infrastructure SIP submittals appears at section 110(a), and it
comports with the more general SIP requirement at section 110(l) of the
CAA. Under the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 51, if a public hearing
is held, an infrastructure SIP submission must include documentation by
the state that the public hearing was held in accordance with the EPA's
procedural requirements for public hearings. See 40 CFR part 51,
Appendix V, paragraph 2.1(g), and 40 CFR 51.102. In the event that a
state's existing SIP does not already meet applicable requirements,
then the infrastructure SIP submission must include the modifications
or additions to the state's SIP in order to update it to meet the
relevant elements of section 110(a)(2).
5. Nonattainment Area Requirements
    Part D of the CAA describes the various program requirements that
apply to states with nonattainment areas for different NAAQS. Clean Air
Act Section 182 (found in subpart 2 of part D) includes the specific
SIP requirements that govern the O3 program, and supplements
the more general nonattainment area requirements in CAA sections 172
and 173. Under CAA section 182, states generally are required to submit
attainment demonstration SIPs within three or four years after the
effective date of area designations promulgated by the EPA, depending
on the classification of the area.\232\ These SIP submissions need to
show how the nonattainment area will attain the primary O3
standard ``as expeditiously as practicable,'' but no later than within
the relevant time frame from the effective date of designations
associated with the classification of the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \232\ Section 181(a)(1) of the CAA establishes classification
categories for areas designated nonattainment for the primary
O3 NAAQS. These categories range from ``Marginal,'' the
lowest O3 classification with the fewest requirements
associated with it, to ``Extreme,'' the highest classification with
the most required programs. Areas with worse O3 problems
are given more time to attain the NAAQS and more associated emission
control requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA believes that the overall framework and policy approach of
the implementation rules associated with the 2008 O3 NAAQS
provide an effective and appropriate template for the general approach
states would follow in planning for attainment of the revised
O3 standard.\233\ However, to assist with the implementation
of the revised O3 standards, the EPA intends to develop and
propose an additional O3 NAAQS Implementation Rule that will
address certain subjects specific to the new O3 NAAQS
finalized here. This will include establishing air quality thresholds
associated with each nonattainment area classification (i.e., Marginal,
Moderate, etc.), associated attainment deadlines, and deadlines for
submitting attainment planning SIP elements (e.g., RACT for major
sources, RACT VOC control techniques guidelines, etc.). The rulemaking
will also address whether to revoke the 2008 O3 NAAQS, and
to impose appropriate anti-backsliding requirements to ensure that the
protections afforded by that standard are preserved. The EPA intends to
propose this implementation rule within one year after the revised
O3 NAAQS is promulgated, and finalize this implementation
rule by no later than the time the area designations process is
finalized (approximately two years after promulgation of the revised
O3 NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \233\ Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Final
Rule (80 FR 12264; March 6, 2015) and Implementation of the 2008
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area
Classifications Approach, Attainment Deadlines and Revocation of the
1997 Ozone Standards for Transportation Conformity Purposes (77 FR
30160; May 21, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We know that developing the implementation plans that outline the
steps a nonattainment area will take to

meet an air quality standard requires a significant amount of work on
the part of state, tribal or local air agencies. The EPA routinely
looks for ways to reduce this workload, including assisting with air
quality modeling by providing inputs such as emissions, meteorological
and boundary conditions; and sharing national-scale model results that
states can leverage in their development of attainment demonstrations.

B. O3 Air Quality Designations

1. Area Designation Process
    After the EPA establishes or revises a NAAQS, the CAA directs the
EPA and the states to take steps to ensure that the new or revised
NAAQS is met. One of the first steps, known as the initial area
designations, involves identifying areas of the country that either
meet or do not meet the new or revised NAAQS, along with any nearby
areas that contribute to areas that do not meet the new or revised
NAAQS.
    Section 107(d)(1) of the CAA provides that, ``By such date as the
Administrator may reasonably require, but not later than 1 year after
promulgation of a new or revised national ambient air quality standard
for any pollutant under section 109, the Governor of each state shall .
. . submit to the Administrator a list of all areas (or portions
thereof) in the state'' that designates those areas as nonattainment,
attainment, or unclassifiable. The EPA must then promulgate the area
designations according to a specified process, including procedures to
be followed if the EPA intends to modify a state's initial
recommendation.
    Clean Air Act Section 107(d)(1)(B)(i) further provides, ``Upon
promulgation or revision of a national ambient air quality standard,
the Administrator shall promulgate the designations of all areas (or
portions thereof) . . . as expeditiously as practicable, but in no case
later than 2 years from the date of promulgation of the new or revised
national ambient air quality standard. Such period may be extended for
up to one year in the event the Administrator has insufficient
information to promulgate the designations.'' By no later than 120 days
prior to promulgating area designations, the EPA is required to notify
states of any intended modifications to their recommendations that the
EPA may deem necessary. States then have an opportunity to demonstrate
why any proposed modification is inappropriate. Whether or not a state
provides a recommendation, the EPA must timely promulgate the
designation that the agency deems appropriate.
    While section 107 of the CAA specifically addresses states, the EPA
intends to follow the same process for tribes to the extent
practicable, pursuant to CAA section 301(d) regarding tribal authority
and the Tribal Authority Rule (63 FR 7254, February 12, 1998). To
provide clarity and consistency in doing so, the EPA issued a 2011
guidance memorandum on working with tribes during the designation
process.\234\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \234\ Page, S. (2011). Guidance to Regions for Working with
Tribes during the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
Designations Process, Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to Regional Air
Directors, Regions I-X, December 20, 2011. Available: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/20120117naaqsguidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in sections II and IV of this preamble, the EPA is
revising both the primary and secondary O3 NAAQS.
Accordingly, the EPA intends to complete designations for both NAAQS
following the standard 2-year process discussed above. In accordance
with section 107(d)(1) of the CAA, state Governors (and tribes, if they
choose) should submit their initial designation recommendations for a
revised primary and secondary NAAQS by 1 year after October 1, 2015. If
the EPA intends to modify any state recommendation, the EPA would
notify the appropriate state Governor (or tribal leader) no later than
120 days prior to making final designation decisions. A state or tribe
that believes the modification is inappropriate would then have the
opportunity to demonstrate to the EPA why it believes its original
recommendation (or a revised recommendation) is more appropriate. The
EPA would take any additional input into account in making the final
designation decisions.
    The CAA defines an area as nonattainment if it is violating the
NAAQS or if it is contributing to a violation in a nearby area.
Consistent with previous area designations processes, the EPA intends
to use area-specific analysis of multiple factors to support area
boundary decisions. The EPA intends to evaluate information related to
the following factors for designations: air quality data, emissions and
emissions-related data, meteorology, geography/topography, and
jurisdictional boundaries. Additional guidance on the designation
process and how these factors may be evaluated and inform the process
will be issued by the EPA early in 2016 to assist states in developing
their recommendations.
    Areas that are designated as nonattainment are also classified at
the time of designation by operation of law according to the severity
of their O3 problem. The classification categories are
Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, and Extreme. Ozone nonattainment
areas are subject to specific mandatory measures depending on their
classification. As indicated previously, the thresholds for the
classification categories will be established in a future O3
implementation rule.
    Clean Air Act section 182(h) authorizes the EPA Administrator to
determine that an area designated nonattainment can be treated as a
rural transport area. Regardless of its classification, a rural
transport area is deemed to have fulfilled all O3-related
planning and control requirements if it meets the CAA's requirements
for areas classified Marginal, which is the lowest classification
specified in the CAA. In accordance with the statute, a nonattainment
area may qualify for this determination if it meets the following
criteria:
     The area does not contain emissions sources that make a
significant contribution to monitored O3 concentrations in
the area, or in other areas; and
     The area does not include and is not adjacent to a
Metropolitan Statistical Area.
    Historically, the EPA has listed four nonattainment areas as rural
transport areas under this statutory provision.\235\ The EPA has not
issued separate written guidance to further elaborate on the
interpretation of these CAA qualification criteria. However, the EPA
developed draft guidance in 2005 that explains the kinds of technical
analyses that states could use to establish that transport of
O3 and/or O3 precursors into the area is so
overwhelming that the contribution of local emissions to an observed 8-
hour O3 concentration above the level of the NAAQS is
relatively minor and determine that emissions within the area do not
make a significant contribution to the O3 concentrations
measured in the area or in other areas.\236\ While this guidance

was not prepared specifically for rural transport areas, it could be
useful to states for developing technical information to support a
request that the EPA treat a specific O3 nonattainment area
as a rural transport area. The EPA will work with states to ensure
nonattainment areas eligible for treatment as rural transport areas are
identified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \235\ For the 1979 1-hour O3 standard, Door County
Area, Wisconsin; Edmonson County Area, Kentucky; Essex County Area
(Whiteface Mountain), New York; and Smyth County Area (White Top
Mountain), Virginia were recognized by the EPA as rural transport
areas. No rural transport areas were recognized for the 1997 or 2008
8-hour O3 standards.
    \236\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2005). Criteria For
Assessing Whether an Ozone Nonattainment Area is Affected by
Overwhelming Transport [Draft EPA Guidance]. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. June 2005. Available
at http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/guide/owt_guidance_07-13-05.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Exceptional Events
    During the initial area designations process, the EPA intends to
evaluate multiple factors, including air quality data, when identifying
and determining boundaries for areas of the country that meet or do not
meet the revised O3 NAAQS. In some cases, these data may be
influenced by exceptional events. Under the Exceptional Events Rule, an
air agency can request and the EPA can agree to exclude data associated
with event-influenced exceedances or violations of a NAAQS, including
the revised O3 NAAQS, provided the event meets the statutory
requirements in section 319(b) of the CAA, which requires that:
     the event ``affects air quality;''
     the event ``is not reasonably controllable or
preventable;''
     the event is ``caused by human activity that is unlikely
to recur at a particular location or [is] a natural event,'' \237\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \237\ A natural event is further described in 40 CFR 50.1(k) as
``an event in which human activity plays little or no direct causal
role.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     that ``a clear causal relationship must exist between the
measured exceedances of a [NAAQS] and the exceptional event. . . .''
    The EPA's implementing regulations, the Exceptional Events Rule,
further specify certain requirements for air agencies making
exceptional events demonstrations.\238\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \238\ 72 FR 13,560 (March 22, 2007), ``Treatment of Data
Influenced by Exceptional Events,'' Final Rule; see also 40 CFR
parts 50 and 51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ISA contains discussions of natural events that may contribute
to O3 or O3 precursors. These include
stratospheric O3 intrusion and wildfire events.\239\ As
indicated above, to satisfy the exceptional events requirements and to
qualify for data exclusion under the Exceptional Events Rule, an air
agency must develop and submit a demonstration, including evidence,
addressing each of the identified criteria. The extent to which a
stratospheric O3 intrusion event or a wildfire event
contributes to O3 levels can be uncertain, and in most cases
requires detailed analyses to determine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \239\ The preamble to the Exceptional Events Rule (72 FR 13560)
identifies both stratospheric O3 intrusions and wildfires
as natural events that could also qualify as exceptional events
under the CAA and Exceptional Event Rule criteria. Note that
O3 resulting from routine natural emissions from
vegetation, microbes, animals and lightning are not exceptional
events authorized for exclusion under the section 319 of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Strong stratospheric O3 intrusion events, most prevalent
at high elevation sites during winter or spring, can be identified
based on measurements of low relative humidity, evidence of deep
atmospheric mixing, and a low ratio of CO to O3 based on
ambient measurements. Accurately determining the extent of weaker
intrusion events remains challenging (U.S. EPA 2013, p. 3-34). Although
states have submitted only a few exceptional events demonstrations for
stratospheric O3 intrusion, the EPA recently approved a
demonstration from Wyoming for a June 2012 stratospheric O3
event.\240\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \240\ U.S. EPA (2014) Treatment of Data Influenced by
Exceptional Events: Examples of Reviewed Exceptional Event
Submissions. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC, available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/analysis/exevents.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While stratospheric O3 intrusions can increase monitored
ground-level ambient O3 concentrations, wildfire plumes can
either suppress or enhance O3 depending upon a variety of
factors including fuel type, combustion stage, plume chemistry, aerosol
effects, meteorological conditions and distance from the fire (Jaffe
and Wigder, 2012). As a result, determining the impact of wildfire
emissions on specific O3 observations is challenging. The
EPA recently approved an exceptional events demonstration for wildfires
affecting 1-hour O3 levels in Sacramento, California in 2008
that successfully used a variety of analytical tools (e.g., regression
modeling, back trajectories, satellite imagery, etc.) to support the
exclusion of O3 data affected by large fires.\241\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \241\ U.S. EPA (2014) Treatment of Data Influenced by
Exceptional Events: Examples of Reviewed Exceptional Event
Submissions. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC. Examples of O3-related exceptional event
submissions, available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/analysis/exevents.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to previously expressed stakeholder feedback regarding
implementation of the Exceptional Events Rule and specific stakeholder
concerns regarding the burden of exceptional events demonstrations, the
EPA is currently engaged in a rulemaking process to amend the
Exceptional Events Rule. As part of an upcoming notice and comment
rulemaking effort (and related activities, including the issuance of
relevant guidance documents), the EPA sees opportunities to standardize
best practices for collaboration between the EPA and air agencies,
clarify and simplify demonstrations, and improve tools and consistency.
    Additionally, the EPA intends to develop guidance to address
implementing the Exceptional Events Rule criteria for wildfires that
could affect ambient O3 concentrations. Wildfire emissions
are a component of background O3 (Jaffe and Wigder, 2012)
and in some locations can significantly contribute to periodic high
O3 levels (Emery, 2012). The threat from wildfires can be
mitigated through management of wildland vegetation. Planned and
managed fires are one tool that land managers can use to reduce fuel
load, unnatural understory and tree density, thus helping to reduce the
risk of catastrophic wildfires. Allowing some wildfires to continue and
the thoughtful use of prescribed fire can influence the occurrence of
catastrophic wildfires, which may reduce the probability of fire-
induced smoke impacts and subsequent health effects. Thus, appropriate
use of prescribed fire may help manage the contribution of wildfires to
both background and periodic peak O3 air pollution. Several
commenters expressed concern that the revised O3 NAAQS could
limit the future use of prescribed fire. Under the current Exceptional
Events Rule, prescribed fires meeting the rule criteria may also
qualify as exceptional events. The EPA intends to further clarify the
Exceptional Events Rule criteria for prescribed fire on wildland in its
upcoming rulemaking.
    The EPA is committed to working with federal land managers, other
federal agencies, tribes and states to effectively manage prescribed
fire use to reduce the impact of wildfire-related emissions on
O3 through policies and regulations implementing these
standards.

C. How do the New Source Review (NSR) requirements apply to the revised
O3 NAAQS?

1. NSR Requirements for Major Stationary Sources for the Revised
O3 NAAQS
    The CAA, at parts C and D of title I, contains preconstruction
review and permitting programs applicable to new major stationary
sources and major modifications of existing major sources. The
preconstruction review of each new major stationary source and major
modification applies on a pollutant-specific basis, and the
requirements that apply for each pollutant depend on whether the area
in which the source is situated is designated as attainment (or

unclassifiable) or nonattainment for that pollutant. In areas
designated attainment or unclassifiable for a pollutant, the PSD
requirements under part C apply to construction at major sources. In
areas designated nonattainment for a pollutant, the NNSR requirements
under part D apply to major source construction. Collectively, those
two sets of permit requirements are commonly referred to as the ``major
New Source Review'' or ``major NSR'' programs.
    Until an area is formally designated with respect to the revised
O3 NAAQS, the NSR provisions applicable under that area's
current designation for the 2008 O3 NAAQS (including any
applicable anti-backsliding requirements) will continue to apply. That
is, for areas designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 2008
O3 NAAQS, PSD will apply for new major stationary sources
and major modifications that trigger major source permitting
requirements for O3; areas designated nonattainment for the
2008 O3 NAAQS must comply with the NNSR requirements for new
major stationary sources and major modifications that trigger major
source permitting requirements for O3. When the new
designations for the revised O3 NAAQS become effective,
under the current rules, those designations will generally serve to
determine whether PSD or NNSR applies to O3 and its
precursors. The PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(2) and 52.21(i)(2)
provide that the substantive PSD requirements do not apply for a
particular pollutant if the owner or operator of the new major
stationary source or major modification demonstrates that the area in
which the source is located is designated nonattainment for that
pollutant under CAA section 107. Thus, new major sources and
modifications will generally be subject to the PSD program requirements
for O3 if they are locating in an area that does not have a
current nonattainment designation under CAA section 107 for
O3. These rules further provide that nonattainment
designations for a revoked NAAQS, as contained in 40 CFR part 81, are
not viewed as current designations under CAA section 107 for purposes
of determining the applicability of such PSD requirements.\242\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \242\ This description of paragraph (i)(2) of the PSD
regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21 reflects revisions made in
the final 2008 O3 NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule. See 80 FR
12264 at 12287 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's major NSR regulations define the term ``regulated NSR
pollutant'' to include any pollutant for which a NAAQS has been
promulgated and any pollutant identified in EPA regulations as a
constituent or precursor to such pollutant.\243\ Both the PSD and NNSR
regulations identify VOC and NOX as precursors to
O3. Accordingly, the major NSR programs for O3
are applied to emissions of VOC and NOX as precursors of
O3.\244\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \243\ The definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' is found in
the PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49) and 52.21(b)(50), and in
the NNSR regulations at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii).
    \244\ VOC and NOX are defined as precursors of ozone
in the PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(b)(1) and
52.21(b)(50)(i)(b)(1), and in the NNSR regulations at 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(B) and (C)(1) and part 51, Appendix S,
II.A.31(ii)(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Program
    The statutory requirements for a PSD permit program set forth under
part C of title I of the CAA (sections 160 through 169) are addressed
by the EPA's PSD regulations found at 40 CFR 51.166 (minimum
requirements for an approvable PSD SIP) and 40 CFR 52.21 (PSD
permitting program for permits issued under the EPA's federal
permitting authority). Both sets of regulations already apply for
O3 when the area is designated attainment or unclassifiable
for O3 and when the new source or modification triggers PSD
requirements for O3.
    For PSD, a ``major stationary source'' is one that emits or has the
potential to emit 250 tons per year (tpy) or more of any regulated NSR
pollutant, unless the new or modified source is classified under a list
of 28 source categories contained in the statutory definition of
``major emitting facility'' in section 169(1) of the CAA. For those 28
source categories, a ``major stationary source'' is one that emits or
has the potential to emit 100 tpy or more of any regulated NSR
pollutant. A ``major modification'' is a physical change or a change in
the method of operation of an existing major stationary source that
results first, in a significant emissions increase of a regulated NSR
pollutant for the project, and second, in a significant net emissions
increase of that pollutant at the source. See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(2)(i),
40 CFR 52.21(b)(2)(i).
    Among other things, for each regulated NSR pollutant emitted or
increased in significant amounts, the PSD program requires a new major
stationary source or a major modification to apply Best Available
Control Technology and to conduct an air quality impact analysis to
demonstrate that the proposed source or project will not cause or
contribute to a violation of any NAAQS or PSD increment (see CAA
section 165(a)(3)-(4), 40 CFR 51.166(j)-(k), 40 CFR 52.21(j)-(k)). The
PSD requirements may also include, in appropriate cases, an analysis of
potential adverse impacts on Class I areas (see CAA sections 162 and
165).\245\ The EPA has generally interpreted the requirement for an air
quality impact analysis under CAA section 165(a)(3) and the
implementing regulations to include a requirement to demonstrate that
emissions from the proposed facility will not cause or contribute to a
violation of any NAAQS that is in effect as of the date a PSD permit is
issued.\246\ See, e.g., 73 FR 28321, 28324, 28340 (May 16, 2008); 78 FR
3253 (Jan. 15, 2013); Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office
of Air Quality Planning & Standards, ``Applicability of the Federal
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit Requirements to New and
Revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (April 1, 2010).
Consistent with this interpretation, the demonstration required under
CAA section 165(a)(3) and 40 CFR 51.166(k) and 52.21(k) will apply to
any revised O3 NAAQS when such NAAQS become effective,
except to the extent that a pending permit application is subject to a
grandfathering provision that the EPA establishes through rulemaking.
In addition, the other existing requirements of the PSD program will
remain applicable to O3 after the revised O3
NAAQS takes effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \245\ Congress established certain Class I areas in section
162(a) of the CAA, including international parks, national
wilderness areas, and national parks that meet certain criteria.
Such Class I areas, known as mandatory federal Class I areas, are
afforded special protection under the CAA. In addition, states and
tribal governments may establish Class I areas within their own
political jurisdictions to provide similar special air quality
protection.
    \246\ An exception occurs in cases where the EPA has included a
grandfathering provision in its PSD regulations for a particular
pollutant. The EPA historically has exercised its discretion to
transition the implementation of certain new requirements through
grandfathering, under appropriate circumstances, either by
rulemaking or through a case-by-case determination for a specific
permit application. In 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit vacated a decision by the EPA to issue an
individual PSD permit grandfathering a permit applicant from certain
requirements. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 762 F.3d 971 (9th Cir. 2014).
In light of that decision, the EPA is no longer asserting authority
to grandfather permit applications on a case-by-case basis. This
decision is addressed in more detail in the discussion of the
grandfathering provisions that the EPA is issuing through this
rulemaking in section VII of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the complex chemistry of O3 formation in the
atmosphere poses significant challenges for the assessing the impacts
of individual stationary sources on O3 formation, the EPA's
judgment historically has been that it is not technically sound to
designate a

specific air quality model that must be used in the PSD permitting
process to make this demonstration for O3. To address
ambient impacts of emissions from proposed individual stationary
sources on O3, the EPA proposed amendments to Appendix W to
40 CFR part 51 in July 2015 that would, among other things, revise the
Appendix W provisions relating to the analytical techniques for
demonstrating that an individual PSD source or modification does not
cause or contribute to a violation of the O3 NAAQS (80 FR
45340, July 29, 2015). Until any revisions are finalized and in effect,
PSD permit applicants should continue to follow the current provisions
in the applicable regulations and Appendix W in order to demonstrate
that a proposed source or modification does not cause or contribute to
a violation of the O3 NAAQS.
a. What transition plan is the EPA providing for implementing the PSD
requirements for the revised O3 NAAQS?
    In this rulemaking, the EPA is amending the PSD regulations at 40
CFR 51.166 and 40 CFR 52.21 to include a grandfathering provision that
will allow reviewing authorities to continue to review certain pending
PSD permit applications in accordance with the O3 NAAQS that
was in effect when a specific permitting milestone was reached, rather
than the revised O3 NAAQS. The EPA is finalizing the
grandfathering provision as proposed with two trigger dates--the
signature date of the revised O3 NAAQS rule for complete
applications and the effective date of the revised O3 NAAQS
for a draft permit or preliminary determination. A more detailed
discussion of the final provision, comments received and our responses
to those comments is provided in section VII of this preamble, which
addresses this change to the PSD regulations, as well as the Response
to Comment Document contained in the docket for this rulemaking.
b. What screening and compliance demonstration tools are used to
implement the PSD program?
    The EPA has historically allowed the use of screening and
compliance demonstration tools to help facilitate the implementation of
the NSR program by reducing the source's burden and streamlining the
permitting process for circumstances where the emissions or ambient
impacts of a particular pollutant could be considered de minimis. For
example, the EPA has established significant emission rates, or SERs,
that are used as screening tools to determine when a pollutant would be
considered to be emitted in a significant amount and, accordingly, when
the NSR requirements should be applied to that pollutant. See 40 CFR
51.166(b)(23) and 52.21(b)(23). For O3, the EPA established
a SER of 40 tpy for emissions of each O3 precursor--VOC and
NOX. For PSD, the O3 SER applies independently to
emissions of VOC and NOX (emissions of precursors are not
added together) to determine when the proposed major stationary source
or major modification must undergo PSD review for that precursor and
whether individual PSD requirements, such as BACT, apply to that
precursor.\247\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \247\ See In re Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development, LP, 16
E.A.D ___, PSD Appeal No. 14-02, at 20-25 (EAB, Sept. 2, 2014)
(including description of EPA's position on application of BACT to
ozone precursors) available at http://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/EAB_Web_Docket.nsf/PSD+Permit+Appeals+(CAA)?OpenView.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the context of the PSD air quality impact analysis, the EPA has
also used a value called a significant impact level (SIL) as a
compliance demonstration tool. The SIL, expressed as an ambient
concentration of a pollutant, may be used first to determine the
geographical scope of the ambient impact analysis that must be
completed for the applicable pollutant to satisfy the air quality
demonstration requirement under CAA section 165(a)(3). A second use is
to guide the determination of whether the impact of the source is
considered to cause or contribute to a violation of any NAAQS. The EPA
has not established a SIL for O3. The EPA is currently
considering development of a SIL for O3 through either
guidance or a rulemaking process. Such a SIL would complement proposed
revisions to Appendix W mentioned above (80 FR 45340, July 29, 2015)
and would assist in the implementation of the PSD air quality analysis
requirement for protection of the O3 NAAQS. However, the EPA
is not making revisions in this rulemaking to address the PSD air
quality analysis for O3. Until any rulemaking to amend
existing PSD regulations for O3 is completed, permitting
decisions should continue to be based on the existing provisions in the
applicable regulations.
    Several commenters addressed statements that the EPA made
concerning screening tools for O3 in the preamble to the
O3 NAAQS proposal. These statements were not linked to any
proposed amendments to EPA regulations. Aside from adopting the
grandfathering provision addressed in section VII of this preamble, the
EPA is not revising the PSD requirements for O3 in this
final rule. Therefore, the EPA is not responding to those comments at
this time, consistent with the EPA's general approach to comments on
implementation topics described above.
c. Other PSD Transition Issues
    The EPA anticipates that the existing O3 air quality in
some areas currently designated attainment of unclassifiable for
O3 will not meet the revised O3 NAAQS upon its
effective date and that some of these areas will ultimately be
designated ``nonattainment'' for the revised O3 NAAQS
through the formal area designation process set forth under the CAA
(see section VIII.B above). However, until the EPA issues such
nonattainment designations, proposed new major sources and major
modifications situated in any area designated attainment or
unclassifiable for the 2008 O3 NAAQS will continue to be
required to address O3 in a PSD permit.\248\ As mentioned
above, the PSD permitting program requires that proposed new major
stationary sources and major modifications must demonstrate that the
emissions from the proposed source or modification will not cause or
contribute to a violation of any NAAQS. In the notice of proposed
rulemaking, the EPA provided information concerning its views on the
possibility that some PSD permit applications could satisfy the air
quality analysis requirements for O3 by obtaining air
quality offsets (called PSD offsets).\249\ Several commenters expressed
concern that without some transition provisions in the final rule
exempting PSD permit applications for sources located in such areas
from meeting the air quality analysis requirements for the revised
O3 NAAQS, such applications might not be able to satisfy the
demonstration requirement, as the current ambient air monitoring data
indicate the revised lower standards are not being met. The
O3 NAAQS proposal included no proposed revisions to PSD
regulations on this

topic and the EPA is not making any revisions to the PSD requirements
for O3 in this action to address this issue. Therefore, the
EPA is not responding to those comments at this time, consistent with
its general approach to comments on implementation topics described
above. However, to help address this concern raised by commenters, the
EPA is considering issuing additional guidance on how PSD offsets can
be implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \248\ Any proposed major stationary source or major modification
subject to PSD for O3 that does not receive its PSD
permit by the effective date of a new O3 nonattainment
designation for the area where the source would locate would then be
required to satisfy all of the applicable NNSR preconstruction
permit requirements for O3, even if such source had been
grandfathered under the PSD regulations from the demonstration
requirement under CAA section 165(a)(3) for O3.
    \249\ The EPA has historically recognized in regulations and
through other actions that sources applying for PSD permits may have
the option of utilizing offsets as part of the required PSD
demonstration under CAA section 165(a)(3)(B). See, e.g., In re
Interpower of New York, Inc., 5 E.A.D. 130, 141 (EAB 1994)
(describing an EPA Region 2 PSD permit that relied in part on
offsets to demonstrate the source would not cause or contribute to a
violation of the NAAQS). 52 FR 24698 (July 1, 1987); 78 FR 3261-62
(Jan. 15, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Nonattainment NSR
    Part D of title I of the CAA includes preconstruction review and
permitting requirements for new major stationary sources and major
modifications when they locate in areas designated nonattainment for a
particular pollutant. The relevant part D requirements are typically
referred to as the nonattainment NSR (NNSR) program. The EPA
regulations for the NNSR program are contained at 40 CFR 51.165, 52.24
and part 51 Appendix S. The EPA's minimum requirements for a NNSR
program to be approvable into a SIP are contained in 40 CFR 51.165.
Appendix S to 40 CFR part 51 contains an interim NNSR program. This
interim program enables implementation of NNSR permitting in
nonattainment areas that lack a SIP-approved NNSR permitting program
for the particular nonattainment pollutant, and the interim program can
be applied during the time between the date of the relevant
nonattainment designation and the date on which the EPA approves into
the SIP a NNSR program or additional components of an NNSR program for
a particular pollutant.\250\ This interim program is commonly known as
the Emissions Offset Interpretative Rule, and is applicable to all
criteria pollutants, including O3.\251\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \250\ See Appendix S, Part I; 40 CFR 52.24(k).
    \251\ As appropriate, certain NNSR requirements under 40 CFR
51.165 or Appendix S can also apply to sources and modifications
located in areas that are designated attainment or unclassifiable in
the Ozone Transport Region. See, e.g., CAA 184(b)(2), 40 CFR
52.24(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is not modifying any existing NNSR requirements in this
rulemaking. Under the CAA, area designations for new or revised NAAQS
are addressed subsequent to the effective date of the new or revised
NAAQS. If the EPA determines that any revisions to the existing NNSR
requirements, including those in Appendix S, are appropriate, the EPA
expects, at a later date contemporaneous with the designation process
for the revised O3 NAAQS, to propose those revisions. If any
changes are proposed to Appendix S requirements, the EPA anticipates
that it would intend for those changes to become effective no later
than the effective date of the area designations. This timing would
allow air agencies that lack an approved NNSR program for O3
to use the relevant Appendix S provisions to issue NNSR permits
addressing O3 on and after the effective date of
designations of new nonattainment areas for O3 until such
time as a NNSR program for O3 is approved into the SIP.\252\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \252\ States with SIP-approved NNSR programs for O3
should evaluate that program to determine whether they can continue
to issue permits under their approved program or whether revisions
to their program are necessary to address the revised O3
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For NNSR, new major stationary sources and major modifications for
O3 must comply with the Lowest Achievable Emission Rate
(LAER) requirements as defined in the CAA and NNSR rules, and must
perform other analyses and satisfy other requirements under section 173
of the CAA. For example, under CAA section 173(c) emissions reductions,
known as emissions offsets, must be secured to offset the increased
emissions of the air pollutant (including the relevant precursors) from
the new or modified source by an equal or greater reduction, as
applicable, of such pollutant. The appropriate emissions offset needed
for a particular source will depend upon the classification for the
O3 nonattainment area in which the source or modification
will locate, such that areas with more severe nonattainment
classifications have more stringent offset requirements. This ranges
from 1.1:1 for areas classified as Marginal to 1.5:1 for areas
classified as Extreme. See, e.g., CAA section 182, 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)
and 40 CFR part 51 Appendix S section IV.G.2.
    To facilitate continued economic development in nonattainment
areas, many states have established offset banks or registries.\253\
Such banks or registries can help new or modified major stationary
source owners meet offset requirements by streamlining identification
and access to available emissions reductions. Some states have
established offset banks to help ensure a consistent method for
generating, validating and transferring NOX and VOC offsets.
Offsets in these areas are generated by emissions reductions that meet
specific creditability criteria set forth by the SIP consistent with
the EPA regulations. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(A)-(J) and part 51
Appendix S section IV.C. The EPA received comments expressing concern
about the limited availability of offsets in nonattainment areas. Since
the EPA did not propose, and is not finalizing, any amendments related
to the NNSR offset provisions, the EPA is not responding to those
comments at this time, consistent with the EPA's general approach to
comment on implementation topics as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \253\ See, for example, emission reduction credit banking
programs in Ohio (OAC Chapter 3745-1111) and California (H&SC
Section 40709).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Transportation and General Conformity

1. What are transportation and general conformity?
    Conformity is required under CAA section 176(c) to ensure that
federal actions are consistent with (``conform to'') the purpose of the
SIP. Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that federal activities
will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations,
or delay timely attainment of the relevant NAAQS or interim reductions
and milestones. Conformity applies to areas that are designated
nonattainment, and those nonattainment areas redesignated to attainment
with a CAA section 175A maintenance plan after 1990 (``maintenance
areas'').
    The EPA's Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR 51.390 and part
93, subpart A) establishes the criteria and procedures for determining
whether transportation activities conform to the SIP. These activities
include adopting, funding or approving transportation plans,
transportation improvement programs (TIPs) and federally supported
highway and transit projects. For further information on conformity
rulemakings, policy guidance and outreach materials, see the EPA's Web
site at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm. The
EPA may issue future transportation conformity guidance as needed to
implement a revised O3 NAAQS.
    With regard to general conformity, the EPA first promulgated
general conformity regulations in November 1993. (40 CFR part 51,
subpart W, 40 CFR part 93, subpart B) Subsequently the EPA finalized
revisions to the general conformity regulations on April 5, 2010. (75
FR 17254-17279). Besides ensuring that federal actions not covered by
the transportation conformity rule will not interfere with the SIP, the
general conformity program also fosters communications between federal
agencies and state/local air quality agencies, provides for public
notification of and access to federal agency conformity determinations,
and allows for air quality review of

individual federal actions. More information on the general conformity
program is available at http://www.epa.gov/air/genconform/.
2. When would transportation and general conformity apply to areas
designated nonattainment for the revised O3 NAAQS?
    Transportation and general conformity apply one year after the
effective date of nonattainment designations for the revised
O3 NAAQS. This is because CAA section 176(c)(6) provides a
1-year grace period from the effective date of initial designations for
any revised NAAQS before transportation and general conformity apply in
areas newly designated nonattainment for a specific pollutant and
NAAQS.
3. Impact of a Revised O3 NAAQS on a State's Existing
Transportation and/or General Conformity SIP
    In this final rule, the EPA is revising the O3 NAAQS,
but is not making specific changes to its transportation or general
conformity regulations. Therefore, states should not need to revise
their transportation and/or general conformity SIPs. While we are not
making any revisions to the general conformity regulations at this
time, we recommend, when areas develop SIPs for a revised O3
NAAQS, that state and local air quality agencies work with federal
agencies with large emitting activities that are subject to the general
conformity regulations to establish an emissions budget for those
facilities and activities in order to facilitate future conformity
determinations under the conformity regulations. Finally, states with
existing conformity SIPs and new nonattainment areas may also need to
revise their conformity SIPs in order to ensure the state regulations
apply in any newly designated areas.
    Because significant tracts of land under federal management may be
included in nonattainment area boundaries, the EPA encourages state and
local air quality agencies to work with federal agencies to assess and
develop emissions budgets that consider emissions from projects subject
to general conformity, including emissions from fire on wildland, in
any baseline, modeling and SIP attainment inventory. Where appropriate,
states, land managers, and landowners may also consider developing
plans to ensure that fuel accumulations are addressed Information is
available from DOI and USDA Forest Service on the ecological role of
fire and on smoke management programs and basic smoke management
practices.\254\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \254\ USDA Forest Service and Natural Resources Conservation
Service, Basic Smoke Management Practices Tech Note, October 2011,
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1046311.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If this is the first time that transportation conformity will apply
in a state, such a state is required by the statute and EPA regulations
to submit a SIP revision that addresses three specific transportation
conformity requirements that address consultation procedures and
written commitments to control or mitigation measures associated with
conformity determinations for transportation plans, TIPs or projects.
(40 CFR 51.390) Additional information and guidance can be found in the
EPA's ``Guidance for Developing Transportation Conformity State
Implementation Plans'' (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/420b09001.pdf).

E. Regional and International Pollution Transport

1. Interstate Transport
    The CAA contains provisions that specifically address and require
regulation of the interstate transport of air pollution that does not
otherwise qualify for data exclusion under the Act's exceptional events
provisions. As previously noted, emissions from events, such as
wildfires, may qualify as exceptional events and may be transported
across jurisdictional boundaries. The EPA intends to address the
transport of event-related emissions in our upcoming proposed revisions
to the Exceptional Events Rule and draft guidance document addressing
the Exceptional Events Rule criteria for wildfires that could affect
O3 concentrations. The EPA encourages affected air agencies
to coordinate with their EPA regional office to identify approaches to
evaluate the potential impacts of transported event-related emissions
and determine the most appropriate information and analytical methods
for each area's unique situation.
    CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), Interstate Transport--CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires states to develop and implement a SIP to
address the interstate transport of emissions. Specifically, this
provision requires the SIP to prohibit ``any source or other type of
emissions activity within the state'' that would ``significantly
contribute to nonattainment'' of any NAAQS in another state, or that
would ``interfere with maintenance'' of any NAAQS in another state.
When EPA promulgates or revises a NAAQS, each state is required to
submit a SIP addressing this interstate transport provision within 3
years.
    CAA section 126, Interstate Transport--CAA section 126(b) provides
states and political subdivisions with a mechanism to petition the
Administrator for a finding that ``any major source or group of
stationary sources emits or would emit any air pollution in violation
of the prohibition of [CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)].'' \255\ Where
the EPA makes such finding, the source is allowed to operate beyond a
3-month period after such finding only if the EPA establishes emissions
limitations and a compliance schedule designated to bring the source
into compliance as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than
three years after such finding. This mechanism is available to downwind
states and political subdivisions, regardless of designation status,
that would be affected by emissions from upwind states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \255\ The text of section 126 codified in the United States Code
cross references section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) instead of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). The courts have confirmed that this is a
scrivener's error and the correct cross reference is to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i), See Appalachian Power Co. v. EPA, 249 F.3d 1032,
1040-44 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. International Transport
    The agency is active in work to reduce the international transport
of O3 and other pollutants that can contribute to
``background'' O3 levels in the U.S. Under the Convention on
Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) of the United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe, the U.S. has been a party to the
Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication, and Ground-level Ozone
(known as the Gothenburg Protocol) since 2005. The U.S. is also active
in the LRTAP Task Force for Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution. The
U.S. has worked bilaterally with Canada under the US-Canada Air Quality
Agreement to adopt an Ozone Annex to address transboundary
O3 impacts and continues to work with China on air quality
management activities. This work includes supporting China's efforts to
rapidly deploy power plant pollution controls that can achieve
NOX reductions of at least 80 to 90%. The U.S. also
continues to work bilaterally with Mexico on the Border 2020 program to
support efforts to improve environmental conditions in the border
region. One of the main goals of the program is to reduce air
pollution, including emissions that can cause transboundary
O3 impacts.

    Clean Air Act section 179B recognizes the possibility that certain
nonattainment areas may be impacted by O3 or O3
precursor emissions from international sources beyond the regulatory
jurisdiction of the state. The EPA's science review suggests that the
influence of international sources on U.S. O3 levels will be
largest in locations that are in the immediate vicinity of an
international border with Canada or Mexico. The science review also
cites two recent studies which indicate that intercontinental transport
of pollution, along with other natural sources and local pollutant
sources, can affect O3 air quality in the western U.S. under
specific conditions. (U.S. EPA 2013, p. 3-140). Section 179B allows
states to consider in their attainment plans and demonstrations whether
an area might meet the O3 NAAQS by the attainment date ``but
for'' emissions contributing to the area originating outside the U.S.
If a state is unable to demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS in such an
area impacted by international transport after adopting all reasonably
available control measures (e.g., RACM, including RACT, as required by
CAA section 182(b)), the EPA can nonetheless approve the CAA-required
state attainment plan and demonstration using the authority in section
179B.
    When the EPA approves this type of attainment plan and
demonstration, and there would be no adverse consequence for a finding
that the area failed to attain the NAAQS by the relevant attainment
date. States can also avoid potential sanctions and FIPs that would
otherwise apply for failure to submit a required SIP submission or
failure to submit an approvable SIP submission. For example, section
179B explicitly provides that the area shall not be reclassified to the
next highest classification or required to implement a section 185
penalty fee program if a state meets the applicable criteria.
    Section 179B authority does not allow an area to avoid a
nonattainment designation or for the area to be classified with a lower
classification than is indicated by actual ambient air quality. Section
179B also does not provide for any relaxation of mandatory emissions
control measures (including contingency measures) or the prescribed
emissions reductions necessary to achieve periodic emissions reduction
progress requirements. In this way, section 179B insures that states
will take actions to mitigate the public health impacts of exposure to
ambient levels of pollution that violate the NAAQS by imposing
reasonable control measures on the sources that are within the
jurisdiction of the state while also authorizing EPA to approve such
attainment plans and demonstrations even though they do not fully
address the public health impacts of international transport. Also,
generally, monitoring data influenced by international transport may
not be excluded from regulatory determinations. However, depending on
the nature and scope of international emissions events affecting air
quality in the U.S., the event-influenced data may qualify for
exclusion under the Exceptional Events Rule. The EPA encourages
affected air agencies to coordinate with their EPA regional office to
identify approaches to evaluate the potential impacts of international
transport and to determine the most appropriate information and
analytical methods for each area's unique situation. The EPA will also
work with states that are developing attainment plans for which section
179B is relevant, and ensure the states have the benefit of the EPA's
understanding of international transport of ozone and ozone precursors.
    The EPA has used section 179B authority previously to approve
attainment plans for Mexican border areas in El Paso, TX
(O3, PM10, and CO plans); and Nogales, AZ
(PM10 plan). The 24-hour PM10 attainment plan for
Nogales, AZ, was approved by EPA as sufficient to demonstrate
attainment of the NAAQS by the Moderate classification deadline, but
for international emissions sources in the Nogales Municipality, Mexico
area (77 FR 38400, June 27, 2012).
    States are encouraged to consult with their EPA Regional Office to
establish appropriate technical requirements for these analyses.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is an economically significant regulatory action that
was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket. The EPA prepared an analysis of the potential
costs and benefits associated with this action. This analysis is
contained in the document, Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Final
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ground-Level Ozone, October
2015. A copy of the analysis is available in the RIA docket (EPA-HQ-
OAR-2013-0169) and the analysis is briefly summarized here. The RIA
estimates the costs and monetized human health and welfare benefits of
attaining three alternative O3 NAAQS nationwide.
Specifically, the RIA examines the alternatives of 65 ppb and 70 ppb.
The RIA contains illustrative analyses that consider a limited number
of emissions control scenarios that states and Regional Planning
Organizations might implement to achieve these alternative
O3 NAAQS. However, the CAA and judicial decisions make clear
that the economic and technical feasibility of attaining ambient
standards are not to be considered in setting or revising NAAQS,
although such factors may be considered in the development of state
plans to implement the standards. Accordingly, although an RIA has been
prepared, the results of the RIA have not been considered in issuing
this final rule.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this final rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The information
collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
The Information Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by the EPA
for these revisions has been assigned EPA ICR #2313.04.
    The information collected and reported under 40 CFR part 58 is
needed to determine compliance with the NAAQS, to characterize air
quality and associated health and ecosystems impacts, to develop
emission control strategies, and to measure progress for the air
pollution program. We are extending the length of the required
O3 monitoring season in 32 states and the District of
Columbia and the revised O3 monitoring seasons will become
effective on January 1, 2017. We are also revising the PAMS monitoring
requirements to reduce the number of required PAMS sites while
improving spatial coverage, and requiring states in moderate or above
O3 non-attainment areas and the O3 transport
region to develop an enhanced monitoring plan as part of the PAMS
requirements. Monitoring agencies will need to comply with the PAMS
requirements by June 1, 2019. In addition, we are revising the
O3 FRM to establish a new, additional technique for
measuring O3 in the ambient air. It will be

incorporated into the existing O3 FRM, using the same
calibration procedure in Appendix D of 40 CFR part 50. We are also
making changes to the procedures for testing performance
characteristics and determining comparability between candidate FEMs
and reference methods.
    For the purposes of ICR number 2313.04, the burden figures
represent the burden estimate based on the requirements contained in
this rule. The burden estimates are for the 3-year period from 2016
through 2018. The implementation of the PAMS changes will occur beyond
the time frame of this ICR with implementation occurring in 2019. The
cost estimates for the PAMS network (including revisions) will be
captured in future routine updates to the Ambient Air Quality
Surveillance ICR that are required every 3 years by OMB. The addition
of a new FRM in 40 CFR part 50 and revisions to the O3 FEM
procedures for testing performance characteristics in 40 CFR part 53
does not add any additional information collection requirements.
    The ICR burden estimates are associated with the changes to the
O3 seasons in this final rule. This information collection
is estimated to involve 158 respondents for a total cost of
approximately $24,597,485 (total capital, labor, and operation and
maintenance) plus a total burden of 339,930 hours for the support of
all operational aspects of the entire O3 monitoring network.
The labor costs associated with these hours are $20,209,966. Also
included in the total are other costs of operations and maintenance of
$2,254,334 and equipment and contract costs of $2,133,185. The actual
labor cost increase to expand the O3 monitoring seasons is
$2,064,707. In addition to the costs at the state, local, and tribal
air quality management agencies, there is a burden to EPA of 41,418
hours and $2,670,360. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). State,
local, and tribal entities are eligible for state assistance grants
provided by the federal government under the CAA which can be used for
related activities. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person
is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. Rather, this
rule establishes national standards for allowable concentrations of
O3 in ambient air as required by section 109 of the CAA. See
also American Trucking Associations v. EPA, 175 F. 3d at 1044-45 (NAAQS
do not have significant impacts upon small entities because NAAQS
themselves impose no regulations upon small entities). Similarly, the
revisions to 40 CFR part 58 address the requirements for states to
collect information and report compliance with the NAAQS and will not
impose any requirements on small entities. Similarly, the addition of a
new FRM in 40 CFR part 50 and revisions to the FEM procedures for
testing in 40 CFR part 53 will not impose any requirements on small
entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded federal mandate of $100
million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The revisions to
the O3 NAAQS impose no enforceable duty on any state, local,
or tribal governments or the private sector beyond those duties already
established in the CAA. The expected costs associated with the
monitoring requirements are described in the EPA's ICR document, and
these costs are not expected to exceed $100 million in the aggregate
for any year.
    Furthermore, as indicated previously, in setting NAAQS the EPA
cannot consider the economic or technological feasibility of attaining
ambient air quality standards, although such factors may be considered
to a degree in the development of state plans to implement the
standards (see American Trucking Associations v. EPA, 175 F. 3d at 1043
[noting that because the EPA is precluded from considering costs of
implementation in establishing NAAQS, preparation of a RIA pursuant to
the UMRA would not furnish any information which the court could
consider in reviewing the NAAQS]). With regard to the sections of the
rule preamble discussing implementation of the revisions to the
O3 NAAQS, the CAA imposes the obligation for states to
submit SIPs to implement the NAAQS for O3. To the extent the
EPA's discussion of implementation topics in this final rule may
reflect some interpretations of those requirements, those
interpretations do not impose obligations beyond the duties already
established in the CAA and thus do not constitute a federal mandate for
purposes of UMRA. The EPA is also adopting a grandfathering provision
for certain PSD permits in this action, as described above. However,
that provision does not impose any mandate on any state, local, or
tribal government or the private sector, but rather provides relief
from requirements that would otherwise result from the new standards.
In addition, the EPA is not requiring states to revise their SIPs to
include such a provision.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes. This rule provides increased protection from
adverse effects of ozone for the entire country, including for
sensitive populations, and tribes are not obligated to adopt or
implement any NAAQS. In addition, tribes are not obligated to conduct
ambient monitoring for O3 or to adopt the ambient monitoring
requirements of 40 CFR part 58. Even if this action were determined to
have tribal implications within the meaning of Executive Order 13175,
it will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal
governments, nor preempt tribal law. Thus, consultation under Executive
Order 13175 was not required.
    Nonetheless, consistent with the ``EPA Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes'', the EPA offered government-to-
government consultation on the proposed rule. No tribe requested
government-to-government consultation with the EPA on this rule. In
addition, the EPA conducted outreach to tribal environmental
professionals, which included participation in the Tribal Air call
sponsored by the National Tribal Air Association, and two other calls
available to tribal environmental professionals. During the public
comment period we received comments on the proposed rule from seven
tribes and three tribal organizations.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & Safety Risks

    This action is subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is an

economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and the EPA believes that the environmental health risk
addressed by this action may have a disproportionate effect on
children. The rule will establish uniform NAAQS for O3;
these standards are designed to protect public health with an adequate
margin of safety, as required by CAA section 109. However, the
protection offered by these standards may be especially important for
children because children, especially children with asthma, along with
other at-risk populations \256\ such as all people with lung disease
and people active outdoors, are at increased risk for health effects
associated with exposure to O3 in ambient air. Because
children are considered an at-risk lifestage, we have carefully
evaluated the environmental health effects of exposure to O3
pollution among children. Discussions of the results of the evaluation
of the scientific evidence, policy considerations, and the exposure and
risk assessments pertaining to children are contained in sections II.B
and II.C of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \256\ As used here and similarly throughout this document, the
term population refers to people having a quality or characteristic
in common, including a specific pre-existing illness or a specific
age or lifestage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. The purpose of this rule is to
establish revised NAAQS for O3, establish an additional FRM,
revise FEM procedures for testing, and revises air quality surveillance
requirements. The rule does not prescribe specific pollution control
strategies by which these ambient standards and monitoring revisions
will be met. Such strategies will be developed by states on a case-by-
case basis, and the EPA cannot predict whether the control options
selected by states will include regulations on energy suppliers,
distributors, or users. Thus, the EPA concludes that this rule is not
likely to have any adverse energy effects and does not constitute a
significant energy action as defined in Executive Order 13211.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking involves environmental monitoring and measurement.
Consistent with the Agency's Performance Based Measurement System
(PBMS), the EPA is not requiring the use of specific, prescribed
analytical methods. Rather, the Agency is allowing the use of any
method that meets the prescribed performance criteria. Ambient air
concentrations of O3 are currently measured by the FRM in 40
CFR part 50, Appendix D (Measurement Principle and Calibration
Procedure for the Measurement of Ozone in the Atmosphere) or by FEM
that meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 53. Procedures are available
in part 53 that allow for the approval of an FEM for O3 that
is similar to the FRM. Any method that meets the performance criteria
for a candidate equivalent method may be approved for use as an FEM.
This approach is consistent with EPA's PBMS. The PBMS approach is
intended to be more flexible and cost-effective for the regulated
community; it is also intended to encourage innovation in analytical
technology and improved data quality. The EPA is not precluding the use
of any method, whether it constitutes a voluntary consensus standard or
not, as long as it meets the specified performance criteria.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations or indigenous peoples. The action
described in this notice is to strengthen the NAAQS for O3.
    The primary NAAQS are established at a level that is requisite to
protect public health, including the health of sensitive or at-risk
groups, with an adequate margin of safety. The NAAQS decisions are
based on an explicit and comprehensive assessment of the current
scientific evidence and associated exposure/risk analyses. More
specifically, EPA expressly considers the available information
regarding health effects among at-risk populations, including that
available for low-income populations and minority populations, in
decisions on NAAQS. Where low-income populations or minority
populations are among the at-risk populations, the decision on the
standard is based on providing protection for these and other at-risk
populations and lifestages. Where such populations are not identified
as at-risk populations, a NAAQS that is established to provide
protection to the at-risk populations would also be expected to provide
protection to all other populations, including low-income populations
and minority populations.
    The ISA, HREA, and PA for this review, which include identification
of populations at risk from O3 health effects, are available
in the docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699. The information on at-risk
populations for this NAAQS review is summarized and considered earlier
in this preamble (see section II.A). This final rule increases the
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on any population, including any minority
populations, low-income populations or indigenous peoples. This rule
establishes uniform national standards for O3 in ambient air
that, in the Administrator's judgment, protect public health, including
the health of sensitive groups, with an adequate margin of safety.
    Although it is part of a separate docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0169) and
is not part of the rulemaking record for this action, EPA has prepared
a RIA of this decision. As part of the RIA, a demographic analysis was
conducted. While, as noted in the RIA, the demographic analysis is not
a full quantitative, site-specific exposure and risk assessment, that
analysis examined demographic characteristics of persons living in
areas with poor air quality relative to the proposed standard.
Specifically, Chapter 9, section 9.10 (page 9-7) and Appendix 9A of the
RIA describe this proximity and socio-demographic analysis. This
analysis found that in areas with poor air quality relative to the
revised standard,\257\ the representation of minority populations was
slightly greater than in the U.S. as a whole. Because the air quality
in these areas does not currently meet the revised standard,
populations in these areas would be expected to benefit from
implementation of the strengthened standard, and, thus, would be more
affected by strategies to attain the revised standard. This analysis,
which evaluates the potential implications for minority populations and
low-income populations of future air pollution control actions that
state and local agencies may consider in implementing the revised
O3 NAAQS described in this decision notice are discussed in
Appendix 9A of the RIA. The RIA is available on the Web, through the
EPA's Technology Transfer Network Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html and

in the RIA docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0169). As noted above, although an
RIA has been prepared, the results of the RIA have not been considered
in issuing this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \257\ This refers to monitored areas with O3 design
values above the revised and alternative standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

References

Adams, WC. (2006). Comparison of chamber 6.6 hour exposures to 0.04-
0.08 ppm ozone via square-wave and triangular profiles on pulmonary
responses. Inhalation Toxicol. 18:127-136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08958370500306107.
Adams, WC. (2002). Comparison of chamber and face-mask 6.6-hour
exposures to ozone on pulmonary function and symptoms responses.
Inhal Toxicol 14:745-764. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08958370290084610.
Akinbami, LJ; Lynch, CD; Parker, JD; Woodruff, TJ. (2010). The
association between childhood asthma prevalence and monitored air
pollutants in metropolitan areas, United States, 2001-2004. Environ
Res 110:294-301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2010.01.001.
Alexis, N; Urch, B; Tarlo, S; Corey, P; Pengelly, D; O'Byrne, P;
Silverman, F. (2000). Cyclooxygenase metabolites play a different
role in ozone-induced pulmonary function decline in asthmatics
compared to normals. Inhal Toxicol 12:1205-1224.
American Thoracic Society. (2000a). What constitutes an adverse
health effect of air pollution? Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.
161:665-673.
American Thoracic Society. (2000b). Guidelines for methacholine and
exercise challenge testing--1999. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.
161:309-329.
American Thoracic Society. (1985). Guidelines as to what constitutes
an adverse respiratory health effect, with special reference to
epidemiological studies of air pollution. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis.
131:666-668.
Andersen, CP; Wilson, R; Plocher, M; Hogsett, WE. (1997). Carry-over
effects of ozone on root growth and carbohydrate concentrations of
ponderosa pine seedlings. Tree Physiol 17:805-811.
Basha, MA; Gross, KB; Gwizdala, CJ; Haidar, AH; Popovich, J, Jr.
(1994). Bronchoalveolar lavage neutrophilia in asthmatic and healthy
volunteers after controlled exposure to ozone and filtered purified
air. Chest 106:1757-1765.
Bell, ML; Peng, RD; Dominici, F. (2006). The exposure-response curve
for ozone and risk of mortality and the adequacy of current ozone
regulations. Environ Health Perspect 114:532-536.
Bloom, B; Cohen, RA; Freeman, G. (2011). Summary health statistics
for U.S. children: National Health Interview Survey, 2010. National
Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 10 (250). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_250.pdf.
Brauer, M; Blair, J; Vedal, S. (1996). Effect of ambient ozone
exposure on lung function in farm workers. Am J Respir Crit Care Med
154:981-987.
Brown, JS; Bateson, TF; McDonnell, WF. (2008). Effects of exposure
to 0.06 ppm ozone on FEV1 in humans: A secondary analysis
of existing data. Environ Health Perspect 116:1023-1026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11396.
Brown, JS. (2007). The effects of ozone on lung function at 0.06 ppm
in healthy adults. June 14, 2007. Memo to the Ozone NAAQS Review
Docket. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172-0175. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_cr_td.html.
Brunekreef, B; Hoek, G; Breugelmans, O; Leentvaar, M. (1994).
Respiratory effects of low-level photochemical air pollution in
amateur cyclists. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 150:962-966.
Cakmak, S; Dales, RE; Judek, S. (2006). Respiratory health effects
of air pollution gases: Modification by education and income. Arch
Environ Occup Health 61:5-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/AEOH.61.1.5-10.
Campbell, SJ; Wanek, R; Coulston, JW. (2007). Ozone injury in west
coast forests: 6 years of monitoring--Introduction. Portland, OR:
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Cavender, K. (2015). Summary of Final PAMS Network Design.
Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS Review Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
Cavender, K. (2014). Network Design Considerations for the PAMS
Network: Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS Review Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0699.
Cavender, K. (2013). Revisions to the PAMS Compound Target List:
Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS Review Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2004). The health
consequences of smoking: A report of the Surgeon General.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/smokingconsequences/.
Cordell, HK; Betz, CJ; Fly, M; Mou, S; Green, GT. (2008) How do
Americans View Wilderness. A WILDERNESS Research Report in the
Internet Research Information Series. National Survey on Recreation
and the Environment. This research is a collaborative effort between
the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service's Southern
Research Station and its Forestry Sciences Laboratory in Athens,
Georgia; the University of Georgia in Athens; and the University of
Tennessee in Knoxville, Tennessee. http://warnell.forestry.uga.edu/nrrt/nsre/IRISWild/IrisWild1rptR.pdf.
Dales, RE; Cakmak, S; Doiron, MS. (2006). Gaseous air pollutants and
hospitalization for respiratory disease in the neonatal period.
Environ Health Perspect 114:1751-1754. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9044.
Darbah, JNT; Kubiske, ME; Nelson, N; Oksanen, E; Vaapavuori, E;
Karnosky, DF. (2008). Effects of decadal exposure to interacting
elevated CO2 and/or O3 on paper birch (Betula
papyrifera) reproduction. Environ Pollut 155:446-452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2008.01.033.
Darbah, JNT; Kubiske, ME; Nelson, N; Oksanen, E; Vaapavuori, E;
Karnosky, DF. (2007). Impacts of elevated atmospheric CO2
and O3 on paper birch (Betula papyrifera): Reproductive
fitness. Scientific World Journal 7:240-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1100/tsw.2007.42.
Darrow, LA; Klein, M; Sarnat, JA; Mulholland, JA; Strickland, MJ;
Sarnat, SE; Russell, AG; Tolbert, PE. (2011a). The use of
alternative pollutant metrics in time-series studies of ambient air
pollution and respiratory emergency department visits. J Expo Sci
Environ Epidemiol 21:10-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/jes.2009.49.
Eresmaa, N, Karppinen, SM; Joffre, SM; Rasanene, J; Talvitie, H.
(2006). Mixing Height Determination by Ceilometer, Atmospheric
Chemistry and Physics, 6. 1485-1493.
Franze, T; Weller, MG; Niessner, R; P[ouml]schl, U. (2005). Protein
nitration by polluted air. Environ Sci Technol 39:1673-1678. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es0488737.
Frey, HC; Samet, JM. (2012a). Letter from Dr. H. Christopher Frey,
Chair and Dr. Jonathan M. Samet, Immediate Past Chair, Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee, to Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. Re:
CASAC Review of the EPA's Policy Assessment for the Review of the
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (First External Review
Draft--August 2012). EPA-CASAC-13-003. November 26, 2012.
Frey, HC; Samet, JM. (2012b). Letter from Dr. H. Christopher Frey,
Chair and Dr. Jonathan M. Samet, Immediate Past Chair, Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee, to Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. Re:
CASAC Review of the EPA's Health Risk and Exposure Assessment for
Ozone (First External Review Draft--Updated August 2012) and Welfare
Risk and Exposure Assessment for Ozone (First External Review
Draft--Updated August 2012). EPA-CASAC-13-002. November 19, 2012.
Frey, HC. (2014a). Letter from Dr. H. Christopher Frey, Chair, Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee, to Administrator Gina McCarthy.
Re: CASAC Review of the EPA's Health Risk and Exposure Assessment
for Ozone (Second External Review Draft--February, 2014). EPA-CASAC-
14-005. July 1, 2014.
Frey, HC. (2014b). Letter from Dr. H. Christopher Frey, Chair, Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee, to Administrator Gina McCarthy.
CASAC Review of the EPA's Welfare Risk and Exposure Assessment for
Ozone (Second External Review Draft). EPA-CASAC-14-003. June 18,
2104.

Frey, HC. (2014c). Letter from Dr. H. Christopher Frey, Chair, Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee, to Administrator Gina McCarthy.
CASAC Review of the EPA's Second Draft Policy Assessment for the
Review of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. EPA-
CASAC-14-004. June, 26, 2014.
Gielen, MH; Van Der Zee, SC; Van Wijnen, JH; Van Steen, CJ;
Brunekreef, B. (1997). Acute effects of summer air pollution on
respiratory health of asthmatic children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med
155:2105-2108.
Goodman, JE; Prueitt, RL; Sax, SN; Bailey, LI; Rhomberg, LR. (2013).
Evaluation of the causal framework used for setting the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards, Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 43(10):829-849.
Haefele, M., R.A. Kramer, and T.P. Holmes. (1991). Estimating the
Total Value of a Forest Quality in High-Elevation Spruce-Fir
Forests. The Economic Value of Wilderness: Proceedings of the
Conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-78 (pp. 91-96). Southeastern For.
Exper. Station. Asheville, NC: USDA Forest Service.
Heck, WW; Cowling, EB. (1997). The need for a long term cumulative
secondary ozone standard--An ecological perspective. EM January:23-
33.
Henderson, R. (2008). Letter from Dr. Rogene Henderson, Chair, Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee, to Administrator Stephen Johnson.
Subject: Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee Recommendations
Concerning the Final Rule for the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone. EPA-CASAC-08-009. April 7, 2008.
Henderson, R. (2006). Letter from Dr. Rogene Henderson, Chair, Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee, to Administrator Stephen Johnson.
Subject: Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee's (CASAC) Peer
Review of the Agency's 2nd Draft Ozone Staff Paper. EPA-CASAC-07-
001. October 24, 2006.
Hill, AB. (1965). The environment and disease: Association or
causation? Proc R Soc Med 58:295-300.
Hoek, G; Brunekreef, B; Kosterink, P; Van den Berg, R; Hofschreuder,
P. (1993). Effect of ambient ozone on peak expiratory flow of
exercising children in the Netherlands. Arch Environ Occup Health
48:27-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00039896.1993.9938390.
Holmes, T; Kramer, R. (1995). ``An Independent Sample Test of Yea-
Saying and StartingPoint Bias in Dichotomous-Choice Contingent
Valuation.'' Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
28:121-132.
Hoppe, P; Peters, A; Rabe, G; Praml, G; Lindner, J; Jakobi, G;
Fruhmann, G; Nowak, D. (2003). Environmental ozone effects in
different population subgroups. Int J Hyg Environ Health 206:505-
516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1078/1438-4639-00250.
Horstman, DH; Ball, BA; Brown, J; Gerrity, T; Folinsbee, LJ. (1995).
Comparison of pulmonary responses of asthmatic and nonasthmatic
subjects performing light exercise while exposed to a low level of
ozone. Toxicol Ind Health 11:369-385.
Howden, LM; Meyer, JA. (2011). U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census
Briefs, C2010BR-03, Age and Sex Composition: 2010, U.S. Department
of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census
Bureau, Washington, DC 20233. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf.
Hwang, BF; Lee, YL; Lin, YC; Jaakkola, JJK; Guo, YL. (2005). Traffic
related air pollution as a determinant of asthma among Taiwanese
school children. Thorax 60:467-473.
Islam, T; McConnell, R; Gauderman, WJ; Avol, E; Peters, JM;
Gilliland, FD. (2008). Ozone, oxidant defense genes and risk of
asthma during adolescence. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 177:388-395.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200706-863OC.
Jacob DJ; Winner DA. (2009). Effect of climate change on air
quality. Atmos Environ 43:51-63.
Jerrett, M; Burnett, RT; Pope, CA, III; Ito, K; Thurston, G;
Krewski, D; Shi, Y; Calle, E; Thun, M. (2009). Long-term ozone
exposure and mortality. N Engl J Med 360:1085-1095. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0803894.
Jorres, R; Nowak, D; Magnussen, H; Speckin, P; Koschyk, S. (1996).
The effect of ozone exposure on allergen responsiveness in subjects
with asthma or rhinitis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 153:56-64.
Katsouyanni, K; Samet, JM; Anderson, HR; Atkinson, R; Le Tertre, A;
Medina, S; Samoli, E; Touloumi, G; Burnett, RT; Krewski, D; Ramsay,
T; Dominici, F; Peng, RD; Schwartz, J; Zanobetti, A. (2009). Air
pollution and health: A European and North American approach
(APHENA). (Research Report 142). Boston, MA: Health Effects
Institute. http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=327.
Kim, CS; Alexis, NE; Rappold, AG; Kehrl, H; Hazucha, MJ; Lay, JC;
Schmitt, MT; Case, M; Devlin, RB; Peden, DB; Diaz-Sanchez, D.
(2011). Lung function and inflammatory responses in healthy young
adults exposed to 0.06 ppm ozone for 6.6 hours. Am J Respir Crit
Care Med 183:1215-1221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201011-1813OC.
King, JS; Kubiske, ME; Pregitzer, KS; Hendrey, GR; McDonald, EP;
Giardina, CP; Quinn, VS; Karnosky, DF. (2005). Tropospheric
O3 compromises net primary production in young stands of
trembling aspen, paper birch and sugar maple in response to elevated
atmospheric CO2. New Phytol 168:623-635. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01557.x.
Kohut, R. (2007). Assessing the risk of foliar injury from ozone on
vegetation in parks in the U.S. National Park Service's Vital Signs
Network. Environ Pollut 149:348-357.
Kreit, JW; Gross, KB; Moore, TB; Lorenzen, TJ; D'Arcy, J;
Eschenbacher, WL. (1989). Ozone-induced changes in pulmonary
function and bronchial responsiveness in asthmatics. J Appl Physiol
66:217-222.
Kubiske, ME; Quinn, VS; Heilman, WE; McDonald, EP; Marquardt, PE;
Teclaw, RM; Friend, AL; Karnoskey, DF. (2006). Interannual climatic
variation mediates elevated CO2 and O3 effects
on forest growth. Global Change Biol 12:1054-1068. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01152.x.
Kubiske, ME; Quinn, VS; Marquardt, PE; Karnosky, DF. (2007). Effects
of elevated atmospheric CO2 and/or O3 on
intra- and interspecific competitive ability of aspen. Plant Biol
(Stuttg) 9:342-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-924760.
Lee, EH; Hogsett, WE. (1996). Methodology for calculating inputs for
ozone secondary standard benefits analysis: Part II. Research
Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Lefohn, AS; Hazucha, MJ; Shadwick, D; Adams, WC. (2010). An
alternative form and level of the human health ozone standard. Inhal
Toxicol 22:999-1011. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/08958378.2010.505253.
Lefohn, AS; Jackson, W; Shadwick, DS; Knudsen, HP. (1997). Effect of
surface ozone exposures on vegetation grown in the southern
Appalachian Mountains: Identification of possible areas of concern.
Atmos Environ 31:1695-1708. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00258-0.
Lin, S; Bell, EM; Liu, W; Walker, RJ; Kim, NK; Hwang, SA. (2008a).
Ambient ozone concentration and hospital admissions due to childhood
respiratory diseases in New York State, 1991-2001. Environ Res
108:42-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2008.06.007.
Lin, S; Liu, X; Le, LH; Hwang, SA. (2008b). Chronic exposure to
ambient ozone and asthma hospital admissions among children. Environ
Health Perspect 116:1725-1730. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11184.
Mar, TF; Koenig, JQ. (2009). Relationship between visits to
emergency departments for asthma and ozone exposure in greater
Seattle, Washington. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 103:474-479.
McCarthy, G. (2012). Letter from Gina McCarthy, Assistant
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to Robert
Ukeiley. January 4, 2012. http://www.epa.gov/scram001/10thmodconf/review_material/Sierra_Club_Petition_OAR-11-002-1093.pdf.
McDonnell, WF; Stewart, PW; Smith, MV; Kim, CS; Schelegle, ES.
(2012). Prediction of lung function response for populations exposed
to a wide range of ozone conditions. Inhal Toxicol 24:619-633.
McDonnell, WF; Chapman, RS; Horstman, DH; Leigh, MW; Abdul-Salaam,
S. (1985). A comparison of the responses of children and adults to
acute ozone exposure.
McLaughlin, SB; Nosal, M; Wullschleger, SD; Sun, G. (2007a).
Interactive effects of ozone and climate on tree growth and water
use in a southern Appalachian forest in the USA. New Phytol 174:109-
124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02018.x.
McLaughlin, SB; Wullschleger, SD; Sun, G; Nosal, M. (2007b).
Interactive effects of ozone and climate on water use, soil

moisture content and streamflow in a southern Appalachian forest in
the USA. New Phytol 174:125-136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.01970.x.
Medina-Ramon, M; Zanobetti, A; Schwartz, J. (2006). The effect of
ozone and PM10 on hospital admissions for pneumonia and
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A national multicity study.
Am J Epidemiol 163:579-588. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwj078.
Mortimer, KM; Neas, LM; Dockery, DW; Redline, S; Tager, IB. (2002).
The effect of air pollution on inner-city children with asthma. Eur
Respir J 19:699-705. http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/09031936.02.00247102.
Mudway, IS; Kelly, FJ. (2004). An investigation of inhaled ozone
dose and the magnitude of airway inflammation in healthy adults. Am
J Respir Crit Care Med 169:1089-1095.
National Academy of Sciences. (1991). Rethinking the Ozone Problem
in Urban and Regional Air Pollution, Committee on Tropospheric
Ozone, National Resource Council, National Academy Press,
Washington, DC 20001. ISBN: 0-309-56037-3.
National Institutes of Health, National Heart Lung and Blood
Institute. (2007). Expert panel report 3: Guidelines for the
diagnosis and management of asthma. (07-4051). Bethesda, MD:
National Institute of Health.
National Research Council. (2008). Estimating Mortality Risk
Reduction and Economic Benefits from Controlling Ozone Air
Pollution. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nicholich, M. (2007). Some additional statistical analyses of the
FEV1 pulmonary response data from the W.C. Adams data (2006).
Appendix A. In: ExxonMobil comments, Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-
0172, October 9, 2007.
Page, S. (2010). Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office
of Air Quality Planning & Standards, U.S. EPA, to Air Division
Directors and Deputies, Regions I-X. Re: Applicability of the
Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit Requirements
to New and Revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards. April 1,
2010.
Page, S. (2011). Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, to Regional Air
Directors, Regions I-X. Re: Guidance to Regions for Working with
Tribes during the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
Designations Process. December 20, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/20120117naaqsguidance.pdf.
Page, S. (2013). Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to Regional Air
Directors, Regions I-X. Re: Guidance on Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2). September 13, 2013. http://www.epa.gov/oar/urbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html.
Phillips, SJ; Comus, PWA. (2000). Natural History of the Sonoran
Desert. University of California Press, 628 pages.
Pope, CA, III; Burnett, RT; Thun, MJ; Calle, EE; Krewski, D; Ito, K;
Thurston, GD. (2002). Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and
long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA 287:1132-
1141.
Rice, J. (2014). Ozone Monitoring Season Analysis. Memorandum to the
Ozone NAAQS Review Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
Riikonen, J; Kets, K; Darbah, J; Oksanen, E; Sober, A; Vapaavuori,
E; Kubiske, ME; Nelson, N; Karnosky, DF. (2008). Carbon gain and bud
physiology in Populus tremuloides and Betula papyrifera grown under
longterm exposure to elevated concentrations of CO2 and
O3. Tree Physiol 28:243-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/28.2.243.
RTI International. (2014). Gas Chromatograph (GC) Evaluation Study:
Laboratory Evaluation Phase Report. http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/ambient/pams/labevalreport.pdf.
Ryerson, TB; Williams, EJ; Fehsenfeld, FC. (2000). An Efficient
Photolysis System for Fast-Response NO2 Measurements,
Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 105, Issue D21.
Salam, MT; Islam, T; Gauderman, WJ; Gilliland, FD. (2009). Roles of
arginase variants, atopy, and ozone in childhood asthma. J Allergy
Clin Immunol 123:596-602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2008.12.020.
Samet, JM. (2011). Letter from Dr. Jonathan M. Samet, Chair, Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee to Administrator Lisa P. Jackson.
Re: Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Response to
Charge Questions on the Reconsideration of the 2008 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards. EPA-CASAC-11-004. March 30, 2011.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/0/
F08BEB48C1139E2A8525785E006909AC/$File/EPA-CASAC-11-004-
unsigned+.pdf.
Samet, JM. (2010). Letter from Dr. Jonathan M. Samet, Chair, Clean
Air Scientific Advisory Committee to Administrator Lisa P. Jackson.
Re: Review of EPA's Proposed Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (Federal Register, Vol. 75, Nov. 11, January 19, 2010).
EPA-CASAC-10-007. February 19, 2010. http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/
sabproduct.nsf/264cb1227d55e02c85257402007446a4/
610BB57CFAC8A41C852576CF007076BD/$File/EPA-CASAC-10-007-
unsigned.pdf.
Samet, JM; Bodurow, CC. (2008). Improving the presumptive disability
decision-making process for veterans. In JM Samet; CC Bodurow
(Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11908.
Samoli, E; Zanobetti, A; Schwartz, J; Atkinson, R; Le Tertre, A;
Schindler, C; P[eacute]rez, L; Cadum, E; Pekkanen, J; Paldy, A;
Touloumi, G; Katsouyanni, K. (2009). The temporal pattern of
mortality responses to ambient ozone in the APHEA project. J
Epidemiol Community Health 63:960-966. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.2008.084012.
Sasser, E. (2014). Memorandum from Erika Sasser, Acting Director,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division, Office of Air Quality
Planing and Standards, U.S. EPA, to Holly Stallworth, Designated
Federal Office, Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Re: Request
for Revised Ozone HREA Chapter 7 Appendix Tables. May 9, 2014.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_2008_rea.html.
Scannell, C; Chen, L; Aris, RM; Tager, I; Christian, D; Ferrando, R;
Welch, B; Kelly, T; Balmes, JR. (1996). Greater ozone-induced
inflammatory responses in subjects with asthma. Am J Respir Crit
Care Med 154:24-29.
Schelegle, ES; Adams, WC; Walby, WF; Marion, MS. (2012). Modelling
of individual subject ozone exposure response kinetics. Inhal
Toxicol 24:401-415. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/08958378.2012.683891.
Schelegle, ES; Morales, CA; Walby, WF; Marion, S; Allen, RP. (2009).
6.6-hour inhalation of ozone concentrations from 60 to 87 parts per
billion in healthy humans. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 180:265-272.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200809-1484OC.
Schiller, JS; Lucas, JW; Ward, BW; Peregoy, JA. (2012). Summary
health statistics for U.S. adults: National Health Interview Survey,
2010. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat
10(252). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_252.pdf.
Silverman, RA; Ito, K. (2010). Age-related association of fine
particles and ozone with severe acute asthma in New York City. J
Allergy Clin Immunol 125:367-373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2009.10.061.
Smith, JT.; Murphy, DL. (2015). Additional Observations From WREA
Datasets for Visible Foliar Injury. Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS
Review Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
Smith, G. (2012). Ambient ozone injury to forest plants in Northeast
and North Central USA: 16 years of biomonitoring. Environ Monit
Assess 184:4049-4065. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2243-z.
Smith, RL; Xu, B; Switzer, P. (2009). Reassessing the relationship
between ozone and short-term mortality in U.S. urban communities.
Inhal Toxicol 21:37-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08958370903161612.
Stafoggia, M; Forastiere, F; Faustini, A; Biggeri, A; Bisanti, L;
Cadum, E; Cernigliaro, A; Mallone, S; Pandolfi, P; Serinelli, M;
Tessari, R; Vigotti, MA; Perucci, CA. (2010). Susceptibility factors
to ozone-related mortality: A population-based case-crossover
analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 182:376-384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200908-1269OC.

Stieb, DM; Szyszkowicz, M; Rowe, BH; Leech, JA. (2009). Air
pollution and emergency department visits for cardiac and
respiratory conditions: A multi-city time-series analysis. Environ
Health Global Access Sci Source 8:25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-8-25.
Strickland, MJ; Darrow, LA; Klein, M; Flanders, WD; Sarnat, JA;
Waller, LA; Sarnat, SE; Mulholland, JA; Tolbert, PE. (2010). Short-
term associations between ambient air pollutants and pediatric
asthma emergency department visits. Am J Respir Crit Care Med
182:307-316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200908-1201OC.
Tolbert, PE; Klein, M; Peel, JL; Sarnat, SE; Sarnat, JA. (2007).
Multipollutant modeling issues in a study of ambient air quality and
emergency department visits in Atlanta. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol
17:S29-S35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.jes.7500625.
Ulmer, C; Kopp, M; Ihorst, G; Frischer, T; Forster, J; Kuehr, J.
(1997). Effects of ambient ozone exposures during the spring and
summer of 1994 on pulmonary function of schoolchildren. Pediatr
Pulmonol 23:344-353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-
0496(199705)23:53.0.CO;2-K.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2003). Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment: Ecosystems and human well-being: A framework for
assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service (2014). Tree
basal area data. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/nidrm2012.shtml.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation
Service (2014), The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 2014),
National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.
(2012). Effects of Ozone Air Pollution on Plants. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/docs.htm?docid=12462.
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (1970). Air
Quality Criteria for Photochemical Oxidants. Washington, DC:
National Air Pollution Control Administration; publication no. AP-
63. Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA; PB-190262/BA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015) Climate Change in the
United States: Benefits of Global Action. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Office of Atmospheric Programs. EPA 430-F-15-001,
June 2015. Available at www.epa.gov/cira.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014a). Health Risk and
Exposure Assessment for Ozone. Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA-452/P-14-004a. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014b). Welfare Risk and
Exposure Assessment for Ozone. Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA-452/P-14-005a. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014c). Policy Assessment for
Ozone. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC. EPA-452/R-14-006. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014d) Policy Assessment for
Ozone, Second External Review Draft. Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA-452/P-14-002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2014e). List of Designated
Reference and Equivalent Methods. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park,
NC 27711. http://epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/criteria/reference-equivalent-methods-list.pdf.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2014f). Performance of the
Proposed New Federal Reference Method for Measuring Ozone
Concentrations in Ambient Air. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA/
600/R-14/432.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2013). Integrated Science
Assessment of Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (Final
Report). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/
600/R-10/076F. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_2008_isa.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2012). Integrated Science
Assessment of Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (Third
External Review Draft). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-10/076C, 2012.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011a). Integrated Review Plan
for the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental
Assessment and Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA 452/R-11-006. April 2011. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/data/2011_04_OzoneIRP.pdf.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011b) Integrated Science
Assessment for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants: First
External Review Draft, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-10/076A.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011c). Integrated Science
Assessment of Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (Second
External Review Draft). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-10/076B.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011d). Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards: Scope and Methods Plan for Health Risk and
Exposure Assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA-
452/P-11-001. April 2011. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_2008_pd.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011e). Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards: Scope and Methods Plan for Welfare Risk and
Exposure Assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA-
452/P-11-002. April 2011. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_2008_pd.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2011f). Review of EPA's
Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) Network Re-
engineering Project. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
the Administrator, Science Advisory Board, Washington DC. EPA-CASAC-
11-010.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2010). Final Assessment:
Integrated Science Assessment for Carbon Monoxide. U.S.
Environmental Proteciton Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-09/019F.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2009a). Assessment of the
Impacts of Global Change on Regional U.S. Air Quality: A Synthesis
of Climate Change Impacts on Ground Level-Ozone. An Interim Report
of the U.S. EPA Global Change Research Program. U.S Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-07/094.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2009b). Integrated Science
Assessment for Particulate Matter (Final Report). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-08/139F, 2009.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2008). Responses to
Significant Comments on the 2007 Proposed Rule on the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, March 2008. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/data/2008_03_rtc.pdf.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Review of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Policy Assessment of
Scientific and Technical Information, OAQPS Staff Paper. EPA-452/R-
07-007.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2006a). Air Quality Criteria
for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (2006 Final). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-05/004aF-
cF. March 2006. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_cr_cd.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2006b). Ecological Benefits
Assessment Strategic Plan. EPA-240-R-06-001. Office of
Administrator, Washington, DC. http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/Webpages/ecologbenefitsplan.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2005). Guidelines for
carcinogen risk

assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. EPA/
630/P-03/001F. http://www.epa.gov/cancerguidelines/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1999). Compendium Method TO-
11A, Determination of Formaldehyde in Ambient Air using Adsorbent
Cartridge Followed by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Cincinnati, OH. EPA/625/R-96/010b.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1998). Technical Assistance
Document (TAD) for Sampling and Analysis of Ozone Precursors. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Research Triangle Park. EPA/600-R-98/161.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1996a). Air quality criteria
for ozone and related photochemical oxidants. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA/600/P-93/004aF,
cF.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1996b). Review of national
ambient air quality standards for ozone: Assessment of scientific
and technical information: OAQPS staff paper. Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA/452/R-96/
007. http://www.ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB96203435.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1992). Summary of selected new
information on effects of ozone on health and vegetation: Supplement
to 1986 air quality criteria for ozone and other photochemical
oxidants. Research Triangle Park, NC: Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment, Environmental Criteria and Assessment
Office; EPA report no. EPA/600/8-88/105F. Available from NTIS,
Springfield, VA; PB92-235670.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989). Review of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Policy Assessment of
Scientific and Technical Information. OAQPS Staff Paper. Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1986). Air quality criteria
for ozone and other photochemical oxidants. Research Triangle Park,
NC. EPA-600/8-84-020aF-EPA-600/8-84-020eF. http://www.ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB87142949.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1978). Air quality criteria
for ozone and other photochemical oxidants. Washington, DC. EPA/600/
8-78/004.
USFS (U.S. Forest Service). (2011). Forest Health Monitoring
Network.
U.S. Forest Service; National Park Service; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. (2010). Federal land managers' air quality related values
work group (FLAG): Phase I report--revised (2010). Natural Resource
Report NPS/NRPC/NRR--2010/232. National Park Service, Denver, CO.
http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Pubs/pdf/flag/FLAG_2010.pdf.
U.S. National Park Service. (2003). Ozone Sensitive Plant Species on
National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lands:
Results of a June 24-25, 2003 Workshop. Baltimore, MD. http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/pubs/pdf/baltfinalreport1.pdf.
U.S. National Park Service. (2006). Ozone Sensitive Plant Species,
by Park, November 2006. http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Permits/ARIS/docs/Ozone_Sensitive_ByPark_3600.pdf.
Ulmer, C; Kopp, M; Ihorst, G; Frischer, T; Forster, J; Kuehr, J.
(1997). Effects of ambient ozone exposures during the spring and
summer of 1994 on pulmonary function of schoolchildren. Pediatr
Pulmonol 23:344-353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-
0496(199705)23:5<344::AID-PPUL63.0.CO;2-K.
Vagaggini, B; Cianchetti, S; Bartoli, M; Ricci, M; Bacci, E; Dente,
FL; Di Franco, A; Paggiaro, P. (2007). Prednisone blunts airway
neutrophilic inflammatory response due to ozone exposure in
asthmatic subjects. Respiration 74:61-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000096078.
Vagaggini, B; Taccola, M; Conti, I; Carnevali, S; Cianchetti, S;
Bartoli, ML; Bacci, E; Dente, FL; Di Franco, A; Giannini, D;
Paggiaro, PL. (2001). Budesonide reduces neutrophilic but not
functional airway response to ozone in mild asthmatics. Am J Respir
Crit Care Med 164:2172-2176.
Vedal, S; Brauer, M; White, R; Petkau, J. (2003). Air pollution and
daily mortality in a city with low levels of pollution. Environ.
Health Perspect. 111:45-51.
Villeneuve, PJ; Chen, L; Rowe, BH; Coates, F. (2007). Outdoor air
pollution and emergency department visits for asthma among children
and adults: A case-crossover study in northern Alberta, Canada.
Environ Health Global Access Sci Source 6:40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-6-40.
Wegman, LN. (2012). Memorandum from Lydia N. Wegman, Director,
Health and Environmental Impacts Division, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, to Holly Stallworth, Designated
Federal Officer, Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Re:
Updates to Information Presented in the Scope and Methods Plans for
the Ozone NAAQS Health and Welfare Risk and Exposure Assessments.
May 2, 2012.
Wells, B. (2015a). Data Analyses Supporting Responses to Public
Comments for the O3 NAAQS. Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS
Review Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
Wells, B. (2015b). Expanded Comparison of Ozone Metrics Considered
in Current NAAQS Review. Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS Review
Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
Wells, B. (2014a). Comparison of Ozone Metrics Considered in Current
NAAQS Review. Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS Review Docket, EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0699.
Wells, B. (2014b). Analysis of Overlapping 8-hour Daily Maximum
Ozone Concentrations. Memorandum to the Ozone NAAQS Review Docket,
EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
Wittig, VE; Ainsworth, EA; Naidu, SL; Karnosky, DF; Long, SP.
(2009). Quantifying the impact of current and future tropospheric
ozone on tree biomass, growth, physiology and biochemistry: A
quantitative meta-analysis. Global Change Biol 15:396-424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01774.x.
Wittig, VE; Ainsworth, EA; Long, SP. (2007). To what extent do
current and projected increases in surface ozone affect
photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of trees? A meta-analytic
review of the last 3 decades of experiments [Review]. Plant Cell
Environ 30:1150-1162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01717.x.
Wolff, GT. (1995). Letter to EPA Administrator Carol Browner:
``CASAC Closure on the Primary Standard Portion of the Staff Paper
for Ozone,'' EPA-SAB-CASAC-LTR-96-002, November 30, 1995.
Wong, CM; Vichit-Vadakan, N; Vajanapoom, N; Ostro, B; Thach, TQ;
Chau, PY; Chan, EK; Chung, RY; Ou, CQ; Yang, L; Peiris, JS; Thomas,
GN; Lam, TH; Wong, TW; Hedley, AJ; Kan, H; Chen, B; Zhao, N; London,
SJ; Song, G; Chen, G; Zhang, Y; Jiang, L; Qian, Z; He, Q; Lin, HM;
Kong, L; Zhou, D; Liang, S; Zhu, Z; Liao, D; Liu, W; Bentley, CM;
Dan, J; Wang, B; Yang, N; Xu, S; Gong, J; Wei, H; Sun, H; Qin, Z.
(2010). Part 5. Public health and air pollution in Asia (PAPA): A
combined analysis of four studies of air pollution and mortality. In
Public Health and Air Pollution in Asia (PAPA): Coordinated Studies
of Short-Term Exposure to Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in Four
Cities (pp. 377-418). Boston, MA: Health Effects Institute. http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=348.
Zanobetti, A; Schwartz, J. (2011). Ozone and survival in four
cohorts with potentially predisposing diseases. Am J Respir Crit
Care Med 184:836-841. http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201102-0227OC.
Zanobetti, A; Schwartz, J. (2008). Mortality displacement in the
association of ozone with mortality: An analysis of 48 cities in the
United States. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 177:184-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200706-823OC.
Zanobetti, A; Schwartz, J. (2006). Air pollution and emergency
admissions in Boston, MA. J Epidemiol Community Health 60:890-895.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.2005.039834.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 50

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practices and

procedures, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations.

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental Protection, Administrative practices and procedures,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations.

40 CFR Part 53

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 58

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 1, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, chapter I of title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 50--NATIONAL PRIMARY AND SECONDARY AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 50 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. Amend Sec.  50.14 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (c)(2)(iii) and (vi) and (c)(3)(i); and
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (c)(2)(iv) and (v) and (c)(3)(ii)
and (iii).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  50.14  Treatment of air quality monitoring data influenced by
exceptional events.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Flags placed on data as being due to an exceptional event
together with an initial description of the event shall be submitted to
EPA not later than July 1st of the calendar year following the year in
which the flagged measurement occurred, except as allowed under
paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section.
* * * * *
    (vi) Table 1 identifies the data submission process for a new or
revised NAAQS. This process shall apply to those data that will or may
influence the initial designation of areas for any new or revised
NAAQS.

  Table 1--Schedule for Flagging and Documentation Submission for Data
  Influenced by Exceptional Events for Use in Initial Area Designations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Exceptional events/regulatory    Exceptional events deadline schedule
              action                                 \d\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flagging and initial event          If state and tribal initial
 description deadline for data       designation recommendations for a
 years 1, 2 and 3.\a\.               new/revised NAAQS are due August
                                     through January, then the flagging
                                     and initial event description
                                     deadline will be the July 1 prior
                                     to the recommendation deadline. If
                                     state and tribal recommendations
                                     for a new/revised NAAQS are due
                                     February through July, then the
                                     flagging and initial event
                                     description deadline will be the
                                     January 1 prior to the
                                     recommendation deadline.
Exceptional events demonstration    No later than the date that state
 submittal deadline for data years   and tribal recommendations are due
 1, 2 and 3.\a\.                     to EPA.
Flagging, initial event             By the last day of the month that is
 description and exceptional         1 year and 7 months after
 events demonstration submittal      promulgation of a new/revised
 deadline for data year 4 \b\ and,   NAAQS, unless either option a or b
 where applicable, data year 5.\c\.  applies.
                                    a. If the EPA follows a 3-year
                                     designation schedule, the deadline
                                     is 2 years and 7 months after
                                     promulgation of a new/revised
                                     NAAQS.
                                    b. If the EPA notifies the state/
                                     tribe that it intends to complete
                                     the initial area designations
                                     process according to a schedule
                                     between 2 and 3 years, the deadline
                                     is 5 months prior to the date
                                     specified for final designations
                                     decisions in such EPA notification.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Where data years 1, 2, and 3 are those years expected to be
  considered in state and tribal recommendations.
\b\ Where data year 4 is the additional year of data that the EPA may
  consider when it makes final area designations for a new/revised NAAQS
  under the standard designations schedule.
\c\ Where data year 5 is the additional year of data that the EPA may
  consider when it makes final area designations for a new/revised NAAQS
  under an extended designations schedule.
\d\ The date by which air agencies must certify their ambient air
  quality monitoring data in AQS is annually on May 1 of the year
  following the year of data collection as specified in 40 CFR
  58.15(a)(2). In some cases, however, air agencies may choose to
  certify a prior year's data in advance of May 1 of the following year,
  particularly if the EPA has indicated its intent to promulgate final
  designations in the first 8 months of the calendar year. Data
  flagging, initial event description and exceptional events
  demonstration deadlines for ``early certified'' data will follow the
  deadlines for ``year 4'' and ``year 5'' data.

    (3) Submission of demonstrations. (i) Except as allowed under
paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section, a State that has flagged data as
being due to an exceptional event and is requesting exclusion of the
affected measurement data shall, after notice and opportunity for
public comment, submit a demonstration to justify data exclusion to EPA
not later than the lesser of 3 years following the end of the calendar
quarter in which the flagged concentration was recorded or 12 months
prior to the date that a regulatory decision must be made by EPA. A
State must submit the public comments it received along with its
demonstration to EPA.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 50.19 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  50.19  National primary and secondary ambient air quality
standards for ozone.

    (a) The level of the national 8-hour primary ambient air quality
standard for ozone (O3) is 0.070 parts per million (ppm),
daily maximum 8-hour average, measured by a reference method based on
appendix D to this part and designated in accordance with part 53 of
this chapter or an equivalent method designated in accordance with part
53 of this chapter.
    (b) The 8-hour primary O3 ambient air quality standard
is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
O3 concentration is less than or equal to 0.070 ppm, as
determined in accordance with appendix U to this part.
    (c) The level of the national secondary ambient air quality
standard for O3 is 0.070 ppm, daily maximum 8-hour

average, measured by a reference method based on appendix D to this
part and designated in accordance with part 53 of this chapter or an
equivalent method designated in accordance with part 53 of this
chapter.
    (d) The 8-hour secondary O3 ambient air quality standard
is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
O3 concentration is less than or equal to 0.070 ppm, as
determined in accordance with appendix U to this part.

0
4. Revise appendix D to part 50 to read as follows:

Appendix D to Part 50--Reference Measurement Principle and Calibration
Procedure for the Measurement of Ozone in the Atmosphere
(Chemiluminescence Method)

    1.0 Applicability.
    1.1 This chemiluminescence method provides reference
measurements of the concentration of ozone (O3) in
ambient air for determining compliance with the national primary and
secondary ambient air quality standards for O3 as
specified in 40 CFR part 50. This automated method is applicable to
the measurement of ambient O3 concentrations using
continuous (real-time) sampling and analysis. Additional quality
assurance procedures and guidance are provided in 40 CFR part 58,
appendix A, and in Reference 14.
    2.0 Measurement Principle.
    2.1 This reference method is based on continuous automated
measurement of the intensity of the characteristic chemiluminescence
released by the gas phase reaction of O3 in sampled air
with either ethylene (C2H4) or nitric oxide
(NO) gas. An ambient air sample stream and a specific flowing
concentration of either C2H4 (ET-CL method) or
NO (NO-CL method) are mixed in a measurement cell, where the
resulting chemiluminescence is quantitatively measured by a
sensitive photo-detector. References 8-11 describe the
chemiluminescence measurement principle.
    2.2 The measurement system is calibrated by referencing the
instrumental chemiluminescence measurements to certified
O3 standard concentrations generated in a dynamic flow
system and assayed by photometry to be traceable to a National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standard reference
photometer for O3 (see Section 4, Calibration Procedure,
below).
    2.3 An analyzer implementing this measurement principle is shown
schematically in Figure 1. Designs implementing this measurement
principle must include: an appropriately designed mixing and
measurement cell; a suitable quantitative photometric measurement
system with adequate sensitivity and wavelength specificity for
O3; a pump, flow control, and sample conditioning system
for sampling the ambient air and moving it into and through the
measurement cell; a sample air dryer as necessary to meet the water
vapor interference limit requirement specified in subpart B of part
53 of this chapter; a means to supply, meter, and mix a constant,
flowing stream of either C2H4 or NO gas of
fixed concentration with the sample air flow in the measurement
cell; suitable electronic control and measurement processing
capability; and other associated apparatus as may be necessary. The
analyzer must be designed and constructed to provide accurate,
repeatable, and continuous measurements of O3
concentrations in ambient air, with measurement performance that
meets the requirements specified in subpart B of part 53 of this
chapter.
    2.4 An analyzer implementing this measurement principle and
calibration procedure will be considered a federal reference method
(FRM) only if it has been designated as a reference method in
accordance with part 53 of this chapter.
    2.5 Sampling considerations. The use of a particle filter on the
sample inlet line of a chemiluminescence O3 FRM analyzer
is required to prevent buildup of particulate matter in the
measurement cell and inlet components. This filter must be changed
weekly (or at least often as specified in the manufacturer's
operation/instruction manual), and the sample inlet system used with
the analyzer must be kept clean, to avoid loss of O3 in
the O3 sample air prior to the concentration measurement.
    3.0 Interferences.
    3.1 Except as described in 3.2 below, the chemiluminescence
measurement system is inherently free of significant interferences
from other pollutant substances that may be present in ambient air.