Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 signed the following proposed rule on November 20, 

2014, and EPA is submitting it for publication in the Federal Register (FR). While we have taken steps to ensure the 

accuracy of this Internet version of the proposed rule, it is not the official version of the proposed rule for purposes 

of public comment. Please refer to the official version in a forthcoming FR publication, which will appear on the 

Government Printing Office's FDsys website (http://fdsys.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action) and on 

Regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov) in Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708. 

Billing Code: 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708; FRL– ] 

Clean Data Determination for 1997 PM2.5 Standards; California - 

South Coast; Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 

to determine that the South Coast air quality planning area in 

California has attained the 1997 annual and 24-hour fine 

particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This 

proposed determination is based upon complete (or otherwise 

validated), quality-assured, and certified ambient air 

monitoring data showing that the area has monitored attainment 

of the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards based on the 2011–

2013 monitoring period. The EPA is further proposing that, if 

the EPA finalizes this determination of attainment, the 

requirements for the area to submit certain State implementation 

plan revisions shall be suspended for so long as the area 

continues to attain the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

2

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before [INSERT 

DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. 

EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0708 by one of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal, at www.regulations.gov, please 

follow the on-line instructions; 

2. E-mail to tax.wienke@epa.gov; or 

3. Mail or delivery to Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office, AIR-2, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information you consider to be CBI or 

otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

www.regulations.gov is an “anonymous access” system, and the EPA 

will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

3

provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the public comment. If you 

submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact information in the body of 

your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA 

cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and 

cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to 

consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. 

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. 

While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some 

information may be publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be 

publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect 

the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during 

normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

4

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wienke Tax, (415) 947-4192, or 

by email at tax.wienke@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, “we”, “us” 

or “our” refer to the EPA. We are providing the following 

outline to aid in locating information in this proposal. 

Table of Contents 

I. What determination is the EPA proposing to make? 

II. What is the background for this action? 

A. PM2.5 NAAQS 

B. South Coast PM2.5 Designations, Classifications, and SIP 

Revisions 

C. How does the EPA make attainment determinations? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the relevant air quality data? 

A. Monitoring Network and Data Considerations 

B. Monitoring Method Considerations 

C. Evaluation of Current Attainment 

IV. What is the effect of a determination of attainment for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 of the Clean Air Act? 

A. Background for the Clean Data Policy 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

5

B. Application of the Clean Data Policy to the AttainmentRelated Provisions of Subpart 4 

V. EPA’s Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What determination is the EPA proposing to make? 

The EPA is proposing to determine that the Los Angeles–

South Coast Air Basin (“South Coast”) nonattainment area has 

clean data for the 1997 annual and 24-hour National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS or “standards”) for fine particles 

(generally referring to particles less than or equal to 2.5 

micrometers in diameter, PM2.5).1 This determination is based upon 

complete (or otherwise validated), quality-assured, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data showing the area has 

monitored attainment of the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

based on 2011-2013 monitoring data. 

Based on this proposed clean data determination, we are 

also proposing to suspend the obligations on the State of 

California to submit certain state implementation plan (SIP) 

 

1 The South Coast includes Orange County, the southwestern two-thirds of Los 

Angeles County, southwestern San Bernardino County, and western Riverside 

County (see 40 CFR 81.305.) 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

6

revisions related to attainment of this standard for the area 

for as long as the area continues to attain the standard. 

II. What is the background for this action? 

A. PM2.5 NAAQS 

Under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or “Act”), the 

EPA has established NAAQS for certain pervasive air pollutants 

(referred to as “criteria pollutants”) and conducts periodic 

reviews of the NAAQS to determine whether they should be revised 

or whether new NAAQS should be established. 

On July 1, 1987 (52 FR 24634), the EPA revised the 

particulate matter NAAQS, replacing the indicator of total 

suspended particulate matter (TSP) (i.e., particles roughly 30 

micrometers or less), with a new indicator that includes only 

those particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10). 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), the EPA revised the NAAQS 

for particulate matter by establishing new NAAQS for particles 

with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 

micrometers (PM2.5). The EPA established primary and secondary 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

7

annual and 24-hour standards for PM2.5.2 The annual primary and 

secondary standards were set at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter 

(μg/m3), based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations, and the 24-hour primary and secondary standards 

were set at 65 μg/m3, based on the 3-year average of the 98th 

percentile of 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring 

site within an area. See 40 CFR 50.7. Collectively, we refer 

herein to the 1997 24-hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS as the “1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS” or “1997 PM2.5 standards.” 

On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the EPA revised the 

level of the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 μg/m3, and on January 15, 

2013 (78 FR 3086), the EPA revised the annual PM2.5 NAAQS to a 

level of 12 μg/m3. Even though the EPA has lowered the 24-hour 

and annual PM2.5 standards, the original 1997 PM2.5 standards 

remain in effect and represent the standards for which today’s 

proposed attainment determination is made.

B. South Coast PM2.5 Designations, Classifications, and SIP 

 

2 For a given air pollutant, “primary” NAAQS are those determined by EPA as 

requisite to protect the public health, allowing an adequate margin of 

safety, and “secondary” standards are those determined by the EPA as 

requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse 

effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in the ambient 

air. See CAA section 109(b). 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

8

Revisions 

Effective April 5, 2005, the EPA established the initial 

air quality designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 944 

(January 5, 2005). The South Coast was designated nonattainment 

for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS at this time, with an attainment 

deadline of April 5, 2010.3

Within three years of the effective date of designations, 

states with areas designated as nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS were required to submit SIP revisions that, among other 

elements, provide for implementation of reasonably available 

control measures (RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP), 

attainment of the standard as expeditiously as practicable but 

no later than five years from the nonattainment designation (in 

this instance, no later than April 5, 2010) unless the state 

justified up to a five-year attainment date extension, as well 

as contingency measures. See CAA section 172(a)(2), 172(c)(1), 

172(c)(2), and 172(c)(9). 

 

3 Originally, the EPA designated nonattainment areas under subpart 1 of part 

D (of title I) of the CAA, not under subpart 4, but as discussed later in 

this document, the EPA has now established classifications for areas 

designated as nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 under subpart 4. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

9

On November 28, 2007, the California Air Resources Board 

(CARB or State) submitted the “Final 2007 Air Quality Management 

Plan, June 2007” (“South Coast 2007 AQMP”), which was prepared 

by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or 

District). The South Coast 2007 AQMP included a PM2.5 attainment 

demonstration for the South Coast for the 1997 NAAQS. In order 

to meet relevant CAA requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS, the South 

Coast 2007 AQMP includes base and projected year PM2.5 emissions 

inventories for the South Coast nonattainment area; air quality 

monitoring data; short-, medium- and long-term District control 

measures; a summary of CARB’s control measures; transportation 

control measures (TCMs); a demonstration of reasonable further 

progress (RFP); a modeled attainment demonstration; a 

demonstration of reasonably available control measures/ 

reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT); RFP and 

attainment contingency measures for the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area; and a request to extend the attainment date 

for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS to April 5, 2015. 

To demonstrate attainment, the South Coast 2007 AQMP relied 

in part on measures in CARB’s State Strategy for California’s 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

10

2007 State Implementation Plan (“2007 State Strategy”). The 2007 

State Strategy discussed CARB’s overall approach to addressing, 

in conjunction with local plans, attainment of both the 1997 

PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS not only in the South Coast 

nonattainment area, but also in California’s other nonattainment 

areas, such as the San Joaquin Valley and the Sacramento area. 

It also included CARB’s commitments to propose 15 defined State 

measures and to obtain specific amounts of aggregate emissions 

reductions of direct PM2.5, sulfur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides 

(NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the South Coast 

from sources under the State’s jurisdiction, such as on- and 

off-road motor vehicles, engines, and fuels. 

On November 9, 2011, we approved the portions of the South 

Coast 2007 AQMP and 2007 State Strategy, as revised in 2009 and 

2011, that addressed attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the 

South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area, except for the attainment 

contingency measures, which we disapproved. (see 76 FR 69928, 

November 9, 2011). On October 29, 2013, we approved SIP 

revisions addressing the attainment contingency measure 

requirements for the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area (see 78 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

11

FR 64402, October 29, 2013). 

C. How does the EPA make attainment determinations? 

A determination of whether an area’s air quality currently 

meets the PM2.5 NAAQS is generally based upon the most recent 

three years of complete, quality-assured data gathered at 

established State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in a 

nonattainment area and entered into the AQS database. Data from 

ambient air monitors operated by state/local agencies in 

compliance with the EPA monitoring requirements must be 

submitted to EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS).4 Monitoring agencies 

annually certify that these data are accurate to the best of 

their knowledge. Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily on data 

in AQS when determining the attainment status of areas. See 40 

CFR 50.7; 40 CFR part 50, appendix L; 40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR 

part 58, and 40 CFR part 58, appendices A, C, D, and E. All data 

are reviewed to determine the area’s air quality status in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix N. 

Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 50, section 50.7 and 

in accordance with appendix N, the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard is 

 

4 The Air Quality System (AQS) is EPA's repository of ambient air quality 

data.
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

12

met when the design value is less than or equal to 15.0 μg/m3

(based on the rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N) 

at each eligible monitoring site within the area.5 Data 

completeness requirements for a given year are met when at least 

75 percent of the scheduled sampling days for each quarter have 

valid data.

Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 50, section 50.7 and 

in accordance with appendix N, the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard is 

met when the design value is less than or equal to 65 μg/m3

(based on the rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N) 

at each eligible monitoring site within the area.6 Data 

completeness requirements for a given year are met when at least 

75 percent of the scheduled sampling days for each quarter have 

valid data. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the relevant air quality data? 

A. Monitoring Network and Data Considerations 

 

5 The annual PM2.5 standard design value is the 3-year average of annual mean 

concentration, and the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is met when the annual standard 

design value at each eligible monitoring site is less than or equal to 15.0 

μg/m3. 

6 The 24-hour PM2.5 standard design value is the 3-year average of annual 98th 

percentile 24-hour average values recorded at each eligible monitoring site, 

and the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is met when the 24-hour standard design value 

at each monitoring site is less than or equal to 65 μg/m3. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

13

The SCAQMD is the governmental agency with the authority 

and responsibility under state law for collecting ambient air 

quality data within the South Coast nonattainment area. 

Annually, SCAQMD submits monitoring network plans to EPA. These 

plans discuss the status of the air monitoring network, as 

required under 40 CFR part 58. The EPA reviews these annual 

network plans for compliance with the applicable reporting 

requirements in 40 CFR 58.10. With respect to PM2.5, we have 

found that SCAQMD’s annual network plans meet the applicable 

requirements under 40 CFR part 58.7 Furthermore, we concluded in 

our Technical System Audit Report concerning SCAQMD’s ambient 

air quality monitoring program that SCAQMD’s ambient air 

monitoring network currently meets or exceeds the requirements 

for the minimum number of monitoring sites designated as SLAMS 

for PM2.5 in the South Coast nonattainment area.8 Also, SCAQMD 

annually certifies that the data it submits to AQS are qualityassured.9 

 

7 See, e.g., letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis 

Office, EPA Region IX, to Dr. Matt Miyasato, Deputy Executive Officer, 

SCAQMD, dated September 30, 2014.

8 EPA Region IX, Technical System Audit Report, South Coast Air Quality 

Management District, September 24-25, 2013, dated September 2014. 

9 See, e.g., letter from Dr. Matt Miyasato, Deputy Executive Officer, SCAQMD, 

to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administration, EPA Region IX, dated May 1, 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

14

The SCAQMD operated 18 PM2.5 SLAMS during the 2011-2013 

period within the South Coast PM2.5 nonattainment area. Nine of 

the sites are located in the Los Angeles County portion of the 

South Coast (Azusa, Burbank, Los Angeles (Main Street), Reseda, 

Compton, Pico Rivera, Pasadena, Long Beach (North), and South 

Long Beach); four are located in the San Bernardino County 

portion of the South Coast (Ontario Fire Station, Fontana, Big 

Bear, and San Bernardino); three are located in the Riverside 

portion of the South Coast (Riverside (Magnolia), Rubidoux, and 

Mira Loma (Van Buren)); and two are located in Orange County 

(Anaheim and Mission Viejo).10 

For the purposes of this proposed action, we have reviewed 

the data for the most recent three-year period (2011-2013) for 

completeness, and we determined that the data collected by the 

SCAQMD meets the completeness criterion for all 12 quarters at 

most PM2.5 monitoring sites. Of the 18 PM2.5 monitoring sites, five 

monitoring sites did not meet the 75% completeness requirements 

in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.1 and 4.2(b) for the 

 

2014.

10 Please see figure 8 in appendix A of SCAQMD’s Annual Air Quality Monitoring 

Network Plan (July 2014) for a map showing PM2.5 ambient monitoring locations. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

15

annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards, respectively. Specifically, 

the Pasadena, Riverside (Magnolia), Ontario Fire Station, Big 

Bear, and San Bernardino monitoring sites had less that 75% data 

completeness in one or more quarters during the 2011-2013 

period. 

For the Riverside (Magnolia), Ontario Fire Station, Big 

Bear, and San Bernardino monitoring sites, the EPA has performed 

the maximum quarterly value data substitution test procedure in 

40 CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.1(c)(ii) and 4.2(c)(ii) 

for the annual and 24-hour standards, respectively, and 

determined that these monitoring sites pass the data 

substitution diagnostic test for both the annual and 24-hour 

standards.11 The EPA concludes that the design values for these 

monitoring sites are valid for NAAQS comparison purposes. 

The remaining monitoring site, Pasadena, is not eligible 

for the maximum quarterly value data substitution test due to 

having less than 50% completeness during the first quarter of 

 

11 Please see files entitled “Maximum Quarterly Value Data Substitution Test 

for the 24-hour 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS” and “Maximum Quarterly Value Data 

Substitution Test for the Annual 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS” for documentation 

regarding the maximum quarterly value data substitution test in the docket 

for today’s proposed action. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

16

2011, the fourth quarter of 2012, and the first and second 

quarters of 2013. The provisions in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, 

section 4.1(c)(ii) and 4.2(c)(ii) state that, if any quarter has 

less than 50% data capture, then the substitution test cannot be 

used. While the Pasadena monitoring site is not eligible for the 

substitution test, per 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, section 

4.1(d) and 4.2(d), the design value may also be considered valid 

with the approval of the EPA Administrator, who may consider 

factors such as monitoring site closures/moves, monitoring 

diligence, the consistency and levels of the daily values that 

are available, and nearby concentrations in determining whether 

to use such data. 

The Pasadena monitoring site had 47% completeness in the 

first quarter of 2011 due to poor quality assurance results and 

sampler operational issues, and 71% completeness in the third 

quarter of 2012 due to multiple different sampler operational 

issues and site operator error. Beginning in the fourth quarter 

of 2012 through the second quarter of 2013, the Pasadena site 

had less than 50% completeness due to site repairs (i.e. SCAQMD 

was working to replace the monitoring site shelter from mid-
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

17

November 2012 until the beginning of June 2013). 

Per 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.1(d) and 4.2(d), 

the EPA evaluated the location of the Pasadena monitoring site 

relative to the historical design value site for the area, the 

historical annual and 24-hour PM2.5 design values trends over the 

past 12 years at nearby monitoring sites, and causes of 

incomplete data when determining whether the 2011-2013 design 

value at the Pasadena monitoring site could be considered valid 

for the purposes of this action. First, the Pasadena monitoring 

site is not located near the previous and current design value 

sites for the area. Historically, the Rubidoux and the Mira Loma 

(Van Buren) monitoring sites have been the design value sites 

for the area for both the annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

Rubidoux monitoring site was the design value site for both the 

annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS from 2001 to 2006, while the Mira 

Loma (Van Buren) monitoring site was the design value site for 

both the annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS from 2006 to 2013. The 

Pasadena monitoring site is located in the center of Los Angeles 

County, while the Rubidoux and Mira Loma (Van Buren) monitoring 

sites are located approximately 38 miles to the east in 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

18

Riverside County, where higher values are typically measured. 

Second, an assessment of the long-term trends at the 

Pasadena monitoring site and nearby monitoring sites shows 

nearby sites have design values below both the annual and 24-

hour 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and the Pasadena monitoring site has the 

lowest design value compared to these nearby sites. For example, 

during the 2001 to 2013 period, the Pasadena monitoring site has 

consistently measured lower design values for both the annual 

and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS than the Azusa, Burbank, Pico Rivera (AQS 

ID: 06-037-1601), Pico Rivera #2, and Los Angeles (Main Street) 

monitoring sites, which are all located within an approximately 

12-mile radius from the Pasadena monitoring site. These four 

sites all have complete annual and 24-hour design values below 

the 1997 NAAQS for the 2011-2013 period and provide appropriate 

characterization of air quality for the area surrounding the 

Pasadena monitoring site.

Based on the location of the Pasadena monitoring site and 

the historical design value concentrations relative to both the 

annual and 24-hour 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS at the site and nearby 

locations, the incomplete data should not preclude the EPA from 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

19

determining the area has attained the NAAQS. Therefore, we 

consider the PM2.5 data set for the 2011-2013 period from the 

Pasadena monitor to be valid for the purposes of determining 

whether the area has attained the standards. 

For the reasons discussed above, we consider the PM2.5 data 

set for 2011-2013 from the 18 PM2.5 monitoring sites to be valid 

for the purposes of determining whether the area has attained 

the standards. 

B. Monitoring Method Considerations 

The monitoring requirements are specified by regulation in 

40 CFR Part 58. These requirements are applicable to State, and 

where delegated, local air monitoring agencies that operate 

criteria pollutant monitors. In section 4.7 of appendix D to 40 

CFR part 58, the EPA specifies minimum monitoring requirements 

for PM2.5 to operate at State and Local Air Monitoring Stations 

(SLAMS). SLAMS produce data comparable to the NAAQS, and 

therefore, the monitor must be an approved federal reference 

method (FRM), federal equivalent method (FEM), or approved 

regional method (ARM). The minimum number of SLAMS required is 

described in section 4.7.1, and can be met by either filter-
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

20

based or continuous FRMs or FEMs. The monitoring regulations 

also provide that each core-based statistical area (CBSA) must 

operate a minimum number of PM2.5 continuous monitors (section 

4.7.2); however, this requirement can be met by either an FEM or 

a non-FEM continuous monitor, and the continuous monitors can be 

located with other SLAMS or at a different location. 

Consequently, the monitoring requirements for PM2.5 can be met 

with a filter-based FRMs/FEMs, continuous FEMs, continuous nonFEMs, or a combination of monitors at each required SLAMS. 

In 2006, the EPA published performance criteria and field 

testing requirements for approval of PM2.5 continuous FEMs and 

PM2.5 continuous ARMs in 40 CFR part 53. Subsequently, several 

PM2.5 continuous monitors have been approved12 as FEMs. As 

monitoring agencies implemented PM2.5 continuous FEMs in their 

networks, the EPA assessed the available data from these 

monitors and included a summary of that assessment in the PM 

Policy Assessment in April of 2011.13

 

12 The EPA maintains a list of designated FRMs and FEMs on the web at: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html. 

13 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Policy Assessment for 

the Review of the Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 

EPA 452/R-11-003, April 2011. This report is available at: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/s_pm_2007_pa.html. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

21

Recognizing that in some cases monitoring agencies were 

still testing and working to optimize the performance of their 

PM2.5 continuous FEMs, but were beyond the 24-month period that 

allows data from an approved method to be set aside using the 

provisions described in 40 CFR 58.20 on Special Purpose 

Monitoring (SPMs), the EPA proposed and finalized a new 

provision to allow PM2.5 FEM data to be considered not eligible 

for comparison to the NAAQS under certain conditions, even if 

more than 24 months of data are collected. 

This provision was part of the PM NAAQS final rule 

published on January 15, 2013 (78 FR 3086), and included 

criteria for monitoring agencies to use, if they choose, that 

allow for PM2.5 continuous FEM or ARM data to be set aside and not 

used for determining NAAQS calculations, if certain performance 

criteria are not met (40 CFR 58.11(e)). 

This provision to allow PM2.5 continuous FEM data to be 

excluded from comparison to the NAAQS is applicable, when in 

accordance with Annual Monitoring Network Plan provisions 

described in 40 CFR 58.10(b)(13), the monitoring agency has 

assessed the data to determine if it meets the criteria 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

22

described in 40 CFR 58.11(e), and has also sought and received 

approval from the applicable EPA Regional office. 

As noted above, the SCAQMD operated 18 PM2.5 SLAMS within 

the South Coast during the 2011-2013 period. At these sites, 

SCAQMD operates manual filter-based FRMs to measure PM2.5. At 

seven of the 18 sites, SCAQMD also measured PM2.5 using 

(automated) continuous FEM monitors: Anaheim, Burbank, Los 

Angeles (Main Street), Long Beach (North), South Long Beach, 

Rubidoux, and Mira Loma (Van Buren). SCAQMD’s primary purpose in 

operating the continuous FEM monitors at these sites is to 

support forecasting and reporting of the Air Quality Index 

(AQI). However, under EPA’s monitoring regulations, data from 

continuous FEM monitors is generally considered valid for NAAQS 

comparison purposes, unless the applicable monitoring agency 

justifies excluding the data for NAAQS comparison purposes under 

40 CFR 58.11(e). 

In this instance, as part of its 2013 and 2014 annual air 

quality monitoring network plans, SCAQMD requested that the data 

from the continuous FEM monitors at the seven monitoring sites 

in the PM2.5 monitoring network be considered not eligible for 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

23

comparison to the NAAQS.14 The EPA evaluated SCAQMD’s request per 

40 CFR 58.11(e), confirmed that the acceptable bias criteria 

were not met during the 2010-2012 and 2011-2013 periods, and 

therefore approved the request for the continuous FEM monitor 

data from the sites listed above to be considered not eligible 

for comparison to the NAAQS.15 As a result, the monitoring data 

presented in the next section of this document reflects data 

collected by filter-based PM2.5 FRMs operated by the SCAQMD at 

the 18 PM2.5 SLAMS within the South Coast. 

C. Evaluation of Current Attainment 

EPA’s evaluation of whether the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area has attained the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS is based on our review of the monitoring data and takes 

into account the adequacy of the PM2.5 monitoring network in the 

nonattainment area and the reliability of the data collected by 

the network as discussed in the previous sections of this 

document. 

 

14 See appendix C (“PM2.5 Continuous Monitor Comparability Assessment and 

Request for Waiver”) of SCAQMD’s Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan 

(July 2013); and appendix C with the same title of SCAQMD’s Annual Air 

Quality Monitoring Network Plan (July 2014). 

15 See letter, Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, Air 

Division, EPA Region 9, to Jason Low, PhD., South Coast Air Quality 

Management District, dated September 9, 2014. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

24

Table 1 and table 2 show the annual and 24-hour PM2.5 design 

values, respectively, at each of the 18 SLAMS monitoring sites 

within the South Coast nonattainment area for the most recent 

three-year period (2011-2013). The data show that the design 

value for the 2011-2013 period was equal to or less than 65 μg/m3

(for the 24-hour standard) and 15.0 μg/m3 (for the annual 

standard) at all monitors. Therefore, we are proposing to 

determine, based on complete (or otherwise validated), qualityassured, and certified data for 2011-2013, that the South Coast 

area has attained the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards. At 

the present time, AQS includes no PM2.5 data for year 2014 for 

the South Coast, but several quarters of preliminary data are 

expected to be uploaded to AQS prior to EPA’s final action on 

the proposed determination of attainment. The EPA will review 

the preliminary 2014 data prior to taking final action to ensure 

that they are consistent with the determination of attainment. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

25

Table 1 - 2011-2013 Annual PM2.5 Design Values for the South 

Coast Nonattainment Area 

General 

Location 

Site (AQS ID) 

Annual Mean (μg/m3) 

2011-

2013 

Annual 

Design 

Values 

(μg/m3)

2011 2012 2013 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 

East San 

Gabriel Valley 

Azusa 

(06-037-0002) 12.1 11.0 10.5 11.2 

East San 

Fernando Valley 

Burbank 

(06-037-1002) 13.2 12.2 12.1 12.5 

Central Los 

Angeles 

Los Angeles 

(Main St.) 

(06-037-1103) 

13.0 12.6 12.0 12.5 

West San 

Fernando Valley 

Reseda 

(06-037-1201) 10.2 10.5 9.9 10.2 

South Central 

Los Angeles 

County 

Compton 

(06-037-1302) 13.0 11.7 12.0 12.2 

South San 

Gabriel Valley 

Pico Rivera 

#2 

(06-037-1602) 

12.5 11.9 11.8 12.0 

West San 

Gabriel Valley 

Pasadena 

(06-037-2005) 10.8* 10.1* 10.2* 10.4 

South Coastal 

Los Angeles 

County 

Long Beach 

(North) 

(06-037-4002) 

11.0 10.4 11.3 10.9 

South Coastal 

Los Angeles 

County 

South Long 

Beach 

(06-037-4004) 

10.7 10.6 11.0 10.8 

ORANGE COUNTY: 

Central Orange 

County 

Anaheim 

(06-059-0007) 11.0 10.8 10.1 10.6 

Saddleback 

Valley 

Mission Viejo 

(06-059-2022) 8.5 7.9 8.1 8.2 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 

Metropolitan Riverside 11.8 11.4* 11.3 11.5 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

26

Table 1 - 2011-2013 Annual PM2.5 Design Values for the South 

Coast Nonattainment Area 

General 

Location 

Site (AQS ID) 

Annual Mean (μg/m3) 

2011-

2013 

Annual 

Design 

Values 

(μg/m3)

2011 2012 2013 

Riverside 

County 

(Magnolia) 

(06-065-1003) 

Metropolitan 

Riverside 

County 

Rubidoux 

(06-065-8001) 13.6 13.5 12.5 13.2 

Mira Loma Mira Loma 

(Van Buren) 

(06-065-8005) 

15.3 15.1 14.1 14.8 

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 

Southwest San 

Bernardino 

Valley 

Ontario Fire 

Station 

(06-071-0025) 

13.3 12.4 12.0* 12.6 

Central San 

Bernardino 

Valley 

Fontana 

(06-071-2002) 12.6 12.8 12.3 12.6 

East San 

Bernardino 

Mountains 

Big Bear 

(06-071-8001) 8.4 8.0* 9.7 8.7 

Central San 

Bernardino 

Valley 

San 

Bernardino 

(06-071-9004) 

12.2* 11.8 11.4 11.8 

Note: The annual standard is set at 15.0 μg/m3. Annual values 

not meeting completeness criteria are marked with an 

asterisk (‘*’) but, as discussed above, the EPA has 

determined that the data is valid for the NAAQS comparison 

purposes. 

Source: EPA, Design Value Report, October 6, 2014. 

 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

27

Table 2 - 2011-2013 24-Hour PM2.5 Design Values for the South 

Coast Nonattainment Area 

General 

Location 

Site (AQS ID) 

98th Percentile

(μg/m3) 

2011-

2013 

24-Hour 

Design 

Values 

(μg/m3)

2011 2012 2013 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 

East San 

Gabriel Valley 

Azusa 

(06-037-0002) 30.6 25.6 26.4 28 

East San 

Fernando Valley 

Burbank 

(06-037-1002) 33.5 28.2 30.4 31 

Central Los 

Angeles 

Los Angeles 

(Main St.) 

(06-037-1103) 

31.5 32.0 29.0 31 

West San 

Fernando Valley 

Reseda 

(06-037-1201) 23.6 31.2 23.0 26 

South Central 

Los Angeles 

County 

Compton 

(06-037-1302) 31.5 30.3 24.3 29 

South San 

Gabriel Valley 

Pico Rivera 

#2 

(06-037-1602) 

31.5 28.5 28.7 30 

West San 

Gabriel Valley 

Pasadena 

(06-037-2005) 29.8* 25.7* 20.5* 25 

South Coastal 

Los Angeles 

County 

Long Beach 

(North) 

(06-037-4002) 

27.8 26.5 26.1 27 

South Coastal 

Los Angeles 

County 

South Long 

Beach 

(06-037-4004) 

26.6 25.6 24.6 26 

ORANGE COUNTY: 

Central Orange 

County 

Anaheim 

(06-059-0007) 28.1 25.0 22.7 25 

Saddleback 

Valley 

Mission Viejo 

(06-059-2022) 28.8 17.6 17.5 21 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 

Metropolitan Riverside 28.0 26.8* 29.2 28 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

28

Table 2 - 2011-2013 24-Hour PM2.5 Design Values for the South 

Coast Nonattainment Area 

General 

Location 

Site (AQS ID) 

98th Percentile

(μg/m3) 

2011-

2013 

24-Hour 

Design 

Values 

(μg/m3)

2011 2012 2013 

Riverside 

County 

(Magnolia) 

(06-065-1003) 

Metropolitan 

Riverside 

County 

Rubidoux 

(06-065-8001) 31.0 33.7 34.6 33 

Mira Loma Mira Loma 

(Van Buren) 

(06-065-8005) 

36.6 35.1 37.5 36 

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 

Southwest San 

Bernardino 

Valley 

Ontario Fire 

Station 

(06-071-0025) 

35.3 28.6 26.8* 30 

Central San 

Bernardino 

Valley 

Fontana 

(06-071-2002) 28.2 35.6 33.1 32 

East San 

Bernardino 

Mountains 

Big Bear 

(06-071-8001) 30.6 27.4* 35.1 31 

Central San 

Bernardino 

Valley 

San 

Bernardino 

(06-071-9004) 

32.5* 27.1 33.4 31 

Note: The 24-hour standard is set at 65 μg/m3. Daily values not 

meeting completeness criteria are marked with an asterisk 

(‘*’) but, as discussed above, the EPA has determined that 

the data is valid for the NAAQS comparison purposes. 

Source: EPA, Design Value Report, October 6, 2014. 

 

IV. What is the effect of a determination of attainment for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 of the Clean Air Act? 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

29

This section of the EPA’s proposal addresses the effects of 

a final determination of attainment for the South Coast 

nonattainment area. 

For the 1997 PM2.5 standard, 40 CFR 51.1004(c) of the EPA’s 

Implementation Rule embodies the EPA’s “Clean Data Policy” 

interpretation under subpart 1. The provisions of section 

51.1004(c) set forth the effects of a determination of 

attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 standard.16 72 FR 20585, 20665 

(April 25, 2007). 

On January 4, 2013, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. 

EPA, the D.C. Circuit remanded to the EPA the “Final Clean Air 

Fine Particle Implementation Rule” (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007) 

and the “Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program 

for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)” final 

rule (73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively, “1997 PM2.5

 

16 Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, section 51.004(c) states: “Upon a 

determination by EPA that an area designated nonattainment for the PM2.5 NAAQS 

has attained the standard, the requirements for such area to submit 

attainment demonstrations and associated reasonably available control 

measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures and other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS shall be suspended until 

such time as the area is redesignated to attainment, at which time the 

requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that that area has violated 

the PM2.5 NAAQS, at which time the area is again required to submit such 

plans.” 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

30

Implementation Rule” or “Implementation Rule”). 706 F.3d 428 

(D.C. Cir. 2013). The Court found that the EPA erred in 

implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant solely to the general 

implementation provisions of subpart 1 of part D of title I of 

the CAA, rather than the particulate-matter-specific provisions 

of subpart 4 of part D of title I. The Court remanded the EPA’s 

Implementation Rule for further proceedings consistent with the 

Court’s decision. 

In light of the Court’s decision and its remand of the 

Implementation Rule, the EPA in this proposed rulemaking 

addresses the effect of a final determination of attainment for 

the South Coast nonattainment area as a moderate nonattainment 

area under subpart 4.17 As set forth in more detail below, under 

the EPA’s Clean Data Policy interpretation, a determination that 

the area has attained the standard suspends the State’s 

obligation to submit attainment-related plan revisions under 

subpart 4 (and the applicable provisions of subpart 1) for so 

long as the area continues to attain the standard. These include 

 

17 In response to the court’s ruling, the EPA published a final rule on June 

2, 2014 classifying all 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 areas as moderate, and setting a 

December 31, 2014 deadline for submittal of any remaining subpart 4 SIP 

requirements (see 79 FR 31566, June 2, 2014). 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

31

requirements to submit an attainment demonstration, RFP, RACM, 

and contingency measures, because the purpose of these 

provisions is to help reach attainment, a goal which has already 

been achieved. 

A. Background for the Clean Data Policy 

Over the past two decades, the EPA has consistently applied 

its “Clean Data Policy” interpretation to attainment-related 

provisions of subparts 1, 2 and 4. The Clean Data Policy is the 

subject of several EPA memoranda and regulations. In addition, 

numerous individual rulemakings published in the Federal 

Register have applied the interpretation to a spectrum of NAAQS, 

including the 1-hour and 1997 ozone, PM10, PM2.5, CO and lead 

standards. The D.C. Circuit has upheld the Clean Data Policy 

interpretation as embodied in EPA’s 8-hour ozone implementation 

rule, 40 CFR 51.918.18 Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 

571 F. 3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Other U.S. Circuit Courts of 

Appeals that have considered and reviewed EPA’s Clean Data 

Policy interpretation have upheld it and the rulemakings 

 

18 The EPA’s “Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard--Phase 2,” 70 FR 71612, 71645-46 (November 29, 2005). 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

32

applying EPA’s interpretation. Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F.3d 1551 

(10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 

2004); Our Children's Earth Foundation v. EPA, N. 04-73032 (9th 

Cir. June 28, 2005 (Memorandum Opinion)), Latino Issues Forum, 

v. EPA, Nos. 06-75831 and 08-71238 (9th Cir. March 2, 2009 

(Memorandum Opinion)). 

As noted above, the EPA incorporated its Clean Data Policy 

interpretation in both its 1997 8-hour ozone implementation rule 

(40 CFR 51.918) and in its PM2.5 Implementation Rule (40 CFR 

51.1004(c)). 70 FR 71612, 71702 (November 29, 2005) (1997 8-hour 

ozone) and 72 FR 20585, 20665 (April 25, 2007)(1997 PM2.5). While 

the D.C. Circuit, in its January 4, 2013 decision, remanded the 

1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the court did not address the 

merits of that regulation, nor cast doubt on the EPA’s existing 

interpretation of the statutory provisions. 

However, in light of the Court’s decision, we set forth 

here the EPA’s Clean Data Policy interpretation under subpart 4, 

for the purpose of identifying the effects of a determination of 

attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 standard for the South Coast 

nonattainment area. The EPA has previously articulated its Clean 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

33

Data interpretation under subpart 4 in implementing the 2006 

PM2.5 and the PM10 standard. See, e.g., 78 FR 41901 (July 12, 

2013) and 78 FR 54394 (September 4, 2013) (proposed and final 

determination of attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 standard in West 

Central Pinal area, Arizona); 75 FR 27944 (May 19, 2010) 

(determination of attainment of the PM10 standard in Coso 

Junction, California); 71 FR 6352 (February 8, 2006) 

(determination of attainment of the PM10 standard in Ajo, 

Arizona); 71 FR 13021 (March 14, 2006) (determination of 

attainment of the PM10 standard in Yuma, Arizona); 71 FR 44920 

(August 8, 2006) (determination of attainment of the PM10

standard in Rillito, Arizona); 71 FR 63642 (October 30, 2006) 

(determination of attainment of the PM10 standard in San Joaquin 

Valley, California); and 72 FR 14422 (March 28, 2007) 

(determination of attainment of the PM10 standard in Miami, 

Arizona). Thus, the EPA has established that, under subpart 4, 

an attainment determination suspends the obligations to submit 

an attainment demonstration, RACM, RFP, contingency measures, 

and other measures related to attainment. 

B. Application of the Clean Data Policy to the Attainment-
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

34

Related Provisions of Subpart 4 

In the EPA’s proposed and final rulemakings determining 

that the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area attained the PM10

standard, the EPA set forth at length its rationale for applying 

the Clean Data Policy to PM10 under subpart 4. The Ninth Circuit 

upheld EPA’s final rulemaking, and specifically EPA’s Clean Data 

Policy, in the context of subpart 4. Latino Issues Forum v. EPA, 

Nos. 06-75831 and 08-71238 (9th Cir. March 2, 2009 (Memorandum 

Opinion)). In rejecting petitioner’s challenge to the Clean Data 

Policy under subpart 4 for PM10, the Ninth Circuit stated, “As 

the EPA explained, if an area is in compliance with PM10

standards, then further progress for the purpose of ensuring 

attainment is not necessary.” 

The general requirements of subpart 1 apply in conjunction 

with the more specific requirements of subpart 4, to the extent 

they are not superseded or subsumed by the subpart 4 

requirements. Subpart 1 contains general air quality planning 

requirements for areas designated as nonattainment. See section 

172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains specific planning and 

scheduling requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas, and under 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

35

the Court’s January 4, 2013 decision in Natural Resources 

Defense Council v. EPA, these same statutory requirements also 

apply for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. The EPA has longstanding 

general guidance that interprets the 1990 amendments to the CAA, 

making recommendations to states for meeting the statutory 

requirements for SIPs for nonattainment areas. See, “State 

Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,” 57 FR 13498 

(April 16, 1992) (the “General Preamble”). In the General 

Preamble, the EPA discussed the relationship of subpart 1 and 

subpart 4 SIP requirements, and pointed out that subpart 1 

requirements were to an extent “subsumed by, or integrally 

related to, the more specific PM10 requirements.” 57 FR 13538 

(April 16, 1992). These subpart 1 requirements include, among 

other things, provisions for attainment demonstrations, RACM, 

RFP, emissions inventories, and contingency measures. 

The EPA has long interpreted the provisions of part D, 

subpart 1 of the Act (sections 171 and 172) as not requiring the 

submission of RFP for an area already attaining the ozone NAAQS. 

For an area that is attaining, showing that the State will make 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

36

RFP towards attainment “will, therefore, have no meaning at that 

point.” 57 FR at 13564. See 71 FR 40952 and 71 FR 63642 

(proposed and final determination of attainment for San Joaquin 

Valley); 75 FR 13710 and 75 FR 27944 (proposed and final 

determination of attainment for Coso Junction). 

Section 189(c)(1) of subpart 4 states that: 

Plan revisions demonstrating attainment submitted to the 

Administrator for approval under this subpart shall contain 

quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 

years until the area is redesignated attainment and which 

demonstrate reasonable further progress, as defined in 

section [section 171(1)] of this title, toward attainment 

by the applicable date. 

With respect to RFP, section 171(1) states that, for 

purposes of part D, RFP “means such annual incremental 

reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are 

required by this part or may reasonably be required by the 

Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the 

applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable date.” Thus, whether 

dealing with the general RFP requirement of section 172(c)(2), 

the ozone-specific RFP requirements of sections 182(b) and (c), 

or the specific RFP requirements for PM10 areas of part D, 

subpart 4, section 189(c)(1), the stated purpose of RFP is to 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

37

ensure attainment by the applicable attainment date. 

Although section 189(c) states that revisions shall contain 

milestones, which are to be achieved until the area is 

redesignated to attainment, such milestones are designed to show 

reasonable further progress “toward attainment by the applicable 

attainment date,” as defined by section 171. Thus, it is clear 

that once the area has attained the standard, no further 

milestones are necessary or meaningful. This interpretation is 

supported by language in section 189(c)(3), which mandates that 

a State that fails to achieve a milestone must submit a plan 

that assures that the State will achieve the next milestone or 

attain the NAAQS if there is no next milestone. Section 

189(c)(3) assumes that the requirement to submit and achieve 

milestones does not continue after attainment of the NAAQS. 

In the General Preamble, we noted with respect to section 

189(c) that the purpose of the milestone requirement “is ‘to 

provide for emission reductions adequate to achieve the 

standards by the applicable attainment date’ (H.R. Rep. No. 490, 

101st Cong., 2d Sess. 267 (1990)).” 57 FR 13539 (April 16, 

1992). If an area has in fact attained the standard, the stated 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

38

purpose of the RFP requirement will have already been 

fulfilled.19

Similarly, the requirements of section 189(c)(2) with 

respect to milestones no longer apply so long as an area has 

attained the standard. Section 189(c)(2) provides in relevant 

part that: 

Not later than 90 days after the date on which a milestone 

applicable to the area occurs, each State in which all or 

part of such area is located shall submit to the 

Administrator a demonstration * * * that the milestone has 

been met. 

Where the area has attained the standard and there are no 

further milestones, there is no further requirement to make a 

submission showing that such milestones have been met. This is 

consistent with the position that the EPA took with respect to 

 

19 Thus, we believe that it is a distinction without a difference that 

section 189(c)(1) speaks of the RFP requirement as one to be achieved until 

an area is “redesignated attainment,” as opposed to section 172(c)(2), which 

is silent on the period to which the requirement pertains, or the ozone 

nonattainment area RFP requirements in sections 182(b)(1) or 182(c)(2), which 

refer to the RFP requirements as applying until the “attainment date,” since 

section 189(c)(1) defines RFP by reference to section 171(1) of the Act. 

Reference to section 171(1) clarifies that, as with the general RFP 

requirements in section 172(c)(2) and the ozone-specific requirements of 

section 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2), the PM-specific requirements may only be 

required “for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable national 

ambient air quality standard by the applicable date.” 42 U.S.C. 7501(1). As 

discussed in the text of this rulemaking, the EPA interprets the RFP 

requirements, in light of the definition of RFP in section 171(1), and 

incorporated in section 189(c)(1), to be a requirement that no longer applies 

once the standard has been attained.
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

39

the general RFP requirement of section 172(c)(2) in the April 

16, 1992 General Preamble and also in the May 10, 1995 Seitz 

memorandum20 with respect to the requirements of section 182(b) 

and (c). In the May 10, 1995 Seitz memorandum, the EPA also 

noted that section 182(g), the milestone requirement of subpart 

2, which is analogous to provisions in section 189(c), is 

suspended upon a determination that an area has attained. The 

memorandum, also citing additional provisions related to 

attainment demonstration and RFP requirements, stated: 

Inasmuch as each of these requirements is linked with the 

attainment demonstration or RFP requirements of section 

182(b)(1) or 182(c)(2), if an area is not subject to the 

requirement to submit the underlying attainment 

demonstration or RFP plan, it need not submit the related 

SIP revision either. 

1995 Seitz memorandum at page 5. 

With respect to the attainment demonstration requirements 

of section 172(c) and section 189(a)(1)(B), an analogous 

rationale leads to the same result. Section 189(a)(1)(B) 

requires that the plan provide for “a demonstration (including 

 

20 Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, “Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment 

Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting 

the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,” dated May 10, 1995 (“Seitz 

memorandum”). 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

40

air quality modeling) that the [SIP] will provide for attainment 

by the applicable attainment date * * *.” As with the RFP 

requirements, if an area is already monitoring attainment of the 

standard, The EPA believes there is no need for an area to make 

a further submission containing additional measures to achieve 

attainment. This is also consistent with the interpretation of 

the section 172(c) requirements provided by the EPA in the 

General Preamble, the Page memorandum,21 and the section 182(b) 

and (c) requirements set forth in the Seitz memorandum. As the 

EPA stated in the General Preamble, no other measures to provide 

for attainment would be needed by areas seeking redesignation to 

attainment since “attainment will have been reached.” 57 FR at 

13564. 

Other SIP submission requirements are linked with these 

attainment demonstration and RFP requirements, and similar 

reasoning applies to them. These requirements include the 

contingency measure requirements of sections 172(c)(9). We have 

interpreted the contingency measure requirements of section 

 

21 Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, “Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards,” December 14, 2004 (“Page memorandum”). 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

41

172(c)(9) (and section 182(c)(9) for ozone) as no longer 

applying when an area has attained the standard because those 

“contingency measures are directed at ensuring RFP and 

attainment by the applicable date.” 57 FR at 13564; Seitz 

memorandum, pages 5-6. 

CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that SIPs in nonattainment 

areas “shall provide for the implementation of specific measures 

to be undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further 

progress, or to attain the [NAAQS] by the attainment date 

applicable under this part. Such measures shall be included in 

the plan revision as contingency measures to take effect in any 

such case without further action by the State or [EPA].” This 

contingency measure requirement is inextricably tied to the 

reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration 

requirements. Contingency measures are implemented if reasonable 

further progress targets are not achieved, or if attainment is 

not realized by the attainment date. Where an area has already 

achieved attainment by the attainment date, it has no need to 

rely on contingency measures to come into attainment or to make 

further progress to attainment. As the EPA stated in the General 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

42

Preamble: “The section 172(c)(9) requirements for contingency 

measures are directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by the 

applicable date.” See 57 FR 13564. Thus these requirements no 

longer apply when an area has attained the standard. 

Both sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) require 

“provisions to assure that reasonably available control 

measures” (i.e., RACM) are implemented in a nonattainment area. 

The General Preamble, 57 FR at 13560 (April 16, 1992), states 

that the EPA interprets section 172(c)(1) so that RACM 

requirements are a “component” of an area’s attainment 

demonstration. Thus, for the same reason the attainment 

demonstration no longer applies by its own terms, the 

requirement for RACM no longer applies. The EPA has consistently 

interpreted this provision to require only implementation of 

potential RACM measures that could contribute to reasonable 

further progress or to attainment. General Preamble, 57 FR at 

13498. Thus, where an area is already attaining the standard, no 

additional RACM measures are required.22 The EPA is interpreting 

 

22 The EPA’s interpretation that the statute requires implementation only of 

RACM measures that would advance attainment was upheld by the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 

743-745 (5th Cir. 2002), and by the United States Court of Appeals for the 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

43

section 189(a)(1)(C) consistent with its interpretation of 

section 172(c)(1). 

The suspension of the obligations to submit SIP revisions 

concerning these RFP, attainment demonstration, RACM, 

contingency measures and other related requirements exists only 

for as long as the area continues to monitor attainment of the 

standard. If the EPA determines, after notice-and-comment 

rulemaking, that the area has monitored a violation of the 

NAAQS, the basis for the requirements being suspended would no 

longer exist. In that case, the area would again be subject to a 

requirement to submit the pertinent SIP revision or revisions 

and would need to address those requirements. Thus, a final 

determination that the area need not submit one of the pertinent 

SIP submittals amounts to no more than a suspension of the 

requirements for so long as the area continues to attain the 

standard. Only if and when the EPA redesignates the area to 

attainment would the area be relieved of these submission 

obligations. Attainment determinations under the Clean Data 

Policy do not shield an area from obligations unrelated to 

 

D.C. Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162-163 (D.C. Cir. 2002)). 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

44

attainment in the area, such as provisions to address pollution 

transport. 

As set forth above, based on our proposed determination 

that the South Coast area is currently attaining the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS, we propose to find that the obligations to submit any 

remaining attainment-related provisions that may be necessary to 

satisfy the requirements applicable to moderate areas under 

subpart 4 of part D (of title I of the Act) are suspended for so 

long as the area continues to monitor attainment of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS. If, in the future, the EPA determines after noticeand-comment rulemaking that the area again violates the 1997 

annual or 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the basis for suspending any 

remaining SIP obligations would no longer apply. 

V. EPA’s Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment 

The EPA proposes to determine, based on the most recent 

three years (2011-2013) of complete (or otherwise validated), 

quality-assured, and certified data meeting the requirements of 

40 CFR part 50, appendix N, that the South Coast PM2.5

nonattainment area has attained the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

45

In conjunction with and based upon our proposed 

determination that the South Coast area has attained and is 

currently attaining the standard, the EPA proposes to determine 

that the obligation to submit any remaining attainment-related 

SIP revisions arising from classification of the South Coast as 

a moderate nonattainment area under subpart 4 of part D (of 

title I of the Act) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS is not applicable 

for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

These attainment-related requirements include, but are not 

limited to, the part D, subpart 4 obligations to provide an 

attainment demonstration pursuant to section 189(a)(1)(B), the 

RACM provisions of section 189(a)(1)(C), and the RFP provisions 

of section 189(c). This proposed action, if finalized, would not 

constitute a redesignation to attainment under CAA section 

107(d)(3). 

The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues 

discussed in this document or on other relevant matters. We will 

accept comments from the public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. We will consider these comments before taking final 

action. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

46

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

This action proposes to make a determination of attainment 

based on air quality and to suspend certain federal 

requirements, and thus, would not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this 

proposed action: 

· Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review 

by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 

Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); 

· Does not impose an information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.); 

· Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

· Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); 

· Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

47

· Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 

on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

· Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

· Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those 

requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

· Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority 

to address disproportionate human health or environmental 

effects with practical, appropriate, and legally 

permissible methods under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 

7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP obligations discussed herein 

do not apply to Indian tribes and thus this proposed action will 

not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 on 

November 20, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version. 

48

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, 

Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

____________________ _____________________ 

Dated: Jared Blumenfeld 

 Regional Administrator, 

Region IX.