56 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

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). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 5, 2010. 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, 

pertaining to the determination of 

attaining data for the 1997 fine 

particulate matter standard for the 

Greensboro, North Carolina, PM2.5

nonattainment area, 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, Particulate matter. 

Dated: December 15, 2009 

J. Scott Gordon, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

■ Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 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 II—North Carolina 

■ 2. Section § 52.1781 is amended by 

adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1781 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides 

and particulate matter. 

* * * * * 

(e) Determination of Attaining Data. 

EPA has determined, as of January 4, 

2010, the Greensboro-Winston SalemHigh Point, North Carolina 

nonattainment area has attaining data 

for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. This 

determination, in accordance with 40 

CFR 52.1004(c), suspends the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, associated 

reasonably available control measures, a 

reasonable further progress plan, 

contingency measures, and other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of 

the standard for as long as this area 

continues to meet the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

[FR Doc. E9–31083 Filed 12–31–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2009–0164–200916; FRL– 

9099–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Tennessee; Redesignation 

of the Shelby County, Tennessee 

Portion of the Memphis, TN-Arkansas 

1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment 

Area to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve a request submitted on 

February 26, 2009, from the State of 

Tennessee, through the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC), Air Pollution 

Control Division, to redesignate the 

Tennessee portion of the bi-state 

Memphis, Tennessee-Arkansas 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘bi-state Memphis 

Area’’) to attainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS). The bi-state 

Memphis 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

nonattainment area is composed of 

Shelby County, Tennessee and 

Crittenden County, Arkansas. EPA’s 

approval of the redesignation request is 

based on the determination that the bistate Memphis Area has met the criteria 

for redesignation to attainment set forth 

in the Clean Air Act (CAA), including 

the determination that the bi-state 

Memphis Area has attained the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard. Additionally, EPA 

is approving a revision to the Tennessee 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

including the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan for Shelby County, 

Tennessee that contains the new 2006, 

2009, 2017, and 2021 motor vehicle 

emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen 

oxides (NOX ) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) for Shelby County, 

Tennessee. This action also approves 

the emissions inventory submitted with 

the maintenance plan (under the CAA 

section 182(a)(1)). The State of Arkansas 

has submitted a similar redesignation 

request and maintenance plan for the 

Arkansas portion of this 1997 8-hour 

ozone area. EPA is taking action on 

Arkansas’ redesignation request, 

emissions inventory and maintenance 

plan through a separate rulemaking 

action. On March 12, 2008, EPA issued 

a revised 8-hour ozone standard. EPA 

later announced on September 16, 2009, 

that it may reconsider this revised ozone 

standard. The current action, however, 

is being taken to address requirements 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Requirements for the bi-state Memphis 

Area under the 2008 standard will be 

addressed in the future. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be 

effective February 3, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2009–0164. All documents in the docket 

are listed on thehttp:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 

Business Information or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane 

Spann or Twunjala Bradley, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Jane 

Spann may be reached by phone at (404) 

562–9029 or via electronic mail at 

spann.jane@epa.gov. The telephone 

number for Ms. Bradley is (404) 562– 

9352 and the electronic mail at 

bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 57 

Table of Contents 

I. What Is the Background for the Actions? 

II. What Actions Is EPA Taking? 

III. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions? 

IV. What Are the Effects of These Actions? 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Is the Background for the 

Actions? 

On February 26, 2009, the State of 

Tennessee, through TDEC, submitted a 

request to redesignate Shelby County, 

Tennessee (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard, and for 

EPA approval of the Tennessee SIP 

revision containing a maintenance plan 

for Shelby County, Tennessee. In an 

action published on November 19, 2009 

(74 FR 59943), EPA proposed to approve 

the redesignation of Shelby County, 

Tennessee (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) to attainment. EPA also 

proposed approval of Tennessee’s plan 

for maintaining the 1997 8-hour NAAQS 

as a SIP revision, including the 

emissions inventory submitted pursuant 

to CAA section 182(a)(1); and proposed 

to approve the NOx and VOC MVEBs for 

Shelby County that were contained in 

the maintenance plan. In the November 

19, 2009, proposed action, EPA also 

provided information on the status of its 

transportation conformity adequacy 

determination for the Shelby County 

NOX and VOC MVEBs. EPA received no 

comments on the November 19, 2009, 

proposal. Additionally, in a separate 

notice, EPA has already found the NOX

and VOC MVEBs, as contained in 

Tennessee’s maintenance plan for 

Shelby County, adequate for the 

purposes of transportation conformity. 

The MVEBs included in the 

maintenance plan area as follows: 

TABLE 1—SHELBY COUNTY VOC AND NOX MVEBS

[Summer season tons per day] 

Year 2006 2009 2017 2021 

NOX .................................................................................................................................................. 55.878 55.620 55.173 54.445 

VOC ................................................................................................................................................. 25.216 27.240 18.323 13.817 

EPA’s adequacy public comment 

period on these MVEBs (as contained in 

Tennessee’s submittal) began on March 

12, 2009, and closed on April 13, 2009. 

No comments were received during 

EPA’s adequacy public comment period. 

In a letter dated September 18, 2009, 

EPA informed the State of Tennessee of 

its intent to make an affirmative 

adequacy determination for the MVEBs 

contained in this maintenance plan for 

Shelby County, Tennessee. On 

November 12, 2009 (74 FR 58277), EPA 

published a Federal Register notice 

deeming the MVEBs for Shelby County, 

Tennessee adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes. EPA provided a 

separate adequacy posting for the 

MVEBs in association with Crittenden 

County, Arkansas. The Crittenden 

County, Arkansas MVEBs (in 

association with the bi-state Memphis 

Area) were found adequate through a 

separate action published May 7, 2009 

(74 FR 21356). As was discussed in 

greater detail in the November 19, 2009, 

proposal, this redesignation is for the 

1997 8-hour ozone designations 

finalized in April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23857). Various aspects of EPA’s Phase 

1 8-hour ozone implementation rule 

were challenged in court and on 

December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (DC Circuit Court) vacated EPA’s 

Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8- 

hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, 

April 30, 2004). South Coast Air Quality 

Management Dist. (SCAQMD) v. EPA, 

472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006). On June 8, 

2007, in response to several petitions for 

rehearing, the DC Circuit Court clarified 

that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only 

with regard to those parts of the Rule 

that had been successfully challenged. 

Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions 

related to classifications for areas 

currently classified under subpart 2 of 

title I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour 

nonattainment areas, the 8-hour 

attainment dates and the timing for 

emissions reductions needed for 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

remain effective. The June 8th decision 

left intact the Court’s rejection of EPA’s 

reasons for implementing the 8-hour 

standard in certain nonattainment areas 

under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By 

limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand 

EPA’s revocation of the 1-hour standard 

and those anti-backsliding provisions of 

the Phase 1 Rule that had not been 

successfully challenged. The June 8th 

decision affirmed the December 22, 

2006, decision that EPA had improperly 

failed to retain measures required for 1- 

hour nonattainment areas under the 

anti-backsliding provisions of the 

regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New 

Source Review requirements based on 

an area’s 1-hour nonattainment 

classification; (2) Section 185 penalty 

fees for 1-hour severe or extreme 

nonattainment areas; and (3) measures 

to be implemented pursuant to section 

172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the 

contingency of an area not making 

reasonable further progress toward 

attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for 

failure to attain that NAAQS. The June 

8th decision clarified that the Court’s 

reference to conformity requirements for 

anti-backsliding purposes was limited to 

requiring the continued use of 1-hour 

MVEBs until 8-hour budgets were 

available for 8-hour conformity 

determinations, which is already 

required under EPA’s conformity 

regulations. The Court thus clarified 

that 1-hour conformity determinations 

are not required for anti-backsliding 

purposes. 

With respect to the requirement for 

transportation conformity under the 1- 

hour standard, the Court in its June 8th 

decision clarified that for those areas 

with 1-hour MVEBs in their 1-hour 

maintenance plans, anti-backsliding 

requires only that those 1-hour budgets 

must be used for 8-hour conformity 

determinations until replaced by 8-hour 

budgets. To meet this requirement, 

conformity determinations in such areas 

must continue to comply with the 

applicable requirements of EPA’s 

conformity regulations at 40 CFR Part 

93. Shelby County, Tennessee has 1- 

hour budgets and is currently using 

these budgets to demonstrate 

transportation conformity until 1997 

8-hour budgets are in place. 

For the above reasons, and those set 

forth in the November 19, 2009, 

proposal for the redesignation of Shelby 

County, Tennessee, EPA does not 

believe that the Court’s rulings alter any 

requirements relevant to this 

redesignation action so as to preclude 

redesignation, and do not prevent EPA 

from finalizing this redesignation. EPA 

believes that the Court’s December 22, 

2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions 

impose no impediment to moving 

forward with redesignation of Shelby 

County, Tennessee to attainment. Even 

in light of the Court’s decisions, 

redesignation is appropriate under the 

relevant redesignation provisions of the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

58 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

CAA and longstanding policies 

regarding redesignation requests. 

II. What Actions Is EPA Taking? 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

Tennessee’s redesignation request and 

to change the legal designation of 

Shelby County, Tennessee from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The bi-state 

Memphis 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

nonattainment area is composed of 

Shelby County, Tennessee and 

Crittenden County, Arkansas. The 

redesignation request, maintenance plan 

and emission inventory in association 

with the Arkansas portion of this Area 

will be addressed through a separate, 

but coordinated action. In this action, 

EPA is also approving Tennessee’s 1997 

8-hour ozone maintenance plan for 

Shelby County, Tennessee (such 

approval being one of the CAA criteria 

for redesignation to attainment status), 

including the emissions inventory 

which was submitted pursuant to CAA 

section 182(a)(1). The maintenance plan 

is designed to help keep Shelby County, 

Tennessee (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) in attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 

2021. These approval actions are based 

on EPA’s determination that Tennessee 

has demonstrated that Shelby County, 

Tennessee has met the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment specified in 

the CAA, including a demonstration 

that the bi-state Memphis Area has 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. EPA’s analyses of Tennessee’s 

1997 8-hour ozone redesignation request 

and maintenance plan are described in 

detail in the proposed rule published 

November 19, 2009 (74 FR 59943). 

Consistent with the CAA, the 

maintenance plan that EPA is approving 

also includes 2006, 2009, 2017, and 

2021 MVEBs for NOX and VOC for 

Shelby County, Tennessee. In this 

action, EPA is approving these NOX and 

VOC MVEBs for the purposes of 

transportation conformity. For regional 

emission analysis years that involve 

years prior to 2017, the new 2009 MVEB 

are the applicable budgets (for the 

purpose of conducting transportation 

conformity analyses). For regional 

emission analysis years that involve 

years prior to 2021, the new 2017 MVEB 

are the applicable budgets (for the 

purpose of conducting transportation 

conformity analyses). For regional 

emission analysis years that involve the 

year 2021 and beyond, the applicable 

budgets, for the purpose of conducting 

transportation conformity analyses, are 

the new 2021 MVEB. In practical terms, 

the 2006 MVEBs will not be used in 

Shelby County, Tennessee because this 

action is being taken in 2009, and there 

are MVEBs being established for the 

year 2009 which are required to be used. 

III. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions? 

EPA has determined that the bi-state 

Memphis Area has attained the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard and has also 

determined that Tennessee has 

demonstrated that all other criteria for 

the redesignation of Shelby County, 

Tennessee (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) from nonattainment to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS have been met. See, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is also 

taking final action to approve the 

maintenance plan for Shelby County, 

Tennessee as meeting the requirements 

of sections 175A and 107(d) of the CAA, 

and the emissions inventory as meeting 

the requirements of section 182(a)(1) of 

the CAA. Furthermore, EPA is 

approving the new NOX and VOC 

MVEBs for the years 2006, 2009, 2017, 

and 2021 contained in Tennessee’s 

maintenance plan for Shelby County 

because these MVEBs are consistent 

with maintenance for the bi-state 

Memphis Area. In the November 19, 

2009, proposal to redesignate Shelby 

County, Tennessee (as part of the bistate Memphis Area), EPA described the 

applicable criteria for redesignation to 

attainment and its analysis of how those 

criteria have been met. The rationale for 

EPA’s findings and actions is set forth 

in the proposed rulemaking and 

summarized in this final rulemaking. 

IV. What Are the Effects of These 

Actions? 

Approval of the redesignation request 

changes the legal designation of Shelby 

County, Tennessee (as part of the bistate Memphis Area) from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, found at 40 

CFR part 81. The approval also 

incorporates into the Tennessee SIP a 

plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in the bi-state Memphis 

Area through 2021. The maintenance 

plan includes contingency measures to 

remedy future violations of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS, and establishes 

NOX and VOC MVEBs for the years 

2006, 2009, 2017, and 2021 for Shelby 

County, Tennessee. Additionally, this 

action approves the emissions inventory 

for this area pursuant to section 

182(a)(1) of the CAA. The other portion 

of the bi-state Memphis Area is 

Crittenden County, Arkansas. EPA is 

taking action on Arkansas’ redesignation 

request for Crittenden County Arkansas 

(as part of the bi-state Memphis area) 

and the associated emissions inventory 

and maintenance plan through a 

separate rulemaking action. 

V. Final Action 

After evaluating Tennessee’s 

redesignation request, EPA is taking 

final action to approve the redesignation 

and change the legal designation of 

Shelby County, Tennessee (as part of the 

bi-state Memphis Area) from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is 

addressing the redesignation request, 

emission inventory and maintenance 

plan for Crittenden County, Arkansas 

(as a portion of the bi-state Memphis 

Area) in a separate but coordinated 

action. Through this action, EPA is also 

approving into the Tennessee SIP, the 

1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for 

the Shelby County, Tennessee, which 

includes the new NOX MVEBs of 55.878 

tons per day (tpd) for 2006, 55.620 tpd 

for 2009, 55.173 tpd for 2017, and 

54.445 tpd for 2021; and new VOC 

MVEBs of 25.216 tpd for 2006, 27.240 

tpd for 2009, 18.323 tpd for 2017, and 

13.817 tpd for 2021. These new MVEBs 

were found adequate through a previous 

action (74 FR 58277). Within 24 months 

from the effective date of EPA’s 

adequacy finding for the MVEBs, the 

transportation partners will need to 

demonstrate conformity to the new NOX

and VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 

93.104(e). Additionally, EPA is 

approving the emissions inventory for 

the Shelby County pursuant to section 

182(a)(1) of the CAA. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive 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.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 59 

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, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, 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. 

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 March 5, 2010. 

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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Incorporation by reference, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection and Air 

pollution control. 

Dated: December 22, 2009. 

Beverly H. Banister, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

■ Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 and 81 

are 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 RR—Tennessee 

■ 2. Section 52.2220(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry at the end of the 

table for ‘‘8-Hour Ozone Maintenance 

Plan for Shelby County, Tennessee’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.2220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED TENNESSEE NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of non-regulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area State effective date EPA approval date Explanation 

* * * * * * * 

8-Hour Ozone Maintenance plan for the Shelby 

County, Tennessee Area.

Memphis, Shelby County.February 26, 2009 ........ January 4, 2010 [Insert 

citation of publication].

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 81.343, the table entitled 

‘‘Tennessee-Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ 

is amended by revising the entry for 

‘‘Memphis, TN–AR: Shelby County,’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 81.343 Tennessee. 

* * * * * 

TENNESSEE-OZONE

[8-hour standard] 

Designated area 

Designation a Category/classification 

Date 1 Type Date1 Type 

* * * * * * * 

Memphis, TN–AR: Shelby County ......................................... January 4, 2010 .................... Attainment ......

* * * * * * * 

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 

2Effective April 15, 2008. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

60 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–31103 Filed 12–31–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 64 

[Docket ID FEMA–2008–0020; Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–8111] 

Suspension of Community Eligibility 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule identifies 

communities, where the sale of flood 

insurance has been authorized under 

the National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP), that are scheduled for 

suspension on the effective dates listed 

within this rule because of 

noncompliance with the floodplain 

management requirements of the 

program. If the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) receives 

documentation that the community has 

adopted the required floodplain 

management measures prior to the 

effective suspension date given in this 

rule, the suspension will not occur and 

a notice of this will be provided by 

publication in the Federal Register on a 

subsequent date. 

DATES: Effective Dates: The effective 

date of each community’s scheduled 

suspension is the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) 

listed in the third column of the 

following tables. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you want to determine whether a 

particular community was suspended 

on the suspension date or for further 

information, contact David Stearrett, 

Mitigation Directorate, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 500 C 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, 

(202) 646–2953. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP 

enables property owners to purchase 

flood insurance which is generally not 

otherwise available. In return, 

communities agree to adopt and 

administer local floodplain management 

aimed at protecting lives and new 

construction from future flooding. 

Section 1315 of the National Flood 

Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 

U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance 

coverage as authorized under the NFIP, 

42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; unless an 

appropriate public body adopts 

adequate floodplain management 

measures with effective enforcement 

measures. The communities listed in 

this document no longer meet that 

statutory requirement for compliance 

with program regulations, 44 CFR part 

59. Accordingly, the communities will 

be suspended on the effective date in 

the third column. As of that date, flood 

insurance will no longer be available in 

the community. However, some of these 

communities may adopt and submit the 

required documentation of legally 

enforceable floodplain management 

measures after this rule is published but 

prior to the actual suspension date. 

These communities will not be 

suspended and will continue their 

eligibility for the sale of insurance. A 

notice withdrawing the suspension of 

the communities will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

In addition, FEMA has identified the 

Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in 

these communities by publishing a 

Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The 

date of the FIRM, if one has been 

published, is indicated in the fourth 

column of the table. No direct Federal 

financial assistance (except assistance 

pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford 

Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act not in connection with a 

flood) may legally be provided for 

construction or acquisition of buildings 

in identified SFHAs for communities 

not participating in the NFIP and 

identified for more than a year, on 

FEMA’s initial flood insurance map of 

the community as having flood-prone 

areas (section 202(a) of the Flood 

Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 

U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This 

prohibition against certain types of 

Federal assistance becomes effective for 

the communities listed on the date 

shown in the last column. The 

Administrator finds that notice and 

public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) 

are impracticable and unnecessary 

because communities listed in this final 

rule have been adequately notified. 

Each community receives 6-month, 

90-day, and 30-day notification letters 

addressed to the Chief Executive Officer 

stating that the community will be 

suspended unless the required 

floodplain management measures are 

met prior to the effective suspension 

date. Since these notifications were 

made, this final rule may take effect 

within less than 30 days. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This rule is categorically excluded from 

the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, 

Environmental Considerations. No 

environmental impact assessment has 

been prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 

Administrator has determined that this 

rule is exempt from the requirements of 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act because 

the National Flood Insurance Act of 

1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, 

prohibits flood insurance coverage 

unless an appropriate public body 

adopts adequate floodplain management 

measures with effective enforcement 

measures. The communities listed no 

longer comply with the statutory 

requirements, and after the effective 

date, flood insurance will no longer be 

available in the communities unless 

remedial action takes place. 

Regulatory Classification. This final 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

under the criteria of section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 

1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 

58 FR 51735. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. 

This rule involves no policies that have 

federalism implications under Executive 

Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule meets the applicable 

standards of Executive Order 12988. 

Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule 

does not involve any collection of 

information for purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq. 

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64 

Flood insurance, Floodplains. 

■ Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 64—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 64 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 

3 CFR, 1979 Comp.; p. 376. 

§ 64.6 [Amended] 

■ 2. The tables published under the 

authority of § 64.6 are amended as 

follows: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES