Opinion ID: 2763880
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: In 1979, EPA promulgated primary and secondary

Text: NAAQS for ozone with a limit of 0.12 parts per million (ppm)—known as the “one-hour” standards, because they measured average ozone levels over one-hour periods. See Revisions to the NAAQS for Photochemical Oxidants, 44 7 Fed. Reg. 8202, 8202 (Feb. 8, 1979). The Clean Air Act as amended in 1977 required states to achieve compliance with the one-hour ozone NAAQS by December 31, 1987. See South Coast, 472 F.3d at 886. The statute afforded EPA and the states “broad discretion” as to the means of compliance. Id. at 886-87. That discretionary approach ultimately accomplished “little to reduce the dangers of key contaminants.” Id. For instance, according to congressional testimony, the number of regions violating the one-hour ozone NAAQS actually increased between August 1987 and February 1989. Id. 2. After nearly a decade of debate, Congress amended the Clean Air Act in 1990 to “abandon[] the discretion-filled approach of two decades prior in favor of more comprehensive regulation” of ozone and five other pollutants. Id.; see 42 U.S.C. §§ 7511-7514a. The amendments moved the prior, discretionary approach to Subpart 1 of Part D of Subchapter I, where it continued to apply as a default matter to pollutants not specifically addressed in the amended portions of the Act. See 42 U.S.C. § 7502(a)(1)(C). Congress enacted Subpart 2 to govern ozone. See id. §§ 7511-7511f (Subpart 2). Subpart 2 contains “a graduated classification scheme that prescribe[s] mandatory controls that each state must incorporate into its SIP.” South Coast, 472 F.3d at 887. 8 The “backbone” of Subpart 2 is “Table 1,” which classifies all nonattainment areas for ozone by operation of law. Whitman, 531 U.S. at 484; see also 42 U.S.C. § 7511(a)(1) tbl.1 (Table 1). † Table 1 includes five classification categories representing graduated degrees of non-compliance with the NAAQS: Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, and Extreme. For each classification, the table lists a range of “Design value[s],” the range of groundlevel ozone concentrations for that classification. Table 1 expresses design values in terms of the one-hour ozone NAAQS in effect at the time of the 1990 amendments. For example, the range for the Marginal category begins at 0.121 ppm, just above the one-hour limit of 0.12 ppm. † Table 1 appears in the statute as follows: TABLE 1 Primary standard Area class Design value attainment date Marginal................ 0.121 up to 0.138..... …………3 years after November 15, 1990 Moderate............... 0.138 up to 0.160..... ................6 years after November 15, 1990 Serious.................. 0.160 up to 0.180..... ................9 years after November 15, 1990 Severe................... 0.180 up to 0.280..... ..............15 years after November 15, 1990 Extreme................. 0.280 and above…... ..............20 years after November 15, 1990  The design value is measured in parts per million (ppm).  The primary standard attainment date is measured from November 15, 1990. 9 Subpart 2 requires all nonattainment areas to achieve the primary NAAQS “as expeditiously as practicable,” but no later than the “Primary standard attainment date” in Table 1. 42 U.S.C. § 7511(a)(1) & tbl.1. Higher classifications—more polluted areas—receive more time to attain compliance. Unless already classified as Severe or Extreme, areas that fail to attain the NAAQS by the statutory deadline are automatically reclassified to the next highest classification, see id. § 7511(b)(2), allowing more time for compliance but imposing a harsher set of mandatory controls. See South Coast, 472 F.3d at 887. The statute imposes additional penalties on Severe and Extreme areas that fail to meet the listed deadlines. See 42 U.S.C. § 7511d. 3. In 1997, citing new information suggesting a correlation between prolonged ozone exposure and “a wide range of health effects,” EPA promulgated new NAAQS for ground-level ozone. See NAAQS for Ozone, 62 Fed. Reg. 38,856, 38,861 (July 18, 1997). EPA replaced the one-hour, 0.12 ppm standard with a 0.08 ppm standard measured over an eight-hour period. See id. at 38,856. The agency explained that an eight-hour, 0.09 ppm standard would have “generally represent[ed] the continuation of the [old] level of protection.” Id. at 38,858. The additional reduction from 0.09 ppm to 0.08 ppm manifested a strengthening of the standard. The regulation stated that the preexisting primary one-hour NAAQS, governed by Subpart 2 of the statute, would remain in effect, but only for areas yet to attain the one-hour standard and only until they did so. Id. at 38,873. Subpart 1 alone thus would govern the 1997 primary NAAQS. Id. This court rejected EPA’s attempt to apply Subpart 1 to the new primary 1997 standard, holding that Subpart 2 must govern any revised primary ozone NAAQS. Am. Trucking 10 Ass’ns, Inc. v. EPA (ATA I), 175 F.3d 1027, 1050 (D.C. Cir. 1999), modified on reh’g, 195 F.3d 4 (D.C. Cir. 1999). We found that conclusion mandated by the plain text of the statute at step one of the framework prescribed by Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). ATA I, 175 F.3d at 1048. On certiorari, the Supreme Court agreed that EPA could not rely exclusively on Subpart 1 to implement the 1997 primary NAAQS because Subpart 2 “unquestionably” “provide[s] for classifying nonattainment ozone areas under the revised standard.” Whitman v. Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc., 531 U.S. 457, 482 (2001). The Court, however, reached that conclusion at Chevron step two rather than step one. Id. at 484. The Court identified various ways in which the statute, on its face, was silent as to how Subpart 2 should apply when EPA revises the ozone standard. See id. at 483-84. Of most relevance here, the Court noted a timing gap in Table 1 stemming from the table’s use of the enactment date of the 1990 amendments (November 15, 1990) as the starting point when prescribing the allowable attainment periods. That approach “seems to make no sense for areas that are first classified under a new standard after November 15, 1990. If, for example, areas were classified in the year 2000, many of the deadlines would already have expired at the time of classification.” Id. at 483-84. In light of the identified gaps in the statute, the Court found the amended Act “ambiguous concerning the manner in which Subpart 1 and Subpart 2 interact with regard to revised ozone standards.” Id. at 484. The Court stated that it therefore would “defer to the EPA’s reasonable resolution of that ambiguity,” under Chevron step two. Id. But “emphasiz[ing]” the “narrow scope” of the identified gaps, South Coast, 472 F.3d at 889, the Court held that “EPA’s 11 interpretation making Subpart 2 abruptly obsolete” went “over the edge of reasonable interpretation.” Whitman, 531 U.S. at 485. “The principal distinction between Subpart 1 and Subpart 2,” the Court explained, “is that the latter eliminates regulatory discretion that the former allowed.” Id. at 484. The agency therefore could “not construe the statute in a way that completely nullifies textually applicable provisions meant to limit its discretion.” Id. at 485. 4. In 2003, with EPA yet to implement the 1997 primary NAAQS in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision in Whitman, several environmental organizations sued the agency, arguing that it had failed to designate areas (as attainment or nonattainment) within the statutory deadlines. See 42 U.S.C. § 7407(d)(1); Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS; Early Action Compact Areas With Deferred Effective Dates, 69 Fed. Reg. 23,858, 23,860 (Apr. 30, 2004). EPA entered into a consent decree requiring it to issue designations by April 15, 2004. 69 Fed. Reg. at 23,860. The agency promulgated designations on April 30, 2004. See id. at 23,858. EPA also contemporaneously issued a new implementation rule for the 1997 NAAQS. See Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS—Phase 1, 69 Fed. Reg. 23,951, 23,951 (Apr. 30, 2004) (2004 Rule). Of particular salience, the rule filled the timing gap for Subpart 2 compliance dates by applying the same attainment periods established in Table 1—e.g., three years for Marginal areas, six years for Moderate areas, and so on—but measured from the effective date of EPA’s designations for the 1997 NAAQS, June 15, 2004 (rather than from the November 15, 1990, enactment date of the 1990 amendments). Id. at 23,967. EPA considered an alternative approach under which it would extend the attainment deadlines by several months, to 12 November or December of the relevant year (e.g., to November or December 2007 for Marginal areas). See id. The agency determined, however, that it lacked statutory authority to extend the attainment deadlines in that fashion. See id. As a general matter, the 2004 Rule addressed the transition from the old one-hour NAAQS to the new 1997 standard by “revok[ing] the 1-hour standard in full, including the associated designations and classifications.” Id. at 23,954. Interpreting the statute’s anti-backsliding provision to apply to the 1997 NAAQS, see 42 U.S.C. § 7502(e), the rule mandated that all “controls” from the one-hour standard remain in place after revocation of the one-hour NAAQS. See Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS—Phase 1, 69 Fed. Reg. at 23,972. EPA concluded, however, that certain requirements in Subpart 2 failed to qualify as “controls” within the meaning of the anti-backsliding provision. Those requirements, including transportation conformity obligations and attainment contingency plans, would not be retained after the NAAQS transition. See id. at 23,984-87. This court invalidated several aspects of the 2004 Rule. See South Coast, 472 F.3d at 890-905. We partially rejected the rule’s approach to the prior, one-hour NAAQS. See id. at 899-905. We initially explained that EPA does possess power to revoke a superseded standard in full: because EPA may make “appropriate” “revisions” to an ozone NAAQS, see 42 U.S.C. § 7409(d)(1), the agency “retains the authority to revoke the one-hour standard so long as adequate . . . provisions are introduced” to satisfy the anti-backsliding requirements of 42 U.S.C. § 7502(e). South Coast, 472 F.3d at 899. But we rejected as “impermissible backsliding” EPA’s failure to maintain several requirements associated 13 with the one-hour NAAQS on the flawed theory that they were not “controls” (including “rate-of-progress milestones, contingency plans, and motor vehicle emissions budgets”). Id. at 900. 5. In 2000, while the litigation concerning the 1997 NAAQS was underway, EPA initiated a new round of ozone NAAQS review. See Mississippi, 744 F.3d at 1340. EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS in 2008, in compliance with a schedule adopted by consent decree. See id. Citing new data concerning ozone’s health effects, EPA lowered the primary and secondary standards to 0.075 ppm, measured using the same eight-hour average as the 1997 NAAQS. See NAAQS for Ozone, 73 Fed. Reg. 16,436, 16,436 (Mar. 27, 2008). EPA originally intended to designate areas under the 2008 NAAQS within two years of their issuance, by March 12, 2010. See Air Quality Designations for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS, 77 Fed. Reg. 30,088, 30,090 (May 21, 2012). The agency extended the designation deadline by one year, to March 12, 2011, citing its authority under 42 U.S.C. § 7407(d)(1)(B). See 77 Fed. Reg. at 30,090-91. When the extended deadline passed, an environmental organization sued to compel EPA to issue the designations. EPA entered into a consent decree requiring it to sign a final rule designating areas by May 31, 2012. See id. The agency issued a final rule on May 21, 2012, designating most areas of the United States effective July 20, 2012. See id. at 30,088. On the same day, EPA promulgated the implementation rule at issue in this case. See Implementation of the 2008 NAAQS for Ozone: Nonattainment Area Classifications Approach, Attainment Deadlines and Revocation of the 1997 Ozone Standards for Transportation Conformity Purposes, 77 Fed. Reg. 30,160 (May 21, 2012) (Implementation Rule). 14 The Implementation Rule applies Subpart 2 to all nonattainment areas for the 2008 NAAQS, translating the one-hour design values in Table 1 to correspond to the new 0.075 ppm, eight-hour standard. See id. at 30,161-64. The rule contains two additional actions challenged here. First, rather than setting attainment deadlines based on the attainment periods in Table 1 measured from the effective date of the new designations—as EPA had done in the 2004 Rule—the agency extended the attainment deadlines by several months to “December 31 of the [corresponding] calendar year.” Id. at 30,166. Second, EPA revoked the 1997 NAAQS for purposes of, and only for purposes of, the transportation conformity requirements. See id. at 30,167-68. The rule otherwise leaves the 1997 NAAQS in place to operate in parallel with the 2008 NAAQS.