Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Attainment Plan for Oakridge, Oregon PM2.5, 72714-72716 [2016-25296]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
72714
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
[FR Doc. 2016–25441 Filed 10–20–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0004; FRL–9954–32–
Region 10]
Partial Approval and Partial
Disapproval of Attainment Plan for
Oakridge, Oregon PM2.5 Nonattainment
Area
Table of Contents
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
On December 12, 2012, the
Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (ODEQ) submitted, on behalf of
the Governor of Oregon, a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submission
to address violations of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or
equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers
(PM2.5) for the Oakridge PM2.5
nonattainment area (2012 SIP
submission). The Lane Regional Air
Protection Agency (LRAPA), in
coordination with the ODEQ, developed
the 2012 SIP submission for purposes of
attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. On February 22, 2016, the
ODEQ withdrew certain provisions of
the 2012 SIP submission (2016 SIP
withdrawal). The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has evaluated
whether the remaining portions of the
2012 SIP submission meet the
applicable Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements. Based on this evaluation,
the EPA is finalizing partial approval
and partial disapproval of the remaining
portions of the 2012 SIP submission.
DATES: This final rule is effective
November 21, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0004. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information the disclosure
of which 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 either
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Planning Unit, Office of Air and
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Oct 20, 2016
Jkt 241001
Waste, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101. The EPA
requests that, if at all possible, you
contact the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christi Duboiski at (360) 753–9081,
duboiski.christi@epa.gov or by using the
above EPA, Region 10 address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background Information
II. Final Action
III. Consequences of a Disapproved SIP
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
provide for attainment by the applicable
attainment date,
• the motor vehicle emissions budget
(MVEB) submitted to meet CAA section
176 requirement for transportation
conformity,
• the demonstration of reasonable
further progress (RFP) and quantitative
milestones submitted to meet section
172(c)(2) and 189(c) requirements for
RFP and quantitative milestones, and
• the contingency measures
submitted to meet the section 172(c)(9)
requirement for the implementation of
measures to be undertaken, without
further action by the state or EPA, if the
area fails to make RFP or attain the
NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date.
I. Background Information
III. Consequences of a Disapproved SIP
On July 28, 2016, the EPA proposed
to partially approve and partially
disapprove the attainment plan
submitted by the ODEQ on December
12, 2012 (81 FR 49592). An explanation
of the CAA attainment planning
requirements, a detailed analysis of the
submittal, and the EPA’s reasons for
proposing partial approval and partial
disapproval were provided in the notice
of proposed rulemaking, and will not be
restated here. The public comment
period for the proposed rule ended on
August 29, 2016. The EPA received no
comments on the proposal.
This section explains the
consequences of a disapproved SIP
submission required under the CAA.
The Act provides for the imposition of
sanctions and the promulgation of a
federal implementation plan (FIP) if a
state fails to submit, and the EPA
approve, a plan revision that corrects
the deficiencies identified by the EPA in
its disapproval.
II. Final Action
The EPA is finalizing approval of the
following elements of the 2012 SIP
submission:
• Description of the Oakridge PM2.5
nonattainment area and listing of the
area as nonattainment, and
• The base year 2008 emission
inventory submitted to meet the CAA
section 172(c)(3) requirement for
emissions inventories.
The EPA is finalizing disapproval of
the following elements of the 2012 SIP
submission:
• The attainment year emission
inventory submitted to meet the CAA
section 172(c)(3) requirement for
emissions inventories,
• the reasonably available control
measures (RACM), including reasonably
available control technology (RACT),
submitted to meet the CAA sections
172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) requirements
for control measures for moderate
nonattainment areas,
• the attainment demonstration
submitted to meet the CAA section
189(a)(1)(B) requirement for a
demonstration that the plan will
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Act’s Provisions for Sanctions
Once the EPA finalizes disapproval of
a required SIP submission, such as an
attainment plan submission, or a
portion thereof, CAA section 179(a)
provides for the imposition of sanctions,
unless the deficiency is corrected within
18 months of the final rulemaking of
disapproval. The first sanction would
apply 18 months after the EPA
disapproves the SIP submission, or
portion thereof. Under the EPA’s
sanctions regulations at 40 CFR 52.31,
the first sanction imposed would be 2:1
offsets for sources subject to the new
source review requirements under
section 173 of the CAA. If the state has
still failed to submit a SIP submission
to correct the identified deficiencies for
which the EPA proposes full or
conditional approval 6 months after the
first sanction is imposed, the second
sanction will apply. The second
sanction is a prohibition on the
approval or funding certain highway
projects.1
1 On April 1, 1996 the US Department of
Transportation published a notice in the Federal
Register describing the criteria to be used to
determine which highway projects can be funded
or approved during the time that the highway
sanction is imposed in an area. (See 61 FR 14363)
E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM
21OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Federal Implementation Plan Provisions
That Apply if a State Fails To Submit
an Approvable Plan
In addition to sanctions, once the EPA
finds that a state failed to submit the
required SIP revision, or finalizes
disapproval of the required SIP revision
or a portion thereof, the EPA must
promulgate a FIP no later than two years
from the date of the finding—if the
deficiency has not been corrected
within that time period.
Ramifications Regarding Conformity
One consequence of the EPA’s action
finalizing disapproval of a control
strategy SIP submission is a conformity
freeze.2 If the EPA finalizes disapproval
of the attainment demonstration SIP
without a protective finding, a
conformity freeze will be in place as of
the effective date of the disapproval (40
CFR 93.120(a)(2)).3 The Oakridge PM2.5
nonattainment area is an isolated rural
area as defined in the transportation
conformity rule (40 CFR 93.101). As
such, it does not have a metropolitan
planning organization (MPO), and there
is no long range transportation plan or
TIP that would be subject to a freeze.
However, the freeze does mean that no
projects in the Oakridge PM2.5
nonattainment area may be found to
conform until another attainment
demonstration SIP is submitted, and the
motor vehicle emissions budgets are
found adequate, or the attainment
demonstration is approved.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
In this rule, the EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
incorporation by reference of the
regulations described in the
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically
through https://www.regulations.gov
and/or in hard copy at the appropriate
2 Control strategy SIP revisions as defined in the
transportation conformity rules include reasonable
further progress plans and attainment
demonstrations (40 CFR 93.101).
3 The EPA would give a protective finding if the
submitted control strategy SIP contains adopted
control measures, or written commitments to adopt
enforceable control measures, that fully satisfy the
emissions reductions requirements relevant to the
statutory provision for which the implementation
plan revision was submitted, such as reasonable
further progress or attainment (40 CFR 93.101 and
93.120(a)(2) and (3)). The submitted attainment
plan for the Oakridge NAA does not contain all
necessary controls to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS and therefore is not eligible for a protective
finding.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Oct 20, 2016
Jkt 241001
EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble for more information).
V. Statutory and Executive Orders
Review
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act 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
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
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
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
72715
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications and it 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 December 20, 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. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2) of the CAA).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: October 6, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, 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.
E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM
21OCR1
72716
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 52.1970
A. Revising the heading for Title 29;
and
■ B. Revising entries 29–0010 and 29–
0030.
The revisions read as follows:
■
Subpart MM—Oregon
2. In 52.1970 (c), amend Table 4—EPA
Approved Lane Regional Air Protection
Agency (LRAPA) Rules for Oregon by:
■
*
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
(c) * * *
TABLE 4—EPA APPROVED LANE REGIONAL AIR PROTECTION AGENCY (LRAPA) RULES FOR OREGON
LRAPA
citation
State
effective date
Title/subject
*
*
EPA approval date
*
*
Explanations
*
*
*
Title 29—Designation of Air Quality Areas
29–0010 .......
Definitions .......................................
10/18/2012
29–0030 .......
Designation
Areas.
10/18/2012
*
of
Nonattainment
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–25296 Filed 10–20–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2013–0145; FRL–9954–15–
Region 8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; North
Dakota; Revisions to Air Pollution
Control Rules
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of North Dakota
on January 28, 2013 and April 22, 2014.
The revisions are to Article 33–15 Air
Pollution Control rules of the North
Dakota Administrative Code. The
revisions include amendments to
update the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) rules and the
definition of ‘‘volatile organic
compounds’’; to add particulate matter
less than 2.5 microns in diameter
(PM2.5) methods of measurement; to
modify the PM2.5 state ambient air
quality standard, permissible open
burning rule, and permit fee processes;
and, to remove permitting fees for
sources that operate an air monitoring
site. The revisions also make clarifying
changes. This action is being taken
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Oct 20, 2016
10/21/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation].
10/21/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation].
Jkt 241001
*
*
under section 110 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on
November 21, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R08–OAR–2013–0145. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129, (303) 312–6252,
dobrahner.jaslyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In our notice of proposed rulemaking
published on August 25, 2016 (81 FR
53438), EPA proposed to approve
revisions to Article 33–15 Air Pollution
Control rules of the North Dakota
Administrative Code submitted by the
State of North Dakota on January 28,
2013 and April 22, 2014. In this
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Except 1–5, 7–9, and 11–15.
Sfmt 4700
*
*
rulemaking, we are taking final action
on revisions submitted in the January
28, 2013 submittal to update the PSD
rules; add PM2.5 methods of
measurement; revise permit fee
processing; remove permitting fees for
sources that operate an air monitoring
site; and make clarifying changes. The
North Dakota State Health Council
adopted those amendments on August
14, 2012 (effective January 1, 2013). In
addition, we are also taking final action
on revisions submitted in the April 22,
2014 submittal to update the PSD rules
and the definition of ‘‘volatile organic
compounds’’; revise the PM2.5 state
ambient air quality standard and
permissible open burning rule; and
clarify excess emissions reporting
requirements. The North Dakota State
Health Council adopted those
amendments on February 11, 2014
(effective April 1, 2014). The reasons for
our approval are provided in detail in
the proposed rule.
II. Response to Comments
We received no comments on our
proposed rule.
III. Final Action
For the reasons expressed in the
proposed rule, EPA is approving
revisions to sections of the State’s Air
Pollution Control rules from the January
28, 2013 and April 22, 214 submittals.
A comprehensive summary of the
revisions in North Dakota’s Air
Pollution Control rules organized by the
EPA’s action, reason for ‘‘no action’’ and
submittal date are provided in Table 1
and Table 2 below.
E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM
21OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72714-72716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25296]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2013-0004; FRL-9954-32-Region 10]
Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Attainment Plan for
Oakridge, Oregon PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 12, 2012, the Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (ODEQ) submitted, on behalf of the Governor of Oregon, a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submission to address violations of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter
with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to a nominal 2.5
micrometers (PM2.5) for the Oakridge PM2.5
nonattainment area (2012 SIP submission). The Lane Regional Air
Protection Agency (LRAPA), in coordination with the ODEQ, developed the
2012 SIP submission for purposes of attaining the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. On February 22, 2016, the ODEQ withdrew certain
provisions of the 2012 SIP submission (2016 SIP withdrawal). The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has evaluated whether the
remaining portions of the 2012 SIP submission meet the applicable Clean
Air Act (CAA) requirements. Based on this evaluation, the EPA is
finalizing partial approval and partial disapproval of the remaining
portions of the 2012 SIP submission.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 21, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2013-0004. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which 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 either electronically through https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Unit, Office of
Air and Waste, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101.
The EPA requests that, if at all possible, you contact the individual
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard
copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Duboiski at (360) 753-9081,
duboiski.christi@epa.gov or by using the above EPA, Region 10 address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background Information
II. Final Action
III. Consequences of a Disapproved SIP
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
I. Background Information
On July 28, 2016, the EPA proposed to partially approve and
partially disapprove the attainment plan submitted by the ODEQ on
December 12, 2012 (81 FR 49592). An explanation of the CAA attainment
planning requirements, a detailed analysis of the submittal, and the
EPA's reasons for proposing partial approval and partial disapproval
were provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking, and will not be
restated here. The public comment period for the proposed rule ended on
August 29, 2016. The EPA received no comments on the proposal.
II. Final Action
The EPA is finalizing approval of the following elements of the
2012 SIP submission:
Description of the Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment
area and listing of the area as nonattainment, and
The base year 2008 emission inventory submitted to meet
the CAA section 172(c)(3) requirement for emissions inventories.
The EPA is finalizing disapproval of the following elements of the
2012 SIP submission:
The attainment year emission inventory submitted to meet
the CAA section 172(c)(3) requirement for emissions inventories,
the reasonably available control measures (RACM),
including reasonably available control technology (RACT), submitted to
meet the CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) requirements for
control measures for moderate nonattainment areas,
the attainment demonstration submitted to meet the CAA
section 189(a)(1)(B) requirement for a demonstration that the plan will
provide for attainment by the applicable attainment date,
the motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) submitted to
meet CAA section 176 requirement for transportation conformity,
the demonstration of reasonable further progress (RFP) and
quantitative milestones submitted to meet section 172(c)(2) and 189(c)
requirements for RFP and quantitative milestones, and
the contingency measures submitted to meet the section
172(c)(9) requirement for the implementation of measures to be
undertaken, without further action by the state or EPA, if the area
fails to make RFP or attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date.
III. Consequences of a Disapproved SIP
This section explains the consequences of a disapproved SIP
submission required under the CAA. The Act provides for the imposition
of sanctions and the promulgation of a federal implementation plan
(FIP) if a state fails to submit, and the EPA approve, a plan revision
that corrects the deficiencies identified by the EPA in its
disapproval.
The Act's Provisions for Sanctions
Once the EPA finalizes disapproval of a required SIP submission,
such as an attainment plan submission, or a portion thereof, CAA
section 179(a) provides for the imposition of sanctions, unless the
deficiency is corrected within 18 months of the final rulemaking of
disapproval. The first sanction would apply 18 months after the EPA
disapproves the SIP submission, or portion thereof. Under the EPA's
sanctions regulations at 40 CFR 52.31, the first sanction imposed would
be 2:1 offsets for sources subject to the new source review
requirements under section 173 of the CAA. If the state has still
failed to submit a SIP submission to correct the identified
deficiencies for which the EPA proposes full or conditional approval 6
months after the first sanction is imposed, the second sanction will
apply. The second sanction is a prohibition on the approval or funding
certain highway projects.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On April 1, 1996 the US Department of Transportation
published a notice in the Federal Register describing the criteria
to be used to determine which highway projects can be funded or
approved during the time that the highway sanction is imposed in an
area. (See 61 FR 14363)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 72715]]
Federal Implementation Plan Provisions That Apply if a State Fails To
Submit an Approvable Plan
In addition to sanctions, once the EPA finds that a state failed to
submit the required SIP revision, or finalizes disapproval of the
required SIP revision or a portion thereof, the EPA must promulgate a
FIP no later than two years from the date of the finding--if the
deficiency has not been corrected within that time period.
Ramifications Regarding Conformity
One consequence of the EPA's action finalizing disapproval of a
control strategy SIP submission is a conformity freeze.\2\ If the EPA
finalizes disapproval of the attainment demonstration SIP without a
protective finding, a conformity freeze will be in place as of the
effective date of the disapproval (40 CFR 93.120(a)(2)).\3\ The
Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment area is an isolated rural area
as defined in the transportation conformity rule (40 CFR 93.101). As
such, it does not have a metropolitan planning organization (MPO), and
there is no long range transportation plan or TIP that would be subject
to a freeze. However, the freeze does mean that no projects in the
Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment area may be found to conform
until another attainment demonstration SIP is submitted, and the motor
vehicle emissions budgets are found adequate, or the attainment
demonstration is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Control strategy SIP revisions as defined in the
transportation conformity rules include reasonable further progress
plans and attainment demonstrations (40 CFR 93.101).
\3\ The EPA would give a protective finding if the submitted
control strategy SIP contains adopted control measures, or written
commitments to adopt enforceable control measures, that fully
satisfy the emissions reductions requirements relevant to the
statutory provision for which the implementation plan revision was
submitted, such as reasonable further progress or attainment (40 CFR
93.101 and 93.120(a)(2) and (3)). The submitted attainment plan for
the Oakridge NAA does not contain all necessary controls to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and therefore is not
eligible for a protective finding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov
and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble for more information).
V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; 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 it 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 December 20, 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2) of the CAA).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: October 6, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 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.
[[Page 72716]]
Subpart MM--Oregon
0
2. In 52.1970 (c), amend Table 4--EPA Approved Lane Regional Air
Protection Agency (LRAPA) Rules for Oregon by:
0
A. Revising the heading for Title 29; and
0
B. Revising entries 29-0010 and 29-0030.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 52.1970 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Table 4--EPA Approved Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) Rules for Oregon
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
LRAPA citation Title/subject effective date EPA approval date Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title 29--Designation of Air Quality Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29-0010................. Definitions........... 10/18/2012 10/21/2016, [Insert Except 1-5, 7-9, and
Federal Register 11-15.
citation].
29-0030................. Designation of 10/18/2012 10/21/2016, [Insert
Nonattainment Areas. Federal Register
citation].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2016-25296 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
