50362 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: July 15, 2016. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

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 V—Maryland 

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding the entries 

‘‘Serious Area Reasonable Further 

Progress (RFP) Plan and 2012 RFP 

Contingency Measures,’’ ‘‘Updates to 

the 2002 Base Year Inventory for VOC, 

NOX and CO,’’ and ‘‘2012 

Transportation Conformity Budgets’’ at 

the end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Name of non-regulatory 

SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

Serious Area Reasonable Further 

Progress (RFP) Plan and 2012 

RFP Contingency Measures.

Baltimore 1997 8-hour ozone serious nonattainment area.July 22, 2013 .... 8/1/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation].§ 52.1076(cc) 

Updates to the 2002 Base Year 

Inventory for VOC, NOX and 

CO.

Baltimore 1997 8-hour ozone serious nonattainment area.July 22, 2013 .... 8/1/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation].§ 52.1075(p) 

2012 Transportation Conformity 

Budgets.

Baltimore 1997 8-hour ozone serious nonattainment area.July 22, 2013 .... 8/1/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation].§ 52.1076(dd) 

■ 3. Section 52.1075 is amended by 

adding paragraph (p) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1075 Base year emissions inventory. 

* * * * * 

(p) EPA approves, as a revision to the 

Maryland State Implementation Plan, 

updates to the 2002 base year emissions 

inventories previously approved under 

paragraph (i) of this section for the 

Baltimore 1997 8-hour ozone serious 

nonattainment area (Area) submitted by 

the Secretary of the Maryland 

Department of the Environment on July 

22, 2013. This submittal consists of 

updated 2002 base year point, area, nonroad mobile, and on-road mobile source 

inventories in the Area for the following 

pollutants: Volatile organic compounds 

(VOC), carbon monoxide (CO) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX). 

■ 4. Section 52.1076 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (cc) and (dd) to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.1076 52.1076 Control strategy plans 

for attainment and rate-of-progress: Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(cc) EPA approves revisions to the 

Maryland State Implementation Plan 

consisting of the serious area reasonable 

further progress (RFP) plan for the 

Baltimore 1997 8-hour ozone serious 

nonattainment area, including 2011 and 

2012 RFP milestones, updates to the 

2008 RFP milestones previously 

approved by EPA under paragraph (q) of 

this section, and contingency measures 

for failure to meet 2012 RFP, submitted 

by the Secretary of the Maryland 

Department of the Environment on July 

22, 2013. 

(dd) EPA approves the following 2012 

RFP motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(MVEBs) for the Baltimore 1997 8-hour 

ozone serious nonattainment area, in 

tons per day (tpd) of volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides 

(NOX), submitted by the Secretary of the 

Maryland Department of the 

Environment on July 22, 2013: 

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE BALTIMORE AREA

Type of control strategy SIP Year VOC 

(tpd) 

NOX

(tpd) 

Effective date of adequacy determination or 

SIP approval 

Rate of Progress Plan .................................... 2012 40.2 93.5 March 8, 2016 (81 FR 8711), published February 22, 2016. 

[FR Doc. 2016–17781 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0119; FRL–9948–26– 

Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, Modoc County Air Pollution 

Control District, Permit Programs 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Modoc County Air Pollution Control 

District (MCAPCD) portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). These revisions concern 

MCAPCD’s administrative and 

procedural requirements to obtain 

preconstruction permits that regulate 

emission sources under the Clean Air 

Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 

Act). We are approving local rules under 

the CAA. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 30, 2016 without further 

notice, unless the EPA receives adverse 

comments by August 31, 2016. If we 

receive such comments, we will publish 

a timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register to notify the public that this 

direct final rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2016–0119 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

R9airpermits@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 50363 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: YaTing (Sheila) Tsai, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3328, Tsai.Ya-Ting@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 rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules under MCAPCD 

Regulation II, ‘‘Permit System’’ 

addressed by this action with the dates 

that they were adopted by the local air 

agency and submitted by the California 

Air Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Rule No. Rule title 

Adoption or 

amendment 

date 

Submittal date 

2.3 .................................................... Transfers ................................................................................................... 1/15/1989 12/31/1990 

2.5 .................................................... Expiration of Applications .......................................................................... 1/15/1989 12/31/1990 

2.7 .................................................... Conditional Approval ................................................................................. 1/15/1989 12/31/1990 

2.10 .................................................. Further Information .................................................................................... 1/15/1989 12/31/1990 

On February 28, 1991, the EPA 

determined that the submittal for the 

MCAPCD rules listed in Table 1 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 these 

rules? 

EPA approved the rules listed in 

Table 2 into the MCAPCD portion of the 

California SIP on the dates listed. When 

the rules listed in Table 1 are approved 

by EPA, those rules will take the place 

of the existing SIP approved rules listed 

in Table 2. 

TABLE 2—SIP APPROVED RULES

Rule No. Rule title SIP approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

citation 

2.3 .................................................... Transfer ..................................................................................................... 09/22/1972 37 FR 19812 

2.5 .................................................... Cancellation of Applications ...................................................................... 09/22/1972 37 FR 19812 

2.7 * .................................................. Provision of Sampling and Testing Facilities ............................................ 09/22/1972 37 FR 19812 

2.9 * .................................................. Conditional Approval ................................................................................. 09/22/1972 37 FR 19812 

* Note: SIP approved Rule 2.7—Provision of Sampling and Testing Facilities will be replaced by newly submitted Rule 2.10 Further Information. SIP approved Rule 2.9—Conditional Approval will be replaced by submitted Rule 2.7—Conditional Approval. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that will 

assure attainment and maintenance of 

the National Ambient Quality Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). These 

rules were developed as part of the local 

agency’s general programmatic 

requirement to implement the 

requirement commonly referred to as 

the minor or general New Source 

Review (NSR) program. The revisions 

contained in the submitted rules listed 

in Table 1 are mostly administrative in 

nature. Rule 2.3 prohibits the transfer of 

an Authority to Construct or Permit to 

Operate without written approval. Rule 

2.5 provides the timeline for an 

Authority to Construct or an application 

for a Permit to Operate to expire and/ 

or be extended. Rule 2.7 is renumbered 

from Rule 2.9 and provides additional 

enforceability by clarifying that 

equipment cannot be operated contrary 

to permit conditions specified in the 

permit. Rule 2.10 is a new rule that 

allows MCAPCD to require data, 

sampling, testing, and monitoring to 

determine a stationary source’s 

emissions. There are no substantive 

relaxations to these rules. 

The TSD, which is available in the 

docket for today’s rulemaking, has more 

information about these rules. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules? 

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). The submitted rules are revisions 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
50364 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

to existing SIP approved general NSR 

permit program requirements under 40 

CFR 51.160–51.164. The revisions are 

primarily administrative in nature 

(reformatting, providing additional 

clarity and enforceability). 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability and SIP 

relaxations. These changes are mostly 

administrative in nature and their 

approval will not interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress, or any other CAA application 

requirement. 

The TSD, which is available in the 

docket for today’s rulemaking, has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

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

the Act, the EPA is fully approving the 

submitted rules because we believe they 

fulfill all relevant requirements. We do 

not think anyone will object to this 

approval, so we are finalizing it without 

proposing it in advance. However, in 

the Proposed Rules section of this 

Federal Register, we are simultaneously 

proposing approval of the same 

submitted rules. If we receive adverse 

comments by August 31, 2016, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that the direct final approval will not 

take effect and we will address the 

comments in a subsequent final action 

based on the proposal. If we do not 

receive timely adverse comments, the 

direct final approval will be effective 

without further notice on September 30, 

2016. This action will incorporate these 

rules into the federally enforceable SIP. 

Please note that if the EPA receives 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this rule and if 

that provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, the EPA may 

adopt as final those provisions of the 

rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

III. 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 

MCAPCD rules described in the 

amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth 

below. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these documents 

available electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX (AIR–3), 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105–3901. 

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 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). 

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 September 30, 

2016. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the Proposed Rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

This action may not be challenged later 

in proceedings to enforce its 

requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 50365 

Dated: June 15, 2016. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations 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 F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c)(6)(xi)(D), and 

(c)(182)(i)(F)(5), (6), (7), and (8) to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(6) * * * 

(xi) * * * 

(D) Previously approved September 

22, 1972 in paragraph (c)(6) of this 

section and now deleted with 

replacement in paragraph 

(c)(182)(i)(F)(5), (6), (7), and (8), Rule 2.3 

‘‘Transfer,’’ Rule 2.5 ‘‘Cancellation of 

Application,’’ Rule 2.7 ‘‘Provision of 

Sampling and Testing Facilities,’’ and 

Rule 2.9 ‘‘Conditional Approval’’. 

* * * * * 

(182) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(F) * * * 

(5) Regulation II, ‘‘Permit System,’’ 

Rule 2.3 ‘‘Transfers’’ amended on 

January 15, 1989. 

(6) Regulation II, ‘‘Permit System,’’ 

Rule 2.5 ‘‘Expiration of Applications’’ 

amended on January 15, 1989. 

(7) Regulation II, ‘‘Permit System,’’ 

Rule 2.7 ‘‘Conditional Approval’’ 

amended on January 15, 1989. 

(8) Regulation II, ‘‘Permit System,’’ 

Rule 2.10 ‘‘Further Information’’ 

amended on January 15, 1989. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2016–18009 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 1816 and 1852 

RIN 2700–AE31 

NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation 

Supplement: Clarification of Award Fee 

Evaluations and Payments (NFS Case 

2016–N008) 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NASA is issuing a final rule 

amending the NASA Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(NFS) to clarify NASA’s award fee 

process by incorporating terms used in 

award fee contracting; guidance relative 

to final award fee evaluations; release of 

source selection information; and the 

calculation of the provisional award fee 

payment percentage in NASA end-item 

award fee contracts. 

DATES: Effective: August 31, 2016. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

William Roets, telephone 202–358– 

4483. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

NASA published a proposed rule in 

the Federal Register at 81 FR 23667 on 

April 22, 2016, to revise NFS 1816.4 and 

1852.216–77 to clarify NASA’s award 

fee evaluation and payment processes. 

One public comment was received in 

response to the proposed rule. 

II. Discussion and Analysis 

NASA reviewed the public comment 

in the development of the final rule. A 

discussion of the comment and the 

changes made to the rule as a result of 

this comment is provided, as follows: 

A. Changes 

No change was made in the final rule 

in response to the public comment 

received. 

B. Analysis of Public Comment 

Comment: Respondent stated that 

they do not support this rule. 

Response: The respondent did not 

identify any specific areas of concern. 

Accordingly, this rule provides needed 

clarification to NASA’s award fee 

processes to enhance the efficient 

administration of award fee incentives. 

III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 

13563 direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. This is not a significant 

regulatory action and, therefore, was not 

subject to review under section 6(b) of 

E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review, dated September 30, 1993. This 

rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 

804. 

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

A final regulatory flexibility analysis 

has been prepared consistent with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, 

et seq., and is summarized as follows: 

NASA is amending the NFS to clarify 

award fee process by incorporating 

terms used in award fee contracting; 

guidance relative to final award fee 

evaluations; release of source selection 

information; and the calculation of the 

provisional award fee payment 

percentage in NASA end-item award fee 

contracts. 

No changes were made to the 

proposed rule in developing the final 

rule. No comments from small entities 

were submitted in reference to the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act request in the 

proposed rule. Therefore, the proposed 

rule has been adopted as final. 

NASA does not expect this final rule 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., 

because the guidance largely clarifies 

aspects relative to the award fee 

evaluation and payment process 

resulting in a more consistent use and 

administration of award fees within 

NASA providing all entities both large 

and small a positive benefit. An analysis 

of data in the Federal Procurement Data 

System (FPDS) revealed that award fee 

contracts are primarily awarded to large 

businesses with large dollar contracts. 

An analysis of FPDS data over the past 

three years (FY2013 through FY2015) 

showed an average of 157 award fee 

contracts were awarded at NASA per 

year, of which 33 (approximately 20%) 

were awarded to small businesses. 

Thus, the application of the award fee 

revisions contained in this rule do not 

apply to a substantial number of small 

entities. 

The rule imposes no reporting, 

recordkeeping, or other information 

collection requirements. There are no 

significant alternatives that could 

further minimize the already minimal 

impact on businesses, small or large. 

V. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The rule does not contain any 

information collection requirements that 

require the approval of the Office of 

Management and Budget under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35). 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES