Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; Determinations of Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 71551-71555 [2012-29013]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 232 / Monday, December 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
records regarding Boiler 8 and Boiler 9
for at least five years:
(i) All CEMS data, including the date,
place, and time of sampling or
measurement; parameters sampled or
measured; and results.
(ii) All stack test results.
(iii) Daily records of fuel usage, heat
input, and data used to determine heat
content.
(iv) Records of quality assurance and
quality control activities for emissions
measuring systems including, but not
limited to, any records required by 40
CFR part 60, appendix F, Procedure 1.
(v) Records of all major maintenance
activities conducted on emission units,
air pollution control equipment, and
CEMS.
(vi) Any other records identified in 40
CFR 60.49b(g) or 40 CFR part 60,
appendix F, Procedure 1.
(7) Reporting. All reports under this
section shall be submitted to the Chief,
Air Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance Branch, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Mail Code
AE–17J, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago,
IL 60604–3590.
(i) Owner/operator of Boiler 8 shall
submit quarterly excess emissions
reports for the limit in paragraph (i)(1)
no later than the 30th day following the
end of each calendar quarter. Excess
emissions means emissions that exceed
the emissions limit specified in
paragraph (i)(1) of this section. The
reports shall include the magnitude,
date(s), and duration of each period of
excess emissions, specific identification
of each period of excess emissions that
occurs during startups, shutdowns, and
malfunctions of the unit, the nature and
cause of any malfunction (if known),
and the corrective action taken or
preventative measures adopted.
(ii) Owner/operator of Boiler 8 shall
submit quarterly CEMS performance
reports, to include dates and duration of
each period during which the CEMS
was inoperative (except for zero and
span adjustments and calibration checks
or when Boiler 8 is not operating),
reason(s) why the CEMS was
inoperative and steps taken to prevent
recurrence, and any CEMS repairs or
adjustments.
(iii) Owner/operator of Boiler 8 shall
also submit results of any CEMS
performance tests required by 40 CFR
part 60, appendix F, procedure 1
(Relative Accuracy Test Audits, Relative
Accuracy Audits, and Cylinder Gas
Audits).
(iv) When no excess emissions have
occurred or the CEMS has not been
inoperative, repaired, or adjusted during
the reporting period, such information
shall be stated in the quarterly reports
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:39 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 229001
required by paragraph (i)(7) of this
section.
(v) Owner/operator of Boiler 9 shall
submit reports of any compliance test
measuring NOX emissions from Boiler 9
within 60 days of the last day of the test.
If owner/operator commences operation
of a continuous NOX emission
monitoring system for Boiler 9, owner/
operator shall submit reports for Boiler
9 as specified for Boiler 8 in paragraphs
(i)(7)(i) to (i)(7)(iv) of this section.
[FR Doc. 2012–29014 Filed 11–30–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0492; FRL–9757–1]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; California;
Determinations of Attainment for the
1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is making a number of
determinations relating to 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas in California.
First, EPA is determining that six 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas in California
(Amador and Calaveras Counties, Chico,
Kern County, Mariposa and Tuolumne
Counties, Nevada County, and Sutter
County) (‘‘six CA areas’’) attained the
1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) by their
applicable attainment dates. Second, in
conjunction with its determinations for
Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties and
Nevada County, EPA is granting these
areas one-year attainment date
extensions. Lastly, EPA is determining
that the six CA areas and the Ventura
County 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area in CA have attained and continue
to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the most recent three years of
data. Under the provisions of EPA’s
ozone implementation rule, these
determinations suspend the
requirements to submit revisions to the
state implementation plans (SIP) for
these areas related to attainment of the
1997 8-hour ozone standard for as long
as these areas continue to meet the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on January 2, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R09–OAR–
2011–0492. The index to the docket is
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71551
available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material) and some
may not be publicly available at either
location (e.g., confidential business
information). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
below.
John
Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office, AIR–2,
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901,
telephone number (415) 972–3963, or
email ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, wherever
‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean
EPA. We are providing the following
outline to aid in locating information in
this final rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Table of Contents
I. What determinations is EPA making?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What comments did we receive on the
proposed rule?
IV. What are the effects of these actions?
A. Attainment Date Extensions
B. Determinations of Attainment by Areas’
Applicable Attainment Dates
C. Determinations of Current Attainment
and 40 CFR 51.918
V. EPA’s Final Actions
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What determinations is EPA making?
EPA is making a number of
determinations with respect to 1997 8hour ozone nonattainment areas in
California. First, pursuant to section
181(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA),
EPA is determining that the Amador
and Calaveras Counties (Central
Mountain Counties), Chico (Butte
County), Kern County (Eastern Kern),
Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties
(Southern Mountain Counties), Nevada
County (Western Nevada County), and
Sutter County (Sutter Buttes) 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas in California
(herein referred to as the ‘‘six CA areas’’)
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
by their respective applicable
attainment dates. Second, in connection
with these determinations, EPA is also
granting, pursuant to section 181(a)(5)
and 40 CFR 51.907, applications
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) for extensions
to the applicable attainment dates for
the Southern Mountain Counties and
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
71552
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 232 / Monday, December 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Western Nevada County nonattainment
areas.
The six CA areas have differing
applicable attainment dates. For Butte
County and Sutter Buttes, EPA is
determining that these areas attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard by their
applicable attainment deadline of June
15, 2007, based on complete, qualityassured, and certified ambient air
quality monitoring data for 2004–2006.
For the Central Mountain Counties and
Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment
areas, EPA is determining that they
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
by their applicable attainment deadline
of June 15, 2010, based on complete,
quality-assured and certified air quality
data for 2007–2009. For the Southern
Mountain Counties and Western Nevada
County, whose original attainment date
was June 15, 2010, EPA is granting a
one-year attainment date extension until
June 15, 2011 and determining that
these areas attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS by that extended
attainment date, based on complete,
quality-assured data for 2008–2010.
In addition, for all the areas listed
above and for Ventura County,1 EPA is
determining, based on complete,
quality-assured and certified air quality
monitoring data for 2009–2011, that
these areas have attained and continue
to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Preliminary data for 2012 indicate that
these areas continue to attain the
NAAQS. Under the provisions of 40
CFR 51.918, these latter determinations
suspend the obligation of the State to
submit certain planning requirements
related to attainment for as long as the
areas continue to attain the standard.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
II. What is the background for these
actions?
On September 14, 2012, EPA
published in the Federal Register a
direct final rule (77 FR 56775) that made
the same determinations for the same
areas addressed in today’s final rule. On
that same date, we also published a
document (77 FR 56797) that was to
serve as the proposed rule addressing
the same actions as the direct final rule
if we were to withdraw the direct final
rule in response to receipt of adverse
comments.
In our direct final rule, we provided
background for these actions by
describing the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS (0.08 parts per million averaged
over an eight-hour time frame), the
designations and classifications of the
1 Ventura County is classified as a ‘‘serious’’
nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. As such, the applicable attainment date
for Ventura County is June 15, 2013.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:39 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 229001
six CA areas and Ventura County with
respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS (see Table 1 from the direct
final rule), and the statutory and
regulatory provisions that allow EPA to
grant attainment date extensions and
that act to suspend attainment-related
SIP submittal obligations. In the direct
final rule, we also describe the basis
upon which we evaluate whether an
area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, and present area-specific
monitoring network information and
data in support of our conclusions: That
two of the six CA areas—the Southern
Mountain Counties and Western Nevada
County—qualified for one-year
extensions of their applicable
attainment dates; that the six CA areas
attained by their respective attainment
dates, that all six CA areas and Ventura
County have attained the NAAQS based
on the most recent complete three-year
monitoring period (2009–2011); and that
the most recent available ambient data
for 2012 are consistent with continued
attainment of the standard. Lastly, we
explained how, under 40 CFR 51.918,
the determinations of attainment based
upon the most recent three-year period
(2009–2011) suspend attainment-related
SIP submittal obligations for these areas
with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard for so long as the areas
continue to attain the standard,
although the areas remain designated
nonattainment until they are
redesignated to attainment. Please see
the direct final rule for detailed
information concerning the subject
areas, ozone monitoring networks and
data, and our review and evaluation.
In our direct final rule, we indicated
that, if we received adverse comments,
then we would publish a withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the
public that the direct final rule will not
take effect. We received such adverse
comments and have withdrawn the
direct final rule. See 77 FR 66715
(November 7, 2012). In our direct final
rule, we stated that EPA would respond
to comments received on the proposed
rule, but that we would not institute a
second comment period. In this final
rule and in responding to comments, we
continue to rely on the information and
analysis that were set forth in the direct
final rule.
III. What comments did we receive on
the proposed rule?
First, EPA received one anonymous
comment that generally supports the
proposed actions, while emphasizing
the need for continued monitoring for
the ozone standard. Second, and with
respect only to EPA’s proposed
determination for the Central Mountain
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Counties, EPA also received two adverse
comment letters from one individual.
These were submitted on behalf of the
Ione Valley Land, Air, and Water
Defense Alliance (‘‘Ione Valley
Alliance’’), and expressed concern over
the proposed determination related to a
portion (Amador County) of the Central
Mountain Counties area (Amador and
Calaveras Counties). See letters, Douglas
Carstens, September 10 and October 3,
2012. EPA received no adverse
comments with respect to its
determinations for any of the other CA
areas in its direct final and proposed
rulemakings. The general, supportive
anonymous comment and the two
comments related to Amador County are
summarized and addressed below.
Comment 1: The anonymous
commenter states that he/she generally
agrees with our proposed
determinations and the related
suspension of the obligation to submit
attainment-related SIP planning
requirements, but emphasizes the need
to continue ambient monitoring to
ensure that the standard is maintained
and to avoid the return of excessive
ozone levels.
Response 1: We agree that continued
ambient air monitoring by CARB and
the individual air districts (where
applicable) in the seven nonattainment
areas that are the subject of this action
is necessary to ensure that continuing
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard is verified. While our final
determinations will suspend certain
attainment-related SIP submittal
requirements, they will not suspend any
monitoring-related requirements and
CARB and the local air districts (where
applicable) will continue to be required
to operate ozone monitoring networks in
compliance with EPA monitoring
regulations.
Lastly, as described in our direct final
rule, the suspension of attainmentrelated SIP requirements continues only
until such time, if any, that EPA (i)
redesignates the area to attainment at
which time those requirements no
longer apply, or (ii) subsequently
determines that the area has violated the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. If EPA
subsequently determines, after noticeand-comment rulemaking, that any one
of the nonattainment areas has violated
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQ, the basis
for the suspension of the requirements
for that area, provided by 40 CFR
51.918, would no longer exist, and the
violating ozone nonattainment area
would thereafter have to address those
requirements. See 77 FR 56775, at 56778
(September 14, 2012).
Comment 2: The Ione Valley Alliance
objects to our proposed determination of
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 232 / Monday, December 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
attainment for Amador County and
contends that Amador County has not
implemented sufficient measures that
will ensure that it can maintain
attainment status.
Response 2: Amador County is part of
a two-county 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area that, together with
Calaveras County, is referred to as
‘‘Central Mountain Counties.’’ As to the
Central Mountain Counties area, we are
finalizing our proposed determination
of attainment by the applicable
attainment date (i.e., June 15, 2010 for
this area) based on 2007–2009 data, as
well as our separate proposed
determination that the area currently
attains the standard based on the most
recent three-year monitoring period
(2009–2011). See pages 56779 and
56780 from our September 14, 2012
direct final rule. We have made these
determinations after reviewing the
complete, quality-assured data from the
ozone monitoring station located in
Jackson, California, which is the county
seat of Amador County. As shown in
Table 3 in the direct final rule (page
56780), the design value based on the
data from the Jackson monitoring site
was 0.080 ppm during the 2007–2009
period and 0.071 ppm during the 2009–
2011 period. These values show levels
in the area that are well below the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS.2 Moreover, the
preliminary ozone data available for
2012 indicate that the area continues to
attain the standard.
EPA’s determinations of attainment
for the Amador and Calaveras Counties
area are solely based on complete,
quality-assured air monitoring data.
EPA’s review of these data does not
involve any evaluation of the
sufficiency of the measures adopted for
the area to maintain the NAAQS, and it
is not dependent on any conclusions
regarding those measures. Thus the
comments of Ione Valley Alliance are
not germane to the action we are taking
today, i.e., determinations based solely
on air quality data. CAA Section
181(b)(2) expressly provides that a
determination that an area has attained
by its attainment date is ‘‘based on the
area’s design value (as of the attainment
date).’’ Similarly, EPA’s determination
that the area continues currently to
attain the standard is based entirely on
data establishing the area’s design value
for the most recent three years. The
commenter does not challenge these air
quality determinations themselves.
Moreover, since our determinations of
attainment for Central Mountain
2 Design values less than or equal to 0.084 ppm
represent attainment of the 1997 eight-hour ozone
standard.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:39 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 229001
Counties are based solely on air quality,
they do not constitute a redesignation of
the area to attainment. In order for EPA
to redesignate an area to attainment,
EPA must, among other criteria,
determine that the improvement in air
quality is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP and applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations. To approve a
redesignation to attainment, EPA must
also review and approve a maintenance
plan that covers the first ten years
beyond redesignation. See CAA sections
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) and (iv) and section
175A. At this time, California has not
submitted a redesignation request or
maintenance plan for Central Mountain
Counties. EPA again notes that, under
40 CFR section 51.918, EPA’s
determination that the area is currently
attaining the standard based on the most
recent three years of data will be
withdrawn if, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking, EPA determines that the
area is once again in violation of the
standard.
Comment 3: The Ione Valley Alliance
contends that EPA’s issuing of a blanket
attainment ruling without public notice
and comment during a formal
rulemaking process may inappropriately
expose the County to overdevelopment
without sufficient oversight to ensure
meaningful measures are implemented
to maintain attainment status. In
support of this contention, Ione Valley
Alliance enclosed, with its September
10, 2012 comment letter, a copy of a
letter the Alliance sent to the Amador
County Air Pollution Control District
(APCD) regarding a Public Records Act
request and a request for notices related
to a specific quarry project, General Plan
Amendment and related environmental
impact report.
Response 3: EPA has addressed the
commenter’s claims as to lack of notice
and opportunity to comment by
withdrawing our direct final rule in
response to receipt of adverse comments
and by fully responding to the
comments in this final rule, which is
based on EPA’s proposed rule,
published the same day (September 14,
2012) as our direct final rule.
Second, as to the concern the
commenter expressed regarding the risk
of overdevelopment without sufficient
oversight, EPA’s determinations today,
which derive solely from ambient ozone
monitoring data, do not in and of
themselves affect development in the
county. The determination that the area
attained the standard by its attainment
date fulfills EPA’s statutory obligation
under section 181(b)(2). Our
determination that the area is currently
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71553
attaining the standard based on the most
recent three years of quality-assured
monitoring data reflects the reality of
recent air quality in the area. It does not
redesignate the area to attainment
status, or relax control requirements.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.918, the
determination has the effect of
suspending only those SIP submittal
requirements related to attainment, but
the suspension of these requirements
lasts only for so long as the area
continues to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. As explained generally
on page 56778 of the direct final rule
with respect to all of the subject areas,
if EPA subsequently determines, after
notice-and-comment rulemaking, that
the Central Mountain Counties area has
violated the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
the basis for the suspension of the
requirements for that area would no
longer exist, and the area would
thereafter have to address those
requirements.
Lastly, as noted above, the enclosure
sent with the September 10th comment
letter is a letter to the Amador County
APCD containing a Public Records Act
Request and a request for notices related
to a quarry project and related
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
prepared under the State’s California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The
letter to Amador County APCD also
asserts that the EIR prepared by Amador
County is deficient and cannot be relied
upon by the APCD in issuing permits to
project-related emissions sources; that
the project would violate certain APCD
rules and regulations; that the emissions
from the project would be significant;
that sensitive receptors in the area
would be adversely affected; that
feasible, less damaging alternatives are
available; and that the permit
applications therefore must be denied.
The contents of the letter to the
Amador County APCD are not germane
to today’s determinations because
today’s determinations are based solely
on ambient air quality data, and the
comments do not challenge the data or
EPA’s review and evaluation of the data.
In addition, EPA’s action today does not
change the status of Amador County as
nonattainment with respect to the 1997
8-hour ozone standard nor would it
affect the permit requirements for the
quarry project. Rather, our action today
simply suspends attainment-related SIP
submittal requirements so long as the
area continues to monitor attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
Comment 4: The Ione Valley Alliance
believes that the attainment
determination does not change the
designation of Amador County and that
the status of the area continues to be
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
71554
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 232 / Monday, December 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘nonattainment’’ until official action is
taken to change that designation.
Response 4: We agree that the neither
the determination of attainment by the
applicable attainment date, nor the
determination of attainment based on
the most recent three-year period, for
the Central Mountain Counties area
changes the designation or classification
of the area with respect to the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS. Central Mountain
Counties will remain ‘‘moderate’’
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard until EPA takes final
action to approve a maintenance plan
for the area and a request to redesignate
the area to attainment under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E). No such
maintenance plan or redesignation
request is pending before EPA at the
present time for the Central Mountain
Counties 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area.
IV. What are the effects of these
actions?
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Attainment Date Extensions
Pursuant to CAA section 181(a)(5) and
40 CFR 51.907, the State has requested,
and EPA is approving one-year
attainment date extensions, until June
15, 2011, for the Southern Mountain
Counties and Western Nevada County
nonattainment areas. The effect of
granting the attainment date extensions
is to extend the 1997 8-hour ozone
attainment deadline for the Southern
Mountain Counties and Western Nevada
County nonattainment areas for an
additional year until June 15, 2011 and
to enable EPA, pursuant to section
181(b)(2) of the CAA, to determine that
the areas attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by their extended deadlines.
B. Determinations of Attainment by
Areas’ Applicable Attainment Dates
Pursuant to section 181(b)(2) of the
CAA, EPA is determining that the Butte
County, Central Mountain Counties,
Eastern Kern, Southern Mountain
Counties, Sutter Buttes, and Western
Nevada County ozone nonattainment
areas attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by their applicable attainment
dates.
These determinations discharge EPA’s
obligations under section 181(b)(2) with
respect to determining whether these
areas attained by their respective
attainment deadlines, and establish that
these areas are not subject to
reclassification for failure to attain by
these deadlines.
C. Determinations of Current
Attainment and 40 CFR 51.918
In addition, EPA is separately
determining that the six CA areas and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:39 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 229001
Ventura County have attained the
standard based upon the most recent
three years of data (without reference to
their attainment deadlines). Under the
provisions of 40 CFR 51.918, these
determinations of attainment suspend
the obligation for the State to submit
certain planning requirements described
above; however, they do not constitute
redesignations to attainment under
section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. The
designation status of the six CA areas
and Ventura County remains
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA
determines that each area meets the
CAA requirements for redesignation to
attainment, including an approved
maintenance plan.
In accordance with 40 CFR 51.918,
based on these determinations, the
obligation under the CAA for the State
of California to submit an attainment
demonstration and reasonably available
control measures (RACM), reasonable
further progress plans (RFP),
contingency measures, and any other
planning requirements related to
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for these seven ozone
nonattainment areas is suspended for so
long as the areas continue to attain the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
The suspension continues until such
time, if any, that EPA (i) redesignates
the area to attainment at which time
those requirements no longer apply, or
(ii) subsequently determines that the
area has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. It is separate from, and does
not influence or otherwise affect, any
future designation determination or
requirements for the area based on any
new or revised ozone NAAQS. It
remains in effect regardless of whether
EPA designates the area as a
nonattainment area for purposes of any
new or revised ozone NAAQS.
If EPA subsequently determines, after
notice-and-comment rulemaking, that
any one of these nonattainment areas
has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of
the requirements for that area, provided
by 40 CFR 51.918, would no longer
exist, and the violating ozone
nonattainment area would thereafter
have to address those requirements.
V. EPA’s Final Actions
Based on the information and
rationale presented in the direct final
rule and in this notice of final
rulemaking and after due consideration
of all comments received, EPA is taking
final action to make a number of
determinations for certain areas in
California for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
First, pursuant to section 181(b)(2),
EPA is determining that six 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas in California
[Amador and Calaveras Counties
(Central Mountain Counties), Chico
(Butte County), Kern County (Eastern
Kern), Mariposa and Tuolumne
Counties (Southern Mountain Counties),
Nevada County (Western Nevada
County), and Sutter County (Sutter
Buttes)] attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by their respective applicable
attainment dates based on complete,
quality-assured, and certified ambient
air quality monitoring data. Second, in
conjunction with its determinations for
Southern Mountain Counties and
Western Nevada County, EPA is
determining that these areas qualified
for one-year extensions and is granting
these extensions under CAA section
181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.907.
Specifically, for Butte County and
Sutter Buttes, EPA is determining that
these areas attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard by their applicable
attainment deadline of June 15, 2007,
based on complete, quality-assured, and
certified ambient air quality monitoring
data for 2004–2006. For the Central
Mountain Counties and Eastern Kern
ozone nonattainment areas, EPA is
determining that they attained the 1997
8-hour ozone standard by their
applicable attainment deadline of June
15, 2010, based on complete, qualityassured and certified air quality data for
2007–2009. For the Southern Mountain
Counties and Western Nevada County,
whose original attainment date was June
15, 2010, EPA is granting a one-year
attainment date extension until June 15,
2011 and determining that these areas
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
by that extended attainment date, based
on complete, quality-assured data for
2008–2010.
Third, EPA is separately determining
that Central Mountain Counties, Butte
County, Eastern Kern, Southern
Mountain Counties, Western Nevada
County, Sutter Buttes, and Ventura
County have each attained the 1997 8hour ozone standard based on the most
recent three years of complete, qualityassured, and certified data for 2009–
2011. Preliminary data available for
2012 show that these areas continue to
attain the standard. As provided in 40
CFR 51.918, these determinations of
attainment suspend the requirements for
the State of California to submit, for
each of these seven ozone
nonattainment areas, an attainment
demonstration and associated RACM,
RFP plan, contingency measures, and
any other planning requirements related
to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, for as long as the areas
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 232 / Monday, December 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
These actions make determinations of
attainment based on air quality, result in
the suspension of certain federal
requirements, grant attainment date
extensions, and/or would not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
these actions:
• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory
actions’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are 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.);
• Do 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);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are 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
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, these actions do not have
Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP
obligations discussed herein do not
apply to Indian Tribes and thus will not
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:39 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 229001
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by February 1, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: November 19, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
71555
Air Resources Board dated March 23,
2010 and May 24, 2010 for extensions
of the applicable attainment date for the
Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties and
Nevada County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas, respectively, from
June 15, 2010 to June 15, 2011.
(2) Determinations of attainment by
the applicable attainment dates. EPA
has determined that the Amador and
Calaveras Counties, Chico, Kern County,
Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties,
Nevada County, and Sutter County 8hour ozone nonattainment areas in
California attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) by their applicable
attainment dates. The applicable
attainment dates are as follows: Amador
and Calaveras Counties (June 15, 2010),
Chico (June 15, 2007), Kern County
(June 15, 2010), Mariposa and
Tuolumne Counties (June 15, 2011),
Nevada County (June 15, 2011), and
Sutter County (June 15, 2007).
(3) Determinations of attainment. EPA
is determining that the Amador and
Calaveras Counties, Chico, Kern County,
Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties,
Nevada County, Sutter County and
Ventura County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas have attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard, based upon
complete quality-assured data for 2009–
2011. Under the provisions of EPA’s
ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR
51.918), these determinations suspend
the attainment demonstrations and
associated reasonably available control
measures, reasonable further progress
plans, contingency measures, and other
planning SIPs related to attainment for
as long as the areas continue to attain
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. If EPA
determines, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking, that any of these areas no
longer meets the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
the corresponding determination of
attainment for that area shall be
withdrawn.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–29013 Filed 11–30–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.282 is amended by
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.282
Ozone.
Control Strategy and regulations:
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Determinations of Attainment:
Effective January 2, 2013.
(1) Approval of applications for
extensions of applicable attainment
dates. Under section 181(a)(5) of the
Clean Air Act, EPA is approving the
applications submitted by the California
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0781; FRL–9370–6]
Halosulfuron-Methyl; Pesticide
Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 232 (Monday, December 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71551-71555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29013]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0492; FRL-9757-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California;
Determinations of Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is making a number of determinations relating to 1997 8-
hour ozone nonattainment areas in California. First, EPA is determining
that six 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas in California (Amador and
Calaveras Counties, Chico, Kern County, Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties,
Nevada County, and Sutter County) (``six CA areas'') attained the 1997
8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by their
applicable attainment dates. Second, in conjunction with its
determinations for Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties and Nevada County,
EPA is granting these areas one-year attainment date extensions.
Lastly, EPA is determining that the six CA areas and the Ventura County
8-hour ozone nonattainment area in CA have attained and continue to
attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the most recent three years
of data. Under the provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule, these
determinations suspend the requirements to submit revisions to the
state implementation plans (SIP) for these areas related to attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard for as long as these areas continue
to meet the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on January 2, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0492. The index to the docket is
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material)
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g.,
confidential business information). To inspect the hard copy materials,
please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office,
AIR-2, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-
3901, telephone number (415) 972-3963, or email ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we'',
``us'' or ``our'' are used, we mean EPA. We are providing the following
outline to aid in locating information in this final rule.
Table of Contents
I. What determinations is EPA making?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?
IV. What are the effects of these actions?
A. Attainment Date Extensions
B. Determinations of Attainment by Areas' Applicable Attainment
Dates
C. Determinations of Current Attainment and 40 CFR 51.918
V. EPA's Final Actions
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What determinations is EPA making?
EPA is making a number of determinations with respect to 1997 8-
hour ozone nonattainment areas in California. First, pursuant to
section 181(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is determining that
the Amador and Calaveras Counties (Central Mountain Counties), Chico
(Butte County), Kern County (Eastern Kern), Mariposa and Tuolumne
Counties (Southern Mountain Counties), Nevada County (Western Nevada
County), and Sutter County (Sutter Buttes) 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas in California (herein referred to as the ``six CA areas'')
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by their respective applicable
attainment dates. Second, in connection with these determinations, EPA
is also granting, pursuant to section 181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.907,
applications submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for
extensions to the applicable attainment dates for the Southern Mountain
Counties and
[[Page 71552]]
Western Nevada County nonattainment areas.
The six CA areas have differing applicable attainment dates. For
Butte County and Sutter Buttes, EPA is determining that these areas
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard by their applicable attainment
deadline of June 15, 2007, based on complete, quality-assured, and
certified ambient air quality monitoring data for 2004-2006. For the
Central Mountain Counties and Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment areas,
EPA is determining that they attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard by
their applicable attainment deadline of June 15, 2010, based on
complete, quality-assured and certified air quality data for 2007-2009.
For the Southern Mountain Counties and Western Nevada County, whose
original attainment date was June 15, 2010, EPA is granting a one-year
attainment date extension until June 15, 2011 and determining that
these areas attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by that extended
attainment date, based on complete, quality-assured data for 2008-2010.
In addition, for all the areas listed above and for Ventura
County,\1\ EPA is determining, based on complete, quality-assured and
certified air quality monitoring data for 2009-2011, that these areas
have attained and continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Preliminary data for 2012 indicate that these areas continue to attain
the NAAQS. Under the provisions of 40 CFR 51.918, these latter
determinations suspend the obligation of the State to submit certain
planning requirements related to attainment for as long as the areas
continue to attain the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ventura County is classified as a ``serious'' nonattainment
area for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. As such, the applicable
attainment date for Ventura County is June 15, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What is the background for these actions?
On September 14, 2012, EPA published in the Federal Register a
direct final rule (77 FR 56775) that made the same determinations for
the same areas addressed in today's final rule. On that same date, we
also published a document (77 FR 56797) that was to serve as the
proposed rule addressing the same actions as the direct final rule if
we were to withdraw the direct final rule in response to receipt of
adverse comments.
In our direct final rule, we provided background for these actions
by describing the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (0.08 parts per million
averaged over an eight-hour time frame), the designations and
classifications of the six CA areas and Ventura County with respect to
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (see Table 1 from the direct final rule),
and the statutory and regulatory provisions that allow EPA to grant
attainment date extensions and that act to suspend attainment-related
SIP submittal obligations. In the direct final rule, we also describe
the basis upon which we evaluate whether an area has attained the 1997
8-hour ozone standard, and present area-specific monitoring network
information and data in support of our conclusions: That two of the six
CA areas--the Southern Mountain Counties and Western Nevada County--
qualified for one-year extensions of their applicable attainment dates;
that the six CA areas attained by their respective attainment dates,
that all six CA areas and Ventura County have attained the NAAQS based
on the most recent complete three-year monitoring period (2009-2011);
and that the most recent available ambient data for 2012 are consistent
with continued attainment of the standard. Lastly, we explained how,
under 40 CFR 51.918, the determinations of attainment based upon the
most recent three-year period (2009-2011) suspend attainment-related
SIP submittal obligations for these areas with respect to the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard for so long as the areas continue to attain the
standard, although the areas remain designated nonattainment until they
are redesignated to attainment. Please see the direct final rule for
detailed information concerning the subject areas, ozone monitoring
networks and data, and our review and evaluation.
In our direct final rule, we indicated that, if we received adverse
comments, then we would publish a withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that the direct final rule will not take effect.
We received such adverse comments and have withdrawn the direct final
rule. See 77 FR 66715 (November 7, 2012). In our direct final rule, we
stated that EPA would respond to comments received on the proposed
rule, but that we would not institute a second comment period. In this
final rule and in responding to comments, we continue to rely on the
information and analysis that were set forth in the direct final rule.
III. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?
First, EPA received one anonymous comment that generally supports
the proposed actions, while emphasizing the need for continued
monitoring for the ozone standard. Second, and with respect only to
EPA's proposed determination for the Central Mountain Counties, EPA
also received two adverse comment letters from one individual. These
were submitted on behalf of the Ione Valley Land, Air, and Water
Defense Alliance (``Ione Valley Alliance''), and expressed concern over
the proposed determination related to a portion (Amador County) of the
Central Mountain Counties area (Amador and Calaveras Counties). See
letters, Douglas Carstens, September 10 and October 3, 2012. EPA
received no adverse comments with respect to its determinations for any
of the other CA areas in its direct final and proposed rulemakings. The
general, supportive anonymous comment and the two comments related to
Amador County are summarized and addressed below.
Comment 1: The anonymous commenter states that he/she generally
agrees with our proposed determinations and the related suspension of
the obligation to submit attainment-related SIP planning requirements,
but emphasizes the need to continue ambient monitoring to ensure that
the standard is maintained and to avoid the return of excessive ozone
levels.
Response 1: We agree that continued ambient air monitoring by CARB
and the individual air districts (where applicable) in the seven
nonattainment areas that are the subject of this action is necessary to
ensure that continuing attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard is
verified. While our final determinations will suspend certain
attainment-related SIP submittal requirements, they will not suspend
any monitoring-related requirements and CARB and the local air
districts (where applicable) will continue to be required to operate
ozone monitoring networks in compliance with EPA monitoring
regulations.
Lastly, as described in our direct final rule, the suspension of
attainment-related SIP requirements continues only until such time, if
any, that EPA (i) redesignates the area to attainment at which time
those requirements no longer apply, or (ii) subsequently determines
that the area has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. If EPA
subsequently determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking, that any
one of the nonattainment areas has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQ,
the basis for the suspension of the requirements for that area,
provided by 40 CFR 51.918, would no longer exist, and the violating
ozone nonattainment area would thereafter have to address those
requirements. See 77 FR 56775, at 56778 (September 14, 2012).
Comment 2: The Ione Valley Alliance objects to our proposed
determination of
[[Page 71553]]
attainment for Amador County and contends that Amador County has not
implemented sufficient measures that will ensure that it can maintain
attainment status.
Response 2: Amador County is part of a two-county 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area that, together with Calaveras County, is referred to
as ``Central Mountain Counties.'' As to the Central Mountain Counties
area, we are finalizing our proposed determination of attainment by the
applicable attainment date (i.e., June 15, 2010 for this area) based on
2007-2009 data, as well as our separate proposed determination that the
area currently attains the standard based on the most recent three-year
monitoring period (2009-2011). See pages 56779 and 56780 from our
September 14, 2012 direct final rule. We have made these determinations
after reviewing the complete, quality-assured data from the ozone
monitoring station located in Jackson, California, which is the county
seat of Amador County. As shown in Table 3 in the direct final rule
(page 56780), the design value based on the data from the Jackson
monitoring site was 0.080 ppm during the 2007-2009 period and 0.071 ppm
during the 2009-2011 period. These values show levels in the area that
are well below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\2\ Moreover, the
preliminary ozone data available for 2012 indicate that the area
continues to attain the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Design values less than or equal to 0.084 ppm represent
attainment of the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's determinations of attainment for the Amador and Calaveras
Counties area are solely based on complete, quality-assured air
monitoring data. EPA's review of these data does not involve any
evaluation of the sufficiency of the measures adopted for the area to
maintain the NAAQS, and it is not dependent on any conclusions
regarding those measures. Thus the comments of Ione Valley Alliance are
not germane to the action we are taking today, i.e., determinations
based solely on air quality data. CAA Section 181(b)(2) expressly
provides that a determination that an area has attained by its
attainment date is ``based on the area's design value (as of the
attainment date).'' Similarly, EPA's determination that the area
continues currently to attain the standard is based entirely on data
establishing the area's design value for the most recent three years.
The commenter does not challenge these air quality determinations
themselves. Moreover, since our determinations of attainment for
Central Mountain Counties are based solely on air quality, they do not
constitute a redesignation of the area to attainment. In order for EPA
to redesignate an area to attainment, EPA must, among other criteria,
determine that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of
the SIP and applicable Federal air pollution control regulations. To
approve a redesignation to attainment, EPA must also review and approve
a maintenance plan that covers the first ten years beyond
redesignation. See CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) and (iv) and section
175A. At this time, California has not submitted a redesignation
request or maintenance plan for Central Mountain Counties. EPA again
notes that, under 40 CFR section 51.918, EPA's determination that the
area is currently attaining the standard based on the most recent three
years of data will be withdrawn if, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking, EPA determines that the area is once again in violation of
the standard.
Comment 3: The Ione Valley Alliance contends that EPA's issuing of
a blanket attainment ruling without public notice and comment during a
formal rulemaking process may inappropriately expose the County to
overdevelopment without sufficient oversight to ensure meaningful
measures are implemented to maintain attainment status. In support of
this contention, Ione Valley Alliance enclosed, with its September 10,
2012 comment letter, a copy of a letter the Alliance sent to the Amador
County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regarding a Public Records
Act request and a request for notices related to a specific quarry
project, General Plan Amendment and related environmental impact
report.
Response 3: EPA has addressed the commenter's claims as to lack of
notice and opportunity to comment by withdrawing our direct final rule
in response to receipt of adverse comments and by fully responding to
the comments in this final rule, which is based on EPA's proposed rule,
published the same day (September 14, 2012) as our direct final rule.
Second, as to the concern the commenter expressed regarding the
risk of overdevelopment without sufficient oversight, EPA's
determinations today, which derive solely from ambient ozone monitoring
data, do not in and of themselves affect development in the county. The
determination that the area attained the standard by its attainment
date fulfills EPA's statutory obligation under section 181(b)(2). Our
determination that the area is currently attaining the standard based
on the most recent three years of quality-assured monitoring data
reflects the reality of recent air quality in the area. It does not
redesignate the area to attainment status, or relax control
requirements. Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.918, the determination has the
effect of suspending only those SIP submittal requirements related to
attainment, but the suspension of these requirements lasts only for so
long as the area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As
explained generally on page 56778 of the direct final rule with respect
to all of the subject areas, if EPA subsequently determines, after
notice-and-comment rulemaking, that the Central Mountain Counties area
has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the basis for the suspension
of the requirements for that area would no longer exist, and the area
would thereafter have to address those requirements.
Lastly, as noted above, the enclosure sent with the September 10th
comment letter is a letter to the Amador County APCD containing a
Public Records Act Request and a request for notices related to a
quarry project and related Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared
under the State's California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The
letter to Amador County APCD also asserts that the EIR prepared by
Amador County is deficient and cannot be relied upon by the APCD in
issuing permits to project-related emissions sources; that the project
would violate certain APCD rules and regulations; that the emissions
from the project would be significant; that sensitive receptors in the
area would be adversely affected; that feasible, less damaging
alternatives are available; and that the permit applications therefore
must be denied.
The contents of the letter to the Amador County APCD are not
germane to today's determinations because today's determinations are
based solely on ambient air quality data, and the comments do not
challenge the data or EPA's review and evaluation of the data. In
addition, EPA's action today does not change the status of Amador
County as nonattainment with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
nor would it affect the permit requirements for the quarry project.
Rather, our action today simply suspends attainment-related SIP
submittal requirements so long as the area continues to monitor
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
Comment 4: The Ione Valley Alliance believes that the attainment
determination does not change the designation of Amador County and that
the status of the area continues to be
[[Page 71554]]
``nonattainment'' until official action is taken to change that
designation.
Response 4: We agree that the neither the determination of
attainment by the applicable attainment date, nor the determination of
attainment based on the most recent three-year period, for the Central
Mountain Counties area changes the designation or classification of the
area with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Central Mountain
Counties will remain ``moderate'' nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard until EPA takes final action to approve a maintenance
plan for the area and a request to redesignate the area to attainment
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). No such maintenance plan or
redesignation request is pending before EPA at the present time for the
Central Mountain Counties 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
IV. What are the effects of these actions?
A. Attainment Date Extensions
Pursuant to CAA section 181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.907, the State has
requested, and EPA is approving one-year attainment date extensions,
until June 15, 2011, for the Southern Mountain Counties and Western
Nevada County nonattainment areas. The effect of granting the
attainment date extensions is to extend the 1997 8-hour ozone
attainment deadline for the Southern Mountain Counties and Western
Nevada County nonattainment areas for an additional year until June 15,
2011 and to enable EPA, pursuant to section 181(b)(2) of the CAA, to
determine that the areas attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by their
extended deadlines.
B. Determinations of Attainment by Areas' Applicable Attainment Dates
Pursuant to section 181(b)(2) of the CAA, EPA is determining that
the Butte County, Central Mountain Counties, Eastern Kern, Southern
Mountain Counties, Sutter Buttes, and Western Nevada County ozone
nonattainment areas attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by their
applicable attainment dates.
These determinations discharge EPA's obligations under section
181(b)(2) with respect to determining whether these areas attained by
their respective attainment deadlines, and establish that these areas
are not subject to reclassification for failure to attain by these
deadlines.
C. Determinations of Current Attainment and 40 CFR 51.918
In addition, EPA is separately determining that the six CA areas
and Ventura County have attained the standard based upon the most
recent three years of data (without reference to their attainment
deadlines). Under the provisions of 40 CFR 51.918, these determinations
of attainment suspend the obligation for the State to submit certain
planning requirements described above; however, they do not constitute
redesignations to attainment under section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. The
designation status of the six CA areas and Ventura County remains
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA
determines that each area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation
to attainment, including an approved maintenance plan.
In accordance with 40 CFR 51.918, based on these determinations,
the obligation under the CAA for the State of California to submit an
attainment demonstration and reasonably available control measures
(RACM), reasonable further progress plans (RFP), contingency measures,
and any other planning requirements related to attainment of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS for these seven ozone nonattainment areas is
suspended for so long as the areas continue to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
The suspension continues until such time, if any, that EPA (i)
redesignates the area to attainment at which time those requirements no
longer apply, or (ii) subsequently determines that the area has
violated the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. It is separate from, and does not
influence or otherwise affect, any future designation determination or
requirements for the area based on any new or revised ozone NAAQS. It
remains in effect regardless of whether EPA designates the area as a
nonattainment area for purposes of any new or revised ozone NAAQS.
If EPA subsequently determines, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking, that any one of these nonattainment areas has violated the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of the
requirements for that area, provided by 40 CFR 51.918, would no longer
exist, and the violating ozone nonattainment area would thereafter have
to address those requirements.
V. EPA's Final Actions
Based on the information and rationale presented in the direct
final rule and in this notice of final rulemaking and after due
consideration of all comments received, EPA is taking final action to
make a number of determinations for certain areas in California for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
First, pursuant to section 181(b)(2), EPA is determining that six
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas in California [Amador and Calaveras
Counties (Central Mountain Counties), Chico (Butte County), Kern County
(Eastern Kern), Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties (Southern Mountain
Counties), Nevada County (Western Nevada County), and Sutter County
(Sutter Buttes)] attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by their
respective applicable attainment dates based on complete, quality-
assured, and certified ambient air quality monitoring data. Second, in
conjunction with its determinations for Southern Mountain Counties and
Western Nevada County, EPA is determining that these areas qualified
for one-year extensions and is granting these extensions under CAA
section 181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.907.
Specifically, for Butte County and Sutter Buttes, EPA is
determining that these areas attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard by
their applicable attainment deadline of June 15, 2007, based on
complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air quality monitoring
data for 2004-2006. For the Central Mountain Counties and Eastern Kern
ozone nonattainment areas, EPA is determining that they attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard by their applicable attainment deadline of
June 15, 2010, based on complete, quality-assured and certified air
quality data for 2007-2009. For the Southern Mountain Counties and
Western Nevada County, whose original attainment date was June 15,
2010, EPA is granting a one-year attainment date extension until June
15, 2011 and determining that these areas attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS by that extended attainment date, based on complete,
quality-assured data for 2008-2010.
Third, EPA is separately determining that Central Mountain
Counties, Butte County, Eastern Kern, Southern Mountain Counties,
Western Nevada County, Sutter Buttes, and Ventura County have each
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard based on the most recent three
years of complete, quality-assured, and certified data for 2009-2011.
Preliminary data available for 2012 show that these areas continue to
attain the standard. As provided in 40 CFR 51.918, these determinations
of attainment suspend the requirements for the State of California to
submit, for each of these seven ozone nonattainment areas, an
attainment demonstration and associated RACM, RFP plan, contingency
measures, and any other planning requirements related to attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, for as long as the areas
[[Page 71555]]
continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
These actions make determinations of attainment based on air
quality, result in the suspension of certain federal requirements,
grant attainment date extensions, and/or would not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, these
actions:
Are not ``significant regulatory actions'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are 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.);
Do 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);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are 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
Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, these actions do not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP obligations discussed herein do not apply to Indian
Tribes and thus will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by February 1, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: November 19, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.282 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.282 Control Strategy and regulations: Ozone.
* * * * *
(e) Determinations of Attainment: Effective January 2, 2013.
(1) Approval of applications for extensions of applicable
attainment dates. Under section 181(a)(5) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is
approving the applications submitted by the California Air Resources
Board dated March 23, 2010 and May 24, 2010 for extensions of the
applicable attainment date for the Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties and
Nevada County 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas, respectively, from June
15, 2010 to June 15, 2011.
(2) Determinations of attainment by the applicable attainment
dates. EPA has determined that the Amador and Calaveras Counties,
Chico, Kern County, Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties, Nevada County, and
Sutter County 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas in California attained
the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by
their applicable attainment dates. The applicable attainment dates are
as follows: Amador and Calaveras Counties (June 15, 2010), Chico (June
15, 2007), Kern County (June 15, 2010), Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties
(June 15, 2011), Nevada County (June 15, 2011), and Sutter County (June
15, 2007).
(3) Determinations of attainment. EPA is determining that the
Amador and Calaveras Counties, Chico, Kern County, Mariposa and
Tuolumne Counties, Nevada County, Sutter County and Ventura County 8-
hour ozone nonattainment areas have attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, based upon complete quality-assured data for 2009-2011. Under
the provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR 51.918),
these determinations suspend the attainment demonstrations and
associated reasonably available control measures, reasonable further
progress plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related
to attainment for as long as the areas continue to attain the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard. If EPA determines, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking, that any of these areas no longer meets the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, the corresponding determination of attainment for that area
shall be withdrawn.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-29013 Filed 11-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
