Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; California; Determination of Termination of Section 185 Fees, 28696-28707 [2011-12063]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 18, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28696-28707]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12063]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0372; FRL-9307-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
California; Determination of Termination of Section 185 Fees

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to determine that the State of California 
is no longer required to submit or implement section 185 fee program 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions for the Sacramento Metro 1-
hour ozone nonattainment area (Sacramento Metro Area) to satisfy anti-
backsliding requirements for the 1-hour ozone standard. The Sacramento 
Metro Area consists of both Sacramento and Yolo counties and portions 
of four adjacent counties (Solano, Sutter, Placer and El Dorado). This 
proposed determination (``Termination Determination'') is based on 
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring 
data for 2007-2009, showing attainment of the 1-hour ozone National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard (1-hour ozone NAAQS or standard), which is 
due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions implemented in the 
area. Complete and

[[Page 28697]]

quality-assured data for 2010 show that the area continues in 
attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to exclude 
from use in determining attainment exceedances of the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS that occurred on three days in 2008, because the exceedances are 
due to exceptional events (wildfires).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 17, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0372, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: John J. Kelly at kelly.johnj@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: John J. Kelly, Air Planning Office (Air-2), at fax number 
415-947-3579.
    4. Mail: John J. Kelly, Air Planning Office (Air-2), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne, San 
Francisco, California 94105.
    5. Hand or Courier Delivery: John J. Kelly, Air Planning Section 
(Air-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne, 
San Francisco, California 94105. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Docket's normal hours of operation. Special arrangements 
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0372. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the 
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information 
through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail that you consider to be 
CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system, which means 
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment 
directly to EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your 
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, 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 EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, 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: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning 
Office (Air-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne, San Francisco, California 94105. EPA requests that if at all 
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection during normal business 
hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John J. Kelly, (415) 947-4151, or by 
e-mail at kelly.johnj@epa.gov.

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

Table of Contents

I. What actions is EPA taking?
II. Background
III. What is the legal rationale for this proposed termination 
determination?
IV. What is the effect of this proposed termination determination?
V. What is EPA's analysis?
    a. Attainment of the 1-Hour Ozone Standard
    b. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
VI. Proposed Actions
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What actions is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to determine that California is no longer required 
to submit or implement Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) section 185 fee 
program SIP revisions for the Sacramento Metro 1-hour ozone 
nonattainment area (Sacramento Metro Area) to satisfy anti-backsliding 
requirements associated with the transition from the 1-hour ozone 
standard (1-hour standard or 1-hour) to the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 
(8-hour standard or 8-hour). This proposed Termination Determination is 
based on EPA's belief that the area is attaining the 1-hour ozone 
standard due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions 
implemented in the area. In addition, EPA proposes to exclude from use 
in determining the area has attained the 1-hour ozone standard certain 
air quality monitoring data because they meet the criteria for ozone 
exceptional events that are caused by wildfires. If finalized, the 
effect of EPA's determination that the area has attained the 1-hour 
ozone standard due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions 
would be to terminate the area's obligations with respect to section 
185 fee program requirements for the 1-hour ozone standard. In a 
separate interim final action, published in the Rules section in 
today's Federal Register, we are deferring sanctions that would 
otherwise apply to the entire Sacramento Metro Area with the exception 
of Sacramento County, that is, the entirety of Yolo County and the 
Sacramento Metro Area portions of Solano, Sutter, Placer and El Dorado 
counties. This action addresses only the CAA section 185 requirements 
for the 1-hour ozone standard for the Sacramento Metro Area, and not 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.

II. Background

    The Act requires us to establish NAAQS for certain widespread 
pollutants that cause or contribute to air pollution that is reasonably 
anticipated to endanger public health or welfare (sections 108 and 109 
of the Act). In 1979, we promulgated the revised 1-hour ozone standard 
of 0.12 parts per million (ppm) (44 FR 8202, February 8, 1979).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For ease of communication, many reports of ozone 
concentrations are given in parts per billion (ppb); ppb = ppm x 
1000. Thus, 0.12 ppm becomes 120 ppb (or between 120 to 124 ppb, 
when rounding is considered).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An area is considered to have attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS if 
there are no violations of the standard, as determined in accordance 
with the regulation codified at 40 CFR section 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.\2\ An

[[Page 28698]]

exceedance occurs when the maximum hourly ozone concentration during 
any day exceeds 0.124 ppm. 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 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. See, 40 CFR 
part 50, Appendix H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Act, as amended in 1990, required EPA to designate as 
nonattainment any area that was violating the 1-hour ozone standard, 
generally based on air quality monitoring data from the 1987 through 
1989 period (section 107(d)(4) of the Act; 56 FR 56694, November 6, 
1991). The Act further classified these areas, based on the severity of 
their nonattainment problem, as Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, or 
Extreme.
    The control requirements and date by which attainment of the 1-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.

Sacramento Metro Area's History

    On November 6, 1991, EPA designated the Sacramento Metro Area as 
Serious nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard, with an attainment 
date no later than November 15, 1999 (56 FR 56694). The Sacramento 
Metro Area consists of the entirety of both Sacramento and Yolo 
counties and portions of four adjacent counties (El Dorado, Placer, 
Solano and Sutter counties) (see 40 CFR section 81.305). Sacramento 
County is under the jurisdiction of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air 
Quality Management District (SMAQMD). Yolo County and the eastern 
portion of Solano County comprise the Yolo-Solano Air Quality 
Management District. The southern portion of Sutter County is part of 
the Feather River Air Quality Management District. The western portion 
of Placer County is part of the Placer County Air Pollution Control 
District. Lastly, the western portion of El Dorado County is part of 
the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District. Under California 
law, each air district is responsible for adopting and implementing 
stationary source rules, such as the rules required under CAA section 
185, while the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopts and 
implements consumer products and mobile source rules. The district and 
state rules are submitted to EPA by CARB.
    In 1995, EPA granted the State's request to reclassify the 
Sacramento Metro Area as Severe. 60 FR 20237 (April 25, 1995). The 
reclassification of the area as Severe required the State to adopt a 
SIP revision creating a penalty fee program under CAA section 185 that 
would apply if the area failed to meet the November 15, 2005 attainment 
date that applies to Severe 1-hour ozone areas and to submit that SIP 
revision to EPA by December 31, 2000 (CAA section 182(d)(3)). On 
September 26, 2002, SMAQMD adopted Rule 307 (''Clean Air Act Fees''). 
CARB submitted Rule 307 to EPA as a SIP revision for the Sacramento 
County portion of the area on December 12, 2002 and EPA approved Rule 
307 on August 26, 2003 (68 FR 51184). The other affected air districts 
in the Sacramento Metro Area did not submit 1-hour section 185 SIP 
revisions for their portions of the nonattainment area. EPA published 
findings of failure to submit on January 5, 2010 (75 FR 232).\3\ These 
findings started sanctions clocks for imposition of offset sanctions 18 
months after January 5, 2010 and highway sanctions six months after the 
offset sanctions, pursuant to section 179 of the CAA and our 
regulations at 40 CFR section 52.31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA's findings also addressed two other 1-hour ozone 
nonattainment areas in California, which are not at issue here: 
Southeast Desert and the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1997, EPA promulgated a new, more protective standard for ozone 
based on an 8-hour average concentration (the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard). In 2004, EPA published the 1997 8-hour ozone designations 
and classifications and a rule governing certain facets of 
implementation of the 8-hour ozone standard (Phase 1 Rule) (69 FR 23858 
and 69 FR 23951, respectively, April 30, 2004).
    By the Sacramento Metro Area's 1-hour ozone 2005 attainment 
deadline, EPA had revoked the 1-hour standard and designated the area 
as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.305. 
The area's initial classification for 8-hour ozone was Serious, but EPA 
subsequently granted CARB's request to reclassify the area to Severe 
for the 8-hour ozone standard. See 75 FR 24409, May 5, 2010. On July 7, 
2010, and in an update on April 13, 2011, CARB requested that EPA find 
that the Sacramento Metro Area had attained the 1-hour ozone standard 
due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions, and that EPA 
terminate 1-hour ozone CAA section 185 requirements for the area. See 
letters from James Goldstene, CARB Executive Officer, to Jared 
Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX, with 
enclosures, dated July 7, 2010 and April 13, 2011.

Section 185 1-Hour Ozone Anti-Backsliding Requirements

    Although EPA revoked the 1-hour ozone standard (effective June 15, 
2005), during the transition from the 1-hour ozone to the 8-hour ozone 
standard, 1-hour nonattainment areas remain subject to certain 
requirements based on their 1-hour ozone classification. The section 
185 fee program requirement applies to any ozone nonattainment area 
classified as Severe or Extreme, including any area that was classified 
Severe or Extreme under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS as of the effective date 
of the area's 8-hour designation (see 40 CFR part 81).
    Initially, in our rules to address the transition from the 1-hour 
to the 8-hour ozone standard, EPA did not include the section 185 fee 
penalty requirement as one of the measures necessary to meet Clean Air 
Act anti-backsliding requirements.\4\ However, on December 23, 2006, 
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 
determined that EPA should not have removed from its anti-backsliding 
requirements the application of the section 185 fee provision for 
Severe and Extreme nonattainment areas that failed to attain the 1-hour 
ozone standard by their attainment date. South Coast Air Quality 
Management District v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006). In light of 
the Court's decision, on January 5, 2010 EPA issued guidance on the 
application of the section 185 1-hour anti-backsliding requirement.\5\ 
EPA's guidance addressed, among other matters, alternative methods of 
satisfying the section 185 1-hour anti-backsliding requirement, and the 
circumstances under which EPA would determine that the obligation was 
terminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient 
Air Quality Standard--Phase 1, 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).
    \5\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, to Air Division Directors, 
``Guidance on Developing Fee Programs Required by Clean Air Act 
Section 185 for the 1-hour Ozone NAAQS,'' January 5, 2010. This 
memorandum is in the docket to this proposed action and can also be 
found on the Internet at: https://www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/pdfs/20100105185guidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After the 1-hour ozone standard was revoked, and in accordance with 
anti-backsliding regulations that remain unchallenged, EPA was no 
longer obligated to find that an area attained by

[[Page 28699]]

its 1-hour attainment date, nor to reclassify 1-hour areas under CAA 
Sections 181(b)(2) or 179(c) (40 CFR 51.905(e)). (69 FR 23951, April 
30, 2004).

III. What is the legal rationale for this proposed termination 
determination?

    As a result of the court decision in South Coast Air Quality 
Management District v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006), states with 
areas classified as Severe or Extreme nonattainment for the 1-hour 
ozone standard at the time of the area's initial nonattainment 
designation for the 1997 8-hour standard are no longer categorically 
exempt from the anti-backsliding requirements imposed by section 185. 
EPA has issued guidance for states related to developing 1-hour ozone 
section 185 fee programs.\6\ As set forth in this guidance, EPA 
believes that states can meet the 1-hour ozone section 185 obligation 
through a SIP revision containing either the fee program prescribed in 
section 185 of the Act, or an equivalent alternative program, as 
further explained below. EPA believes that an alternative program may 
be acceptable if EPA determines, through notice-and-comment rulemaking, 
that it is consistent with the principles of section 172(e) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(e) is an anti-backsliding provision of the CAA that 
requires EPA to develop regulations to ensure that controls in a 
nonattainment area are ``no less stringent'' than those that applied to 
the area before EPA revised a NAAQS to make it less stringent. In the 
Phase 1 ozone implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS published on 
April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA determined that although section 
172(e) does not directly apply where EPA has strengthened the NAAQS, as 
it did in 1997, it was reasonable to apply the same anti-backsliding 
principle that would apply to the relaxation of a standard for the 
transition from the 1-hour NAAQS to the more stringent 1997 8-hour 
NAAQS. As part of applying the principle in section 172(e) for purposes 
of the transition from the 1-hour standard to the 1997 8-hour standard, 
EPA can either require states to retain programs that applied for 
purposes of the 1-hour standard, or alternatively can allow states to 
adopt alternative programs, but only if such alternatives are 
determined through notice-and-comment rulemaking to be ``no less 
stringent'' than the mandated program.
    EPA is electing to consider alternative programs to satisfy the 1-
hour ozone section 185 fee program SIP revision requirement. States 
choosing to adopt an alternative program to the section 185 fee program 
must demonstrate that the alternative program is no less stringent than 
the otherwise applicable section 185 fee program and EPA can only 
approve such demonstration after notice-and-comment rulemaking.
    As set forth in EPA's January 5, 2010 guidance, EPA believes that 
for an area that we determine is attaining either the 1-hour ozone or 
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based on permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions, the area would no longer be obligated to satisfy the 
section 185 anti-backsliding requirements associated with the 
transition from the 1-hour ozone standard to the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard. In such cases, an area's existing SIP could be considered an 
adequate alternative program. Our reasoning follows from the fact that 
an area's existing SIP measures, in conjunction with other enforceable 
Federal measures, are adequate for the area to achieve attainment, 
which is the purpose of the section 185 program. The section 185 fee 
program is an element of an area's attainment demonstration and its 
objective is to bring about attainment after a failure of an area to 
attain by its attainment date. Thus, areas that have attained the 1-
hour ozone standard, the standard for which the fee program was 
originally required, as a result of permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions, would have a SIP that is no less stringent than the SIP 
required under section 185. Therefore, EPA concludes that the 
obligation to submit a rule or to collect fees terminates once EPA 
determines that the area has attained the 1-hour ozone standard based 
on permanent and enforceable emission reductions.
    There is also an additional, independent basis for EPA's approach 
to determining that the anti-backsliding requirements associated with 
section 185 have been satisfied. Although section 185 provides that 
fees are to continue until the area is redesignated to attainment for 
ozone, EPA no longer promulgates redesignations for the 1-hour ozone 
standard because that standard has been revoked. Therefore, relief from 
the 1-hour section 185 fee program requirements under the terms of the 
statute is an impossibility, since the conditions the statute 
envisioned for relieving an area of its fee program obligation no 
longer can exist. There is thus a gap in the statute which must be 
filled by EPA. We believe that under these circumstances we must 
exercise our discretion under Chevron USA, Inc. v. Natural Resources 
Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984), to fill this gap, so as to carry 
out Congressional intent in the unique context of anti-backsliding 
requirements for a revoked standard. We believe that it is reasonable 
for the fee program obligation that applies for purposes of anti-
backsliding to cease upon a determination, based on notice-and-comment 
rulemaking, that an area has attained the 1-hour ozone standard due to 
permanent and enforceable measures. This determination centers on the 
core criteria for redesignations under CAA section 107(d)(3). We 
believe these criteria provide reasonable assurance that the purpose of 
the 1-hour anti-backsliding fee program obligation has been fulfilled 
in the context of a regulatory regime where the area remains subject to 
other applicable 1-hour anti-backsliding and 8-hour nonattainment 
measures. Under these circumstances, retention of the fee program under 
the anti-backsliding rule is no longer necessary for the purpose of 
achieving attainment of the 8-hour standard. See EPA's January 5, 2010 
guidance (footnote 5, above).

IV. What is the effect of this proposed termination determination?

    If this proposed determination to terminate the section 185 fee 
anti-backsliding requirement for the 1-hour ozone standard is 
finalized, the requirement for the State of California to submit 
section 185 penalty fee program SIP revisions for the portions of the 
area for which we made findings of failure to submit, which would 
require major stationary sources under the Sacramento Metro Area 1-hour 
ozone Severe nonattainment classification to pay fees as a penalty for 
the area's failure to attain the 1-hour ozone standard by the area's 1-
hour ozone attainment date, as well as the requirement for the 
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District portion of the 
area to implement its 1-hour ozone section 185 fee program, would be 
removed.
    A final Termination Determination for the 1-hour standard section 
185 measures will not be rescinded based on subsequent nonattainment of 
the 1-hour ozone standard. After EPA has determined that an area has 
attained the 1-hour standard due to permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions, EPA believes that it would be unduly punitive, confusing, 
and potentially destabilizing to re-impose the years-old penalty 
requirements if at some point in the future the area lapses back into 
1-hour nonattainment. Moreover, EPA believes that under current 
circumstances, it would not be in keeping with the intent of Congress. 
First, we note that had the area attained the 1-hour ozone standard 
prior to its

[[Page 28700]]

attainment date, no penalties at all would have been imposed even if 
the area subsequently lapsed into nonattainment. Second, the statute 
provides that penalties for failure to attain by an area's attainment 
date would be terminated by redesignation of the area. Now that the 1-
hour ozone standard has been revoked and EPA is no longer promulgating 
redesignations for that standard, relief from the 1-hour section 185 
fee program requirements under the terms of the statute is an 
impossibility--the mechanism the statute envisioned for relief no 
longer exists. As EPA explains in its January 5, 2010 guidance, we have 
reasonably concluded in these circumstances that a determination of 
attainment due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions, along 
with the area's existing SIP and its continuing obligations to meet 
ever more stringent ozone standards, are a reasonable alternative means 
for terminating these unique anti-backsliding penalty provisions. EPA 
believes that, given the gap in the statute, and the intent of Congress 
as expressed in quite different regulatory circumstances, it would be 
counterproductive and in conflict with that intent for EPA's 
determination to merely suspend rather than permanently terminate the 
1-hour anti-backsliding penalty fees. Requiring areas to remain subject 
to the threat of reviving stale penalty fees for an old revoked 
standard, when these areas and the sources subject to the penalties 
must now muster their resources to focus on meeting newer more 
stringent standards, would be at odds with the purposes of the Act and 
in conflict with the principle that penalty provisions should be 
narrowly construed. This is also true because the area is subject to a 
host of ongoing obligations for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard as well 
as the future anticipated new 8-hour ozone standard,\7\ when it has 
already shown great improvement towards meeting the 1-hour and 1997 8-
hour ozone standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ EPA anticipates announcing the reconsidered 8-hour ozone 
standard in July 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. What is EPA's analysis?

    EPA's proposed Termination Determination is based upon EPA's belief 
that the area is attaining the 1-hour ozone standard due to permanent 
and enforceable emission reductions implemented in the area. In its 
January 5, 2010 guidance, EPA set forth its views as to potential 
rationales for terminating section 185 obligations for 1-hour ozone. 
This notice formally sets forth EPA's legal interpretation concerning 
the basis for terminating those obligations.
    As explained above, EPA set forth our belief in our January 5, 2010 
guidance that for an area that we determine is attaining either the 1-
hour ozone or 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based on permanent and 
enforceable emission reductions, that the area would no longer be 
obligated to satisfy the anti-backsliding requirements associated with 
the transition from the 1-hour ozone standard to the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard.

a. Attainment of the 1-Hour Ozone Standard

    A determination of whether an area's air quality meets the 1-hour 
ozone NAAQS is generally based upon the most recent three years of 
complete, quality-assured and certified air quality monitoring data 
gathered at established National Air Monitoring Stations (``NAMS'') or 
State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (``SLAMS'') in the 
nonattainment area and entered into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) 
database. Data from air monitors operated by state/local agencies in 
compliance with 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, EPA relies 
primarily on data in its AQS database when determining the attainment 
status of an area. 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.
    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.9, the 1-hour ozone standard is 
attained at a monitoring site when the expected number of days per 
calendar year with maximum hourly average concentrations above 0.12 
parts per million (235 micrograms per cubic meter) is equal to or less 
than 1, as determined by 40 CFR part 50, Appendix H.
    EPA proposes to determine that the Sacramento Metro Area has 
attained the 1-hour ozone standard; that is, the number of expected 
exceedances at any site in the nonattainment area is not greater than 
one per year.\8\ This proposed determination is based on three years of 
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring 
data in AQS showing attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard for the 
2007-2009 monitoring period, and complete, quality-assured data in AQS 
for 2008-2010 that show continued attainment. As explained below, in 
determining the area's attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard, EPA is 
also proposing to exclude from consideration exceedances that occurred 
on three days in 2008, because they are due to wildfire exceptional 
events.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The average number of expected exceedances is determined by 
averaging the expected exceedances of the 1-hour ozone standard over 
a consecutive three calendar year period. See 40 CFR part 50 
Appendix H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Monitoring Network
    In the Sacramento Metro Area, the agencies responsible for assuring 
that the area meets air quality monitoring requirements include CARB, 
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), 
Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and Yolo-Solano 
Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD). Both CARB and SMAQMD submit 
annual monitoring network plans to EPA. SMAQMD Network Plans describe 
the monitoring network the district operates; CARB's Network Plans 
describe the monitoring sites CARB operates, in addition to monitoring 
sites operated by smaller air districts, namely, for the Sacramento 
Metro Area, PCAPCD and YSAQMD. These plans discuss the status of the 
air monitoring network, as required under 40 CFR 58.10.
    Since 2007, EPA regularly reviews these annual plans for compliance 
with the applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 58. With 
respect to ozone, EPA has found that the area's network plans meet the 
applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 58. See EPA letters to CARB 
and SMAQMD approving their annual network plans for years 2007, 2009 
and 2010.\9\ Furthermore, we concluded in our Technical System Audit of 
the CARB Primary Quality Assurance Organization (PQAO),\10\ conducted 
during Summer 2007, that the combined ambient air monitoring network 
operated by CARB and the local air districts in their PQAO currently 
meets or exceeds the requirements for the minimum number of SLAMS 
monitoring sites for all criteria pollutants, and that all of the 
monitoring sites are properly located with respect to monitoring 
objectives, spatial scales and other site criteria, as

[[Page 28701]]

required by 40 CFR part 58, Appendix D. See letter from Deborah Jordan, 
Director, Air Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, to James Goldstene, 
Executive Officer, CARB, transmitting ``Technical System Audit of the 
California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board: 2007,'' 
with enclosure, August 18, 2008. Also, CARB annually certifies that the 
data it submits to AQS are complete and quality-assured. See, e.g., 
letter from Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, Planning 
and Technical Support Division, CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 
Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX, certifying calendar year 2009 
ambient air quality data and quality assurance data, May 19, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Neither CARB nor SMAQMD proposed modifications to their 
networks in 2008; therefore, neither agency was required to submit a 
network plan to EPA for approval that year.
    \10\ A primary quality assurance organization is responsible for 
a group of monitoring stations for which data quality assessments 
can be pooled See 40 CFR section 58.1. CARB is the lead PQAO for all 
the air districts in the Sacramento Metro Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There were 16 ozone monitoring sites located throughout the 
Sacramento Metro Area in calendar years 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.\11\ 
Sacramento Metro AQMD operates six ozone monitors in Sacramento County: 
Elk Grove (southwest Sacramento County), Del Paso Manor (northeast City 
of Sacramento), Folsom (City of Folsom), Sacramento-Goldenland Court 
\12\ (northwest City of Sacramento), North Highlands (north Sacramento 
County) and Sloughhouse Road (west Sacramento County). CARB operates 
six ozone monitors in the Sacramento Metro Area: Sacramento-T Street 
(City of Sacramento) in Sacramento County; Cool (City of Cool), Echo 
Summit (in the Sierra Nevada Mountains) and Placerville (City of 
Placerville) in El Dorado County; Roseville (City of Roseville) in 
Placer County; and Davis (City of Davis) in Yolo County. Placer County 
APCD operates two ozone monitors in the Sacramento Metro Area: Colfax 
(City of Colfax) and Auburn (City of Auburn). Yolo-Solano AQMD operates 
two ozone monitors in the Sacramento Metro Area: Vacaville (City of 
Vacaville) in Solano County, and Woodland (City of Woodland) in Yolo 
County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Enclosure 2 of CARB's July 7, 2010 request includes a map 
on page 3.2 showing locations of all ozone monitors in the 
Sacramento Metro Area. Letter from James Goldstene, CARB Executive 
Officer, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA 
Region IX, dated July 7, 2010, requesting termination of CAA section 
185 requirements as they pertain to the Sacramento Metro Area. The 
document can be found on the Internet at: https://www.airquality.org/notices/1hour/AttainmentReport.pdf.
    \12\ The Sacramento-Airport Road site was relocated to 
Sacramento-Goldenland Court in August 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All Sacramento Metro Area sites monitor ozone concentrations on a 
continuous basis using ultraviolet absorption monitors.\13\ EPA defines 
specific monitoring site types and spatial scales of representativeness 
to characterize the nature and location of required monitors. See 40 
CFR part 58, Appendix D, Sec.  1. Table 1 below lists the site types 
and spatial scale for each ozone monitoring site in the Sacramento 
Metro Area. Due to ozone precursor source distribution and general 
meteorological patterns in the area, the highest ozone concentrations 
for the past several years have typically occurred at the Folsom and 
Sloughhouse Road sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Sacramento Metro Area monitoring agencies operate Federal 
equivalent method (FEM) monitors for ozone, specifically, API 400 
Series ultraviolet absorption monitors. See SMAQMD's ``Annual 
Network Plan Report'' (July 2010) and CARB's ``Monitoring Network 
Report for Small Districts in California'' (July 2010). These 
monitoring devices have an EPA designation number EQOA-0992-087. See 
EPA ``List of Designated Reference and Equivalent Methods, page 27 
(February 1, 2011), available on the Internet at: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html.

                 Table 1--Site Type and Spatial Scale a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Spatial scale
            Site name                  Site type \b\           \c\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Placerville (06-017-0010)........  HC, TR..............  RS
Echo Summit (06-017-0012)........  HC, TR..............  RS
Cool (06-017-0020)...............  HC, TR..............  RS
Auburn (06-061-0002).............  HC..................  US
Colfax (06-061-0004).............  HC..................  US
Roseville (06-061-0006)..........  HC..................  US
North Highlands (06-067-0002)....  RC..................  NS
Sacramento-Del Paso Manor (06-067- HC..................  NS
 0006).
Sacramento-T Street (06-067-0010)  RC..................  US
Elk Grove (06-067-0011)..........  RC..................  NS
Folsom (06-067-0012).............  HC..................  NS
Sacramento-Airport Road (06-067-   RC..................  NS
 0013).
Sacramento-Goldenland Court (06-   RC..................  NS
 067-0014).
Sloughhouse Rd. (06-067-5003)....  RC..................  NS
Vacaville (06-095-3003)..........  HC, TR..............  RS
Davis (06-113-0004)..............  HC..................  US
Woodland (06-113-1003)...........  HC..................  US
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source: SMAQMD's ``Annual Network Plan Report'' (July 2010) and
  CARB's ``Monitoring Network Report for Small Districts in California''
  (July 2010).
\b\ Site types are defined in 40 CFR part 58, Appendix D section 1.1.1.
  The site types utilized in the Sacramento Metro Area include high
  concentration (HC), representative concentration (RC) and pollutant
  transport (TR).
\c\ Spatial scales are defined in 40 CFR part 58 Appendix D section 1.2.
  The monitoring sites in the Sacramento Metro Area are either
  neighborhood scale (NS), urban scale (US) or regional scale (RS)
  sites.

Exceptional Events
    On March 22, 2007, EPA adopted a final rule, ``Treatment of Data 
Influenced by Exceptional Events,'' also known as the Exceptional 
Events Rule (EER), to govern the review and handling of certain air 
quality monitoring data for which the normal planning and regulatory 
processes are not appropriate (72 FR 13560). Under the EER, EPA may 
exclude data from use in determinations of NAAQS exceedances and 
violations if a state demonstrates that an ``exceptional event'' caused 
the exceedance or exceedances. 40 CFR 50.1, 50.14. Before EPA can 
exclude data from these regulatory determinations, the state must flag 
the data in EPA's AQS database and, after public notice and opportunity 
for comment, submit a demonstration to EPA to justify the exclusion. 
EPA considers the demonstration and concurs or nonconcurs with the 
state's flag. After notice-and-comment rulemaking, EPA determines 
whether to

[[Page 28702]]

exclude the data from use when making a determination of attainment.
    In submittals dated September 17, 2009 and March 30, 2011, CARB 
provided documentation for ozone exceedances that occurred at the 
Folsom monitor on three days in Summer 2008 which the state had flagged 
as due to wildfire exceptional events. EPA reviewed the documentation 
and concurred with the June 23, June 27 and July 10, 2008 flags in a 
letter from Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 
IX, to Mary D. Nichols, Chairman, CARB, dated April 13, 2011. EPA 
included with the letter a document setting forth in detail the bases 
for EPA's concurrences. See ``Review of Exceptional Events Request: 
Folsom, CA; 1-hour ozone; June 23, June 27 and July 10, 2008,'' dated 
April 13, 2011 (in the docket for this proposed rulemaking). For the 
reasons set forth in the concurrence letter and its enclosure, EPA is 
proposing to exclude from regulatory consideration data showing 
exceedances at the Folsom monitoring site on June 23, June 27 and July 
10, 2008.
Monitoring Data
    EPA's proposal to exclude ozone exceedances monitored at the Folsom 
site on June 23, June 27 and July 10, 2008, if finalized, would result 
in a revision of the number of exceedances (as determined by 40 CFR 
part 50, Appendix H and described in section II of this notice) for 
2008 and, therefore, the average number of expected exceedances for the 
2007-2009 period. With the exclusion of the data for these three days, 
the highest three-year average of expected exceedances at any site in 
the Sacramento Metro Area for 2007-2009 is 1.0, which shows attainment 
of the 1-hour ozone standard (a three-year average of expected 
exceedances less than or equal to 1). For more information, please see 
``National 1-hour primary and secondary ambient air quality standards 
for ozone'' (40 CFR section 50.9) and ``Interpretation of the 1-Hour 
Primary and Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for 
Ozone'' (40 CFR part 50, Appendix H). Consistent with 40 CFR part 50, 
Appendix H, Tables 2 and 3 set forth the 1-hour ozone data for the 
Sacramento Metro Area monitors that show that the area is currently 
attaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

              Table 2--1-Hour Ozone Data for the Sacramento Metro 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Expected exceedances by year         Expected
                                                          --------------------------------------- exceedances 3-
                    Site (monitor ID)                                                               yr average
                                                               2007         2008         2009    ---------------
                                                                                                     2007-2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Placerville (06-017-0010)................................          0.0          2.0          0.0             0.7
Echo Summit (06-017-0012)................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Cool (06-017-0020).......................................          0.0          2.0          0.0             0.7
Auburn (06-061-0002).....................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Colfax (06-061-0004).....................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Roseville (06-061-0006)..................................          0.0          2.0          0.0             0.7
North Highlands (06-067-0002)............................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Sacramento-Del Paso Manor (06-067-0006)..................          1.0          0.0          0.0             0.3
Sacramento-T Street (06-067-0010)........................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Elk Grove (06-067-0011)..................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Folsom (06-067-0012).....................................          1.0      \b\ 2.0          0.0             1.0
Sacramento-Airport Road (06-067-0013)....................          0.0      \c\ 0.0           NA              NA
Sacramento-Goldenland Court (06-067-0014)................           NA      \c\ 0.0          0.0             0.0
Sloughhouse Rd. (06-067-5003)............................          0.0          3.0          0.0             1.0
Vacaville (06-095-3003)..................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Davis (06-113-0004)......................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Woodland (06-113-1003)...................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Quicklook Report, May 3, 2011 (in the docket to this proposed action).
\a\ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix H--Interpretation of the 1-Hour Primary and Secondary National Ambient Air Quality
  Standards for Ozone.
\b\ Data shown exclude exceedances on June 23, June 27 and July 10, 2008 due to exceptional events.
\c\ The Airport Road site was relocated to the Goldenland Court site in August 2008.
NA--Data is not available.

    The data in Table 2 indicate a long-term trend observed in the 
Sacramento Metro Area. As described in CARB's July 7, 2010 letter 
requesting a Termination Determination, the monitoring sites that 
historically experienced exceedances of the 1-hour ozone standard are 
the Cool, Sloughhouse, Folsom and Del Paso Manor sites. For example, in 
1998 five exceedances were monitored at Cool and ten at Folsom. In 
2009, by contrast, there were no exceedances at any monitor in the 
entire Sacramento Metro Area.
    In sum, EPA believes that, if the exceedances resulting from 
wildfire exceptional events on three days in 2008 are excluded from 
consideration, the 2007-2009 ambient air monitoring data for the 
Sacramento Metro Area show attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. In 
addition, if EPA's proposal to exclude exceedances on three days due to 
wildfire exceptional events is finalized, the data for 2010 (complete 
and quality-assured but not yet certified), shown in Table 3 for the 
2008-2010 monitoring period, show continued attainment. Preliminary 
data available for 2011 are also consistent with continued attainment.

[[Page 28703]]



   Table 3--2010 1-Hour Ozone Data for the Sacramento Metro 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Showing Continued
                                                  Attainment a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Expected exceedances by year         Expected
                                                          --------------------------------------- exceedances 3-
                    Site (monitor ID)                                                               yr average
                                                               2008         2009       2010 \b\  ---------------
                                                                                                   2008-2010 \b\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Placerville (06-017-0010)................................          2.0          0.0          0.0             0.7
Echo Summit (06-017-0012)................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Cool (06-017-0020).......................................          2.0          0.0          0.0             0.7
Auburn (06-061-0002).....................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Colfax (06-061-0004).....................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Roseville (06-061-0006)..................................          2.0          0.0          0.0             0.7
North Highlands (06-067-0002)............................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Sacramento-Del Paso Manor (06-067-0006)..................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Sacramento-T Street (06-067-0010)........................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Elk Grove (06-067-0011)..................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Folsom (06-067-0012).....................................      \c\ 2.0          0.0          0.0             0.7
Sacramento-Airport Road (06-067-0013)....................      \d\ 0.0           NA           NA              NA
Sacramento-Goldenland Court (06-067-0014)................      \d\ 0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Sloughhouse Rd. (06-067-5003)............................          3.0          0.0          0.0             1.0
Vacaville (06-095-3003)..................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Davis (06-113-0004)......................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
Woodland (06-113-1003)...................................          0.0          0.0          0.0             0.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Quicklook Report, May 3, 2011 (in the docket to this proposed action).
\a\ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix H--Interpretation of the 1-Hour Primary and Secondary National Ambient Air Quality
  Standards for Ozone.
\b\ Data from 2010 are complete but have not yet been certified.
\c\ Data exclude exceedances on June 23, June 27 and July 10, 2008 due to exceptional events.
\d\ The Airport Road site was relocated to the Goldenland Court site in August 2008.
NA--Data are not available.

b. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions

    EPA believes that the State has demonstrated that the observed air 
quality improvements in the Sacramento Metro Area with respect to the 
1-hour ozone standard are due to permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions through the implementation of state and district emission 
controls contained in the SIP and not due to favorable meteorology or 
temporary reductions in emission rates, such as temporary adverse 
economic conditions. See letter and accompanying documentation 
(Enclosure 2, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District 
1-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Request for the Sacramento 
Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area) from James Goldstene, CARB Executive 
Officer, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 
IX, dated July 7, 2010, requesting termination of CAA section 185 
requirements as they pertain to the Sacramento Metro Area (July 7, 2010 
request).
    In 1994, California submitted a comprehensive ozone plan for all 
ozone nonattainment areas in California including the Sacramento Metro 
Area (1994 SIP), which EPA approved on January 8, 1997 (62 FR 1150). 
The plan provided a blueprint for attaining the 1-hour ozone standard 
that relied on a combination of stationary and mobile source measures 
by the districts, and state and Federal governments. In addition, 
California air districts in the Sacramento Metro Area adopted and 
implemented emission control rules requiring many existing sources of 
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic compounds 
(VOCs) \14\ to meet, at minimum, Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT). These requirements apply to sources in categories 
covered by Control Technology Guidelines (CTGs) and major non-CTG 
sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ NOX and VOCs are chemical precursors to ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meteorology
    In its July 7, 2010 request (Enclosure 2, Sacramento Metropolitan 
Air Quality Management District 1-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration 
Request for the Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area), CARB 
provided documentation that the improvement in air quality in the 
Sacramento Metro Area is not due to favorable meteorology. CARB showed 
that the weather patterns in the last decade have not been unusually 
favorable. For example, looking at days equal to or over 95 degrees 
Fahrenheit in each of the last thirteen years (1997 to 2009) as an 
indicator of conditions conducive to ozone formation, the area had an 
annual average of 37 such ``high temperature'' days, while in the last 
four years (2006-2009), the area also had an annual average of 37 high 
temperature days.
Economic Activity
    The State provided documentation showing that the improvement in 
air quality leading to 1-hour ozone attainment in the Sacramento Metro 
Area is not due to a temporary economic downturn. See July 7, 2010 
request (Enclosure 2, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management 
District 1-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Request for the 
Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area). As an indicator of 
economic activity, this analysis presented information on gasoline and 
diesel sales in California from 2000 to 2009. Fuel sales are an 
indicator of economic activity, and represent an indicator of emissions 
trends of both VOCs and NOX as well. The Sacramento Metro 
Area's emissions inventory is dominated by mobile sources. See Table 7 
below and Table 4.1 of Enclosure 2 of July 7, 2010 request. Although 
fuel sales have decreased in the last several years, perhaps coinciding 
with an overall economic downturn in California and nationally, we note 
that the decrease has been slight and that the last year presented, 
2009, still had a higher level (14.8 billion gallons of fuel sold) than 
the first year presented (2001, at 14.5 billion gallons). Between those 
years, fuel sales increased gradually to a peak

[[Page 28704]]

between 2005 and 2006 (both at 15.9 billion gallons sold per year), 
before gradually declining.
    Given that the earliest years in that ten-year period were years 
when the area was not attaining the 1-hour ozone standard, EPA believes 
that any temporary emission reductions due to the more recent economic 
downturn in 2008 and later are relatively small and not a significant 
factor in the attainment of the 1-hour standard. Therefore, we conclude 
that economic conditions are not a source of temporary reductions in 
emission rates. On the contrary, EPA believes that the steady decline 
of emissions of NOX and VOCs during the same ten-year period 
is attributable to fleet turnover with newer vehicles having lower 
evaporative and tailpipe emissions, as well as greater fuel economy. 
Additionally, EPA notes that CARB's emissions database (https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/emissiondata.htm) shows that during 2006 through 
2009, the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) have increased from 
approximately 68 million miles per day to 72 million miles per day in 
the Sacramento Valley Air Basin. See CEPAM: 2009 Almanac--Population 
and Vehicle Trends Tool, Sacramento Valley Air Basin, Daily Vehicle 
Miles Traveled, All Vehicles.
Local Districts' Measures Since 1990
    Since 1990, the Districts have adopted, implemented and submitted 
for EPA approval dozens of stationary source rules which achieve 
NOX and VOC emission reductions and have thus helped reduce 
ozone levels. Tables 4 through 7 below summarize the local air district 
rules adopted since 1990 and approved into the California 
SIP.15 16
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD) does 
not have any rules listed in the table because, since 1990, no 
additional FRAQMD VOC or NOX rules have been added to the 
SIP. FRAQMD consists of the entirety of both Sutter and Yuba 
counties. Only the very southern portion of Sutter County falls 
within the Sacramento Metro Area, and that portion includes no major 
NOX or VOC stationary sources.
    \16\ EPA is currently evaluating approximately 30 additional 
rules that have been adopted by Sacramento Metro Area air districts 
to control VOC and/or NOX and that were submitted to EPA 
as SIP revisions. Although EPA has not yet taken action on these 
submitted rules, they are currently being implemented by the air 
districts.

  Table 4--Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Rules Adopted Since 1990 and Approved Into the California State Implementation Plan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Date rule       Date rule
                Rule No.                                Rule                 adopted by     approved into  Federal  Register  citation    NOX      VOC
                                                                              district           SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
411.....................................  NOX from Boilers, Process            08/23/2007        5/6/2009  74 FR 20880                       X   .......
                                           Heaters and Steam Generators.
412.....................................  Stationary Internal Combustion       06/01/1995       4/30/1996  61 FR 18959                       X   .......
                                           Engine.
413.....................................  Stationary Gas Turbines........      03/24/2005       1/10/2008  73 FR 1819                        X   .......
414.....................................  Natural Gas-fired Water Heater.      08/01/1996       4/20/1999  64 FR 19277                       X   .......
442.....................................  Architectural Coatings.........      09/05/1996       11/9/1998  63 FR 60214                  .......       X
443.....................................  Leaks from Synthetic Organic         09/05/1996       11/9/1998  63 FR 60214                  .......       X
                                           Chemical & Polymer
                                           Manufacturing.
446.....................................  Storage of Petroleum Products..      11/16/1993       9/16/1994  59 FR 47544                  .......       X
447.....................................  Organic Liquid Loading.........      04/02/1998      11/26/1999  64 FR 66393                  .......       X
448.....................................  Gasoline Transfer into               02/02/1995       1/23/1996  61 FR 1716                   .......       X
                                           Stationary Storage Containers.
449.....................................  Transfer of Gasoline into            09/26/2002       3/24/2003  68 FR 14156                  .......       X
                                           Vehicle Fuel Tanks.
450.....................................  Graphic Arts...................      10/23/2008        4/9/2010  75 FR 18068                  .......       X
452.....................................  Can Coating....................      09/25/2008        4/9/2010  75 FR 18068                  .......       X
454.....................................  Degreasing Operations..........      09/25/2008        4/9/2010  75 FR 18068                  .......       X
456.....................................  Aerospace Assembly and               10/23/2008       7/14/2010  75 FR 40726                  .......       X
                                           Component Coating Operations.
458.....................................  Large Commercial Bread Bakeries      09/05/1996       11/9/1998  63 FR 60214                  .......       X
459.....................................  Automotive, Truck and Heavy          10/02/1997      11/13/1998  63 FR 63410                  .......       X
                                           Equipment Refinishing
                                           Operations.
463.....................................  Wood Products Coatings.........      09/25/2008        4/9/2010  75 FR 18068                  .......       X
464.....................................  Organic Chemical Manufacturing       07/23/1998       4/19/2000  65 FR 20912                  .......       X
                                           Operations.
466.....................................  Solvent Cleaning...............      05/23/2002        5/5/2010  75 FR 24406                  .......       X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


      Table 5--El Dorado County Air Quality Management District Rules Adopted Since 1990 and Approved Into the California State Implementation Plan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Date rule       Date rule
                Rule No.                                Rule                 adopted by     approved into  Federal  Register  citation    NOX      VOC
                                                                              district           SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
215.....................................  Architectural Coatings.........       9/27/1994       7/18/1996  61 FR 37390                  .......       X
224.....................................  Cutback Asphalt Paving Material       9/27/1994       8/21/1995  60 FR 43383                  .......       X
225.....................................  Solvent Cleaning (Degreasing)..       9/27/1994       8/21/1995  60 FR 43383                  .......       X
229.....................................  Industrial, Institutional, and        1/23/2001      10/10/2001  66 FR 51578                       X   .......
                                           Commercial Boilers, Steam
                                           Generators, and Process
                                           Heaters.
230.....................................  Motor Vehicle & Mobile                9/27/1994       4/30/1996  61 FR 18962                  .......       X
                                           Equipment Coating.
231.....................................  Graphic Arts...................       9/27/1994       7/11/1997  62 FR 37136                  .......       X
232.....................................  Biomass Boilers................       9/25/2001      10/14/2003  68 FR 59121                       X   .......
233.....................................  Stationary Internal Combustion        6/11/2002       9/13/2002  67 FR 57960                       X   .......
                                           Engines.
234.....................................  VOC RACT Rule--Sierra Pacific         4/25/1995       9/12/1995  60 FR 47273                  .......       X
                                           Industries.
235.....................................  Surface Preparation and Cleanup       6/27/1995       4/30/1996  61 FR 18962                  .......       X
236.....................................  Adhesives......................       7/25/1995       7/18/1996  61 FR 37390                  .......       X
237.....................................  Wood Products Coatings.........       6/27/1995       7/18/1996  61 FR 37390                  .......       X
238.....................................  Gasoline Transfer and                 3/27/2001       8/27/2001  66 FR 44974                  .......       X
                                           Dispensing.
239.....................................  Natural Gas-fired Residential         3/24/1998       3/30/1999  64 FR 15129                       X   .......
                                           Water Heaters.

[[Page 28705]]

 
240.....................................  Polyester Resin Operations.....       2/15/2000       7/17/2001  66 FR 37154                  .......       X
244...................................