47300 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: July 18, 2016. 

Sue Swenson, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2016–17323 Filed 7–20–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0241; FRL–9948–08– 

Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, El Dorado County Air 

Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve a revision to the El 

Dorado County Air Quality Management 

District (EDCAQMD) portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). We are approving a local 

emergency episode plan that describes 

actions that EDCAQMD must take in the 

event of dangerously high ambient 

ozone concentrations levels under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 19, 2016 without further 

notice, unless the EPA receives adverse 

comments by August 22, 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–2016–0241 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

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: 

Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947 4115, Steckel.Andrew@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 plan did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this plan? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

plan? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the plan? 

B. Does the plan 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 plan did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the plan addressed by 

this action with the date that it was 

adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED PLAN

Local agency Plan title Adopted Submitted 

EDCAQMD ....................................... Ozone Emergency Episode Plan .............................................................. 01/12/16 04/06/16 

On April 21, 2016, the EPA 

determined that EDCAQMD’s Ozone 

Emergency Episode Plan submittal 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 this plan? 

There are no previous versions of this 

plan adopted by EDCAQMD or 

approved by EPA in the SIP. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

plan? 

The CAA requires the EPA to 

establish National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone and five 

other pollutants that are harmful to 

public health and the environment. 

Each state is required to submit to the 

EPA, within three years after the 

promulgation of a primary or secondary 

NAAQS, or any revision thereof, an 

infrastructure SIP revision that provides 

for the implementation, maintenance, 

and enforcement of such NAAQS. CAA 

section 110(a)(2) describes the contents 

required of such a plan that constitute 

the ‘‘infrastructure’’ of a state’s air 

quality management program. The 

EDCAQMD Ozone Emergency Episode 

Plan is intended to fulfill the CAA 

§ 110(a)(2)(G) infrastructure SIP 

requirement. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the plan? 

SIPs must be enforceable (see CAA 

section 110(a)(2)) and SIP revisions are 

restricted in how they can relax 

approved SIPs. This plan must also 

meet the infrastructure SIP requirements 

of CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) and EPA’s 

implementing regulations found in 40 

CFR part 51, subpart H (51.150 through 

51.153). 

Guidance that we used to evaluate 

section 110(a)(2) CAA requirements 

includes: ‘‘Guidance Document for 

Infrastructure State Implementation 

Plan Elements under Clean Air Act 

Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)’’, EPA 

(September 2013). 

B. Does the plan meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe this plan is consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations 

and infrastructure SIPs. The EPA’s 

technical support document (TSD) has 

more information about this plan and 

our evaluation. 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 47301 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

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

the Act, the EPA is fully approving the 

submitted plan because we believe it 

fulfills 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 plan. If we receive adverse 

comments by August 22, 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 19, 

2016. This will incorporate the plan into 

the federally enforceable SIP. 

Please note that if the EPA receives 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this plan and if 

that provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the plan, the EPA may 

adopt as final those provisions of the 

plan 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 

EDCAQMD plan 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 (AIR4), 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 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. 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, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: June 13, 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 add 

ing paragraph (c)(473) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(473) A new regulation for the 

following AQMD was submitted on 

April 6, 2016 by the Governor’s 

designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
47302 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

(A) El Dorado County Air Quality 

Management District. 

(1) ‘‘Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,’’ 

adopted January 12, 2016. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2016–17177 Filed 7–20–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0583; FRL–9949–24– 

Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, Mojave Desert Air Quality 

Management District, Riverside County 

Air Pollution Control District, and San 

Bernardino County Air Pollution 

Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve rescissions from the 

Mojave Desert Air Quality Management 

District (MDAQMD) portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP), as it applies to rules approved 

into the SIP for the Riverside County Air 

Pollution Control District (RCAPCD) 

and San Bernardino County Air 

Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD). 

These revisions concern superseded 

New Source Review (NSR) rules. We are 

approving the rescission of rules under 

the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 

(CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 19, 2016 without further 

notice, unless the EPA receives adverse 

comments by August 22, 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–2015–0583 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 

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: 

Laura Lawrence, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3407, lawrence.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit for 

rescission? 

B. What are the purposes of the submitted 

rule rescissions? 

III. Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the 

rescission of the rules? 

B. Do the rule rescissions meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

The California Air Resources Board 

(CARB) submitted Riverside County Air 

Pollution Control District (RCAPCD) 

and San Bernardino County Air 

Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) 

Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2, which 

address Clean Air Act (CAA) 

requirements for New Source Review 

(NSR) programs, to the EPA on June 6, 

1977 for inclusion in the California SIP. 

The EPA approved RCAPCD Rules 213, 

213.1, and 213.2 and SBCAPCD Rules 

213, 213.1, and 213.2 into the SIP on 

November 9, 1978 (43 FR 52237). The 

area under the jurisdiction of RCAPCD 

and SBCAPCD at the time these rules 

were submitted is now under the 

jurisdiction of the Mojave Desert Air 

Quality Management District 

(MDAQMD) and the South Coast Air 

Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD). More information about the 

jurisdictional history of this area is 

found in the EPA’s Technical Support 

Document (TSD) accompanying this 

rulemaking. 

CARB has since submitted and the 

EPA has approved into the California 

SIP a series of NSR rules for MDAQMD 

and SCAQMD referred to as Regulation 

XIII. These rules supersede, among 

other rules, Rules 213, 213.1, and 213.2. 

This rulemaking action clarifies the 

applicable NSR rules for the Mojave 

Desert air district by removing from the 

Mojave Desert portion of the California 

SIP RCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, and 

213.2 and SBCAPCD Rules 213, 213.1, 

and 213.2. 

RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 

213.3 and SBCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, 

and 213.3 also address NSR 

requirements. However, we can find no 

evidence that RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 

203.2, and 213.3 and SBCAPCD Rules 

203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 were ever 

submitted for SIP approval. 

Consequently, we are taking no action 

on the rescission of RCAPCD Rules 

203.1, 203.2, and 213.3 and SBCAPCD 

Rules 203.1, 203.2, and 213.3. 

II. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit for 

rescission? 

MDAQMD rescinded Rules 203.1, 

203.2, 213, 213.1, 213.2, and 213.3 on 

April 28, 2008, and CARB submitted the 

rescissions adopted by MDAQMD as a 

revision to the California SIP on October 

20, 2008. As noted above, these rules 

had originally been adopted by RCAPCD 

and SBCAPCD and approved by the 

EPA as part of the California SIP. More 

than a decade later, when MDAQMD 

was established, MDAQMD adopted the 

rules that had been adopted by the 

previous air pollution control district as 

part of that agency’s initial set of rules 

and regulations. MDAQMD’s submittal 

of the rescissions to CARB for submittal 

to the EPA make it clear that the 

rescissions relate to the corresponding 

SIP rules from which the corresponding 

MDAQMD rules derive. As such, 

CARB’s submittal of the rescission of 

MDAQMD Rules 203.1, 203.2, 213, 

213.1, 213.2, and 213.3 constitutes the 

rescission of the corresponding SIP 

rules, i.e., RCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, 

213, 213.1, 213.2, and 213.3 and 

SBCAPCD Rules 203.1, 203.2, 213, 

213.1, 213.2, and 213.3. Table 1 lists 

these rules, along with SIP approval 

dates (if any). 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES