Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Nevada; Redesignation of Clark County to Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 1149-1153 [2013-00057]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
All coordinates are North American
Datum 1983.
(b) Regulations. (1) The general
regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.10,
165.11, and 165.13 apply.
(2) In accordance with the general
regulations, entry into, anchoring, or
movement within the RNA, during
periods of enforcement, is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Long Island Sound (COTP) or the
COTP’s designated representative.
(3) During periods of enforcement,
entry and movement within the RNA is
subject to a ‘‘Slow-No Wake’’ speed
limit. Vessels may not produce more
than a minimum wake and may not
attain speeds greater than six knots
unless a higher minimum speed is
necessary to maintain steerageway when
traveling with a strong current. In no
case may the wake produced by the
vessel be such that it creates a danger of
injury to persons, or damage to vessels
or structures of any kind.
(4) During periods of enforcement, all
persons and vessels must comply with
all orders and directions from the COTP
or the COTP’s designated representative.
(5) During periods of enforcement,
upon being hailed by a Coast Guard
vessel by siren, radio, flashing light or
other means, the operator of the vessel
must proceed as directed.
(6) Persons and vessels may request
permission to enter the RNA during
periods of closure on VHF–16 or via
phone at 203–468–4401.
(7) Notwithstanding anything
contained in this rule, the Rules of the
Road (33 CFR part 84—Subchapter E,
inland navigational rules) are still in
effect and must be strictly adhered to at
all times.
(c) Effective period. This rule is
effective from January 7, 2013 through
November 30, 2017.
(d) Enforcement period. Except when
suspended in accordance with
paragraph (e) of this section, this RNA
is enforceable 24 hours a day during the
effective period.
(e) Suspension of enforcement. The
COTP may suspend enforcement of the
RNA. If enforcement is suspended, the
COTP will cause a notice of the
suspension of enforcement by all
appropriate means to promote the
widest publicity among the affected
segments of the public. Such means of
notification may include, but are not
limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners
and Local Notice to Mariners. Such
notifications will include the date and
time that enforcement is suspended as
well as the date and time that
enforcement will resume.
(f) Waterway closure. The COTP may
temporarily suspend all traffic through
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:24 Jan 07, 2013
Jkt 229001
the RNA for any situation that would
pose imminent hazard to life on the
navigable waters. In the event of a
complete waterway closure, the COTP
will make advance notice of the closure
by all means available to promote the
widest public distribution including,
but not limited to, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners.
Such notification will include the date
and time of the closure as well as the
date and time that normal vessel traffic
can resume.
(g) Violations of this RNA may be
reported to the COTP, at 203–468–4401
or on VHF-Channel 16. Persons in
violation of this RNA may be subject to
civil or criminal penalties.
Dated: December 20, 2012.
T.J. Vitullo,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013–00211 Filed 1–7–13; 8:45 am]
1149
Generally, documents in the docket for
this action are available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
(e.g., confidential business information
or ‘‘CBI’’). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ginger Vagenas, Air Planning Office
(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, (415) 972–3964,
vagenas.ginger@epa.gov.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
Table of Contents
[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0792; FRL–9766–9]
I. Summary of Proposed Action
A. Determination That the Area Has
Attained the Applicable NAAQS
B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved
SIP Meeting Requirements Applicable
for Purposes of Redesignation Under
Section 110 and Part D
C. The Area Must Show the Improvement
in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and
Enforceable Emissions Reductions
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Under CAA Section
175A
II. Public Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; State of Nevada;
Redesignation of Clark County to
Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking final action to
approve, as a revision of the Nevada
state implementation plan, the State’s
plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard in Clark County for ten
years beyond redesignation, and the
related motor vehicle emissions
budgets, because they meet the
applicable requirements for such plans
and budgets. EPA is also taking final
action to approve a request from the
Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection to redesignate the Clark
County ozone nonattainment area to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
because the area meets the statutory
requirements for redesignation under
the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on February 7, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0792.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Summary of Proposed Action
On November 13, 2012 (77 FR 67600),
we proposed to take several related
actions. First, under Clean Air Act (CAA
or ‘‘Act’’) section 110(k)(3), EPA
proposed to approve a submittal from
the Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection (NDEP) dated April 11, 2011
of Clark County’s Ozone Redesignation
Request and Maintenance Plan (March
2011) (‘‘Clark County Ozone
Maintenance Plan’’ or ‘‘Ozone
Maintenance Plan’’) as a revision to the
Nevada state implementation plan (SIP).
In connection with the Clark County
Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA proposed
to find that the maintenance
demonstration showing that the area
will continue to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
1150
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
standard (NAAQS or ‘‘standard’’) 1 for
10 years beyond redesignation (i.e.,
through 2022), and the contingency
provisions describing the actions that
Clark County will take in the event of
a future monitored violation, meet all
applicable requirements for
maintenance plans and related
contingency provisions in CAA section
175A. EPA also proposed to approve the
motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) in the Clark County Ozone
Maintenance Plan because we found
they met the applicable transportation
conformity requirements under 40 CFR
93.118(e).
Second, under CAA section
107(d)(3)(D), EPA proposed to approve
NDEP’s request that accompanied the
submittal of the maintenance plan to
redesignate the Clark County 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area 2 to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. We did so based on our
conclusion that the area has met the five
criteria for redesignation under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E). Our conclusion in
this regard was based on our
determination that the area has attained
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, that
relevant portions of the Nevada SIP are
fully approved, that the improvement in
air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions,
that Nevada has met all requirements
applicable to the Clark County 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area with respect
to section 110 and part D of the CAA,
and based on our approval as part of
this action of the Clark County Ozone
Maintenance Plan.
For the purposes of this final rule, we
have summarized the basis for our
findings in connection with the
proposed approvals of the Ozone
Maintenance Plan and redesignation
request. For a more detailed explanation
as well as background information
concerning the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the CAA requirements for
redesignation, and the ozone planning
history of Clark County, please see our
November 13, 2012 proposed rule.
1 The 1997 8-hour ozone standard is 0.08 parts
per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time
frame.
2 The boundaries of the Clark County ozone
nonattainment area are defined in 40 CFR 81.329.
Specifically, the area is defined as: ‘‘That portion
of Clark County that lies in hydrographic areas
164A, 164B, 165, 166, 167, 212, 213, 214, 216, 217,
and 218 but excluding the Moapa River Indian
Reservation and the Fort Mojave Indian
Reservation.’’ The area includes a significant
portion of the unincorporated portions of central
and southern Clark County, as well as the cities of
Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, and
Boulder City.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Jan 07, 2013
Jkt 229001
A. Determination That the Area Has
Attained the Applicable NAAQS
Prior to redesignating an area to
attainment, CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)
requires that we determine that the area
has attained the NAAQS. For our
proposed rule, consistent with the
requirements contained in 40 CFR part
50, EPA reviewed the ozone ambient air
monitoring data for the monitoring
period from 2009 through 2011, as
recorded in the EPA Air Quality System
(AQS) database, and determined, based
on the complete, quality-assured data
for 2009–2011, that the Clark County 8hour ozone nonattainment area has
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
because the design value 3 is less than
0.084 ppm. We also reviewed
preliminary data from 2012 and found
that it was consistent with continued
attainment of the standard in the Clark
County 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area. See pages 67602–67604 of our
November 13, 2012 proposed rule.
B. The Area Must Have a Fully
Approved SIP Meeting Requirements
Applicable for Purposes of
Redesignation Under Section 110 and
Part D
Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) of the
CAA require EPA to determine that the
area has a fully approved applicable SIP
under section 110(k) that meets all
applicable requirements under section
110 and part D for the purposes of
redesignation. For the reasons
summarized below, we found that the
Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area has a fully approved
applicable SIP under section 110(k) that
meets all applicable requirements under
section 110 and part D for the purposes
of redesignation. See pages 67604–
67607 of our November 13, 2012
proposed rule.
With respect to section 110 of the
CAA (General SIP Requirements), we
concluded that NDEP and Clark County
have met all SIP requirements for Clark
County applicable for purposes of
redesignation. Our conclusion in this
regard was based on our review of the
Clark County portion of the Nevada SIP.
With respect to part D (of title I of the
CAA), we reviewed the Clark County
portion of the Nevada SIP for
compliance with applicable
requirements under both subparts 1 and
2.4
First, we noted that EPA previously
determined that the Clark County 8hour ozone nonattainment area attained
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on
2007–2009 ozone data (76 FR 17343,
March 29, 2011), and thereby
suspended, under 40 CFR 51.918, the
obligation on the State of Nevada to
submit an attainment demonstration
and associated reasonably available
control measures (RACM), a reasonable
further progress (RFP) plan, contingency
measures and other planning
requirements related to attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As
such, we explained that the State’s
compliance status with the attainmentrelated SIP requirements under subpart
1 was not relevant for the purposes of
evaluating the State’s redesignation
request.
As to the other applicable subpart 1
requirements, we found that:
• The emissions inventory
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3)
would be met by our approval of the
Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan
and related emissions inventories for
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
oxides of nitrogen (NOX);
• A fully-approved nonattainment
New Source Review (NSR) program was
not a prerequisite to redesignation in
this instance because the Clark County
Ozone Maintenance Plan demonstrates
maintenance of the standard without
implementation of nonattainment NSR;
moreover, after redesignation, sources
under NDEP jurisdiction would be
subject to the federal PSD program and
sources under Clark County jurisdiction
would be subject to an EPA-approved
PSD program that is deficient in certain
respects but not in ways that would
interfere with maintenance of the ozone
standard; and
• Clark County and the State
previously met the requirements for
transportation conformity SIPs under
section 176(c) (see EPA’s approval of
Clark County’s transportation
conformity SIP at 73 FR 66182,
November 7, 2008).5
With respect to the requirements
associated with subpart 2, we noted that
the Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area was initially
designated nonattainment under subpart
1 of the CAA, but was subsequently
classified as marginal nonattainment for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard under
3 The design value for the 8-hour standard is the
three-year average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration at the
worst-case monitoring site in the area.
4 Subpart 1 contains general, less prescriptive
requirements for all nonattainment areas of any
pollutant, including ozone, governed by a NAAQS.
Subpart 2 contains additional, more specific
requirements for ozone nonattainment areas
classified under subpart 2.
5 In any event, EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity requirements as not
applicable for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation request under section 107(d)(3)(E).
See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426, 439 (6th Cir. 2001)
upholding this interpretation.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
subpart 2 of part D of the CAA in May
2012, i.e., after NDEP’s submittal of the
redesignation request. Under EPA’s
longstanding policy of evaluating
requirements in accordance with the
requirements due at the time a
redesignation request is submitted and
in consideration of the inequity of
applying retroactively any requirements
that might in the future be applied, we
determined that the requirements under
subpart 2 need not be addressed as a
condition of redesignation.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
C. The Area Must Show the
Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Emissions
Reductions
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) precludes
redesignation of a nonattainment area to
attainment unless EPA determines that
the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable regulations. Based on
our review of the control measures
credited in the Clark County Ozone
Maintenance Plan as providing the
emissions reductions sufficient to attain
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area through the year
2022, and based on our consideration of
other factors such as weather patterns
and economic activity, we found that
the improvement in air quality in the
Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area is the result of
permanent and enforceable emissions
reductions from a combination of
Federal vehicle and fuel measures and
EPA-approved State and local control
measures. See pages 670607–67608 of
our November 13, 2012 proposed rule.
D. The Area Must Have a Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Under
CAA Section 175A
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. As
explained in the proposed rule, we
interpret this section of the Act to
require, in general, the following core
elements: Attainment inventory,
maintenance demonstration, monitoring
network, verification of continued
attainment, and contingency plan.
Based on our review and evaluation of
the Ozone Maintenance Plan, we
concluded that it contained the core
elements and met the requirements of
CAA section 175A. See pages 67608–
67613. Our conclusion was based on the
following findings:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Jan 07, 2013
Jkt 229001
• The base year emissions inventories
for 2008 are comprehensive, that the
methods and assumptions used by Clark
County Department of Air Quality
(DAQ) to develop the 2008 emission
inventory are reasonable, and that the
inventories reasonably estimate actual
ozone season emissions in an
attainment year. Moreover, we found
that the 2008 emissions inventories in
the Ozone Maintenance Plan reflect the
latest planning assumptions and
emissions models available at the time
the plan was developed, and provide a
comprehensive and reasonably accurate
basis upon which to forecast ozone
precursor emissions for years 2015 and
2022;
• The projected VOC and NOX
emissions estimates adequately account
for projected area-wide growth, specific
projects (including, among others, the
Nellis Air Force Base F–35 beddown
project), and emissions reduction
credits (ERCs), and show that VOC and
NOX emissions would remain well
below the attainment levels throughout
the 10-year maintenance period and
thereby adequately demonstrate
maintenance through that period;
• Clark County DAQ has committed
to continue to operate the air quality
monitoring network to verify the
continued attainment of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS ambient ozone
monitoring; 6
• Clark County DAQ’s commitment in
the Ozone Maintenance Plan to the
continued operation of an ozone
monitoring network and the
requirement that NDEP and Clark
County DAQ must inventory emissions
sources and report to EPA on a periodic
basis 7 would be sufficient for the
purpose of verifying continued
attainment; and
• The contingency provisions of the
Ozone Maintenance Plan clearly
identify specific contingency measures,
contain adequate tracking and triggering
mechanisms to determine when
contingency measures are needed,
contain a sufficient description of the
process of recommending and
implementing contingency measures,
and contain specific timelines for
action, and would, therefore, be
adequate to ensure prompt correction of
a violation and comply with the
6 Although the Ozone Maintenance Plan is not
explicit in this regard, we presume that Clark
County DAQ’s intention to continue operation of a
monitoring network means that the agency intends
to do so consistent with EPA’s monitoring
requirements in 40 CFR part 58 (‘‘Ambient Air
Quality Surveillance’’).
7 See 40 CFR part 51, subpart A (‘‘Air Emissions
Reporting Requirements’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1151
contingency-related requirements under
CAA section 175A(d).
Lastly, we proposed to approve the
motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) contained in the Ozone
Maintenance Plan because we found
that they meet the transportation
conformity adequacy requirements
under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). In so
proposing, we found that, among other
things, the MVEBs, when considered
with emissions from all other sources,
would be consistent with maintenance
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area.
II. Public Comments
Our November 13, 2012 proposed rule
provided for a 30-day comment period.
We received comment letters in support
of our proposed action from NDEP and
the Washoe County Health District. In
its comment letter, NDEP also noted that
approval of the redesignation request for
the Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area will negate the
need, that had been identified in EPA’s
proposed limited approval and limited
disapproval of Clark County’s revised
NSR rules at 77 FR 43206, for a revision
to NDEP’s nonattainment NSR
provisions at this time. We received no
adverse comments in response to our
November 13, 2012 proposed rule.
III. Final Action
Under CAA sections 110(k)(3) and
107(d)(3)(D), and for the reasons set
forth in our proposed rule and
summarized above, EPA is taking final
action to approve NDEP’s submittal
dated April 11, 2011 of Clark County’s
Ozone Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan (March 2011) (‘‘Clark
County Ozone Maintenance Plan’’) as a
revision to the Nevada SIP and to
approve NDEP’s request to redesignate
the Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area to attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In
connection with the Clark County
Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA finds
that the maintenance demonstration
showing that the area will continue to
attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for 10 years beyond redesignation (i.e.,
through 2022) and the contingency
provisions describing the actions that
Clark County will take in the event of
a future monitored violation meet all
applicable requirements for
maintenance plans and related
contingency provisions in CAA section
175A. EPA is also approving the
following motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) from the Clark County
Ozone Maintenance Plan for
transportation conformity purposes
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
1152
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
because we find that they meet the
applicable transportation conformity
requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e):
Budget
year
VOC (tpd,
average summer
weekday)
NOX (tpd,
average summer
weekday)
65.08
45.32
36.71
68.46
34.69
23.15
2008
2015
2022
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
These new MVEBs become effective
on the date of publication of this final
rule in the Federal Register (see 40 CFR
93.118(f)(2)) and must be used by U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT)
and the Regional Transportation
Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC)
for future transportation conformity
determinations for Clark County. The
existing 2008 VOC and NOX MVEBs
from the Clark County Early Progress
Plan,8 which EPA found adequate in
2009, are replaced by these budgets.
In connection with the redesignation
request, EPA is taking final action to
approve the request because we find
that the area has met the five criteria for
redesignation under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E). Specifically, we find that
the area has attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, that relevant portions of
the Nevada SIP are fully approved, that
the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions, that Nevada has met all
requirements applicable to the Clark
County 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area with respect to section 110 and part
D of the CAA, and that the area has a
fully approved maintenance plan
meeting the requirements of section
175A (i.e., the Clark County Ozone
Maintenance Plan approved herein).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment under section
107(d)(3)(E) and the accompanying
approval of a maintenance plan under
section 175A are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by State law. Redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
8 On July 28, 2008, NDEP submitted the 8-Hour
Early Progress Plan for Clark County, Nevada (June
2008) to EPA as a revision to the Nevada SIP.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Jan 07, 2013
Jkt 229001
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, these
actions merely approve a State plan and
redesignation request as meeting
Federal requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those
by State law. For these reasons, these
actions:
• Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not a significant regulatory
action subject to Executive Order 13211
(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law. Nonetheless, EPA discussed
the proposed action with the one Tribe,
the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, located
within the Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. The Tribe has
indicated that it concurs with the
redesignation request.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by March 11, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: December 20, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DD—Nevada
2. Section 52.1470 in paragraph (e),
the table is amended by adding an entry
for ‘‘Ozone Redesignation Request and
■
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
1153
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Maintenance Plan, Clark County,
Nevada (March 2011)’’ after the entry for
§ 52.1470
‘‘Emissions Inventory for 1995’’ to read
as follows:
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED NEVADA NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
Name of SIP provision
State submittal
date
EPA approval date
Explanation
Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada
*
*
*
Ozone Redesignation Request Clark County, Nevada: that
and Maintenance Plan,
portion of Clark County that
Clark County, Nevada
lies in hydrographic areas
(March 2011).
164A, 164B, 165, 166, 167,
212, 213, 214, 216, 217,
and 218, but excluding the
Moapa River Indian Reservation and the Fort Mohave Indian Reservation.
*
*
*
4/11/11
*
*
[Insert Federal Register
page number where the
document begins] 1/8/13.
*
*
*
*
Approval includes appendices
A, B, and C. Relates to the
1997 8-hour ozone standard.
*
*
PART 81—[AMENDED]
Subpart C—[AMENDED]
3. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
revising the entry for ‘‘Las Vegas, NV’’
to read as follows:
■
4. Section 81.329 is amended in the
table for ‘‘Nevada—1997 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS (Primary and Secondary)’’ by
§ 81.329
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
*
*
Nevada.
*
*
*
NEVADA—1997 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS
[Primary and secondary]
Designation a
Classification
Designated area
Date 1
Las Vegas, NV: Clark County (part) That portion of Clark County
that lies in hydrographic areas 164A, 164B, 165, 166, 167, 212,
213, 214, 216, 217, and 218, but excluding the Moapa River Indian Reservation and the Fort Mohave Indian Reservationb.
*
*
*
Type
2/7/13
*
Date 1
Type
Attainment.
*
*
a Includes
*
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
use of reservation boundaries for this designation is for purposes of CAA planning only and is not intended to be a federal determination
of the exact boundaries of the reservations. Nor does the specific listing of the Tribes in this table confer, deny, or withdraw Federal recognition
of any of the Tribes listed or not listed.
1 This date is June 15, 2004 unless otherwise noted.
b The
[FR Doc. 2013–00057 Filed 1–7–13; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Jan 07, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\08JAR1.SGM
08JAR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 8, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1149-1153]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00057]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0792; FRL-9766-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Nevada;
Redesignation of Clark County to Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve, as a revision of the
Nevada state implementation plan, the State's plan for maintaining the
1997 8-hour ozone standard in Clark County for ten years beyond
redesignation, and the related motor vehicle emissions budgets, because
they meet the applicable requirements for such plans and budgets. EPA
is also taking final action to approve a request from the Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection to redesignate the Clark County
ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard because the area meets the
statutory requirements for redesignation under the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on February 7, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0792. Generally, documents in the docket for
this action are available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in
hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California. While all documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at
the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and
some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g.,
confidential business information or ``CBI''). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Vagenas, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-
3964, vagenas.ginger@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Proposed Action
A. Determination That the Area Has Attained the Applicable NAAQS
B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Meeting Requirements
Applicable for Purposes of Redesignation Under Section 110 and Part
D
C. The Area Must Show the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Emissions Reductions
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under
CAA Section 175A
II. Public Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of Proposed Action
On November 13, 2012 (77 FR 67600), we proposed to take several
related actions. First, under Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') section
110(k)(3), EPA proposed to approve a submittal from the Nevada Division
of Environmental Protection (NDEP) dated April 11, 2011 of Clark
County's Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan (March 2011)
(``Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan'' or ``Ozone Maintenance Plan'')
as a revision to the Nevada state implementation plan (SIP).
In connection with the Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA
proposed to find that the maintenance demonstration showing that the
area will continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality
[[Page 1150]]
standard (NAAQS or ``standard'') \1\ for 10 years beyond redesignation
(i.e., through 2022), and the contingency provisions describing the
actions that Clark County will take in the event of a future monitored
violation, meet all applicable requirements for maintenance plans and
related contingency provisions in CAA section 175A. EPA also proposed
to approve the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) in the Clark
County Ozone Maintenance Plan because we found they met the applicable
transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1997 8-hour ozone standard is 0.08 parts per million
(ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time frame.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), EPA proposed to approve
NDEP's request that accompanied the submittal of the maintenance plan
to redesignate the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area \2\ to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We did so based on our
conclusion that the area has met the five criteria for redesignation
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). Our conclusion in this regard was based
on our determination that the area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, that relevant portions of the Nevada SIP are fully approved,
that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions, that Nevada has met all requirements
applicable to the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area with
respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA, and based on our approval
as part of this action of the Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The boundaries of the Clark County ozone nonattainment area
are defined in 40 CFR 81.329. Specifically, the area is defined as:
``That portion of Clark County that lies in hydrographic areas 164A,
164B, 165, 166, 167, 212, 213, 214, 216, 217, and 218 but excluding
the Moapa River Indian Reservation and the Fort Mojave Indian
Reservation.'' The area includes a significant portion of the
unincorporated portions of central and southern Clark County, as
well as the cities of Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, and
Boulder City.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the purposes of this final rule, we have summarized the basis
for our findings in connection with the proposed approvals of the Ozone
Maintenance Plan and redesignation request. For a more detailed
explanation as well as background information concerning the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, the CAA requirements for redesignation, and the ozone
planning history of Clark County, please see our November 13, 2012
proposed rule.
A. Determination That the Area Has Attained the Applicable NAAQS
Prior to redesignating an area to attainment, CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(i) requires that we determine that the area has attained
the NAAQS. For our proposed rule, consistent with the requirements
contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA reviewed the ozone ambient air
monitoring data for the monitoring period from 2009 through 2011, as
recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database, and determined,
based on the complete, quality-assured data for 2009-2011, that the
Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard because the design value \3\ is less than 0.084
ppm. We also reviewed preliminary data from 2012 and found that it was
consistent with continued attainment of the standard in the Clark
County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. See pages 67602-67604 of our
November 13, 2012 proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The design value for the 8-hour standard is the three-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone
concentration at the worst-case monitoring site in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Meeting Requirements
Applicable for Purposes of Redesignation Under Section 110 and Part D
Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) of the CAA require EPA to
determine that the area has a fully approved applicable SIP under
section 110(k) that meets all applicable requirements under section 110
and part D for the purposes of redesignation. For the reasons
summarized below, we found that the Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area has a fully approved applicable SIP under section
110(k) that meets all applicable requirements under section 110 and
part D for the purposes of redesignation. See pages 67604-67607 of our
November 13, 2012 proposed rule.
With respect to section 110 of the CAA (General SIP Requirements),
we concluded that NDEP and Clark County have met all SIP requirements
for Clark County applicable for purposes of redesignation. Our
conclusion in this regard was based on our review of the Clark County
portion of the Nevada SIP.
With respect to part D (of title I of the CAA), we reviewed the
Clark County portion of the Nevada SIP for compliance with applicable
requirements under both subparts 1 and 2.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Subpart 1 contains general, less prescriptive requirements
for all nonattainment areas of any pollutant, including ozone,
governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 contains additional, more specific
requirements for ozone nonattainment areas classified under subpart
2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, we noted that EPA previously determined that the Clark
County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS based on 2007-2009 ozone data (76 FR 17343, March 29, 2011), and
thereby suspended, under 40 CFR 51.918, the obligation on the State of
Nevada to submit an attainment demonstration and associated reasonably
available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further progress (RFP)
plan, contingency measures and other planning requirements related to
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As such, we explained that
the State's compliance status with the attainment-related SIP
requirements under subpart 1 was not relevant for the purposes of
evaluating the State's redesignation request.
As to the other applicable subpart 1 requirements, we found that:
The emissions inventory requirements of CAA section
172(c)(3) would be met by our approval of the Clark County Ozone
Maintenance Plan and related emissions inventories for volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX);
A fully-approved nonattainment New Source Review (NSR)
program was not a prerequisite to redesignation in this instance
because the Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan demonstrates
maintenance of the standard without implementation of nonattainment
NSR; moreover, after redesignation, sources under NDEP jurisdiction
would be subject to the federal PSD program and sources under Clark
County jurisdiction would be subject to an EPA-approved PSD program
that is deficient in certain respects but not in ways that would
interfere with maintenance of the ozone standard; and
Clark County and the State previously met the requirements
for transportation conformity SIPs under section 176(c) (see EPA's
approval of Clark County's transportation conformity SIP at 73 FR
66182, November 7, 2008).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In any event, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the
conformity requirements as not applicable for purposes of evaluating
a redesignation request under section 107(d)(3)(E). See Wall v. EPA,
265 F.3d 426, 439 (6th Cir. 2001) upholding this interpretation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the requirements associated with subpart 2, we
noted that the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area was
initially designated nonattainment under subpart 1 of the CAA, but was
subsequently classified as marginal nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard under
[[Page 1151]]
subpart 2 of part D of the CAA in May 2012, i.e., after NDEP's
submittal of the redesignation request. Under EPA's longstanding policy
of evaluating requirements in accordance with the requirements due at
the time a redesignation request is submitted and in consideration of
the inequity of applying retroactively any requirements that might in
the future be applied, we determined that the requirements under
subpart 2 need not be addressed as a condition of redesignation.
C. The Area Must Show the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Emissions Reductions
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) precludes redesignation of a
nonattainment area to attainment unless EPA determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable
SIP and applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable regulations. Based on our review of the
control measures credited in the Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan as
providing the emissions reductions sufficient to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area through
the year 2022, and based on our consideration of other factors such as
weather patterns and economic activity, we found that the improvement
in air quality in the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is
the result of permanent and enforceable emissions reductions from a
combination of Federal vehicle and fuel measures and EPA-approved State
and local control measures. See pages 670607-67608 of our November 13,
2012 proposed rule.
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under CAA
Section 175A
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
As explained in the proposed rule, we interpret this section of the Act
to require, in general, the following core elements: Attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification
of continued attainment, and contingency plan. Based on our review and
evaluation of the Ozone Maintenance Plan, we concluded that it
contained the core elements and met the requirements of CAA section
175A. See pages 67608-67613. Our conclusion was based on the following
findings:
The base year emissions inventories for 2008 are
comprehensive, that the methods and assumptions used by Clark County
Department of Air Quality (DAQ) to develop the 2008 emission inventory
are reasonable, and that the inventories reasonably estimate actual
ozone season emissions in an attainment year. Moreover, we found that
the 2008 emissions inventories in the Ozone Maintenance Plan reflect
the latest planning assumptions and emissions models available at the
time the plan was developed, and provide a comprehensive and reasonably
accurate basis upon which to forecast ozone precursor emissions for
years 2015 and 2022;
The projected VOC and NOX emissions estimates
adequately account for projected area-wide growth, specific projects
(including, among others, the Nellis Air Force Base F-35 beddown
project), and emissions reduction credits (ERCs), and show that VOC and
NOX emissions would remain well below the attainment levels
throughout the 10-year maintenance period and thereby adequately
demonstrate maintenance through that period;
Clark County DAQ has committed to continue to operate the
air quality monitoring network to verify the continued attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS ambient ozone monitoring; \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Although the Ozone Maintenance Plan is not explicit in this
regard, we presume that Clark County DAQ's intention to continue
operation of a monitoring network means that the agency intends to
do so consistent with EPA's monitoring requirements in 40 CFR part
58 (``Ambient Air Quality Surveillance'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clark County DAQ's commitment in the Ozone Maintenance
Plan to the continued operation of an ozone monitoring network and the
requirement that NDEP and Clark County DAQ must inventory emissions
sources and report to EPA on a periodic basis \7\ would be sufficient
for the purpose of verifying continued attainment; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 40 CFR part 51, subpart A (``Air Emissions Reporting
Requirements'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The contingency provisions of the Ozone Maintenance Plan
clearly identify specific contingency measures, contain adequate
tracking and triggering mechanisms to determine when contingency
measures are needed, contain a sufficient description of the process of
recommending and implementing contingency measures, and contain
specific timelines for action, and would, therefore, be adequate to
ensure prompt correction of a violation and comply with the
contingency-related requirements under CAA section 175A(d).
Lastly, we proposed to approve the motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) contained in the Ozone Maintenance Plan because we found that
they meet the transportation conformity adequacy requirements under 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). In so proposing, we found that, among other
things, the MVEBs, when considered with emissions from all other
sources, would be consistent with maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
II. Public Comments
Our November 13, 2012 proposed rule provided for a 30-day comment
period. We received comment letters in support of our proposed action
from NDEP and the Washoe County Health District. In its comment letter,
NDEP also noted that approval of the redesignation request for the
Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area will negate the need, that
had been identified in EPA's proposed limited approval and limited
disapproval of Clark County's revised NSR rules at 77 FR 43206, for a
revision to NDEP's nonattainment NSR provisions at this time. We
received no adverse comments in response to our November 13, 2012
proposed rule.
III. Final Action
Under CAA sections 110(k)(3) and 107(d)(3)(D), and for the reasons
set forth in our proposed rule and summarized above, EPA is taking
final action to approve NDEP's submittal dated April 11, 2011 of Clark
County's Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan (March 2011)
(``Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan'') as a revision to the Nevada
SIP and to approve NDEP's request to redesignate the Clark County 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. In connection with the Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA
finds that the maintenance demonstration showing that the area will
continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years beyond
redesignation (i.e., through 2022) and the contingency provisions
describing the actions that Clark County will take in the event of a
future monitored violation meet all applicable requirements for
maintenance plans and related contingency provisions in CAA section
175A. EPA is also approving the following motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) from the Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan for
transportation conformity purposes
[[Page 1152]]
because we find that they meet the applicable transportation conformity
requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC (tpd, NOX (tpd,
Budget year average summer average summer
weekday) weekday)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 65.08 68.46
2015 45.32 34.69
2022 36.71 23.15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These new MVEBs become effective on the date of publication of this
final rule in the Federal Register (see 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)) and must
be used by U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Regional
Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) for future
transportation conformity determinations for Clark County. The existing
2008 VOC and NOX MVEBs from the Clark County Early Progress
Plan,\8\ which EPA found adequate in 2009, are replaced by these
budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ On July 28, 2008, NDEP submitted the 8-Hour Early Progress
Plan for Clark County, Nevada (June 2008) to EPA as a revision to
the Nevada SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In connection with the redesignation request, EPA is taking final
action to approve the request because we find that the area has met the
five criteria for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E).
Specifically, we find that the area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, that relevant portions of the Nevada SIP are fully approved,
that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions, that Nevada has met all requirements
applicable to the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area with
respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA, and that the area has a
fully approved maintenance plan meeting the requirements of section
175A (i.e., the Clark County Ozone Maintenance Plan approved herein).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment under section
107(d)(3)(E) and the accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under
section 175A are actions that affect the status of a geographical area
and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those imposed by State law. Redesignation to attainment does not
in and of itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the
Clean Air Act. Accordingly, these actions merely approve a State plan
and redesignation request as meeting Federal requirements and do not
impose additional requirements beyond those by State law. For these
reasons, these actions:
Are not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not an economically significant regulatory action
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. Nonetheless, EPA
discussed the proposed action with the one Tribe, the Las Vegas Paiute
Tribe, located within the Clark County 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
The Tribe has indicated that it concurs with the redesignation request.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 11, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: December 20, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DD--Nevada
0
2. Section 52.1470 in paragraph (e), the table is amended by adding an
entry for ``Ozone Redesignation Request and
[[Page 1153]]
Maintenance Plan, Clark County, Nevada (March 2011)'' after the entry
for ``Emissions Inventory for 1995'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Nevada Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of SIP provision geographic or State EPA approval date Explanation
nonattainment area submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Ozone Redesignation Request and Clark County, 4/11/11 [Insert Federal Approval includes
Maintenance Plan, Clark County, Nevada: that Register page appendices A, B,
Nevada (March 2011). portion of Clark number where the and C. Relates to
County that lies document begins] 1/ the 1997 8-hour
in hydrographic 8/13. ozone standard.
areas 164A, 164B,
165, 166, 167,
212, 213, 214,
216, 217, and 218,
but excluding the
Moapa River Indian
Reservation and
the Fort Mohave
Indian Reservation.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 81--[AMENDED]
0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--[AMENDED]
0
4. Section 81.329 is amended in the table for ``Nevada--1997 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and Secondary)'' by revising the entry for ``Las
Vegas, NV'' to read as follows:
Sec. 81.329 Nevada.
* * * * *
Nevada--1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
[Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation a Classification
Designated area -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date 1 Type Date 1 Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Las Vegas, NV: Clark County 2/7/13 Attainment..............
(part) That portion of Clark
County that lies in
hydrographic areas 164A, 164B,
165, 166, 167, 212, 213, 214,
216, 217, and 218, but
excluding the Moapa River
Indian Reservation and the Fort
Mohave Indian Reservation\b\.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\b\ The use of reservation boundaries for this designation is for purposes of CAA planning only and is not
intended to be a federal determination of the exact boundaries of the reservations. Nor does the specific
listing of the Tribes in this table confer, deny, or withdraw Federal recognition of any of the Tribes listed
or not listed.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004 unless otherwise noted.
[FR Doc. 2013-00057 Filed 1-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
