[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26697-26722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09729]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0468; FRL-9945-17-OAR]


Determinations of Attainment by the Attainment Date, Extensions 
of the Attainment Date, and Reclassification of Several Areas for the 
2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action on three separate and independent types of determinations for 
each of the 36 areas that are currently classified as ``Marginal'' for 
the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). First, 
the EPA is determining that 17 areas attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 
the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2015, based on complete, 
quality-assured and certified ozone monitoring data for 2012-2014. 
Second, the EPA is granting 1-year attainment date extensions for eight 
areas on the basis that the requirements for such extensions under the 
Clean Air Act (CAA) and the EPA's implementing regulations have been 
met. Third, the EPA is determining that 11 areas failed to attain the 
2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2015, 
and thus are reclassified by operation of law as ``Moderate'' for the 
2008 ozone NAAQS. States containing any or any portion of these new 
Moderate areas must submit State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 
that meet the statutory and regulatory requirements that apply to 2008 
ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate by January 1, 2017.

DATES: This rule is effective on June 3, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0468 
for this action. All documents in the docket are listed on http://www.regulation.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business 
Information 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 electronically 
through http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Cecil (Butch) Stackhouse or Mr. H. 
Lynn Dail, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality 
Policy Division, Mail Code C539-01, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. 
Telephone Mr. Stackhouse at (919) 541-5208 or Mr. Dail at (919) 541-
2363; or both at fax number: (919) 541-5315; email addresses: 
[email protected], or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Actions
    A. Determinations of Attainment
    B. Extensions of Marginal Area Attainment Dates
    C. Determinations of Failure To Attain and Reclassification
    D. Moderate Area SIP Revision Submission Deadline
    E. Rescission of Clean Data Determination and Proposed SIP Call 
for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS for the New York-N. New Jersey-Long 
Island (NY-NJ-CT) Nonattainment Area
II. Final Actions
    A. Determinations of Attainment
    B. Extensions of Marginal Area Attainment Dates
    C. Determinations of Failure To Attain and Reclassification
    D. Moderate Area SIP Revision Submission Deadline
    E. Rescission of Clean Data Determination and Final SIP Call for 
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS for the New York-N. New Jersey-Long 
Island (NY-NJ-CT) Nonattainment Area
III. Environmental Justice Considerations
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
    L. Judicial Review

I. Proposed Actions

    On August 27, 2015, the EPA proposed to find that 17 Marginal areas 
attained the 2008 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 
2015, based on complete, quality-assured and certified ozone monitoring 
data for 2012-2014. See 80 FR 51992. The EPA also proposed to find that 
eight areas met the criteria, as provided in CAA section 181(a)(5) and 
40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.1107, to qualify for a 1-year 
attainment date extension for the 2008 ozone NAAQS even though they did 
not attain the NAAQS by the applicable deadline. Finally, the EPA 
proposed to find that 11 areas failed to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 
the applicable Marginal attainment date and that they did not qualify 
for a 1-year attainment date extension. Under CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), 
if the EPA determines that an area failed to attain a given NAAQS by 
the applicable attainment date, the area shall be reclassified to a 
higher classification. In the EPA's August 2015 proposal, the EPA 
specified those 11 areas would be reclassified to Moderate.

[[Page 26698]]

The reclassified areas must attain the standard as expeditiously as 
practicable, but in any event no later than July 20, 2018.
    The EPA proposed two options for establishing a deadline for states 
to submit the SIP revisions required for Moderate areas once their 
areas are reclassified from Marginal. The first option would have 
required state air agencies to submit the required SIP revisions as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the beginning of the 
ozone season in 2017 for each respective area. The second option would 
have required state air agencies to submit the required SIP revisions 
as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than January 1, 2017. 
After consideration of the comments received on these proposed options, 
the EPA is finalizing a due date of no later than January 1, 2017, for 
all Moderate area SIP requirements that apply to newly reclassified 
areas.

A. Determinations of Attainment

    In the proposal, the EPA evaluated data from air quality monitors 
in the 36 areas classified as Marginal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 
order to determine each area's attainment status as of the applicable 
attainment date of July 20, 2015. Seventeen of the 36 nonattainment 
areas' monitoring sites with valid data had a design value \1\ equal to 
or less than 0.075 parts per million (ppm) based on 2012-2014 
monitoring period.\2\ Thus, the EPA proposed to determine, in 
accordance with section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and the EPA's 
implementing regulations at 40 CFR 51.1103, that the 17 areas listed in 
the following Table 1 attained the standard by the applicable 
attainment date for Marginal areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Design value is a statistic that describes the air quality 
status of a given location relative to the level of the NAAQS. 
Design values for a site are the 3-year average annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations.
    \2\ These determinations were based upon 3 years of complete, 
quality-assured and certified 2012-2014 data, in accordance with 40 
CFR part 58 and recorded in EPA's Air Quality Statistics (AQS) 
database. Some areas attained the standard earlier with 2011, 2012 
and 2013 data and maintained the standard in 2014, i.e., Knoxville, 
TX attained the standard with 2011-2013 ozone data and continued to 
attain with 2012-2014 data.

Table 1--Marginal Nonattainment Areas That Attained the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
                  by the July 20, 2015, Attainment Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2012-2014
          2008 ozone NAAQS  nonattainment area             design value
                                                               (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA..........................           0.070
Baton Rouge, LA.........................................           0.072
Calaveras County, CA....................................           0.071
Charlotte-Rock Hill, NC-SC..............................           0.073
Chico (Butte County), CA................................           0.074
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN....................................           0.075
Columbus, OH............................................           0.075
Dukes County, MA........................................           0.068
Jamestown, NY...........................................           0.071
Knoxville, TN...........................................           0.067
Lancaster, PA...........................................           0.071
Memphis, TN-MS-AR.......................................           0.073
Reading, PA.............................................           0.071
San Francisco Bay Area, CA..............................           0.072
Seaford, DE.............................................           0.074
Tuscan Buttes, CA.......................................           0.075
Upper Green River Basin Area, WY........................           0.064
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Extensions of Marginal Area Attainment Dates

    Of the 36 Marginal nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 
there are eight areas for which the EPA proposed to grant a 1-year 
attainment date extension based on determinations that these areas met 
the requirements for an extension under CAA section 181(a)(5), 
including compliance with all commitments and requirements in the 
applicable implementation plan and ``clean'' data in the year preceding 
the attainment year. In addition, for each of these areas, at least one 
state with jurisdiction over all or part of the area requested such an 
extension.
    The EPA proposed that eight Marginal nonattainment areas for the 
2008 ozone NAAQS failed to attain the NAAQS by July 20, 2015, but met 
the attainment date extension criteria of CAA section 181(a)(5), as 
interpreted in 40 CFR 51.1107. The EPA proposed to find that all 
implicated states were meeting the obligations and commitments of their 
applicable implementation plans, in accordance with CAA section 
181(a)(5)(A), and that, per CAA section 181(a)(5)(B) and the 
implementing regulations, the 4th highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
concentrations for all monitors in each area were not greater than 
0.075 ppm for 2014, the year preceding the attainment year (see 40 CFR 
51.1107). The EPA, therefore, proposed to grant a 1-year extension of 
the applicable Marginal area attainment date from July 20, 2015, to 
July 20, 2016, for the nonattainment areas listed in Table 2.

     Table 2--Marginal Nonattainment Areas That Qualify for a 1-Year
           Attainment Date Extension for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2014 4th
                                             2012-2014    highest  daily
   2008 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area     design value     maximum 8-hr
                                               (ppm)       average (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH..............           0.078           0.075
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX..........           0.080           0.072
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,             0.077           0.074
 PA-NJ-MD-DE............................
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA............           0.077           0.071
San Luis Obispo (Eastern San Luis                  0.076           0.073
 Obispo), CA............................
Sheboygan County, WI....................           0.081           0.072
St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL.           0.078           0.072
Washington, DC-MD-VA....................           0.076           0.069
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 26699]]

C. Determinations of Failure To Attain and Reclassification

    Lastly, the EPA proposed to determine that 11 areas (listed in 
Table 3) failed to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of July 20, 2015 and were not eligible for a 1-year 
attainment date extension. For each of these areas, the 4th highest 
daily maximum 8-hour average for at least one monitor in each area was 
greater than 0.075 ppm for 2014. CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) provides that 
a Marginal nonattainment area shall be reclassified by operation of law 
upon a determination by the EPA that such area failed to attain the 
relevant NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. The new 
classification proposed for each of these 11 areas would be the next 
higher classification of ``Moderate'' under the CAA statutory 
scheme.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The 2012-2014 design values for the 11 areas did not exceed 
0.100 ppm, which is the threshold for reclassifying an area to 
Serious per CAA section 181(b)(2)(A)(ii) and 40 CFR 51.1103.

  Table 3--Marginal Nonattainment Areas To Be Reclassified as Moderate
 Because They Did Not Attain the 2008 Ozone NAAQS by the July 20, 2015,
                             Attainment Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2014 4th
                                             2012-2014     highest daily
   2008 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area     design value    maximum 8-hr
                                               (ppm)      average  (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlanta, GA.............................           0.077           0.079
Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI............           0.081           0.076
Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins-                0.082           0.077
 Loveland, CO...........................
Greater Connecticut, CT.................           0.080           0.077
Imperial County, CA.....................           0.080           0.078
Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA..........           0.084           0.089
Mariposa County, CA.....................           0.078           0.077
Nevada County (Western part), CA........           0.079           0.082
New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-            0.085           0.081
 NJ-CT..................................
Phoenix-Mesa, AZ........................           0.080           0.080
San Diego County, CA....................           0.079           0.079
------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Moderate Area SIP Revision Submission Deadline

    The EPA also proposed to apply the Administrator's discretion, per 
CAA section 182(i), to adjust the statutory deadlines for submitting 
required SIP revisions for reclassified Moderate ozone nonattainment 
areas. CAA section 182(i) requires that reclassified areas meet the 
applicable plan submission requirements ``according to the schedules 
prescribed in connection with such requirements, except that the 
Administrator may adjust any applicable deadlines (other than 
attainment dates) to the extent such adjustment is necessary or 
appropriate to assure consistency among the required submissions.'' 
Under the Moderate area plan requirements of CAA section 182(b)(1) and 
40 CFR 51.1108, states with ozone nonattainment areas classified as 
Moderate are provided 3 years (or 36 months) from the date of 
designation to submit a SIP revision complying with the Moderate ozone 
nonattainment plan requirements. For areas designated nonattainment for 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS and originally classified as Moderate, that 
deadline was July 20, 2015, a date that has already passed. The EPA, 
therefore, interpreted CAA section 182(i) as providing the authority to 
adjust the applicable deadlines ``as necessary or appropriate to assure 
consistency among the required submissions'' for the 11 reclassified 
2008 Marginal ozone nonattainment areas. The CAA neither provides 
authority for the EPA to adjust the deadline to provide the full 3 
years from the date of reclassification nor provides that the EPA may 
adjust the attainment date. In determining an appropriate deadline for 
the states with jurisdiction for these 11 reclassified nonattainment 
areas to submit their Moderate area SIP revisions, the EPA proposed two 
options for deadlines. The first proposed option would require that 
states submit the required SIP revisions as expeditiously as 
practicable, but no later than the beginning of the ozone season in 
2017 for each state. We believed that this option would provide states 
additional time that may be needed to accomplish planning, 
administrative and SIP revision processes. Of the 11 areas proposed for 
reclassification to Moderate, four areas have ozone seasons that begin 
later than January 1 (based on ozone monitoring season changes 
finalized with the 2015 ozone NAAQS) \4\ and this option would provide 
2 additional months past January 2017 for those four areas. The second 
proposed option would require states submit the SIP revisions as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than January 1, 2017. We 
believed that setting a single specific submittal date would establish 
a consistent deadline for all 11 nonattainment areas, similar to the 
single uniform SIP submission deadline that would have applied to all 
areas if they had been initially classified as Moderate. This option 
would provide states with approximately 9 months after these 
reclassifications are finalized to develop complete SIP submissions and 
it is the latest SIP submittal date that would be compatible with the 
date by when Moderate area reasonably available control measures (RACM) 
and reasonably available control technology (RACT) must be in place 
(i.e., begin no later than January 1 of the 5th year after the 
effective date of designation for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, which is, in 
this case, January 1, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Table D-3 of appendix D to 40 CFR part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Rescission of Clean Data Determination and Proposed SIP Call for the 
1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS for New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island (NY-NJ-
CT) Nonattainment Area

    On June 18, 2012, the EPA issued a clean data determination (CDD) 
for the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area, suspending the three states' 
obligations to submit attainment-related planning requirements, 
including the obligation to submit attainment demonstrations, RACM and 
reasonable further progress (RFP) plans, and contingency measures, with 
respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone

[[Page 26700]]

standard. On May 15, 2014 (79 FR 27830), the EPA proposed to rescind 
the CDD for the area based on the fact that the area was no longer 
attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and the EPA proposed a SIP 
Call for submittal of a new ozone attainment demonstration for the NY-
NJ-CT area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. As an alternative to submitting a 
new attainment demonstration for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the EPA proposed 
to permit the relevant states to respond to the SIP Call by voluntarily 
requesting to be reclassified to Moderate for the 2008 ozone standard 
(see CAA section 181(b)(3)) and to prepare SIP revisions demonstrating 
how they would attain the more stringent 2008 standard as expeditiously 
as practicable, but no later than the Moderate area attainment date in 
2018. The EPA explained in the May 2014 proposal that, because the 2008 
standard is more stringent than the 1997 standard, the area would 
necessarily attain the 1997 standard once the area adopted a control 
strategy designed to achieve the tighter standard. Moreover, where 
state planning resources were constrained, those resources were better 
used focused on attaining the more stringent standard.
    In the agency's August 27, 2015, proposal regarding determinations 
of attainment of the 2008 Marginal ozone areas, the EPA discussed how 
its proposed actions affected the May 2014 proposed options for 
responding to a SIP Call for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, 
the proposed option to permit the relevant states to respond to the 
final SIP Call by requesting reclassification to Moderate for the 2008 
ozone standard [see CAA section 181(b)(3)] would consequently require 
that the states submit SIPs demonstrating how they would attain the 
more stringent 2008 standard as expeditiously as practicable. We 
explicitly noted in the August 2015 proposal that, if we were to 
finalize the determination that the NY-NJ-CT area failed to attain the 
2008 ozone NAAQS by the Marginal area attainment date, the area would 
be reclassified by operation of law, and thus effectively eliminating 
the need for the three states to voluntarily request reclassification. 
The area would then be subject to Moderate nonattainment area planning 
requirements, and the subsequent submission of Moderate area attainment 
plans for the 2008 ozone standard would necessarily satisfy a final SIP 
Call for the NY-NJ-CT area on the 1997 ozone standard, because an 
approvable plan would demonstrate attainment of a more stringent NAAQS. 
We also noted that either of the proposed 2008 ozone attainment plan 
due dates would meet the statutory timeframe for the SIP revision due 
subsequent to a SIP Call for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the area.

II. Final Actions

    The publication of the EPA's proposed rule on August 27, 2015, (80 
FR 51992) started a public comment period that ended on September 28, 
2015.\5\ The comments received during this period may be found in the 
electronic docket for this action. A majority of commenters supported 
the EPA's actions as proposed to determine that certain areas attained 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, to provide 1-
year attainment date extensions to the identified areas, and to 
reclassify to Moderate the non-attaining areas that do not qualify for 
an attainment date extension. Additional significant comments pertinent 
to each proposed action are addressed in the following appropriate 
sections. Included in the docket for this action is a full summary of 
significant comments received on the EPA's proposal and our responses 
to those comments. To access comments and the Response to Comment 
document, please go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0468, or contact the person listed in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The EPA offered to hold a public hearing on the proposed 
actions, but no one requested such a hearing.

                      Table 4--2008 Ozone Marginal Nonattainment Area Final Action Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Extension of
                                                                Determination    Determination     the marginal
                      Nonattainment area                        of attainment    of failure to   area attainment
                                                                    by the       attain by the     date to July
                                                               attainment date  attainment date      20, 2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA...............................               X   ...............  ...............
Atlanta, GA..................................................  ...............               X   ...............
Baton Rouge, LA..............................................               X   ...............  ...............
Calaveras County, CA.........................................               X   ...............  ...............
Charlotte-Rock Hill, NC-SC \a\...............................               X   ...............  ...............
Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI.................................  ...............               X   ...............
Chico (Butte County), CA.....................................               X   ...............  ...............
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN.........................................               X   ...............  ...............
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH...................................  ...............  ...............               X
Columbus, OH.................................................               X   ...............  ...............
Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins-Loveland, CO..............  ...............               X   ...............
Dukes County, MA.............................................               X   ...............  ...............
Greater Connecticut, CT......................................  ...............               X   ...............
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX...............................  ...............  ...............               X
Imperial County, CA..........................................  ...............               X   ...............
Jamestown, NY................................................               X   ...............  ...............
Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA...............................  ...............               X   ...............
Knoxville, TN \b\............................................               X   ...............  ...............
Lancaster, PA................................................               X   ...............  ...............
Mariposa County, CA..........................................  ...............               X   ...............
Memphis, TN-MS-AR \c\........................................               X   ...............  ...............
Nevada County (Western part), CA.............................  ...............               X   ...............
New York, N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT................  ...............               X   ...............
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE...........  ...............  ...............               X

[[Page 26701]]

 
Phoenix-Mesa, AZ.............................................  ...............               X   ...............
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA.................................  ...............  ...............               X
Reading, PA..................................................               X   ...............  ...............
San Diego County, CA.........................................  ...............               X   ...............
San Francisco Bay Area, CA...................................               X   ...............  ...............
San Luis Obispo (Eastern San Luis Obispo), CA................  ...............  ...............               X
Seaford, DE..................................................               X   ...............  ...............
Sheboygan County, WI.........................................  ...............  ...............               X
St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL......................  ...............  ...............               X
Tuscan Buttes, CA............................................               X   ...............  ...............
Upper Green River Basin Area, WY.............................               X   ...............  ...............
Washington, DC-MD-VA.........................................  ...............  ...............               X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ On July 28, 2015, the EPA redesignated to attainment the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte-Rock Hill,
  NC-SC, nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, effective August 27, 2015. See 80 FR 44873. On
  December 11, 2015, the EPA redesignated to attainment the South Carolina portion of the Charlotte-Rock Hill,
  NC-SC, nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, effective January 11, 2016. See 80 FR 76865. The
  EPA is herein determining that this area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date in
  order to satisfy the agency's obligation under CAA section 181(b)(2)(A).
\b\ On July 13, 2015, the EPA redesignated to attainment the Knoxville, TN, nonattainment area for the 2008 8-
  hour ozone NAAQS, effective August 12, 2015. See 80 FR 39970. Given that this area was still designated
  nonattainment as of July 20, 2015, the EPA is herein determining that this area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS
  by the applicable attainment date in order to satisfy the agency's obligation under CAA section 181(b)(2)(A).
\c\ On February 10, 2016, the EPA proposed to redesignate to attainment the Arkansas portion of the Memphis, TN-
  MS-AR, nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 81 FR 7046. On February 11, 2016, the EPA
  proposed to redesignate to attainment the Mississippi portion of the Memphis, TN-MS-AR, nonattainment area for
  the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 81 FR 7269.

A. Determinations of Attainment

    Pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.1103, the 
EPA is making a final determination that the 17 Marginal nonattainment 
areas listed in Table 1 attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of July 20, 2105. We received no adverse comments on 
this proposal.
    Once effective, this action satisfies the EPA's obligation pursuant 
to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on an area's air 
quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the 
standard by that date. The effect of a final determination of 
attainment by the area's attainment date is to discharge the EPA's 
obligation under CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), and to establish that, in 
accordance with CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), the areas will not be 
reclassified for failure to attain by the applicable attainment date. 
These determinations of attainment do not constitute a redesignation to 
attainment. Redesignations require states to meet a number of 
additional statutory criteria, including the EPA approval of a state 
plan demonstrating maintenance of the air quality standard for 10 years 
after redesignation. As for all NAAQS, the EPA is committed to working 
with states that choose to submit redesignation requests for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS.

B. Extensions of Marginal Area Attainment Dates

    Pursuant to CAA section 181(a)(5), the EPA is making a final 
determination to grant 1-year attainment date extensions of the 
applicable attainment date from July 20, 2015, to July 20, 2016, for 
the 8 Marginal nonattainment areas listed in Table 2. The EPA received 
a number of comments on its proposal to extend the Marginal area 
attainment dates for the areas listed in Table 2. We summarize and 
respond to some of the key comments. The docket for this action 
contains a more detailed Response to Comment document.
    Comment: One commenter claimed that the EPA's proposed 1-year 
extension of the attainment date for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE area is unlawful and arbitrary because the 
state of Delaware did not request an extension of the attainment date. 
The commenter argued that granting an attainment date extension to a 
multi-state area when all states have not requested the extension is 
inconsistent with the EPA's failure to grant the state of New York's 
most recent voluntary reclassification request with regard to the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS.\6\ The commenter stated that there, the EPA refused 
to grant New York's request because the agency's position was that 
voluntarily reclassifying the area required all states with 
jurisdiction over the multi-state area to request the reclassification. 
The commenter noted that in that case the EPA interpreted CAA section 
182(j)(1) ``to require coordination and unanimity among the affected 
states,'' and the commenter stated that the provision ``seemingly has 
equal bearing'' on a request to extend the attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Letter from Joseph J. Martens, Commissioner, New York 
Department of Environmental Conservation, addressed to the EPA 
Administrator Lisa Jackson. June 20, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that a request for 
voluntary reclassification under CAA section 181(b)(3) and a request 
for an extension of the attainment date under CAA section 181(a)(5) 
both require ``unanimity'' among the affected states. The EPA also does 
not agree that granting an extension of the attainment date to all 
states with jurisdiction over the Philadelphia multi-state 
nonattainment area is inconsistent with its prior reading of CAA 
section 182(j)(1).
    The statutory provisions governing voluntary reclassifications and 
requests for 1-year attainment date extensions differ in key respects 
regarding the question of whether all states in a nonattainment area 
need to request the action before the EPA may grant such requests. CAA 
section 181(b)(3), which governs voluntary reclassifications, states 
that ``the Administrator shall grant the request of any State to 
reclassify a nonattainment area in that State [in accordance with the 
area's

[[Page 26702]]

design value] to a higher classification'' (emphasis added). The EPA 
reads that provision, and specifically the words ``in that state,'' to 
mean that although any state may request a reclassification, it can 
only do so on behalf of its own state. The same limiting phrase does 
not appear in the statutory provision governing 1-year attainment date 
extensions. That provision, CAA section 181(a)(5), states, ``Upon 
application by any State, the Administrator may extend for 1 additional 
year'' the attainment date, provided that the state has complied with 
all requirements and commitments pertaining to the area in its 
applicable implementation plan and the area meets certain air quality 
criteria. Because the statute grants the EPA the discretion to extend 
an attainment date ``upon application by any State'' and establishes 
limiting conditions that can be demonstrated as satisfied by either a 
state or by the EPA, CAA section 181(a)(5) by its terms does not 
require the consent of every state within a multi-state nonattainment 
area. The EPA does, however, interpret that provision as requiring all 
states with jurisdiction over the nonattainment area to substantively 
meet the two statutory conditions, although we note that the provision 
does not specify who must make the demonstration that the conditions 
have been met.
    Interpreting these two provisions to permit differing thresholds of 
state ``unanimity'' is particularly reasonable given the consequence of 
the EPA's action in each case. In extending an attainment date, the EPA 
imposes no additional obligation upon any state, but rather grants 
areas that are close to achieving the air quality standard 1 additional 
year to come into compliance, provided that the states governing that 
area meet certain criteria. A voluntary reclassification, on the other 
hand, can impose significant new attainment planning and emission 
reduction obligations. Had Congress intended to allow one state to 
request a reclassification on behalf of another state, and, therefore, 
to impose upon another state, without that state's consent, all of the 
resource-intensive consequences potentially associated with that 
action, it could have clearly stated so.
    The EPA further disagrees with the commenter that its prior 
interpretation of CAA section 182(j)(1)--requiring all states in a 
multi-state ozone nonattainment area to agree to a voluntary 
reclassification--is inconsistent with not requiring such consensus in 
the case of an attainment date extension. CAA section 182(j)(1)(A) 
directs states to ``take all reasonable steps to coordinate, 
substantively and procedurally, the revisions and implementation of 
[SIPs] applicable to the nonattainment area concerned.'' This provision 
on its face does not apply to an attainment date extension under CAA 
section 181(a)(5). Extending the attainment date by 1 year does not 
change an area's SIP submission requirements. Therefore, CAA section 
182(j)(1)(A)'s directive to states governing a multi-state area to 
coordinate SIP submissions plainly does not have bearing on a provision 
that does not alter or affect SIP submissions. By contrast, as the EPA 
has stated, the coordination required by CAA section 182(j)(1)(A) is 
relevant to a voluntary reclassification, which establishes upon the 
states with jurisdiction over the nonattainment area new obligations to 
prepare and submit revisions to SIPs.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the states of Delaware and New 
Jersey did not make any claim or demonstration that they have complied 
with all requirements and commitments in the SIP, and, therefore, 
granting an extension to the multi-state area is not warranted. The 
commenter alleged that the EPA implied that an analysis of Delaware's 
compliance with the CAA section 181(a)(5)(A) criteria was conducted but 
that the EPA failed to provide any evidence or showing that Delaware 
did in fact comply with all requirements and commitments in the 
applicable implementation plan pertaining to the Philadelphia 
nonattainment area.
    Response: Given the state and federal partnership in implementing 
the CAA, it is not unreasonable for the EPA to interpret CAA section 
181(a)(5)(A), in the absence of a state submitting a certification of 
compliance, for the EPA to exercise discretion and conduct an 
independent review of the applicable SIP in order to, in this case, 
determine whether Delaware and New Jersey are in compliance with the 
requirements and commitments of the federally-approved SIP. CAA section 
302(q) defines ``applicable implementation plan'' as the portion (or 
portions) of the implementation plan, or most recent revision thereof, 
which has been approved under CAA section 110, or promulgated under CAA 
section 110(c), or promulgated or approved pursuant to regulations 
promulgated under CAA section 201(d) and which implements the relevant 
requirements of the CAA. The Act does not specify what type of review 
is required in order for the states or the EPA to demonstrate that the 
condition under CAA section 181(a)(5)(A) has been met; therefore, the 
EPA reasonably interprets the condition to require a review of the 
relevant, applicable approved implementation plan provisions, and an 
application of its own knowledge and expertise with regard to whether 
the state is meeting those obligations, including a review of whether 
the agency or outside parties has identified state noncompliance with 
the obligations. Therefore, in proposing to grant a 1-year extension of 
the attainment date for the Philadelphia area, and in conjunction with 
EPA Headquarters, the EPA Regional Offices, which have particular 
expertise and knowledge of the contents and implementation of SIPs, 
conducted reviews of whether Delaware and New Jersey are in compliance 
with their applicable implementation plans.
    The EPA reviewed New Jersey's applicable ozone implementation plan 
found at 40 CFR 52.1570 and the most recent actions related to New 
Jersey's applicable ozone implementation plan, which include the 
following EPA approvals: 74 FR 22837--``Approval and Promulgation of 
Implementation plans, New Jersey Reasonable Further Progress Plans, 
Reasonable Available Control Technology, Reasonably Available Control 
Measures and Conformity Budgets''; 75 FR 45483--``Approval and 
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Implementation Plan Revision; 
State of New Jersey''; and 75 FR 80340--``Approval and Promulgation of 
Implementation Plans; New Jersey; 8-hour Ozone Control Measure.'' Since 
the adoption of these measures, New Jersey has also amended its SIP to 
adopt and implement additional emission reductions as part of its SIPs 
to reduce regional haze and to meet the NAAQS for fine particles. The 
EPA has reviewed the contents of New Jersey's applicable SIPs and notes 
that there are no pending enforcement actions by the EPA or outside 
parties alleging that New Jersey has failed to implement its applicable 
plan.
    Similarly, the EPA reviewed Delaware's applicable ozone 
implementation plan found at 40 CFR 52.420. In our August 2015 
proposal, we noted a recent proposal to disapprove a revision to 
Delaware's New Source Review (NSR) preconstruction permitting program 
regulation, see 80 FR 30015 (May 26, 2015). Despite this proposed 
disapproval of a SIP revision, we did not believe this proposal to 
disapprove a SIP revision was a bar to the EPA granting a 1-year 
attainment date extension for the Philadelphia area because there is an 
underlying approved nonattainment NSR SIP. The EPA has examined its own 
internal database of the notices required under 40 CFR 51.161(a), (b) 
and (d) (relating to a

[[Page 26703]]

notice providing for public and the EPA comment on permit applications) 
and information posted by the state of Delaware. For the period after 
September 11, 2013 (the date on which Delaware's newly expanded offset 
area provisions under state law were effective), the EPA has identified 
no permits which triggered the requirement for lowest achievable 
emission rate (LAER) and offsets under Delaware's Regulation 1125 
relating to ozone precursors of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen 
oxides (NOX). The EPA found that Delaware had undertaken a 
number of permitting actions since September 11, 2013, but none of 
these were subject to sections 2.5.5 and 2.5.6 of Delaware's Regulation 
1125. The EPA also did not find any incidences of enforcement actions 
by the agency or outside parties alleging that Delaware is not meeting 
its SIP obligations.
    Moreover, the commenter has not presented any evidence or made any 
demonstration that suggests either New Jersey or Delaware is not in 
compliance with their applicable SIP and is, thus, unqualified to 
receive an attainment date extension. Based on its review of the 
states' applicable implementation plans and its knowledge and expertise 
of state actions with regard to those plans, the EPA is making a final 
determination that both New Jersey and Delaware are meeting the 
conditional requirement of CAA section 181(a)(5)(A).
    Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA deny Wisconsin's 
request for a 1-year extension to their attainment year for the 
Sheboygan County Marginal ozone nonattainment area. The commenter 
argued that 2015 preliminary air quality monitoring data for the 
Sheboygan area indicates that the area will not attain the standard in 
2016, and, moreover, that the data also will not support a second 1-
year extension of the attainment date for the Sheboygan area. The 
commenter maintained that even if a state meets the two conditions 
provided in CAA section 181(a)(5), the EPA retains the discretion to 
deny a request for a 1-year extension, and the commenter urged that the 
EPA should exercise its discretion in this case. In support, the 
commenter provided a citation to a 1994 EPA memo (Berry Memorandum) \7\ 
that cautions states to consider whether an attainment date extension 
will ultimately be helpful if the area is not likely to attain the 
NAAQS by the extended attainment date. The commenter further pointed 
out that Wisconsin has an ``inflexible and lengthy process for 
rulemaking,'' which could further hinder the state's ability to meet 
the attainment date in the future, if the state delays planning and 
implementing additional control measures now. The commenter also 
pointed out that the Sheboygan area has not made considerable progress 
towards attaining the standard, and that the area backslid into 
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 2012 and 2013. The 
commenter suggested that, rather than granting a 1-year extension of 
the attainment date, the EPA should determine that the Sheboygan area 
failed to meet its Marginal area attainment date of July 20, 2015, and, 
therefore, the EPA should reclassify the area to Moderate, which will 
allow the state of Wisconsin adequate time to achieve emissions 
reductions to meet the new attainment date for a Moderate area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See memorandum signed by D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air 
Quality Management Division, ``Procedures for Processing Bump Ups 
and Extension Requests for Marginal Ozone Nonattainment Areas.'' 
U.S. EPA, February 3, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: CAA section 181(a)(5) of the CAA, as interpreted by the 
EPA in 40 CFR 51.1107, authorizes the EPA to grant a 1-year attainment 
date extension upon application by a state if: (1) The state has 
complied with all requirements and commitments in the applicable SIP, 
and (2) all monitors in the area have a fourth highest daily maximum 8-
hour average of 0.075 ppm or less for the last full year of air quality 
data prior to the attainment date (i.e., 2014 for an attainment date of 
July 20, 2015). Here, Wisconsin has clearly met both of the conditions 
for the Sheboygan area. Wisconsin submitted a request to the EPA for a 
1-year extension of the attainment date for the Sheboygan area, 
certifying that Wisconsin had complied with all requirements and 
commitments pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation 
plan and that all monitors in the area have a fourth highest daily 
maximum 8-hour average of 0.075 ppm or less for 2014, the most recent 
complete year of quality-assured and certified data preceding the July 
20, 2015, attainment date.\8\ The EPA has also evaluated the quality-
assured and certified air quality monitoring data for 2014 and 
determined that Sheboygan met the air quality requirements of CAA 
section 181(a)(5)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1107. Although the EPA agrees with 
the commenter that the Administrator retains the discretion to deny a 
state's request for an attainment date extension even if the state has 
met both criteria in CAA section 181(a)(5), the agency is declining to 
exercise that discretion here. The commenter relies primarily upon 
preliminary air quality data for 2015 that has not been quality assured 
and certified to contend that the Administrator should deny Wisconsin's 
request here.\9\ Given that the state meets the extension criteria, the 
Administrator is disinclined to deny the state's request based on 
preliminary data. Moreover, the citation from the Berry Memorandum that 
the commenter relies upon is directed at cautioning states, in deciding 
whether to request an extension, to consider whether a 1-year 
attainment date extension will be helpful in achieving the NAAQS and is 
not directed at the Administrator's decision to grant or deny such 
request. The EPA does, however, agree with the commenter that, given 
the air quality trends and data presented by the commenter, it would be 
prudent for the state to begin preparing for the possibility that the 
area may not attain by the July 20, 2016, attainment date, and also may 
fail to meet the requirements to get an additional 1-year attainment 
date extension. However, the agency does not believe that those 
possibilities are reason enough to deny the state's request for this 
first 1-year attainment date extension, given that Wisconsin has met 
the two statutory criteria. Therefore, the EPA declines to grant the 
commenter's request to find that the area failed to attain by July 20, 
2015, and to subsequently reclassify the area accordingly. The 
Sheboygan nonattainment area will remain classified as Marginal for the 
2008 ozone NAAQS until the EPA (1) determines, based on quality assured 
and certified air quality data for 2013-2015, that the area did not 
attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by July 20, 2016, and does not qualify for 
an additional 1-year extension\10\ and (2) reclassifies the area based 
on this determination. We expect Wisconsin to be taking the necessary 
steps to achieve timely attainment and will continue to work with the 
state toward that end.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See letter signed by Bart Sponseller, Deputy Division 
Administrator, Air, Waste and Remediation & Redevelopment Division, 
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources addressed to Ms. Susan 
Hedman, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 5. RE: Request for 
1-year extension to the attainment date for the Sheboygan, WI 
nonattainment area, May 12, 2015. Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0468-0022 
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    \9\ These data are subject to the EPA's date certification 
requirements of 40 CFR 58.15, which require a state to submit its 
annual data certification letter by May 1.
    \10\ The area will qualify for a second 1-year extension if, and 
only if, the average of annual fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour 
ozone concentrations for 2014 and 2015 is at or below 0.075 ppm at 
all monitors in Sheboygan County.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 26704]]

    Comment: One commenter maintained that, in evaluating whether a 
state is in compliance with all requirements and commitments pertaining 
to an area pursuant to CAA section 181(a)(5)(A), the EPA may not rely 
on a letter from the state certifying that the state is meeting this 
requirement. The commenter argued that there must be a factual and 
rational basis for the agency to grant 1-year extensions and that 
assertions by the states that they are in compliance with all 
requirements and commitments does not provide a factual or rational 
basis when there is no evidence that the assertion was based on a 
systematic review of compliance or noncompliance.
    Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion. CAA 
section 181(a)(5) does not specify who must make the demonstration as 
to whether a state is complying with all requirements and commitments 
to the area in the applicable implementation plan. Nothing in the 
provision explicitly prohibits the EPA from relying on certified 
statements from state officials that the requirement of CAA section 
181(a)(5)(A) has been met, and nothing in the provision supports the 
commenter's suggestion that the EPA is independently required to 
perform a ``systematic review of compliance or noncompliance'' of the 
state's SIP regardless of whether a state official has made a certified 
statement to that effect in order to grant an attainment date 
extension. Given the state and federal partnership in implementing the 
CAA, it is not unreasonable for the EPA to interpret CAA section 
181(a)(5)(A) as permitting the agency to rely upon the certified 
statements of its state counterparts, and the EPA has long interpreted 
the provision to be satisfied by such statements.\11\ In practice, in 
conjunction with a request for an extension, a state air agency's 
Executive Officer, or other senior individual with equivalent 
responsibilities, signs and affirms that their state is complying with 
their applicable federally-approved SIP. The commenter argues that the 
certifications lack rational or factual bases, but has not presented 
any evidence or made any demonstration that suggests any of the states 
receiving an attainment date extension are not in compliance with their 
SIPs. Absent such a showing, the EPA is disinclined to invalidate the 
certifications made by the states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Berry Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Determinations of Failure To Attain and Reclassification

    Pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2), the EPA is finalizing its 
proposed determinations that the 11 Marginal nonattainment areas listed 
in Table 3 have failed to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of July 20, 2015. Therefore, upon the effective date of 
this rule, these 11 Marginal 2008 ozone nonattainment areas will be 
reclassified by operation of law to Moderate for the 2008 ozone 
standard. The EPA received a number of adverse comments on its proposal 
to find that certain Marginal nonattainment areas failed to attain and 
to reclassify those areas. We summarize and respond to some of the key 
comments later. The docket for this action contains a more detailed 
Response to Comments document.
    Comment: A number of commenters, while conceding that air quality 
monitoring data factually required the EPA to determine that an area 
failed to attain by its attainment date, alleged that certain 
nonattainment areas' failure to attain by the Marginal area attainment 
date was due in large part to the influence of transported emissions 
from upwind states. These commenters alleged that the EPA has not done 
enough to enforce CAA section 110(a)(2)(D), which requires states to 
eliminate emissions that significantly contribute to, or interfere with 
maintenance of the NAAQS in other states. One commenter further noted 
that the EPA's current strategy with regard to ozone transport 
addresses only the revoked 85 parts per billion (ppb) standard, and 
that the EPA has no strategy to reduce transport after 2017.
    Response: The agency's mandatory duty to make determinations of 
attainment or failure to attain the NAAQS exists regardless of the 
nature or effect of transported emissions on monitored air quality data 
in a given nonattainment area.\12\ Nonetheless, the EPA readily 
acknowledges the role interstate transport of precursors to ozone 
pollution plays in the efforts of downwind areas to attain and maintain 
the NAAQS. To that end, as commenters have alluded to, the agency has 
taken a number of steps to fulfill its statutory obligation to enforce 
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D), or the ``good neighbor'' provision, including 
the NOX SIP Call, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, and the 
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). most recently, the EPA has 
proposed to update CSAPR specifically to address the 2008 ozone NAAQS 
with tightened NOX budgets designed to achieve emission 
reductions in upwind states before the Moderate area attainment date of 
July 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 160-62 (D.C. Cir. 
2002) (holding that the EPA is not permitted to relax mandatory 
statutory requirements for downwind areas on the basis of interstate 
transport).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Moderate Area SIP Revision Submission Deadline

    The EPA received a number of comments on its two proposed options 
for establishing the Moderate area SIP due date that would apply to 
areas newly reclassified under this final action. After full 
consideration of those comments and pursuant to CAA section 182(i), the 
EPA is finalizing that SIP revisions required for the newly 
reclassified Moderate areas must be submitted as expeditiously as 
practicable, but no later than January 1, 2017. The EPA acknowledges 
that for some states with Moderate nonattainment areas reclassified 
from Marginal, meeting this SIP submittal deadline may be challenging. 
The EPA is committed to working closely with these states to help them 
prepare their SIP revisions in a timely manner.
    We summarize and provide responses to the most significant comments 
on this issue later; however, all comments received on the proposed 
options and the EPA's responses are available in the Response to 
Comment document located in the docket for this final rule.
    Comment: One commenter contended that the EPA failed to provide a 
legal basis for extending the SIP submittal deadlines for Moderate 
nonattainment areas. The commenter believed that the EPA made no claim 
that the 2017 SIP submittal deadlines are necessary or appropriate to 
assure consistency among the required submissions. The commenter also 
believed that the EPA's proposed extension would interfere with the 
attainment date and contravene CAA section 110(l). The commenter 
pointed out that if the EPA finalized the SIP submission deadline to 
coincide with the area's beginning of the ozone monitoring season, the 
consequence would be that the EPA would have less than 18 months to 
take action on state SIP submittals, as late as July 2018, which is 
very near the attainment date. The commenter believed that would be far 
too late for the EPA to require timely corrections of SIPs that fail to 
satisfy the requirements and fail to assure timely attainment.
    Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter on all aspects of 
these comments. First, we believe that CAA section 182(i) clearly 
provides the Administrator the discretion to adjust any applicable 
deadline for reclassified

[[Page 26705]]

areas (other than attainment dates) to the extent such adjustment is 
necessary or appropriate to assure consistency among the required 
submissions.
    The EPA disagrees with the implication of the comment that the 
default assumption upon reclassification is that the EPA would not 
adjust the Moderate area SIP submission deadlines. The fact that 
Congress included CAA section 182(i) in the statute indicates that it 
envisioned that upon reclassification, deadlines would be adjusted by 
the Administrator in a reasonable fashion. This is a particularly 
reasonable interpretation under the facts at issue here: The attainment 
date for Marginal areas under the statute and regulations was July 20, 
2015, and the Moderate area SIP submission date for areas initially 
classified as Moderate for the 2008 ozone NAAQS was also July 20, 2015. 
Under CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), the EPA must make determinations of 
attainment and necessary reclassifications within 6 months of the 
statutory attainment date. Therefore, under the commenter's 
interpretation of the CAA, upon reclassification 6 months after July 
20, 2015, states would immediately be found to be in default of the 
obligation to submit a Moderate area plan, a deadline that had passed 6 
months prior, even though that obligation did not apply until the 
moment of reclassification. We do not agree that Congress would have 
intended the draconian and absurd result of providing states initial 
notice of an obligation and in the same action finding them at fault 
for already failing to have met that obligation. Therefore, the EPA 
believes that it is reasonable to read CAA section 182(i) in the 
context of the 11 reclassified 2008 Marginal ozone areas to provide the 
Administrator the authority to adjust the applicable deadline for 
Moderate area attainment plans ``as necessary or appropriate to assure 
consistency among the required submissions.''
    Moreover, failing to establish new Moderate area SIP submission 
deadlines for the 11 areas that we are reclassifying in this rulemaking 
would lead to potential inconsistency in required submissions among 
those areas. Under the commenter's interpretation, these areas would 
all have missed their deadline to submit a Moderate area plan on July 
20, 2015. The commenter would, therefore, have the EPA begin issuing 
findings of failure to submit under CAA section 110(k), which are 
required by statute 6 months following the statutory deadline to submit 
a SIP, simultaneously with this action, that is, the EPA's 
determination that the areas failed to attain and reclassification of 
those areas. Following the EPA's issuance of findings of failure to 
submit for the 11 areas, there would be no defined statutory or 
regulatory deadline by which to remedy the states' failures to make 
submittals, except the outside limit of 2 years, the deadline for EPA's 
obligation to implement a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). 
Additionally, if the EPA had not affirmatively determined that a state 
had made a complete SIP submittal for an area within 18 months from the 
issuance of a finding of failure to submit, the offset sanction 
identified in CAA section 179(b)(2) would apply to the affected 
nonattainment area.
    The EPA also disagrees with the commenter that establishing a new 
SIP submittal deadline for the reclassified areas is in contravention 
of CAA section 110(l). CAA section 110(l) requires that plan revisions 
must go through notice and public hearing at the state level before 
submission to the EPA, and that ``the Administrator shall not approve a 
revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable 
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress . . . 
or any other applicable requirement of this chapter.'' In order for the 
EPA's proposed SIP submittal date to be in contravention of CAA section 
110(l), one has to assume that the states will submit deficient SIPs 
and that the EPA will not take any kind of corrective action on those 
SIPs until after the maximum possible time period permitted under the 
statue to take action on such submittals (18 months) has passed. Only 
then could a SIP submittal date of more than 18 months prior to the 
attainment date be interpreted as interfering with the attainment of 
the NAAQS. The EPA does not believe this is a reasonable reading of CAA 
section 110(l) or the circumstances of these reclassifications and SIP 
deadline adjustments. While the EPA acknowledges that the timeline for 
preparation and submittal of SIPs must be compressed in order for 
measures to be in place to ensure areas attain by their new Moderate 
area attainment date, in establishing the new SIP submittal deadlines 
for these reclassified areas, the agency is also taking into account 
the time required for states to identify measures, complete the public 
notice and hearing process at the state level, and prepare SIP 
submissions.
    Comment: Several commenters supported the EPA's proposed option to 
align the deadline for SIP revisions with the start of the respective 
nonattainment area's 2017 ozone season. They cited a number of reasons 
this option was preferred, including that more time would be provided 
to states to accomplish planning, administrative and SIP revisions 
processes in order to meet the deadline. They also cited that this 
option would be consistent among states in that they would need to 
submit their SIP revisions by their respective ozone seasons. However, 
another commenter pointed out that finalizing this option would result 
in SIP submittal dates that would be varied among the states and, 
therefore, inconsistent. The same commenter also stated that setting 
the SIP deadline for the beginning of each area's ozone season would 
not be compatible with ensuring implementation of RACT by January 1, 
2017, which is the deadline established in 40 CFR 51.1112(a)(3).
    Response: As noted earlier, of the 11 areas being reclassified to 
Moderate, there are only four areas located in states with ozone 
seasons that begin later than January 1 that could potentially benefit 
from an extra 2 months to submit their SIP revisions. While the EPA 
recognizes the value of additional time (beyond January 1, 2017) to 
these states to develop an attainment demonstration, an RFP plan, and 
contingency measures, the EPA also recognizes the value in establishing 
a single due date for Moderate area SIP submissions--including RACT--
that does not extend beyond the deadline for implementing such 
controls. Thus, the EPA is finalizing its second proposed option, which 
requires that states submit the required Moderate area SIP revisions as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than January 1, 2017. This 
approach aligns the SIP submittal deadline with the January 1, 2017, 
deadline for implementing RACT pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1112(a)(3), for 
each area, and would also ensure that SIPs requiring control measures 
needed for attainment, including RACM, would be submitted prior to when 
those controls are required to be implemented. This option also treats 
states consistently, in keeping with CAA section 182(i). The EPA 
recognizes the challenges posed by these very short deadlines and is 
committed to working closely with all states to help them prepare their 
SIP revisions, including parallel processing, in a timely manner.

E. Rescission of Clean Data Determination and Final SIP Call for the 
1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS for the New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island (NY-
NJ-CT) Nonattainment Area

    This action finalizes the EPA's determination that the NY-NJ-CT 
nonattainment area failed to attain the

[[Page 26706]]

2008 standard by the Marginal area attainment date of July 20, 2015, 
and must be reclassified to Moderate by operation of law in accordance 
with CAA section 181(b)(2)(A). In addition, the EPA is also finalizing 
in this rulemaking the proposed rescission of its prior CDD for the NY-
NJ-CT nonattainment area with regard to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as 
well as the accompanying SIP Call proposed with that rescission. As 
noted previously, in the May 2014 proposal, the EPA proposed that one 
way the affected states could respond to the SIP Call would be to 
voluntarily request a reclassification under the 2008 ozone NAAQS and 
to submit a SIP that meets the Moderate area requirements for that 
standard.
    By reclassifying the area by operation of law, this final action 
effectively eliminates the need for the three affected states to 
request reclassification under this option. However, as explained in 
the agency's August 27, 2015, proposal and reiterated later, the EPA 
believes it is appropriate for the three states involved to be able to 
meet their obligations under the SIP Call for the 1997 ozone NAAQS with 
their Moderate area SIP submittal for the 2008 ozone standard. This 
final action also supersedes the 18 months, which is the maximum period 
allowed under CAA section 110(k)(5), that EPA proposed to provide the 
states of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut from the effective date 
of a final SIP Call to develop and submit to the EPA the relevant SIPs 
for the 1997 or 2008 ozone NAAQS. As discussed previously, the EPA is 
finalizing that the required SIP revisions for these areas shall be 
submitted as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than January 1, 
2017. We also note that this deadline meets the statutory timeframe for 
a SIP revision under CAA section 110(k)(5).
    The EPA did not receive adverse comments on its August 27, 2015, 
proposal to reclassify the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area to Moderate, nor 
did the EPA receive comments about its statement that submitting an 
attainment plan for the 2008 ozone standard would satisfy a final SIP 
Call on the 1997 ozone standard. We received a number of comments on 
the May 15, 2014, proposal (79 FR 27830) to rescind the CDD for the NY-
NJ-CT 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and the accompanying SIP 
Call for attainment plans. We summarize later some of the significant 
comments submitted in response to the May 15, 2014, proposal and our 
responses. Additionally, we have made available a more detailed summary 
of comments and responses in a document titled, ``Response to Comments: 
Proposed Rule: Rescission of Determination of Attainment and Call for 
Attainment Plans for New York, New Jersey and Connecticut for the 1997 
8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards for the NY-NJ-CT 
1997 Ozone Nonattainment Area,'' which is available in the docket 
associated with this rulemaking.
    Comment: One commenter believed that CAA section 110(k)(5) either 
compels or provides the EPA the authority necessary to expand the 
proposed SIP Call to include any state that is shown to significantly 
contribute to the failure of the NY-NJ-CT area to attain because these 
states have failed to meet their obligations under CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).\13\ The commenter further believed that CAA section 
110(k)(5) allows the EPA to issue a SIP Call to address states' SIPs 
that are inadequate in mitigating transport as described in CAA 
sections 176A and 184. The commenter believed that the U.S. Supreme 
Court decision in EPA v. EME Homer City (134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014)), 
compels the EPA to immediately issue FIPs for upwind states that have 
failed to take all necessary steps to make it feasible for any 
nonattainment area significantly impacted by interstate air pollution 
to attain and maintain both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
Finally, the commenter noted that the ``CSAPR modeling shows that 
Connecticut receives no more than a 0.2 ppb total benefit from the 
CSAPR remedy, which is entirely inadequate given the overwhelming scope 
of transport.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The commenter refers to states' interstate transport 
obligations under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), but the EPA 
understands these citations to in fact refer to the good neighbor 
provision, which is CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires states to 
prohibit emissions that contribute significantly to nonattainment in, 
or interfere with maintenance by any other state with respect to 
primary and secondary NAAQS. In the CSAPR promulgated on August 8, 2011 
(76 FR 48207), the EPA found that emissions of sulfur dioxide and 
NOX in 27 eastern, midwestern, and southern states 
contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance 
in one or more downwind states with respect to one or more of three air 
quality standards--the annual PM2.5 NAAQS promulgated in 
1997, the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS promulgated in 2006, and, as 
relevant here, the ozone NAAQS promulgated in 1997.
    For the 1997 ozone NAAQS specifically, twenty states are required 
under CSAPR to reduce NOX emissions during the ozone season 
(May through September) because they contribute to downwind states' 
ozone pollution. The emission reductions under CSAPR in these upwind 
states will improve ozone air quality in downwind states and help them 
attain and maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    The timing of CSAPR's implementation was initially affected by 
litigation over the rule. On December 30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit stayed 
the effectiveness of CSAPR pending resolution of judicial review. On 
August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit vacated CSAPR,\14\ but on April 29, 
2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion reversing the D.C. 
Circuit's 2012 decision and remanded the case to the D.C. Circuit.\15\ 
Following the remand, on October 23, 2014, the D.C. Circuit granted the 
EPA's motion to lift the CSAPR stay and toll the CSAPR compliance 
deadlines by 3 years. Accordingly, CSAPR Phase 1 implementation began 
on January 1, 2015, with Phase 2 beginning in 2017. See CSAPR interim 
final rule at 81 FR 13275 (March 14, 2016). Subsequently, the D.C. 
Circuit issued its final ruling as to CSAPR, affirming it in most 
respects but invalidating without vacating several of the rule's state-
specific budgets, including some of the rule's Phase 2 ozone-season 
NOX budgets.\16\ The EPA has since proposed a rulemaking to 
update to the CSAPR ozone-season NOX budgets in order to 
address the more stringent 2008 ozone NAAQS and to respond to the D.C. 
Circuit's remand of the Phase 2 ozone-season NOX 
budgets.\17\ As proposed, the CSAPR Update ozone-season NOX 
budgets would be effective starting in 2017, effectively replacing 
CSAPR Phase 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 
(D.C. Circuit 2012).
    \15\ EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 
(2014).
    \16\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. 
Circuit 2015).
    \17\ 80 FR 75706 (December 3, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA disagrees with the commenter that the Supreme Court's 
decision in EPA v. EME Homer City compels the agency to issue new FIPs 
or to expand the scope of the proposed SIP Call to address the 1997 and 
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Supreme Court did, however, confirm that 
the EPA properly issued the CSAPR FIPs in response to disapprovals of 
SIPs or findings of failure to submit SIPs implementing states' 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligations with regard to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 
Those FIPs took effect and began implementation on January 1,

[[Page 26707]]

2015 pursuant to the D.C. Circuit's grant of the EPA's motion 
requesting lifting of the stay, so we note that at the time the NY-NJ-
CT area fell back into nonattainment of the 1997 standard, it did not 
have the benefit of CSAPR reductions. While the commenter points out 
that modeling conducted for the CSAPR rulemaking projected that the 
remedy would provide ``no more than a 0.2 ppb total benefit,'' the same 
modeling also predicted that those reductions, once implemented, would 
fully resolve nonattainment and maintenance problems for the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS in the receptors identified in the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area. 
For upwind states that were linked only to receptors where downwind 
nonattainment and maintenance problems were fully resolved under the 
remedy, the EPA found that CSAPR quantified the full reduction 
responsibility for the 1997 ozone NAAQS under CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).\18\ Therefore, the EPA could not expand the scope 
of the SIP Call being issued on the basis that upwind states had not 
fulfilled their 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligations as to the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS when the EPA has already issued a FIP that fully resolves the 
obligations of those states with respect to that standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See 76 FR 48210, Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate 
Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP 
Approvals (August 8, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA also does not agree that it would be appropriate in this 
action to more broadly apply its 110(k)(5) authority to include 
additional states in this SIP Call to address interstate pollutant 
transport as described in sections 176A and 184 of the CAA. The EPA 
acknowledges that a number of states, including Connecticut and New 
York, submitted a petition under CAA section 176A requesting that the 
EPA add additional states to the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) that was 
established under section 184 of the CAA. The EPA is reviewing that 
petition separately and is not acting on that petition in this action. 
In addition, the EPA's authority to require SIP revisions under 
110(k)(5) as they relate to additional control measures required by CAA 
section 184 applies to only states that are currently part of the OTR.

III. Environmental Justice Considerations

    The CAA requires that states with areas designated as nonattainment 
submit to the Administrator the appropriate SIP revisions and implement 
specified control measures by certain dates applicable to the area's 
classification. By requiring additional planning and implementation 
requirements for the 11 nonattainment areas that we determined failed 
to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS standard, the part of this action 
reclassifying those 11 areas from Marginal to Moderate will protect all 
those residing, working, attending school, or otherwise present in 
those areas regardless of minority or economic status.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is exempt from review by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) because it makes determinations if designated 2008 ozone 
nonattainment areas are either attaining or failing to attain the 2008 
ozone NAAQS by the attainment date along with resulting 
reclassifications or determination to grant 1-year attainment date 
extensions.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This rule does not impose any new information collection burden 
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection 
activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB 
control number 2060-0695. This action to find that the Marginal ozone 
nonattainment areas listed in Table 3 failed to attain the 2008 NAAQS 
by the applicable attainment date, to reclassify those areas as 
Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, and to adjust any applicable 
deadlines, does not establish any new information collection burden 
that has not already been identified in the existing 2008 ozone NAAQS 
Information Collection Request number 2347.01.

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. 
Determinations of nonattainment and the resulting reclassification of 
nonattainment areas by operation of law under section 181(b)(2) of the 
CAA do not in and of themselves create any new requirements. Instead, 
this rulemaking only makes a factual determination, and does not 
directly regulate any entities. This action also establishes the 
deadline by which states will need to submit revisions to their SIPs to 
address the new Moderate area requirements, and that deadline, if based 
on the statute, would otherwise be more stringent. In this final 
action, the EPA is exercising discretion under CAA section 182(i) which 
allows the Administrator to provide state air agencies additional time 
to comply with those requirements.

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 imposes no enforceable duty on any 
state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.

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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. No tribal areas are implicated in the 11 areas 
that we are finding to have failed to meet their attainment date. 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 and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because this action determines that 11 areas, 
identified in Table 3, did not attain the 2008 ozone standard by their 
applicable attainment date and to reclassify these areas as Moderate 
ozone nonattainment areas and to adjust applicable deadlines.

[[Page 26708]]

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.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed 
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and 
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income 
or indigenous populations. The results of this evaluation are contained 
in the section of the preamble titled ``Environmental Justice 
Considerations.''

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This rule is exempt from the CRA because it is a rule of particular 
applicability that names specific entities where this rule makes 
factual determinations and does directly regulate any entities. The 
determinations of attainment and failure to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS 
(and resulting reclassifications), and the determination to grant 1-
year attainment date extensions do not in themselves create any new 
requirements beyond what is mandated by the CAA.

L. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of final actions that are locally and regionally applicable may be 
filed only in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate 
circuit. However, the statute also provides that notwithstanding that 
general rule, ``a petition for review of any action . . . may be filed 
only in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
if such action is based on a determination of nationwide scope or 
effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds and 
publishes that such action is based on such a determination.'' 42 
U.S.C. 7607(b)(1). See also Dalton Trucking v. EPA, 808 F.3d 875 (D.C. 
Circuit 2015). Because this final action makes findings with regard to 
nonattainment areas across the country, interprets the CAA and applies 
such interpretations to states and nonattainment areas across the 
country, and establishes SIP deadlines for newly reclassified areas in 
different states in a consistent fashion, the Administrator finds that 
this action has nationwide scope and effect. Therefore, in accordance 
with CAA section 307(b)(1), petitions for review of this final action 
may be filed only in the United States Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit by July 5, 2016. Note, under CAA section 
307(b)(2), the requirements established by this final rule may not be 
challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings for 
enforcement.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Designations and classifications, Incorporation 
by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Designations and classifications, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: April 11, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, parts 52 and 81, title 40, 
chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations are 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 E--Arkansas

0
2. Add Sec.  52.174 to read as follows:


Sec.  52.174  Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.

    (a) The EPA has determined that the Crittenden County Marginal 2008 
ozone NAAQS nonattainment area attained the NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of July 20, 2015.
    (b) [Reserved]

Subpart F--California

0
3. Section 52.282 is amended by revising paragraphs (e) introductory 
text and (e)(1) and (2) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.282  Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (e) Determinations of attainment. Effective June 3, 2016.
    (1) Approval of applications for extensions of applicable 
attainment dates. Under section 181(a)(5) of the Clean Air Act, the EPA 
is approving the applications submitted by the California Air Resources 
Board dated June 1, 2015, referencing the District's letter of May 19, 
2015, for extensions of the applicable attainment date for the San Luis 
Obispo (Eastern San Luis Obispo), CA 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment 
areas from July 20, 2015 to July 20, 2016.
    (2) Determinations of attainment. The EPA has determined that the 
Calaveras County, Chico (Butte County), San Francisco Bay Area and 
Tuscan Buttes 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas in California have 
attained the 2008 8-hour ozone standard by the July 20, 2015 applicable 
attainment date, based upon complete quality-assured data for 2012-
2014. Therefore, the EPA has met its obligation pursuant to CAA section 
181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality data as of 
the attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. As a 
result of these determinations, the Calaveras County, Chico (Butte 
County), San Francisco Bay Area and Tuscan Buttes 2008 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment areas in California will not be reclassified for failure 
to attain by their July 20, 2015, applicable attainment date under 
section 181(b)(2)(A).
* * * * *

Subpart H--Connecticut

0
4. Section 52.377 is amended by adding paragraph (p) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.377  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (p) Rescission of clean data determination for the 1997 eight-hour 
ozone standard. Effective June 3, 2016, the EPA is determining that 
complete quality-assured and certified ozone monitoring data for 2012-
2014 show the NY-NJ-CT 1997 eight-hour ozone nonattainment area did not 
meet 1997 eight-hour ozone standard. Therefore, the EPA is rescinding 
the clean data determination for the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard 
only. The prior determination (see paragraph k of this section) is in 
accordance with 40 CFR 51.918. The prior determination suspended the 
requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, 
associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable

[[Page 26709]]

further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs 
related to attainment of the standard for as long as this area 
continues to meet the 1997 annual eight-hour ozone NAAQS. This 
rescission of the clean data determination will result in a SIP Call 
for a new ozone attainment demonstration, associated reasonably 
available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, 
contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to attainment of 
the standard, for this area only. If the revised plan is approved by 
the EPA as demonstrating reasonable further progress and attainment for 
the more stringent 2008 NAAQS by the Moderate area attainment date, and 
is approved by the EPA as containing adequate contingency measures for 
the 2008 NAAQS, then the plan would be deemed to have also satisfied 
requirements of the SIP Call associated with violations for the 1997 
NAAQS.

Subpart I--Delaware

0
5. Section 52.425 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.425  Determinations of attainment.

* * * * *
    (c) The EPA has determined, as of June 3, 2016, that based on 2012 
to 2014 ambient air quality data, the Seaford, DE 2008 ozone Marginal 
nonattainment area has attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of July 20, 2015. Therefore, the EPA has met the 
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on 
the area's air quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area 
attained the standard. The EPA also determined that the Seaford 
nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by 
its applicable attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).

Subpart P--Indiana

0
6. Section 52.777 is amended by adding paragraph (tt) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.777  Control strategy: photochemical oxidants (hydrocarbons).

* * * * *
    (tt) Determination of attainment. As required by section 
181(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act, the EPA has determined that the 
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN Marginal 2008 ozone nonattainment area has 
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July 
20, 2015.

Subpart S--Kentucky

0
7. Section 52.930 is amended by adding paragraph (m) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.930  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (m) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined, as of June 
3, 2016, that based on 2012 to 2014 ambient air quality data, the 
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN 2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment area has 
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA has met the 
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on 
the area's air quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area 
attained the standard. The EPA also determined that the Cincinnati, OH-
KY-IN nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain 
by its applicable attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).

Subpart T--Louisiana

0
8. Section 52.977 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.977  Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (f) The EPA has determined that the Baton Rouge Marginal 2008 ozone 
NAAQS nonattainment area attained the NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of July 20, 2015.

Subpart W--Massachusetts

0
9. Section 52.1129 is amended by adding paragraph (k) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1129  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (k) Determination of attainment for the eight-hour ozone standard. 
Effective June 3, 2016, the EPA is determining that complete quality-
assured and certified ozone monitoring data for 2012 to 2014 show the 
Dukes County, Massachusetts eight-hour ozone nonattainment area 
attained the 2008 eight-hour ozone standard by its July 20, 2015 
attainment deadline. Therefore, the EPA has met the requirement 
pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's 
air quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area attained 
the standard. The EPA also determined that the Dukes County 
nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by 
its applicable attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).

Subpart Z--Mississippi

0
10. Add Sec.  52.1273 to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1273  Control strategy: Ozone.

    (a) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined, as of June 
3, 2016, that based on 2012 to 2014 ambient air quality data, the 
Memphis, TN-MS-AR 2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment area has attained 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA has met the requirement 
pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's 
air quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area attained 
the standard. The EPA also determined that the Memphis, TN-MS-AR 
nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by 
its applicable attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).
    (b) [Reserved]

Subpart FF--New Jersey


Sec.  52.1576  [Amended]

0
11. Section 52.1576 is amended by remove paragraph (d).

0
12. Section 52.1582 is amended by adding paragraph (p) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1582  Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (p) Rescission of clean data determination for the 1997 eight-hour 
ozone standard. Effective June 3, 2016, the EPA is determining that 
complete quality-assured and certified ozone monitoring data for 2012-
2014 show the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT 1997 
eight-hour ozone nonattainment area did not meet 1997 eight-hour ozone 
standard. Therefore, the EPA is rescinding the clean data determination 
for the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard only. The prior determination 
(see paragraph (n)(2)) is in accordance with 40 CFR 51.918. The prior 
determination suspended the requirements for this area to submit an 
attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control 
measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and 
other planning SIPs related to attainment of the standard for as long 
as this area continues to meet the 1997 annual eight-hour ozone NAAQS. 
This rescission of the clean data determination will result in a SIP 
Call for a new ozone attainment demonstration, associated reasonably 
available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, 
contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to attainment of 
the standard, for this area only. If the revised plan is approved by 
the EPA as demonstrating reasonable further progress and attainment for 
the more stringent 2008 NAAQS by the Moderate area

[[Page 26710]]

attainment date, and is approved by the EPA as containing adequate 
contingency measures for the 2008 NAAQS, then the plan would be deemed 
to have also satisfied requirements of the SIP Call associated with 
violations for the 1997 NAAQS.

Subpart HH--New York

0
13. Section 52.1679 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1679  Determinations of attainment.

* * * * *
    (b) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined, as of June 
3, 2016, that based on 2012 to 2014 ambient air quality data, the 
Jamestown, NY 2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment area has attained the 
2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA has met the requirement pursuant 
to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air 
quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the 
standard. The EPA also determined that the Jamestown, NY nonattainment 
area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its applicable 
attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).

0
14. Section 52.1683 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(2)(v) and 
adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1683  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (v) Jamestown (consisting of Chautauqua County) as of June 3, 2016.
* * * * *
    (n) Rescission of clean data determination for the 1997 eight-hour 
ozone standard. Effective June 3, 2016, the EPA is determining that 
complete quality-assured and certified ozone monitoring data for 2012 
to 2014 show the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT 
1997 eight-hour ozone nonattainment area did not meet the 1997 eight-
hour ozone standard. Therefore, the EPA is rescinding the clean data 
determination for the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard only. The prior 
determination (see paragraph (f)(2)(viii) of this section) is in 
accordance with 40 CFR 51.918. The prior determination suspended the 
requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, 
associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further 
progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to 
attainment of the standard for as long as this area continues to meet 
the 1997 annual eight-hour ozone NAAQS. This rescission of the clean 
data determination will result in a SIP Call for a new ozone attainment 
demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures, a 
reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other 
planning SIPs related to attainment of the standard, for this area 
only. If the revised plan is approved by the EPA as demonstrating 
reasonable further progress and attainment for the more stringent 2008 
NAAQS by the Moderate area attainment date, and is approved by the EPA 
as containing adequate contingency measures for the 2008 NAAQS, then 
the plan would be deemed to have also satisfied requirements of the SIP 
Call associated with violations for the 1997 NAAQS.

Subpart II--North Carolina

0
15. Section 52.1779 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1779  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (c) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined, as of June 
3, 2016, that based on 2012 to 2014 ambient air quality data, the 
Charlotte-Rock Hill, NC-SC 2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment area has 
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA has met the 
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on 
the area's air quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area 
attained the standard. The EPA also determined that the Charlotte-Rock 
Hill, NC-SC nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to 
attain by its applicable attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).

Subpart KK--Ohio

0
16. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (nn) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1885  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (nn) Determination of attainment. As required by section 
181(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act, the EPA has determined that the 
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN and Columbus, OH Marginal 2008 ozone nonattainment 
areas have attained the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July 
20, 2015.

Subpart NN--Pennsylvania

0
17. Section 52.2056 is amended by adding paragraphs (k), (l), and (m) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  52.2056  Determinations of attainment.

* * * * *
    (k) The EPA has determined, as of June 3, 2016, that based on 2012 
to 2014 ambient air quality data, the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA 
2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2015. 
Therefore, the EPA has met the requirement pursuant to CAA section 
181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality as of the 
attainment date, whether the area attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
The EPA also determined that the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA 
marginal nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to 
attain by its applicable attainment date pursuant to section 
181(b)(2)(A).
    (l) The EPA has determined, as of June 3, 2016, that based on 2012 
to 2014 ambient air quality data, the Lancaster, PA 2008 ozone Marginal 
nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the 
applicable attainment date of July 20, 2015. Therefore, the EPA has met 
the requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, 
based on the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the 
area attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA also determined that 
the Lancaster, PA Marginal nonattainment area will not be reclassified 
for failure to attain by its applicable attainment date pursuant to 
section 181(b)(2)(A).
    (m) The EPA has determined, as of June 3, 2016, that based on 2012 
to 2014 ambient air quality data, the Reading, PA 2008 ozone Marginal 
nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the 
applicable attainment date of July 20, 2015. Therefore, the EPA has met 
the requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, 
based on the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the 
area attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA also determined that 
the Reading, PA Marginal nonattainment area will not be reclassified 
for failure to attain by its applicable attainment date pursuant to 
section 181(b)(2)(A).

Subpart PP--South Carolina

0
18. Section 52.2125 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2125  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (c) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined, as of June 
3, 2016, that based on 2012 to 2014 ambient air quality data, the 
Charlotte-Rock Hill, NC-SC 2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment area has 
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA has met the 
requirement pursuant to

[[Page 26711]]

CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality 
data as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. 
The EPA also determined that the Charlotte-Rock Hill, NC-SC 
nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by 
its applicable attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
19. Section 52.2235 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2235  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (d) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined, as of June 
3, 2016, that based on 2011 to 2013 ambient air quality data, the 
Knoxville, TN and Memphis, TN-MS-AR 2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment 
areas have attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA has met 
the requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, 
based on an area's air quality data as of the attainment date, whether 
the areas attained the standard. The EPA also determined that the 
Knoxville, TN and Memphis, TN-MS-AR nonattainment areas will not be 
reclassified for failure to attain by their applicable attainment date 
under section 181(b)(2)(A).

 Subpart ZZ--Wyoming

0
20. Add Sec.  52.2623 to read as follows:


Sec.  52.2623  Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.

    (a) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined, as of June 
3, 2016, that based on 2012 to 2014 ambient air quality data, the Upper 
Green River Basin Area, WY 2008 ozone Marginal nonattainment area has 
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the EPA has met the 
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on 
the area's air quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area 
attained the standard. The EPA also determined that the Upper Green 
River Basin Area, WY nonattainment area will not be reclassified for 
failure to attain by its applicable attainment date under section 
181(b)(2)(A).
    (b) [Reserved]

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
21. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
22. Section 81.303 is amended in the table for ``Arizona-2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the heading entry for 
``Phoenix-Mesa, AZ'' and the entries for ``Maricopa County (part)'' to 
read as follows:


Sec.  81.303  Arizona.

* * * * *

                                                            Arizona--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                                                 [Primary and secondary]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Designation                                 Classification
                        Designated area                        -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Date \1\                 Type                Date \1\                 Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phoenix-Mesa, AZ: \2\.........................................  ..............  Nonattainment..............          6/3/16  Moderate.
    Maricopa County (part)
        T1N, R1E (except that portion in Indian Country); T1N,
         R2E; T1N, R3E; T1N, R4E; T1N, R5E; T1N, R6E; T1N,
         R7E; T1N, R1W; T1N, R2W; T1N, R3W; T1N, R4W; T1N,
         R5W; T1N, R6W; T1N, R7W; T1N, R8W; T2N, R1E; T2N,
         R2E; T2N, R3E; T2N, R4E; T2N, R5E; T2N, R6E; T2N,
         R7E; T2N, R8E; T2N, R9E; T2N, R10E; T2N, R11E; T2N,
         R12E (except that portion in Gila County); T2N, R13E
         (except that portion in Gila County); T2N, R1W; T2N,
         R2W; T2N, R3W; T2N, R4W; T2N, R5W; T2N, R6W; T2N,
         R7W; T2N, R8W; T3N, R1E; T3N, R2E; T3N, R3E; T3N,
         R4E; T3N, R5E; T3N, R6E; T3N, R7E; T3N, R8E; T3N,
         R9E; T3N, R10E (except that portion in Gila County);
         T3N, R11E (except that portion in Gila County); T3N,
         R12E (except that portion in Gila County); T3N, R1W;
         T3N, R2W; T3N, R3W; T3N, R4W; T3N, R5W; T3N, R6W;
         T4N, R1E; T4N, R2E; T4N, R3E; T4N, R4E; T4N, R5E;
         T4N, R6E; T4N, R7E; T4N, R8E; T4N, R9E; T4N, R10E
         (except that portion in Gila County); T4N, R11E
         (except that portion in Gila County); T4N, R12E
         (except that portion in Gila County); T4N, R1W; T4N,
         R2W; T4N, R3W; T4N, R4W; T4N, R5W; T4N, R6W; T5N,
         R1E; T5N, R2E; T5N, R3E; T5N, R4E; T5N, R5E; T5N,
         R6E; N, R8E; T5N, R9E (except that portion in Gila
         County); T5N, R10E (except that portion in Gila
         County); T5N, R1W; T5N, R2W; T5N, R3W; T5N, R4W; T5N,
         R5W; T6N, R1E (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T6N, R2E; T6N, R3E; T6N, R4E; T6N, R5E; T6N,
         R6E; T6N, R7E; T6N, R8E; T6N, R9E (except that
         portion in Gila County); T6N, R10E (except that
         portion in Gila County); T6N, R1W (except that
         portion in Yavapai County); T6N, R2W; T6N, R3W; T6N,
         R4W; T6N, R5W; T7N, R1E; (except that portion in
         Yavapai County); T7N, R2E (except that portion in
         Yavapai County);

[[Page 26712]]

 
         T7N, R3E; T7N, R4E; T7N, R5E; T7N, R6E; T7N, R7E;
         T7N, R8E; T7N, R9E (except that portion in Gila
         County); T7N, R1W (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T7N, R2W (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T8N, R2E (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T8N, R3E (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T8N, R4E (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T8N, R5E (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T8N, R6E (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T8N, R7E (except that portion in Yavapai
         County); T8N, R8E (except that portion in Yavapai and
         Gila Counties); T8N, R9E (except that portion in
         Yavapai and Gila Counties); T1S, R1E (except that
         portion in Indian Country); T1S, R2E (except that
         portion in Pinal County and in Indian Country); T1S,
         R3E; T1S, R4E; T1S, R5E; T1S, R6E; T1S, R7E; T1S,
         R1W; T1S, R2W; T1S, R3W; T1S, R4W; T1S, R5W; T1S,
         R6W; T2S, R1E (except that portion in Indian
         Country); T2S, R5E; T2S, R6E; T2S, R7E; T2S, R1W;
         T2S, R2W; T2S, R3W; T2S, R4W; T2S, R5W; T3S, R1E;
         T3S, R1W; T3S, R2W; T3S, R3W; T3S, R4W; T3S, R5W;
         T4S, R1E; T4S, R1W; T4S, R2W; T4S, R3W; T4S, R4W;
         T4S, R5W; T5S, R4W (Sections 1 through 22 and 27
         through 34).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

0
23. Section 81.305 is amended in the table for ``California-2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Imperial County, CA'', ``Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA'', ``Mariposa 
County, CA'', ``Nevada County (Western part), CA'', and ``San Diego 
County, CA'', and ``San Luis Obispo (Eastern San Luis Obispo), CA'' and 
adding a footnote ``5'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.305  California.

* * * * *

                                       California--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Designation                         Classification
           Designated area           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Date \1\             Type             Date \1\             Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imperial County, CA: \2\............  ..............  Nonattainment.......          6/3/16  Moderate.
    Imperial County.................
    Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
     Indian Reservation \3\.
    Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla
     Indians \3\.
Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA: \2\.  ..............  Nonattainment.......          6/3/16  Moderate.
    Kern County (part)..............

[[Page 26713]]

 
That portion of Kern County (with
 the exception of that portion in
 Hydrologic Unit Number 18090205--
 the Indian Wells Valley) east and
 south of a line described as
 follows: Beginning at the Kern-Los
 Angeles County boundary and running
 north and east along the northwest
 boundary of the Rancho La Liebre
 Land Grant to the point of
 intersection with the range line
 common to Range 16 West and Range
 17 West, San Bernardino Base and
 Meridian; north along the range
 line to the point of intersection
 with the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant
 boundary; then southeast,
 northeast, and northwest along the
 boundary of the Rancho El Tejon
 Grant to the northwest corner of
 Section 3, Township 11 North, Range
 17 West; then west 1.2 miles; then
 north to the Rancho El Tejon Land
 Grant boundary; then northwest
 along the Rancho El Tejon line to
 the southeast corner of Section 34,
 Township 32 South, Range 30 East,
 Mount Diablo Base and Meridian;
 then north to the northwest corner
 of Section 35, Township 31 South,
 Range 30 East; then northeast along
 the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon
 Land Grant to the southwest corner
 of Section 18, Township 31 South,
 Range 31 East; then east to the
 southeast corner of Section 13,
 Township 31 South, Range 31 East;
 then north along the range line
 common to Range 31 East and Range
 32 East, Mount Diablo Base and
 Meridian, to the northwest corner
 of Section 6, Township 29 South,
 Range 32 East; then east to the
 southwest corner of Section 31,
 Township 28 South, Range 32 East;
 then north along the range line
 common to Range 31 East and Range
 32 East to the northwest corner of
 Section 6, Township 28 South, Range
 32 East, then west to the southeast
 corner of Section 36, Township 27
 South, Range 31 East, then north
 along the range line common to
 Range 31 East and Range 32 East to
 the Kern-Tulare County boundary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mariposa County, CA: \2\ Mariposa     ..............  Nonattainment.......          6/3/16  Moderate.
 County.
Nevada County (Western part), CA:     ..............  Nonattainment.......          6/3/16  Moderate.
 \2\.
    Nevada County (part)............
        That portion of Nevada
         County, which lies west of
         a line, described as
         follows: Beginning at the
         Nevada-Placer County
         boundary and running north
         along the western
         boundaries of Sections 24,
         13, 12, 1, Township 17
         North, Range 14 East, Mount
         Diablo Base and Meridian,
         and Sections 36, 25, 24,
         13, 12, Township 18 North,
         Range 14 East to the Nevada-
         Sierra County boundary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Diego County, CA: \2\...........  ..............  Nonattainment.......          6/3/16  Moderate.
    San Diego County................
    Barona Group of Capitan Grande
     Band of Mission Indians of the
     Barona Reservation \3\.
    Campo Band of Diegueno Mission
     Indians of the Campo Indian
     Reservation \3\.
    Capitan Grande Band of Diegueno
     Mission Indians of California
     \3\.
    Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumayaay
     Indians \3\.
    Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel \3\
    Inaja Band of Diegueno Mission
     Indians of the Inaja and Cosmit
     Reservation \3\.
    Jamul Indian Village of
     California \3\.
    La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians
     \3\.
    La Posta Band of Diegueno
     Mission Indians of the La Posta
     Indian Reservation \3\.
    Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and
     Cupeno Indians \3\.

[[Page 26714]]

 
    Manzanita Band of Diegueno
     Mission Indians of the
     Manzanita Reservation \3\.
    Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno
     Mission Indians of the Mesa
     Grande Reservation \3\.
    Pala Band of Luiseno Mission
     Indians of the Pala Reservation
     \3\.
    Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission
     Indians of the Pauma and Yuima
     Reservation \3\.
    Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission
     Indians of the Rincon
     Reservation \3\.
    San Pasqual Band of Diegueno
     Mission Indians of California
     \3\.
    Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay
     Nation \3\.
    Viejas (Baron Long) Group of
     Capitan Grande Band of Mission
     Indians \3\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Luis Obispo (Eastern San Luis     ..............  Nonattainment.......          6/3/16  Marginal.\5\
 Obispo), CA: \2\.
    San Luis Obispo County (part)...
        That portion of San Luis
         Obispo County that lies
         east of a line described as
         follows: Beginning at the
         San Luis Obispo County/
         Santa Barbara County
         boundary and running north
         along 120 degrees 24
         minutes longitude to the
         intersection with 35
         degrees 27 minutes
         latitude; east along 35
         degrees 27 minutes latitude
         to the intersection with
         120 degrees 18 minutes
         longitude; then north along
         120 degrees 18 minutes
         longitude to the San Luis
         Obispo County/Monterey
         County boundary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
\3\ Includes Indian country of the tribe listed in this table located in the identified area. Information
  pertaining to areas of Indian country in this table is intended for CAA planning purposes only and is not an
  EPA determination of Indian country status or any Indian country boundary. EPA lacks the authority to
  establish Indian country land status, and is making no determination of Indian country boundaries, in this
  table.
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
24. Section 81.306 is amended in the table for ``Colorado--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins-Loveland, CO'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.306  Colorado.

* * * * *

                                        Colorado--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins- ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.
 Loveland, CO: \2\.
    Adams County..................
    Arapahoe County...............
    Boulder County................
    Broomfield County.............
    Denver County.................
    Douglas County................
    Jefferson County..............
    Larimer County (part).........

[[Page 26715]]

 
        That portion of the county
         that lies south of a line
         described as follows:
         Beginning at a point on
         Larimer County's eastern
         boundary and Weld
         County's western boundary
         intersected by 40
         degrees, 42 minutes, and
         47.1 seconds north
         latitude, proceed west to
         a point defined by the
         intersection of 40
         degrees, 42 minutes, 47.1
         seconds north latitude
         and 105 degrees, 29
         minutes, and 40.0 seconds
         west longitude, thence
         proceed south on 105
         degrees, 29 minutes, 40.0
         seconds west longitude to
         the intersection with 40
         degrees, 33 minutes and
         17.4 seconds north
         latitude, thence proceed
         west on 40 degrees, 33
         minutes, 17.4 seconds
         north latitude until this
         line intersects Larimer
         County's western boundary
         and Grand County's
         eastern boundary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Weld County (part)............
        That portion of the county
         that lies south of a line
         described as follows:
         Beginning at a point on
         Weld County's eastern
         boundary and Logan
         County's western boundary
         intersected by 40
         degrees, 42 minutes, 47.1
         seconds north latitude,
         proceed west on 40
         degrees, 42 minutes, 47.1
         seconds north latitude
         until this line
         intersects Weld County's
         western boundary and
         Larimer County's eastern
         boundary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

0
25. Section 81.307 is amended by revising the table for ``Connecticut--
2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.307  Connecticut.

* * * * *

                                      Connecticut--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greater Connecticut, CT: \2\......  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.
    Hartford County
    Litchfield County
    New London County
    Tolland County
    Windham County
    Mashantucket Pequot Tribe of
     Connecticut \3\
    Mohegan Indian Tribe of
     Connecticut \3\
New York-N. New Jersey-Long         ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.
 Island, NY-NJ-CT: \2\.
    Fairfield County
    Middlesex County
    New Haven County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

[[Page 26716]]

 
\3\ Includes Indian country of the tribe listed in this table located in the identified area. Information
  pertaining to areas of Indian country in this table is intended for CAA planning purposes only and is not an
  EPA determination of Indian country status or any Indian country boundary. EPA lacks the authority to
  establish Indian country land status, and is making no determination of Indian country boundaries, in this
  table.

* * * * *

0
26. Section 81.308 is amended by revising the table for ``Delaware--
2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.308  Delaware.

* * * * *

                                        Delaware--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic    ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
 City, PA-NJ-MD-DE: \2\.
    New Castle County
Seaford: \2\
    Sussex County                   ..............  Nonattainment........  ..............  Marginal.
Rest of State: \3\
    Southern Delaware Intrastate
     AQCR: (remainder)
    Kent County                     ..............  Unclassifiable/                        .....................
                                                     Attainment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
\3\ Includes any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise specified.
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
27. Section 81.309 is amended by revising the table for ``District of 
Columbia--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  81.309  District of Columbia.

* * * * *

                                  District of Columbia--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington, DC-MD-VA: District of   ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\3\
 Columbia \2\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
\3\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
28. Section 81.311 is amended in the table for ``Georgia--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Atlanta, GA'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.311  Georgia.

* * * * *

                                        Georgia--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlanta, GA: \2\..................  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.

[[Page 26717]]

 
    Bartow County
    Cherokee County
    Clayton County
    Cobb County
    Coweta County
    DeKalb County
    Douglas County
    Fayette County
    Forsyth County
    Fulton County
    Gwinnett County
    Henry County
    Newton County
    Paulding County
    Rockdale County
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

0
29. Section 81.314 is amended in the table for ``Illinois--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by:
0
a. Revising the entries for ``Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI'';
0
b. Revising the heading entry ``St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-
IL'' and the entries ``Madison County'', ``Monroe County'', and ``St. 
Clair County''; and
0
c. Adding a footnote ``4''.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  81.314   Illinois.

* * * * *

                                        Illinois--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI: \2\.  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.
    Cook County
    DuPage County
    Grundy County (part)
        Aux Sable Township
        Goose Lake Township
    Kane County
    Kendall County (part)
        Oswego Township
    Lake County
    McHenry County
    Will County
St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington,   ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
 MO-IL: \2\.
    Madison County
    Monroe County
    St. Clair County
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
30. Section 81.315 is amended in the table for ``Indiana--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.315  Indiana.

* * * * *

[[Page 26718]]



                                        Indiana--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI: \2\.  ..............  Nonattainment........         6/3/16.  Moderate.
    Lake County
    Porter County
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
0
31. Section 81.321 is amended in the table for ``Maryland--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by:
0
a. Revising the entries for ``Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, 
PA-NJ-MD-DE'';
0
b. Revising the heading entry ``Washington, DC-MD-VA''; and
0
c. Adding a footnote ``4''.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  81.321  Maryland.

* * * * *

                                        Maryland--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic    ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
 City, PA-NJ-MD-DE: \2\.
    Cecil County..................  ..............  .....................  ..............  .....................
Washington, DC-MD-VA: \2\.........  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\ 4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
32. Section 81.326 is amended in the table for ``Missouri--2008--8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the heading entry for 
``St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL'' and adding a footnote ``4'' 
to read as follows:


Sec.  81.326  Missouri.

* * * * *

                                        Missouri--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington,   ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
 MO-IL: \2\.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
33. Amend Sec.  81.331 by revising the table for ``New Jersey--2008 8-
Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.331  New Jersey.

* * * * *

[[Page 26719]]



                                       New Jersey--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York-N. New Jersey-Long         ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.
 Island, NY-NJ-CT: \2\.
    1Bergen County................
    Essex County..................
    Hudson County.................
    Hunterdon County..............
    Middlesex County..............
    Monmouth County...............
    Morris County.................
    Passaic County................
    Somerset County...............
    Sussex County.................
    Union County..................
    Warren County.................
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic    ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\3\.
 City, PA-NJ-MD-DE: \2\.
    Atlantic County...............
    Burlington County.............
    Camden County.................
    Cape May County...............  ..............
    Cumberland County.............
    Gloucester County.............
    Mercer County.................
    Ocean County..................
    Salem County..................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
\3\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
34. Section 81.333 is amended in the table for ``New York--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for ``New 
York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.333  New York.

* * * * *

                                        New York--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
New York-N. New Jersey-Long         ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.
 Island, NY-NJ-CT: \2\.
    Bronx County..................
    Kings County..................
    Nassau County.................
    New York County...............
    Queens County.................
    Richmond County...............
    Rockland County...............
    Suffolk County................
    Westchester County............
    Shinnecock Indian Nation \3\..
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
\3\ Includes Indian country of the tribe listed in this table located in the identified area. Information
  pertaining to areas of Indian country in this table is intended for CAA planning purposes only and is not an
  EPA determination of Indian country status or any Indian country boundary. EPA lacks the authority to
  establish Indian country land status, and is making no determination of Indian country boundaries, in this
  table.

* * * * *
0
35. Section 81.336 is amended in the table for ``Ohio--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH'' and adding a footnote ``4'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  81.336  Ohio.

* * * * *

[[Page 26720]]



                                         Ohio--2008--8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH: \2\...  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
    Ashtabula County..............
    Cuyahoga County...............
    Geauga County.................
    Lake County...................
    Lorain County.................
    Medina County.................
    Portage County................
    Summit County.................
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
36. Section 81.339 is amended in the table for ``Pennsylvania--2008 8-
Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE'' and 
``Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA'' and adding a footnote ``4'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  81.339  Pennsylvania.

* * * * *

                                      Pennsylvania--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Date\1\              Type              Date\1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic    ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
 City, PA-NJ-MD-DE \2\.
    Bucks County..................
    Chester County................
    Delaware County...............
    Montgomery County.............
    Philadelphia County...........
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA \2\..  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
    Allegheny County..............
    Armstrong County..............
    Beaver County.................
    Butler County.................
    Fayette County................
    Washington County.............
    Westmoreland County...........
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
37. Section 81.344 is amended in the table for ``Texas--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX'' and adding a footnote ``4'' to read 
as follows:


Sec.  81.344  Texas.

* * * * *

[[Page 26721]]



                                         Texas--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Date\1\              Type              Date\1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX:\2\  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
    Brazoria County...............
    Chambers County...............
    Fort Bend County..............
    Galveston County..............
    Harris County.................
    Liberty County................
    Montgomery County.............
    Waller County.................
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
38. Section 81.347 is amended in the table for ``Virginia--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entries for 
``Washington, DC-MD-VA'' and adding a footnote ``4'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  81.347  Virginia.

* * * * *

                                        Virginia--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
        Designated area \1\        -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \2\              Type             Date \2\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington, DC-MD-VA: \2\.........  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\
    Arlington County..............
    Fairfax County................
    Loudoun County................
    Prince William County.........
    Alexandria City...............
    Fairfax City..................
    Falls Church City.............
    Manassas City.................
    Manassas Park City............
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *

0
39. Section 81.350 is amended in the table for ``Wisconsin--2008 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by:
0
a. Revising the heading entry for ``Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI'' and 
the entries for ``Sheboygan County, WI''; and
0
b. Adding a footnote ``4''.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  81.350  Wisconsin.

* * * * *

                                       Wisconsin--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type             Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI: \2\.  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Moderate.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sheboygan County, WI: \2\.........  ..............  Nonattainment........          6/3/16  Marginal.\4\

[[Page 26722]]

 
    Sheboygan County..............
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
* * *
\4\ Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2016.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-09729 Filed 5-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P