Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 108 / Monday, June 6, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 36179 

(e) * * * 

STATE OF OREGON AIR QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM

SIP citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanations 

*******

4.62, 12/12/ 

2012 

4.62, 6/6/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation].4.62, Klamath 

Falls PM2.5

Attainment 

Plan 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2016–13031 Filed 6–3–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0793; FRL–9947–27– 

Region 9] 

Partial Approval and Partial 

Disapproval of Air Quality State 

Implementation Plans; Arizona; 

Infrastructure Requirements To 

Address Interstate Transport for the 

2008 Ozone NAAQS; Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; correcting 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects an 

omission in the final rule document 

published on May 19, 2016, announcing 

the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA’s) approval in part and 

disapproval in part of State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality to address the 

interstate transport requirements of 

Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

with respect to the 2008 ozone national 

ambient air quality standard. The 

correction of this omission does not 

change the EPA’s final action to approve 

in part and disapprove in part these SIP 

revisions. 

DATES: This correcting amendment is 

effective on June 20, 2016. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Kelly, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, (415) 972–3856, 

kelly.thomasp@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 

22, 2016 (81 FR 15200), the EPA 

proposed to approve in part and to 

disapprove in part SIP revisions 

submitted by the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) on 

December 27, 2012, and supplemented 

on December 3, 2015, to address the 

interstate transport requirements of 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 2008 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS). More specifically, 

in the March 22, 2016 proposed rule, 

the EPA proposed to approve Arizona’s 

SIP as meeting the interstate transport 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prongs 1 and 2 and to 

disapprove Arizona’s SIP with respect 

to the interstate transport requirements 

of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) prong 

4. Id., at 15204. No comments were 

submitted on the EPA’s March 22, 2016 

proposed action. On May 19, 2016 (81 

FR 31513), the EPA published a final 

rulemaking action announcing its 

approval in part and disapproval in part 

of the relevant SIP revisions as proposed 

on March 22, 2016. However, in its May 

19, 2016 final rule, the EPA 

inadvertently omitted the regulatory text 

that codifies the final action taken 

therein. This document corrects that 

oversight. 

The EPA has determined that this 

action falls under the ‘‘good cause’’ 

exemption in section 553(b)(B) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 

which, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’ 

authorizes agencies to dispense with 

public participation where public notice 

and comment procedures are 

impracticable, unnecessary or contrary 

to the public interest. Public notice and 

comment for this action are unnecessary 

because the action codified herein was 

already subject to a 30-day comment 

period beginning with publication of the 

related proposed rule on March 22, 

2016, and as noted above, no comments 

were submitted. Thus, no purpose 

would be served by additional public 

notice and comment. 

The EPA also finds that there is good 

cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for 

the regulatory text added herein to 

become effective on the same date as the 

final rulemaking for which the 

regulatory text was inadvertently 

omitted. Section 553(d)(3) of the APA 

allows an effective date less than 30 

days after publication ‘‘as otherwise 

provided by the agency for good cause 

found and published with the rule.’’ 5 

U.S.C. 553(d)(3). The purpose of the 30- 

day waiting period prescribed in APA 

section 553(d)(3) is to give affected 

parties a reasonable time to adjust their 

behavior and prepare before the final 

rule takes effect. This rule, however, 

does not create any new regulatory 

requirements such that affected parties 

would need time to prepare before the 

rule takes effect. Rather, this rule merely 

adds regulatory text codifying the 

partial approval and partial disapproval 

action that the EPA published on May 

19, 2016, which is 30 days from the date 

on which this rule will become 

effective. The May 19, 2016 final rule 

thus provided sufficient notice and time 

for affected parties to take appropriate 

action to the extent any action is 

necessary to comply with the rule. For 

these reasons, the EPA finds good cause 

under APA section 553(d)(3) for the 

regulatory text codified herein and 

associated with the May 19, 2016 final 

rule to become effective on same date as 

the May 19, 2016 final rule becomes 

effective (i.e., June 20, 2019). 

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely adds 

regulatory text inadvertently omitted 

from a previous final rule and imposes 

no additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES

36180 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 108 / Monday, June 6, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

that this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

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

et seq.). Because this rule merely adds 

regulatory text inadvertently omitted 

from a previous final rule, and does not 

impose any additional enforceable duty 

beyond that required by state law, it 

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). 

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 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. 

This rule also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

states, on the relationship between the 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This rule merely 

corrects an inadvertent omission of 

regulatory text for a previously 

published final rule, and does not alter 

the relationship or the distribution of 

power and responsibilities established 

in the Clean Air Act (CAA). This rule 

also is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 ‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not economically 

significant. In addition, this rule does 

not involve technical standards, thus 

the requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. This rule also 

does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

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. Section 808 allows 

the issuing agency to make a rule 

effective sooner than otherwise 

provided by the CRA if the agency 

makes a good cause finding that notice 

and public procedure is impracticable, 

unnecessary or contrary to the public 

interest. This determination must be 

supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 

808(2). As stated previously, the EPA 

has made such a good cause finding, 

including the reasons therefore, and 

established an effective date of June 20, 

2016. The 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 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 August 5, 2016. 

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, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 

and Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: May 24, 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 D—Arizona 

■ 2. Section 52.120 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(174) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(174) The following plan was 

submitted on December 3, 2015 by the 

Governor’s designee. 

(i) [Reserved] 

(ii) Additional materials. 

(A) Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality. 

(1) SIP Revision: Clean Air Act 

Section 110(a)(2)(D), 2008 Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(December 3, 2015). 

■ 3. Section 52.123 is amended by 

revising paragraph (o) to read as follows: 

§ 52.123 Approval status. 

* * * * * 

(o) 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS: The 

SIPs submitted on October 14, 2011, 

December 27, 2012, and December 3, 

2015 are fully or partially disapproved 

for Clean Air Act (CAA) elements 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (J) and (K) 

for all portions of the Arizona SIP. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2016–13160 Filed 6–3–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

UTAH RECLAMATION MITIGATION 

AND CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

43 CFR Part 10000 

Place of Business Location Change 

AGENCY: Utah Reclamation Mitigation 

and Conservation Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Utah Reclamation 

Mitigation and Conservation 

Commission (Commission) is updating 

its regulations to reflect a change of 

agency location. The Commission has 

moved from 111 East Broadway, Suite 

310 to 230 South 500 East, Suite 230 in 

Salt Lake City, Utah. 

DATES: This rule is effective June 6, 

2016. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Diane Simmons at 801–524–3146, or 

email to dsimmons@usbr.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Utah Reclamation Mitigation and 

Conservation Commission is an 

independent Federal agency established 

by the Central Utah Project Completion 

Act of 1992. The Act set terms and 

conditions for completing the Central 

Utah Project, which diverts stores and 

delivers large quantities of water from 

numerous Utah rivers to meet the needs 

of central Utah’s citizens. The 

Commission is responsible for planning, 

funding, and implementing projects that 

benefit fish, wildlife, and related 

recreation resources in order to offset 

impacts caused by the Central Utah 

Project, and other Federal water 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES