ALASKA CALIFORNIA FLORIDA MID-PACIFIC NORTHEAST NORTHERN ROCKIES

 NORTHWEST ROCKY MOUNTAIN WASHINGTON, D.C. INTERNATIONAL

C A L I F O R N I A O F F I C E 5 0 C A L I F O R N I A S T R E E T , S U I T E 5 0 0 S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 1 1

T : 4 1 5 . 2 1 7 . 2 0 0 0 F : 4 1 5 . 2 1 7 . 2 0 4 0 C A O F F I C E @ E A R T H J U S T I C E . O R G W W W . E A R T H J U S T I C E . O R G

January 22, 2015

Via Email

Wienke Tax

Air Planning Office, AIR-2

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Region IX

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, California 94105-3901

tax.wienke@epa.gov 

RE: Clean Data Determination for 1997 PM2.5 Standards; California—South Coast; 

Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements,” EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708.

Dear Ms. Tax, 

On behalf of Communities for a Better Environment, Sierra Club, Center for Biological 

Diversity, WildEarth Guardians, Medical Advocates for Healthy Air, and Physicians for Social 

Responsibility – Los Angeles (collectively, “Health Advocates”), we submit the following 

comments on EPA’s Proposed Rule, “Clean Data Determination for 1997 PM2.5 Standards; 

California—South Coast; Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements,” EPA-R09-OAR-2014-

0708, 79 Fed. Reg. 72999 (Dec. 9, 2014) (“Clean Data Determination”). Health Advocates 

disagrees with the determination for the following reasons.

I. 2014 Monitoring Data Demonstrates that the South Coast is Out of Attainment with 

the 1997 PM2.5 Standards, and Must Continue to Adopt Measures to Come Into 

Attainment.

EPA indicates that no 2014 data was included in the proposed Clean Data Determination, 

but that “EPA will review the preliminary 2014 data prior to taking final action to ensure that 

they are consistent with the determination of attainment.” 79 Fed. Reg. at 73003. Because 2014 

data shows that the South Coast is not in attainment, EPA cannot make the proposed Clean Data 

Determination. 

The 2014 data uploaded onto the California Air Resources Board’s monitoring website 

indicates that several monitoring sites exceeded the 1997 PM2.5 Standards, and therefore the 

South Coast was not in attainment of these standards in 2014.1These sites include Central Los 

 

1 EPA’s AirData database does not yet have complete data for 2014. 
2

Angeles, Metropolitan Riverside County-Rubidoux, Riverside-Magnolia, Mira Loma, Burbank, 

and San Bernardino Upland.

Site 2014 Annual Mean (μg/m3)

Central Los Angeles – Los 

Angeles (Main St.)2

18.8

Metropolitan Riverside County –

Rubidoux3

15.6

Riverside-Magnolia416.3

Mira Loma – Mira Loma 

(Van Buren)5

19.2

Burbank W Palm Ave 

(Jan-March)6

19.8

San Bernardino Upland717.9

 

2 Data pulled from CARB’s air monitoring database for monitoring site 2899, monitors “l” and “-“, 

available at

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2899&monitor=I&ptype=aqd, and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2899&monitor=-&ptype=aqd.

3 Data pulled from CARB’s air monitoring database for monitoring site 2596, monitors “-“ and “F”, 

available at

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/pickdownload.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SIT

E1YR&statistic=DAVG&site=2596&monitor=-&ptype=aqd, and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2596&monitor=F&ptype=aqd. 

4 Data pulled from CARB’s air monitoring database for monitoring site 233, monitors “C” and “-“, 

available at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2333&monitor=-&ptype=aqd, and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2333&monitor=C&ptype=aqd. 

5 Data pulled from CARB’s air monitoring database for monitoring site 3702, monitors “C” and “-“, 

available at

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=3702&monitor=-&ptype=aqd, and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=3702&monitor=C&ptype=aqd.

6 Data pulled from CARB’s air monitoring database for site 2492, monitors “C” and “-“, available at

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2492&monitor=C&ptype=aqd, and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2492&monitor=-&ptype=aqd. 

7 Data pulled from CARB’s monitoring database for site 2485, monitors “A” and “-“, available at

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2485&monitor=A&ptype=aqd, and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=PM25HR&units=001&year=2014&report=SITE1YR

&statistic=DAVG&site=2485&monitor=-&ptype=aqd. 
3

EPA notes that it proposes to suspend the obligations to submit State Implementation

Plan revisions concerning Reasonable Further Progress (RFP), attainment demonstration, 

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM), contingency measures, and other 

requirements related to nonattainment, only “for so long as the area continues to attain the 

standard.” 79 Fed. Reg. at 73004. Because, as discussed above, the South Coast was out of 

attainment with the 1997 standard in 2014, suspending these requirements is inappropriate. C.f.

Revocation of Determination of Attainment of Ozone Standard by the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley 

Ozone Nonattainment Area and Reinstatement of Applicability of Certain Reasonable Further 

Progress and Attainment Demonstration Requirements, 61 Fed. Reg. 28061 (Jun. 4, 1996) 

(revoking attainment demonstration after finding exceedances over the preceding year). 

EPA should continue to require the South Coast to adopt measures to ensure that the 

region comes into attainment with the 1997 PM2.5 Standards. Indeed, because the region has been 

out of attainment for more than six years, EPA must go a step further, and reclassify the South 

Coast as a “serious” nonattainment area and require the South Coast to prepare a serious area 

plan. 42 U.S.C. § 7513(b)(2).

II. EPA Cannot Make a Clean Data Determination Because the Data Excludes NearRoadway Monitoring.

Section 107(a) of the Clean Air Act requires states to “assure[] air quality within the 

entire geographic area.” 42 U.S.C. § 7407(a). Congress provided no exemption for areas near 

highways, where the evidence shows much higher levels of direct PM2.5 within 300 meters of 

the highway.8Thus, the inclusion of this data is necessary to protect the over 1-million people 

who live, work, and go to school--thus, breathe the ambient air--within 300 meters of a highway 

in the South Coast Air Basin.9Indeed, including near-roadway data is critical where, as shown 

above, several existing sites exceeded the 1997 PM2.5 standard in 2014. Monitors next to 

highways in the same vicinity as those that exceed the standard are likely to show even higher 

concentrations of PM2.5 than the existing monitors. Therefore, EPA’s clean data determination 

 

8

See e.g., South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (June 

2007), at 11-2, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-qualitymanagement-plans/2007-air-quality-management-plan/2007-aqmp-final-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2; See also 

U.S. EPA, Final Technical Support Document and Response to Comments, Final Rulemaking Action on 

the South Coast 2007 AQMP for PM2.5 and the South Coast Portions of the Revised 2007 State Strategy 

(September 30, 2011) [Attached as Exhibit A], at 55-56; Communities for a Better Environment et al., 

Comments on the 2011 Air Monitoring Network Plan for the South Coast Air

Quality Management District (June 30, 2011) [hereinafter “2011 Monitoring Plan Comments”] [Attached

as Exhibit B]. See also Gould, Greg, Draft Report—Near Roadway Emissions: Measurement, Exposure, 

and Monitoring (June 21, 2011) [hereinafter “Gould report”] [Attached as Exhibit C]; E.H. Pechan & 

Associates, Inc., Estimating Contributions of On-Road Emissions to Near Highway PM2.5 

Concentrations (April 16, 2009) [hereinafter “Pechan Report”] [Attached as Exhibit D].

9

See 2011 Monitoring Plan Comments (Exhibit B) at 10, 16; Gould Report (Exhibit C) at 18, 26-27; 

Pechan Report (Exhibit D) at 2.
4

most likely excludes thousands of people who live, work, and go to school near highways and 

freeways from the protections of the Clean Air Act.10

In addition, as a result of the clear evidence of higher levels of PM2.5 near highways and 

freeways, several of the Health Advocates groups have a case pending in the Ninth Circuit in 

which the groups argue that the PM2.5 NAAQS determinations must include near-roadway 

monitoring data.

11 The case has been argued and is under submission. It is premature for EPA to 

make a “clean data” determination before the court has ruled on this issue.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Forsyth 

Earthjustice 

50 California Street, Ste. 500

San Francisco, CA 94111 

415-217-2000

eforsyth@earthjustice.org

Maya Golden-Krasner

Staff Attorney

Communities for a Better Environment

6325 Pacific Blvd., Suite 300

Huntington Park, CA 90255

323-826-9771 x. 121

maya@cbecal.org

 

10 In fact, in January 2013, EPA recognized that demonstrating attainment does require near-roadway 

monitoring in areas with over one million people, and the D.C. Circuit upheld this determination. 78 Fed. 

Reg. 3086, 3238 (Jan. 15, 2013); Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs. v. EPA, 750 F.3d 921 (DC Cir. 2014). EPA found 

that “[a] significant fraction of the population lives in proximity to major roads. These exposures occur in 

locations that represent ambient air for which the agency has a responsibility to ensure the public is 

protected with an adequate margin of safety. Ignoring monitoring results from such areas (or not 

monitoring at all) would abdicate this responsibility. Put another way, monitoring in such areas does not 

make the standard more stringent, but rather affords requisite protection to the populations, among them 

at-risk populations, exposed to fine particulate in these areas.” 78 Fed. Reg. at 3240; Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs., 

750 F.3d at 926.

11 Physicians for Social Responsibility-LA et al. v. U.S. EPA, Case No. 12-70079. The groups include 

Physicians for Social Responsibility-LA and Communities for a Better Environment.