Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 42447 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2017–0840] 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Upper Mississippi River, Rock Island, 

IL 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of deviation from 

drawbridge regulation. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a 

temporary deviation from the operating 

schedule that governs the Rock Island 

Railroad and Highway Drawbridge 

across the Upper Mississippi River, mile 

482.9, at Rock Island, Illinois. The 

deviation is necessary to facilitate the 

Quad Cities Marathon. This deviation 

allows the bridge to remain in the 

closed-to-navigation position for 

approximately four and a half (4.5) 

hours on one day until the race is 

completed. 

DATES: This deviation is effective from 

7 a.m. through 11:30 a.m. on September 

24, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this 

deviation, (USCG–2017–0840) is 

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 Eric A. 

Washburn, Bridge Administrator, 

Western Rivers, Coast Guard; telephone 

314–269–2378, email Eric.Washburn@

uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. 

Army Rock Island Arsenal requested a 

temporary deviation for the Rock Island 

Railroad and Highway Drawbridge, 

across the Upper Mississippi River, mile 

482.9, at Rock Island, Illinois. The 

bridge has a vertical clearance of 23.8 

feet above normal pool in the closed-tonavigation position. This bridge is 

governed by 33 CFR 117.5. 

This deviation allows the bridge to 

remain in the closed-to-navigation 

position from 7 a.m. through 11:30 a.m. 

on September 24, 2017. Navigation on 

the waterway consists primarily of 

commercial tows and recreational 

watercraft. This temporary deviation has 

been coordinated with waterway users. 

No objections were received. 

The bridge will not be able to open for 

emergencies and there are no alternate 

routes for vessels transiting this section 

of the Upper Mississippi River. The 

Coast Guard will inform users of the 

waterways through our Local and 

Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the 

change in operating schedule for the 

bridge so the vessel operators 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: September 1, 2017. 

Eric A. Washburn, 

Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers. 

[FR Doc. 2017–19036 Filed 9–7–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2017–0216 and EPA–R10– 

OAR–2017–0193; FRL–9967–22–Regions 8 

and 10] 

Attainment Date Extensions for the 

Logan, Utah-Idaho 2006 24-Hour Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is granting two one-year 

extensions to the Moderate attainment 

date for the 2006 24-hour fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) Logan, Utah 

(UT)-Idaho (ID) nonattainment area. 

This action is based on the EPA’s 

evaluation of air quality monitoring data 

and extension requests submitted by the 

State of Utah on May 2, 2017, and the 

State of Idaho on December 15, 2015, 

February 26, 2016, and April 25, 2017. 

The EPA is extending the Moderate 

attainment date from December 31, 2015 

to December 31, 2017, in accordance 

with section 188(d) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 10, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established 

two dockets for this action under Docket 

ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2017–0216 and 

EPA–R10–OAR–2017–0193. All 

documents in the dockets are listed on 

http://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly-available docket 

materials are available at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Region 8, Office of Partnerships 

and Regulatory Assistance, Air Program, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado, 80202–1129 or at the EPA 

Region 10, Office of Air and Waste, 1200 

Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington, 

98101. The EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individuals 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 

federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, EPA, 

Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129, (303) 312–6602, 

ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov, or Jeff Hunt, 

Air Planning Unit, Office of Air and 

Waste (OAW–150), EPA, Region 10, 

1200 Sixth Ave, Suite 900, Seattle, 

Washington, 98101; (206) 553–0256; 

hunt.jeff@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In early June of this year, the EPA 

proposed to grant two one-year 

extensions to the Moderate attainment 

date for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area. See 82 FR 

25992 (June 6, 2017); 82 FR 26638 (June 

8, 2017). Under CAA section 188(d), the 

EPA may grant a state’s request to 

extend the attainment date for a 

Moderate area if: ‘‘(1) the state has 

complied with all requirements and 

commitments pertaining to the area in 

the applicable implementation plan; 

and (2) no more than one exceedance of 

the 24-hour [National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS)] level for 

PM10 has occurred in the area in the 

year preceding the Extension Year, and 

the annual mean concentration for PM10

in the area for such year is less than or 

equal to the standard level.’’ The statute 

provides the EPA with authority to issue 

only two one-year extensions for a 

single Moderate area. 

On August 24, 2016, the EPA 

finalized the Fine Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards: State Implementation Plan 

Requirements (‘‘PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule’’), 81 FR 58010, and that rule 

includes requirements applicable to 

Moderate area extension requests under 

CAA section 188(d). Under the 

regulations, the EPA may grant an 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
42448 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

1WRA notes that between 2010 and 2016, the 

98th percentile PM2.5 concentrations at the Logan 

monitors have been: 42.4 micrograms per cubic 

meter (mg/m3) in 2010, 42.3 mg/m3 in 2011, 27.1 mg/ 

m3 in 2012, 68.3 mg/m3 in 2013, 41.1 mg/m3 in 2014, 

32.7 mg/m3 in 2015, and 34.4 mg/m3 in 2016. In 

2017, WRA states that the 7th highest 24-hour PM2.5

concentration is 39.9 mg/m3 and the 8th highest is 

34.4 mg/m3, with a high concentration of 75.7 mg/ 

m3. 

2WRA notes that between 2010 and 2015, the 

design values (three-year average of the 98th 

percentile) have been: 37.3 mg/m3 in 2010–2012, 

45.8 mg/m3 in 2011–2013, 45 mg/m3 in 2012–2014, 

45.6 mg/m3 in 2013–2015, and 34.5 mg/m3 in 2014– 

2015. 

3PM2.5 Implementation Rule, Section 

51.1005(a)(1)(i)–(ii). 

extension if the agency determines that: 

(1) The state has complied with all 

requirements and commitments 

pertaining to the area in the applicable 

implementation plan; and (2) for an area 

designated nonattainment for the 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS for which the state 

seeks an attainment date extension, the 

98th percentile 24-hour concentration at 

each monitor in that area for the 

calendar year that includes the 

applicable attainment date is less than 

or equal to the level of the applicable 

24-hour standard (calculated according 

to the data analysis requirements in 40 

CFR part 50, appendix N). See 40 CFR 

51.1005(a)(1). The applicable 

implementation plan is defined as the 

plan submitted to meet Moderate area 

requirements. Id. § 51.1005(a)(2). The 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule explains 

that, to meet the first criterion, a state 

needs to show that it has ‘‘submitted the 

necessary attainment plan for the area 

for the applicable PM2.5 NAAQS and is 

implementing the control measures in 

the submission.’’ See 81 FR 58070 and 

58073, August 24, 2016. 

On June 6, 2017 (82 FR 25992), the 

EPA Region 8 Regional Administrator, 

and on June 8, 2017 (82 FR 26638), the 

EPA Region 10 Regional Administrator 

proposed to grant two one-year 

extensions to the Moderate area 

attainment date for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area. 

The requests on which the EPA 

proposed action were submitted by the 

State of Utah on May 2, 2017, and the 

State of Idaho on December 15, 2015, 

February 26, 2016, and April 25, 2017. 

The EPA took comment on granting the 

two one-year extension requests that 

would extend the Moderate PM2.5

attainment date from December 31, 2015 

to December 31, 2017, for the Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area. For details of 

the EPA’s reasons for proposing to grant 

the extensions, please see the June 6, 

2017 and June 8, 2017 proposal notices. 

II. Response to Comments 

The EPA received two public 

comments on the proposed actions. One 

was submitted anonymously and the 

second was submitted by Western 

Resource Advocates (WRA). 

Comment: The first comment briefly 

mentions that the State of Utah has had 

adequate time to address the air quality 

issue and the extension should not be 

approved because medical issues by 

excessive particulate matter are well 

substantiated. 

Response: The EPA agrees that there 

are medical issues associated with PM2.5

exposures. However, CAA section 

188(d) and implementing regulations 

provide flexibility for states to address 

air quality issues in Moderate 

nonattainment areas if certain 

conditions are met. Under CAA section 

188(d) and the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, the EPA may grant a state’s 

request to extend the attainment date for 

a Moderate area if: (1) The state has 

complied with all requirements and 

commitments pertaining to the area in 

the applicable implementation plan; 

and (2) for an area designated 

nonattainment for the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS for which the state seeks an 

attainment date extension, the 98th 

percentile 24-hour concentration at each 

monitor in that area for the calendar 

year that includes the applicable 

attainment date is less than or equal to 

the level of the applicable 24-hour 

standard (calculated according to the 

data analysis requirement in 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix N). 40 CFR 

51.1005(a)(1). The PM2.5

Implementation Rule explains that, to 

meet the first criterion, a state needs to 

show that it has ‘‘submitted the 

necessary attainment plan for the area 

for the applicable PM2.5 NAAQS and is 

implementing the control measures in 

the submission.’’ See 81 FR 58070– 

58073, August 24, 2016. The applicable 

implementation plan is defined as the 

plan submitted to meet Moderate area 

requirements for the NAAQS at issue. 

Id. § 51.1005(a)(2). The EPA cannot 

issue more than two one-year extensions 

for a single Moderate area. 

As discussed in the proposed 

approval of the extension requests, and 

in the response to the comment from 

WRA below, the Logan, UT-ID 

nonattainment area has met the CAA 

section 188(d) requirements for granting 

the two one-year extensions. 

Accordingly, the EPA is finalizing 

approval of the two one-year extension 

requests to the Moderate area attainment 

date as proposed. 

Comment: The second comment, sent 

by WRA, asserts that the State of Utah 

has not complied with all requirements 

and commitments pertaining to the area 

in the applicable implementation plan. 

Specifically, according to WRA, the 

State of Utah has not met the reasonable 

further progress and quantitative 

milestones requirements of the 

Moderate State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). The commenter states that the 

State of Utah’s Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 SIP 

does not establish whether the emission 

reductions have been achieved on a 

linear or stepwise basis in years 4.5 

(June 2013) and 7.5 (June 2017). 

Additionally, WRA states that the 

Logan, UT-ID SIP contains no 

quantitative milestones; thus according 

to WRA, the State of Utah has failed to 

define and failed to demonstrate that 

any quantitative milestones have been 

achieved. 

WRA further states that air quality 

monitoring data indicates that the 

extensions are inappropriate. The 

commenter provides air quality data 

representing the 98th percentile values 

for the Logan PM2.5 air quality monitors 

from 2010 to 2016, and additional 

information regarding preliminary 2017 

values.1 Additionally, the commenter 

provides the specific three-year design 

values from 2010 to 2015 at the Logan 

monitors.2 Referring to the 98th 

percentiles and design values, the 

commenter states that the monitoring 

data shows high variability and fails to 

reveal any correlation between emission 

reductions and better air quality. The 

commenter concludes that the Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area has not 

attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

and should be reclassified to a ‘‘Serious 

Area.’’ 

Response: The EPA disagrees with the 

commenter’s interpretation of the 

requirements found in CAA section 

188(d) and the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule. The relevant criteria for granting 

an extension for a Moderate 

nonattainment area are whether (1) the 

state has complied with all 

requirements and commitments 

pertaining to the area in the applicable 

state plan; and (2) the 98th percentile 

24-hour concentration for the 

attainment year is less than or equal to 

the level of the applicable 24-hour 

standard.3 In requesting an extension, 

the State of Utah submitted a letter on 

May 2, 2017, stating that it has complied 

with all requirements and commitments 

in the state plan and that the 98th 

percentile 24-hour concentration for the 

applicable year is below the standard. 

Regarding the first criterion for 

granting an attainment date extension 

under CAA Section 188(d)(1), the 

preamble of the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule notes that CAA section 188(d) 

‘‘does not explicitly require that the 

state comply with all requirements 

pertaining to the area in the CAA, but 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 42449 

4 81 FR 58070, August 24, 2016. This 

interpretation as applied to CAA section 188(e) for 

Serious area attainment date extensions was upheld 

by the Ninth Circuit in Vigil v. Leavitt, 366 F.3d 

1025, amended at 381 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004). 

5 81 FR 58070, August 24, 2016. 

6The comment appears to interpret the language 

in the preamble stating that the State must have 

‘‘complied with all requirements and commitments 

pertaining to the area in the applicable 

implementation plan’’ in a manner that appears 

inconsistent with the EPA’s implementation rule. 

The regulatory language makes clear that the State 

must comply with the requirements and 

commitments in the Moderate area plan that was 

submitted to the EPA for the relevant NAAQS in 

the area at issue. The preamble language clarifies 

that the relevant requirements and commitments 

are those that apply to the nonattainment area for 

which the extension has been requested and for the 

relevant NAAQS. Thus, if the State failed to meet 

a requirement or commitment in the applicable 

implementation plan for some other nonattainment 

area or failed to meet a requirement applicable to 

a different NAAQS (e.g. ozone), that would not bar 

the State from getting an extension for the 

nonattainment area and NAAQS at issue. 

7 82 FR 25992 (June 6, 2017) and 82 FR 26638 

(June 8, 2017). The State of Utah submitted its 

Moderate PM2.5 attainment SIP on December 22, 

2014 and the State of Idaho submitted its Moderate 

PM2.5 attainment SIP on December 14, 2012 and 

supplement on December 24, 2014, respectively. 8 82 FR 25994/5, June 6, 2017; 82 FR 26638, June 

8, 2017. 

9 81 FR 58071, August 24, 2016. 

10 81 FR 58010, 58070–58071, August 24, 2016. 

11 82 FR 25992 (June 6, 2017) and 82 FR 26638 

(June 8, 2017). 

merely requires that the state comply 

with all requirements in the applicable 

SIP.’’ 4 In other words, so long as the 

state has submitted the necessary 

attainment plan for the area for the 

applicable PM2.5 NAAQS and is 

implementing the submitted plan, the 

fact that the EPA has not yet acted on 

such submission to make it an approved 

part of the applicable SIP should not 

preclude the state from obtaining an 

extension of the attainment date under 

CAA section 188(d)(1). Specifically, in 

order to satisfy the first criterion, a state 

would have to demonstrate that control 

measures included in the plan 

submission as reasonably available 

control measures (RACM), reasonably 

available control technology (RACT), 

and additional reasonable measures for 

sources in the area have been 

implemented.5

The regulatory requirements for 

extensions of the Moderate area 

attainment date that the EPA 

promulgated in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule are consistent 

with the CAA. Under 40 CFR. 

51.1005(a)(1)(i) and (a)(2), the state must 

have complied with all requirements 

and commitments in the applicable 

implementation plan, which is defined 

as the Moderate area plan submitted to 

meet the requirements of 40 CFR 

51.1003(a). Thus, the EPA has, by rule, 

interpreted section 188(d)(1) to require 

the state to have complied with the 

requirements to implement RACM, 

RACT, and additional reasonable 

measures that were submitted in the 

Moderate area plan.6 To the extent the 

comment suggests the EPA must first 

approve the plan submission before a 

Moderate area extension may be 

granted, that issue was addressed in the 

implementation rule and the time to 

comment has passed to challenge the 

EPA’s regulatory interpretation of the 

statute. See CAA section 307(b)(1). 

The EPA has acted on certain aspects 

of the State of Utah’s SIP in separate 

actions, as described in the proposed 

action to grant the two one-year 

attainment date extensions.7 Moreover, 

the EPA’s evaluation as to whether the 

Moderate area plan has met all CAA 

requirements, including those for 

reasonable further progress and 

quantitative milestones, will be 

addressed in a separate action, which as 

noted above is a different determination 

than whether the State of Utah has 

complied with the requirements and 

commitments in the submitted 

Moderate area plan. As discussed in the 

proposal, the State of Utah submitted 

the necessary attainment plan for the 

area, the plan contains control measures 

identified as RACM and RACT, and 

additional reasonable measures for 

sources in the area and the State is 

implementing those control measures.8

The comment does not dispute these 

facts. Thus, the Logan, UT-ID 

nonattainment area has met the SIP 

submission criterion found in CAA 

section 188(d)(1). 

For the second criterion in CAA 

Section 188(d)(2), the EPA interprets the 

requirement to demonstrate that the area 

had ‘‘no more than one exceedance’’ of 

the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to mean that 

the state must simply demonstrate that 

the area had ‘‘clean data’’ in the year 

preceding the extension year.9 Thus, a 

state seeking an attainment date 

extension for a Moderate nonattainment 

area for a 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS would 

be required to demonstrate that the area 

had clean data with respect to the 

statistical form of that particular 

standard (i.e., for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, the 98th percentile value did 

not exceed 35 micrograms per cubic 

meter (mg/m3)) in the calendar year prior 

to the applicable attainment date for the 

area.10

As noted in the proposal,11 the years 

that need to be reviewed for granting the 

two one-year attainment date extension 

requests are 2015 for the first extension 

request and 2016 for the second 

extension request. To demonstrate that 

the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area 

had clean data for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, the 98th percentile values may 

not exceed 35 mg/m3. The 98th 

percentile value at the Logan monitor 

(Utah) was 29.0 mg/m3 in 2015 and at 

the Smithfield monitor (Utah) was 34.4 

mg/m3 in 2016. Additionally, the 98th 

percentile concentrations at the 

Franklin, Idaho monitor were 18.8 mg/ 

m3 in 2015 and 33.3 mg/m3 in 2016. 

Thus, the area met the second criterion 

for granting the two one-year extensions 

found in CAA section 188(d)(2) as 

interpreted by the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule. 

The comment does not dispute that 

the area has met the criterion set forth 

in 40 CFR 51.1005(a)(1)(ii). Instead, the 

comment cites other monitoring data 

from previous years. Again, the EPA 

established its interpretation in the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule of what 

monitoring data is relevant for CAA 

section 188(d)(2). Notwithstanding that 

fact, WRA appears to believe that 

monitoring data from the years before 

2015 and 2016 must be considered and 

argues that it is not reasonable to ignore 

such data. As with the comments on the 

first extension criterion, the commenter 

appears to take issue with the EPA’s 

interpretations of the CAA as set forth 

in the implementation rule; however, 

the time has passed to challenge the 

implementation rule. The EPA 

evaluated the extension request 

consistent with the PM2.5

Implementation Rule and we decline to 

adopt the commenter’s interpretation of 

the statute. 

To the extent the comment also argues 

that the EPA should deny the extension 

requests in our discretion, we decline to 

do so. As explained in our proposal and 

restated above, we have reviewed the 

requests from the states and 

accompanying data, and we find that 

they support granting two one-year 

extensions of the attainment date for 

this area. Thus, we do not agree that the 

EPA must necessarily consider all 

aspects of air quality (such as the other 

data the comment presents) in addition 

to our evaluation of the extension year 

air quality data under the second 

criterion. We also do not agree that the 

EPA must necessarily consider the 

concerns the comment raises regarding 

reasonable further progress and 

quantitative milestones in addition to 

our evaluation under the first criterion 

of the state’s compliance with 

commitments and requirements in the 

submitted Moderate area plan. 

However, even if the EPA were to 

consider the other information 

presented in the comment, we would 

still grant the extension requests. First, 

we note that Utah’s submitted Moderate 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
42450 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

12The Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP can be 

found within the docket, EPA–R08–OAR–2017– 

0216. The entire submittal is entitled ‘‘December 

16, 2014 State of Utah Moderate PM2.5 SIP 

Submittal,’’ and the Logan section, ‘‘Utah SIP 

Control Measures for Area and Point Sources, Fine 

Particulate Matter, PM2.5 SIP for the Logan, UT-ID 

Nonattainment Area, Section IX. Part A.23’’ starts 

on pdf page number 546. The Logan, UT-ID 

Moderate PM2.5 SIP contains reasonable further 

progress analysis and quantitative milestones in 

Chapter 8. 13 In addition, the 98th percentile value for 2015 

for Logan appears to be incorrect in the comment. 

It should be 29.0 mg/m3 instead of 32.7 mg/m3. 

area plan does contain reasonable 

further progress and quantitative 

milestone sections.12 We also disagree 

that the plan does not attempt to show 

a correlation between emission 

reductions and air quality improvement: 

that is precisely what the attainment 

demonstration does. In remainder, the 

comment argues that these elements of 

the plan do not meet all Moderate area 

requirements, but as explained above 

that will be determined in a separate 

action. 

If we were to consider the other air 

quality data presented by the comment, 

we would note that, as the comment 

states, there is variability from year to 

year.13 In such a circumstance, granting 

the extension request seems entirely 

consistent with the purpose of section 

188(d): A state may have met all of its 

commitments and requirements in the 

submitted Moderate area plan, but due 

to variability—such as poor air quality 

in a single year prior to the extension 

year (in this case 2013)—the area fails 

to attain by the attainment date. In such 

a circumstance, section 188(d) provides 

a means for dealing with this variability. 

III. EPA’s Final Action 

In response to requests from the State 

of Utah on May 2, 2017, and from the 

Idaho Department of Environmental 

Quality (IDEQ) on December 15, 2015, 

February 26, 2016, and April 25, 2017, 

the EPA is granting two one-year 

attainment date extensions to the 

Moderate attainment date for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area. This final 

action extends the Moderate area 

attainment date for the Logan, UT-ID 

nonattainment area from December 31, 

2015 to December 31, 2017. This final 

action to extend the Moderate 

attainment date for this nonattainment 

area is based on both states’ compliance 

with the requirements for the applicable 

SIPs for the area and on the 2015 and 

2016 PM2.5 98th percentile data from the 

Logan (Utah), Smithfield (Utah), and 

Franklin (Idaho) monitoring sites in the 

Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area. 

Consistent with CAA section 188(d) and 

40 CFR 51.1005(a), the nonattainment 

area will remain a Moderate PM2.5

nonattainment area, with a Moderate 

area attainment date of December 31, 

2017. Additionally, the states will not 

have to submit the additional 

requirements that apply to Serious PM2.5

nonattainment areas unless the area fails 

to attain the standard by the December 

31, 2017 Moderate area attainment date 

and the area is reclassified to a Serious 

PM2.5 nonattainment area. 

This action is not a redesignation to 

attainment under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E). The State of Utah and the 

State of Idaho are not currently attaining 

the PM2.5 NAAQS in the nonattainment 

area and have not submitted 

maintenance plans as required under 

section 175(A) of the CAA or met the 

other statutory requirements for 

redesignation to attainment. The 

designation status for the area in 40 CFR 

part 81 will remain as a Moderate 

nonattainment area until such time as 

the State of Utah and the State of Idaho 

meet the CAA requirements for 

redesignation to attainment, or the area 

is reclassified to Serious. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws

regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and therefore is not 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). This 

final action merely approves a state 

request as meeting federal requirements 

and imposes no new requirements. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any 

additional information collection 

burden under the provisions of the PRA, 

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This action 

merely approves a state request for an 

attainment date extension, and this 

action does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. 

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 will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities beyond those imposed by state 

law. Approval of a state’s request for an 

attainment date extension does not 

create any new requirements and does 

not directly regulate any entities. 

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. This action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

state, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, will result from this 

action. 

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. Pursuant to the 

CAA, this action merely approves a state 

request for an attainment date 

extension. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. No tribal areas are located 

in the nonattainment area that will be 

receiving an attainment date extension. 

The CAA and the Tribal Authority Rule 

establish the relationship of the federal 

government and tribes in developing 

plans to attain the NAAQS, and this rule 

does nothing to modify that 

relationship. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, and because the 

EPA does not believe any environmental 

health or safety risks addressed by this 

action present a disproportionate risk to 

children. This action merely approves a 

state request for an attainment date 

extension and it does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. 

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. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 173 / Friday, September 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 42451 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. This action merely 

approves a state request for an 

attainment date extension. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

The EPA believes that this action does 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous 

peoples, as specified in Executive Order 

12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

This action approves a state request for 

an attainment date extension based on 

the state’s compliance with 

requirements and commitments in its 

plan and recent air quality monitoring 

data that meets requirements for an 

extension. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

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. This action is 

subject to the CRA, and the EPA will 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. 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). 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 November 7, 2017. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule 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, Ammonia, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

dioxide, Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: August 21, 2017. 

Debra H. Thomas, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

Dated: August 22, 2017. 

Michelle L. Pirzadeh, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18878 Filed 9–7–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0802; FRL–9967–40– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Volatile 

Organic Compound Control Rules 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA), a November 18, 

2015, State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submittal from the Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency consisting of 

adjustments and additions to volatile 

organic compound (VOC) rules in the 

Ohio Administrative Code (OAC). The 

changes to these rules are based on an 

Ohio-initiated five-year periodic review 

of its VOC rules and a new rule to 

update the VOC reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) requirements 

for the miscellaneous metal and plastic 

parts coatings source category for the 

Cleveland-Akron-Lorain area 

(‘‘Cleveland area’’) consisting of 

Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, 

Lorain, Medina, Portage, and Summit 

counties. Additionally, EPA is 

approving into the Ohio SIP an oxides 

of nitrogen (NOX) emission limit for 

Arcelor-Mittal Cleveland that Ohio is 

using as an offset in its anti-backsliding 

demonstration for architectural 

aluminum coatings. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 10, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0802. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://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 https://

www.regulations.gov or at the 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Jenny 

Liljegren, Physical Scientist, at (312) 

886–6832 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

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

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6832, 

Liljegren.Jennifer@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the purpose of this action? 

II. What is EPA’s analysis of Ohio’s 

submitted VOC rules? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the purpose of this action? 

EPA is approving a November 18, 

2015, Ohio SIP submittal consisting of 

adjustments and additions to OAC 

Chapter 3745–21. Specifically, this 

includes amended OAC rules 3745–21– 

01, 3745–21–03, 3745–21–04, 3745–21– 

08, 3745–21–09, 3745–21–10, 3745–21– 

12, 3745–21–13, 3745–21–14, 3745–21– 

15, 3745–21–16, 3745–21–17, 3745–21– 

18, 3745–21–19, 3745–21–20, 3745–21– 

21, 3745–21–22, 3745–21–23, 3745–21– 

25, 3745–21–27, 3745–21–28, 3745–21– 

29; rescission of existing OAC rule 

3745–21–24, and adoption of new OAC 

rules 3745–21–24 and 3745–21–26. 

Except for OAC rule 3745–21–26, the 

changes to the Chapter 3745–21 rules 

are based on an Ohio-initiated five-year 

periodic review of its VOC rules. When 

Ohio reviews a rule and amends greater 

than fifty percent of that rule, Ohio 

issues the entire rule as a new 

replacement rule. This is the case with 

OAC 3745–21–24. OAC rule 3745–21– 

26 is an entirely new rule, the purpose 

of which is to update the VOC RACT 

requirements for the Cleveland area for 

the miscellaneous metal and plastic 

parts coatings source category. 

Additionally, EPA is approving into the 

Ohio SIP the NOX emission limit on 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES