Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 63431 

Subpart SS—Texas 

■ 2. Section 52.2275 is amended by 

adding paragraph (j) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2275 Control strategy and 

regulations: Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(j) Approval of Redesignation 

Substitute for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria 1-hour Ozone Nonattainment 

Area. EPA has approved the 

redesignation substitute for the 

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 1-hour 

ozone nonattainment area submitted by 

the State of Texas on July 22, 2014. The 

State is no longer being required to 

adopt any additional applicable 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS requirements for the 

area. 

[FR Doc. 2015–26302 Filed 10–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0614; FRL–9935–53– 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; New 

Mexico; Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County; Revisions to State Boards and 

Conflict of Interest Provisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to 

the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, 

New Mexico State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). These revisions add 

administrative updates and clarifying 

changes to the state board and conflict 

of interest provisions in Albuquerque/

Bernalillo County. The EPA is 

approving these revisions pursuant to 

section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

December 21, 2015 without further 

notice unless EPA receives relevant 

adverse comments by November 19, 

2015. If EPA receives such comments, 

EPA 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–R06– 

OAR–2013–0614, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

• Email: Mr. John Walser at 

walser.john@epa.gov. Please also send a 

copy by email to the person listed in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section below. 

• Mail or Delivery: Mr. Guy 

Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section 

(6PD–L), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2013– 

0614. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index and in hard copy at EPA Region 

6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, 

Texas. While all documents in the 

docket are listed in the index, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material), and some may 

not be publicly available at either 

location (e.g., CBI). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

John Walser (6PD–L), (214) 665–7128, 

walser.john@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ means EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. What is a SIP? 

B. State Boards 

II. Overview of the June 13, 2013 State 

Submittal 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Submittal 

IV. Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. What is a SIP? 

Section 110 of the CAA requires states 

to develop air pollution regulations and 

control strategies to ensure that air 

quality meets the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) established 

by EPA. The NAAQS are established 

under section 109 of the CAA and 

currently address six criteria pollutants: 

Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, 

ozone, lead, particulate matter, and 

sulfur dioxide. A SIP is a set of air 

pollution regulations, control strategies, 

other means or techniques, and 

technical analyses developed by the 

state, to ensure that air quality in the 

state meets the NAAQS. It is required by 

section 110 and other provisions of the 

CAA. A SIP protects air quality 

primarily by addressing air pollution at 

its point of origin. SIPs can be extensive, 

containing state regulations or other 

enforceable documents, and supporting 

information such as city and county 

ordinances, monitoring networks, and 

modeling demonstrations. Each state 

must submit any SIP revision to EPA for 

approval and incorporation into the 

federally-enforceable SIP. 

The New Mexico SIP includes a 

variety of control strategies, including 

the regulations that outline general 

provisions applicable to Albuquerque/

Bernalillo County Air Quality Control 

Board (AQCB) regulations and state 

boards/conflict of interest requirements. 

B. State Boards 

The Act, section 128(a) entitled State 

Boards, requires each SIP to contain 

provisions which ensure that: (1) Any 

board or body which approves permits 

or enforcement orders under the Act 

shall have at least a majority of members 

who represent the public interest and do 

not derive any significant portion of 

their income from persons subject to 

permits or enforcement orders under the 

Act, and (2) any potential conflicts of 

interest by members of such board or 

body, or the head of an executive agency 

with similar powers, be adequately 

disclosed. 

A state may adopt any requirements 

respecting conflicts of interest for such 

boards or bodies or heads of executive 

agencies, or any other entities which are 

more stringent than the requirements of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

63432 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

1Also see Pages 39 through 43 of EPA guidance, 

dated September 13, 2013 entitled ‘‘Guidance on 

Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) 

and 110(a)(2),’’ which may be accessed in the 

docket for this rulemaking at http://

www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA–R06–OAR– 

2013–0614. 

2Emails from Ed Merta, City of Albuquerque, 

Environmental Health Department, dated August 

28, 2015 and September 10, 2015 may be accessed 

in the docket for this action. 

paragraphs (1) and (2), and the 

Administrator shall approve any such 

more stringent requirements submitted 

as part of an implementation plan.1

The New Mexico Air Quality Control 

Act (section 74–2–4) authorizes 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County to 

locally administer and enforce the State 

Air Quality Control Act by providing for 

a local air quality control program. 

Thus, State law views Albuquerque/

Bernalillo County and the remainder of 

the State of New Mexico as distinct air 

quality control entities. Therefore, each 

entity is required to submit its own SIP 

revision in order to completely satisfy 

the requirements of section 128(a) of the 

Clean Air Act for the entire State of New 

Mexico. 

The EPA approved the SIP revision 

for Board composition and conflict of 

interest disclosure requirements on June 

1, 1999 (see 64 FR 29235). Since that 

time the supporting city and county 

ordinances have been revised. 

II. Overview of the June 13, 2013 State 

Submittal 

The revisions we are approving 

address City of Albuquerque and 

Bernalillo County, Code of Ordinances 

governing Air Quality Control Board 

(AQCB) composition and conflict of 

interest provisions required to meet the 

requirements of section 128(a) of the 

CAA. These revisions are mostly 

administrative in nature and/or add 

clarifying language to the City of 

Albuquerque and Bernalillo County 

Ordinances already contained in the 

SIP. These ordinances and revisions do 

not apply to Indian lands over which 

the AQCB lacks jurisdiction. We have 

prepared a Technical Support 

Document (TSD) for this action which 

details our evaluation. Our TSD may be 

accessed in the docket for this action, at 

http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. 

EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0614. 

We are also approving a ministerial 

change to the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 52.1620(e). 

The entry titled ‘‘City of Albuquerque 

request for redesignation’’ was 

mistakenly placed in the first table of 40 

CFR 52.1620(e) under the heading ‘‘EPA 

Approved city of Albuquerque and 

Bernalillo County Ordinances for State 

Board Composition and Conflict of 

Interest Provisions’’ and belongs in the 

second table of 40 CFR 52.1620(e) under 

the heading ‘‘EPA-Approved 

Nonregulatory Provisions and QuasiRegulatory Measures in the New Mexico 

SIP.’’ 

On June 13, 2013, New Mexico 

submitted revisions to the Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County SIP. The submittal 

was adopted consistent with the public 

notice SIP requirements of CAA section 

110(l). The revisions modified various 

chapters to the City of Albuquerque and 

Bernalillo County ordinances for the Air 

Quality Control Board and the 

Metropolitan Environmental Health 

Advisory Board. The revisions include 

all the adopted changes to the 

ordinances since the last EPA SIP 

approval in June of 1999. Changes to the 

ordinances include adding clarifying 

text regarding conflict of interest, 

renumbering to account for changes to 

subsections and other ministerial 

changes that reflect the correct citations 

to currently effective versions of the 

ordinances in use today. Other minor 

amendments are added or deleted for 

further clarification. Please see Table 1 

below for the list of ordinances, and the 

TSD for further details: 

TABLE 1—CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE AND BERNALILLO COUNTY ORDINANCES FOR STATE BOARD COMPOSITION AND

CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROVISIONS

Exhibit Description 

Exhibit 2c ........................................ Metropolitan Environmental Health Advisory Board, City of Albuquerque, Chapter 9, Article 5, Part 6. 

Exhibit 3c ........................................ Metropolitan Environmental Health Advisory Board, Bernalillo County Code of Ordinances, Chapter 42, Article II, Sections 42–36 to 42–39. 

Exhibit 4c ........................................ Metropolitan Environmental Health Advisory Board, Bernalillo County Code of Ordinances, Chapter 42, Article II, Sections 42–36 through 42–40. 

Exhibit 5c ........................................ Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, City of Albuquerque, Chapter 9, Article 5, Part 1. 

Exhibit 6c ........................................ Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, Bernalillo County Code of Ordinances, Chapter 30, Article II. 

Exhibit 7c ........................................ Public Boards, City of Albuquerque Chapter 1, Article XII Sections 1–12–1 to 3. 

Exhibit 8c ........................................ Conflict of Interest, City of Albuquerque Chapter 2, Article III Sections 3–3–1 to 13. 

Exhibit 9c ........................................ Code of Ethics, City of Albuquerque Charter, Article XII, Section 4. 

Exhibit 10c ...................................... Code of Ethics, Bernalillo County Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2, Article III, Division 4—Code of Ethics, 

Sections 2–126 to 2–136. 

Exhibit 11c ...................................... City Code of Conduct, City of Albuquerque, Personnel Rules & Regulations. 

The Governor’s letter dated June 26, 

2013 accompanying the submittal 

indicated that only those portions or 

sections of the ordinances dealing with 

state boards or conflict of interest are 

being submitted for EPA review and 

action. Therefore, the following 

revisions, as shown in Table 1 above, 

are not being considered before EPA for 

review as they do not address board 

composition or conflict of interest 

provisions. The ordinances not being 

proposed include Exhibit 7c—Article 6: 

Public Boards, Commissions and 

Committees and Exhibit 11c—City Code 

of Conduct, City of Albuquerque, as 

these ordinances involve personnel 

rules and regulations, conditions of 

employment, the conduct and 

organizational structure of a board, 

commission or committee and do not 

specifically address board composition 

and conflict of interest pursuant to CAA 

section 128. 

Additionally, since the Metropolitan 

Environmental Health Advisory Board 

(MEHAB) has effectively ceased to 

function for over 25 years, as confirmed 

with the City of Albuquerque,2 the 

MEHAB ordinances are not legally 

required or practicably necessary for the 

continued operation of the AQCB or the 

City of Albuquerque Environmental 

Health Department. Therefore, Exhibits 

2c, 3c and 4c, dealing with the MEHAB 

(see Table 1 above), are not applicable 

to the AQCB and are not considered as 

a basis for this action. 

The remaining Exhibits 5c (only 

Section 9–5–1–3), 6c (only section 30– 

32), 8c, 9c, and 10c all involve state 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 63433 

boards or conflict of interest and are 

being considered part of this action. 

Our evaluation of the submittal finds 

that the submitted SIP revisions were 

adopted by Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County after reasonable notice, a public 

comment period, a corresponding 

public hearing, and that approval of the 

revisions would not interfere with any 

CAA requirement, are consistent with 

the requirements of section 128 of the 

CAA (see background section of this 

notice), and are approvable, as 

discussed below. 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Submittal 

Our primary consideration for 

determining the approvability of the 

New Mexico submittal is whether these 

proposed revisions comply with CAA 

section 110(l) and 128 of the CAA. 

Section 110(l) of the Act provides that 

a SIP revision must be adopted by a 

State after reasonable notice and public 

hearing. The submitted revisions 

address the City of Albuquerque and 

Bernalillo County, Code of Ordinances 

governing Air Quality Control Board 

(AQCB) composition and conflict of 

interest provisions that address the 

requirements of Section 128 of the CAA. 

Please see the TSD for our detailed 

evaluation. 

The submitted revisions update the 

currently the SIP approved versions, 

and includes revisions that are 

ministerial in nature and mostly involve 

renumbering and additions/deletions 

that add further clarity. 

Revisions to Ordinances for the Joint Air 

Quality Control Board, Conflict of 

Interest and Code of Ethics 

The AQCB is submitting revisions to 

update the SIP to incorporate the latest 

City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo 

County Ordinances and policies 

regarding board composition and 

conflict of interest as it applies to the 

Air Board. The previous SIP-approval 

dates back to 1999. The proposed 

revisions incorporate into the SIP with 

the most current versions of affected 

ordinances and policies concerning 

state board composition and conflict of 

interest. 

For Exhibit 5c, the ordinance that 

deals with the Joint Air Quality Control 

Board, the revisions in section 9–5–1–3 

highlight the requirements for state 

boards and conflict of interest 

provisions consistent with federal 

requirements found in CAA section 

128(a)(1). Section 9–5–1–3(B)(4)(a) of 

Exhibit 5c states that ‘‘at least a majority 

of the membership of the Board shall be 

individuals who represent the public 

interest and meet the requirements of 

the state and federal guidelines set forth 

in the New Mexico Air Quality Control 

Act, as amended, and the federal CAA, 

42 U.S.C.A. Section 7401, et seq., as 

amended.’’ Section 9–5–1–3(E) states 

‘‘any member of the Board who has a 

conflict of interest regarding a matter 

before the Board shall disqualify himself 

or herself from the discussion and shall 

abstain from the vote on such matter. A 

conflict of interest means any interest 

which may yield, directly or indirectly 

any monetary or other material benefit 

to the Board member or the member’s 

spouse or minor child.’’ These sections 

are wholly consistent with the 

requirements found in CAA section 

128(a)(1) and (2) as outlined in Section 

I(B) of this document titled ‘‘State 

Boards.’’ Further analysis and details of 

the revisions are included in the TSD 

for this rulemaking. 

Therefore, EPA finds that these 

revisions are consistent with federal 

requirements, and also are consistent 

with what is currently in the New 

Mexico SIP for Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County (see 40 CFR 52.1620, paragraph 

(e)—EPA Approved Nonregulatory 

Provisions). 

For Exhibit 6c, only Section 30–32 of 

the Exhibit—Joint Air Quality Control 

Board, is part of the State Boards 

submittal. The revisions in Exhibit 6c, 

specifically section 30–32—Joint Air 

Quality Control Board, establish the 

creation and authority of the Board, also 

include the provisions regarding 

conflict of interest (as discussed above 

for Exhibit 5c), and are consistent with 

federal requirements and what is 

currently in the New Mexico SIP for 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County. 

For Exhibit 8c, Article 3: Conflict of 

Interest Ordinance, the revisions to the 

SIP include renumbering and 

clarification of the purpose of 

definitions, meaning that for the 

purpose of the ordinance, the 

definitions contained in the ordinance 

shall apply unless the context clearly 

indicates or requires a different 

meaning. The Conflict of Interest 

Ordinance is already contained in the 

SIP, therefore, these revisions add 

clarity and are approvable by EPA. For 

example, the Conflict of Interest 

Ordinance (Exhibit 8c) outlines conflict 

of interest provisions for employees and 

former employees, and includes details 

on the prohibition on nepotism and 

restrictions on outside employment. The 

1985 version of this ordinance is 

currently SIP-approved (see 64 FR 

29235). 

For Exhibit 9c, Charter of the City of 

Albuquerque, Article XII: Code of 

Ethics, Section 4—Conflict of Interest, 

the ordinance clearly outlines conflict of 

interest provisions for officials, and 

includes details on the prohibition on 

gifts and private financial interest. The 

previous version of this ordinance 

(Article XII: Code of Ethics, adopted in 

1989) is currently SIP-approved. 

Therefore, only redlines and strikeouts 

to Section 4 of that ordinance are 

submitted as revisions (please see the 

TSD for this action). The addition of 

Section 4(b) to the ordinance outlines 

the prohibition on a member of the City 

Council from participating in any debate 

or vote on any matter which will likely 

result in any benefit to the member 

which benefit is greater that the benefit 

to the public in general. The other key 

revision adds specific criteria for 

disqualifications as presented in Section 

4(c). Both the addition of subsections 

4(b) and 4(c) enhance the ordinance by 

adding further clarity and stringency to 

the conflict of interest requirements. 

Section 128 of the CAA states that a 

State may adopt any requirements 

respecting conflicts of interest for such 

boards or bodies or heads of executive 

agencies, which are more stringent, and 

the Administrator shall approve any 

such requirement as submitted. Other 

revisions are ministerial in nature and 

mostly involve renumbering and 

additions/deletions that add clarity 

(please see the TSD for details). 

For Exhibit 10c, Bernalillo County, 

New Mexico, Code of Ordinances, 

Chapter 2—Administration, Article III— 

Officers and Employees, Division 4— 

Code of Ethics, the Bernalillo County 

Commission Ordinance, revises the SIPapproved version (previously Ordinance 

85–3) to further enhance the 

requirements pursuant to section 128 of 

the CAA. This Code of Ethics Ordinance 

establishes a code of ethics for all 

elected officials and employees and 

volunteers of county government, 

including members of boards, 

committees and commissions. For 

example, in Section 2–130—Standards 

of conduct, the ordinance clearly 

indicates that the standards of conduct 

apply to elected officials, employees 

and volunteers at all times. Section 128 

of the CAA does not require volunteers 

to be subject to the conflict of interest 

provisions, and adding them makes the 

ordinance more stringent. Additionally, 

the ordinance requires such candidates, 

elected officials, employees, and 

volunteers to disclose personal interests, 

financial or otherwise, in matters of the 

county. Other revisions include 

establishing a declaration of policy 

section, (Section 2–127), standards of 

conduct including conflict of interest 

(Section 2–130), disclosure of certain 

financial interests (Section 2–131), 

reporting violations of code of ethics 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

63434 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

(Section 2–132), and Ethics Board 

requirements. These revisions enhance 

the current SIP-approved version, which 

focused on elected officials and 

employees and did not specifically 

identify volunteers as well. EPA 

considers these revisions more stringent 

than the requirements pursuant to 

section 128 of the CAA, and are 

approvable. 

Additionally, CAA section 110(l) 

states that the EPA cannot approve a SIP 

revision if that revision would interfere 

with any applicable requirement 

regarding attainment, reasonable further 

progress (RFP) or any requirement 

established in the CAA. The revisions 

do not interfere with any applicable 

requirement, but enhance the current 

SIP-approved version as discussed 

above. Additionally, approvability of 

these actions are also based upon EPA’s 

guidance for state boards and conflict of 

interest provisions as discussed in the 

TSD for this rulemaking. 

EPA approves the revisions and 

updates for Exhibits 5c, 6c, 8c, 9c and 

10c pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

and has determined they are consistent 

with the requirements in section 128(a) 

of the CAA. 

IV. Final Action 

Pursuant to section 110 of the Act, 

EPA is approving through a direct final 

action, revisions to the New Mexico SIP 

that were submitted on June 12, 2013. 

We evaluated the state’s submittal and 

determined that they meet the 

applicable requirements of the CAA 

section 128(a). Also, in accordance with 

CAA section 110(l), the proposed 

revisions will not interfere with 

attainment of the NAAQS, reasonable 

further progress, or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because we view these as 

non-controversial amendments and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if relevant adverse 

comments are received. This rule will 

be effective on December 21, 2015 

without further notice unless we receive 

relevant adverse comments by 

November 19, 2015. If we receive 

relevant adverse comments, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final rulemaking in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

direct final rule will not take effect. We 

will address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. We will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so now. Please note that if we 

receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

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 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this 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 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 CAA; and 

• Does not provide 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). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where 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 as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

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. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule 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 21, 2015. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule 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)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: September 30, 2015. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 63435 

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 GG—New Mexico 

■ 2. In § 52.1620(e): 

■ a. The first table entitled ‘‘EPAApproved New Mexico Statutes in the 

Current New Mexico SIP’’ is amended 

by revising all entries in the table under 

the heading ‘‘EPA Approved City of 

Albuquerque and Bernalillo County 

Ordinances for State Board Composition 

and Conflict of Interest Provisions’’; and 

■ b. The second table entitled ‘‘EPAApproved Nonregulatory Provisions and 

Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New 

Mexico SIP’’ is amended by adding 

entry ‘‘City of Albuquerque request for 

redesignation’’ before the entry entitled 

‘‘Waiver of NOX control requirements.’’. 

The addition and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1620 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NEW MEXICO STATUTES IN THE CURRENT NEW MEXICO SIP 

State citation Title/subject 

State 

approval/ 

effective date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

EPA Approved City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County Ordinances for State Board Composition and Conflict of Interest Provisions 

City of Albuquerque, Chapter 

9, Article 5, Part 1: Air Quality Control Board, Sections 

9–5–1–1 to 9–5–1–15, and 

9–5–1–98.

Joint Air Quality Control 

Board.

06/12/2013 10/20/2015, [Insert Federal 

Register citation.

Section 9–5–1–3 Joint Air 

Quality Control Board only. 

Bernalillo County, Code of Ordinances, Chapter 30, Article II, Air Pollution; Section 

30–31 to 30–47.

Joint Air Quality Control 

Board.

06/12/2013 10/20/2015, [Insert Federal 

Register citation.

Section 30–32—Joint Air 

Quality Control Board only. 

City of Albuquerque, Chapter 

2, Article III, Sections 3–3–1 

to 3–3–13.

Conflict of Interest .................. 06/12/2013 10/20/2015, [Insert Federal 

Register citation.

City of Albuquerque Charter, 

Article XII, Section 4—Conflict of Interest.

Code of Ethics ....................... 06/12/2013 10/20/2015, [Insert Federal 

Register citation.

Bernalillo County Ordinance, 

Chapter 2, Administration, 

Article III, Officers and Employees, Division 4, Code of 

Ethics, Sections 2–126 to 

2–136.

Code of Ethics ....................... 06/12/2013 10/20/2015, [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

EPA-APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE NEW MEXICO SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area 

State 

submittal/ 

effective date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

City of Albuquerque request 

for redesignation.

Carbon monoxide maintenance plan and motor vehicle emission budgets.06/22/1998 5/24/2000, 65 FR 33460 

*******

[FR Doc. 2015–26306 Filed 10–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES