Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 17343 

Forest Idaho roadless area Number WLR Primitive BCR GFRG SAHTS FPSA 

*******

Payette ................ Big Creek Fringe ..... 009 .................... .................... X .................... .................... ....................

* * * * * * * 

Payette ................ Placer Creek ........... 008 .................... X X .................... .................... ....................

* * * * * * * 

Dated: March 22, 2011. 

Thomas L. Tidwell, 

Chief, U.S. Forest Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7247 Filed 3–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0169; FRL–9286–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Nevada; 

Determination of Attainment for the 

Clark County 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is determining that the 

Clark County (Nevada) 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). This 

determination is based upon complete, 

quality-assured, and certified ambient 

air monitoring data that show the area 

has monitored attainment of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS for the 2007 to 2009 

monitoring period. Preliminary air 

quality monitoring data available for 

2010 are consistent with continued 

attainment. Based on this 

determination, the obligation for 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 for the Clark County ozone 

nonattainment area shall be suspended 

for as long as the nonattainment area 

continues to meet the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. This action is being 

taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This action is effective on May 

31, 2011 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comment by April 

28, 2011. If EPA receives adverse 

comment, we will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0169 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: kelly.johnj@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (415) 947–3579. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0169,’’ 

Lisa Hanf, Chief, Air Planning Office, 

Air Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street (Air–2), San 

Francisco, California 94105. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: At the 

previously-listed EPA Region IX 

address. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2011– 

0169. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or by e-mail 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets/. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, for 

example, CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Planning Office, Air Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street (Air–2), 

San Francisco, California 94105. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection during normal 

business hours. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Kelly, (415) 947–4151, or by e-mail at 

kelly.johnj@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What determination is EPA making? 

II. What is the background for this action? 

A. The Clark County Ozone Nonattainment 

Area 

B. Determination of Attainment 

C. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data 

III. What is the effect of this action? 

A. Determination of Attainment 

B. Subpart 1 Designation 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the relevant air 

quality data? 

V. EPA’s Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
17344 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

1The 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. 

I. What determination is EPA making? 

EPA is determining that the Clark 

County (Nevada) 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (‘‘Clark County 

ozone nonattainment area’’) has attained 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 

Clark County ozone nonattainment area 

is composed of a portion of Clark 

County in Nevada.1 EPA’s 

determination is based upon complete, 

quality-assured, and certified ambient 

air quality monitoring data for the years 

2007 to 2009 showing that the Clark 

County ozone nonattainment area has 

monitored attainment of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. Preliminary air 

quality monitoring data available for 

2010 are consistent with continued 

attainment. 

On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), 

EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour 

ozone standard of 0.075 parts per 

million (ppm). On January 6, 2010, EPA 

again addressed this 2008 revised 

standard and proposed to set the 

primary 8-hour ozone standard within 

the range of 0.060 to 0.070 ppm, rather 

than at 0.075 ppm. EPA is working to 

complete reconsideration of the 

standard and thereafter will proceed 

with attainment/nonattainment area 

designations. This rulemaking relates 

only to a determination of attainment 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and 

is not affected by the ongoing process of 

reconsidering the revised 2008 standard. 

This action addresses only the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard of 0.08 ppm, and 

does not address any subsequently 

revised 8-hour ozone standard. 

II. What is the background for this 

action? 

A. The Clark County Ozone 

Nonattainment Area 

In 1997, EPA revised the health-based 

NAAQS for ozone, setting it at 0.08 ppm 

averaged over an 8-hour timeframe. EPA 

set the 8-hour ozone standard based on 

scientific evidence demonstrating that 

ozone causes adverse health effects at 

lower ozone concentrations and over 

longer periods of time, than was 

understood when the pre-existing 1- 

hour ozone standard was set. EPA 

determined that the 8-hour standard 

would be more protective of human 

health, especially children and adults 

who are active outdoors, and 

individuals with a pre-existing 

respiratory disease, such as asthma. 

On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), EPA 

finalized its attainment/nonattainment 

designations for areas across the country 

with respect to the 8-hour ozone 

standard. In that action we designated 

Clark County as nonattainment and 

provided that this designation would 

become effective on June 15, 2004. 

Following the April 2004 final rule, the 

State of Nevada submitted additional 

information requesting that the 

boundaries of the area to be designated 

nonattainment be reconsidered. In 

response, EPA granted a deferral of the 

effective date for Clark County to 

consider this information. See 69 FR 

34076 (June 18, 2004). On September 

17, 2004, EPA reduced the geographic 

extent of the ozone nonattainment area 

to encompass a portion of, but not all of, 

Clark County. See 69 FR 55956 

(September 17, 2004) and 40 CFR 

81.329. In 2005, we published a final 

rule that we would treat the effective 

date of the partial-county nonattainment 

area designation the same as the 

designations for the rest of the country, 

i.e., June 15, 2004. See 70 FR 71612 

(November 29, 2005) and 40 CFR 

51.917. 

B. Determination of Attainment 

Under the provisions of EPA’s ozone 

implementation rule for the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS (see 40 CFR 51.918), if EPA 

issues a determination that an area is 

attaining the standard (through a 

rulemaking that includes public notice 

and comment), it will suspend the area’s 

obligations to submit an attainment 

demonstration, RACM, RFP, 

contingency measures and other 

planning requirements related to 

attainment for as long as the area 

continues to attain. The determination 

of attainment is not equivalent to a 

redesignation. The State must still meet 

the statutory requirements for 

redesignation in order to be 

redesignated to attainment. 

C. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data 

Complete, quality-assured, and 

certified 8-hour ozone air quality 

monitoring data for 2007 through 2009, 

as well as preliminary data available to 

date for 2010, show that the Clark 

County ozone nonattainment area has 

attained, and continues to attain, the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

III. What is the effect of this action? 

As noted, under 40 CFR section 

51.918, the effect of today’s 

determination of attainment is to 

suspend the obligation to submit certain 

planning requirements described above; 

however, it does not constitute a 

redesignation to attainment under 

section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. The 

designation status of the Clark County 

ozone nonattainment area remains 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA 

determines that the area meets the CAA 

requirements for redesignation to 

attainment, including an approved 

maintenance plan. 

A. Determination of Attainment 

EPA is determining that the Clark 

County ozone nonattainment area is 

attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. In accordance with 40 CFR 

51.918, based on this determination, the 

obligation under the CAA for the State 

of Nevada to submit an attainment 

demonstration and RACM, RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning requirements related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the Clark County ozone 

nonattainment area is suspended for so 

long as the area continues to attain the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Although 

these requirements are suspended, EPA 

is not precluded from acting upon these 

elements, if Nevada submits them for 

EPA review and approval. 

The effect of this determination is to: 

(1) Suspend the requirements to 

submit an attainment demonstration, 

RACM, RFP plan, contingency 

measures, and any other planning 

requirements related to attainment of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS; 

(2) Continue until such time, if any, 

that EPA (i) redesignates the area to 

attainment at which time those 

requirements no longer apply, or (ii) 

subsequently determines that the area 

has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS; 

(3) Be separate from, and not 

influence or otherwise affect, any future 

designation determination or 

requirements for the area based on any 

new or revised ozone NAAQS; and 

(4) Remain in effect regardless of 

whether EPA designates this area as a 

nonattainment area for purposes of any 

new or revised ozone NAAQS. 

If EPA subsequently determines, after 

notice-and-comment rulemaking, that 

the Clark County ozone nonattainment 

area has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of 

the specific requirements, set forth at 40 

CFR 51.918, would no longer exist, and 

the Clark County ozone nonattainment 

area would thereafter have to address 

applicable requirements. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 17345 

2 DAQEM operates Federal equivalent method 

(FEM) monitors for ozone. Specifically, API 400 

Series ultraviolet absorption monitors. See ‘‘Annual 

Network Plan Report’’, page 13, June 2010. These 

monitoring devices have an EPA designation 

number EQOA–0992–087. See EPA ‘‘List of 

Designated Reference and Equivalent Methods’’, 

page 27, February 1, 2011, available at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html. 

B. Subpart 1 Designation 

Under the implementation rule for the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard, EPA 

designated certain areas under title I, 

part D, subpart 1 of the CAA (subpart 1) 

if they had a 1-hour design value below 

0.121 ppm. As discussed above, in 2004, 

EPA designated a portion of Clark 

County nonattainment under subpart 1 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. In 

June 2007, the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (DC Circuit Court) vacated the 

portion of the 1997 ozone 

implementation rule that allowed areas 

to be designated under subpart 1. On 

January 16, 2009 (74 FR 2936), EPA 

published a proposed rule to address, 

among other issues, the DC Circuit 

Court vacatur of the classification 

system that EPA used to designate a 

subset of initial 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas under subpart 1. In 

that rulemaking, EPA proposed that all 

areas designated nonattainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS under 

subpart 1 would be classified as subpart 

2 areas (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘Subpart 1/Subpart 2 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone Rulemaking’’). The Clark County 

ozone nonattainment area is among 

those areas that would be classified 

under subpart 2 if EPA’s proposal is 

finalized. EPA has not yet completed its 

final rulemaking action for the Subpart 

1/Subpart 2 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Rulemaking. When the Subpart 1/ 

Subpart 2 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Rulemaking is finalized, and if the Clark 

County ozone nonattainment area 

continues in attainment for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS, EPA will address 

in a future rulemaking the consequences 

of a determination of attainment for any 

requirements to which the Clark County 

ozone nonattainment area becomes 

subject as a result of its reclassification. 

If, after the Clark County ozone 

nonattainment area is classified under 

subpart 2, EPA determines in a future 

rulemaking that the Clark County ozone 

nonattainment area continues to be in 

attainment, then the obligation to 

submit the applicable attainment 

planning-related requirements for its 

new classification would be suspended 

in accordance with 40 CFR 51.918. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

relevant air quality data? 

A determination of whether an area’s 

air quality meets the ozone NAAQS is 

generally based upon the most recent 

three years of complete, quality-assured 

data gathered at established National 

Air Monitoring Stations (‘‘NAMS’’) or 

State and Local Air Monitoring Stations 

(‘‘SLAMS’’) in the nonattainment area 

and entered into the EPA Air Quality 

System (‘‘AQS’’) database. Data from air 

monitors operated by State/local 

agencies in compliance with EPA 

monitoring requirements must be 

submitted to the EPA AQS database. 

Heads of monitoring agencies annually 

certify that these data are accurate to the 

best of their knowledge. Accordingly, 

EPA relies primarily on data in its AQS 

database when determining the 

attainment status of areas. See 40 CFR 

50.10; 40 CFR part 50, appendix I; 40 

CFR part 53; 40 CFR part 58, appendices 

A, C, D and E. All data are reviewed to 

determine the area’s air quality status in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix I. 

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 

50, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard is 

attained at a site when the 3-year 

average of the annual fourth-highest 

daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentrations at an ozone monitor is 

less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. See 40 

CFR 50.10. This 3-year average is 

referred to as the design value. When 

the design value is less than or equal to 

0.084 ppm (based on the rounding 

convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

I) at each monitoring site within the 

area, then the area is meeting the 

NAAQS. The data completeness 

requirement is met when the three-year 

average percent of days with valid 

ambient monitoring data is greater than 

90%, and no single year has less than 

75% data completeness as determined 

in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 50. 

The Clark County Department of Air 

Quality & Environmental Management 

(DAQEM) is responsible for monitoring 

ambient air quality within Clark County. 

DAQEM submits monitoring network 

plan reports to EPA on an annual basis. 

These reports discuss the status of the 

air monitoring network, as required 

under 40 CFR part 58. Beginning in 

2007, EPA reviews these annual plans 

for compliance with the applicable 

reporting requirements in 40 CFR 58.10. 

With respect to ozone, we have found 

DAQEM’s annual network plans to meet 

the applicable requirements under 40 

CFR part 58. See EPA letters to DAQEM 

concerning DAQEM’s annual network 

plan reports for years 2007, 2008, 2009 

and 2010. Furthermore, we concluded 

in our Technical System Audit Report 

(February 2010) that Clark County 

DAQEM’s ambient air monitoring 

network currently meets or exceeds the 

requirements for the minimum number 

of monitoring sites designated as State 

and local air monitoring stations 

(SLAMS) for all of the criteria 

pollutants, and that all of the 

monitoring sites are properly located 

with respect to monitoring objectives, 

spatial scales and other site criteria. 

Also, DAQEM annually certifies that the 

data it submits to AQS are complete and 

quality-assured. See, e.g., letter dated 

April 14, 2010, from Lewis 

Wallenmeyer, Director, DAQEM, to 

Jared Blumenfeld, EPA Region IX 

Regional Administrator. 

Clark County DAQEM operated 12 

ozone SLAMS monitoring sites over the 

2007–2010 period within the Clark 

County ozone nonattainment area: Apex 

(Apex Valley), Boulder City (City of 

Boulder City), Craig Road (City of North 

Las Vegas), J.D. Smith School (City of 

North Las Vegas), Jean (City of Jean, 

south of Las Vegas), Joe Neal (northwest 

Las Vegas), Lone Mountain (northwest 

Las Vegas), Orr School (centralsoutheast Las Vegas), Paul Meyer Park 

(southwest Las Vegas), Palo Verde 

School (west Las Vegas), Walter Johnson 

(west Las Vegas), and Winterwood 

(southeast Las Vegas). All 12 sites 

monitor ozone concentrations on a 

continuous basis using ultraviolet 

absorption monitors.2 The spatial scale 

and monitoring objective of most of 

DAQEM’s ozone monitoring sites are 

‘‘neighborhood’’ and ‘‘population 

exposure,’’ respectively. The exceptions 

are the Apex and Jean sites, whose 

spatial scale and monitoring objective is 

‘‘regional’’ and ‘‘regional transport,’’ 

respectively, and the Joe Neal site, 

whose spatial scale is ‘‘neighborhood’’ 

and monitoring objective is ‘‘highest 

concentration.’’ See Clark County 

DAQEM’s Annual Network Plan Report 

(June 2010). 

Consistent with the requirements 

contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA has 

reviewed the ozone ambient air 

monitoring data for the monitoring 

period from 2007 through 2009 

collected at the monitoring sites 

discussed above, as recorded in AQS. 

On the basis of that review, EPA has 

concluded that this area attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on 

data for the 2007–2009 ozone seasons. 

Table 1 shows the ozone design values 

for the Clark County ozone 

nonattainment area monitors based on 

2007–2009 ambient air quality 

monitoring data. Preliminary data 

available for 2010, summarized in table 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
17346 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

3For 2010, DAQEM has reported three calendar 

quarters of data for Apex, Boulder City and Craig 

Road. Lone Mountain and Orr School monitors 

closed in April, 2010. The rest of the monitoring 

stations in the Clark County ozone nonattainment 

area reflect four quarters of monitoring data for 

2010. 

2, are also consistent with continued 

attainment.3

TABLE 1—2007–2009 CLARK COUNTY OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA 8-HOUR OZONE DESIGN VALUES

DAQEM Monitoring site Monitoring 

site ID 

2007–2009 

Average % data 

completeness 

2007–2009 

Design value 

(ppm) 

Apex ........................................................................................................................... 32–003–0022 96 0.074 

Boulder City ............................................................................................................... 32–003–0601 92 0.072 

Craig Road ................................................................................................................. 32–003–0020 97 0.072 

J.D. Smith .................................................................................................................. 32–003–2002 98 0.073 

Jean ........................................................................................................................... 32–003–1019 96 0.076 

Joe Neal School ........................................................................................................ 32–003–0075 98 0.078 

Lone Mountain ........................................................................................................... 32–003–0072 98 0.076 

Orr School .................................................................................................................. 32–003–1021 97 0.074 

Paul Meyer Park ........................................................................................................ 32–003–0043 97 0.077 

Palo Verde School ..................................................................................................... 32–003–0073 97 0.075 

Walter Johnson .......................................................................................................... 32–003–0071 97 0.078 

Winterwood ................................................................................................................ 32–003–0538 92 0.072 

TABLE 2—PRELIMINARY 2008–2010 CLARK COUNTY OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA 8-HOUR OZONE DESIGN VALUES

DAQEM Monitoring site Monitoring 

site ID 

2008–2010 

Average % data 

completeness 

Preliminary 

2008–2010 

design value 

(ppm) 

Apex ........................................................................................................................... 32–003–0022 87 0.069 

Boulder City ............................................................................................................... 32–003–0601 84 0.070 

Craig Road ................................................................................................................. 32–003–0020 88 0.070 

J.D. Smith .................................................................................................................. 32–003–2002 98 0.069 

Jean ........................................................................................................................... 32–003–1019 97 0.073 

Joe Neal School ........................................................................................................ 32–003–0075 98 0.076 

Lone Mountain ........................................................................................................... 32–003–0072 76 0.070 

Orr School .................................................................................................................. 32–003–1021 75 0.068 

Paul Meyer Park ........................................................................................................ 32–003–0043 98 0.072 

Palo Verde School ..................................................................................................... 32–003–0073 98 0.072 

Walter Johnson .......................................................................................................... 32–003–0071 97 0.074 

Winterwood ................................................................................................................ 32–003–0538 94 0.069 

EPA’s review of these data indicates 

that the Clark County ozone 

nonattainment area has met the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. Preliminary air 

quality monitoring data available for 

2010 are consistent with continued 

attainment. 

V. EPA’s Final Action 

EPA is determining that the Clark 

County (Nevada) 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on 

2007–2009 complete, quality-assured, 

and certified ambient air quality 

monitoring data. Preliminary data 

available to date for 2010 are consistent 

with continued attainment. As provided 

in 40 CFR 51.918, this determination of 

attainment suspends the requirements 

for the State of Nevada to submit, for the 

Clark County ozone nonattainment area, 

an attainment demonstration and 

associated RACM, RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning requirements related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS as long as the area continues to 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

We are publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial action 

and anticipates no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, 

EPA is publishing a separate document 

that will serve as the proposal should 

adverse comments be filed. This action 

will be effective May 31, 2011, without 

further notice unless the EPA receives 

relevant adverse comments by April 28, 

2011. 

If we receive such comments, then we 

will publish a document withdrawing 

the final rule and informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. All 

public comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. We will not 

institute a second comment period. 

Parties interested in commenting should 

so at this time. If no such comments are 

received, the public is advised that this 

rule will be effective on May 31, 2011 

and no further action will be taken on 

the proposed rule. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action makes a determination of 

attainment based on air quality and 

suspends certain Federal requirements, 

and does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. For that reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 17347 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

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 determination that 

the Clark County ozone nonattainment 

area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS 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. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by May 31, 2011. 

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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: March 15, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7221 Filed 3–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

Revision to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Great Basin 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

CFR Correction 

In Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 52 (§§ 52.01 to 

52.1018), revised as of July 1, 2010, on 

page 252, in § 52.220, paragraph 

(c)(345)(i)(D) is added to read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(345) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(D) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution 

Control District 

(1) Rule 201, ‘‘Exemptions,’’ adopted 

on September 5, 1974 and revised on 

January 23, 2006. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–7432 Filed 3–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

45 CFR Part 2522 

Americorps Participants, Programs, 

and Applicants 

CFR Correction 

In Title 45 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 1200 to End, revised as 

of October 1, 2010, on page 674, in 

§ 2522.910, paragraph (b)(1)(ii) is 

removed. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7439 Filed 3–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 1, 2 and 87 

[WT Docket No. 01–289; FCC 10–103] 

Aviation Communications 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission or FCC) addresses a 

number of important issues pertaining 

to the Aviation Radio Services, 

amending its rules in the interest of 

accommodating the communications 

needs of the aviation community to the 

greatest possible extent, and ensuring 

that aeronautical spectrum is used 

efficiently to enhance the safety of 

flight. 

DATES: Effective May 31, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Tobias, Jeff.Tobias@FCC.gov, 

Mobility Division, Wireless 

Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418– 

1617, or TTY (202) 418–7233. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Federal 

Communications Commission’s Third 

Report and Order (Third R&O), in WT 

Docket No. 01–289, FCC 10–103, 

adopted on June 1, 2010, and released 

on June 15, 2010. Contemporaneous 

with this document, the Commission 

issues an Order that stays a rule that 

was adopted in the Third R&O 

(published elsewhere in this 

publication). The full text of this 

document is available for inspection 

and copying during normal business 

hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 

12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20554. The complete text may be 

purchased from the Commission’s copy 

contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 

445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1