Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 122 / Tuesday, June 29, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 34141 

EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area 

State 

submittal/ 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

2017 Emissions Inventory for 

the 2015 Ozone NAAQS.

Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston GalvestonBrazoria, and Bexar County Ozone Nonattainment Areas.June 24, 

2020 

June 29, 2021 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–13771 Filed 6–28–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0464; FRL–10024–27– 

OAR] 

Air Quality Designations for the 2010 

1-Hour SO2 NAAQS: Responses to 

Petitions for Reconsideration and 

Administrative Stay of the 

Designations for Portions of Freestone 

and Anderson Counties, Rusk and 

Panola Counties, and Titus County in 

Texas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notification of actions denying 

petitions for reconsideration and 

administrative stay. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is providing notice that it 

has responded to petitions for 

reconsideration and/or administrative 

stay of a final action under the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) published in the Federal 

Register on December 13, 2016, titled, 

‘‘Air Quality Designations for the 2010 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard— 

Supplement to Round 2 for Four Areas 

in Texas: Freestone and Anderson 

Counties, Milam County, Rusk and 

Panola Counties, and Titus County.’’ 

The EPA has denied these petitions in 

letters to the petitioners for the reasons 

that the EPA explains in those 

documents. 

DATES: The Administrator signed the 

associated notification letters on June 

10, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Corey Mocka, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Policy Division, 109 T.W. Alexander 

Drive, Mail Code C539–04, Research 

Triangle Park, NC 27711; phone 

number: (919) 541–5142; email address: 

mocka.corey@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The EPA is providing notice that it 

has responded to petitions for 

reconsideration and/or administrative 

stay of a final action under the CAA 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 13, 2016, titled, ‘‘Air Quality 

Designations for the 2010 Sulfur 

Dioxide (SO2) Primary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard— 

Supplement to Round 2 for Four Areas 

in Texas: Freestone and Anderson 

Counties, Milam County, Rusk and 

Panola Counties, and Titus County’’ (81 

FR 89870). On February 13, 2017, Vistra 

Energy submitted a petition requesting 

that the EPA reconsider and stay the 

effective date of the EPA’s 

nonattainment designations for portions 

of Freestone and Anderson Counties, 

Rusk and Panola Counties, and Titus 

County. Vistra Energy later 

supplemented this petition on 

December 19, 2017. On March 15, 2017, 

the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 

submitted a request for administrative 

stay of the effective date for the EPA’s 

final designations for these areas in 

Texas. The TCEQ also submitted a 

petition for reconsideration of the 

nonattainment designations on 

December 11, 2017. The EPA has denied 

these petitions in letters to the 

petitioners for the reasons that the EPA 

explains in those documents. 

II. Where can I get copies of this 

document and other related 

information? 

This Federal Register document, the 

petitions for reconsideration and 

administrative stay, and the response 

letters to the petitioners are available in 

the docket that the EPA established for 

the rulemaking, under Docket ID NO. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0464. 

All documents in the docket are listed 

in the index at http://

www.regulations.gov. Although listed in 

the index, some information may not be 

publicly available, i.e., 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. 

Out of an abundance of caution for 

members of the public and our staff, the 

EPA is temporarily suspending the 

Docket Center and Reading Room for 

public visitors to reduce the risk of 

transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket 

Center staff will continue to provide 

remote customer service via email, 

phone, and webform. For further 

information and updates on EPA Docket 

Center services, please visit us online at 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets. The EPA 

continues to carefully and continuously 

monitor information from the Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention, 

local area health departments, and our 

federal partners so we can respond 

rapidly as conditions change regarding 

COVID–19. 

In addition, the EPA has established 

a website for SO2 designations 

rulemakings at: https://www.epa.gov/ 

sulfur-dioxide-designations. This 

Federal Register notice, the petitions for 

reconsideration and administrative stay, 

and the response letters denying the 

petitions are also available on this 

website along with other information. 

III. Judicial Review 

Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA governs 

judicial review of final actions by the 

EPA. This section provides, in part, that 

petitions for review must be filed in the 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit: (i) When the agency 

action consists of ‘‘nationally applicable 

regulations promulgated, or final actions 

taken, by the Administrator,’’ or (ii) 

when such action is locally or regionally 

applicable, if ‘‘such action is based on 

a determination of nationwide scope or 

effect and if in taking such action the 

Administrator finds and publishes that 

such action is based on such a 

determination.’’ For locally or regionally 

applicable final actions, the CAA 

reserves to the EPA complete discretion 

whether to invoke the exception in (ii). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
34142 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 122 / Tuesday, June 29, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

1Cf. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. Thomas, 

838 F.2d 1224, 1249 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (the clause in 

CAA section 307(b) governing ‘‘nationally 

applicable regulations’’ provides jurisdiction over 

both the direct challenge to the regulations and the 

petition for reconsideration). 

2The EPA intends to maintain this position in 

merits briefing in the 5th Circuit, as the 5th 

Circuit’s venue decision denied the EPA’s motion 

to dismiss or transfer the case to the D.C. Circuit 

without prejudice to reconsideration of the issue by 

the merits panel. Texas v. EPA, 706 Fed. Appx. 159, 

161, 165 (5th Cir. 2017) (‘‘EPA’s motion therefore 

is denied without prejudice to reconsideration by 

the merits panel . . . merits briefing will provide 

greater clarity on what determinations lie at the 

[Round 2] Supplement’s core, by, for example, 

illuminating that the key determinations in the rule 

are determinations that specific methodologies are 

appropriate or preferable for assessing sulfur 

dioxide levels nationwide, as opposed to factspecific assessments of sulfur dioxide levels in the 

four Texas regions. In that case, the merits panel 

should not be constrained from revisiting the 

issue.’’). 

3 In deciding whether to invoke the exception by 

making and publishing a finding that this final 

action is based on a determination of nationwide 

scope or effect, the Administrator has also taken 

into account a number of policy considerations, 

including his judgment balancing the benefit of 

obtaining the D.C. Circuit’s authoritative centralized 

review versus allowing development of the issue in 

other contexts and the best use of agency resources. 

4 In the report on the 1977 Amendments that 

revised section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Congress 

noted that the Administrator’s determination that 

the ‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ exception applies 

would be appropriate for any action that has a 

scope or effect beyond a single judicial circuit. See 

H.R. Rep. No. 95–294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977 

U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402–03. 

5See, supra, n.2. 

Judicial challenges to the EPA’s denials 

of petitions for reconsideration of CAA 

actions belong in the same venue as any 

challenge to the action that such 

petitions request the agency to 

reconsider.1

The D.C. Circuit is the only 

appropriate venue for both challenges to 

the final action titled, ‘‘Air Quality 

Designations for the 2010 Sulfur 

Dioxide (SO2) Primary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard— 

Supplement to Round 2 for Four Areas 

in Texas: Freestone and Anderson 

Counties, Milam County, Rusk and 

Panola Counties, and Titus County,’’ 81 

FR 89870 (December 13, 2016) (‘‘Round 

2 Supplement’’) and challenges to these 

actions denying administrative petitions 

on the Round 2 Supplement. The EPA 

made a finding in the Round 2 

Supplement, that the Round 2 

Supplement is based on a determination 

of ‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ within 

the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). 

See 81 FR at 89874–75. That action is 

currently being challenged in the Court 

of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; 

however, the EPA maintains that the 

proper venue for that action is the D.C. 

Circuit.2 Thus, judicial challenges to the 

actions noticed here, denying 

administrative petitions for 

reconsideration and/or stay of the 

Round 2 Supplement, also belong in the 

D.C. Circuit. 

To the extent a court finds these 

actions denying the administrative 

petitions on the Round 2 Supplement to 

be locally or regionally applicable, the 

Administrator is exercising the 

complete discretion afforded to him 

under the CAA to make and publish a 

finding that each of these actions are 

based on a determination of 

‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ within the 

meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1).3

Both the Round 2 Supplement and these 

final actions noticed here are finalized 

pursuant to a common, uniform 

nationwide analytical method and 

interpretation of CAA section 107(d). In 

denying the petitions for 

reconsideration and administrative stay 

of the Round 2 Supplement, these final 

actions apply the same common, 

uniform nationwide analytical method 

and interpretation of CAA section 

107(d) that the EPA applied across the 

country in designations for the SO2

Primary National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS), including the EPA’s 

nationwide approach to and technical 

evaluation of air quality modeling and 

monitoring data within the EPA’s 

interpretation of statutory terms under 

section 107(d)(1) of the CAA.4 These 

final actions are based on this same 

common core of determinations 

regarding the nationwide analytical 

method and interpretation of CAA 

section 107(d), determinations that 

specific methodologies are appropriate 

or preferable for assessing sulfur dioxide 

levels nationwide.5 More specifically, 

these final actions are based on a 

determination by the EPA to evaluate 

areas nationwide using a common fivefactor analysis in determining whether 

areas are in violation of or contributing 

to an area in violation of the 2010 SO2

NAAQS at the time of the designations 

final action. The actions denying the 

petitions for reconsideration explained, 

for example, that the EPA’s designations 

and the denials for reconsideration are 

based on the EPA’s determination to 

consider and assess the technical 

representativeness of all available 

information regarding then-current air 

quality at the time of designations (e.g., 

to consider third party modeling 

submitted to the EPA of the then-most 

recent years of air quality and thencurrently available monitoring 

information, and not to consider 

projections or intended monitoring of 

future years’ emissions, for SO2

designations under the CAA). For these 

reasons, the Administrator is exercising 

the complete discretion afforded to him 

by the CAA and hereby finds that each 

of these final actions is based on a 

determination of nationwide scope or 

effect for purposes of CAA section 

307(b)(1) and is hereby publishing those 

findings in the Federal Register. 

Under CAA section 307(b), any 

petition for review of these actions 

denying the petitions for 

reconsideration and/or stay must be 

filed in the Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit within 60 

days from the date this notice is 

published in the Federal Register. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of these final actions 

does not affect the finality of the actions 

for the purposes of judicial review, nor 

does it extend the time within which a 

petition for judicial review must be 

filed, and shall not postpone the 

effectiveness of such actions. 

Michael S. Regan, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2021–13938 Filed 6–28–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0474; FRL–10025–18] 

Bacillus subtilis Strain RTI477; 

Exemption From the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of Bacillus subtilis 

strain RTI477 in or on all food 

commodities when used in accordance 

with label directions and good 

agricultural practices. FMC Corporation 

submitted a petition to EPA under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA), requesting an exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance. This 

regulation eliminates the need to 

establish a maximum permissible level 

for residues of Bacillus subtilis strain 

RTI477 under FFDCA when used in 

accordance with this exemption. 

DATES: This regulation is effective June 

29, 2021. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

August 30, 2021 and must be filed in 

accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also 

Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1