81 FR 95473 - Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 249 (December 28, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 249 (December 28, 2016)
| Page Range | 95473-95475 | |
| FR Document | 2016-31225 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 28, 2016)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 95473-95475] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-31225] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0393; FRL-9955-62-Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve a revision to the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns emissions of particulate matter at Owens Lake, CA. [[Page 95474]] We are approving a local rule that regulates these emissions under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). DATES: This rule will be effective on January 27, 2017. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0393. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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 http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4125, [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action On September 13, 2016 (81 FR 62849), the EPA proposed to approve the following rule into the California SIP. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GBUAPCD............................... 433 Control of Particulate 04/13/16 06/09/16 Emissions at Owens Lake. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We proposed to approve this rule because we determined that it complied with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action contains more information on the rule and our evaluation. II. Public Comments and EPA Responses The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received one comment that was submitted anonymously. Comment: The comment begins, ``I don't see why this would not be approved right away,'' and generally supports the EPA's proposal to approve Rule 433. The comment also includes general statements and questions such as ``the fact that `Indian' is still the term being used in this proposed rule is troublesome,'' ``it would be nice to see them go above and beyond the EPA's suggested guidelines,'' ``what does this mean for the Indigenous land,'' ``who is in charge of regulation,'' ``how will this alter the particle [sic] matters given off by this lakebed,'' ``what happened to cause this lakebed to behave in such a way . . . shouldn't that be looked into instead of altering the way nature is now,'' and ``instead of being a reactive society we should be more proactive and investigate into `unintended consequences' more so than we do now.'' Response: The comment generally supports EPA's proposed approval of Rule 433. The comment does not provide specific information related to the basis for EPA's proposed approval and does not request any changes to our proposed action. In addition, most of the statements and questions in the comment are not relevant to EPA's action approving Rule 433 or are outside of the scope of this action. For those reasons, the EPA is finalizing its proposed approval of Rule 433 without change based on the comment. III. EPA Action No comments were submitted that change our assessment of the rule as described in our proposed action. Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully approving this rule into the California SIP. IV. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the GBUAPCD rule described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). V. 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, 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 (Public Law 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 [[Page 95475]] 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 February 27, 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: November 10, 2016. 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 0 1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F--California 0 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(483) to read as follows: Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part. * * * * * (c) * * * (483) A new regulation was submitted on June 9, 2016 by the Governor's Designee. (i) Incorporation by Reference. (A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District. (1) Rule 433, ``Control of Particulate Emissions at Owens Lake,'' adopted on April 13, 2016. [FR Doc. 2016-31225 Filed 12-27-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 95473
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the appropriate, disproportionate human PART 52—APPROVAL AND
incorporation by reference of the health or environmental effects, using PROMULGATION OF
SCAQMD rules described in the practicable and legally permissible IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth methods, under Executive Order 12898
below. The EPA has made, and will (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52
continue to make, these documents In addition, the SIP is not approved continues to read as follows:
available through www.regulations.gov to apply on any Indian reservation land Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
and at the EPA Region IX Office (please or in any other area where the EPA or
contact the person identified in the FOR an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a Subpart F—California
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
this preamble for more information). Indian country, the rule does not have ■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by
tribal implications and will not impose adding paragraphs (c)(379)(i)(A)(7),
V. Statutory and Executive Order (c)(428)(i)(D)(2), and (c)(461)(i)(C)(3) to
Reviews substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as read as follows:
Under the Clean Air Act, the specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 § 52.220 Identification of plan—in part.
Administrator is required to approve a FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
SIP submission that complies with the (c) * * *
The Congressional Review Act, 5 (379) * * *
provisions of the Act and applicable U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); (i) * * *
Business Regulatory Enforcement (A) * * *
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (7) Previously approved on August 4,
submissions, the EPA’s role is to that before a rule may take effect, the 2010 in paragraph (c)(379)(i)(A)(4) of
approve state choices, provided that agency promulgating the rule must this section and now deleted with
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air submit a rule report, which includes a replacement in paragraph
Act. Accordingly, this action merely copy of the rule, to each House of the (c)(428)(i)(D)(2), Rule 1147, ‘‘NOX
approves state law as meeting federal Congress and to the Comptroller General Reductions from Miscellaneous
requirements and does not impose of the United States. The EPA will Sources,’’ adopted on December 5, 2008.
additional requirements beyond those submit a report containing this action
imposed by state law. For that reason, * * * * *
and other required information to the (428) * * *
this action: U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
• Is not a significant regulatory action (i) * * *
Representatives, and the Comptroller (D) * * *
subject to review by the Office of General of the United States prior to
Management and Budget under (2) Rule 1147, ‘‘NOX Reductions from
publication of the rule in the Federal Miscellaneous Sources,’’ amended on
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Register. A major rule cannot take effect
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, September 9, 2011.
until 60 days after it is published in the
January 21, 2011); * * * * *
Federal Register. This action is not a
• does not impose an information ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
(461) * * *
collection burden under the provisions (i) * * *
804(2). (C) * * *
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean (3) Rule 1153.1, ‘‘Emissions of Oxides
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a Air Act, petitions for judicial review of of Nitrogen from Commercial Food
significant economic impact on a this action must be filed in the United Ovens,’’ adopted on November 7, 2014.
substantial number of small entities States Court of Appeals for the
* * * * *
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 appropriate circuit by February 27,
2017. Filing a petition for [FR Doc. 2016–31226 Filed 12–27–16; 8:45 am]
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded reconsideration by the Administrator of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
mandate or significantly or uniquely this final rule does not affect the finality
affect small governments, as described of this action for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act AGENCY
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); within which a petition for judicial
• does not have Federalism review may be filed, and shall not
40 CFR Part 52
implications as specified in Executive postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. This action may not be [EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0393; FRL–9955–62–
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
challenged later in proceedings to Region 9]
1999);
• is not an economically significant enforce its requirements (see section
Approval of California Air Plan
regulatory action based on health or 307(b)(2)).
Revisions, Great Basin Unified Air
safety risks subject to Executive Order List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Pollution Control District
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action Environmental protection, Air AGENCY: Environmental Protection
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR pollution control, Incorporation by Agency (EPA).
28355, May 22, 2001); reference, Intergovernmental relations, ACTION: Final rule.
• is not subject to requirements of Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
Section 12(d) of the National recordkeeping requirements. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Technology Transfer and Advancement Dated: November 21, 2016. Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Alexis Strauss, approve a revision to the Great Basin
application of those requirements would Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Unified Air Pollution Control District
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; (GBUAPCD) portion of the California
and Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
• does not provide the EPA with the of Federal Regulations is amended as revision concerns emissions of
discretionary authority to address, as follows: particulate matter at Owens Lake, CA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:15 Dec 27, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM 28DER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_95722/page/1.svg)
![95474 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
We are approving a local rule that Certain other material, such as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
regulates these emissions under the copyrighted material, is not placed on Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). the Internet and will be publicly and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
DATES: This rule will be effective on available only in hard copy form.
Table of Contents
January 27, 2017. Publicly available docket materials are
available through http:// I. Proposed Action
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
www.regulations.gov, or please contact II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
docket for this action under Docket ID III. EPA Action
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0393. All the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
IV. Incorporation by Reference
documents in the docket are listed on V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
the http://www.regulations.gov Web additional availability information.
site. Although listed in the index, some FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Proposed Action
information is not publicly available, Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, On September 13, 2016 (81 FR 62849),
e.g., CBI or other information whose (415) 947–4125, vineyard.christine@ the EPA proposed to approve the
disclosure is restricted by statute. epa.gov. following rule into the California SIP.
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
GBUAPCD ............................... 433 Control of Particulate Emissions at Owens Lake .................. 04/13/16 06/09/16
We proposed to approve this rule proposed approval of Rule 433 without Management and Budget under
because we determined that it complied change based on the comment. Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
with the relevant CAA requirements. October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
III. EPA Action
Our proposed action contains more January 21, 2011);
information on the rule and our No comments were submitted that • does not impose an information
evaluation. change our assessment of the rule as collection burden under the provisions
described in our proposed action. of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
II. Public Comments and EPA Therefore, as authorized in section U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Responses 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully • is certified as not having a
The EPA’s proposed action provided approving this rule into the California significant economic impact on a
a 30-day public comment period. During SIP. substantial number of small entities
this period, we received one comment under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
that was submitted anonymously. IV. Incorporation by Reference
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Comment: The comment begins, ‘‘I In this rule, the EPA is finalizing • does not contain any unfunded
don’t see why this would not be regulatory text that includes mandate or significantly or uniquely
approved right away,’’ and generally incorporation by reference. In affect small governments, as described
supports the EPA’s proposal to approve accordance with requirements of 1 CFR in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Rule 433. The comment also includes 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the of 1995 (Public Law 104–4);
general statements and questions such incorporation by reference of the • does not have Federalism
as ‘‘the fact that ‘Indian’ is still the term GBUAPCD rule described in the implications as specified in Executive
being used in this proposed rule is amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
troublesome,’’ ‘‘it would be nice to see below. The EPA has made, and will 1999);
them go above and beyond the EPA’s continue to make, these documents • is not an economically significant
suggested guidelines,’’ ‘‘what does this available through www.regulations.gov regulatory action based on health or
mean for the Indigenous land,’’ ‘‘who is and at the EPA Region IX Office (please safety risks subject to Executive Order
in charge of regulation,’’ ‘‘how will this contact the person identified in the FOR 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
alter the particle [sic] matters given off FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of • is not a significant regulatory action
by this lakebed,’’ ‘‘what happened to this preamble for more information). subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
cause this lakebed to behave in such a 28355, May 22, 2001);
V. Statutory and Executive Order
way . . . shouldn’t that be looked into • is not subject to requirements of
Reviews
instead of altering the way nature is Section 12(d) of the National
now,’’ and ‘‘instead of being a reactive Under the Clean Air Act, the Technology Transfer and Advancement
society we should be more proactive Administrator is required to approve a Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
and investigate into ‘unintended SIP submission that complies with the application of those requirements would
consequences’ more so than we do provisions of the Act and applicable be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
now.’’ federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); and
Response: The comment generally 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP • does not provide the EPA with the
supports EPA’s proposed approval of submissions, the EPA’s role is to discretionary authority to address, as
Rule 433. The comment does not approve state choices, provided that appropriate, disproportionate human
provide specific information related to they meet the criteria of the Clean Air health or environmental effects, using
the basis for EPA’s proposed approval Act. Accordingly, this action merely practicable and legally permissible
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
and does not request any changes to our approves state law as meeting federal methods, under Executive Order 12898
proposed action. In addition, most of requirements and does not impose (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
the statements and questions in the additional requirements beyond those In addition, the SIP is not approved
comment are not relevant to EPA’s imposed by state law. For that reason, to apply on any Indian reservation land
action approving Rule 433 or are outside this action: or in any other area where the EPA or
of the scope of this action. For those • Is not a significant regulatory action an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
reasons, the EPA is finalizing its subject to review by the Office of tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:15 Dec 27, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM 28DER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_95722/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 95475
Indian country, the rule does not have Subpart F—California submitting comments. Once submitted,
tribal implications and will not impose comments cannot be edited or removed
substantial direct costs on tribal ■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by from Regulations.gov. For either manner
governments or preempt tribal law as adding paragraph (c)(483) to read as of submission, EPA may publish any
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 follows: comment received to its public docket.
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Do not submit electronically any
§ 52.220 Identification of plan—in part.
information you consider to be
The Congressional Review Act, 5 * * * * * Confidential Business Information (CBI)
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small (c) * * * or other information whose disclosure is
Business Regulatory Enforcement (483) A new regulation was submitted restricted by statute. Multimedia
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides on June 9, 2016 by the Governor’s submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
that before a rule may take effect, the Designee. accompanied by a written comment.
agency promulgating the rule must (i) Incorporation by Reference. The written comment is considered the
submit a rule report, which includes a (A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution
official comment and should include
copy of the rule, to each House of the Control District.
discussion of all points you wish to
Congress and to the Comptroller General (1) Rule 433, ‘‘Control of Particulate
make. EPA will generally not consider
of the United States. The EPA will Emissions at Owens Lake,’’ adopted on
comments or comment contents located
submit a report containing this action April 13, 2016.
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
and other required information to the [FR Doc. 2016–31225 Filed 12–27–16; 8:45 am]
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P system). For additional submission
Representatives, and the Comptroller methods, please contact the person
General of the United States prior to identified in the FOR FURTHER
publication of the rule in the Federal ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
Register. A major rule cannot take effect AGENCY full EPA public comment policy,
until 60 days after it is published in the information about CBI or multimedia
Federal Register. This action is not a 40 CFR Part 52
submissions, and general guidance on
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. [EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0502; FRL–9955–89– making effective comments, please visit
804(2). Region 5] http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean commenting-epa-dockets.
Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Volatile
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Organic Compounds Definition
this action must be filed in the United Michelle Becker, Life Scientist,
States Court of Appeals for the AGENCY: Environmental Protection Attainment Planning and Maintenance
appropriate circuit by February 27, Agency (EPA). Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
2017. Filing a petition for ACTION: Direct final rule. Environmental Protection Agency,
reconsideration by the Administrator of Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
this final rule does not affect the finality SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–3901,
of this action for the purposes of judicial (CAA), the Environmental Protection becker.michelle@epa.gov.
review nor does it extend the time Agency (EPA) is approving a state SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
within which a petition for judicial submission as a revision to the Illinois Throughout this document whenever
review may be filed, and shall not State Implementation Plan (SIP). The ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
postpone the effectiveness of such rule revision amends the Illinois EPA. This supplementary information
or action. This action may not be Administrative Code (IAC) by updating section is arranged as follows:
challenged later in proceedings to the definition of volatile organic I. What is the background for this action?
enforce its requirements (see section material (VOM), otherwise known as II. What is EPA’s analysis of the SIP
307(b)(2)). volatile organic compounds (VOC), to Revision?
exclude 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol III. What action is EPA taking?
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 (AMP). This revision is in response to IV. Incorporation by Reference
an EPA rulemaking in 2014 which V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Environmental protection, Air exempted this compound from the
pollution control, Incorporation by I. What is the background for this
Federal definition of VOC on the basis action?
reference, Intergovernmental relations, that the compound makes a negligible
Particulate matter, Reporting and contribution to tropospheric ozone The Illinois Environmental Protection
recordkeeping requirements. formation. Agency (IEPA) submitted a revision to
the Illinois SIP to EPA for approval on
Dated: November 10, 2016. DATES: This direct final rule will be August 9, 2016. The SIP revision
Alexis Strauss, effective February 27, 2017, unless EPA excludes the chemical compound 2-
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. receives adverse comments by January amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP) from
27, 2017. If adverse comments are the definition of VOM or VOC at 35 IAC
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code received, EPA will publish a timely Part 211, Subpart B, Section
of Federal Regulations is amended as withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 211.7150(a).
follows: Federal Register informing the public The Illinois Pollution Control Board
that the rule will not take effect. (IPCB) held a public hearing on the
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, proposed SIP revision on January 8,
PROMULGATION OF
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 2015. There were no public comments
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
OAR–2016–0502 at http:// received at the public hearing. IPCB
www.regulations.gov or via email to received one comment from the
■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 aburano.douglas@epa.gov. For American Coatings Association in a
continues to read as follows: comments submitted at Regulations.gov, letter dated December 16, 2014,
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. follow the online instructions for supporting the exemption of AMP from
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:15 Dec 27, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM 28DER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_95722/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-12-28 02:16:53
Document Modified: 2016-12-28 02:16:53
| 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 January 27, 2017. | |
| Contact | Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4125, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 95473 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Particulate Matter and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR