Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2016 / Proposed Rules 62849 

1CARB submitted the GBUAPCD’s 2016 OVPA 

PM10 SIP on June 9, 2016. We intend to evaluate 

and propose action on the 2016 OVPA PM10 SIP, 

including BACM, in a separate action in the near 

future. 

2OVPA 2016 SIP BACM Assessment at p. 1. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0393; FRL–9952–08– 

Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, Great Basin Unified Air 

Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Great Basin Unified Air 

Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision concerns emissions of 

particulate matter (PM) at Owens Lake, 

CA. We are proposing to approve a local 

rule to regulate this emission source 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the 

Act). We are taking comments on this 

proposal and plan to follow with a final 

action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

October 13, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2016–0393 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office 

Chief at Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be removed or edited 

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: 

Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, 

(415) 947–4125, vineyard.christine@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this 

proposal with the date that it was 

adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

GBUAPCD .... 433 Control of Particulate Emissions at Owens Lake ............................................. 04/13/16 06/09/16 

On July 6, 2016, the EPA determined 

that the submittal for GBUAPCD Rule 

433 met the completeness criteria in 40 

CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be 

met before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

There are no previous versions of 

Rule 433 in the SIP. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule? 

PM, including PM equal to or less 

than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), 

contributes to effects that are harmful to 

human health and the environment, 

including premature mortality, 

aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 

function, visibility impairment, and 

damage to vegetation and ecosystems. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit regulations that control 

PM emissions, including PM10

emissions. GBUAPCD Rule 433 

establishes PM10 emission control 

requirements at the dry Owens Lake bed 

in the Owens Valley Planning Area 

(OVPA). The rule defines Best Available 

Control Measures (BACM) and 

establishes the temporal and geographic 

requirements of these controls at Owens 

Lake, with the goal of reducing PM10

emissions from the dry lake bed to 

attain the 24-hour PM10 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

in 2017. For example, Rule 433 requires 

the application of controls such as 

gravel blankets, managed vegetation, or 

shallow flooding to areas of the dry 

Owens Lake bed that have contributed 

to violations of the NAAQS. The EPA’s 

technical support document (TSD) has 

more information about this rule. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? 

SIP rules must be enforceable (see 

CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not 

interfere with applicable requirements 

concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress or other CAA 

requirements (see CAA section 110(l)), 

and must not modify certain SIP control 

requirements in nonattainment areas 

without ensuring equivalent or greater 

emissions reductions (see CAA section 

193). 

Generally, SIP rules must implement 

BACM, including Best Available Control 

Technology (BACT), in areas classified 

as serious nonattainment (see CAA 

section 189(b)(1)(B)) for PM10. The 

GBUAPCD regulates the OVPA, which 

is a PM10 nonattainment area classified 

as serious. A BACM and BACT 

evaluation is generally performed in 

context of a broader plan.1

The dry Owens Lake bed is the 

predominant source of PM10 emissions 

in the OVPA.2 Rule 433 requires the 

City of Los Angeles to implement a 

number of PM10 control measures, 

including shallow flooding, managed 

vegetation, installation of gravel 

blankets, application of brine, or surface 

roughening (tillage) over a large portion 

of the dry Owens Lake bed. The control 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
62850 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

3OVPA 2016 SIP at p. 87 and Figure 10–1. 

measures required by Rule 433 will 

result in a substantial reduction of PM10

emissions in the OVPA from the Owens 

Lake bed.3

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability, 

revision/relaxation and rule stringency 

requirements for the applicable criteria 

pollutants include the following: 

1. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990). 

3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for 

Serious PM10 Nonattainment Areas, and 

Attainment Date Waivers for PM10

Nonattainment Areas Generally; 

Addendum to the General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 

FR 41998 (August 16, 1994). 

5. ‘‘PM10 Guideline Document,’’ EPA 

452/R–93–008, April 1993. 

6. ‘‘Fugitive Dust Background 

Document and Technical Information 

Document for Best Available Control 

Measures,’’ EPA 450/2–92–004, 

September 1992. 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

The PM10 emission controls and other 

requirements in Rule 433 are clear and 

adequately enforceable. The 

requirements clearly strengthen the SIP 

and are consistent with CAA sections 

110(l) and 193. We intend to address 

BACM for this area in the near future 

when we act on the OVPA 2016 SIP. 

Therefore, we find that Rule 433 is 

consistent with the relevant policy and 

guidance regarding enforceability and 

does not result in a SIP relaxation. The 

TSD has more information on our 

evaluation. 

C. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, the EPA proposes to fully 

approve the submitted rule because it 

fulfills all relevant requirements. We 

will accept comments from the public 

on this proposal until October 13, 2016. 

If we take final action to approve the 

submitted rule, our final action will 

incorporate this rule into the federally 

enforceable SIP. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the GBUAPCD rule described in Table 1 

of this preamble. The EPA has made, 

and will continue to make, these 

materials available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region IX Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air 

Act. Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely proposes to approve State law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, 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). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: August 24, 2016. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2016–21872 Filed 9–12–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 680 

RIN 0648–BG15 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization 

Program 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of fishery 

management plan amendment; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery 

Management Council submitted 

Amendment 47 to the Fishery 

Management Plan for Bering Sea/ 

Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs 

(Crab FMP) to NMFS for review. If 

approved, Amendment 47 would 

exempt eastern Chionoecetes bairdi 

Tanner (EBT) and western C. bairdi 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS