### 63429 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH’’. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District, telephone (212) 514–4336, email joe.m.arca@uscg.mil.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The AK Railroad Bridge, across Arthur Kill, mile 11.6, between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 31 feet at MHW and 35 feet at MLW. The existing drawbridge operation regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.702.

The waterway supports both commercial and recreational navigation of various vessel sizes. The operator of the bridge, Conrail, requested a temporary deviation to facilitate scheduled maintenance, tie and miter rail replacement at the bridge. The bridge must remain in the closed position to perform this maintenance.

Under this temporary deviation the draw may remain in the closed position as follows:

On October 23, 2015 from 6 a.m. to 10:26 a.m. and from 12:26 p.m. to 4:11
p.m.

On October 24, 2015 from 7:00 a.m. to 11:22 a.m. and from 1:32 p.m. to 5:13
p.m.

On October 25, 2015 from 7:46 a.m. to 12:17 p.m. and from 2:17 p.m. to 6:09
p.m.

On October 30, 2015 from 5:51 a.m. to 9:58 a.m. and from 11:58 a.m. to 4:36
p.m.

On October 31, 2015 from 6:41 a.m. to 10:56 a.m. and from 12:56 p.m. to 5:28
p.m.

On November 1, 2015 from 6:30 a.m. to 10:54 a.m. and from 12:54 p.m. to 5:25 p.m.

On November 6, 2015, 5:17 a.m. to 9:28 a.m. and from 11:28 a.m. to 3:32
p.m.

On November 7, 2015, from 6:07 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and from 12:15 p.m. to 4:21 p.m.

On November 8, 2015 from 6:51 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. and from 1:00 p.m. to 5:06
p.m.

On November 13, 2015, from 3:49 a.m. to 7:40 a.m., from 9:40 a.m. to 2:28 p.m., and from 4:28 p.m. to 8:04 p.m.

On November 14, 2015, from 4:24 a.m. to 8:11 a.m. and from 10:11 a.m. to 3:07 p.m.

On November 15, 2015, from 4:59 a.m. to 8:50 a.m. and from 10:50 a.m. to 3:48 p.m. On November 20, 2015 from 3:24 a.m. to 8:07 a.m., from 10:07 a.m. to 1:42 p.m., and from 3:42 p.m. to 8:36 p.m.

On November 21, 2015 from 4:27 a.m. to 9:09 a.m. and from 11:09 a.m. to 2:49
p.m.

On November 22, 2015 from 5:29 a.m. to 10:06 a.m. and from 12:06 p.m. to 3:53 p.m.

On December 4, 2015 from 3:07 a.m. to 7:23 a.m., from 9:23 a.m. to 1:14 p.m., and from 3:14 p.m. to 7:54 p.m.

On December 5, 2015 from 3:54 a.m. to 8:20 a.m. and from 10:20 a.m. to 2:06
p.m.

On December 6, 2015 from 4:48 a.m. to 9:10 a.m. and from 11:10 a.m. to 3:00
p.m.

On December 11, 2015 from 2:45 a.m. to 6:44 a.m., from 8:44 a.m. to 1:26 p.m., and from 3:26 p.m. to 7:08 p.m.

On December 12, 2015 from 3:26 a.m. to 7:17 a.m. and from 9:17 a.m. to 2:07
p.m.

On December 13, 2015 from 4:06 a.m. to 7:54 a.m. and from 9:54 a.m. to 2:48
p.m.

Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed positions may do so at anytime. There are no alternate routes for vessel traffic. The bridge can be opened in an
emergency.

The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterway through our Local Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

Dated: October 7, 2015. C.J. Bisignano, Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015–26609 Filed 10–19–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R06–OAR–2014–0259; FRL–9935–68– Region 6]** 

**Clean Air Act Redesignation Substitute for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 1-**  **Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area; Texas** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). **ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a redesignation substitute demonstration provided by the State of Texas that the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 1-hour ozone nonattainment area (HGB area) has attained the revoked 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions, and that it will maintain that NAAQS for ten years from the date of the EPA’s approval of this demonstration.

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on November 19, 2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2014–0259. 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 form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Tracie Donaldson, (214) 665–6633, Donaldson.tracie@epa.gov

. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document wherever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the EPA. I. Background

The background for today’s action is discussed in detail in our August 18, 2015 proposal (80 FR 49970). In that notice, we proposed to approve the ‘‘Redesignation Substitute Report for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria One-Hour Standard Nonattainment Area’’ (redesignation substitute report) submitted by TCEQ to EPA on July 22, 2014, that demonstrated attainment with the revoked 1-hour ozone standard. We did not receive any comments regarding our proposal.

II. Final Action

Based on the Clean Air Act’s criteria for redesignation to attainment (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)) and the regulation for a redesignation substitute (40 CFR 51.1105(b)), EPA is finding that Texas has successfully demonstrated it has met the requirements for a redesignation substitute. In this final action we are


### 63430 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

1 Proposal, Redesignation Substitute for Houston 1 hour ozone Standard, (80 FR 49970), August 18, 2015 and normally we would include in our basis for the final action comments and Comment Response Summary, but we received to comments on the cited proposal. approving the redesignation substitute for the HGB area based on our evaluation that the demonstration provided by the State of Texas that shows that the HGB area has attained the revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions, and that it will maintain that NAAQS for ten years from the date of this final action. In addition, this final action is based on the proposal 1 and the accompanying Technical Support Document (TSD).

With this final action, Texas is no longer required to adopt any additional applicable 1-hour ozone NAAQS requirements for the area which have not already been approved into the SIP. Generally, final action would also allow the state to remove or revise the 1-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment NSR provisions in the SIP and, upon ashowing of consistency with the antibacksliding checks in CAA sections 110(1) and 193 (if applicable), shift 1- hour ozone NAAQS requirements which are contained in the active portion of the SIP to the contingency measures portion of the SIP. We note that because the HGB area was classified as severe nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS the severe classification NSR requirement would still apply (October 1, 2008, 73 FR 56983). III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), 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 approves a demonstration provided by the State of Texas and finds that the HGB area is no longer subject to the anti-backsliding obligations for additional measures for the revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS; and imposes no additional requirements. Accordingly, I certify 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 does not impose any additional enforceable duties, 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). This rule also does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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), because it merely approves a demonstration provided by the State of Texas and finds that the HGB area is no longer subject to the anti-backsliding obligations for additional measures for the revoked 1- hour ozone NAAQS; and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

The rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). Additionally, this rule does not involve establishment of technical standards, and 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.

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. EPA has determined that this rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. The rulemaking does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment because approving the demonstration provided by Texas and finding that the HGB area is no longer subject to the anti-backsliding obligations for additional measures for the revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS does not alter the emission reduction measures that are required to be implemented in the HGB area, which was classified as Severe nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. See 73 FR 56983, October 1, 2008, and 40 CFR 51.1105. Additionally, the rule is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).

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 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 21, 2015. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposed 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, Ozone.

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:

**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.


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

**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 RedesignationSubstitute 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