80 FR 60049 - Air Plan Approval; California; Mammoth Lakes; Redesignation; PM10
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 192 (October 5, 2015)
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 192 (October 5, 2015)
| Page Range | 60049-60052 | |
| FR Document | 2015-25165 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 192 (Monday, October 5, 2015)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 60049-60052] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-25165] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0279; FRL-9935-05-Region 9] Air Plan Approval; California; Mammoth Lakes; Redesignation; PM10 Maintenance Plan AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve, as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP), California's request to redesignate the Mammoth Lakes nonattainment area to attainment for the 1987 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter of ten microns or less (PM10 ). Also, EPA is taking final action to approve the PM10 maintenance plan for the Mammoth Lakes area and the associated motor vehicle emissions budgets for use in transportation conformity determinations. Lastly, EPA is finalizing our approval of the 2012 attainment year emissions inventory. We are taking these final actions because the SIP revision meets the requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA guidance for maintenance plans and motor vehicle emissions budgets. DATES: This rule will be effective on November 4, 2015. ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0279 for this action. Generally, documents in the [[Page 60050]] docket for this action are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy format at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed at http://www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multi-volume reports) and some may not be publicly available in 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: Jerry Wamsley, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4111, [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and ``our'' refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA's Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action On July 30, 2015, EPA proposed to approve the Mammoth Lakes PM10 redesignation request and maintenance plan. We proposed this action because California's SIP revision meets the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements and EPA guidance concerning redesignations to attainment of a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) and maintenance plans (80 FR 45477). For our detailed procedural and substantive review of the State's SIP submittal and our discussion of our findings and rationale for our proposal and this final action, please see our proposal and the docket for this action. First, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), EPA proposed to approve the State's request to redesignate the Mammoth Lakes PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. In our July 30, 2015 proposal, we concluded that the area has met the five criteria for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E): (1) The area has attained the PM10 NAAQS over the period 2009-2014; (2) the required portions of the SIP are fully approved for the area; (3) the improvement in ambient air quality in the area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in PM10 emissions; (4) California has met all requirements applicable to the Mammoth Lakes PM10 nonattainment area with respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA; and, (5) the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan, as described below, meets the requirements of CAA section 175A. Second, under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA proposed to approve as a revision to the SIP, the maintenance plan developed by the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD) entitled ``2014 Update Air Quality Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Town of Mammoth Lakes'' (herein and in our proposal referred to as the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan), dated May 5, 2014, submitted by California, through the California Air Resources Board (CARB), to EPA on October 21, 2014.\1\ EPA proposed to find that the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan meets the requirements in section 175A of the CAA. The plan's maintenance demonstration shows that the Mammoth Lakes area will continue to attain the PM10 NAAQS for at least 10 years beyond redesignation (i.e. through 2030) by continued implementation of the local control measures approved into the SIP. The plan's contingency provisions incorporate a process for identifying new or more stringent control measures in the event of a future monitored violation. Finally, EPA proposed to approve the plan's 2012 emission inventory as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172 and 175A. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See the docket for this action for copies of the California's submittal documents including the October 21, 2014 submittal letter from the State. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Third, EPA proposed to approve the motor vehicle emission budgets (budgets) in the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan because we find they meet the applicable transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e). With our proposal published July 30, 2015, EPA informed the public that we are reviewing the plan's budgets for adequacy and that we started the public comment period on adequacy of the proposed budgets. This comment period closed on August 31, 2015. We received no public comments concerning the adequacy of the proposed PM10 motor vehicle emissions budgets. II. Public Comments and EPA Responses EPA's proposed rule provided a 30-day comment period. During this comment period we received no comments on our proposal. III. EPA's Final Action To conclude, based on our review of the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan and redesignation request submitted by California, air quality monitoring data, and other relevant materials contained within our docket, EPA finds that the State has addressed all the necessary requirements for redesignation of the Mammoth Lakes nonattainment area to attainment of the PM10 NAAQS, pursuant to CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 175A. First, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), we are approving the State's request, which accompanied the submittal of the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan, to redesignate the Mammoth Lakes PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. Our redesignation of the Mammoth Lakes area is based on our determination that the area has met the five criteria for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E): (1) The area has attained the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS as demonstrated by 2009-2014 data; \2\ (2) the relevant portions of the SIP are fully approved; (3) the improvement in air quality in the Mammoth Lakes area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in PM10 emissions; (4) California has met all requirements applicable to the Mammoth Lakes PM10 nonattainment area with respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA; and, (5) our approval of the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan, as part of this action. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ We reviewed 2015 preliminary data received from the State and found that the Mammoth Lakes area did not show exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in the first quarter of 2015. Second quarter data was not submitted by the State in time for consideration within this notice. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Second, under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is approving the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan and finds that it meets the requirements of Section 175A. We find that the maintenance demonstration shows that the area will continue to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS for at least 10 years beyond redesignation (i.e., through 2030). We find that the Maintenance Plan provides a contingency process for identifying and adopting new or more stringent control measures if a monitored violation of the PM10 NAAQS occurs. Finally, we are approving the 2012 emissions inventory as meeting applicable requirements for emissions inventories in Sections 172 and 175A of the CAA. Last, we find that the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan's motor vehicle emissions budgets meet applicable CAA requirements for maintenance plans and transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e). With the effective date of this action, these approved budgets must be used in any future regional PM10 regional emissions [[Page 60051]] analysis conducted by the State and the Federal Highway Administration. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and, does not provide 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 State plan that EPA is approving today does not apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, this rule, as it relates to the maintenance plan, 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. 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 4, 2015. 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 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 40 CFR Part 81 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: September 18, 2015. Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, Region IX. Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52--[AMENDED] 0 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F--[Amended] 0 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding and reserving paragraph (c)(461) and adding paragraph (c)(462) to read as follows: Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan. * * * * * (c) * * * (461) [Reserved] (462) The following plan was submitted on October 21, 2014, by the Governor's designee. (i) [Reserved] (ii) Additional Materials. (A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD). (1) ``2014 Air Quality Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Town of Mammoth Lakes'' (Mammoth Lakes PM 10 Maintenance Plan), adopted on May 5, 2014. (2) GBUAPCD Board Order #140505-03 adopting the Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan, dated May 5, 2014. (B) State of California Air Resources Board (CARB). (1) CARB Resolution 14-27 adopting the redesignation request and Mammoth Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan, dated September 18, 2014. PART 81--[AMENDED] 0 3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. Subpart C--[Amended] 0 4. Section 81.305 is amended in the table entitled ``California-PM-10'' by revising the entry under Mono County for the ``Mammoth Lake planning area'' to read as follows: Sec. 81.305 California. * * * * * [[Page 60052]] California--PM-10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Designation Classification Designated area ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date Type Date Type ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * Mono County Mammoth Lakes planning area. November 4, 2015... Attainment......... .............. .................... Includes the following sections: a. Sections 1-12, 17, and 18 of Township T4S, R28E; b. Sections 25-36 of Township T3S, R28E; c. Sections 25-36 of Township T3S, R27E; d. Sections 1-18 of Township T4S, R27E; and, e. Sections 25 and 36 of Township T3S, R26E. * * * * * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * [FR Doc. 2015-25165 Filed 10-2-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 192 / Monday, October 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60049
continue to make, these documents In addition, the SIP is not approved PART 52—APPROVAL AND
generally available electronically to apply on any Indian reservation land PROMULGATION OF
through www.regulations.gov and/or in or in any other area where EPA or an IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
hard copy at the appropriate EPA office Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
(see the ADDRESSES section of this tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52
preamble for more information). Indian country, the rule does not have continues to read as follows:
IV. Statutory and Executive Order tribal implications and will not impose Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Reviews substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as Subpart F—California
Under the Clean Air Act, the specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
Administrator is required to approve a ■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). adding paragraph (c)(457)(i)(A)(4) to
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable The Congressional Review Act, 5 read as follows:
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement § 52.220 Identification of plan.
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides * * * * *
state choices, provided that they meet that before a rule may take effect, the (c) * * *
the criteria of the Clean Air Act. agency promulgating the rule must (457) * * *
submit a rule report, which includes a (i) * * *
Accordingly, this action merely
(A) * * *
approves state law as meeting Federal copy of the rule, to each House of the (4) Rule 10.1, ‘‘New Source Review,’’
requirements and does not impose Congress and to the Comptroller General amended on October 6, 2014.
additional requirements beyond those of the United States. EPA will submit a
imposed by state law. For that reason, * * * * *
report containing this action and other
this action: required information to the U.S. Senate, [FR Doc. 2015–25141 Filed 10–2–15; 8:45 am]
• Is not a significant regulatory action the U.S. House of Representatives, and BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
subject to review by the Office of the Comptroller General of the United
Management and Budget under States prior to publication of the rule in
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
the Federal Register. A major rule
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, AGENCY
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
January 21, 2011); is published in the Federal Register.
• does not impose an information 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
collection burden under the provisions [EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0279; FRL–9935–05–
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Region 9]
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
• is certified as not having a Air Act, petitions for judicial review of Air Plan Approval; California;
significant economic impact on a this action must be filed in the United Mammoth Lakes; Redesignation; PM10
substantial number of small entities States Court of Appeals for the Maintenance Plan
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 appropriate circuit by December 4,
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 2015. Filing a petition for Agency (EPA).
• does not contain any unfunded reconsideration by the Administrator of
mandate or significantly or uniquely ACTION: Final rule.
this final rule does not affect the finality
affect small governments, as described of this action for the purposes of judicial SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act review nor does it extend the time Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); within which a petition for judicial approve, as a revision to the California
• does not have Federalism review may be filed, and shall not State Implementation Plan (SIP),
implications as specified in Executive postpone the effectiveness of such rule California’s request to redesignate the
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, or action. This action may not be Mammoth Lakes nonattainment area to
1999); challenged later in proceedings to attainment for the 1987 National
• is not an economically significant
enforce its requirements (see section Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
regulatory action based on health or
307(b)(2)). for particulate matter of ten microns or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
less (PM10). Also, EPA is taking final
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
• is not a significant regulatory action action to approve the PM10 maintenance
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Environmental protection, Air plan for the Mammoth Lakes area and
28355, May 22, 2001); pollution control, Incorporation by the associated motor vehicle emissions
• is not subject to requirements of reference, Intergovernmental relations, budgets for use in transportation
Section 12(d) of the National Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate conformity determinations. Lastly, EPA
Technology Transfer and Advancement is finalizing our approval of the 2012
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because attainment year emissions inventory.
requirements, Volatile organic
application of those requirements would We are taking these final actions
compounds.
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; because the SIP revision meets the
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. requirements of the Clean Air Act and
and
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
• does not provide EPA with the Dated: August 21, 2015. EPA guidance for maintenance plans
discretionary authority to address, as and motor vehicle emissions budgets.
Jared Blumenfeld,
appropriate, disproportionate human DATES: This rule will be effective on
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
health or environmental effects, using November 4, 2015.
practicable and legally permissible Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket
methods, under Executive Order 12898 of Federal Regulations is amended as number EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0279 for
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). follows: this action. Generally, documents in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Oct 02, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\05OCR1.SGM 05OCR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_60241/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 192 / Monday, October 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60051
analysis conducted by the State and the In addition, the State plan that EPA is Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Federal Highway Administration. approving today does not apply on any Dated: September 18, 2015.
Indian reservation land or in any other Jared Blumenfeld,
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
Reviews Regional Administrator, Region IX.
demonstrated that a tribe has
Under the Clean Air Act, the jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Administrator is required to approve a country, this rule, as it relates to the Federal Regulations is amended as
SIP submission that complies with the maintenance plan, does not have tribal follows:
provisions of the Act and applicable implications and will not impose
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); substantial direct costs on tribal PART 52—[AMENDED]
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP governments or preempt tribal law as
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
state choices, provided that they meet FR 67249, November 9, 2000). continues to read as follows:
the criteria of the Clean Air Act. The Congressional Review Act, 5 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Accordingly, this action merely U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
approves state law as meeting Federal Business Regulatory Enforcement Subpart F—[Amended]
requirements and does not impose Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
additional requirements beyond those ■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by
that before a rule may take effect, the adding and reserving paragraph (c)(461)
imposed by state law. For that reason, agency promulgating the rule must
this action: and adding paragraph (c)(462) to read as
submit a rule report, which includes a
• Is not a significant regulatory action follows:
copy of the rule, to each House of the
subject to review by the Office of
Congress and to the Comptroller General § 52.220 Identification of plan.
Management and Budget under
of the United States. EPA will submit a * * * * *
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
report containing this action and other (c) * * *
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011); required information to the U.S. Senate, (461) [Reserved]
• does not impose an information the U.S. House of Representatives, and (462) The following plan was
collection burden under the provisions the Comptroller General of the United submitted on October 21, 2014, by the
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 States prior to publication of the rule in Governor’s designee.
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); the Federal Register. A major rule
(i) [Reserved]
• is certified as not having a cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register. (ii) Additional Materials.
significant economic impact on a (A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution
substantial number of small entities This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Control District (GBUAPCD).
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean (1) ‘‘2014 Air Quality Maintenance
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded Air Act, petitions for judicial review of Plan and Redesignation Request for the
mandate or significantly or uniquely this action must be filed in the United Town of Mammoth Lakes’’ (Mammoth
affect small governments, as described States Court of Appeals for the Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan), adopted
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act appropriate circuit by December 4, on May 5, 2014.
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 2015. Filing a petition for (2) GBUAPCD Board Order #140505–
• does not have Federalism reconsideration by the Administrator of 03 adopting the Mammoth Lakes PM10
implications as specified in Executive this final rule does not affect the finality Maintenance Plan, dated May 5, 2014.
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, of this action for the purposes of judicial (B) State of California Air Resources
1999); review nor does it extend the time Board (CARB).
• is not an economically significant within which a petition for judicial (1) CARB Resolution 14–27 adopting
regulatory action based on health or review may be filed, and shall not the redesignation request and Mammoth
safety risks subject to Executive Order postpone the effectiveness of such rule Lakes PM10 Maintenance Plan, dated
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); or action. This action may not be September 18, 2014.
• is not a significant regulatory action challenged later in proceedings to
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR enforce its requirements (see section PART 81—[AMENDED]
28355, May 22, 2001); 307(b)(2)).
• is not subject to requirements of ■ 3. The authority citation for part 81
Section 12(d) of the National List of Subjects continues to read as follows:
Technology Transfer and Advancement 40 CFR Part 52 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would Environmental protection, Air Subpart C—[Amended]
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; pollution control, Incorporation by
and, reference, Intergovernmental relations, ■ 4. Section 81.305 is amended in the
• does not provide EPA with the Particulate matter, Reporting and table entitled ‘‘California–PM–10’’ by
discretionary authority to address, as recordkeeping requirements. revising the entry under Mono County
appropriate, disproportionate human for the ‘‘Mammoth Lake planning area’’
40 CFR Part 81
health or environmental effects, using to read as follows:
practicable and legally permissible Environmental protection, Air
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
methods, under Executive Order 12898 pollution control, National parks, § 81.305 California.
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Wilderness areas. * * * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Oct 02, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\05OCR1.SGM 05OCR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_60241/page/3.svg)
![60052 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 192 / Monday, October 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
CALIFORNIA—PM–10
Designation Classification
Designated area
Date Type Date Type
* * * * * * *
Mono County
Mammoth Lakes planning area ............................. November 4, 2015 ............ Attainment ........................ ........................
Includes the following sections:
a. Sections 1–12, 17, and 18 of Township
T4S, R28E;
b. Sections 25–36 of Township T3S, R28E;
c. Sections 25–36 of Township T3S, R27E;
d. Sections 1–18 of Township T4S, R27E;
and,
e. Sections 25 and 36 of Township T3S,
R26E.
* * * * * * *
* * * * * publish a timely withdrawal in the I. Why is EPA using a direct final rule?
[FR Doc. 2015–25165 Filed 10–2–15; 8:45 am] Federal Register informing the public The EPA is publishing this rule
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P that this rule will not take effect. without a prior proposed rule because
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a we view this as a non-controversial
docket for this action under Docket ID amendment and anticipate no adverse
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
No. EPA–R07–RCRA–2014–0452. All comment. This action narrowly changes
AGENCY
documents in the docket are listed on the delisting levels for the F006/F019
40 CFR Part 261 the www.regulations.gov Web site. wastewater treatment sludge generated
Although listed in the index, some at the John Deere Des Moines facility in
[EPA–R07–RCRA–2014–0452; FRL–9934– information is not publicly available, Ankeny, Iowa. If the EPA receives
78–Region 7] e.g., CBI or other information whose adverse comment, we will publish a
Hazardous Waste Management disclosure is restricted by statute. timely withdrawal in the Federal
System; Identification and Listing of Certain other material, such as Register informing the public that this
Hazardous Waste; Direct Final Rule copyrighted material, is not placed on direct final rule will not take effect. In
the Internet and will be publicly that case, we may issue a proposed rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection available only in hard copy form. to propose the changes and would
Agency (EPA). Publicly available docket materials are address public comments in any
ACTION: Direct final rule. available either electronically through subsequent final rule based on the
www.regulations.gov or in by contacting proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection the further information contact below.
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final II. Does this action apply to me?
The public may copy material from any
action to revise delisting levels for the regulatory docket at no cost for the first This action only applies to the F006/
hazardous waste exclusion granted to 100 pages and at a cost of $0.15 per page F019 wastewater treatment sludge
John Deere Des Moines Works (John for additional copies. generated at the John Deere Des Moines
Deere) of Deere & Company, in Ankeny, facility in Ankeny, Iowa.
Iowa to exclude or ‘‘delist’’ up to 600 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
tons per calendar year of F006/F019 Kenneth Herstowski, Waste III. Background
wastewater treatment sludge. The Remediation and Permits Branch, Air A. What is a delisting petition?
wastewater treatment sludge is a filter and Waste Management Division, EPA
Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, A delisting petition is a request from
cake generated by John Deere’s Ankeny, a generator to EPA or to an authorized
Iowa, facility wastewater treatment Lenexa, KS 66219; telephone number
(913) 551–7631; email address: state to exclude or delist, from the
system was conditionally excluded from RCRA list of hazardous wastes, waste
the list of hazardous wastes on herstowski.ken@epa.gov.
the generator believes should not be
November 25, 2014. This direct final SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
considered hazardous under RCRA.
rule responds to a request submitted by information in this section is organized
John Deere to increase certain delisting as follows: B. How did EPA act on John Deere’s
levels and eliminate certain delisting I. Why is EPA using a direct final rule?
delisting petition?
levels for the excluded waste. After II. Does this action apply to me? After evaluating the delisting petition
careful analysis and use of the Delisting III. Background submitted by John Deere, EPA proposed,
Risk Assessment Software (DRAS), EPA A. What is a delisting petition? on August 20, 2014 (79 FR 49252), to
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
has concluded the request may be B. How did EPA act on John Deere’s exclude the waste from the lists of
granted. delisting petition? hazardous waste under § 261.31. EPA
C. What are the changes John Deere is
DATES: This direct final rule is effective
requesting?
issued a final rule on November 25,
on December 4, 2015, without further D. How did EPA evaluate John Deere’s 2014 (79 FR 70108) granting John
notice, unless EPA receives adverse request? Deere’s delisting petition to have up to
comment by November 4, 2015. If EPA E. How does this final rule affect states? 600 tons per year of the F006/F019
receives adverse comment, we will IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews wastewater treatment sludge generated
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Oct 02, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\05OCR1.SGM 05OCR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_60241/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-15 08:52:52
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 08:52:52
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This rule will be effective on November 4, 2015. | |
| Contact | Jerry Wamsley, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4111, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 60049 | |
| CFR Citation | 40
CFR
52 40 CFR 81 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; National Parks and Wilderness Areas |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR