Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 47145 

OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES, APPROVED BUT NOT INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE—Continued 

State citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

200–0110 .......... Public Interest Representation 4/16/2015 10/11/2017, [Insert 

Federal Register 

citation].

200–0120 .......... Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest 4/16/2015 10/11/2017, [Insert 

Federal Register 

citation].

*******

* * * * * 

EPA-APPROVED OREGON STATE DIRECTIVES

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

Directive 1–4–1–601 .............. Operational Guidance for the 

Oregon Smoke Management Program.

10/23/1992 11/1/2001, 66 FR 55112.

ODEQ–LRAPA Stringency Directive, Attachment B.DEQ analysis and recommendations regarding 

which of the proposed rules 

that the EQC should require LRAPA to implement 

directly.

4/16/2015 10/11/2017, [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

EPA-APPROVED MANUALS

Name Adoption date 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

ODEQ Source Sampling Manual ... 4/16/2015 4/16/2015 10/11/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].Volumes I and II for purposes of 

the limits approved into the SIP. 

ODEQ Continuous Emissions Monitoring Manual.4/16/2015 4/16/2015 10/11/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].For purposes of the limits approved into the SIP. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 52.1987 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1987 Significant deterioration of air 

quality. 

(a) The Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality rules for the 

prevention of significant deterioration of 

air quality (provisions of OAR Chapter 

340, Divisions 200, 202, 209, 212, 216, 

222, 224 (except 0510(3) inter-pollutant 

offset ratios), 225, and 268, as in effect 

on April 16, 2015, are approved as 

meeting the requirements of title I, part 

C, subpart I of the Clean Air Act for 

preventing significant deterioration of 

air quality. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–21803 Filed 10–10–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0265; FRL–9969– 

18—Region 9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality State Implementation Plans; 

California; Ambient Ozone Monitoring 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval of 

a portion of a state implementation plan 

(SIP) submission from the State of 

California regarding Clean Air Act (CAA 

or ‘‘Act’’) requirements for ambient 

ozone monitoring in the Bakersfield 

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) for 

the 1997 ozone and 2008 ozone national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS 

or ‘‘standards’’). The SIP submission is 

intended to revise a portion of the 

State’s ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP that, more 

broadly, provides for implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of the 

standards. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 13, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0265. 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, 

e.g., 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 through https://

www.regulations.gov, or please contact 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
47146 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

1Letter from Richard W. Corey, Executive Officer, 

CARB to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional 

Administrator, Region IX, EPA, August 24, 2016. 

2 82 FR 30812 (July 3, 2017). 

3 2016 CARB Staff Report, Section V.H 

(‘‘Bakersfield Area Monitor’’), p. 23 and Section VII 

(‘‘Staff Recommendation’’), p. 24. 

4 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997). 

5 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). 

6 81 FR 18766 at 18772 (April 1, 2016). 

7 40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, 4.1(b) requires at 

least one site in each MSA to be designed to capture 

the maximum ozone concentration in that MSA. 

8Letter from K. Magliano, Chief, Air Quality 

Planning and Science Division, CARB to Meredith 

Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, 

Region IX, EPA, April 29, 2016. 9 81 FR 47300 (July 21, 2016). 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rory 

Mays, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), EPA 

Region IX, (415) 972–3227, mays.rory@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On August 24, 2016, the California 

Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted 

the ‘‘Staff Report, [C]ARB Review of the 

San Joaquin Valley 2016 Plan for the 

2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard’’ (‘‘2016 

CARB Staff Report’’).1 On July 3, 2017, 

we proposed to approve the portions of 

the submission that address ambient 

ozone monitoring in the Bakersfield 

MSA pursuant to CAA section 

110(a)(2)(B),2 and refer to those portions 

herein as the ‘‘2016 Bakersfield Ozone 

Monitoring SIP.’’ 3 We proposed to 

approve this SIP submission because we 

determined that it complied with the 

relevant CAA requirements, as outlined 

below. Our proposed rule contains more 

information on the SIP submission and 

our evaluation. We provided a 30-day 

public comment period on the proposed 

rule, during which we received no 

comments. 

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires 

states to submit SIPs meeting the 

applicable requirements of section 

110(a)(2) within three years after 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS or within a shorter period that 

the EPA may prescribe. The EPA refers 

to such SIP submissions as 

‘‘infrastructure SIPs.’’ This final rule 

pertains to infrastructure SIP 

requirements for ambient air quality 

monitoring. 

On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the 

form and levels of the primary and 

secondary ozone standards to an 8-hour 

average of 0.08 parts per million (ppm).4

On March 12, 2008, the EPA revised the 

levels of the primary and secondary 8- 

hour ozone standards to 0.075 ppm.5

Each of these NAAQS revisions 

triggered the requirement for states to 

submit infrastructure SIPs, including 

provisions for ambient ozone 

monitoring. 

Section 110(a)(2)(B) of the CAA 

requires states to provide for the 

establishment and operation of ambient 

air quality monitoring to (i) monitor, 

compile, and analyze data, and (ii) make 

data available to the EPA Administrator 

upon request. For the 1997 ozone and 

2008 ozone NAAQS, the San Joaquin 

Valley nonattainment area includes 

several MSAs and one Combined 

Statistical Area. 

California made SIP submissions in 

2007 and 2014 to, among other things, 

address the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(B) and the EPA’s 

implementing regulations for the 1997 

ozone and 2008 ozone NAAQS. The 

EPA approved the submissions with 

respect to the ambient monitoring 

requirements with one exception: 6 We 

partially disapproved the submissions 

for CAA section 110(a)(2)(B) with 

respect to the 1997 ozone and 2008 

ozone NAAQS for the Bakersfield MSA, 

which includes all of Kern County. Our 

partial disapproval was based on the 

closure of the MSA’s maximum ozone 

concentration site located at Arvin-Bear 

Mountain Boulevard (i.e., Air Quality 

System (AQS) ID: 06–029–5001), 

without EPA approval of an alternative 

maximum ozone concentration site.7

CARB had operated an ozone monitor 

at the Arvin-Bear Mountain Boulevard 

site for 20 years, and the highest ozone 

concentrations in the Bakersfield MSA 

generally occurred at this site or the 

Edison site (i.e., AQS ID: 06–029–0007), 

which continues to operate. Upon 

notification in 2009 that the site lease 

would not be renewed, CARB 

established a replacement site at the 

Arvin-Di Giorgio elementary school (i.e., 

AQS ID: 06–029–5002). This ozone 

monitor site relocation had not been 

approved by the EPA at the time of the 

EPA’s 2014 partial disapproval of 

California’s 2007 and 2014 

infrastructure SIPs. 

Based on the 2016 Bakersfield Ozone 

Monitoring SIP, CARB’s 2016 site 

relocation request,8 and the EPA’s 2016 

approval of that relocation request 

(included in the SIP submission as 

Appendix C to the 2016 CARB Staff 

Report), the EPA concluded that the 

Arvin-Di Giorgio site provided the most 

similar concentrations from similar 

sources to the Arvin-Bear Mountain 

Boulevard site and fulfilled the federal 

regulatory requirement that such 

replacement site be nearby and have the 

same scale of representation. In 

addition, we found that CARB’s site 

relocation, as approved by the EPA 

consistent with 40 CFR 58.14, met the 

substantive requirements for site 

relocation under 40 CFR part 58 

Appendix D, including the requirement 

under section 4.1(b) to designate a site 

to record the maximum ozone 

concentration in the Bakersfield MSA. 

II. Final Action 

The underlying basis of the EPA’s 

2014 disapproval has been adequately 

resolved via the approved site relocation 

for the maximum ozone concentration 

site in the Bakersfield MSA. 

Accordingly, the EPA is fully approving 

the 2016 Bakersfield Ozone Monitoring 

SIP for CAA section 110(a)(2)(B) for the 

1997 ozone and 2008 ozone NAAQS, as 

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

Act. 

In addition, the EPA previously 

approved an ozone emergency episode 

plan from El Dorado County APCD as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 ozone 

and 2008 ozone NAAQS.9 That action 

resolved a separate, partial disapproval 

from the EPA’s 2016 rulemaking on 

California’s 2007 and 2014 

infrastructure SIPs. However, we 

inadvertently did not remove certain 

paragraphs from the California SIP that 

reflected the earlier disapproval. Thus, 

as an administrative matter, we are 

removing the obsolete paragraphs, 

specifically 40 CFR 52.223(i)(7) and 40 

CFR 52.223(l)(7), from the California 

SIP. 

III. 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, 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 47147 

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 December 11, 

2017. 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. 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. 

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

Dated: September 26, 2017. 

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 

adding paragraph (c)(496) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan-in part. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(496) The following plan was 

submitted on August 24, 2016, by the 

Governor’s Designee. 

(i) [Reserved] 

(ii) Additional materials. (A) 

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 

(1) CARB Resolution 16–8, dated July 

21, 2016, adopting the ‘‘2016 Ozone 

State Implementation Plan for the San 

Joaquin Valley.’’ 

(2) ‘‘Staff Report, ARB Review of the 

San Joaquin Valley 2016 Plan for the 

2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard,’’ section 

V.H (‘‘Bakersfield Area Monitor’’) and 

Appendix C (‘‘U.S. EPA Letter 

Regarding Arvin Site Relocation’’), only. 

§ 52.223 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 52.223 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraphs 

(i)(1), (i)(7), (l)(1), and (l)(7). 

[FR Doc. 2017–21777 Filed 10–10–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0513; FRL–9969–12– 

Region 7] 

Approval of Missouri Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Infrastructure 

SIP Requirements for the 2012 Annual 

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving elements of 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision from the State of Missouri for 

the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter 

(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) and two state 

statutes into the SIP to address the 

requirements relating to conflicts of 

interest found in section 128 of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). Section 110 of the 

CAA requires that each state adopt and 

submit a SIP for the implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of each 

new or revised NAAQS promulgated by 

EPA. These SIPs are commonly referred 

to as ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. The 

infrastructure requirements are designed 

to ensure that the structural components 

of each state’s air quality management 

program are adequate to meet the state’s 

responsibilities under the CAA. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 11, 2017, without 

further notice, unless EPA receives 

adverse comment by November 13, 

2017. If EPA receives adverse comment, 

we will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the direct final rule in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2017–0513, to https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

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 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES