2776 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

satisfaction of the Director to the 

previous timely mailing, transmission or 

submission. If the correspondence was 

sent by facsimile transmission, a copy of 

the sending unit’s report confirming 

transmission may be used to support 

this statement. If the correspondence 

was transmitted via the Office electronic 

filing system, a copy of an 

acknowledgment receipt generated by 

the Office electronic filing system 

confirming submission may be used to 

support this statement. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 1.33 is amended by revising 

the introductory text of paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 1.33 Correspondence respecting patent 

applications, reexamination proceedings, 

and other proceedings. 

(a) Correspondence address and 

daytime telephone number. When filing 

an application, a correspondence 

address must be set forth in either an 

application data sheet (§ 1.76), or 

elsewhere, in a clearly identifiable 

manner, in any paper submitted with an 

application filing. If no correspondence 

address is specified, the Office may treat 

the mailing address of the first named 

inventor (if provided, see §§ 1.76(b)(1) 

and 1.63(c)(2)) as the correspondence 

address. The Office will direct, or 

otherwise make available, all notices, 

official letters, and other 

communications relating to the 

application to the person associated 

with the correspondence address. For 

correspondence submitted via the 

Office’s electronic filing system, 

however, an electronic acknowledgment 

receipt will be sent to the submitter. The 

Office will generally not engage in 

double correspondence with an 

applicant and a patent practitioner, or 

with more than one patent practitioner 

except as deemed necessary by the 

Director. If more than one 

correspondence address is specified in a 

single document, the Office will select 

one of the specified addresses for use as 

the correspondence address and, if 

given, will select the address associated 

with a Customer Number over a typed 

correspondence address. For the party 

to whom correspondence is to be 

addressed, a daytime telephone number 

should be supplied in a clearly 

identifiable manner and may be 

changed by any party who may change 

the correspondence address. The 

correspondence address may be 

changed as follows: 

* * * * * 

Dated: January 17, 2007. 

Jon W. Dudas, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. E7–906 Filed 1–22–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2006–0386; FRL–8272–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso 

County Carbon Monoxide 

Redesignation to Attainment, and 

Approval of Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: On January 20, 2006, the 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality (TCEQ) submitted a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to 

request redesignation of the El Paso 

carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment 

area to attainment for the CO National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). This submittal also included 

a CO maintenance plan for the El Paso 

area and associated Motor Vehicle 

Emission Budgets (MVEBs). The 

maintenance plan was developed to 

ensure continued attainment of the CO 

NAAQS for a period of 10 years from 

the effective date of EPA approval of 

redesignation to attainment. In this 

action, EPA is approving the El Paso CO 

redesignation request and the 

maintenance plan with its associated 

MVEBs as satisfying the requirements of 

the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) as 

amended in 1990. 

DATES: This rule is effective on March 

26, 2007 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives relevant adverse comment 

by February 22, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–

OAR–2006–0386, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Mr. Thomas Diggs at 

diggs.thomas@epa.gov. Please also send 

a copy by e-mail to the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section below. 

• Fax: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), at fax 

number 214–665–7263. 

• Mail: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. 

• Hand Delivery: Mr. Thomas Diggs, 

Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. 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–R06–OAR–2006–

0386. 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The 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 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. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 2777 

inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review 

Room between the hours of 8:30am and 

4:30pm weekdays except for legal 

holidays. Contact the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at 

214–665–7253 to make an appointment. 

If possible, please make the 

appointment at least two working days 

in advance of your visit. There will be 

a 15 cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

The State submittal is also available 

for public inspection at the State Air 

Agency listed below during official 

business hours by appointment: 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, Office of Air Quality, 12124 

Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning Section, 

(6PD–L), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone (214) 665–8542; fax number 

214–665–7263; e-mail address 

riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. EPA’s Evaluation of the El Paso 

Redesignation Request and Maintenance 

Plan 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Transportation 

Conformity Requirements 

IV. Consideration of Section 110(l) of the 

CAA 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Under the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act 

(CAA) Amendments, El Paso was 

designated and classified as a moderate 

nonattainment area for CO because it 

did not meet the 8-hour CO NAAQS for 

this criteria pollutant (56 FR 56694). El 

Paso’s classification as a moderate 

nonattainment area under sections 

107(d)(4)(A) and 186(a) of the CAA 

imposed a schedule for attainment of 

the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1995. 

The El Paso nonattainment area has 

unique considerations for CO 

attainment planning due to airshed 

contributions from Ciudad Juarez, 

Mexico. Section 179B of the 1990 CAA 

Amendments contains provisions for 

CO nonattainment areas affected by 

emissions emanating from outside the 

United States. Under CAA Section 

179B, the EPA shall approve a SIP for 

the El Paso nonattainment area if the 

TCEQ establishes to the EPA’s 

satisfaction that implementation of the 

plan would achieve timely attainment of 

the NAAQS but for emissions emanating 

from Ciudad Juarez. This provision 

prevents El Paso County from being 

reclassified to a higher level of 

nonattainment should monitors 

continue to record CO concentrations in 

excess of the NAAQS. 

To meet the CAA attainment schedule 

of December 31, 1995, Texas submitted 

an initial revision to the SIP for the El 

Paso CO moderate nonattainment area 

in a letter dated September 27, 1995. 

This submittal, as well as a February 

1998 supplemental submittal, included 

air quality modeling demonstrating that 

El Paso would attain the CO NAAQS by 

December 31, 1995, but for emissions 

emanating outside of the United States 

from Mexico. The EPA approved a 

revision to the Texas SIP submitted to 

show attainment of the 8-hour CO 

NAAQS in the El Paso CO 

nonattainment area under Section 179B 

provisions, as well as approving the El 

Paso area’s CO emissions budget and a 

CO contingency measure requirement. 

The State submitted the revisions to 

satisfy Section 179B and Part D 

requirements of the CAA. This approval 

was published July 2, 2003 (68 FR 

39457) and became effective September 

2, 2003. TCEQ also submitted all the 

requirements for the moderate area 

classification and EPA approved them. 

See further discussion in Section II.B.2. 

On January 20, 2006, the State of 

Texas submitted a revision to the SIP 

which consists of a request for 

redesignation of the El Paso carbon 

monoxide (CO) nonattainment area to 

attainment for the CO NAAQS, as well 

as an 8-hour CO maintenance plan to 

ensure that El Paso County remains in 

attainment of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. 

In this action, we are approving a 

change in the legal designation of the El 

Paso area from nonattainment for CO to 

attainment, in addition to approving the 

maintenance plan that is designed to 

keep the area in attainment for CO until 

2015. Under the CAA, we can change 

designations if acceptable data are 

available and if certain other 

requirements are met. Section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA provides that 

the Administrator may not promulgate a 

redesignation of a nonattainment area to 

attainment unless: 

(i) The Administrator determines that 

the area has attained the national 

ambient air quality standard; 

(ii) The Administrator has fully 

approved the applicable 

implementation plan for the area under 

CAA section 110(k); 

(iii) The Administrator determines 

that the improvement in air quality is 

due to permanent and enforceable 

reductions in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable 

implementation plan and applicable 

Federal air pollutant control regulations 

and other permanent and enforceable 

reductions; 

(iv) The Administrator has fully 

approved a maintenance plan for the 

area as meeting the requirements of 

CAA section 175A; and, 

(v) the State containing such area has 

met all requirements applicable to the 

area under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA. 

Before we can approve the 

redesignation request, we must decide 

that all applicable SIP elements have 

been fully approved. Approval of the 

applicable SIP elements may occur 

simultaneously with final approval of 

the redesignation request. The State of 

Texas has incorporated a CO 

maintenance plan into this submittal to 

satisfy the requirement of a fully 

approved maintenance plan for the area. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation of the El Paso 

Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan 

We have reviewed the El Paso CO 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan and believe that approval of the 

request is warranted, consistent with the 

requirements of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E). The following are 

descriptions of how the section 

107(d)(3)(E) requirements are being 

addressed. 

(a) Redesignation Criterion: The Area 

Must Have Attained the Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) NAAQS 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA 

states that for an area to be redesignated 

to attainment, the Administrator must 

determine that the area has attained the 

applicable NAAQS. The area is 

designated attainment for the 1-hour CO 

NAAQS and designated nonattainment 

for the 8-hour CO NAAQS. As described 

in 40 CFR 50.8, the 8-hour CO NAAQS 

for carbon monoxide is 9 parts per 

million (ppm), (10 milligrams per cubic 

meter) for an 8-hour average 

concentration not to be exceeded more 

than once per year. 40 CFR 50.8 

continues by stating that the levels of 

CO in the ambient air shall be measured 

by a reference method based on 40 CFR 

part 50, Appendix C and designated in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 53 or an 

equivalent method designated in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 53. 

Attainment of the 8-hour CO standard is 

not a momentary phenomenon based on 

short-term data. Instead, we consider an 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
2778 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

1Refer to EPA’s September 4, 1992, John Calcagni 

policy memorandum entitled ‘‘Procedures for 

Processing requests to Redesignate areas to 

Attainment.’’

area to be in attainment if each of the 

8-hour CO ambient air quality monitors 

in the area doesn’t have more than one 

exceedance of the 8-hour CO standard 

over a one-year period. If any monitor 

in the area’s CO monitoring network 

records more than one exceedance of 

the 8-hour CO standard during a oneyear calendar period, then the area is in 

violation of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. In 

addition, our interpretation of the CAA 

and EPA national policy 1 has been that 

an area seeking redesignation to 

attainment must show attainment of the 

CO NAAQS for at least a continuous 

two-year calendar period. In addition, 

the area must also continue to show 

attainment through the date that we 

promulgate the redesignation in the 

Federal Register. 

The State of Texas’ CO redesignation 

request for the El Paso area is based on 

an analysis of quality assured ambient 

air quality monitoring data that are 

relevant to the redesignation request. As 

presented in Chapter 3, Table 3–1 of the 

State’s maintenance plan, ambient air 

quality monitoring data for consecutive 

calendar years 1999 through 2005 show 

a measured exceedance rate of the CO 

NAAQS of 1.0 or less per year, per 

monitor, in the El Paso nonattainment 

area. We have evaluated the ambient air 

quality data and have determined that 

the El Paso area has not violated the 8- 

hour CO standard and continues to 

demonstrate attainment. The El Paso 

nonattainment area has quality-assured 

data showing no violations of the 8-hour 

CO NAAQS for the most recent 

consecutive two-calendar-year period 

(2004 and 2005). Therefore, we believe 

the El Paso area has met the first 

component for redesignation: 

Demonstration of attainment of the CO 

NAAQS. We note too that the State of 

Texas has also committed, in the 

maintenance plan, to continue the 

necessary operation of the CO 

monitoring network in compliance with 

40 CFR Part 58. 

(b) Redesignation Criterion: The Area 

Must Have Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA 

To be redesignated to attainment, 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) requires that an 

area must meet all applicable 

requirements under section 110 and part 

D of the CAA. We interpret section 

107(d)(3)(E)(v) to mean that for a 

redesignation to be approved by us, the 

State must meet all requirements that 

applied to the subject area prior to or at 

the time of the submission of a complete 

redesignation request. In our evaluation 

of a redesignation request, we don’t 

need to consider other requirements of 

the CAA that became due after the date 

of the submission of a complete 

redesignation request. 

1. CAA Section 110 Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA 

delineates the general requirements for 

a SIP, which include enforceable 

emissions limitations and other control 

measures, means, or techniques, 

provisions for the establishment and 

operation of appropriate devices 

necessary to collect data on ambient air 

quality, and programs to enforce the 

limitations. On July 2, 2003, we 

approved the El Paso CO element 

revisions to Texas’s SIP as meeting the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA (see 68 FR 39457). 

2. Part D Requirements 

Before the El Paso ‘‘moderate’’ CO 

nonattainment area may be redesignated 

to attainment, the State must have 

fulfilled the applicable requirements of 

part D. Under part D, an area’s 

classification indicates the requirements 

to which it will be subject. Subpart 1 of 

part D sets forth the basic nonattainment 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas. Subpart 3 of Part 

D contains specific provisions for 

‘‘moderate’’ CO nonattainment areas. 

The relevant subpart 1 requirements are 

contained in sections 172(c) and 176. 

Our General Preamble (see 57 FR 13529 

to 13532, April 16, 1992) provides 

EPA’s interpretations of the CAA 

requirements for ‘‘moderate’’ CO areas 

such as El Paso with CO design values 

that are less than or equal to 12.7 ppm. 

The General Preamble (see 57 FR 13530, 

et seq.) provides that the applicable 

requirements of CAA section 172 are: 

172(c)(3) (emissions inventory), 

172(c)(5) (new source review permitting 

program), 172(c)(7) (the section 

110(a)(2) air quality monitoring 

requirements), and 172(c)(9) 

(contingency measures). Regarding the 

requirements of sections 172(c)(3) 

(inventory) and 172(c)(9) (contingency 

measures), please refer to our discussion 

below of sections 187(a)(1) and 

187(a)(3), which are the more specific 

provisions of subpart 3 of Part D of the 

CAA. 

It is also worth noting that we 

interpreted the requirements of sections 

172(c)(2) (reasonable further progress—

RFP) and 172(c)(6) (other measures) as 

being irrelevant to a redesignation 

request because they only have meaning 

for an area that is not attaining the 

standard. See EPA’s September 4, 1992, 

John Calcagni memorandum entitled 

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment’’, and 

the General Preamble, 57 FR at 13564, 

dated April 16, 1992. Finally, the State 

has not sought to exercise the options 

that would trigger sections 172(c)(4) 

(identification of certain emissions 

increases) and 172(c)(8) (equivalent 

techniques). Thus, these provisions are 

also not relevant to this redesignation 

request. 

For the section 172(c)(5) New Source 

Review (NSR) requirements, the CAA 

requires all nonattainment areas to meet 

several requirements regarding NSR, 

including provisions to ensure that 

increased emissions will not result from 

any new or modified stationary major 

sources and a general offset rule. The 

State of Texas has an approved NSR 

program (see 60 FR 49781, September 

27, 1995) that meets the requirements of 

CAA section 172(c)(5). For the CAA 

section 172(c)(7) provisions (compliance 

with the CAA section 110(a)(2) Air 

Quality Monitoring Requirements), our 

interpretations are presented in the 

General Preamble (57 FR 13535). CO 

nonattainment areas are to meet the 

‘‘applicable’’ air quality monitoring 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA. Information concerning CO 

monitoring in Texas is included in the 

Annual Monitoring Network Review 

(MNR) prepared by the State and 

submitted to EPA. Our personnel have 

concurred with Texas’ annual network 

reviews and have agreed that the El Paso 

network remains adequate. 

In Chapter 5, Section 5.4 of the 

maintenance plan, the State commits to 

the continued operation of the existing 

CO monitoring network according to 

applicable Federal regulations and 

guidelines (40 CFR part 58). 

The relevant subpart 3 provisions 

were created when the CAA was 

amended on November 15, 1990. The 

new CAA requirements for ‘‘moderate’’

CO areas, such as El Paso, required that 

the SIP be revised to include a 1990 

base year emissions inventory (CAA 

section 187(a)(1)), contingency 

provisions (CAA section 187(a)(3)), 

corrections to existing motor vehicle 

inspection and maintenance (I/M) 

programs (CAA section 187(a)(4)), 

periodic emission inventories (CAA 

section 187(a)(5)), and the 

implementation of an oxygenated fuels 

program (CAA section 211(m)(1)). 

Sections 187(a)(2), (6), and (7) do not 

apply to the El Paso area because its 

design value was below 12.7 ppm at the 

time of classification. How the State met 

these requirements and our approvals, 

are described below: 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 2779 

A. 1990 base year emissions inventory 

(CAA section 187(a)(1)): EPA approved 

an emissions inventory on September 

12, 1994 (see 59 FR 46766). 

B. Contingency provisions (CAA 

section 187(a)(3)): EPA approved the use 

of 46 tons per day in incremental CO 

reduction credits from the Texas lowenhanced vehicle inspection and 

maintenance program, as fulfillment of 

the State’s CO attainment contingency 

measure requirement for the El Paso 

nonattainment area under section 

172(c)(9) on July 2, 2003 (see 68 FR 

39457). 

C. Corrections to the El Paso basic 

I/M program (CAA section 187(a)(4)): 

EPA approved the Texas Motorist 

Choice (TMC) I/M Program (which 

includes El Paso) on November 14, 2001 

(see 66 FR 57261). 

D. Periodic emissions inventories 

(CAA section 187(a)(5)): The State 

submitted an initial revision to the SIP 

for the El Paso CO moderate 

nonattainment area in a letter dated 

September 27, 1995. This submittal, as 

well as a February 1998 supplemental 

submittal contained a commitment to 

submit emission inventory updates. 

TCEQ continues to submit the Periodic 

Emissions Inventory (PEI) every three 

years. 

E. Oxygenated fuels program 

implementation (CAA section 211(m)): 

EPA approved the El Paso oxygenated 

fuels program on September 12, 1994 

(see 59 FR 46766). 

(c) Redesignation Criterion: The Area 

Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Under 

Section 110(k) of the CAA 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA 

states that for an area to be redesignated 

to attainment, it must be determined 

that the Administrator has fully 

approved the applicable 

implementation plan for the area under 

section 110(k). As noted above, EPA 

previously approved SIP revisions for 

the El Paso CO nonattainment area that 

were required by the 1990 amendments 

to the CAA. In this action, we are also 

approving the maintenance plan 

proposed by the State, and the State’s 

commitment to maintain an adequate 

monitoring network (contained in the 

maintenance plan). Thus, with this final 

rule to approve the El Paso 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan, we will have fully approved the El 

Paso CO element of the SIP under 

section 110(k) of the CAA. 

(d) Redesignation Criterion: The Area 

Must Show That the Improvement in Air 

Quality Is Due to Permanent and 

Enforceable Emissions Reductions 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA 

provides that for an area to be 

redesignated to attainment, the 

Administrator must determine that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable 

implementation plan, implementation 

of applicable Federal air pollutant 

control regulations, and other 

permanent and enforceable reductions. 

The CO emissions reductions for El 

Paso, that are further described in 

Sections 3.5 and 5.3.3 of the El Paso 

maintenance plan, were achieved 

primarily through the Federal Motor 

Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP), an 

oxygenated fuels program, and a motor 

vehicle inspection and maintenance 

(I/M) program. 

In general, the FMVCP provisions 

require vehicle manufacturers to meet 

more stringent vehicle emission 

limitations for new vehicles in future 

years. These emission limitations are 

phased in (as a percentage of new 

vehicles manufactured) over a period of 

years. As new, lower emitting vehicles 

replace older, higher emitting vehicles 

(‘‘fleet turnover’’), emission reductions 

are realized for a particular area such as 

El Paso. For example, EPA promulgated 

lower hydrocarbon (HC) and CO exhaust 

emission standards in 1991, known as 

Tier I standards for new motor vehicles 

(light-duty vehicles and light-duty 

trucks) in response to the 1990 CAA 

amendments. These Tier I emissions 

standards were phased in with 40% of 

the 1994 model year fleet, 80% of the 

1995 model year fleet, and 100% of the 

1996 model year fleet. 

As stated in Section 5.3.3 of the 

maintenance plan, significant additional 

emission reductions were realized from 

El Paso’s basic I/M program. The 

program requires annual inspections of 

vehicles at independent inspection 

stations. We note that further 

improvements to the El Paso area’s basic 

I/M program, to meet the requirements 

of EPA’s November 5, 1992 (57 FR 

52950) I/M rule, and upgrading the I/M 

program to meet the requirements for a 

low-enhanced program, were approved 

by us into the SIP on November 14, 

2001 (68 FR 39457). 

Oxygenated fuels are gasolines that 

are blended with additives that increase 

the level of oxygen in the fuel and, 

consequently, reduce CO tailpipe 

emissions. TAC Title 30, Chapter 114, 

Section 114.100, ‘‘Oxygenated Fuels 

Program’’, contains the oxygenated fuels 

provisions for the El Paso 

nonattainment area. This rule requires 

all El Paso area gas stations to sell fuels 

containing a 2.7% minimum oxygen 

content (by weight) during the 

wintertime CO high pollution season. 

The use of oxygenated fuels has 

significantly reduced CO emissions and 

contributed to the area’s attainment of 

the CO NAAQS. 

We have evaluated the various State 

and Federal control measures, and 

believe that the improvement in air 

quality in the El Paso nonattainment 

area has resulted from emission 

reductions that are permanent and 

enforceable. 

(e) Redesignation Criterion: The Area 

Must Have a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Under CAA Section 

175A 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA 

provides that for an area to be 

redesignated to attainment, the 

Administrator must have fully approved 

a maintenance plan for the area meeting 

the requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA. Section 175A of the CAA sets 

forth the elements of a maintenance 

plan for areas seeking redesignation 

from nonattainment to attainment. The 

maintenance plan must demonstrate 

continued attainment of the applicable 

NAAQS for at least ten years after the 

Administrator approves a redesignation 

to attainment. Eight years after the 

promulgation of the redesignation, the 

State must submit a revised 

maintenance plan that demonstrates 

continued attainment for the subsequent 

ten-year period following the initial ten 

year maintenance period. To address the 

possibility of future NAAQS violations, 

the maintenance plan must contain 

contingency measures, with a schedule 

for adoption and implementation, that 

are adequate to assure prompt 

correction of a violation. In addition, we 

issued further maintenance plan 

interpretations in the ‘‘General Preamble 

for the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990’’ (57 

FR 13498, April 16, 1992), ‘‘General 

Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments 

of 1990; Supplemental’’ (57 FR 18070, 

April 28, 1992), and the EPA guidance 

memorandum entitled ‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment’’ from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, Office of Air 

Quality and Planning Standards, to 

Regional Air Division Directors, dated 

September 4, 1992 (hereafter the 

September 4, 1992 Calcagni 

Memorandum). 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
2780 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

2 ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance 

Demonstrations for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 

(CO) Nonattainment Areas’’, signed by D. Kent 

Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, November 30, 1993. 

In this Federal Register action, EPA is 

approving the maintenance plan for the 

El Paso CO nonattainment area because 

we believe, as detailed below, that the 

State’s maintenance plan submittal 

meets the requirements of section 175A 

and is consistent with our 

interpretations of the CAA, as reflected 

in the documents referenced above. Our 

analysis of the pertinent maintenance 

plan requirements, with reference to the 

State’s January 20, 2006, submittal, is 

provided as follows: 

1. Emissions Inventories—Attainment 

Year and Projections 

EPA’s interpretations of the CAA 

section 175A maintenance plan 

requirements are generally provided in 

the General Preamble (see 57 FR 13498, 

April 16, 1992) and the September 4, 

1992, Calcagni Memorandum referenced 

above. Under our interpretations, areas 

seeking to redesignate to attainment for 

CO may demonstrate future 

maintenance of the CO NAAQS either 

by showing that future CO emissions 

will be equal to or less than the 

attainment year emissions or by 

providing a modeling demonstration. 

For the El Paso area, the State selected 

the emissions inventory approach for 

demonstrating maintenance of the CO 

NAAQS; however, the State also 

conducted ‘‘hot spot’’ CO modeling to 

demonstrate that CO exceedances are 

not currently occurring at a potential 

hot spot and will not occur at such 

locations in the future. The maintenance 

plan submitted by the TCEQ on January 

20, 2006, includes comprehensive 

inventories of CO emissions for the El 

Paso area. These inventories include 

emissions from stationary point sources, 

area sources, non-road mobile sources, 

and on-road mobile sources. The State 

selected 2002 as the year from which to 

develop the attainment year inventory 

and included interim-year projections 

out to 2015. More detailed descriptions 

of the 2002 attainment year inventory 

and the projected inventories are 

documented in the maintenance plan in 

Chapter 2. Summary emission figures 

from the 2002 attainment year, the 

interim projected years, and the final 

maintenance year of 2015 are provided 

in Table 1 below. 

TABLE 1.—EL PASO COUNTY CO EMISSIONS FOR 2002–2015 (TPD) 

2002 2005 2011 2015 

Point Source .................................................................................................... 4.67 4.42 4.78 5.03 

Area Source ..................................................................................................... 16.42 16.80 17.61 18.17 

Nonroad Mobile ............................................................................................... 45.90 48.71 55.23 59.18 

Onroad Mobile ................................................................................................. 360.34 325.50 245.16 232.02 

Total .......................................................................................................... 427.33 385.43 322.78 314.40 

As presented in Chapter 3, Table 3–

1 of the State’s maintenance plan, 

ambient air quality monitoring data for 

consecutive calendar years 1999 

through 2004 show a measured 

exceedance rate of the CO NAAQS of 

1.0 or less per year, per monitor, in the 

El Paso nonattainment area. To further 

demonstrate maintenance of the CO 

NAAQS, the TCEQ agreed to additional 

‘‘hot spot’’ modeling as requested by 

EPA on the basis of EPA’s Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards’

(OAQPS) September 30, 1994 Ozone/ 

Carbon Monoxide Redesignations 

Reference Document. The modeling was 

done specifically to address two 

concerns—the El Paso CO monitoring 

network has a limited number of sites, 

and therefore may not have identified 

all the hot spots in the El Paso area; and 

in the future, urban growth may 

increase mobile emissions enough to 

cause exceedances of the NAAQS. 

The TCEQ performed CO modeling at 

a heavily utilized intersection to 

demonstrate that CO exceedances are 

not currently occurring at a potential 

hot spot and will not occur at that 

location in the future. A modeling 

protocol detailing hotspot selection, 

proposed model usage, and data 

analysis was submitted by the State on 

February 17, 2005, and was approved by 

EPA via a letter dated March 30, 2005. 

The modeling protocol and approach 

taken are detailed in Chapter 4 of the 

maintenance plan. As shown in Table 

4–2 of the maintenance plan, the current 

(base) case hot spot analysis predicted a 

maximum 8-hour CO concentration of 

7.8 ppm, and the 2015 future case 

analysis predicted a maximum 8-hour 

CO concentration of 2.2 ppm. Both of 

these values are below the 9 ppm 

NAAQS, and demonstrate current and 

projected compliance with the CO 

standard. A more detailed evaluation by 

EPA of this hot spot analysis is provided 

in the TSD. 

2. Demonstration of Maintenance—

Projected Inventories 

As we noted above, total CO 

emissions were projected forward by the 

State for the years 2005, 2011, and 2015. 

We note the State’s approach for 

developing the projected inventories 

follows EPA guidance on projected 

emissions and we believe they are 

acceptable.2 The projected inventories 

show that CO emissions are not 

estimated to exceed the 2002 attainment 

level during the time period 2002 

through 2015 and, therefore, the El Paso 

area has satisfactorily demonstrated 

maintenance. The year 2005 was 

selected as the year of designation of 

attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS, 

so the final projection year, 2015, was 

intended to represent the last year of the 

10-year maintenance plan. The year 

2011 was selected as an interim year for 

conformity determination. These 

projected inventories were developed 

using EPA-approved technologies and 

methodologies. No new control 

strategies for point and area sources 

were relied upon in the projected 

inventories. CO emission reductions 

anticipated from EPA’s national rule for 

the Spark Ignition Small Engine Rule, 

Phase 1, were relied upon as a new 

control strategy for Nonroad sources. 

TCEQ relied upon emissions reductions 

anticipated from existing control 

strategies: FMVCP, Texas Oxygenated 

Fuel SIP, and the Texas I/M Program. 

Please see the TSD for more information 

on EPA’s review and evaluation of the 

State’s methodologies, modeling, inputs, 

etc., for developing the projected 

emissions inventories. 

3. Monitoring Network and Verification 

of Continued Attainment 

The TCEQ commits to maintain an 

appropriate air monitoring network for 

the El Paso area throughout the 10-year 

maintenance period. As required by 40 

CFR Part 58.20(d), TCEQ will consult 

with EPA in annual review of the air 

monitoring network to determine the 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 2781 

adequacy of the CO monitoring network, 

whether or not additional monitoring is 

needed, and if/when monitor sites can 

be discontinued. The TCEQ also 

commits to adhere to data quality 

requirements as specified in 40 CFR Part 

58 Quality Assurance Requirements. 

Texas commits to track the progress of 

the maintenance plan by continuing to 

periodically update the emissions 

inventory (EI). It will compare the 

updated EIs against the projected 2005, 

2011 and 2015 EIs. 

TCEQ also commits to continuing all 

the applicable control strategies, i.e., the 

measures approved into the El Paso SIP. 

For example, these measures include 

the Federal Motor Vehicle Control 

Program (FMVCP), an oxygenated fuels 

program, and a motor vehicle inspection 

and maintenance (I/M) program. 

Based on the above, we are approving 

these commitments as satisfying the 

relevant requirements and we note that 

his final rulemaking approval will 

render the State’s commitments 

federally enforceable. 

4. Contingency Plan 

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires 

that a maintenance plan include 

contingency provisions. To meet this 

requirement, the State has identified 

appropriate contingency measures along 

with a schedule for the development 

and implementation of such measures. 

In the January 20, 2006 submittal, Texas 

specifies the contingency trigger as a 

violation of the 8-hour CO standard base 

upon air quality monitoring data from 

the El Paso monitoring network. In the 

event that a monitored violation of the 

8-hour CO standard occurs in any 

portion of the maintenance area, the 

State will first analyze the data to 

determine if the violation was caused by 

actions outside TCEQ’s jurisdiction 

(e.g., emissions from Mexico or another 

state) or within its jurisdiction. If the 

violation was caused by actions outside 

TCEQ’s jurisdiction, TCEQ will notify 

the EPA. If TCEQ determines the 

violation was caused by actions within 

TCEQ’s jurisdiction, TCEQ commits to 

adopt and implement the identified 

contingency measures as expeditiously 

as practicable, but no later than 18 

months. 

The State will analyze one or more of 

the following contingency measures to 

reattain the standard: 

• Vehicle idling restrictions. 

• Improved vehicle I/M. 

• Improved traffic control measures. 

The maintenance plan indicates that 

the State may evaluate other potential 

strategies to address any future 

violations in the most appropriate and 

effective manner possible. Based on the 

above, we find that the contingency 

measures provided in the State’s El Paso 

CO maintenance plan are sufficient and 

meet the requirements of section 

175A(d) of the CAA. 

5. Subsequent Maintenance Plan 

Revisions 

In accordance with section 175A(b) of 

the CAA, Texas has committed to 

submit a revised maintenance plan eight 

years after our approval of the 

redesignation. This provision for 

revising the maintenance plan is 

contained in Chapter 5, Section 5.1 of 

the El Paso CO maintenance plan. 

The maintenance plan adequately 

addresses the five basic components of 

a maintenance plan. EPA believes that 

the 8-hour CO maintenance plan SIP 

revision submitted by the State of Texas 

for the El Paso area meets the 

requirements of Section 175A of the 

CAA. For more information, please refer 

to our Technical Support Document. 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the 

Transportation Conformity 

Requirements 

Table 2 documents the motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the El 

Paso CO nonattainment area that have 

been established by this CO 

redesignation request. The MVEB is that 

portion of the total allowable emissions 

defined in the SIP revision allocated to 

on-road mobile sources for a certain 

date for meeting the purpose of the SIP, 

in this case maintaining compliance 

with the NAAQS in the nonattainment 

or maintenance area. EPA’s conformity 

rule (40 CFR part 51, subpart T and part 

93, subpart A) requires that 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects in nonattainment or 

maintenance areas conform to the SIP. 

The motor vehicle emissions budget is 

one mechanism EPA has identified for 

demonstrating conformity. Upon the 

effective date of this SIP approval, all 

future transportation improvement 

programs and long range transportation 

plans for the El Paso area will have to 

show conformity to the budgets in this 

plan; previous budgets approved or 

found adequate will no longer be 

applicable. 

TABLE 2.—EL PASO CO MVEB FOR

2002–2015 (TPD) 

Year MVEB 

2002 .................................................. 29.66 

2011 .................................................. 18.56 

2015 .................................................. 16.63 

Our analysis indicates that the above 

figures are consistent with maintenance 

of the CO NAAQS throughout the 

maintenance period. In accordance with 

EPA’s adequacy process, these MVEBs 

were posted on EPA’s adequacy Web 

site for public notice on May 4, 2006 

and were open for comment until June 

5, 2006. No comments were received 

during this period. Therefore, we are 

finding as adequate and approving the 

29.66 tpd for 2002 through 2010, 18.56 

tpd for 2011 through 2014, and 16.63 

tpd for 2015 and beyond, CO emissions 

budgets for the El Paso area. Budget 

modeling was developed for TCEQ 

under contract by the Texas 

Transportation Institute (TTI), utilizing 

El Paso travel model datasets developed 

by the El Paso Metropolitan Planning 

Organization. The modeling 

incorporated two onroad source control 

strategies that apply in the El Paso area: 

The El Paso Oxygenated Fuel Program, 

and the I/M program (both detailed in 

Chapter 5, Section 5.3.3 of the 

maintenance plan). 

IV. Consideration of Section 110(l) of 

the CAA 

Section 110(l) of the CAA states that 

a SIP revision cannot be approved if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress towards attainment of a 

NAAQS or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. As stated 

above, the El Paso area has shown 

continuous attainment of the CO 

NAAQS since 1999 and has met the 

applicable Federal requirements for 

redesignation to attainment. The 

maintenance plan will not interfere with 

attainment or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. No control 

measures in the El Paso SIP are being 

removed. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is approving the redesignation of 

the El Paso area to attainment of the 8- 

hour CO NAAQS, as well as approving 

the El Paso area CO maintenance plan. 

We also are approving the associated 

MVEBs. 

We have evaluated the State’s 

submittal and have determined that it 

meets the applicable requirements of the 

Clean Air Act and EPA regulations, and 

is consistent with EPA policy. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a non-controversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’

section of today’s Federal Register, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposed rule to 

approve the SIP revision if relevant 

adverse comments are received on this 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
2782 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

direct final rule. We will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so at this time. For further 

information about commenting on this 

rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this 

document. 

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. We 

would address all public comments in 

a subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. Please note that if we 

receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

rule approves pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it 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). 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have federalism 

implications because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

approves a state rule implementing a 

Federal standard, and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

CAA. This rule also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the CAA. Thus, the requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not 

apply. This rule does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

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 rule 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 26, 2007. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: January 11, 2007. 

Richard E. Greene, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

■ 40 CFR parts 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 SS—Texas 

■ 2. In § 52.2270, the second table in 

paragraph (e) entitled ‘‘EPA Approved 

Nonregulatory Provisions and QuasiRegulatory Measures in the Texas SIP’’

is amended by adding an entry at the 

end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.2270 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 2783 

EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State submittal/ 

effective date EPA approval date Comments 

* * * * * * * 

El Paso County Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan.El Paso, TX ................. 1/11/06 1/23/07 [Insert FR 

page number where 

document begins].

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 4. Section 81.344 is amended by 

revising the Carbon Monoxide table 

entry for El Paso County to read as 

follows: 

§ 81.344 Texas. 

* * * * * 

TEXAS—CARBON MONOXIDE

Designated area 

Designation Category/classification 

Date 1 Type Date 1 Type 

El Paso, El Paso County ................................................................................... 1/23/07 Attainment. 

* * * * * * * 

1This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–926 Filed 1–22–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 67 

Final Flood Elevation Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Base (1% annual chance) 

Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified 

BFEs are made final for the 

communities listed below. The BFEs 

and modified BFEs are the basis for the 

floodplain management measures that 

each community is required either to 

adopt or to show evidence of being 

already in effect in order to qualify or 

remain qualified for participation in the 

National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP). 

DATES: The date of issuance of the Flood 

Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing 

BFEs and modified BFEs for each 

community. This date may be obtained 

by contacting the office where the maps 

are available for inspection as indicated 

on the table below. 

ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each 

community are available for inspection 

at the office of the Chief Executive 

Officer of each community. The 

respective addresses are listed in the 

table below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering 

Management Section, Mitigation 

Division, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3151. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) makes the final determinations 

listed below for the modified BFEs for 

each community listed. These modified 

elevations have been published in 

newspapers of local circulation and 

ninety (90) days have elapsed since that 

publication. The Mitigation Division 

Director of FEMA has resolved any 

appeals resulting from this notification. 

This final rule is issued in accordance 

with section 110 of the Flood Disaster 

Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, 

and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has 

developed criteria for floodplain 

management in floodprone areas in 

accordance with 44 CFR part 60. 

Interested lessees and owners of real 

property are encouraged to review the 

proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM 

available at the address cited below for 

each community. The BFEs and 

modified BFEs are made final in the 

communities listed below. Elevations at 

selected locations in each community 

are shown. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This final rule is categorically excluded 

from the requirements of 44 CFR part 

10, Environmental Consideration. An 

environmental impact assessment has 

not been prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood 

elevation determinations are not within 

the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

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 final rule involves no policies that 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This final rule meets the 

applicable standards of Executive Order 

12988. 

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

■ Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 67—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 67 

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. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES