SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this proposed rule, the use of “we,” “us,” or “our” is intended to refer to the EPA. We use multiple abbreviations and terms in this proposed rule. While this list may not be exhaustive, for ease of reading and for reference purposes, the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms here:

AQS—Air Quality System

CAA—Clean Air Act

CARB—California Air Resources Board

CBI—confidential business information

CDD—clean data determination

CFR—Code of Federal Regulations

EDCAQMD—El Dorado County Air Quality Management District

EPA—Environmental Protection Agency

FR—Federal Register

FRAQMD—Feather River Air Quality Management District

NAAQS—national ambient air quality standards

NO_X —nitrogen oxides

NSR—New Source Review

NTTA—National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

OMB—Office of Management and Budget

PCAPCD—Placer County Air Pollution Control District

ppm—parts per million

PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act

RACM—reasonably available control measures

RFP—reasonable further progress

RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act

SIP—state implementation plan

SLAMS—State and local air monitoring stations

SMAQMD—Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

SRR—SIP Requirements Rule

TSA—technical systems audit

UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

U.S.C.—United States Code

VOC—volatile organic compounds

YSAQMD—Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary

A. What action is the EPA proposing to take?

B. What is the legal authority and what are the requirements?

II. Background

A. Ozone NAAQS

B. Sacramento Ozone Designations, Classifications, and SIP Revisions

C. The EPA's Clean Data Policy

III. The EPA's Analysis

A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions

B. Clean Data Determination

C. Monitoring Network Considerations

D. Data Considerations

E. Effects of This Proposed Determination

IV. The EPA's Proposed Action

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Executive Summary

A. What action is the EPA proposing to take?

The EPA is proposing to issue a CDD for the Sacramento Metro, California nonattainment area to reflect our finding that the area is attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This finding is based on quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data from 2023 through 2025.

B. What is the legal authority and what are the requirements?

Under the EPA's longstanding Clean Data Policy,^[1] which is reaffirmed for the 1997 ozone NAAQS at 40 CFR 51.918, when an area has attained the relevant 8-hour ozone standards, the Agency may issue a CDD after notice and comment rulemaking determining that a specific area is attaining the relevant standards. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.10, an area attains the 1997 ozone NAAQS when the 3-year average ( printed page 58047) of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 parts per million (ppm) at each eligible monitoring site within the area.

II. Background

A. Ozone NAAQS

Ground-level ozone is formed when nitrogen oxides (NO_X ) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the presence of sunlight.^[2] These two pollutants, referred to as ozone precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution sources, including on- and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden equipment and paints.

Health effects associated with exposure to ground-level ozone include reduced lung function; reduced ability to breathe as deeply and vigorously as normal; irritated airways, coughing, or a sore or scratchy throat; pain when taking a deep breath and shortness of breath; increased frequency of asthma attacks; inflammation of and damage to the lining of the lung; increased susceptibility to respiratory infection; and aggravation of chronic lung diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. Ozone may continue to cause lung damage even when the symptoms have disappeared, and breathing ozone may contribute to premature death, especially in people with heart and lung disease.^[3]

Under CAA section 109, the EPA promulgates NAAQS for pervasive air pollutants, such as ozone. The NAAQS establish concentration levels whose attainment and maintenance the EPA has determined to be requisite to protect public health and welfare. In 1979, the EPA established primary (public health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 ppm averaged over a 1-hour timeframe (“1-hour ozone NAAQS”).^[4] In 1997, the EPA revised the primary and secondary ozone NAAQS to set the acceptable level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 ppm averaged over an 8-hour timeframe (“1997 ozone NAAQS”).^[5]

The EPA further tightened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.075 ppm in 2008 (“2008 ozone NAAQS”),^[6] and to 0.070 ppm in 2015 (“2015 ozone NAAQS”), however, this determination pertains to the 1997 ozone NAAQS.^[7] The EPA subsequently revoked the 1-hour ozone NAAQS ^[8] and the 1997 ozone NAAQS,^[9] but has retained applicable requirements for anti-backsliding purposes for areas that remained designated as nonattainment for those standards at the time of revocation.^[10]

B. Sacramento Ozone Designations, Classifications, and SIP Revisions

The Sacramento Metro area consists of Sacramento and Yolo counties and portions of El Dorado, Placer, Solano, and Sutter counties, and is under the jurisdiction of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the following regional air pollution control districts: the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District (EDCAQMD), the Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD), the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD), the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), and the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) (collectively, “Districts”).^[11] The area also includes Tribal lands under the jurisdiction of the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, Shingle Springs Rancheria (Verona Track), California; the United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria of California; and the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, California.

CARB is the State agency responsible for the adoption and submission to the EPA of California state implementation plan (SIP) submissions. Under California law, air districts in California are generally responsible for the development of regional air quality plans and related rules. For the Sacramento Metro area, the Districts develop and adopt air quality management plans and rules to address CAA requirements applicable to the region. The Districts then submit such plans and rules to CARB for adoption and submission to the EPA as proposed revisions to the California SIP. In general, Tribes are not required to submit tribal implementation plans.^[12]

Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. The EPA designated the Sacramento Metro area as nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2004, and classified the area as “Serious,” effective June 15, 2004.^[13] On May 5, 2010, the EPA reclassified the area from Serious to “Severe-15,” effective June 4, 2010.^[14] The area's applicable attainment date for the 1997 ozone NAAQS is June 15, 2019.^[15]

On January 29, 2015, the EPA approved the planning elements required as a result of a reclassification to Severe-15, including the reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstration, the attainment demonstration, and transportation control measures.^[16] As a consequence of the reclassification to Severe-15, California was also required to submit nonattainment new source review (NSR) program revisions ^[17] and CAA section 185 fee rules.^[18] At the time of reclassification from Serious to Severe-15, the EPA had approved NSR program revisions for YSAQMD and EDCAQMD into the California SIP,^[19] and our reclassification notice established a deadline for California to submit the SMAQMD, PCAPCD, and ( printed page 58048) FRAQMD NSR program revisions.^[20] CARB submitted, and the EPA subsequently approved, revisions to the SMAQMD, PCAPCD, and FRAQMD NSR programs.^[21] CARB submitted, and the EPA approved, the SMAQMD submittal for the CAA section 185 fee rule requirement in 2024.^[22] In the 2010 reclassification notice, the EPA deferred the deadline for submittal of EDCAQMD, PCAPCD, FRAQMD, and YSAQMD section 185 fee rules.^[23] However, FRAQMD submitted Rule 7.15 to meet the CAA section 185 fee rule requirement for the Severe-15 ozone classification on July 5, 2022, and the EPA approved Rule 7.15 into the SIP on December 31, 2024.^[24] EDCAQMD submitted Rule 611 on March 13, 2024, and the EPA has not yet acted on this rule. PCAPCD and YSAQMD have not submitted section 185 fee rules for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

C. The EPA's Clean Data Policy

Under the EPA's longstanding Clean Data Policy,^[25] which is reaffirmed for the 1997 ozone NAAQS at 40 CFR 51.918, when an area has attained the relevant 8-hour ozone standards, the Agency may issue a CDD after notice and comment rulemaking determining that a specific area is attaining the relevant standards. A CDD is not linked to any particular attainment deadline and is not necessarily equivalent to a determination that an area has attained the standard by its applicable attainment deadline.^[26]

The effect of a CDD is to suspend the requirement for an area to submit an attainment demonstration, a reasonably available control measures (RACM) analysis, an RFP plan, contingency measures, and any other planning requirements related to attainment for as long as the area continues to attain the standard.^[27] With respect to the attainment demonstration requirements of CAA section 182(c)(2)(A), under the Clean Data Policy, if an area already has air quality monitoring data demonstrating attainment of the standard, there is no need for the area to make a further submittal containing additional measures to achieve attainment, nor is there a need for the area to perform future modeling to show how the area will achieve attainment.^[28] Similarly, the EPA interprets the CAA as not requiring the submittal of RFP and associated quantitative milestones for areas that are already attaining the NAAQS. For areas that are attaining the NAAQS, showing that the State will make RFP towards attainment has no meaning. Similar reasoning applies to other SIP submittal requirements that are linked with attainment demonstration and RFP requirements. The EPA interprets the obligation to submit contingency measures as suspended when the area has attained the standard because those contingency measures are directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by the applicable date. A CDD does not suspend the requirements for an emissions inventory, for NSR, or for a section 185 fee program.^[29]

III. The EPA's Analysis

A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions

A CDD is typically based on three years of complete, quality-assured, and certified air quality monitoring data gathered at established State and local air monitoring stations (SLAMS) and entered into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.^[30] Data from ambient air monitors operated by State/local agencies in compliance with EPA monitoring requirements must be submitted to the AQS database. Monitoring agencies annually certify that these data are accurate to the best of their knowledge. Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily on data in its AQS database when determining compliance with the NAAQS.^[31] With respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the EPA reviews data to determine the area's air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.10, an area attains the 1997 ozone NAAQS when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm at each eligible monitoring site within the area. This 3-year average is referred to as the “design value.” When the design value is greater than 0.08 ppm at any monitor within the area, then the area is violating the NAAQS.^[32] The data completeness requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater than or equal to 90 percent and no single year has less than 75 percent data completeness, as determined under appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.^[33]

B. Clean Data Determination

The EPA is proposing to determine that the Sacramento Metro area attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS and to issue a CDD for the area. Our proposed determination is based on three years of quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data collected in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA's AQS database for the 2023-2025 monitoring period. Preliminary data available in EPA's AQS database for 2026 (January-March) indicate that the area continues to show concentrations consistent with attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS.^[34] The average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations at each eligible monitoring site within the area was below 0.08 ppm in these three years. As discussed in Section II.D of this document, ambient air quality ( printed page 58049) monitoring data for the most recent 3-year period ( i.e., 2023-2025) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the Sacramento Metro area meet the data completeness requirements in 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.

C. Monitoring Network Considerations

CAA section 110(a)(2)(B)(i) requires States to establish and operate air monitoring networks to compile data on ambient air quality for all criteria pollutants. The ambient air monitoring network in the Sacramento Metro area includes air monitoring stations that are managed and operated by CARB, PCAPCD, SMAQMD, and YSAQMD. Although both EDCAQMD and FRAQMD have jurisdiction in portions of the Sacramento Metro area, neither district operates SLAMS ozone monitors in the area. CARB operates SLAMS ozone monitors within the portion of the area under EDCAQMD jurisdiction, and there are no ozone monitors within the portion of the area under FRAQMD jurisdiction.^[35] CARB and SMAQMD submit annual network plans to the EPA,^[36] which document the status of CARB and the Districts' air monitoring networks, as required under 40 CFR 58.10. The EPA reviews these annual network plans for compliance with the specific requirements in 40 CFR part 58. With respect to ozone, we have found that the annual network plans submitted by CARB and SMAQMD meet the minimum monitoring requirements of 40 CFR part 58.^[37]

Finally, the EPA conducts regular technical systems audits (TSAs) to review and inspect State and local ambient air monitoring programs to assess compliance with applicable regulations concerning the collection, analysis, validation, and reporting of ambient air quality data. CARB is the primary quality assurance organization in California that is responsible for overseeing the quality of data collected by local air monitoring organizations, which includes the Districts. For the purposes of this determination, we reviewed the findings from the EPA's 2022 TSA of CARB's ambient air monitoring program.^[38] The results of the TSA do not preclude the EPA from determining that the Sacramento Metro area has attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

D. Data Considerations

In accordance with 40 CFR 58.15, SMAQMD and CARB certify annually that the previous year's ambient concentration and quality assurance data are completely submitted to AQS and that the ambient concentration data are accurate, taking into consideration the quality assurance findings.^[39] SMAQMD certifies data from its monitoring network, and CARB certifies data for the CARB network as well as the PCAPCD and YSAQMD networks. There were 16 ozone monitoring sites located throughout the Sacramento Metro area in calendar years 2023 through 2025: three within El Dorado County, four within Placer County, six within Sacramento County, one within Solano County, and two within Yolo County.^[40] Table 1 of this document summarizes the ozone monitoring data from the various monitoring sites in the Sacramento Metro area by showing the annual fourth-highest daily maximum concentrations and design values over the 2023-2025 period. The data summarized in Table 1 of this document are considered complete for the purposes of determining if the standard is met.^[41] The ozone data show that the design values at the Sacramento Metro area monitoring sites were below the 1997 ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm.

Consistent with the requirements in 40 CFR part 50, the EPA has reviewed the quality-assured and certified ozone ambient air monitoring data for completeness. The EPA reviewed the data as recorded in AQS for the applicable monitoring period, collected at the monitoring sites in the Sacramento Metro area, and has determined that the data are generally complete, with the exceptions of the Echo Summit, North Highlands—Blackfoot Way, Elk Grove—Bruceville, and Sloughhouse monitoring sites. These exceptions are described here:

• The Echo Summit monitoring site typically operates seasonally from April through October, but it could not operate during the month of April in 2019 to 2024 because persistent weather conditions made the access roads to the sites impassible.^[42] Due to safety and accessibility issues, CARB submitted a site closure request for the Echo Summit ozone monitor on February 10, 2025 as well as a separate request to open a new ozone monitor at the South Lake Tahoe—Sandy Way monitoring site with a proposed start date of April 1, 2025.^[43] The EPA approved CARB's closure request for the Echo Summit monitoring site on April 15, 2025 and new monitor request for the South Lake Tahoe—Sandy Way monitoring site on April 14, 2025.^[44] The South Lake Tahoe—Sandy Way ozone monitor began operation on April 1, 2025. Due to the accessibility challenges and site location change, Echo Summit did not meet the 3-year completeness criterion of 90 percent for the 2025 design value period. While Echo Summit did not have a valid design value for the previous five years, for the five most recent valid design value years (2010-2014), Echo Summit was not among the top 50 percent of design values for the Sacramento Metro area, was 0.016-0.031 ppm lower than the highest design value site, and was below the 1997 ozone NAAQS.^[45]
• The North Highlands—Blackfoot Way monitoring site was shut down on August 1, 2022, due to sudden loss of the lease providing access to the monitor following the property's sale to another owner. SMAQMD notified the EPA of this abrupt closure via letter on July 28, 2022,^[46] and documentation within the 2023 annual network plan.^[47] The North Highlands—Blackfoot Way monitoring site had design values that were 0.006-0.012 ppm lower than the highest design value site for the five previous valid design value years of its operation (2016-2020), did not have the highest fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration in the Sacramento Metro area in the last five ( printed page 58051) years of operations (2018-2022), and were below the 1997 ozone NAAQS.^[48]
• The Elk Grove—Bruceville site had several hours of nullified data throughout 2023-2025 that resulted in a 3-year completeness of 88 percent which did not meet the 90 percent 3-year completeness criterion. While Elk Grove—Bruceville did not have a valid 2025 design value, for the previous five valid design values (2020-2024), Elk Grove—Bruceville was not among the top 50 percent of design values for the Sacramento Metro area, was 0.012-0.021 ppm lower than the highest design value site in the nonattainment area, and was below the 1997 ozone NAAQS.^[49]
• The Sloughhouse monitoring site failed an annual performance evaluation due to an incorrectly installed ozone calibrator, which resulted in data invalidation from July 2023 through April 2024.^[50] As a result, the site did not meet the 3-year completeness criterion of 90 percent and the 2023 and 2024 calendar years did not meet the annual completeness criterion of 75 percent. While Sloughhouse did not have valid design values for the most recent three design value years (2023-2025), the Sloughhouse monitoring site was 0.008-0.014 ppm lower than the highest design value site, below the 1997 ozone NAAQS, and did not have the highest fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration in the Sacramento Metro area for the five previous valid design value years (2018-2022).^[51] Additionally, the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration measured in 2025 was valid at 0.069 ppm, which is well below the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

Historically, the design values for the Echo Summit, North Highlands—Blackfoot Way, Elk Grove—Bruceville, and Sloughhouse monitoring sites have consistently measured 0.005-0.015 ppm lower than the highest design value site for the Sacramento Metro area.^[52] Therefore, we find that the invalid design values at the Echo Summit, North Highland—Blackfoot Way, Elk Grove—Bruceville, and Sloughhouse monitoring sites do not preclude an attainment determination for the Sacramento Metro area. The remaining ozone monitoring sites meet the data completeness requirements of 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.^[53]

Per 40 CFR part 50, appendix I, section 2.3(b), “[w]hen computing whether the minimum data completeness requirements have been met, meteorological or ambient data may be sufficient to demonstrate that meteorological conditions on missing days were not conducive to concentrations above the level of the standard. Missing days assumed less than the level of the standard are counted for the purpose of meeting the data completeness requirement, subject to the approval of the appropriate Regional Administrator.” Both the Sacramento—Del Paso Manor and Folsom monitoring sites did not meet the data completeness criterion of at least 90 percent on average over the three-year period for the 2025 design value. However, SMAQMD submitted requests for the EPA Region 9 Regional Administrator to approve inclusion of missing days at the Sacramento—Del Paso Manor and Folsom monitors towards the minimum data completeness requirements.^[54] These requests were approved by the EPA and resulted in data completeness at or above 90 percent on average over the three-year period of 2023-2025 for the Sacramento—Del Paso Manor and Folsom sites; therefore, these 2025 design values are considered valid.^[55]

Preliminary, not yet certified data available in the EPA AQS database for 2026,^[56] indicate that the area continues to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Prior to finalizing this action, we will examine all preliminary and certified ozone monitoring data available to ensure this trend persists. The AQS data reports for the Sacramento Metro area for the three years 2023 through 2025 are included in the docket for this rulemaking. Taking into account the extent and reliability of the applicable ozone monitoring network, and the data collected therefrom and summarized in Table 1 of this document, we are proposing to determine that the Sacramento Metro area attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS (as defined in 40 CFR part 50, appendix I) and on this basis to issue a CDD for the area.

E. Effects of This Proposed Determination

As discussed in Section II.C of this document, a CDD has the effect of suspending certain planning requirements, including an attainment demonstration, a reasonably available control measures (RACM) analysis, an RFP plan, contingency measures, and any other planning requirements related to attainment. The EPA approved these planning elements for the Sacramento Metro area ^[57] for the 1997 ozone standards on January 29, 2015, as discussed in Section II.B of this document.

A CDD does not suspend the CAA requirements to submit an emissions inventory, revisions to nonattainment NSR programs, or rules for section 185 fee programs. Of these three remaining requirements, the Sacramento Metro area has fulfilled the emissions inventory requirement and nonattainment NSR program revisions requirement, as discussed in Section II.B of this document. Section II.B also notes that SMAQMD and FRAQMD have met the CAA section 185 fee rule requirement. We will work with the remaining districts to ensure the CAA section 185 fee rule requirement is met throughout the area.

A CDD does not have the effect of redesignating an area to attainment. Redesignation of an area to attainment requires that an area has met all applicable requirements of CAA section 110 and part D, and that the area has submitted, and the EPA has approved, a redesignation request and maintenance plan.^[58] Therefore, if we finalize this determination as proposed, the Sacramento Metro area will remain subject to the requirements for an area that has been designated nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS with a classification of Severe-15. This proposed CDD, if finalized, will apply throughout the nonattainment area, including to lands under the jurisdiction of CARB and the Districts, and to lands under Tribal jurisdiction.

( printed page 58052)

IV. The EPA's Proposed Action

The EPA is proposing to determine, based on the most recent three years (2023-2025) of complete or otherwise validated, quality-assured, and certified data meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 50, appendix I, that the Sacramento Metro area has attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

In conjunction with and based on our proposed determination that the Sacramento Metro area has attained and is currently attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS, in accordance with 40 CFR 51.918, the EPA is proposing to issue a CDD for the Sacramento Metro area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

The Sacramento Metro area will remain subject to the requirements for an area that has been designated nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS until such time as the EPA determines, consistent with CAA sections 107 and 175A, that the Sacramento Metro area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment, including an approved maintenance plan showing that the area will continue to attain the standard for 10 years.

The EPA is soliciting public comments on the proposed action, our rationale for the proposed action, and any issues discussed in this document. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal for the next 30 days and will consider comments before taking final action.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at www.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 not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. This action proposes to issue a CDD for the Sacramento Metro area and imposes no new requirements.

B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation

Executive Order 14192 does not apply because actions that make attainment determinations under Clean Air Act section 181(b)(2) are exempted from review under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.

D. 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 beyond those imposed by State law. The proposed CDD does not create any new requirements and does not directly regulate any entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will result from this action.

F. 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. Pursuant to the CAA, this action proposes a CDD.

G. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, Nov. 9, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have Tribal implications.” This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175, because this determination will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. The EPA has identified Tribal areas within the Sacramento Metro area. We note that this determination, if finalized, would apply throughout the area, including on Tribal lands.

The EPA plans to notify the Tribes located within the boundaries of the Sacramento Metro area of this proposed determination. Because a final determination of attainment would not change the Tribe's existing nonattainment designation or classification, the EPA does not plan to offer government-to-government consultation on this proposed determination, however, it is our practice to initiate government-to-government consultation at the request of any Tribe.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the Agency has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. Therefore, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it merely proposes a CDD meets Federal requirements. Furthermore, the EPA's Policy on Children's Health does not apply to this action.

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

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA.

91 FR 58046