality monitoring data and the extension request submitted by the
California, we are finalizing the one-year extension as proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n of the U.S., Inc. v. State
Farm Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 48 (1983).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. The EPA's Action
In response to the request from the State of California on October
11, 2024, the EPA is granting a one-year extension to the applicable
attainment date for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for Coachella Valley.
Additionally, the EPA is taking final action on the exceptional events
request submitted by CARB on October 11, 2024, and concurred with by
EPA on December 10, 2024. This final action extends the applicable
attainment date from June 15, 2024, to June 15, 2025, for this
nonattainment area. This decision is based on the State's compliance
with the requirements in the applicable SIP for the area and on the
2023 ozone monitoring data from sites in the Coachella Valley.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action provides a one-year extension of the Coachella Valley
attainment date for the 1997 ozone NAAQS from June 15, 2024, to June
15, 2025, and imposes no additional requirements. For that reason, this
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.);
[[Page 42849]]
<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 approves 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).
This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 4, 2025. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen oxides,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 25, 2025.
Joshua F.W. Cook,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends part 81,
chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations California
0
2. Section 81.305 is amended in the table for ``California 1997 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS [Primary and Secondary]'' by:
0
a. Revising the entry for ``Riverside Co. (Coachella Valley), CA'';
0
b. Adding footnote ``h.''; and
0
c. Revising footnote ``2''
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 81.305 California.
* * * * *
California--1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
[Primary and Secondary]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation \a\ Category/classification
Designated area --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Riverside Co. (Coachella Valley), CA
Riverside County (part) \g\...................... ......... Nonattainment.................... 6/12/19 Subpart 2/Extreme. \h\
That portion of Riverside County which lies ......... ................................. ......... ........................................
to the east of a line described as follows:
Beginning at the Riverside-San Diego County
boundary and running north along the range
line common to Range 4 East and Range 3
East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian; then
east along the Township line common to
Township 8 South and Township 7 South; then
north along the range line common to Range 5
East and Range 4 East; then west along the
Township line common to Township 6 South and
Township 7 South to the southwest corner of
Section 34, Township 6 South, Range 4 East;
then north along the west boundaries of
Sections 34, 27, 22, 15, 10, and 3, Township
6 South, Range 4 East; then west along the
Township line common to Township 5 South and
Township 6 South; then north along the range
line common to Range 4 East and Range 3
East; then west along the south boundaries
of Sections 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18,
Township 5 South, Range 3 East; then north
along the range line common to Range 2 East
and Range 3 East; to the Riverside-San
Bernardino County line. And that portion of
Riverside County which lies to the west of a
line described as follows:
[[Page 42850]]
That segment of the southwestern boundary ......... ................................. ......... ........................................
line of Hydrologic Unit Number 18100100
within Riverside County, further described
as follows: Beginning at the Riverside-
Imperial County boundary and running north
along the range line common to Range 17 East
and Range 16 East, San Bernardino Base and
Meridian; then northwest along the ridge
line of the Chuckwalla Mountains, through
Township 8 South, Range 16 East and Township
7 South, Range 16 East, until the Black
Butte Mountain, elevation 4504'; then west
and northwest along the ridge line to the
southwest corner of Township 5 South, Range
14 East; then north along the range line
common to Range 14 East and Range 13 East;
then west and northwest along the ridge line
to Monument Mountain, elevation 4834'; then
southwest and then northwest along the ridge
line of the Little San Bernardino Mountains
to Quail Mountain, elev. 5814'; then
northwest along the ridge line to the
Riverside-San Bernardino County line.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
* * * * * * *
\g\ Excludes Indian country of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians, the Cabazon Band of Mission
Indians, the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, and the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians in
Riverside County.
\h\ Attainment date is extended to June 15, 2025.
\1\ This date is 30 days after June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ This date is June 4, 2010, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-17060 Filed 9-4-25; 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 September 5, 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.