43634 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Representatives and the Comptroller 

General of the Government 

Accountability Office. The changes in 

this notice are not expected to result in 

an annual effect on the economy of 100 

million dollars or more, a major increase 

in costs or prices, or significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic and 

export markets. Therefore, this notice is 

not expected to result in a ‘‘major rule’’ 

as defined in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

K. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995: The changes proposed in this 

notice do not involve a Federal 

intergovernmental mandate that will 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or 

more in any one year, or a Federal 

private sector mandate that will result 

in the expenditure by the private sector 

of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or 

more in any one year, and will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions are 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. See 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. 

L. National Environmental Policy Act: 

This rule making will not have any 

effect on the quality of environment and 

is thus categorically excluded from 

review under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969. See 

42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 

M. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act: The requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

applicable because this rule making 

does not contain provisions which 

involve the use of technical standards. 

N. Paperwork Reduction Act: The 

changes in this rule making involve 

information collection requirements 

which are subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction 

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

collection of information involved in 

this notice has been reviewed and 

approved by OMB under OMB control 

number 0651–0031. This rule making 

proposes to harmonize the standard for 

materiality under §§ 1.56 and 1.555 with 

the standard for materiality required to 

establish inequitable conduct. This 

notice does not propose any additional 

fees or information collection 

requirements on patent applicants or 

patentees. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of law, no person is required to respond 

to nor shall a person be subject to a 

penalty for failure to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. 

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 1 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Courts, Freedom of 

Information, Inventions and patents, 

Reporting and record keeping 

requirements, Small businesses. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 37 CFR Part 1 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 1—RULES OF PRACTICE IN 

PATENT CASES 

1. The authority citation for 37 CFR 

Part 1 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2). 

2. Section 1.56 is amended by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 1.56 Duty to disclose information 

material to patentability. 

* * * * * 

(b) Information is material to 

patentability if it is material under the 

standard set forth in Therasense, Inc. v. 

Becton, Dickinson & Co., ___ F.3d ___ 

(Fed. Cir. 2011). Information is material 

to patentability under Therasense if: 

(1) The Office would not allow a 

claim if it were aware of the 

information, applying the 

preponderance of the evidence standard 

and giving the claim its broadest 

reasonable construction; or 

(2) The applicant engages in 

affirmative egregious misconduct before 

the Office as to the information. 

* * * * * 

3. Section 1.555 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 1.555 Information material to 

patentability in ex parte reexamination and 

inter partes reexamination proceedings. 

* * * * * 

(b) Information is material to 

patentability if it is material under the 

standard set forth in Therasense, Inc. v. 

Becton, Dickinson & Co., ___ F.3d ___ 

(Fed. Cir. 2011). Information is material 

to patentability under Therasense if: 

(1) The Office would not find a claim 

patentable if it were aware of the 

information, applying the 

preponderance of the evidence standard 

and giving the claim its broadest 

reasonable construction; or 

(2) The patent owner engages in 

affirmative egregious misconduct before 

the Office as to the information. 

* * * * * 

Dated: July 15, 2011. 

David J. Kappos, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18408 Filed 7–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0469; FRL–9441–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia and Ohio; Determinations of 

Attainment of the 1997 Annual Fine 

Particle Standard for the ParkersburgMarietta and Wheeling Nonattainment 

Areas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make a 

determination that the ParkersburgMarietta, West Virginia-Ohio (WV-OH) 

nonattainment area and the Wheeling, 

WV-OH fine particle (PM2.5) 

nonattainment areas (hereafter referred 

to as ‘‘Areas’’) have attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the 

applicable attainment date of April 5, 

2010. These determinations are based 

upon complete, quality-assured, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data for 

the 2007–2009 monitoring period. EPA 

is finding these Areas to be in 

attainment, in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 22, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0469 by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: 

fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0469, 

Cristina Fernandez, 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. 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 43635 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011– 

0469. 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Region 3, Irene Shandruk, Office of Air 

Program Planning (3AP30), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 3, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029, (215) 

814–2166, shandruk.irene@epa.gov. 

Region 5, Carolyn Persoon, Control 

Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 

(312) 353–8290, 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

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

EPA. 

This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What actions is EPA proposing? 

II. What is the background of these actions? 

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

quality data? 

IV. What are the effects of these actions? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What actions is EPA proposing? 

In accordance with section 179(c)(1) 

of the CAA, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Parkersburg-Marietta, 

WV-OH PM2.5 nonattainment area and 

the Wheeling, WV-OH PM2.5

nonattainment area have attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date of April 5, 

2010. The proposal is based upon 

complete, quality-assured, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data for the 

2007–2009 monitoring period and EPA’s 

determinations are in accordance with 

EPA’s PM2.5 Implementation Rule of 

April 25, 2007 (72 FR 20664). 

II. What is the background of these 

actions? 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA 

established a health-based PM2.5

NAAQS at 15.0 micrograms per cubic 

meter (μg/m3) based on a 3-year average 

of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations 

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘the annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS’’ or ‘‘the annual 

standard’’). At that time, EPA also 

established a 24-hour standard of 65 μg/ 

m3 (the ‘‘1997 24-hour standard’’). See 

40 CFR 50.7. On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 

944), EPA published its air quality 

designations and classifications for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS based upon air 

quality monitoring data from those 

monitors for calendar years 2001–2003. 

These designations became effective on 

April 5, 2005. The Parkersburg-Marietta, 

WV-OH and Wheeling, WV-OH 

nonattainment areas were designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS during this designations 

process. See 40 CFR 81.349 (West 

Virginia) and 40 CFR 81.336 (Ohio). The 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH 

nonattainment area consists of Wood 

County, WV, the Grant Tax District of 

Pleasants County, WV, and Washington 

County, OH. The Wheeling, WV-OH 

nonattainment area consists of Marshall 

County, WV, Ohio County, WV, and 

Belmont County, OH. 

On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), 

EPA retained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS at 15 μg/m3 based on a 3-year 

average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations, and promulgated a 24- 

hour standard of 35 μg/m3 based on a 

3-year average of the 98th percentile of 

24-hour concentrations (the ‘‘2006 24- 

hour standard’’). On November 13, 

2009, EPA designated the ParkersburgMarietta and Wheeling Areas as 

attainment for the 2006 24-hour 

standard (74 FR 58688). In that action, 

EPA also clarified the designations for 

the NAAQS promulgated in 1997, 

stating that the Parkersburg-Marietta 

and Wheeling Areas were designated as 

nonattainment for the annual standard, 

but attainment for the 1997 24-hour 

standard. Today’s action, however, does 

not address attainment of either the 

1997 or the 2006 24-hour standard. 

In response to legal challenges of the 

annual standard promulgated in 2006, 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit) 

remanded this standard to EPA for 

further consideration. See American 

Farm Bureau Federation and National 

Pork Producers Council, et al. v. EPA, 

559 F.3d 512 (DC Cir. 2009). However, 

given that the 1997 and 2006 annual 

standards are essentially identical, 

attainment of the 1997 annual standard 

would also indicate attainment of the 

remanded 2006 annual standard. 

EPA previously made clean data 

determinations related to the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS for each of these 

Areas pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c). 

These determinations were made on 

November 20, 2009 (74 FR 60199) and 

remain in effect. 

Under CAA section 179(c), EPA is 

required to make a determination that a 

nonattainment area has attained by its 

attainment date, and publish that 

determination in the Federal Register. 

The determination of attainment is not 

equivalent to a redesignation, and the 

state must still meet the statutory 

requirements for redesignation in order 

for the Areas to be redesignated to 

attainment. 

Complete, quality-assured, and 

certified PM2.5 air quality monitoring 

data recorded in the EPA Air Quality 

System (AQS) database for 2007 through 

2009, show that the ParkersburgMarietta, WV-OH and Wheeling, WV– 

OH nonattainment areas attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by their 

applicable attainment date. 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
43636 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

relevant air quality data? 

EPA has reviewed the ambient air 

monitoring data for PM2.5, consistent 

with the requirements contained in 40 

CFR part 50 and recorded in the data in 

the EPA AQS database for the 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH and 

Wheeling, WV-OH nonattainment areas 

for the monitoring period from 2007 

through 2009. On the basis of that 

review, EPA proposes to determine that 

the Areas attained the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 5, 2010 

attainment date. 

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 

50.7, the annual primary and secondary 

PM2.5 standards are met when the 

annual arithmetic mean concentrations, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than 

or equal to 15.0 μg/m3, at all relevant 

monitoring sites. The values calculated 

in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 

Appendix N, are referred to as design 

values, and these values are used to 

determine if an area is attaining the 

PM2.5 NAAQS. According to the PM2.5

implementation rule, the attainment 

date for these Areas is April 5, 2010 and 

the monitoring data from 2007 through 

2009 is used to determine if the Areas 

attained by April 5, 2010. 

Table 1 shows the PM2.5 design values 

for each monitor in the ParkersburgMarietta, WV-OH nonattainment area 

and the Wheeling, WV-OH 

nonattainment area, respectively, for the 

years 2007–2009. All 2007–2009 design 

values are below 15.0 μg/m3, and all 

monitors meet the data completeness 

requirements. Therefore, the 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH and 

Wheeling, WV-OH nonattainment areas 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

by their attainment date. 

TABLE 1.—ANNUAL PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES FOR PARKERSBURG-MARIETTA, WV-OH AND WHEELING, WV–OH 

NONATTAINMENT AREAS * 

State County Monitor ID 

Certified annual design 

value 2007– 

2009 

(μg/m 3) 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH 

West Virginia ........................................... Wood County ........................................... 541071002 ............................................... 13.7 

Grant Tax District of Pleasants County .. No monitor ............................................... ........................

Ohio ......................................................... Washington County ................................. No monitor ............................................... ........................

Wheeling, WV-OH 

West Virginia ........................................... Marshall County ...................................... 540511002 ............................................... 13.4 

Ohio County ............................................ 540690010 ............................................... 13.2 

Ohio ......................................................... Belmont County ....................................... No monitor ............................................... ........................

* The data presented in Table 1 are available at http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/values.html. 

IV. What are the effects of these 

actions? 

If EPA’s proposed determination that 

the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH and 

Wheeling, WV-OH nonattainment areas 

have attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard by the applicable attainment 

date (April 5, 2010) is finalized, EPA 

will have met its requirement pursuant 

to section 179(c) of the CAA to make a 

determination based on the Areas’ air 

quality data as of the attainment date 

that the Areas attained the standard by 

that date. The action described above is 

a proposed determination regarding the 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH, and 

Wheeling, WV-OH areas’ attainment of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Finalizing this proposed action would 

not constitute a redesignation of the 

Areas to attainment of the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3) of 

the CAA. Further, finalizing this 

proposed action does not involve 

approving maintenance plans for the 

Areas as required under section 175A of 

the CAA, nor would it find that the 

Areas have met all other requirements 

for redesignation. Even if EPA finalizes 

the proposed action, the designation 

status of the Parkersburg-Marietta, WVOH, and Wheeling, WV-OH areas would 

remain nonattainment for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as 

EPA determines that the Areas meet the 

CAA requirements for redesignation to 

attainment and take action to 

redesignate the Parkersburg-Marietta, 

WV-OH, and Wheeling, WV-OH areas. 

EPA is soliciting comment on the 

action discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before EPA takes final action. Please 

note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on either of the proposed 

determinations described above and if 

that determination may be severed from 

the remainder of the final agency action, 

EPA may adopt as final these provisions 

of the final agency action that are not 

the subject of an adverse comment. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action proposes to make 

attainment determinations based on air 

quality data and would not, if finalized, 

result in the suspension of certain 

Federal requirements and would not 

impose any additional requirements. 

For that reason, this proposed 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); 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 43637 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, these proposed PM2.5

NAAQS attainment determinations do 

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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: May 25, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 3. 

Dated: June 24, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18427 Filed 7–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2011–0451; FRL–9441–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Plans: State of Missouri 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

an April 20, 2011, request from the State 

of Missouri to exempt sources of 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) in the Missouri 

portion of the St. Louis (MO-IL) 

metropolitan 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area from the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) requirements for NOX

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) for purposes of 

attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). The Missouri NOX RACT 

waiver request for its portion of the St. 

Louis metropolitan 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area is based on the most 

recent three years of complete, qualityassured ozone monitoring data, which 

demonstrate that additional reductions 

of NOX emissions in the Area would not 

contribute to attainment of the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing by 

August 22, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2011–0451, by mail to Ms. 

Lachala Kemp, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, U.S. EPA Region 

7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 

Kansas 66101. Comments may also be 

submitted electronically or through 

hand delivery/courier by following the 

detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES

section of the direct final rule located in 

the rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lachala Kemp, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 901 N. 5th Street, 

Kansas City, Kansas 66101 at 913 551 

7214, or by e-mail at 

kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

request to exempt sources of NOX in the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis (MOIL) metropolitan 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area from the CAA 

requirements for NOX RACT for 

purposes of attaining the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA is approving the 

Missouri’s SIP revision as a direct final 

rule without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates 

no adverse comments. A detailed 

rationale for the approval is set forth in 

the direct final rule. If no adverse 

comments are received in response to 

this action no further activity is 

contemplated. If EPA receives adverse 

comments, the direct final rule will be 

withdrawn and all public comments 

received will be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule, which is located in the 

rules section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: July 12, 2011. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18182 Filed 7–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 67 

[Docket ID FEMA–2008–0020; Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1038] 

Proposed Flood Elevation 

Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: On March 25, 2009, FEMA 

published in the Federal Register a 

proposed rule that contained an 

erroneous table. This notice provides 

corrections to that table, to be used in 

lieu of the information published at 74 

FR 12799. The table provided here 

represents the flooding sources, location 

of referenced elevations, effective and 

modified elevations, and communities 

affected for Monroe County, Kentucky, 

and Incorporated Areas. Specifically, it 

addresses the following flooding 

sources: Bailey Branch (backwater 

effects from Cumberland River), Butler 

Branch (backwater effects from 

Cumberland River), Cumberland River, 

McFarland Creek (backwater effects 

from Cumberland River), Meredith 

Creek (backwater effects from 

Cumberland River), Meshack Creek 

(backwater effects from Cumberland 

River), Murphy Branch (backwater 

effects from Cumberland River), and 

Ward Branch (backwater effects from 

Cumberland River). 

DATES: Comments are to be submitted 

on or before October 19, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. FEMA–B– 

1038, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, 

Engineering Management Branch, 

Federal Insurance and Mitigation 

Administration, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4064 

or (e-mail) luis.rodriguez1@dhs.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis 

Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering 

Management Branch, Federal Insurance 

and Mitigation Administration, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 500 C 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, 

(202) 646–4064 or (e-mail) 

luis.rodriguez1@dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) publishes proposed 

determinations of Base (1% annualchance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and 

modified BFEs for communities 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with PROPOSALS