### 71988 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

10 U.S. State Department, 2016 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, available at http://www.state.gov/j/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2016/vol2/ 253387.htm.

11 See Section 706(1) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003 (Pub. L. 107– 228); 2016 Presidential Determination for Major Drug Producing and Transit Countries, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/12/presidential-determination-major-drugtransit-or-major-illicit-drug. 12 69 FR at 19094. CFT regime, FinCEN remains concerned that Burma has not yet implemented its new reforms and has not displayed adequate effectiveness in mitigating the risks and threats of money laundering and terrorist financing. FinCEN also notes that a significant portion of financial activity in Burma relies upon informal money transfer systems, which remain largely unregulated and unsupervised.

FinCEN is also concerned that Burma has not sufficiently addressed the corruption issues identified in the 2003 finding. Burma’s ranking on Transparency International’s International Corruption Perceptions Index remains high. The U.S. State Department’s 2016 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report on Burma notes that ‘‘corruption is endemic in both business and government. . . The rule of law remains weak, and Burma continues to face a significant risk of narcotics proceeds being laundered through commercial ventures.’’ 10

The United States also continues to recognize Burma as a haven for international drug trafficking. In September 2016, under the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, the President determined Burma to be a major illicit drug producing country or major drug-transit country. 11 Further, Burma’s cooperation with U.S. law enforcement, while improved since 2003, nonetheless remains nascent and largely untested. Considerations for Exceptive Relief

As noted in the final rule, the Section 311 action was designed to encourage Burma to make necessary changes to its AML/CFT regime in order to address FinCEN’s concerns. Burma has begun to address those concerns, but significant work remains. FinCEN welcomes Burma’s recent commitment to work with FinCEN and other components of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, as well as with the U.S. government more broadly, in advancing its AML/CFT efforts. FinCEN has considered Burma’s progress, its remaining deficiencies, and its commitment to address those deficiencies in deciding to issue this exceptive relief. This exceptive relief also takes into account the effect of FinCEN’s action on U.S. national security and foreign policy, as did the final rule. 12 FinCEN’s final rule contained an exemption at 31 CFR 1010.651(b)(3) that allowed U.S. financial institutions to maintain correspondent accounts for Burmese banks if such activity was licensed under authorities administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). Since 2012, OFAC has, via general licenses, authorized a broad range of financial activity with respect to Burma that would otherwise have been prohibited under the Section 311 rule. On October 7, 2016, the President terminated the national emergency with respect to Burma and revoked all Burma sanctions Executive orders, lifting the economic and financial sanctions on Burma administered by OFAC. As a result of the termination of the Burma sanctions program, the OFAC general licenses referenced above are no longer in effect. Therefore, the exemption incorporated into FinCEN’s final rule at 31 CFR 1010.651(b)(3), which effectively permitted U.S. correspondent account activity with Burmese banks, no longer has any operational effect. FinCEN has taken this into consideration in deciding to issue this exceptive relief.

Dated: October 13, 2016. Jamal El Hindi, Acting Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. 2016–25249 Filed 10–18–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4810–02–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0311; FRL–9954–14– Region 8]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of**  **Utah; Revisions to the Utah Division of Administrative Rules, R307–300**  **Series; Area Source Rules for Attainment of Fine Particulate Matter**  **Standards**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval and finalizing the conditional approval of portions of the fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) State Implementation Plan (SIP) and other general rule revisions submitted by the State of Utah. The revisions affect the Utah Division of Administrative Rules (DAR), R307–300 Series; Requirements for Specific Locations. The revisions had submission dates of May 9, 2013, May 20, 2014, September 8, 2015, and March 8, 2016. The March 8, 2016 submittal contains rule revisions to address our February 25, 2016 conditional approval of several Utah DAR R307–300 Series rules submitted on February 2, 2012, May 9, 2013, and May 20, 2014. These area source rules control emissions of direct PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursors, which are sulfur dioxides (SO 2), nitrogen oxides (NO X) and volatile organic compounds (VOC). Additionally, the EPA is finalizing to approve the State’s reasonably available control measure (RACM) determinations for the rule revisions that pertain to the PM 2.5 SIP. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on November 18, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0311. 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,
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 http:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the **FOR FURTHER**
**INFORMATION CONTACT** section for additional availability information.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 312–6602, ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the EPA strengthened the level of the 24-hour PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), lowering the primary and secondary standards from 65 micrograms per cubic meter ( mg/m 3 ), the 1997 standard, to 35 mg/m 3

. On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), the EPA designated three nonattainment areas in Utah for the 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS of 35 mg/m 3 . These are the Salt Lake City, Utah; Provo, Utah; and


### 71989 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

1 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). Logan, Utah-Idaho nonattainment areas. The State of Utah has made a number of SIP submittals intended to address the requirements under part D of title I of the CAA for these PM 2.5 nonattainment areas. Among those requirements are those in sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) regarding RACM and reasonably available control technology (RACT).

On August 18, 2016 (81 FR 55156), the EPA proposed to approve and conditionally approve a number of RACM components in the PM 2.5 Moderate area SIP submitted by the State. Our proposed notice provides details on the EPA’s interpretation of the RACM requirements under part D and our evaluation of the State’s submittals. The submittals dated May 9, 2013, May 20, 2014, September 8, 2015, and March 8, 2016, contained various revisions to the Utah DAR, Title R307— Environmental Quality, set of rules, most of which are applicable to the Utah SIP for PM 2.5 nonattainment areas. The rules we are addressing in this final rule were provided by Utah in the four different submissions listed above, and these rules are R307–101–2, General Requirements: Definitions; R307–302, Solid Fuel Burning Devices in Box Elder, Cache, Davis, Salt Lake, Tooele, Utah, and Weber Counties; R307–312, Aggregate Processing Operations for PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas; and R307– 328, Gasoline Transfer and Storage.
II. Response to Comments

The EPA did not receive any comments on the proposed action.

III. Final Action

For the reasons stated in our proposed notice, the EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to Administrative Rule R307– 101–2, along with revisions in R307– 300 Series; Requirements for Specific Locations (Within Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas), R307–312 and R307–328 for incorporation into the Utah SIP as submitted by the State of Utah on March 8, 2016. This final rule completes the February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9343) conditional approval for R307– 101–2, R307–312, and R307–328 that had submission dates of February 2, 2012, May 9, 2013, and May 20, 2014. Additionally, we are finalizing approval of Utah’s determination that R307–312 constitutes RACM for the Utah PM 2.5 SIP that was conditionally approved on February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9343); however, we are not acting at this time to determine that Utah’s PM 2.5 attainment plan has met all requirements regarding RACM under subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the Act. We intend to act separately on the remainder of Utah’s PM 2.5 attainment plan.

The EPA is finalizing the conditional approval of revisions for R307–302 found in the May 9, 2013, May 20, 2014, and September 8, 2015 submittals. Additionally, the EPA is finalizing the conditional approval of Utah’s determination that R307–302 constitutes RACM for the Utah PM 2.5 SIP for solid fuel burning devices. As stated earlier, we are not determining that Utah’s PM 2.5 attainment plan has met all requirements regarding RACM under subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the Act. Under section 110(k)(4) of the Act, the EPA may approve a SIP revision based on a commitment by the state to adopt specific enforceable measures by a date certain, but not later than one year after the date of approval of the plan revision. On May 19, 2016, Utah submitted a commitment letter to adopt and submit specific revisions within one year of our final action on these submittals; specifically to add continuous controls that extend to startup, shutdown, and malfunction, by establishing a prohibition on fuel types that can’t be burned in a solid fuel burning device at any time. Since we are finalizing our conditional approval, Utah must adopt and submit the specific revisions it has committed to within one year of our finalization. If Utah does not submit these revisions within one year, or if we find Utah’s revisions to be incomplete, or we disapprove Utah’s revisions, this conditional approval will convert to a disapproval. If any of these convert to a disapproval, that will constitute a disapproval of a required plan element under part D of title I of the Act, which starts an 18-month clock for sanctions, see CAA section 179(a)(2), and the two-year clock for a federal implementation plan (FIP) to address the disapproved plan element, see CAA section 110(c)(1)(B). 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 Utah Division of Administrative Rules described in the amendments set forth to 40 CFR part 52 below. Therefore, these materials have been approved by the EPA for inclusion in the state implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by the EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of the EPA’s approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation. 1 The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** section of this preamble for more information). V. 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 action merely approves of state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this final 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


### 71990 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

• 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).

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).

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 Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 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. 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, Intergovernmental relations, Incorporation by reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organization compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: September 26, 2016. Debra H. Thomas, Regional Administrator, Region 8.

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 TT—Utah**

■ 2. Section 52.2320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended as follows:

■ a. Under ‘‘R307–101. General Requirements’’ by revising the entry for ‘‘R307–101–2’’;

■ b. Under ‘‘R307–302. Davis, Salt Lake, and Utah Counties: Residential Fireplaces and Stoves’’ by revising the entries ‘‘R307–302–1’’, ‘‘R307–302–2’’, ‘‘R307–302–3’’, ‘‘R307–302–4’’;

■ c. Under ‘‘R307–302. Davis, Salt Lake, and Utah Counties: Residential Fireplaces and Stoves’’ by adding the entries ‘‘R307–302–05’’, ‘‘R307–302– 06’’;

■ d. Under ‘‘R307–312. Aggregate Processing Operations for PM 2.5 ; Nonattainment Areas’’ by revising the entry for ‘‘R307–312’’;

■ e. Under ‘‘R307–312. Aggregate Processing Operations for PM 2.5 ; Nonattainment Areas’’ by removing the entry for ‘‘R307–312–5(2)(a)’’;

■ f. Under ‘‘R307–328. Ozone Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas and Utah and Weber Counties: Gasoline Transfer and Storage’’ by revising the entry for ‘‘R307–328’’; and

■ g. Under ‘‘R307–328. Ozone Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas and Utah and Weber Counties: Gasoline Transfer and Storage’’ by removing the entry for ‘‘307–328–4(6)’’.

The revisions and additions read as follows:

**§ 52.2320 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(c) * * *

Rule No. Rule title State effective

date Final rule citation, date Comments

*******

**R307–101. General Requirements**

******* R307–101–2 ...... Definitions ..................................... 3/3/2016 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016.

* * * * * * *

**R307–302. Davis, Salt Lake, and Utah Counties: Residential Fireplaces and Stoves**

R307–302–01 .... Definitions ..................................... 2/4/2015 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016. Conditionally approved through 10/19/2017. R307–302–02 .... No-Burn Periods for PM 10 ............. 2/4/2015 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016. Conditionally approved through 10/19/2017.R307–302–03 .... No-Burn Periods for Carbon Monoxide. 3/6/2014 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016. Conditionally approved through 10/19/2017. R307–302–04 .... Violations ....................................... 3/6/2014 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016. Conditionally approved through 10/19/2017. R307–302–05 .... Opacity and other Controls for Heating Appliances. 3/6/2014 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016. Conditionally approved through 10/19/2017.


### 71991 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

Rule No. Rule title State effective

date Final rule citation, date Comments

R307–302–06 .... Prohibition ..................................... 1/1/2013 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016. Conditionally approved through 10/19/2017.

*******

**R307–312. Aggregate Processing Operations for PM** 2.5 **; Nonattainment Areas**

R307–312 .......... Aggregate Processing Operations for PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas. 2/4/2016 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016.

* * * * * * *

**R307–328. Ozone Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas and Utah and Weber Counties: Gasoline Transfer and Storage**

R307–328 .......... Ozone Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas and Utah and Weber Counties: Gasoline Transfer and Storage. 2/4/2016 [Insert **Federal Register** citation], 10/19/2016.

* * * * * * *

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2016–25148 Filed 10–18–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0107; FRL–9954–13- Region 8]** 

**Approval and Disapproval and Promulgation of Air Quality**  **Implementation Plans; Interstate Transport for Utah** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action on portions of six submissions from the State of Utah that are intended to demonstrate that the State Implementation Plan (SIP) meets certain interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA). These submissions address the 2006 and 2012 fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2008 lead (Pb) NAAQS, 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) NAAQS and 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) NAAQS. The interstate transport requirements under the CAA consist of four elements: Significant contribution to nonattainment (prong 1) and interference with maintenance (prong 2) of the NAAQS in other states; and interference with measures required to be included in the plan for other states to prevent significant deterioration of air quality (prong 3) or to protect visibility (prong 4). Specifically, the EPA is approving interstate transport prongs 1, 2 and 4 for the 2008 Pb NAAQS, approving prong 4 for the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, disapproving prong 4 for the 2006 PM 2.5 , 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 and 2012 PM 2.5 NAAQS, and disapproving prong 2 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on November 18, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification Number EPA–R08–OAR– 2016–0107. All documents in the docket are listed on the http:// www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. The EPA requests that 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, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Adam Clark, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202– 1129, (303) 312–7104, clark.adam@
epa.gov. I. Background

On May 10, 2016, the EPA proposed action on two submittals from Utah for the interstate transport requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 Pb and 2008 ozone NAAQS. 81 FR 28807. An explanation of the CAA requirements, a detailed analysis of the state’s submittals, and the EPA’s rationale for approval of a portion of the 2008 Pb submittal and disapproval of a portion of the 2008 ozone submittal were all provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking, and will not be restated here. The public comment period for this proposed rule ended on June 9, 2016. The EPA received four comments on the proposal, which will be addressed in the ‘‘Response to Comments’’ section, below.

In the May 10, 2016 proposed action, the EPA proposed to disapprove the Utah SIP for prongs 1 and 2 of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. In that document, the EPA cited to air quality modeling conducted to support the promulgation of an update to the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule to address interstate transport with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (CSAPR Update). The air quality modeling (1) identified locations in the U.S. where the EPA anticipates nonattainment or maintenance issues in 2017 for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (these are identified as nonattainment and maintenance receptors), and (2) quantified the projected contributions from emissions from upwind states to downwind ozone concentrations at the nonattainment and maintenance receptors in 2017. The document also