Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 30, 2021 / Rules and Regulations and 110a2M. We are also partially approving and partially disapproving the submittal for CAA sections 110a2C, 110a2D, and 110a2J due to PSD program deficiencies in Amador, Antelope Valley, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa, Mendocino, Modoc, Mojave Desert, North Coast, Northern Sierra, Northern Sonoma, Sacramento Metro, San Diego, Shasta, Siskiyou, South Coast, Tehama, and Tuolumne air districts. These partial disapprovals will not create any new consequences as the air districts with PSD deficiencies are already subject to PSD federal implementation plans FIPs.
At this time, EPA is not acting on the interstate transport requirements of 110a2DiI, which prohibit emission sources from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. The EPA will propose action on the interstate transport requirements for the 2015
ozone NAAQS in a separate rulemaking.

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

B. Approval of Updated California Code of Regulations Provisions Californias Infrastructure SIP
Submittals included an updated version of the California Code of Regulations CCR, Title 2, section 18700, which maintains the key provisions of that section and also incorporates language in CCR, Title 2, section 18701 that the EPA previously approved into the SIP to meet the conflict of interest requirements of CAA sections 110a2Eii and 128. It also included an updated version of CCR, Title 2, section 18701. We proposed to approve the updated versions of CCR, Title 2, sections 18700 and 18701 into the SIP
in our October 16, 2020 rulemaking.
These updated provisions continue to meet the conflict of interest requirements of CAA sections 110a2Eii and 128. We are finalizing approval, as proposed, of these updated provisions with this action.
C. Approval of Reclassification Requests for Emergency Episode Planning In its 2018 submittal, CARB requested that the EPA reclassify three air quality control regions AQCRs with respect to the emergency episode planning requirements of CAA section 110a2G and 40 CFR part 51, subpart H, as applicable to ozone.6 The air 6 In our proposed rulemaking, we inadvertently stated that CARB requested to re-classify the AQCRs for NO2 and SO2. CARB did not make such a request in either of its submittals for the 2015 ozone NAAQS and we did not propose to re-classify the
VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:52 Mar 29, 2021

Jkt 253001

quality tests for classifying AQCRs are prescribed in 40 CFR 51.150 and are pollutant-specific e.g., ozone rather than being specific to any given NAAQS
e.g., 1997 ozone NAAQS. Consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR 51.153, reclassification of AQCRs must rely on the most recent three years of air quality data. For ozone, an AQCR with a 1-hour ozone level greater than 0.10 ppm over the most recent three-year period must be classified Priority I, while all other areas are classified Priority III. AQCRs that are classified Priority I are required to have SIP-approved emergency episode contingency plans, while those classified Priority III are not required to have such plans, pursuant to 40 CFR
51.151 and 51.152. We interpret 40 CFR
51.153 as establishing the means for states to review air quality data and request a higher or lower classification for any given region and as providing the regulatory basis for the EPA to reclassify such regions, as appropriate, under CAA sections 110a2G and 301a1.
On the basis of Californias ambient air quality data for 20152017, we are finalizing approval, as proposed, of Californias request to reclassify Lake County, North Central Coast, and South Central Coast to Priority I areas for ozone.
D. Approval of Emergency Episode Contingency Plans To meet the requirements of CAA
110a2G, Californias 2020 Submittal included the ozone emergency episode contingency plans for Amador County APCD, San Luis Obispo County APCD, Northern Sierra AQMD, Tuolumne County APCD, Mariposa County APCD, and Calaveras County APCD, as well as the exemption request for Lake County AQMD based on its attainment status.
The contingency plans meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.152a to specify two or more stages of episode criteria, provide for public announcement whenever any episode stage has been determined to exist, and to specify adequate emission control actions to be taken at each episode stage. The emergency episode contingency plans also meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.152b to provide for prompt acquisition of forecasts of atmospheric stagnation conditions, to provide for inspection of sources to ascertain compliance with applicable emission control action requirements, and provide for communications procedures for transmitting status reports and orders as AQCRs for those NAAQS in our proposal. See 85
FR 65755, 65773 October 16, 2020.

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

16535

to emission control actions to be taken during an episode stage. We are finalizing approval, as proposed, of these emergency episode contingency plans into the California SIP.
Because of Lake Countys attainment status for ozone, it meets the criteria of 40 CFR 51.152d1 that permits the Administrator to exempt those portions of Priority I regions that have been designated as attainment under section 107 of the CAA. The mix of ozone precursor sources in Lake County, as well as the historical 1-hour ozone levels below 0.10 ppm make it unlikely that additional measures are needed to keep ozone pollution below the significant harm level of 0.6 ppm. We are finalizing approval, as proposed, of the request to exempt the Lake County AQMD from emergency episode contingency planning requirements of 40 CFR 51.152.
IV. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference as 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 CAA, 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. 7410k; 40 CFR 52.02a.
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPAs role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves, or conditionally approves, state plans 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;
Is not an Executive Order 13771 82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017 regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866;
Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.;

E:FRFM30MRR1.SGM

30MRR1