59086 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 November 26, 

2010. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

This action pertaining to Maryland’s 

adoption of the CTG standards for 

paper, film, and foil coatings 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, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 7, 2010. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart V—Maryland 

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry for 

COMAR 26.11.19.07 to read as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP 

Code of Maryland 

Administrative 

Regulations 

(COMAR) citation 

Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Additional explanation/citation at 

40 CFR 52.1100 

*******

26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds From Specific Processes 

*******

26.11.19.07 ............. Paper, fabric, vinyl and other 

plastic parts coating.

4/19/10 9/27/10 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

Revisions to Section .07A, .07B 

and the addition of new Section 

.07D. 

*******

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–23980 Filed 9–24–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0484; FRL–9205–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Adoption of Control 

Techniques Guidelines for Flexible 

Packaging Printing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Maryland Department 

of the Environment (MDE). This SIP 

revision includes amendments to 

Maryland’s regulation for Volatile 

Organic Compounds from Specific 

Processes, and meets the requirement to 

adopt Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) for sources covered 

by EPA’s Control Techniques 

Guidelines (CTG) standards for flexible 

packaging printing. These amendments 

will reduce emissions of volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from 

flexible packaging printing. Therefore, 

this revision will help Maryland attain 

and maintain the national ambient air 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 59087 

quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. 

This action is being taken under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 26, 2010 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

written comment by October 27, 2010. 

If EPA receives such comments, it will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

and inform the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0484, by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: pino.maria@epa.gov 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0484, 

Maria A. Pino, Acting Associate 

Director, Office of Air Program 

Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2010– 

0484. 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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the Air 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Maryland Department of 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Irene Shandruk, (215) 814–2166, or by 

e-mail at shandruk.irene@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 

23, 2010, MDE submitted to EPA a SIP 

revision concerning the adoption of the 

EPA CTG for flexible packaging 

printing. 

I. Background 

Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides 

that SIPs for nonattainment areas must 

include reasonably available control 

measures (RACM), including RACT for 

sources of emissions. Section 

182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain 

nonattainment areas, States must revise 

their SIPs to include RACT for sources 

of VOC emissions covered by a CTG 

document issued after November 15, 

1990 and prior to the area’s date of 

attainment. 

The CTG for flexible package printing 

is intended to provide state and local air 

pollution control authorities 

information that should assist them in 

determining RACT for VOC from 

flexible package printing facilities. In 

developing this CTG, EPA, among other 

things, evaluated the sources of VOC 

emissions from this industry and the 

available control approaches for 

addressing these emissions, including 

the costs of such approaches. Based on 

available information and data, EPA 

provides recommendations for RACT for 

VOC from flexible package printing 

facilities. 

In December 1978, EPA published a 

CTG for graphic arts (rotogravure 

printing and flexographic printing) that 

included flexible package printing. The 

1978 CTG discusses the flexible package 

printing industry, the nature of VOC 

emissions from that industry, available 

control technologies for addressing such 

emissions, the costs of available control 

options, and other items. EPA also 

published a national emission standard 

for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) 

for the printing and publishing industry 

(40 CFR Part 60, Subpart KK) in May 

1996, which is applicable to flexible 

package printing. 

Under section 183(e) of the CAA, EPA 

conducted a study of VOC emissions 

from the use of consumer and 

commercial products to assess their 

potential to contribute to levels of ozone 

that violate the NAAQS for ozone, and 

to establish criteria for regulating VOC 

emissions from these products. Section 

183(e) of the CAA directs EPA to list for 

regulation those categories of products 

that account for at least 80 percent of 

the VOC emissions, on a reactivityadjusted basis, from consumer and 

commercial products in areas that 

violate the NAAQS for ozone (i.e., ozone 

nonattainment areas), and to divide the 

list of categories to be regulated into 

four groups. 

EPA published the original list of 

product categories and the original 

schedule that established the four 

groups of categories in the Federal 

Register on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 

15264). Flexible package printing 

materials was included in that list. EPA 

noted in that notice that EPA may 

amend the list of products for 

regulation, and the groups of products 

for regulation, and the groups of product 

categories, in order to achieve an 

effective regulatory program in 

accordance with the Agency’s discretion 

under CAA section 183(e). EPA 

published a revised schedule and 

grouping on March 18, 1999 (64 FR 

13422). EPA again revised the list to 

regroup the product categories on 

November 17, 2005 (70 FR 69759). On 

May 16, 2006 (71 FR 28320), EPA 

modified the section 183(e) list and 

schedule for regulation by adding one 

category and removing one category of 

consumer and commercial products. 

Flexible package printing materials 

remained on the list and are still 

included on the current section 183(e) 

list under Group II. 

In September 2006, after conducting a 

review of currently existing state and 

local VOC emission reduction 

approaches for flexible package 

printing, reviewing the 1978 CTG and 

the 1996 NESHAP for the printing and 

publishing industry (40 CFR part 60, 

subpart KK), which is applicable to 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

59088 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

flexible package printing, and taking 

into account the information that has 

become available since then, EPA 

developed a new CTG for flexible 

package printing entitled ‘‘Control 

Techniques Guidelines for Flexible 

Package Printing’’ (Publication No. EPA 

453/R–06–003). 

Flexible packaging refers to any 

package or part of a package the shape 

of which can be readily changed. There 

are two types of printing processes used 

by flexible package printing facilities: 

(1) Rotogravure printing; and (2) 

flexographic printing. There are two 

main sources of VOC emissions from 

flexible package printing for both 

rotogravure and flexographic: (1) 

Evaporation of VOC from inks, coatings, 

and adhesives, and (2) evaporation of 

VOC from cleaning materials. There are 

two approaches to reducing VOC 

emissions from inks, coatings, and 

adhesives used in the flexible package 

printing industry: (1) Adding/improving 

add-on controls, and (2) material 

reformulation or substitution. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On April 23, 2010, MDE submitted to 

EPA a SIP revision (#10–04) concerning 

the adoption of the EPA CTG for flexible 

packaging printing. EPA develops CTGs 

as guidance on control requirements for 

source categories. States can follow the 

CTGs or adopt more restrictive 

standards. MDE has adopted EPA’s CTG 

standards for flexible packaging printing 

and work practices (see EPA 453/R–06– 

003, September 2006). This SIP revision 

includes amendments to COMAR 

26.11.19.10 and a new regulation .10–1 

under COMAR 26.11.19, Volatile 

Organic Compounds from Specific 

Processes. This action affects sources 

that use flexographic and rotogravure 

presses to print flexible packaging 

materials. 

New regulation COMAR 26.11.19.10– 

1 contains the following requirements 

and standards for flexible packaging 

printing lines: Emissions are either 

reduced by using water-based inks that 

contain less than 25 percent VOC by 

volume of the volatile portion of the ink, 

or high solids inks that contain not less 

than 60 percent nonvolatiles. If 

compliance cannot be achieved through 

use of the water-based inks or high 

solids inks described above, the source 

shall reduce the VOC content of each 

ink, or reduce the average VOC content 

of inks used at each press as follows: 

(a) 60 percent reduction for 

flexographic presses; 

(b) 65 percent reduction for packaging 

rotogravure presses; and 

(c) 75 percent reduction for 

publication rotogravure presses. 

Additional emission standards and 

requirements for a flexible packaging 

printing line with potential to emit 

VOCs of 25 tons or more per year are 

limiting the VOC content of each 

flexible packaging coating or limiting 

the average VOC content of flexible 

packaging coatings of the line to not 

more than: 

(a) 0.8 lb VOC/lb or kg VOC/kg solids 

applied; or 

(b) 0.16 lb VOC/lb or kg VOC/kg 

materials applied; or 

(c) Venting the dryer exhaust of the 

line through a control device that is 

constructed, operated, and maintained 

to achieve an overall control efficiency 

of: 

• 65 percent overall control for a 

press that was first installed prior to 

March 14, 1995 and that is controlled by 

an add-on air pollution control device 

(APCD) whose first installation date was 

prior to the effective date. 

• 70 percent overall control for a 

press that was first installed prior to 

March 14, 1995 and that is controlled by 

an add-on APCD whose first installation 

date was on or after the effective date of 

the rule. 

• 75 percent overall control for a 

press that was first installed on or after 

March 14, 1995 and that is controlled by 

an add-on APCD whose first installation 

date was prior to the effective date of 

the rule. 

• 80 percent overall control for a 

press that was first installed on or after 

March 14, 1995 and that is controlled by 

an add-on APCD whose first installation 

date was on or after the effective date of 

the rule. 

III. Final Action 

Maryland’s April 23, 2010 SIP 

revision meets the CAA requirement to 

include RACT for sources covered by 

the EPA CTG for flexible package 

printing. Therefore, EPA is approving 

the Maryland SIP revision for adoption 

of the CTG standards for flexible 

packaging printing. EPA is publishing 

this rule without prior proposal because 

the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipates no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of today’s Federal Register, EPA 

is publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if adverse comments are 

filed. This rule will be effective on 

November 26, 2010 without further 

notice unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by October 27, 2010. If EPA 

receives adverse comment, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. EPA 

will address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so at this time. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

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

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

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 59089 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 November 26, 

2010. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

This action pertaining to Maryland’s 

adoption of the CTG standards for 

flexible packaging printing 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, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 7, 2010. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart V—Maryland 

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry for 

COMAR 26.11.19.10 and adding an 

entry for COMAR 26.11.19.10–1 to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c)* * * 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP 

Code of Maryland 

Administrative 

Regulations 

(COMAR) 

citation 

Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date 

Additional explanation/ 

citation at 40 CFR 

52.1100 

*******

26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes 

*******

26.11.19.10 ............... Flexographic and rotogravure printing .................. 4/19/10 September 27, 2010 .....

[Insert page number 

where the document 

begins].

Revision to section 

.10(B)(2). 

26.11.19.10–1 ........... Flexible packaging printing ................................... 4/19/10 September 27, 2010 .....

[Insert page number 

where the document 

begins].

New Regulation. 

* * * * * * * 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

59090 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 186 / Monday, September 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1Specifically, the Las Vegas Valley CO 

nonattainment area is defined by reference to State 

hydrographic area #212. See 40 CFR 81.329. The 

Las Vegas Valley encompasses roughly 1,500 square 

miles within Clark County and includes the cities 

of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and Henderson. 

Roughly two million people reside in Clark County, 

mostly within Las Vegas Valley. NDEP is the state 

agency under state law that is responsible for SIP 

matters for the State of Nevada. Within Clark 

County, the Clark County Board of Commissioners, 

acting through the Department of Air Quality and 

Environmental Management (DAQEM), is 

empowered under state law to develop air quality 

plans and to regulate stationary sources within the 

county with the exception of certain types of power 

plants, which lie exclusively within the jurisdiction 

of NDEP. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–24000 Filed 9–24–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0585; FRL–9204–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; State of Nevada; 

Redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to 

Attainment for the Carbon Monoxide 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve the State of Nevada’s request to 

redesignate to attainment the Las Vegas 

Valley nonattainment area for the 

carbon monoxide national ambient air 

quality standard. EPA is also taking 

final action to approve the carbon 

monoxide maintenance plan and motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for the area, 

as well as certain additional revisions to 

the Nevada state implementation plan 

that relate to Las Vegas Valley. These 

revisions include the suspension of a 

local wintertime cleaner burning 

gasoline rule, and the relaxation of a 

State rule governing wintertime gasoline 

in Clark County. EPA’s proposed 

approval of the redesignation request 

and maintenance plan had been made 

contingent upon receipt of a 

supplemental submittal from the State 

of Nevada containing a commitment to 

seek reinstatement of the existing vapor 

pressure limit in the State wintertime 

gasoline rule, if necessary, to implement 

the related contingency measure in the 

maintenance plan. Nevada has now 

submitted, and EPA is today approving, 

the necessary commitment as a revision 

to the Nevada state implementation 

plan. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on September 27, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0585 for 

this action. The index to the docket is 

available electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karina O’Connor, EPA Region IX, (775) 

833–1276, oconnor.karina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, the terms 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This 

supplementary information is organized 

as follows: 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments 

III. EPA Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Proposed Action 

On July 29, 2010 (75 FR 44734), we 

proposed to approve the Nevada 

Division of Environmental Protection’s 

(NDEP’s) request to redesignate to 

attainment the Las Vegas Valley 1 carbon 

monoxide (CO) nonattainment area 

located within Clark County, Nevada, 

and related revisions to the Nevada state 

implementation plan (SIP). The specific 

SIP revision submittals that we 

proposed to approve are listed in the 

following table: 

Plan or rule Adoption date(s) State of Nevada submittal date(s) 

Carbon Monoxide Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan, Las 

Vegas Valley Nonattainment Area, Clark County, Nevada (September 2008).

Adopted by the Clark County 

Board of Commissioners on 

September 2, 2008.

Submitted by NDEP by letter 

dated September 18, 2008. 

Clark County Air Quality Regulations, Section 54 (‘‘Cleaner Burning 

Gasoline (CBG): Wintertime Program’’) (Suspended).

Adopted by the Clark County 

Board of Commissioners on 

September 15, 2009, effective 

September 29, 2009.

Submitted by NDEP by letter 

dated March 26, 2010. 

Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) section 590.065 (amended) .......... Adopted by the Nevada Board of 

Agriculture on December 9, 

2009, effective January 28, 

2010.

Submitted by NDEP by letter 

dated March 26, 2010. 

We proposed to approve NDEP’s 

redesignation request because we found 

that the area meets all of the criteria for 

redesignation under section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i) through (v) of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’), as discussed in 

the following paragraphs. 

• Based on our review of the 

monitoring network and complete, 

quality-assured data for 2008–2009 up 

to the present time, we proposed to find 

that Las Vegas Valley has attained, and 

continues to attain, the CO standard and 

thus meets the criterion for 

redesignation set forth in section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i). See the July 29, 2010 

proposed rule at pages 44738–44739. 

• Based on our review of previous 

rulemakings approving various rules 

and plans affecting the Las Vegas Valley 

CO nonattainment area, we proposed to 

find that, with the sole exception of the 

CO milestone requirement, the area has 

a fully approved SIP under CAA section 

110(k) that meets all of the applicable 

requirements under CAA section 110 

and part D for the purposes of 

redesignation and thereby meets the 

criteria for redesignation under CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v). See the 

July 29, 2010 proposed rule at pages 

44739–44743. With respect to the CO 

milestone requirement under CAA 

section 187(d), we proposed to adapt to 

CO nonattainment areas the provisions 

of our Clean Data Policy, which was 

initially established for ozone (see 

discussion at 75 FR 44742). Under the 

Clean Data Policy, certain CAA Part D 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES