53308 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

(i) [Reserved] 

(ii) Additional Material. 

(A) California Air Resources Board. 

(1) ‘‘Report on Reductions Achieved 

from Incentive-based Emission 

Reduction Measures in the San Joaquin 

Valley,’’ adopted on October 24, 2014, 

including appendices F–H. 

[FR Doc. 2016–18903 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0464; FRL–9950–49– 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Louisiana; Interstate Transport of Air 

Pollution for the 2008 Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is disapproving the 

portion of a Louisiana State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal 

pertaining to interstate transport of air 

pollution which will significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2008 ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) in other states. Disapproval 

will establish a 2-year deadline, under 

Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 110(c), for 

the EPA to promulgate a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) for Louisiana 

to address the CAA interstate transport 

requirements pertaining to significant 

contribution to nonattainment and 

interference with maintenance of the 

2008 ozone NAAQS in other states, 

unless the EPA approves a SIP that 

meets these requirements. Disapproval 

does not start a mandatory sanctions 

clock for Louisiana. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 12, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0464. 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., Confidential Business Information 

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. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202– 

2733. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sherry Fuerst 214–665–6454, 

fuerst.sherry@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA. 

I. Background 

This rulemaking addresses an 

infrastructure SIP submittal from the 

State of Louisiana addressing, among 

other things, the requirements of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), also known as 

the good neighbor provision, with 

respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The 

background for this action is discussed 

in detail in our June 7, 2016 proposal 

(81 FR 36496). In that action we 

proposed to disapprove the portion of 

the June 4, 2013 Louisiana SIP submittal 

pertaining to CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

which requires that the State prohibit 

the interstate transport of air pollution 

which will significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS 

in other states. 

In proposing to disapprove the State’s 

SIP submittal as to the good neighbor 

provision, we noted two specific 

deficiencies in the Louisiana 

submission. First, Louisiana cited the 

State’s approved Clean Air Interstate 

Rule (CAIR) SIP as support for its 

conclusion that the State satisfied its 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligation with 

respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

However, as explained in our proposal, 

CAIR was invalidated by the D.C. 

Circuit in North Carolina v. EPA, 531 

F.3d 896 (2008). Even if Louisiana could 

rely on its CAIR SIP the modeling and 

rulemaking conducted for both CAIR, or 

its successor, the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR), 76 FR 48208 

(August 8, 2011) addressed the 1997 

ozone NAAQS, not the more stringent 

2008 ozone NAAQS at issue in this 

action. Because the Louisiana submittal 

addressed by this action concerns the 

State’s interstate transport obligations 

for a different and more stringent 

standard (the 2008 ozone NAAQS), we 

stated it is not sufficient to merely cite 

to older EPA or state implemented 

programs as evidence of compliance 

with the current 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

Second, the State’s submittal lacked any 

technical analysis evaluating or 

demonstrating whether emissions in 

Louisiana impacts air quality in another 

state. As such, we proposed that the 

submittal did not provide us with a 

basis to agree with the State’s 

conclusion that the State already has 

adequate provisions in the SIP to 

address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

requirements for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. We did not receive any 

comments regarding our proposal. 

II. Final Action 

EPA is disapproving a portion of a 

June 4, 2013 SIP submittal from 

Louisiana pertaining to interstate 

transport of air pollution which will 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS 

in other states. Disapproval will 

establish a 2-year deadline, under the 

CAA Section 110(c), for the EPA to 

promulgate a FIP for Louisiana to 

address the CAA interstate transport 

requirements pertaining to significant 

contribution to nonattainment and 

interference with maintenance of the 

2008 ozone NAAQS in other states, 

unless the EPA approves a SIP that 

meets these requirements. Disapproval 

does not start a mandatory sanctions 

clock for Louisiana pursuant to CAA 

section 179 because this action does not 

pertain to a part D plan for 

nonattainment areas required under 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) or a SIP call 

pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This final action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ because it is not 

categorized as ‘‘significant’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 

and therefore was not submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget for 

review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This final action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA because it does not contain any 

information collection activities. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action merely 

disapprove a SIP submission as not 

meeting the CAA. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The action imposes no 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 53309 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will 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. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. This action does not apply 

on any Indian reservation land, any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction, or non-reservation areas of 

Indian country. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it merely disapproves a SIP 

submission as not meeting the CAA. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

EPA believes the human health or 

environmental risk addressed by this 

action will not have potential 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority, low-income or indigenous 

populations. This action merely 

disapproves a SIP submission as not 

meeting the CAA. 

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 CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by October 11, 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, Incorporation by 

reference, and Ozone. 

Dated: July 29, 2016. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

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 T—Louisiana 

■ 2. Section 52.996 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.996 Disapprovals. 

(a) The portion of the SIP submitted 

on June 4, 2013 addressing Clean Air 

Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS is disapproved. 

(b) [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2016–19148 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0704; FRL–9950–54– 

Region 5] 

Wisconsin; Approval/Disapproval of 

Interstate Transport Requirements for 

the 2008 Ozone NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is partially approving and 

partially disapproving elements of State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submission 

from Wisconsin regarding the 

infrastructure requirements of section 

110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 

2008 ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). The 

infrastructure requirements are designed 

to ensure that the structural components 

of each state’s air quality management 

program are adequate to meet the state’s 

responsibilities under the CAA. This 

action pertains specifically to 

infrastructure requirements concerning 

interstate transport provisions for which 

Wisconsin made a SIP submission that, 

among other things, certified that the 

existing SIP was sufficient to meet the 

interstate transport requirements for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 12, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0704. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(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 either through 

www.regulations.gov or please contact 

the person identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section for 

additional availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–9401, 

arra.sarah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES