Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0164-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Determination of Attainment of the 1-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard: San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area in California
Posted Date: 2016-05-18T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 18, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31206-31212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11630]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0164; FRL-9946-358-Region 9]

Determination of Attainment of the 1-Hour Ozone National Ambient 
Air Quality Standard in the San Joaquin Valley Nonattainment Area in 
California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
determine that the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area has attained 
the 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard. This proposed 
determination is based on the most recent three-year period (2012-2014) 
of sufficient, quality-assured, and certified data. Preliminary data 
for 2015 are consistent with continued attainment of the standard in 
the San Joaquin Valley.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by June 17, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2016-0164 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
lee.anita@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow 
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either 
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person 
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 
EPA's full public comment

[[Page 31207]]

policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Lee, (415) 972-3958, or by email 
at lee.anita@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. The EPA's Analysis
    A. Analysis of Ambient Air Quality Data
    B. Analysis of 1-Hour Ozone Trends in the San Joaquin Valley
    C. Analysis of Monitoring Network Adequacy
III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    The Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requires the EPA to establish 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') for 
certain widespread pollutants, such as ozone, that cause or contribute 
to air pollution that is reasonably anticipated to endanger public 
health or welfare.\1\ In 1979, we promulgated an ozone NAAQS of 0.12 
parts per million (ppm), one-hour average (``1-hour ozone 
standard'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See sections 108 and 109 of the Act.
    \2\ See 44 FR 8202, February 8, 1979.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An area is considered to have attained the 1-hour ozone standard if 
there are no violations of the standard, as determined in accordance 
with the regulation codified at 40 CFR 50.9, based on three consecutive 
calendar years of complete, quality-assured and certified monitoring 
data. A violation occurs when the ambient ozone air quality monitoring 
data show greater than one (1.0) ``expected number'' of exceedances per 
year at any site in the area, when averaged over three consecutive 
calendar years. An ``expected number'' of exceedances is a statistical 
term that refers to an arithmetic average. An ``expected number'' of 
exceedances may be equivalent to the number of observed exceedances 
plus an increment that accounts for incomplete sampling.\3\ An 
exceedance occurs when the maximum hourly ozone concentration during 
any day exceeds 0.124 ppm.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 40 CFR part 50, appendix H. Because, in this context, 
the term ``exceedances'' refers to days (during which the daily 
maximum hourly ozone concentration exceeded 0.124 ppm), the maximum 
possible number of exceedances in a given year is 365 (or 366 in a 
leap year).
    \4\ For more information, please see ``National 1-hour primary 
and secondary ambient air quality standards for ozone'' (40 CFR 
50.9) and ``Interpretation of the 1-Hour Primary and Secondary 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone'' (40 CFR part 50, 
appendix H).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Act, as amended in 1990, required the EPA to designate as 
nonattainment any ozone areas that were still designated nonattainment 
under the 1977 Act Amendments, and any other areas violating the 1-hour 
ozone standard, generally based on air quality monitoring data from the 
1987 through 1989 period.\5\ The 1990 CAA Amendments further classified 
these areas, based on the severity of their nonattainment problem, as 
Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, or Extreme.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See section 107(d)(4) of the Act. See also 56 FR 56694, 
November 6, 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The control requirements and date by which attainment of the one-
hour ozone standard was to be achieved varied with an area's 
classification. Marginal areas were subject to the fewest mandated 
control requirements and had the earliest attainment date, November 15, 
1993, while Severe and Extreme areas were subject to more stringent 
planning requirements and were provided more time to attain the 
standard.
    The San Joaquin Valley (SJV or ``Valley'') covers approximately 
23,000 square miles and includes all of Fresno, Kings, Madera, Merced, 
San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare counties, as well as the western 
half of Kern County.\6\ The Valley is home to approximately four 
million residents. On November 6, 1991, the EPA classified the San 
Joaquin Valley as ``Serious'' nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone 
standard with an applicable attainment date of November 15, 1999.\7\ 
The Valley was later reclassified by operation of law as ``Severe'' 
based on our determination that the Valley had failed to attain the 
standard by the 1999 deadline.\8\ Later, the EPA approved a request by 
the State of California to reclassify the Valley as ``Extreme'' for the 
1-hour ozone standard, with an applicable attainment date of November 
15, 2010.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 40 CFR 81.305.
    \7\ See 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991.
    \8\ See 66 FR 56476, November 8, 2001.
    \9\ See 69 FR 20550, April 16, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1997, the EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 ppm 
(``1997 8-hour ozone standard''), to replace the 1-hour ozone 
standard.\10\ Although the 1-hour ozone standard was revoked in 2005, 
we continue to determine whether areas attain, or fail to attain, the 
1-hour ozone standard. This is because, under the EPA's regulations 
governing the transition from implementation of the revoked ozone 
standard to implementation of the replacement ozone standard, ``anti-
backsliding'' provisions require the continued applicability of certain 
1-hour ozone control requirements in areas, such as the San Joaquin 
Valley, that are designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard and the connection between some of those requirements and 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard.\11\ In 2008, we tightened the 
8-hour ozone standard (``2008 8-hour ozone standard''),\12\ and in 
2015, we revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, but the principles of 
anti-backsliding continue to apply to both revoked ozone standards.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 62 FR 38856, July 18, 1997.
    \11\ See, generally, 40 CFR 51.905.
    \12\ 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
    \13\ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). See, generally, 40 CFR 
51.1105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this action, we are proposing to determine that the San Joaquin 
Valley has attained the 1-hour ozone standard. Under 40 CFR 50.1118, if 
this action is finalized as proposed and to the extent not already 
fulfilled, the requirement for this area to submit an attainment 
demonstration and associated planning requirements related to 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard, including reasonably available 
control measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency 
measures for failure to attain, or make reasonable progress, shall be 
suspended until such time as the area is redesignated as attainment for 
the current ozone NAAQS or a redesignation substitute for the 1-hour 
ozone standard is approved, at which time the requirements no longer 
apply.\14\ If, however, prior to such redesignation or approval of such 
redesignation substitute, the EPA determines that the area has violated 
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, then the area is again required to submit such 
attainment-related plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See 40 CFR 50.1118 and 80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over the decades since the 1990 CAA Amendments, despite high rates 
of growth in population and regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT), 1-
hour ozone concentrations in San Joaquin Valley have decreased, 
primarily due to emissions reductions from mobile source and consumer 
product control measures adopted by the California Air Resources Board 
(CARB) and from stationary source control measures adopted by the San 
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD or 
``District''). For instance, despite regional growth, 1-hour ozone 
exceedance-days within the Valley (i.e.,

[[Page 31208]]

number of days in a year during which the 0.12 ppm standard was 
violated at a (i.e., at least one) monitoring site) decreased from 45 
in 1990 to 7 in 2010.\15\ Nonetheless, upon review of the ambient data 
for the three years preceding the November 15, 2010 attainment date 
(i.e., 2008-2010), we determined that the San Joaquin Valley failed to 
attain the 1-hour ozone standard by that date.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See table A-1 in appendix A to the San Joaquin Valley 2013 
Plan for the Revoked 1-Hour Ozone Standard, adopted by the District 
on September 19, 2013.
    \16\ See 76 FR 82133, December 30, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since then, the trend towards fewer 1-hour ozone exceedance-days 
has continued, and on February 11, 2016, CARB requested that the EPA 
determine that the San Joaquin Valley has attained the 1-hour ozone 
standard (also referred to as a ``clean data determination'').\17\ As 
part of its request for a clean data determination for the 1-hour ozone 
standard for the San Joaquin Valley, CARB submitted its own staff 
report and appendices, a letter dated July 13, 2015 from the District 
to the EPA and CARB requesting a clean data determination, the 
District's staff report to support its clean data determination 
request, and an ozone study final report prepared for the District.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Letter from Richard W. Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, 
to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, dated 
February 11, 2016.
    \18\ See ``San Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone Clean Data 
Determination'' dated February 8, 2016, prepared by CARB; ``San 
Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone Clean Data Determination--Appendices'' 
dated February 8, 2016 prepared by CARB; letter from Seyed Sadredin, 
Executive Officer/Air Pollution Control Officer, San Joaquin Valley 
Unified Air Pollution Control District, to Jared Blumenfeld, EPA 
Region IX, and Richard Corey, CARB, dated July 13, 2015; 
``Attainment Determination Request for the Revoked 1-Hour Ozone 
Standard'' dated July 13, 2015 prepared by the San Joaquin Valley 
Air Pollution Control District; and ``Sonoma Technology, Inc., 
``Ozone Concentrations In and Around the City of Arvin,'' final 
report prepared for the District, May 2014 (``Arvin Ozone Saturation 
Study'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the request for a clean data determination, the 
District provided documentation in its staff report intended to support 
a finding that attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard is due to 
permanent and enforceable emission reductions. In our final 
implementation rule for the 2008 ozone standard (80 FR 12264, March 6, 
2015), we established a mechanism, referred to as a ``redesignation 
substitute,'' through which an area may shift to contingency status 
those requirements, such as penalty fee program requirements under CAA 
section 185, to which an area had remained subject under the EPA's 
anti-backsliding regulations governing the transition from revoked 
ozone standards (such as the 1-hour ozone standard) to current ozone 
standards. To invoke this mechanism, a state must submit a 
demonstration that the area has attained the revoked ozone NAAQS due to 
permanent and enforceable emission reductions and that the area will 
maintain the revoked NAAQS for 10 years from the date of the EPA's 
approval of this showing.\19\ In this action, we are not taking action 
on the District's demonstration that attainment of the 1-hour ozone 
standard in the San Joaquin Valley is due to permanent and enforceable 
emission reductions because it is not relevant for the purposes of a 
clean data determination, but we will consider the District's 
demonstration in a separate rulemaking if and when it is supplemented 
with the 10-year maintenance demonstration element also needed to 
invoke the redesignation substitute mechanism in 40 CFR 51.1105(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 40 CFR 51.1105(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Analysis

    A determination of whether an area's air quality meets the 1-hour 
ozone NAAQS is generally based upon three years of complete, quality-
assured and certified air quality monitoring data gathered at 
established State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in the 
nonattainment area and entered into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) 
database.\20\ A determination of whether an area meets the 1-hour ozone 
standard relies upon a review of the daily maximum ozone levels. Under 
40 CFR part 50, appendix H, a daily maximum ozone level is defined to 
be the highest hourly ozone value recorded for the day. This daily 
maximum value is considered valid if 75 percent of the hours from 9:01 
a.m. to 9:00 p.m. were measured or if the highest hour is greater than 
the level of the standard. A missing daily maximum ozone value may be 
assumed to be less than the level of the standard if the valid daily 
maxima on both the preceding day and the following day do not exceed 75 
percent of the NAAQS. Data from air monitors operated by state or local 
agencies in compliance with the EPA monitoring requirements must be 
submitted to the AQS database. Monitoring agencies annually certify 
that these data are accurate to the best of their knowledge. 
Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily on data in its AQS database when 
determining the attainment status of an area.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Generally, a ``complete'' data set for determining 
attainment of the ozone standard is one that includes three years of 
data with an average percent of days with valid monitoring data 
greater than 90 percent with no single year less than 75 percent. 
See 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.
    \21\ See 40 CFR 50.9; 40 CFR part 50, appendix H; 40 CFR part 
53; 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 H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Analysis of Ambient Air Quality Data

    When the EPA determined that the San Joaquin Valley had failed to 
attain the November 15, 2010 attainment date, the Agency made its 
determination based on 2008 to 2010 data from a network of 22 ozone 
monitoring sites.\22\ By 2015, the number of ozone monitoring sites in 
San Joaquin Valley had increased to 27, 24 of which are designated as 
regulatory and from which data may be compared to the NAAQS.\23\ All of 
these sites monitor ozone concentrations on a continuous basis using 
ultraviolet absorption monitors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 76 FR 56694, at 56698 (September 14, 2011).
    \23\ Relevant changes in the ozone monitoring network include 
the relocation of the Fresno-North First Street site (AQS ID: 06-
019-0008) approximately 0.25 miles north to the Fresno-Garland site 
(AQS ID: 06-019-0011), the relocation of the Arvin-Bear Mountain 
site (AQS ID: 06-029-5001) approximately 2 miles north to the Arvin-
Di Giorgio site (AQS ID: 06-029-5002), and the establishment of new 
ozone monitors at Tranquility (AQS ID: 06-019-2009) in Fresno 
County, at Bakersfield Municipal Airport (AQS ID: 06-029-2012) in 
Kern County, in the City of Madera (AQS ID: 06-039-2010) in Madera 
County, and in Porterville (AQS ID: 06-107-2010) in Tulare County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB or SJVAPCD operates 23 of the monitoring sites: Seven within 
Kern County, six within Fresno County, two within Madera, San Joaquin, 
Stanislaus, and Tulare counties, and one within Kings and Merced 
counties.\24\ CARB annually certifies that the data the agency submits 
to AQS are quality-assured, including data collected by CARB at 
monitoring sites in San Joaquin Valley.\25\ SJVAPCD does the same for 
monitors operated by the District.\26\ In addition, the National Park 
Service (NPS) operates two ozone monitoring sites in Sequoia National 
Park in Tulare County; the Tachi-Yokut Tribe operates a monitoring site 
at the Santa Rosa Rancheria in Kings County; and the Chukchansi Indians 
of California

[[Page 31209]]

operate a monitoring site at the Picayune Rancheria in Madera County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See figure 1 in SJVAPCD's 2015 Air Monitoring Network Plan 
(August 28, 2015) for a map of the ambient air monitors in the San 
Joaquin Valley.
    \25\ See, e.g., letter from Ravi Ramalingam, Chief, Consumer 
Products and Air Quality Assessment Branch, Air Quality Planning and 
Science Division, CARB, to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, 
U.S. EPA Region IX, certifying calendar year 2014 ambient air 
quality data and quality assurance data, dated May 8, 2015.
    \26\ See, e.g., letter from Sheraz Gill, Director of Strategies 
and Incentives, letter to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, 
U.S. EPA Region IX, certifying calendar year 2014 ambient air 
quality data and quality assurance data, dated July 8, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Sequoia National Park--Ash Mountain (AQS ID 06-107-0009) NPS 
monitoring site is designated as regulatory and comparable to the 
NAAQS. NPS annually certifies that the data it submits to AQS are 
quality-assured.\27\ One NPS site within Tulare County, Sequoia 
National Park--Lower Kaweah (AQS ID 06-107-0006), is designated as non-
regulatory and not comparable to the NAAQS. The EPA notes that the two 
monitoring sites located in Indian country, Santa Rosa Rancheria (AQS 
ID 06-031-0500) and Picayune Rancheria (AQS ID 06-019-0500), are 
designated as non-regulatory and not comparable to the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See, e.g., letter from Barkley Sive, Program Manager, NPS, 
to Lew Weinstock, U.S. EPA, certifying 2014 ozone data, incorrectly 
dated April 29, 2014, received by EPA via electronic mail on April 
30, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 1 summarizes the expected 1-hour ozone exceedances, per year 
and as an average over the 2012-2014 period, at the regulatory 
monitoring sites in the San Joaquin Valley. Generally, the highest 
ozone concentrations in the San Joaquin Valley have occurred in the 
central and southern portions of the nonattainment area, but in recent 
years, the highest ozone concentrations have occurred in the central 
portion of the valley (i.e., within Fresno County). As shown in Table 
1, the highest three-year average of expected exceedances at any site 
in the San Joaquin Valley for 2012-2014 is 0.7 at Fresno--Sierra 
Skypark in Fresno County. The calculated exceedance rate of 0.7 
represents attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (a three-year average 
of expected exceedances less than or equal to 1). Thus, taking into 
account the extent and reliability of the applicable ozone monitoring 
network, and the data collected and summarized in Table 1, we propose 
to determine that the San Joaquin Valley has attained the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS (as defined in 40 CFR part 50, appendix H). Preliminary 2015 data 
have not been certified but are consistent with the continued 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley.

          Table 1--One-Hour Ozone Data for the San Joaquin Valley One-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Expected exceedances by year              Expected
                                                 ------------------------------------------------ exceedances  3-
                  Site (AQS ID)                                                                     yr average
                                                       2012            2013            2014      ---------------
                                                                                                     2012-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRESNO COUNTY:
    Clovis--Villa (06-019-5001).................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Fresno--Drummond Street (06-019-0007).......             1.0             0.0             0.0             0.3
    Fresno--Garland (06-019-0011)...............             1.0             0.0             0.0             0.3
    Fresno--Sierra Skypark (06-019-0242)........             1.0             0.0             1.1             0.7
    Parlier (06-019-4001).......................             1.0             0.0             0.0             0.3
    Tranquility (06-019-2009)...................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
KERN COUNTY:
    Arvin--Di Giorgio (06-029-5002).............             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Bakersfield--Muni (06-029-2012).............             0.0             0.0             0.0         \2\ 0.0
    Bakersfield--California (06-029-0014).......             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Edison (06-029-0007)........................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Maricopa (06-029-0008)......................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Oildale (06-029-0232).......................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Shafter (06-029-6001).......................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
KINGS COUNTY:
    Hanford--Irwin (06-031-1004)................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
MADERA COUNTY:
    Madera--Pump Yard (06-039-0004).............             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Madera--City (06-039-2010)..................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
MERCED COUNTY:
    Merced--Coffee (06-047-0003)................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY:
    Stockton--Hazelton (06-077-1002)............             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Tracy--Airport (06-077-3005)................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
STANISLAUS COUNTY:
    Modesto--14th Street (06-099-0005)..........             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Turlock (06-099-0006).......................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
TULARE COUNTY:
    Porterville (06-107-2010)...................             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
    Sequoia National Park--Ash Mountain (06-107-             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
     0009)......................................
    Visalia--Church Street (06-107-2002)........             0.0             0.0             0.0             0.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Source: Quicklook Report, ``20160311_QLRpt_SJV_1hrO3_2012-2015.pdf,'' March 11, 2016; and
  ``20160411_QLRpt_SJV_1hrO3_2012-2015.xlsx,'' April 11, 2016 (in the docket for this proposed action).
\2\ Based on CARB's missing data analysis for this site, at most one exceedance could have been recorded during
  the first half of 2012 if the site had been operational during that period. Assuming such an exceedance had
  occurred, the 3-year average of expected exceedances for the 2012-2014 period at the Bakersfield-Municipal
  Airport site would have been 0.3, which is less than the corresponding value at Fresno-Sierra Skypark (0.7)
  and less than the NAAQS.

    As noted above, a ``complete'' data set for determining attainment 
of the ozone standard is generally one that includes three years of 
data with an average percent of days with valid monitoring data greater 
than 90 percent with no single year less than 75 percent. Based on 
these criteria, the data summarized in Table 1 from all of the sites 
meet the

[[Page 31210]]

criteria over the 2012 to 2014 period except for the Bakersfield--
Municipal Airport site (AQS ID: 06-029-2012). The Bakersfield--
Municipal Airport site began operation on July 1, 2012 and although 
completeness was greater than 90 percent for the period of the year it 
was operating, total completeness for the entire year, including the 
period prior to establishment of the monitor, was 48 percent. 
Completeness was greater than 90 percent at the Bakersfield--Municipal 
Airport site in 2013 and 2014.
    To address the data gap at the Bakersfield--Municipal Airport, CARB 
prepared a missing data analysis to identify an upper bound on the 
ozone concentrations and exceedance days that might have been recorded 
at this site during the first half of 2012 if it had been operational 
during that time.\28\ To identify an upper bound, CARB calculated the 
maximum differences between daily maximum 1-hour ozone measurements 
occurring on the same days from the three surrounding sites (Oildale, 
Bakersfield--California Avenue, and Edison) and the Bakersfield--
Municipal Airport site during the first six months of 2013 and 2014 and 
applied the maximum differences to the highest daily maximum hourly 
concentrations measured at the three nearby ozone sites during the 
first half of 2012. The results showed that at most one exceedance 
could have been measured at the Bakersfield--Municipal Airport during 
the first six months of 2012 if it had been operational during that 
time. Based on our review, we find CARB's methods for estimating an 
upper bound on ozone concentrations and exceedances at the 
Bakersfield--Municipal Airport site to be acceptable and agree with 
CARB's conclusions drawn from the analysis. Thus, we find that 
incompleteness of the 2012 data set from the Bakersfield--Municipal 
Airport site does not preclude an attainment determination for the San 
Joaquin Valley that relies, in part, on 2012 data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See CARB's missing data analysis in appendix A to ``San 
Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone Clean Data Determination'' dated 
February 8, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Analysis of 1-Hour Ozone Trends in the San Joaquin Valley

    In support of its request to EPA for a Clean Data Determination, 
CARB submitted analyses of the 1-hour ozone design value and 
concentration trends, along with analyses of topography, meteorology, 
and ozone precursor emissions in the Valley. Based on its analyses, 
CARB concluded that the ozone site within the Valley with the maximum 
1-hour ozone concentration is currently located in the Fresno 
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Between 1990 and 2007, the maximum 
1-hour ozone concentrations in the Valley alternated between the 
Bakersfield MSA in the southern portion of the Valley and the Fresno 
MSA in the central portion of the Valley.\29\ In 2008 the location of 
the maximum 1-hour ozone concentration site shifted from the 
Bakersfield MSA (at the Edison monitoring site for 2006-2007) to the 
Fresno MSA (at the Clovis--N. Villa Avenue monitoring site in 2008-
2010), where it has remained through 2015 (at the Fresno--Sierra 
Skypark monitoring site in 2012-2014).\30\ CARB provided detailed 
evidence that the maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations in the 
Bakersfield MSA have decreased and the location of the maximum 1-hour 
ozone concentration has occurred in the Fresno MSA over last seven 
years (2008-2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See pp. 21-22, CARB ``San Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone Clean 
Data Determination'' dated February 8, 2016.
    \30\ See Table 9, p.22, CARB ``San Joaquin Valley 1-Hour Ozone 
Clean Data Determination'' dated February 8, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB's analyses suggest that the Valley's topography, weather, and 
transport patterns strongly influence the geographic distribution of 
ozone, resulting in lower levels in the north, with higher levels in 
the central and southern portions of the Valley. In addition, CARB's 
analysis of emission inventories show decreasing trends in 
anthropogenic emissions of nitrogen oxides and reactive organic gases 
throughout the Valley from 2000 to 2014, with the fastest rates of 
decrease expected in the Bakersfield MSA, providing further support 
that the Valley's design value is likely to continue to occur in the 
Fresno MSA.
    The Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site in the Bakersfield MSA was 
closed in 2010. Prior to its ceasing operation, a monitor intended to 
replace it began operating nearby at the Arvin--Di Giorgio site. The 
request to replace the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site with the 
Arvin--Di Giorgio monitoring site and the EPA's analysis of the request 
are discussed in section II.C., below. At the time of its closure, the 
Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site had not recorded the maximum ozone 
concentration in the Valley in more than five years. However, in order 
to ensure that all sites that had been violating the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 
would be attaining the standard, CARB conducted a detailed analysis of 
the daily maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations expected at the Arvin--
Bear Mountain monitoring site following its closure in 2010 because it 
had been one of the Valley sites that, in some prior years, recorded 
the highest ozone concentration in the Valley. CARB conducted rank-by-
rank regression analyses and comparisons using 2010 data from the 
Arvin--Bear Mountain, Arvin--Di Giorgio, and Edison monitoring sites to 
estimate daily maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations and estimated 
expected exceedances at the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site for 
2011-2015 had the monitor remained operational until this time. CARB's 
analyses indicated that the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site would 
have attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the 2012-2014 period and would 
have continued to attain the standard for 2013-2015 based on the most 
recent preliminary data for 2015.\31\ CARB's analyses also concluded 
that the three-year average of estimated expected exceedances of 0.3 at 
the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site for both the 2012-2014 and 
2013-2015 periods would have been less than the corresponding values at 
the Fresno--Sierra Skypark monitoring site (0.7 for 2012-2014 and 0.4 
for 2013-2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See pp. 18-19 and Appendix B, CARB ``San Joaquin Valley 1-
Hour Ozone Clean Data Determination'' dated February 8, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to CARB's analyses, the District conducted predictive 
regression calculations of daily maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations 
for 2012 through 2014 at the Arvin--Bear Mountain and Arvin--Di Giorgio 
monitoring sites.\32\ Although the District used different methods, 
their results are consistent with the results from CARB's analyses, 
indicating that ozone concentrations at the Arvin--Bear Mountain 
monitoring site would have attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during 2012-
2014. The District's analyses also indicate the location of the maximum 
1-hour concentration ozone site within the Fresno MSA and provide 
support for the shift, in 2008, of the Valley's maximum site from the 
Bakersfield region to the Fresno region. This is further supported by 
monitoring data at the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site that show 
that in the last five years of Arvin--Bear Mountain's monitor operation 
prior to its 2010 closure, the Valley's maximum 1-hour ozone 
concentration did not occur at the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring 
site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See ``Attainment Determination Request for the Revoked 1-
Hour Ozone Standard'' dated July 13, 2015 prepared by the San 
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.

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

[[Page 31211]]

    Based on our review of the submitted documentation, we find that 
CARB's and the District's methods and analyses regarding 1-hour ozone 
trends in the San Joaquin Valley and estimates of post-2010 ozone 
concentrations and expected exceedances at the Arvin--Bear Mountain 
site to be reasonable and agree with the conclusions drawn therefrom.

C. Analysis of Monitoring Network Adequacy

    Within the San Joaquin Valley, CARB and the District are jointly 
responsible for assuring that the area meets air quality monitoring 
requirements. The SLAMS network of ozone monitors in the Valley 
includes monitors operated by the District and monitors operated by 
CARB. The District submits annual monitoring network plans to the EPA. 
The District's network plans describe the various monitoring sites 
operated by the District as well as those operated by CARB. These plans 
discuss the status of the air monitoring network, as required under 40 
CFR 58.10.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See SJVAPCD's ``2015 Air Monitoring Network Plan'', dated 
August 28, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA reviews the District's annual network plans and conducts 
technical systems audits and has generally found the combined ambient 
air monitoring network meets or exceeds the requirements for the 
minimum number of SLAMS monitoring sites for ozone and is in compliance 
with the applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 58 for ozone 
except for the requirement to identify a maximum concentration ozone 
site within the Bakersfield MSA.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See, e.g., letter from Deborah Jordan, Director, Air 
Division, EPA Region IX, to James Goldstene, Executive Officer, 
California Air Resources Board, dated October 22, 2012, transmitting 
the findings from the EPA's 2011 Technical Systems Audit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, 40 CFR part 58 requires, among other things, that at 
least one ozone site for each MSA must be designated to record the 
maximum concentration for that particular area. The closure of the 
Arvin--Bear Mountain site without subsequent approval of a replacement 
site prevented the designation of a maximum concentration ozone site 
for the Bakersfield MSA. On April 29, 2016, CARB submitted a request 
letter to the EPA for the relocation of the San Joaquin Valley Arvin--
Bear Mountain ozone air monitoring site to the Arvin--Di Giorgio air 
monitoring site, which is 2.2 miles away and began operation prior to 
closure of the Arvin--Bear Mountain site.\35\ On May 2, 2016, EPA 
approved the relocation request based on a thorough review of all 
nearby available site options.\36\ Approval of the replacement site for 
the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site resolves the ozone ambient air 
monitoring network issue for the Bakersfield MSA. The EPA is 
determining that the ozone monitoring network in the Valley is adequate 
based on the following: The foregoing analyses provided by CARB and the 
District indicating that the Valley's maximum 1-hour ozone 
concentration site has shifted away from the Bakersfield MSA to sites 
located in the Fresno MSA and that 1-hour ozone design values that 
would have occurred at the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site post-
2010 are consistent with attainment; the EPA's approval of the Arvin--
Bear Mountain monitoring site relocation request; and the fact that the 
replacement for the Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site (i.e., Arvin--
Di Giorgio) has been in operation since prior to the closure of the 
Arvin--Bear Mountain monitoring site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See letter from Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Planning 
and Science Division, California Air Resources Board, to Meredith 
Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, dated 
April 29, 2016.
    \36\ See letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality 
Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Karen Magliano, Chief, Air 
Quality Planning and Science Division, California Air Resources 
Board, dated May 2, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment

    The EPA is proposing to determine that the San Joaquin Valley has 
attained the 1-hour ozone standard based on sufficient, quality-assured 
and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2012-2014 
monitoring period. Preliminary data for 2015 are consistent with the 
continued attainment of the standard in San Joaquin Valley.
    If we finalize this determination as proposed, to the extent not 
already fulfilled, the requirements for the state to submit attainment 
demonstrations and associated reasonably available control measures, 
reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures for failure to 
attain or make reasonable progress and other plans related to 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard for San Joaquin Valley shall be 
suspended until such time as the area is redesignated as attainment for 
the current ozone NAAQS or a redesignation substitute for the 1-hour 
ozone standard is approved, at which time the requirements no longer 
apply.\37\ If, however, prior to such redesignation or approval of such 
redesignation substitute, the EPA determines that San Joaquin Valley 
has violated the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, then the area is again required to 
submit such attainment-related plans.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See 40 CFR 51.1118.
    \38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action proposes to make a determination based on air quality 
data and does 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);
     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, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or 
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible 
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed clean data determination does not have 
tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000), and will not impose substantial

[[Page 31212]]

direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: May 3, 2016.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016-11630 Filed 5-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P