Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 146/Tuesday, July 31, 2007/Rules and Regulations

State regulation State effective date EPA approved date Comments

Subchapter 19, "Control and Prohibition of Air October 17, 2005 ...... July 31, 2007 [Insert Subchapter 19 is approved into the SIP exPollution from Oxides of Nitrogen." FR page citation]. cept for the following provisions: (1) Open

Market Emissions Trading- (OMET) provisions at 19.3(g), 19.3(h), 19.27 and 19.27

Appendix; and (2) New amendments to

phased compliance plan through

repowering in § 19.21 that allow for imple- mentation beyond May 1, 1999; and (3)

New amendments to phased compliance

plan through the use of innovative control

technology in § 19.23 that allow for implementation beyond May 1, 1999.

[FR Doc. E7-14480 Filed 7-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-0295, FRL-8443-5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; States of

Arizona and Nevada; InterstateTransport of Pollution

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action to approve state implementation

plans submitted by the States of Arizona

and Nevada that address interstate

transport with respect to the 8-hour

ozone and fine particulate matter

national ambient air quality standards.

In so doing, EPA has determined that

the plans submitted by Arizona and

Nevada and approved herein satisfy

requirements under Clean Air Act.

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for each State to

submit a plan containing adequate

provisions to prohibit interstate

transport with respect to the standards

for 8-hour ozone and fine particulate

matter. EPA is taking this action

pursuant to those provisions of the

Clean Air Act that obligate the Agency

to take action on submittals of state

implementation plans. The effect of this

action is to approve the Arizona and

Nevada state implementation plans

addressing interstate transport with

respect to the 8-hour ozone and fine

particulate standards and to eliminate

obligations on the Agency to promulgate

Federal implementation plans for these

States addressing this same

requirement. -

DATES: This rule is effective on October

1, 2007, without further notice, unless

EPA receives adverse comments-by

August 30, 2007. If adverse comment is

received, EPA will publish a timely

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the

Federal Register informing the public

that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,

identified by Docket ID No. EPA-RO9-

OAR-2007-0295 by one of the following

methods:

* Federal eRulemaking portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.

E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov.

" Fax: (415) 947-3579 (please alert

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing

comments). e Mail: Wienke Tax, Office of Air

Planning, Environmental Prote6tion

-Agency (EPA), Region IX, Mailcode

AIR-2, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, California 94105-3901.

* Hand Delivery: Wienke Tax, Office

of Air Planning, Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), Region IX,

Mailcode AIR-2, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, Califoriia 94105-3901.

Such deliveries are only accepted

Monday through Friday,_8 a.m. to 4:55

p.m., excluding federal holidays.

Special arrangements should be made

for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to

Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2007-

0295. 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 http://

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 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 informatioji

about EPA's public docket visit the EPA

Docket Center homepage at http:// .

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

Docket: All documents. in the docket

are listed in the http://

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 form. Publicly available docket

materials are available either

electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at

the Office of Air Planning,

Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA), Region IX, Mailcode AIR-2, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,

California 94105-3901. EPA requests

that if at all possible, you contact the

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to view

the hard copy of the docket. You may

view the hard copy of the docket

41629

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 41629 2007
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 146/Tuesday, July 31, 2007/Rules and Regulations

Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4

p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

Arizona issues, contact Wienke Tax,

EPA Region IX, (520) 622-1622,

tax. wienke@epa.gov; for Nevada issues,

contact Karina O'Connor, EPA Region

IX, (775) 833-1276,

oconnor.karina@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, wherever

"we," "us," or "our" is used, we mean

the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background

II. Applicable Clean Air Act Requirements A. CAA Procedural Provisions

B. "Significant Contribution" and

"Interference With Maintenance"

Requirements

C. Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD)

D. Visibility

-III. Arizona's Interstate Transport SIP

A. CAA Procedural Provisions

B. "Significant Contribution" and

"Interference With Maintenance"

Requirements

C. Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD) and Visibility

D. Evaluation and Conclusion

IV. Nevada's Interstate Transport SIP

A. CAA Procedural Provisions

B. "Significant Contribution" and

"Interference With Maintenance"

Requirements

C. Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD) and Visibility

D. Evaluation and Conclusion

V. EPA's Final Action

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

On July 18, 1997, EPA issued new

standards for the 8-hour ozone and

particulate matter (PM) national

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).

For ozone, EPA revised the NAAQS by

adding an 8-hour averaging period

(versus 1 hour for the previoug

NAAQS), and the level of the standard

was changed from 0.12 ppm to 0.08

ppm (62 FR 38856). For the PM

NAAQS, EPA added a new 24-hour

standard and a new annual standard for

fine particles (generally referring to

particles less than or equal to 2.5

micrometers (gm) in diameter, PM2.

5).

Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act

(CAA or "Act") requires States to

submit new state implementation plans

(SIPs) that provide for the

implementation, maintenance, and

enforcement of a new or revised

standard within three years after

promulgation of such standard, or within such shorter period as EPA may

prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) lists the

elements that such new SIPs must

address, including sectidn

110(a)(2)(D)(i), which applies to

interstate transport of certain emissions.

Section 110(a)(1) imposes the obligation

upon States to make a SIP submission

for a new or revised NAAQS, but the

contents of that submission may vary

depending upon the facts and

circumstances of each State.

On April 25, 2005, EPA made a

finding that States had failed to submit

SIPs to satisfy the requirements of

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Act for the

8-hour.ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70

FR 21147. This finding started a 2-yedr

clock for promulgation by EPA of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), in

accordance with section 110(c)(1), for

any State that did not submit a SIP

meeting the requirements of section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-hour ,ozone and

PM 2.

5 NAAQS, unless prior to that time,

each State makes a submission to meet

the requirements of section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) and EPA approves such

submission. On August 15, 2006, EPA

issued a guidance memorandum

("Interstate Transport Guidance")

concerning the SIP submissions under

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i).'

On February 7, 2007, the Nevada

Division of Environmental Protection

(NDEP) submitted a SIP entitled Nevada

State Implementation Plan for Interstate

Traiisport to Satisfy the Requirements of

Clean Air Act 110(a)(2)(D)(i),for the 8-

Hour Ozone and PM 2.

5 NAAQS

Promulgated in July 1997 (January 31;

2007) ("Nevada Interstate Transport

SIP"). On May 24, 2007, the Arizona

Department of Environmental Quality

(ADEQ) submitted a SIP entitled

Revision to the Arizona State

Implementation Plan Under Clean Air

Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)-Regional

Transport (May 2007) ("Arizona

Interstate Transport SIP"). For the

reasons provided in sections III and IV

of this rule, we are approving Arizona's

and Nevada's interstate transport SIPs in

this action thereby eliminating the

requirement under CAA Section

110(c)(1) for EPA to promulgate

interstate transport FIPs for these States.

II. Applicable Clean Air Act

Requirements

As noted above, EPA promulgated new NAAQS for 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5'

in 1997, and under section 110(a)(1),

within three years thereafter, States

were to submit SIPs to address the

See memorandum from William T. Harnett,

Director, Air Quality Policy Division, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, entitled

"Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding

Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-

Hour Ozone and PM 2.

5 National Ambient Air

Quality Standards," dated Augdst 15, 2006.

various SIP elements listed under

section 110(a)(2) for the new NAAQS,

including the "good neighbor's

provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of

the Act. Under the "good neighbor"

provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i),

.each State must submit a SIP that

contains adequate provisions:

(i) Prohibiting, consistent with the

provisions of this subchapter, any source or other type of emissions activitywithin the

state from emitting any air pollutant in

amounts which will-

(I) Contribute significantly to

nonattainment in, or interfere with

maintenance by, any other state with respect

to any such national primary or secondary

ambient air quality standard, or (II) Interfere with measures required to be

included in the applicable implementation

plan for any other State under part C of this

subchapter to prevent significant

deterioration of air quality or to protect

visibility.

Under section 110 of the Act and EPA

regulations (at 40 CFR part 51, subpart

F), each State must provide reasonable

notice and public hearing prior to

adoption of SIPs and SIP revisions for

gubsequent submittal to EPA.

III. Arizona's Interstate Transport SIP

A. CAA Procedural Provisions

On March 29 and 30, 2007, ADEQ

published a notice in the Arizona

Republic, a newspaper of general

circulation in the Phoenix area, of a

public hearing on proposed revisions to

the Arizona SIP to address the

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i).

A public hearing was held on April 30,

2007 in Phoenix. On May 24, 2007, in

accordance with Arizona law, the

Director of ADEQ adopted the Arizona

Interstate Transport SIP and submitted

the SIP to EPA for approval. ADEQ's

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP submittal

package includes'evidence of public'

notice, public hearing, and ADEQ

adoption as described above. No public

comments were received on the draft

SIP. Based on review of these materials,

we find that ADEQ has met the

procedural requirements of CAA section

110 and 40 CFR part 51, subpart F.

B. "Significant Contribution" and

"Interference With Maintenance"

Requirements

As noted above, CAA section

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires States to

prohibit emissions that contribute

significantly to nonattainment in, or

interfere with maintenance by, any

other state with respect to the NAAQS.

ADEQ's Arizona Interstate Transport

SIP concludes that emissions from air

pollution sources in Arizona do not

significantly contribute to

nonattainment of the 8-hour ozone or

41630

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 41630 2007
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 31, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

PM2.5 NAAQS or interfere with

maintenance of those standards in

another state. In support of this negative

declaration, the Arizona Interstate

Transport SIP identifies the following

factors and provides the following

analysis:

* Boundary designations and

locations. Nonattainment boundaries are

intended to include areas where

NAAQS violations are occurring as well

as areas that contribute to those

violations and in the case of Arizona

and the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the only

8-hour ozone nonattainment area (the

Phoenix-Mesa Nonattainment Area) is

located within the central portion .of the

State. The Phoenix-Mesa Nonattainment

Area includes much of eastern Maricopa

County as well as Apache Junction in

Pinal County. There are no

nonattainment areas in Arizona for the

PM 2.

5 NAAQS. The Maricopa

Association of Governments (MAG) is

currently developing a SIP revision for

the area which will demonstrate

attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard

by its statutory attainment date of 2009.

e Spatial distribution of emissions.

Emissions of pollutants contribiuting to

8-hour ozone and PM2.

5 formation are

highest in the Phoenix metropolitan

area, which as noted above, is locAted in

the central portion of the State. The

most recently available emissions

inventories from EPA's AirData for

Arizona counties show that Maricopa

County sources emit approximately 50

percent of the state's volatile organic

compounds (VOC) and 36 percent of the

nitrogen oxides (NOx), known

precursors to ozone, and approximately

30 percent of the state's total PM2.5

emissions. No other county emits the

level of emissions generated by

Maricopa County.

* Monitoring data. An examination of

historic monitored ambient air quality

data demonstrates that Maricopa County

is the only county in the state where

monitors have recorded violations of the

8-hour ozone standard. Data collected

from 2004-2006 show that all

monitored areas are currently meeting

the 8-hour ozone and PM 2.

5 standards.

The highest recorded ambient

concentrations from this period are from

Maricopa County monitoring sites or

from those of nearby sites in Gila and

Pinal Counties.

* Topography. The Phoenix-Mesa 8-

hour Ozone Nonattainment Area is

located primarily in the broad and

mostly flat Salt River Valley and is

separated from other areas of the State

by mountainous, complex terrain on the

north, northeast, east, and southwest.

* Meteorology/Climatology. Wind

patterns in the Phoenix-Mesa

Nonattainment Area are greatly

influenced by local topography. Because

of its valley location, backed by high

terrain to the north and east, the

Phoenix-Mesa Nonattainment Area is

subject to distinct up-valley/downvalley wind patterns. The prevailing

winds and high elevation blocking

terrain to the east of the area were two

of the factors that helped determine the

impacts of transported emissions and

the eastern extent of the Phoenix-Mesa

Nonattainment Area. Similar patterns

are repeated across Arizona's many

airsheds and areas of complex terrain.

* Location of Nonattainment Areas in

Neighboring States. Nonattainment

areas for 8-hour ozone in states

neighboring Arizona are located in

southern Nevada (40 CFR 81.329),

southern California (40 CFR 81.305),

and north-central Cdlorado (40 CFR

81.306). First, in designating the 8-hour

ozone nonattainment area in southern

Nevada (i.e., a portion of Clark County),

EPA concurred in Arizona's conclusion

that sources in neighboring Mojave

County did not contribute to

nonattainment in the Las Vegas area.

Second, the closest 8-hour ozone

nonattainment area in California is

located in Imperial County, more than

80 miles west of the Phoenix-Mesa

Nonattainment Area and more than 200

miles from large point sources in

Apache, Coconino, and Navajo

Counties. Based on regional and local

airflow patterns, California

nonattainment areas are upwind of

Arizona emissions sources. Third, the 8-

hour ozone nonattainrment area in

Colorado is separated from Arizona by

the Rocky Mountains, with elevations

greater than 14,000 feet and are more

than 200 miles from the ArizonaColorado border and more than 400

miles from the Phoenix-Mesa

Nonattainment Area. With respect to

PM2.

5, as noted, California

nonattainment areas are upwind of

Arizona emissions sources. All other

states that border Arizona are

designated unclassifiable/attainment for

PM2.

5.

., Modeling. With respect to the PM2 5

NAAQS, ADEQ also points to modeling

that EPA conducted in connection with

EPA's promulgation of the Clean Air

Interstate Rule (CAIR), which

purportedly shows Arizona's

contribution to nonattainment in

downwind states to be minimal. The

information that EPA provided ADEQ

concerning EPA's modeling for the

CAIR rule, however, was in error. The

State of Arizona was not included in the

modeling. We believe that ADEQ has'

presented sufficient support for the

negative declaration in its discussion of

the other factors and need not rely on

CAIR modeling results.

C. Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD) and Visibility

As noted above, CAA section

110(a)(25(D)(i)(II) requires States t6

prohibit emissions that interfere with

measures required to be included in the

SIP for any other State to prevent

significant deterioration of air quality or

to protect visibility.

The Arizona Interstate Transport SIP

explains that non-interference with

CAA PSD measures in other states is

achieved through preconstruction

review and permitting procedures for

stationary sources. Specifically, all new

sources and modifications to existing

sources in Arizona are subject to state

requirements for preconstruction review

and permitting pursuant to Arizona

Administrative Code (AAC), Title 18,

Chapter 2, Articles 2 and 4 or relevant

county rules. All new major sources and

major modifications to existing major

sources in Arizona are subject to the

nonattainment New Source Review

(NNSR) provisions of these rules

(including 8-hour ozone nonattainment

areas) or Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD) for attainment areas.

ADEQ indicates that Arizona will

update the NSR rules when EPA's PM2.

5

implementation guidance is finalized

and that Arizona will implement the

current rules in accordance with EPA's

interim guidance using PM10 as a

surrogate for PM 2.5 in the PSD and

NNSR programs.

The Arizona Interstate Transport SIP

explains that non-interference with

CAA visibility measures in other states

is achieved with respect to 8-hour ozone

and PM2.

5 through implementation and

enforcement of the State's reasonably

attributable visibility impairment

(RAVI) rule (codified at Arizona

Administrative Code Sections R18-2-

1601 through R18-2-1606), which

requires Arizona to analyze and

implement control strategies where

applicable should a source be certified

and found attributable for causingor

contributing to visibility impairment.

The Arizona Interstate Transport SIP

notes that Arizona Administrative Code

Section R18-2-410 provides additional

protection of visibility by requiring new

major sources or major modifications to

complete an analysis of the anticipated

impacts on visibility to any Class I area

that may be affected by the emissions

from the source. Federal Land Managers

-(FLMs) may also submit a visibility

impact analysis for additional

consideration during the permitting

process.

41631 o

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 41631 2007
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 146/Tuesday, July 31, 2007 / Rules and. Regulationg

Regarding visibility impairment

caused by regional haze, the Arizona

Interstate Transport SIP concurs with

EPA in concluding that it is currently

premature to determine whether or not

SIPs for 8-hour ozone or PM2.5 contain

adequate provisions to prohibit

emissions that interfere with measures

in other States' SIPs designed to address

regional haze.2 Under EPA's regional

haze regulations, regional haze SIPs are

not due until December 17, 2007, and

until these SIPs are submitted, accurate

assessments regarding the impact of

emissions and control measures on

other States' SIPs cannot be made.

D. Evaluation and Conclusion

We find that ADEQ's selection of

factors and accompanying analysis (see

section III.B., above) provide a

reasonable basis with which to evaluate

the impacts of emissions from within

Arizona on other states. We also find

that ADEQ's conclusion that emissions

from Arizona do not significantly

contribute to nonattainment or interfere

with maintenance of the 8-hour ozone

or PM2.5 standard in any other state is

adequately supported by the

information in the Arizona Interstate

Transport SIP.

We also find that the Arizona

Interstate Transport SIP adequately

provides for non-interference with CAA

PSD and visibility (not including

regional haze) measures in other states

with respect to 8-hour ozone and PM2.

5

and reasonably concludes that a

determination of whether or not the

Arizona SIP for 8-hour ozone or PM2.

5

contains adequate provisions to prohibit

emissions that interfere with measures

in other States'SIPs designed to address

regional visibility impairment caused by

regional haze must wait for the

submittal of regional haze SIPs.

Based on these findings, we are

approving the Arizona Interstate

Transport SIP as meeting the

requirements of CAA section

110(a)(2)(D)(i), and as a result of our

approval of this SIP, we are no longer

obligated to promulgate a FIP for

Arizona addressing the CAA section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirement.

IV. Nevada's Interstate Transport SIP

A. CAA Procedural Provisions

On December 18, 2007, NDEP's

Bureau of Air Quality Planning (BAQP)

published a notice on their Web site of

a comment period on a proposed SIP to

address the requirements of section

110(a)(2)(D)(i). Notice of the comment

period was also sent via the State

See pages 9 -and 10 in EPA's Interstate Transport

Guidance, referenced in Footnote 1.

Environmental Commission's (SEC's)

electronic mailing list as well as the

BAQP's lists of interested persons. The

comment period was open until January

19, 2007. No public comments were

received on the proposed SIP. The

notice provided the opportunity for

members of the public to request a

public hearing, but no such request was

made. On February 5, 2007, in'

accordance with Nevada law, the

Administrator of NDEP adopted the

Nevada Interstate Transport SIP and

submitted the SIP to EPA for approval.

NDEP's section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP

submittal package includes evidence of

public notice and opportunity for public

hearing, and NDEP adoption, and, based

on review of these materials, we find

that NDEP has met the procedural

requirements of CAA section 110 and 40

CFR part 51, subpart F.

B. "Significant Contribution" and

"Interference With Maintenance"

Requirements

As noted above, CAA section

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires States to

prohibit emissions that contribute

significantly to nonattainment in, or

interfer with maintenance by, any

other state with respect to the NAAQS.

NDEP's Nevada Interstate Transport SIP

concludes that emissions from air

pollution sources in Nevada do not

significantly contribute to

nonattainment of the 8-hour ozone or

PM2.

5 NAAQS or interfere with

maintenance of those standards in

another state. In support of this negative

declaration, the Nevada Interstate

Transport SIP identifies the following

factors and provides the following

analysis:

-0 Prevailing Winds and Location of

PM2.s Nonattainment Areas in

Neighboring States. There are no PM2.5

no nattainment areas in Nevada.

Moreover, prevailing winds are from the

south to west, and PM2.

5 nonattainment

areas in neighboring states are located to

the east, i.e., upwind, in California.

* Prevailing Winds and Location of 8-

Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas in

Neighboring States. There is one

nonattainment area in Nevada, the Las

Vegas area. Data from McCarran

International Airport in Las Vegas

indicate that prevailing winds are from

the southwest. Thus, 8-hour ozone

nonattainment areas in southern

California lie upwind of the Las Vegas

area. The Phoenix metropolitan area, the

only 8-hour ozone nonattainment area

in Arizona, lies 300 miles south of Las

Vegas and is characterized byeast-west

winds and thus is not downwind of Las

-Vegas.

* Nonattainment Plans. Clark County

Department of Air Quality and

Environmental Management (Clark

County) is currently required to develop

a SIP revision for the Las Vegas area

which will demonstrate attainment of

the 8-hour ozone standard by 2009.

In the Nevada Interstate Transport

SIP, NDEP commits to continue toreview new air quality information as it

becomes available to ensure that the

negative declaration based on the above

factors and analysis is still supported by

such information.

C. Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD) and Visibility

As noted above, CAA section

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(ll) requires States to

prohibit emissions that interfere with

measures required to be included in the

SIP for any other State to prevent

significant deterioration of air quality or,

to protect visibility.

The Nevada Interstate Transport SIP

explains that non-interference with

CAA PSD measures in other states is

achieved through preconstruction

review and permitting procedures for

major new sources and major

modifications under the State's PSD

progran (delegated from EPA) and

under the State's regulations for

nonattainment New Source Review"

(NNSR). NDEP notes that EPA has

established or will establish schedules

for SIP. submissions that incorporate

revisions to EPA's preconstruction

permitting regulations that are specific

to the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS

and that Nevada intends to revise the

Nevada SIP consistent with such

schedules. In the meantime, NDEP will

implement thecurrent rules and PSD

delegation in accordance with EPA's

interim guidance using PM1o as a

surrogate for PM2.

5 in the PSD and

NNSR programs.

For showing non-interference with

CAA visibility measures in other states,

the Nevada Interstate. Transport SIP

notes that EPA has made no

determination that the emissions from

any State interfere with measures

required to be included in a plan to

address reasonably attributable visibility

impairment. With respect to regional

haze, NDEP notes in the Nevada

Interstate Transport-SIP that Nevada is

working on a SIP to address visibility

impairment due to regional haze and is

required to submit a regional haze SIP

by December 17, 2007.

D. Evaluation and Conclusion

We find that NDEP's selection of

factors and accompanying analysis (see

section IV.B., above) provide a

reasonable basis with which to evaluate

41632

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 41632 2007
Federal Register/VoL, 7-2, No.. 146/Tueqday, July 31, 2007./Rules andRegllations

the impacts of emissions from within

Nevada on other states. We also find

that NDEP's conclusion that emissions

from Nevada do not significantly

contribute to nonattainment'or interfere

with maintenance of the 8-hour ozone

or PM2 .

5 standard in any other state is

adequately supported by the

information in the Nevada Interstate

'Transport SIP.

We also find that the Nevada

Interstate Transport SIP adequately

provides for non-interference with CAA

PSD and visibility (not including

regional haze) measures in other states

with respect to 8-hour ozone and PM 2.

5.

A determination of whether or not the

Nevada SIP for 8-hour ozone or PM2.

5

contains adequate provisions to prohibit

emissions that interfere with measures

in other States' SIPs designed to address

regional visibility impairment caused by

regional haze must wait for the

submittal of regional haze SIPs.

Based on these findings, we are

approving the Nevada Interstate

Transport SIP as meeting the

requirements of CAA section

110(a)(2)(D)(i), and as a result of our

approval of this SIP, we are no longer

obligated to promulgate a FIP for

Nevada addressing the CAA section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirement.

V. EPA's Final Action

In today's action, EPA is approving

the SIPs submitted by the States of

Arizona and Nevada to satisfy the

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of

the CAA for the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5

NAAQS. These approvals eliminate the

obligation on EPA to promulgate section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) FIPs for these States.

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 October 1, 2007,

without further notice unless the EPA

receives relevant adverse comments by

August 30, 2007.

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

do so at this time. If no such comments

are received, the public is advised that

this rule will be effective on October 1,

2007 and no further action will be tal~en

on the proposed rule.

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 plans 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 State plans implementing'a

Federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. 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 approves State plans

implementing a Federal standard.

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 Clean Air-Act. 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. gection 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 eadh 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. section 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 October 1, 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 in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile

organic compounds.

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

41633*

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 41633 2007
Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 146/Tuesday, July 31, 2007/Rules and Regulations

Dated: June 11, 2007.

Laura Yoshii,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

m Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52-[AMENDED]

In 1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart D-Arizona

m 2. Section 52.120 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(136) to read as

follows:

§52.120 Identification of plan. * * * * *

(c) ....

(136) The following plan was

submitted on May 24, 2007 by the

Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Arizona Department of

Environmental Quality.

(1) Revision to the Arizona State

Implementation Plan Under Clean Air

Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)-Regional

Transport (May 2007), adopted by the

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality on May 24, 2007.

Subpart DD-Nevada

E 3. Section 52.1470 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(64)to read as

follows:

§52.1470 Identification of plan.

V . * * *

(c) * * *

(64) The following plan was

submitted -on February 5, 2007 by the

Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Nevada Division of Environmental

Protection.

(1) Nevada State Implementation Plan

for Interstate Transport to Satisfy the

Requirements of Clean Air Act

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-hour Ozone and

PM2.g NAAQS Promulgated in July 1997

(January 31, 2007), adopted by the

Nevada Division of Environmental

Protection on February 5, 2007.

[FR Doc. E7-14473 Filed 7-30-07; 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 communit4. The

respective addresses are listed in the

table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering

Management Section, Mitigation

Directorate, 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.

m Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is

amended as follows:

PART 67--[AMENDED]

m 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.

§ 67.11 [Amended]

Is 2. The tables published under the

authority of § 67.11 are amended as

follows:

41634

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 41634 2007