16792 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED IDAHO REGULATIONS AND STATUTES—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanations 

*******

620 ..................... Registration Fee ......................................... 7/1/11, 4/2/08 ... 3/19/13 

[Insert page number where the document 

begins] 

* * * * * * * 

622 ..................... General Provisions ..................................... 7/1/11, 4/2/08 ... 3/19/13 

[Insert page number where the document 

begins] 

623 ..................... Public Notification ....................................... 7/1/11, 4/2/08 ... 3/19/13 

[Insert page number where the document 

begins] 

624 ..................... Spot Burn, Baled Agricultural Residue 

Burn, and Propane Flaming Permits.

7/1/11 ............... 3/19/13 

[Insert page number where the document 

begins] 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–06198 Filed 3–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0135; FRL–9791–6] 

Designation of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; State of California; 

Imperial Valley Planning Area for PM10; 

Clarification of Nonattainment Area 

Boundary 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is clarifying the 

description of the Imperial Valley 

planning area, an area designated as 

nonattainment for the national ambient 

air quality standard for particulate 

matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 

a nominal 10 microns or less (PM10). 

EPA is not changing the boundaries of 

the PM10 area or the status of the area 

as a ‘‘serious’’ PM10 nonattainment area 

but is clarifying the description of this 

partial county area in the Code of 

Federal Regulations. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

May 20, 2013, unless EPA receives 

adverse comment by April 18, 2013. If 

adverse comments are received, EPA 

will publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. We will address all 

public comments in a subsequent final 

rule based on the proposed rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0135 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal, at 

www.regulations.gov, please follow the 

on-line instructions; 

2. Email to ward.laweeda@epa.gov; or 

3. Mail or delivery to La Weeda Ward, 

Air Division (AIR–1), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, 600 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 

1460, Los Angeles, CA 90017. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected should be clearly identified as 

such and should not be submitted 

through www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. 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). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: La 

Weeda Ward, Air Division (AIR–1), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, 600 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 

1460, Los Angeles, CA 90017, telephone 

number (213) 244–1812, or email 

ward.laweeda@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean 

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. EPA’s Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

EPA sets the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for certain 

ambient air pollutants at levels required 

to protect public health and welfare. 

Particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

ten micrometers, or PM10, is one of these 

ambient air pollutants for which EPA 

has established health-based standards. 

EPA revised the NAAQS for 

particulate matter on July 1, 1987 (52 FR 

24633), replacing standards for total 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 16793 

1 Imperial County is located in the southeastern 

corner of California. It borders Mexico to the south, 

Riverside County to the north, Arizona to the east, 

and San Diego County to the west. Imperial County 

lies within the Sonoran Desert. 

2EPA also listed ‘‘Yuma planning area’’ as a 

Group I area within Yuma County, Arizona. 

3California area designations are codified at 40 

CFR 81.305. 

4Within Imperial County, the northeastern 

boundary of Hydrologic Unit #18100200 generally 

follows the crestline of the Chocolate Mountains. 

5See pages 1–2 and 1–3 of the Imperial Valley 

PM10 Plan submitted by CARB on January 11, 1994. 

suspended particulates (TSP less than 

30 microns in diameter) that were set in 

1971 with new standards applying only 

to particulate matter up to 10 microns 

in diameter (PM10). Simultaneously, 

EPA published revised requirements for 

state implementation plans (SIPs) to 

attain and maintain the standards (52 

FR 24672, July 1, 1987). To focus 

Federal and State resources on 

implementing the PM10 NAAQS first in 

those areas of the country believed to be 

violating the standards, EPA classified 

all areas of the Nation into one of three 

groups. Group I areas were those having 

a very high probability of violating the 

PM10 standards based on ambient air 

quality data available for 1984 through 

1987 for PM10 and TSP. Group II areas 

had a moderate probability of violating 

the standards, and Group III areas were 

those believed to be currently attaining 

the standards. 

A list of Group I and II areas in each 

State was published on August 7, 1987 

(52 FR 29383). Within Imperial County,1

EPA listed two areas, ‘‘Imperial Valley 

planning area’’ and ‘‘Yuma planning 

area,’’ 2 among the Group I areas. The 

remaining portions of any State not 

listed as Group I or II were classified in 

Group III. 

On October 31, 1990 (55 FR 45799), 

EPA clarified the descriptions of several 

Group I and II areas of concern. In so 

doing, EPA did not clarify the 

description of the ‘‘Imperial Valley 

planning area’’ but did eliminate ‘‘Yuma 

planning area’’ as a Group I or II area of 

concern within Imperial County, 

California. 

Under section 107(d)(4)(B) of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’), as 

amended in 1990, certain areas were 

designated as nonattainment for PM10

by operation of law upon enactment of 

the 1990 Amendments (i.e., November 

15, 1990). These areas included all areas 

included in Group I in EPA’s 1987 list 

(unless changed by EPA prior to the 

1990 Amended Act) as well as certain 

Group II and III areas. The Imperial 

Valley planning area, as a former 

‘‘Group I’’ area, was one of the areas 

designated as a PM10 nonattainment 

area by operation of law effective 

November 15, 1990. 

On March 15, 1991 (56 FR 11101), 

EPA announced all of those areas that 

were designated nonattainment for PM10

by operation of law and announced that 

all of the nonattainment areas were 

classified as ‘‘moderate,’’ also effective 

November 15, 1990. The ‘‘Imperial 

Valley planning area’’ was one of the 

areas listed by EPA in March 1991 as an 

‘‘initial’’ PM10 nonattainment area. On 

November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), EPA 

codified the PM10 nonattainment area 

designations, including the 

nonattainment area designation for 

‘‘Imperial Valley planning area,’’ in 40 

CFR part 81.3

States with ‘‘moderate’’ PM10

nonattainment areas were required 

under the CAA as amended in 1990 to 

revise their SIPs to provide for 

attainment of the PM10 NAAQS no later 

than December 31, 1994. ‘‘Moderate’’ 

areas that failed to attain the PM10

NAAQS by December 31, 1994 were 

subject to reclassification to ‘‘serious.’’ 

Such reclassification would extend the 

applicable attainment date to December 

31, 2001 but would require the SIP for 

the area to be further revised to meet 

more stringent requirements than had 

applied to ‘‘moderate’’ areas. On August 

11, 2004 (69 FR 48792), EPA determined 

that the Imperial Valley planning area 

failed to attain the PM10 NAAQS by 

December 31, 1994 and reclassified the 

area to ‘‘serious.’’ 

The listing of the ‘‘Imperial Valley 

planning area’’ in the PM10 area 

designations table in 40 CFR 81.305 

without further description has led to 

some confusion as to the precise 

boundaries of the designated 

nonattainment area, and the purpose of 

today’s direct final rule is to clarify the 

description of the ‘‘Imperial Valley 

planning area’’ to eliminate such 

confusion. Specifically, we are 

clarifying in this action that the 

‘‘Imperial Valley planning area’’ PM10

nonattainment area is that portion of 

Imperial County that is defined as 

follows: Commencing at the southwest 

corner of Imperial County and 

extending north along the Imperial-San 

Diego County line to the northwest 

corner of Imperial County; then east 

along the Imperial-Riverside County 

line to the point of intersection of the 

eastern boundary line of Hydrologic 

Unit #18100200; 4 then southeasterly 

along the eastern boundary line of 

Hydrologic Unit #18100200 to the 

Imperial County-Mexico Border; then 

west along the Imperial County-Mexico 

Border to the point of the beginning. 

For the purposes of this action, EPA 

reviewed the Federal Register 

documents listed above as well as EPA 

memoranda and State planning 

documents. Based on that review, EPA 

confirmed the accuracy of the above 

description. Specifically, EPA found 

that: 

• EPA’s 1987 listing of two Group I 

areas within Imperial County, i.e., the 

‘‘Imperial Valley planning area’’ and the 

‘‘Yuma planning area,’’ establishes that 

‘‘Imperial Valley planning area’’ is a 

partial county area; 

• The long-standing use of 

Hydrologic Units to describe other PM10

area designations in desert areas of 

California (see, e.g., the PM10 area 

designations in 40 CFR 81.305 for Coso 

Junction planning area, Owens Valley 

planning area, Trona planning area, and 

Indian Wells planning area) establishes 

precedent for the use of such units to 

describe the PM10 area designation for 

‘‘Imperial Valley planning area,’’ which 

is also a California desert area; 

• EPA staff memorandum dated July 

17, 1991 describes the ‘‘Imperial Valley 

Study Area’’ boundary in terms of 

latitude and longitude that approximate 

the hydrologic unit boundary; 

• EPA staff map, undated but 

believed to have been prepared in the 

early 1990s, illustrates the Imperial 

Valley planning area in terms of the 

northeastern boundary line for 

Hydrologic Unit #18100200; 

• EPA map (dated May 1992) of PM10

area designations within Region IX 

shows the Imperial Valley 

nonattainment area as covering that 

portion of the county east of a line that 

appears to approximate the northeastern 

boundary line for Hydrologic Unit 

#18100200; and 

• A SIP submittal dated January 11, 

1994 for the Imperial Valley planning 

area from the California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) to EPA includes a PM10

plan that describes the nonattainment 

area as containing ‘‘most of Imperial 

County (approximately 80%) except for 

the portion east of the Chocolate 

Mountain Range’’ and includes a figure 

that illustrates the nonattainment area 

showing a northeastern boundary line 

that approximates the boundary for 

Hydrologic Unit #18100200.5

Through today’s action, EPA is not 

changing the boundaries of the Imperial 

Valley planning area PM10

nonattainment area, but is simply 

clarifying the boundaries of the existing 

PM10 nonattainment area by providing a 

more detailed description herein and in 

40 CFR 81.305. EPA is also not changing 

the status or classification of the 

Imperial Valley planning area PM10

nonattainment area. As such, the area 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
16794 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

remains designated as ‘‘nonattainment’’ 

for PM10 and classified as ‘‘serious.’’ 

II. EPA’s Final Action 

EPA is clarifying that the Imperial 

Valley planning area PM10

nonattainment area is that portion of 

Imperial County that is defined as 

follows: Commencing at the southwest 

corner of Imperial County and 

extending north along the Imperial-San 

Diego County line to the northwest 

corner of Imperial County; then east 

along the Imperial-Riverside County 

line to the point of intersection of the 

eastern boundary line of Hydrologic 

Unit #18100200; then southeasterly 

along the eastern boundary line of 

Hydrologic Unit #18100200 to the 

Imperial County-Mexico Border; then 

west along the Imperial County-Mexico 

Border to the point of the beginning. 

EPA is not changing the boundaries of 

the PM10 area or the status of the area 

as a ‘‘serious’’ PM10 nonattainment area 

but is simply clarifying the description 

of this partial county area and amending 

the applicable table in 40 CFR 81.305 

accordingly. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a non-controversial action and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if relevant adverse 

comments are received. This rule will 

be effective on May 20, 2013 without 

further notice unless we receive adverse 

comments by April 18, 2013. If we 

receive adverse comments, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. We will 

address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. We will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so now. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action simply clarifies the 

description of an existing air quality 

planning area and would not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not significant regulatory actions 

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 CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this action does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the action 

simply clarifies the description of 

existing air quality planning area and 

thus will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

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 CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by May 20, 2013. 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 

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 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: March 6, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart C—[Section 107 Attainment 

Status Designations] 

■ 2. Section 81.305 is amended in the 

table for ‘‘California-PM–10’’ by revising 

the entry for ‘‘Imperial County’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 81.305 California. 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 16795 

CALIFORNIA—PM10

Designated Area 

Designation Classification 

Date Type Date Type 

*******

Imperial County 

Imperial Valley planning area: That portion 

of Imperial County that is defined as follows: 

11/15/90 Nonattainment 9/10/04 Serious 

Commencing at the southwest corner of Imperial County and extending north along 

the Imperial-San Diego County line to the 

northwest corner of Imperial County; then 

east along the Imperial-Riverside County 

line to the point of intersection of the 

eastern boundary line of Hydrologic Unit 

#18100200; then southeasterly along the 

eastern boundary line of Hydrologic Unit 

#18100200 to the Imperial County-Mexico 

Border; then west along the Imperial 

County-Mexico Border to the point of the 

beginning.

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–06208 Filed 3–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Parts 483, 488, 489, and 498 

[CMS–3230–F] 

RIN 0938–AQ09 

Medicare and Medicaid Programs; 

Requirements for Long-Term Care 

(LTC) Facilities; Notice of Facility 

Closure 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule adopts, with 

technical changes, the interim rule that 

published February 18, 2011. That 

interim rule revised the requirements 

that a long-term care (LTC) facility must 

meet in order to qualify to participate as 

a skilled nursing facility (SNF) in the 

Medicare program, or a nursing facility 

(NF) in the Medicaid program. The 

requirements implemented section 6113 

of the Patient Protection and Affordable 

Care Act to ensure that, among other 

things, in the case of an LTC facility 

closure, individuals serving as 

administrators of a SNF or NF provide 

written notification of the impending 

closure and a plan for the relocation of 

residents at least 60 days prior to the 

impending closure or, if the Secretary 

terminates the facility’s participation in 

Medicare or Medicaid, not later than the 

date the Secretary determines 

appropriate. 

DATES: Effective on April 18, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Collins, (410) 786–3189. 

Ronisha Davis, (410) 786–6882. 

Lisa Parker, (410) 786–4665. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Overview 

According to the Centers for Medicare 

& Medicaid Services (CMS) data, as of 

October 2011, there were 15,720 longterm care (LTC) facilities (commonly 

referred to as nursing homes) in the 

United States. These facilities are 

generally referred to as skilled nursing 

facilities (SNFs) in the Medicare 

program and as nursing facilities (NFs) 

in the Medicaid program. For the past 

decade, CMS Survey and Certification 

Tabulation of Certification and Survey 

Provider Enhanced Reporting (CASPER) 

data have shown a decline in the 

number of nursing homes, from 17,508 

in 1999 to 15,720 in 2011. In 2010, there 

were 141 nursing home closures. In 

2011, there were 90 closures. 

LTC facility closures have 

implications related to access to care, 

the quality of care, availability of 

services, and the overall health of 

residents. Therefore, having an 

organized process that facilities must 

follow in the event of a nursing home 

closure will protect residents’ health 

and safety, and make the transition as 

smooth as possible for residents, as well 

as family members and facility staff. 

On February 18, 2011, we published 

in the Federal Register an interim final 

rule with comment period, entitled 

‘‘Requirements for Long-Term Care 

(LTC) Facilities; Notice of Facility 

Closure’’ (76 FR 9503). In that rule, we 

revised the current requirements for 

LTC facilities under the provisions of 

section 1128I(h) of the Social Security 

Act (the Act), as added by section 

6113(a) of the Patient Protection and 

Affordable Care Act (Pub. L. 111–148, 

March 23, 2010)(Affordable Care Act). 

The new statutory provision requires us, 

among other things, to impose sanctions 

on the administrator of an LTC facility 

for failure to provide proper notice to 

specified parties, including CMS, that 

the facility is about to close. 

B. Legislative History and Statutory 

Background 

Sections 1819(b)(1)(A) of the Act for 

SNFs and 1919(b)(1)(A) of the Act for 

NFs both state that a SNF/NF must care 

for its residents in a manner and in an 

environment that will promote 

maintenance or enhancement of the 

quality of life of each resident. 

Sections 1819(c)(2)(A)(vi) and 

1919(c)(2)(A)(vi) of the Act state that in 

general, with certain specified 

exceptions, a SNF/NF must permit each 

resident to remain in the facility and 

must not transfer or discharge the 

resident from the facility, except under 

specified circumstances, including, at 

clause (vi), when the facility ceases to 

operate. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES