Air Plan Approval; Oregon; Medford Area Carbon Monoxide Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan, 47029-47034 [2016-17060]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132. Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES F. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone, during daylight hours, lasting less than 13 hours per day for 21 days that will prohibit entry into or transit within MM 23 to 23.5 of the Houma Navigation Canal. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant 14:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: ■ The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. VerDate Sep<11>2014 Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule. Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T08–0650 to read as follows: ■ § 165.T08–0650 Safety zone; Houma Navigation Canal between mile 23 to 23.5, Dulac, LA. (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: All waters of the Houma Navigation Canal, surface to bottom, between mile 23 and mile 23.5, Dulac, LA. (b) Enforcement period. This safety zone will be enforced from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. daily from July 7 through July 27, 2016. (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23, entry into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Morgan City (COTP) or designated personnel. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or pass through the zone must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF–FM radio channel 13 and 16 or phone at 504–343–7928. (2) Persons and vessels permitted to deviate from this safety zone regulation and enter the restricted area must transit PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 47029 at the slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful directions issued by the COTP or the designated representative. (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to mariners of the enforcement period for the temporary safety zone as well as any changes in the planned schedule. Dated: July 1, 2016. B.E. Welborn, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Morgan City. [FR Doc. 2016–17035 Filed 7–19–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R10–OAR–2015–0854; FRL–9949–00– Region 10] Air Plan Approval; Oregon; Medford Area Carbon Monoxide Second 10Year Maintenance Plan Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve a second 10-year carbon monoxide (CO) limited maintenance plan (LMP) for the Medford area in Oregon, submitted by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (tODEQ) on December 11, 2015, along with a supplementary submittal on December 30, 2015, as a revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). In accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA is approving this SIP revision because it demonstrates that the Medford area will continue to meet the CO National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for a second 10-year period beyond redesignation, through 2025. DATES: This rule is effective on September 19, 2016, without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by August 19, 2016. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– OAR–2015–0854 at http:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to Chi.John@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM 20JYR1 47030 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Chi, Air Planning Unit, Office of Air and Waste (OAW–150), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101; telephone number: 206–553–1185; email address: Chi.John@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA. I. This Action The EPA is approving the carbon monoxide limited maintenance plan (CO LMP) submitted by the ODEQ, on December 11, 2015, along with a supplementary submittal on December 30, 2015, (the submittal) for the Medford area. A LMP is a means of meeting Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for formerly designated nonattainment areas that meet certain qualification criteria. This CO LMP is designed to II. Background Under section 107(d)(1)(c) of the CAA, each CO area designated nonattainment prior to enactment of the 1990 Amendments, such as Medford, was designated nonattainment by operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 Amendments. Under section 186(a) of the CAA, each CO area designated nonattainment under section 107(d) was also classified by operation of law as either ‘‘moderate’’ or ‘‘serious’’ depending on the severity of the area’s air quality problem. CO areas with design values between 9.1 and 16.4 parts per million (ppm), such as Medford, were classified as moderate. These nonattainment designations and classifications were codified in 40 CFR part 81 on November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56695). On July 24, 2002, the EPA approved the ODEQ’s request to redesignate the Medford area to attainment of the CO standard (67 FR 48388). In that action, the EPA also approved the maintenance plan required under CAA section 175A(a) to provide for 10 years of maintenance of the CO standard in the Medford area through the year 2015 (67 FR 48388). As required by the CAA section 175A(b), the SIP submittal provides a second 10-year plan for maintaining the CO standard in the Medford area until 2025. For the second 10-year maintenance plan, the ODEQ chose the option as described in an EPA October 6, 1995 memorandum from Joseph Paisie, the Group Leader of the Integrated Policy and Strategies Group, titled, ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas’’ (LMP Option). To qualify for the LMP Option, the CO design value for an area, based on the eight consecutive quarters (two years of data) used to demonstrate attainment, must be at or below 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the CO NAAQS). In addition, the control measures from the first CO maintenance plan must remain in place. The EPA has determined that the LMP Option for CO is also available to all states as part of the CAA 175A(b) update to the maintenance plans, regardless of the original nonattainment classification, or lack thereof. Thus, the EPA finds that although the Medford area was designated as a moderate nonattainment area for the CO NAAQS, 1 MOVES2010b was the most current model available at the time that ODEQ was performing its redesignation to attainment status in conjunction with meeting all requirements of the October 6, 1995, memorandum, allows the ODEQ to be eligible to submit a LMP as the update to its original maintenance plan per section 175A(b) of the CAA. analysis. The EPA released MOVES2014 on October 7, 2014 (79 FR 60343). Table of Contents I. This Action II. Background III. Evaluation of Oregon’s Submittal A. Base Year Emission Inventory B. Demonstration of Maintenance C. Control Measures D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment E. Contingency Plan F. Transportation and General Conformity IV. Final Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES keep the Medford area in attainment with the CO standard for a second 10year period beyond redesignation, through 2025. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 III. Evaluation of Oregon’s Submittal The requirements of the LMP Option and the EPA’s evaluation of how each requirement has been met by the ODEQ’s submittal is summarized below. A. Base Year Emission Inventory The LMP must contain an attainment year emissions inventory to identify a level of CO emissions in the area that is sufficiently low enough to attain the CO NAAQS. The submittal contains a summary of the CO emissions inventory for the Medford area for the base year 2008. The emission inventory lists CO emissions by general source category— stationary point sources, stationary area sources, on-road mobile sources and non-road mobile sources. On-road mobile sources emissions for the 2008 base year inventory were estimated with the EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) 2010b.1 The methods used to determine the Medford area CO emission inventory are consistent with the EPA’s most recent guidance on developing emission inventories. Historically, exceedances of the CO standard in the Medford area have occurred during the winter months, when cooler temperatures contribute to incomplete combustion, and when CO emissions are trapped near the ground by atmospheric inversions. Sources of carbon monoxide include industry, motor vehicles, non-road mobile sources, (e.g., construction equipment, recreational vehicles, lawn and garden equipment, and area sources (e.g., outdoor burning, woodstoves, fireplaces, and wildfires). The three consecutive months—December through February define the typical CO season. As such, season day emissions in addition to annual emissions are included in the inventory. The unit of measure for annual emissions is in tons per year (tpy), while the unit of measure for season day emissions is in pounds per day (lb/day). The county-wide emissions inventory data is spatially allocated to the Medford urban growth boundary (UGB), and to buffers around the UGB, depending on emissions category. E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM 20JYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 47031 2008 EMISSIONS INVENTORY, MAIN SOURCE CATEGORY SUBTOTALS Annual emissions tons per year Main source category CO emissions pounds per winter day Stationary Point Sources ......................................................................................................................................... On-road Mobile Sources .......................................................................................................................................... Non-road Mobile Sources ........................................................................................................................................ Stationary Area Sources .......................................................................................................................................... 2.367.1 5,730.0 4,488.2 3,333.1 13,159 28,731 10,061 30,399 Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 15,927.4 82,350 B. Demonstration of Maintenance The CO NAAQS is attained when the annual second highest 8-hour average CO concentration for an area does not exceed a concentration of 9.0 ppm. The last monitored violation of the CO NAAQS in the Medford area occurred in 1991, and CO levels have been steadily in decline. The second highest 8-hour CO concentration in 2009 was 2.4 ppm, which is in attainment with the CO NAAQS. For areas that meet the criteria to use the LMP Option, the maintenance plan demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied. The EPA believes that if the area begins the maintenance period at, or below, 85 percent of the level of the CO 8-hour NAAQS (at or below 7.65 ppm), the applicability of prevention of significant deterioration requirements, the control measures already in the SIP, and Federal control measures already in place will provide adequate assurance of maintenance over the maintenance period. Thus, there is no requirement to project emissions of air quality over the upcoming maintenance period. The second highest 8-hour CO concentration for Medford based on the two most recent years of data (2008–2009) is 2.4 ppm, which is significantly below the LMP Option requirement of 7.65 ppm.2 Therefore, the EPA finds that the ODEQ has demonstrated that the Medford area qualifies for the LMP Option and has satisfied the maintenance demonstration requirement. rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES C. Control Measures The submittal retains the control measures from the first CO maintenance plan (67 FR 48388). The primary control measure has been the emission standards for new motor vehicles under the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program. Other control measures have been the Major New Source Review 2 The years 2008–2009 are the most recent two years for available monitoring data because monitoring was discontinued after 2009. The ODEQ has developed an alternate method to verify continued attainment of the CO NAAQS, discussed in the next section. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 Program with Best Available Control Technology (BACT), Motor Vehicle Inspection Program, and a woodsmoke curtailment program. As stated above, the EPA believes that the Medford area will continue to maintain the standard with the continued implementation of these control measures along with meeting the other requirements to qualify for the LMP option. D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment Monitored CO levels in the Medford area have declined progressively since 1991. CO levels have declined significantly across the nation through motor vehicle emissions controls and fleet turnover to newer, cleaner vehicle models. Once CO levels declined and continued to stay well below the NAAQS, the ODEQ requested to remove the Medford CO monitor in 2009 and the EPA approved the request on October 14, 2010. The ODEQ now has been using an alternate method of verifying continued attainment with the CO standard based on the regional emissions analysis conducted by the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization and by using the Portland CO monitor to track trends in general CO levels. Both the ODEQ report and the EPA network approval letter are included in the materials of this docket. Under the Medford CO LMP, the ODEQ will verify continued attainment of the CO NAAQS by conducting a review of CO emissions inventory data for the Medford area. The ODEQ will calculate CO emissions every three years as part of the Statewide Emissions Inventory, which is submitted to the EPA for inclusion in the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The ODEQ commits to review the NEI estimates to identify any increases over the 2008 emission levels (see the base year emissions inventory in this section) and report on them in the annual monitoring network plan for the applicable year. Because on-road mobile sources and stationary area sources are the predominant sources of CO in Medford, these source categories will be the PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 primary focus of the ODEQ’s review. The ODEQ will evaluate any increase in CO emissions to confirm it is not due to a change in emission calculation methodology, an exceptional event, or other factor not representative of an actual emissions increase. E. Contingency Plan Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include contingency provisions necessary to ensure prompt correction of any violations of the standard that may occur. The ODEQ has submitted a revised contingency plan that has three phase of action. The initial contingency plan trigger is a ‘‘significant increase’’ in the emissions inventory, which is defined as ten percent above the 2008 emissions inventory levels. The three phases of actions are as follows: Phase 1. If the three-year review of CO emissions shows a significant increase in emissions, the ODEQ will reestablish ambient CO monitoring in Medford. Phase 2. If the monitoring data indicates that the LMP eligibility level of 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 8-hr standard) is exceeded, the ODEQ will evaluate the cause of the CO increase, and investigate corrective strategies. Phase 3. If a validated violation of the CO standard occurs, in addition to Phase 2 above, the ODEQ will replace the BACT requirement for new and expanding industry with Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER); reinstate CO emissions offset requirements for new and expanding industry; and consider other CO emission reduction measures. F. Transportation and General Conformity Federal transportation conformity rules (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) and general conformity rules (58 FR 63214) continue to apply under a LMP. However, as noted in the LMP Option memo, these requirements are greatly simplified. An area under a LMP can demonstrate conformity without submitting an emissions budget, and as a result, emissions do not need to be capped nor does a regional emissions E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM 20JYR1 47032 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations analysis (including modeling) need to be conducted. On April 28, 2016, the EPA found the Medford CO LMP to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes (81 FR 25394). Although regional emissions are no longer required as part of the transportation conformity determinations for CO for the Medford area, other transportation conformity requirements continue to apply to the area, such as consultation, transportation control measures, and project level conformity requirements. The Medford area will continue to be exempt from performing a regional emission analysis, but must meet project-level conformity analyses as well as transportation conformity areas. IV. Final Action In accordance with the requirements of the CAA, the EPA is approving the Medford CO LMP submitted by the ODEQ on December 11, 2015, and supplemented on December 30, 2015. The ODEQ has adequately demonstrated that the Medford area qualifies for the LMP option and will maintain the CO NAAQS through the second 10-year maintenance period through 2025. rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and • does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 19, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review, nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of the Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: June 30, 2016. Michelle L. Pirzadeh, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart MM—Oregon 2. Amend § 52.1970, paragraph (e), table titled ‘‘State of Oregon Air Quality Control Program’’ by revising ‘‘Section 4’’ to read as follows: ■ § 52.1970 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM 20JYR1 * * Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 47033 STATE OF OREGON AIR QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM State effective date EPA approval date * * 4.1, 12/19/1980 ...................... * 4.1, 4/12/1982, 47 FR 15587 4.2, 7/16/1982 ........................ 4.2, 10/7/1982, 47 FR 44261 4.3, 7/16/1982 ........................ 4.3, 10/7/1982, 47 FR 44261 4.4, 6/20/1979 ........................ 4.4, 6/24/1980, 45 FR 42265 4.5, 9/19/1980 ........................ 4.5, 4/12/1982, 47 FR 15587 4.6, 1/30/1981 ........................ 4.6, 4/12/1982, 47 FR 15587 4.7, 6/20/1979 ........................ 4.7, 6/24/1980, 45 FR 42265 4.7, 12/9/1988 ........................ 4.7, 12/6/1993, 58 FR 64161 4.8, 1/25/85 ............................ 4.8, 6/4/1986, 51 FR 20285 .. 4.9, 10/15/1982 ...................... 4.9, 2/13/1987, 52 FR 4620 .. 4.10, 4/1983 ........................... 4.10, 8/15/1984, 49 FR 32574 4.11, 10/24/1986 .................... 4.11, 1/15/1988, 53 FR 1020 4.12, 8/18/1995 ...................... 4.12, 4/14/1997, 62 FR 18047 4.13, 11/13/1991 .................... 4.14, 9/9/2005 ........................ 4.13, 12/17/1993, 58 FR 65934. 4.14, 6/19/2006, 71 FR 35163 4.15, 11/8/1991 ...................... 4.15, 2/15/1995, 60 FR 8563 4.16, 1/31/1991 ...................... 4.16, 8/24/1994, 59 FR 43483 4.17, 11/20/2000, (submittal date). 4.18, 11/4/1996 ...................... SIP citation 4.17, 9/20/2001, 66 FR 48340 Title/subject * Section 4 ........ * Control Strategies for Nonattainment Areas. 4.19, 6/1/1995, (submittal date). 4.50, 8/14/1996 ...................... Explanation 4.18, 3/15/1999, 64 FR 12751 4.19, 9/21/1999, 64 FR 51051 4.50, 5/19/1997, 62 FR 27204 4.50, 4/12/2007 ...................... 4.50, 12/19/2011, 76 FR 78571. 4.51, 7/12/1996 ...................... 4.51, 9/2/1997, 62 FR 46208 4.52, 3/9/2001 ........................ 4.52, 7/24/2002, 67 FR 48388 4.53, 9/10/1999 ...................... 4.53, 8/31/2000, 65 FR 52932 4.55, 10/4/2002 ...................... 4.58, 12/15/2004 .................... 4.55, 10/27/2003, 68 FR 61111. 4.56, 10/21/2003, 68 FR 60036. 4.57, 12/30/2008, 73 FR 79655. 4.58, 1/24/2006, 71 FR 3768 4.58, 12/11/2013 .................... 4.58, 5/22/2014, 79 FR 29360 4.59, 9/9/2005 ........................ 4.59, 6/19/2006, 71 FR 35161 4.56, 10/4/2002 ...................... rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES 4.57, 6/28/2007 ...................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM 20JYR1 * * 4.1 Portland-Vancouver TSP Attainment Plan. 4.2 Portland-Vancouver CO Attainment Plan. 4.3 Portland-Vancouver Ozone Attainment Plan. 4.4 Salem CO Attainment Plan. 4.5 Salem Ozone Attainment Plan. 4.6 Eugene-Springfield TSP Attainment Plan. 4.7 Eugene-Springfield CO Attainment Plan. 4.7 Eugene-Springfield CO Maintenance Plan. 4.8 Medford-Ashland Ozone, Maintenance Plan. 4.9 Medford-Ashland CO Attainment Plan. 4.10 Medford-Ashland TSP, Attainment Plan. 4.11 Grants Pass CO, Attainment Plan. 4.12 Klamath Falls PM–10 Attainment Plan. 4.13 Grants Pass PM–10 Attainment Plan. 4.14 Medford PM–10 Attainment and Maintenance Plan. 4.15 La Grande PM–10 Attainment Plan. 4.16 Eugene-Springfield PM– 10 Attainment Plan. 4.17 Klamath Falls CO Maintenance Plan. 4.18 Oakridge PM–10 Attainment Plan. 4.19 Lakeview PM–10 Attainment Plan. 4.50 Portland/Vancouver Ozone Maintenance Plan. 4.50 Portland-Vancouver AQMA (Oregon portion) & Salem Kaizer Area 8-hour Ozone (110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan. 4.51 Portland CO Maintenance Plan. 4.52 Medford CO Maintenance Plan. 4.53 Grants Pass CO Maintenance Plan. 4.55 Grants Pass PM–10 Maintenance Plan. 4.56 Klamath Falls PM–10 Maintenance Plan. 4.57 Salem-Keizer Area CO, Limited Maintenance Plan. 4.58 Portland Area CO Maintenance Plan 2nd 10-year. 4.58 Portland Area CO Maintenance Plan 2nd 10-year; TCM substitution update 4.58.3.2.2. 4.59 La Grande PM10 Maintenance Plan. 47034 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations STATE OF OREGON AIR QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM—Continued 4.60, 6/19/2006, 71 FR 35159 4.61, 4/11/2013, 78 FR 21547 4.62, 6/6/2016, 81 FR 36178 4.63, 4/16/2015 ...................... 4.63, 7/28/2015, 80 FR 44867 4.64, 4/16/2015 ...................... 4.64, 7/30/2015 80 FR 45435 4.65, 12/11/2015 .................... 4.65 7/20/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 4.60 Lakeview PM10 Maintenance Plan. 4.61 Eugene-Springfield PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan. 4.62, Klamath Falls PM2.5 Attainment Plan. 4.63 Grants Pass Second 10Year Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan. 4.64 Grants Pass Second 10Year PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan. 4.65 Medford Second 10Year Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan. Title/subject * * * * * * BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0708; FRL 9949–13– Region 7] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Kansas; 2015 Kansas State Implementation Plan for the 2008 Lead Standard Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: 14:53 Jul 19, 2016 * EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0708. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the State of Kansas. This final action will approve Kansas’ SIP for the lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) nonattainment area of Salina, Saline County, Kansas, received by EPA on February 25, 2015. EPA proposed approval of this plan on February 29, 2016. The applicable standard addressed in this action is the lead NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 2008. EPA believes that the SIP submitted by the state satisfies the applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) identified in EPA’s Final Rule published in the Federal Register on October 15, 2008, and will bring the designated portions of Salina, Kansas, into attainment of the 0.15 microgram per cubic meter (ug/m3) lead NAAQS. DATES: This final rule is effective on August 19, 2016. SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 * ADDRESSES: [FR Doc. 2016–17060 Filed 7–19–16; 8:45 am] rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES Explanation 4.62, 12/12/2012 .................... * EPA approval date 4.61, 9/26/2011 ...................... * State effective date 4.60, 9/9/2005 ........................ SIP citation Jkt 238001 Stephanie Doolan, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551–7719, or by email at doolan.stephanie@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. What is being addressed in this document? II. Have the requirements for the approval of a SIP revision been met? III. EPA’s Response to Comments IV. What action is EPA taking? I. What is being addressed in this document? In this document, EPA is granting final approval of Kansas’ attainment demonstration SIP for the lead NAAQS nonattainment area in portions of Salina, Saline County, Kansas. The applicable standard addressed in this action is the lead NAAQS promulgated PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 * * by EPA in 2008. EPA believes that the SIP submitted by the state satisfies the applicable requirements of the CAA identified in EPA’s Final Rule (73 FR 66964, October 15, 2008), and will bring the area into attainment of the 0.15 microgram per cubic meter (ug/m3) lead NAAQS. EPA’s proposal containing the background information for this action can be found at 81 FR 10162, February 29, 2016. II. Have the requirements for the approval of a SIP revision been met? The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In addition, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations. III. EPA’s Response to Comments The public comment period on EPA’s proposed rule opened February 29, 2016, the date of its publication in the Federal Register, and closed on March 30, 2016. During this period, EPA received one comment letter from Exide Technologies, dated March 23, 2016. The comment letter contained one comment regarding EPA’s process description in section V.A.1 of the proposal which states: ‘‘The Exide facility in Salina, Kansas, manufactures lead acid batteries for automobiles, trucks, and watercraft. Lead emissions result from breaking open used batteries, re-melting the lead and reformulating new batteries.’’ Exide commented that EPA is in error regarding the description of the facility’s processes; the Exide Salina, Kansas, facility does not break open used E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM 20JYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 20, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47029-47034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17060]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0854; FRL-9949-00-Region 10]


Air Plan Approval; Oregon; Medford Area Carbon Monoxide Second 
10-Year Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct 
final action to approve a second 10-year carbon monoxide (CO) limited 
maintenance plan (LMP) for the Medford area in Oregon, submitted by the 
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (tODEQ) on December 11, 
2015, along with a supplementary submittal on December 30, 2015, as a 
revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). In accordance with the 
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA is approving this SIP 
revision because it demonstrates that the Medford area will continue to 
meet the CO National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for a second 
10-year period beyond redesignation, through 2025.

DATES: This rule is effective on September 19, 2016, without further 
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by August 19, 2016. If 
the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal 
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not 
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2015-0854 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
Chi.John@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 
online instructions for submitting

[[Page 47030]]

comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish 
any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically 
any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information 
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact 
the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section. 
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or 
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective 
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Chi, Air Planning Unit, Office of 
Air and Waste (OAW-150), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 6th 
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101; telephone number: 206-553-1185; email 
address: Chi.John@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. This Action
II. Background
III. Evaluation of Oregon's Submittal
    A. Base Year Emission Inventory
    B. Demonstration of Maintenance
    C. Control Measures
    D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    E. Contingency Plan
    F. Transportation and General Conformity
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. This Action

    The EPA is approving the carbon monoxide limited maintenance plan 
(CO LMP) submitted by the ODEQ, on December 11, 2015, along with a 
supplementary submittal on December 30, 2015, (the submittal) for the 
Medford area. A LMP is a means of meeting Clean Air Act (CAA) 
requirements for formerly designated nonattainment areas that meet 
certain qualification criteria. This CO LMP is designed to keep the 
Medford area in attainment with the CO standard for a second 10-year 
period beyond redesignation, through 2025.

II. Background

    Under section 107(d)(1)(c) of the CAA, each CO area designated 
nonattainment prior to enactment of the 1990 Amendments, such as 
Medford, was designated nonattainment by operation of law upon 
enactment of the 1990 Amendments. Under section 186(a) of the CAA, each 
CO area designated nonattainment under section 107(d) was also 
classified by operation of law as either ``moderate'' or ``serious'' 
depending on the severity of the area's air quality problem. CO areas 
with design values between 9.1 and 16.4 parts per million (ppm), such 
as Medford, were classified as moderate. These nonattainment 
designations and classifications were codified in 40 CFR part 81 on 
November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56695).
    On July 24, 2002, the EPA approved the ODEQ's request to 
redesignate the Medford area to attainment of the CO standard (67 FR 
48388). In that action, the EPA also approved the maintenance plan 
required under CAA section 175A(a) to provide for 10 years of 
maintenance of the CO standard in the Medford area through the year 
2015 (67 FR 48388).
    As required by the CAA section 175A(b), the SIP submittal provides 
a second 10-year plan for maintaining the CO standard in the Medford 
area until 2025. For the second 10-year maintenance plan, the ODEQ 
chose the option as described in an EPA October 6, 1995 memorandum from 
Joseph Paisie, the Group Leader of the Integrated Policy and Strategies 
Group, titled, ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO 
Nonattainment Areas'' (LMP Option). To qualify for the LMP Option, the 
CO design value for an area, based on the eight consecutive quarters 
(two years of data) used to demonstrate attainment, must be at or below 
7.65 ppm (85 percent of the CO NAAQS). In addition, the control 
measures from the first CO maintenance plan must remain in place.
    The EPA has determined that the LMP Option for CO is also available 
to all states as part of the CAA 175A(b) update to the maintenance 
plans, regardless of the original nonattainment classification, or lack 
thereof. Thus, the EPA finds that although the Medford area was 
designated as a moderate nonattainment area for the CO NAAQS, 
redesignation to attainment status in conjunction with meeting all 
requirements of the October 6, 1995, memorandum, allows the ODEQ to be 
eligible to submit a LMP as the update to its original maintenance plan 
per section 175A(b) of the CAA.

III. Evaluation of Oregon's Submittal

    The requirements of the LMP Option and the EPA's evaluation of how 
each requirement has been met by the ODEQ's submittal is summarized 
below.

A. Base Year Emission Inventory

    The LMP must contain an attainment year emissions inventory to 
identify a level of CO emissions in the area that is sufficiently low 
enough to attain the CO NAAQS. The submittal contains a summary of the 
CO emissions inventory for the Medford area for the base year 2008. The 
emission inventory lists CO emissions by general source category--
stationary point sources, stationary area sources, on-road mobile 
sources and non-road mobile sources. On-road mobile sources emissions 
for the 2008 base year inventory were estimated with the EPA's Motor 
Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) 2010b.\1\ The methods used to 
determine the Medford area CO emission inventory are consistent with 
the EPA's most recent guidance on developing emission inventories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ MOVES2010b was the most current model available at the time 
that ODEQ was performing its analysis. The EPA released MOVES2014 on 
October 7, 2014 (79 FR 60343).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Historically, exceedances of the CO standard in the Medford area 
have occurred during the winter months, when cooler temperatures 
contribute to incomplete combustion, and when CO emissions are trapped 
near the ground by atmospheric inversions. Sources of carbon monoxide 
include industry, motor vehicles, non-road mobile sources, (e.g., 
construction equipment, recreational vehicles, lawn and garden 
equipment, and area sources (e.g., outdoor burning, woodstoves, 
fireplaces, and wildfires). The three consecutive months--December 
through February define the typical CO season. As such, season day 
emissions in addition to annual emissions are included in the 
inventory. The unit of measure for annual emissions is in tons per year 
(tpy), while the unit of measure for season day emissions is in pounds 
per day (lb/day). The county-wide emissions inventory data is spatially 
allocated to the Medford urban growth boundary (UGB), and to buffers 
around the UGB, depending on emissions category.

[[Page 47031]]



        2008 Emissions Inventory, Main Source Category Subtotals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Annual       CO emissions
          Main source category            emissions tons    pounds per
                                             per year       winter day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Point Sources................         2.367.1          13,159
On-road Mobile Sources..................         5,730.0          28,731
Non-road Mobile Sources.................         4,488.2          10,061
Stationary Area Sources.................         3,333.1          30,399
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................        15,927.4          82,350
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Demonstration of Maintenance

    The CO NAAQS is attained when the annual second highest 8-hour 
average CO concentration for an area does not exceed a concentration of 
9.0 ppm. The last monitored violation of the CO NAAQS in the Medford 
area occurred in 1991, and CO levels have been steadily in decline. The 
second highest 8-hour CO concentration in 2009 was 2.4 ppm, which is in 
attainment with the CO NAAQS.
    For areas that meet the criteria to use the LMP Option, the 
maintenance plan demonstration requirement is considered to be 
satisfied. The EPA believes that if the area begins the maintenance 
period at, or below, 85 percent of the level of the CO 8-hour NAAQS (at 
or below 7.65 ppm), the applicability of prevention of significant 
deterioration requirements, the control measures already in the SIP, 
and Federal control measures already in place will provide adequate 
assurance of maintenance over the maintenance period. Thus, there is no 
requirement to project emissions of air quality over the upcoming 
maintenance period. The second highest 8-hour CO concentration for 
Medford based on the two most recent years of data (2008-2009) is 2.4 
ppm, which is significantly below the LMP Option requirement of 7.65 
ppm.\2\ Therefore, the EPA finds that the ODEQ has demonstrated that 
the Medford area qualifies for the LMP Option and has satisfied the 
maintenance demonstration requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The years 2008-2009 are the most recent two years for 
available monitoring data because monitoring was discontinued after 
2009. The ODEQ has developed an alternate method to verify continued 
attainment of the CO NAAQS, discussed in the next section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Control Measures

    The submittal retains the control measures from the first CO 
maintenance plan (67 FR 48388). The primary control measure has been 
the emission standards for new motor vehicles under the Federal Motor 
Vehicle Control Program. Other control measures have been the Major New 
Source Review Program with Best Available Control Technology (BACT), 
Motor Vehicle Inspection Program, and a woodsmoke curtailment program. 
As stated above, the EPA believes that the Medford area will continue 
to maintain the standard with the continued implementation of these 
control measures along with meeting the other requirements to qualify 
for the LMP option.

D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment

    Monitored CO levels in the Medford area have declined progressively 
since 1991. CO levels have declined significantly across the nation 
through motor vehicle emissions controls and fleet turnover to newer, 
cleaner vehicle models. Once CO levels declined and continued to stay 
well below the NAAQS, the ODEQ requested to remove the Medford CO 
monitor in 2009 and the EPA approved the request on October 14, 2010. 
The ODEQ now has been using an alternate method of verifying continued 
attainment with the CO standard based on the regional emissions 
analysis conducted by the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning 
Organization and by using the Portland CO monitor to track trends in 
general CO levels. Both the ODEQ report and the EPA network approval 
letter are included in the materials of this docket.
    Under the Medford CO LMP, the ODEQ will verify continued attainment 
of the CO NAAQS by conducting a review of CO emissions inventory data 
for the Medford area. The ODEQ will calculate CO emissions every three 
years as part of the Statewide Emissions Inventory, which is submitted 
to the EPA for inclusion in the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The 
ODEQ commits to review the NEI estimates to identify any increases over 
the 2008 emission levels (see the base year emissions inventory in this 
section) and report on them in the annual monitoring network plan for 
the applicable year. Because on-road mobile sources and stationary area 
sources are the predominant sources of CO in Medford, these source 
categories will be the primary focus of the ODEQ's review. The ODEQ 
will evaluate any increase in CO emissions to confirm it is not due to 
a change in emission calculation methodology, an exceptional event, or 
other factor not representative of an actual emissions increase.

E. Contingency Plan

    Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions necessary to ensure prompt correction of any 
violations of the standard that may occur. The ODEQ has submitted a 
revised contingency plan that has three phase of action. The initial 
contingency plan trigger is a ``significant increase'' in the emissions 
inventory, which is defined as ten percent above the 2008 emissions 
inventory levels. The three phases of actions are as follows:
    Phase 1. If the three-year review of CO emissions shows a 
significant increase in emissions, the ODEQ will reestablish ambient CO 
monitoring in Medford.
    Phase 2. If the monitoring data indicates that the LMP eligibility 
level of 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 8-hr standard) is exceeded, the 
ODEQ will evaluate the cause of the CO increase, and investigate 
corrective strategies.
    Phase 3. If a validated violation of the CO standard occurs, in 
addition to Phase 2 above, the ODEQ will replace the BACT requirement 
for new and expanding industry with Lowest Achievable Emission Rate 
(LAER); reinstate CO emissions offset requirements for new and 
expanding industry; and consider other CO emission reduction measures.

F. Transportation and General Conformity

    Federal transportation conformity rules (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) 
and general conformity rules (58 FR 63214) continue to apply under a 
LMP. However, as noted in the LMP Option memo, these requirements are 
greatly simplified. An area under a LMP can demonstrate conformity 
without submitting an emissions budget, and as a result, emissions do 
not need to be capped nor does a regional emissions

[[Page 47032]]

analysis (including modeling) need to be conducted.
    On April 28, 2016, the EPA found the Medford CO LMP to be adequate 
for transportation conformity purposes (81 FR 25394). Although regional 
emissions are no longer required as part of the transportation 
conformity determinations for CO for the Medford area, other 
transportation conformity requirements continue to apply to the area, 
such as consultation, transportation control measures, and project 
level conformity requirements. The Medford area will continue to be 
exempt from performing a regional emission analysis, but must meet 
project-level conformity analyses as well as transportation conformity 
areas.

IV. Final Action

    In accordance with the requirements of the CAA, the EPA is 
approving the Medford CO LMP submitted by the ODEQ on December 11, 
2015, and supplemented on December 30, 2015. The ODEQ has adequately 
demonstrated that the Medford area qualifies for the LMP option and 
will maintain the CO NAAQS through the second 10-year maintenance 
period through 2025.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority 
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or 
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible 
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated 
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the 
rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial 
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified 
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by September 19, 2016. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review, nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of the Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition 
for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can 
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed 
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 30, 2016.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart MM--Oregon

0
2. Amend Sec.  52.1970, paragraph (e), table titled ``State of Oregon 
Air Quality Control Program'' by revising ``Section 4'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1970  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 47033]]



                                   State of Oregon Air Quality Control Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SIP citation            Title/subject     State effective date    EPA approval date        Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 4...............  Control Strategies    4.1, 12/19/1980.....  4.1, 4/12/1982, 47    4.1 Portland-
                           for Nonattainment                           FR 15587.             Vancouver TSP
                           Areas.                                                            Attainment Plan.
                                                4.2, 7/16/1982......  4.2, 10/7/1982, 47    4.2 Portland-
                                                                       FR 44261.             Vancouver CO
                                                                                             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.3, 7/16/1982......  4.3, 10/7/1982, 47    4.3 Portland-
                                                                       FR 44261.             Vancouver Ozone
                                                                                             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.4, 6/20/1979......  4.4, 6/24/1980, 45    4.4 Salem CO
                                                                       FR 42265.             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.5, 9/19/1980......  4.5, 4/12/1982, 47    4.5 Salem Ozone
                                                                       FR 15587.             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.6, 1/30/1981......  4.6, 4/12/1982, 47    4.6 Eugene-
                                                                       FR 15587.             Springfield TSP
                                                                                             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.7, 6/20/1979......  4.7, 6/24/1980, 45    4.7 Eugene-
                                                                       FR 42265.             Springfield CO
                                                                                             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.7, 12/9/1988......  4.7, 12/6/1993, 58    4.7 Eugene-
                                                                       FR 64161.             Springfield CO
                                                                                             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.8, 1/25/85........  4.8, 6/4/1986, 51 FR  4.8 Medford-Ashland
                                                                       20285.                Ozone, Maintenance
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.9, 10/15/1982.....  4.9, 2/13/1987, 52    4.9 Medford-Ashland
                                                                       FR 4620.              CO Attainment Plan.
                                                4.10, 4/1983........  4.10, 8/15/1984, 49   4.10 Medford-Ashland
                                                                       FR 32574.             TSP, Attainment
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.11, 10/24/1986....  4.11, 1/15/1988, 53   4.11 Grants Pass CO,
                                                                       FR 1020.              Attainment Plan.
                                                4.12, 8/18/1995.....  4.12, 4/14/1997, 62   4.12 Klamath Falls
                                                                       FR 18047.             PM-10 Attainment
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.13, 11/13/1991....  4.13, 12/17/1993, 58  4.13 Grants Pass PM-
                                                                       FR 65934.             10 Attainment Plan.
                                                4.14, 9/9/2005......  4.14, 6/19/2006, 71   4.14 Medford PM-10
                                                                       FR 35163.             Attainment and
                                                                                             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.15, 11/8/1991.....  4.15, 2/15/1995, 60   4.15 La Grande PM-10
                                                                       FR 8563.              Attainment Plan.
                                                4.16, 1/31/1991.....  4.16, 8/24/1994, 59   4.16 Eugene-
                                                                       FR 43483.             Springfield PM-10
                                                                                             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.17, 11/20/2000,     4.17, 9/20/2001, 66   4.17 Klamath Falls
                                                 (submittal date).     FR 48340.             CO Maintenance
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.18, 11/4/1996.....  4.18, 3/15/1999, 64   4.18 Oakridge PM-10
                                                                       FR 12751.             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.19, 6/1/1995,       4.19, 9/21/1999, 64   4.19 Lakeview PM-10
                                                 (submittal date).     FR 51051.             Attainment Plan.
                                                4.50, 8/14/1996.....  4.50, 5/19/1997, 62   4.50 Portland/
                                                                       FR 27204.             Vancouver Ozone
                                                                                             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.50, 4/12/2007.....  4.50, 12/19/2011, 76  4.50 Portland-
                                                                       FR 78571.             Vancouver AQMA
                                                                                             (Oregon portion) &
                                                                                             Salem Kaizer Area 8-
                                                                                             hour Ozone
                                                                                             (110(a)(1)
                                                                                             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.51, 7/12/1996.....  4.51, 9/2/1997, 62    4.51 Portland CO
                                                                       FR 46208.             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.52, 3/9/2001......  4.52, 7/24/2002, 67   4.52 Medford CO
                                                                       FR 48388.             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.53, 9/10/1999.....  4.53, 8/31/2000, 65   4.53 Grants Pass CO
                                                                       FR 52932.             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.55, 10/4/2002.....  4.55, 10/27/2003, 68  4.55 Grants Pass PM-
                                                                       FR 61111.             10 Maintenance
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.56, 10/4/2002.....  4.56, 10/21/2003, 68  4.56 Klamath Falls
                                                                       FR 60036.             PM-10 Maintenance
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.57, 6/28/2007.....  4.57, 12/30/2008, 73  4.57 Salem-Keizer
                                                                       FR 79655.             Area CO, Limited
                                                                                             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.58, 12/15/2004....  4.58, 1/24/2006, 71   4.58 Portland Area
                                                                       FR 3768.              CO Maintenance Plan
                                                                                             2nd 10-year.
                                                4.58, 12/11/2013....  4.58, 5/22/2014, 79   4.58 Portland Area
                                                                       FR 29360.             CO Maintenance Plan
                                                                                             2nd 10-year; TCM
                                                                                             substitution update
                                                                                             4.58.3.2.2.
                                                4.59, 9/9/2005......  4.59, 6/19/2006, 71   4.59 La Grande PM10
                                                                       FR 35161.             Maintenance Plan.

[[Page 47034]]

 
                                                4.60, 9/9/2005......  4.60, 6/19/2006, 71   4.60 Lakeview PM10
                                                                       FR 35159.             Maintenance Plan.
                                                4.61, 9/26/2011.....  4.61, 4/11/2013, 78   4.61 Eugene-
                                                                       FR 21547.             Springfield PM10
                                                                                             Limited Maintenance
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.62, 12/12/2012....  4.62, 6/6/2016, 81    4.62, Klamath Falls
                                                                       FR 36178.             PM2.5 Attainment
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.63, 4/16/2015.....  4.63, 7/28/2015, 80   4.63 Grants Pass
                                                                       FR 44867.             Second 10-Year
                                                                                             Carbon Monoxide
                                                                                             Limited Maintenance
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.64, 4/16/2015.....  4.64, 7/30/2015 80    4.64 Grants Pass
                                                                       FR 45435.             Second 10-Year PM10
                                                                                             Limited Maintenance
                                                                                             Plan.
                                                4.65, 12/11/2015....  4.65 7/20/2016        4.65 Medford Second
                                                                       [Insert Federal       10-Year Carbon
                                                                       Register citation].   Monoxide Limited
                                                                                             Maintenance Plan.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-17060 Filed 7-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P