11890 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: February 13, 2015. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart RR—Tennessee 

■ 2. In § 52.2220, table 1 in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry 

‘‘Section 1200–3–18–.02’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1—EPA APPROVED TENNESSEE REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Chapter 1200–3–18 Volatile Organic Compounds 

*******

Section 1200–3–18–.02 General Provisions and 

Applicability.

12/18/2014 3/5/2015 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Adds Knox, Blount, and Anderson County to 

Emissions Statement requirement applicability; 

clarifies that 25 tons or more NOX sources are 

required to submit in addition to VOC sources; 

and allows subject sources to send statements 

to the local permitting authority rather than to 

the Technical Secretary of the Tennessee Air 

Pollution Control Board. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–04489 Filed 3–4–15; 08:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0798; FRL 9923–92– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Mississippi: 

New Source Review—Prevention of 

Significance Deterioration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve revisions to the Mississippi 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submitted by the State of Mississippi, 

through the Mississippi Department of 

Environmental Quality (MDEQ), on 

February 10, 2012. The SIP revision 

modifies Mississippi’s New Source 

Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) program to 

incorporate by reference (IBR) certain 

Federal PSD regulations. The revision 

also removes certain language from the 

SIP that is no longer relevant. EPA is 

approving Mississippi’s February 10, 

2012, revision to Mississippi’s SIP 

because the Agency has determined that 

the changes are consistent with the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA’s 

PSD permitting regulations. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 6, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2012–0798. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Regulatory Management Section 

(formerly the Regulatory Development 

Section), Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch (formerly the 

Air Planning Branch), Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tiereny Bell, Air Regulatory and 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, 

Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. The telephone 

number is (404) 562–9088. Ms. Bell can 

also be reached via electronic mail at 

bell.tiereny@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 11891 

1Throughout this rulemaking the acronym IBR 

means ‘‘incorporate by reference’’ or ‘‘incorporates 

by reference.’’ 

2 ‘‘Deferral for CO2 Emissions From Bioenergy 

and Other Biogenic Sources Under the Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V 

Programs,’’ Final Rule, 76 FR 43490, (July 20, 2011) 

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘CO2 Biomass 

Deferral Rule’’). 

3 Implementation of the New Source Review 

(NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 

Micrometers (PM2.5); Final Rule To Repeal 

Grandfather Provision, 76 FR 28646 (May 18, 2011) 

(hereafter referred to as the ‘‘PM10 Surrogate and 

Grandfather Policy Repeal’’). 

4 ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration and 

Nonattainment New Source Review: Reasonable 

Possibility in Recordkeeping’’ Final Rule, 72 FR 

72607, (December 21, 2007) (hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘Reasonable Possibility Rule’’). 

5Prevention of Significant Deterioration and 

Nonattainment New Source Review: Reasonable 

Possibility in Recordkeeping, 72 FR 72607 

(December 21, 2007) (hereafter referred to as the 

Reasonable Possibility Rule). For additional 

information on the 2002 NSR Reform Rules, see 67 

FR 80186 (December 31, 2002) and http://www.epa.

gov/nsr. 

6On July 10, 2006, EPA published the final 

rulemaking approving Mississippi’s SIP revision 

adopting the NSR Reform Rule.1 See 71 FR 38773. 

In the approval, EPA acknowledged that 

Mississippi’s rule did not contain the reasonable 

possibility language that was included in the 

remand and stated, ‘‘EPA continues to move 

forward with its evaluation of the portion of its NSR 

reform rules that were remanded by the D.C. Circuit 

and is preparing to respond to the D.C. Circuit’s 

remand. EPA’s final decision with regard to the 

remand may require EPA to take further action on 

this portion of Mississippi’s rules.’’ 

7This rulemaking established regulations to 

implement the NSR program for the PM2.5 NAAQS 

on May 16, 2008. See 73 FR 28321. As a result of 

EPA’s final NSR PM2.5 Rule, states were required to 

submit SIP revisions to EPA no later than May 16, 

2011, to address these requirements for both the 

PSD and NNSR programs. On May 12, 2011, 

Mississippi submitted a SIP revision to IBR the NSR 

PM2.5 Rule into the state’s SIP at APC–S–5. EPA 

approved portions of the NSR PM2.5 rule into the 

Mississippi SIP PSD program on September 26, 

2012. See 77 FR 59095. 

I. Background 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

Mississippi’s February 10, 2012, SIP 

revision to IBR1 federal requirements 

for NSR permitting. Mississippi’s 

February 10, 2012, SIP revision includes 

changes to the air quality regulations in 

Air Pollution Control, Section 5 (APC– 

S–5)—Regulations for the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration of Air Quality. 

These rule changes were provided to 

comply with Federal NSR PSD 

permitting requirements. The February 

10, 2012, SIP submission updates the 

IBR date at APC–S–5 to November 4, 

2011, for the Federal PSD permitting 

regulations at 40 CFR 52.21 and 

portions of 51.166 to include PSD 

provisions promulgated in the Carbon 

Dioxide (CO2) Biomass Deferral Rule,2

Particulate Matter (PM10), Surrogate and 

Grandfather Policy Repeal,3 and 

Reasonable Possibility Rule.4 However, 

EPA cannot act on the portion of 

Mississippi’s SIP submission that IBR 

the July 20, 2011, CO2 Biomass Deferral 

Rule because the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued a decision 

on July 12, 2013, in Center for Biological 

Diversity v. EPA, 722 F.3d 401 (D.C. Cir. 

2013) vacating the rule. Accordingly, 

Mississippi has since submitted a letter 

to EPA dated October 22, 2014, 

requesting that the Biomass Deferral 

Rule provisions from the February 10, 

2012, SIP submission be withdrawn 

from EPA’s consideration; therefore 

these provisions are no longer before 

EPA for consideration. The letter can be 

found in Docket ID: EPA–R04–OAR– 

2012–0798. 

On August 6, 2014, EPA published a 

proposed rulemaking to approve the 

aforementioned changes to MDEQ’s 

NSR program at APC–S–5. See 79 FR 

45733. Comments on the proposed 

rulemaking were due on or before 

September 5, 2014. No comments, 

adverse or otherwise, were received on 

EPA’s August 6, 2014, proposed 

rulemaking. Pursuant to section 110 of 

the CAA, EPA is now taking final action 

to approve the changes to Mississippi’s 

NSR program as provided in EPA’s 

August 6, 2014, proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s August 6, 2014, proposed 

rulemaking contains more detailed 

information regarding Mississippi’s SIP 

revision being approved today, and the 

rationale for today’s final action. 

Detailed information regarding the 

Reasonable Possibility Rule and PM10

Surrogate and Grandfather Policy 

Repeal can be found in EPA’s August 6, 

2014, proposed rulemaking as well as in 

the aforementioned final rulemakings. 

See 72 FR 72607 (December 21, 2007) 

and 76 FR 28646 (May 18, 2011), 

respectively. These rulemakings are 

summarized below. This final action 

approves a revision to the Mississippi 

SIP that (1) IBR the PSD provisions 

promulgated in the PM10 Surrogate and 

Grandfather Policy Repeal and the 

Reasonable Possibility Rule, and (2) 

removes language from the SIP relating 

to the PM10 Surrogate and Grandfather 

Policy and the Reasonable Possibility 

Rule that is no longer relevant. 

A. Reasonable Possibility Rule 

On December 14, 2007, EPA issued a 

final rule that provides additional 

explanation and more detailed criteria 

to clarify the ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ 

recordkeeping and reporting standard 

found in 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6) and 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(6) and 51.166(r)(6) of the 2002 

NSR reform rules.5 The ‘‘reasonable 

possibility’’ standard establishes for 

sources and reviewing authorities the 

criteria for determining when 

recordkeeping and reporting are 

required for a major stationary source 

undergoing a physical change or change 

in the method of operation that does not 

trigger major NSR permitting 

requirements. The standard also 

specifies the recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements for such sources. 

The December 14, 2007, final rule 

clarified and required recordkeeping 

and reporting when the projected 

increase in emissions to which the 

‘‘reasonable possibility’’ test applies 

equals or exceeds 50 percent of the Act’s 

NSR significance levels for any 

pollutant. See 72 FR 72607. NSR 

significance levels are pollutant-specific 

threshold emission rates (tons per year). 

If a project results in an emissions 

increase of a regulated NSR pollutant 

that equals or exceeds the significance 

level for that pollutant, the increase is 

a ‘‘significant emissions increase’’ and 

NSR permitting requirements would 

apply. EPA’s December 14, 2007, 

rulemaking clarifying the reasonable 

possibility provision was in response to 

the June 24, 2005, remand from the D.C. 

Circuit Court requiring that EPA either 

provide an acceptable explanation for 

its ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ standard or 

devise an appropriately supported 

alternative. 

MDEQ adopted the NSR Reform rules 

in the SIP on July 28, 2005, but did not 

incorporate the ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ 

provision into their SIP at APC–S–5 due 

to the remand. In its 2005 PSD 

regulations at APC–S–5(2.6), MDEQ 

excluded the following phrase from its 

IBR of 40 CFR 52.21: ‘‘In circumstances 

where there is a reasonable possibility, 

within the meaning of paragraph 

(r)(6)(vi) of 40 CFR 52.21, that a project 

that is not a part of a major modification 

may result in a significant emissions 

increase.’’ 6 MDEQ’s February 10, 2012, 

SIP revision removes the ‘‘reasonable 

possibility’’ exclusion at APC–S–5(2.6) 

and IBR EPA’s December 21, 2007, 

revised definition of ‘‘reasonable 

possibility’’ into its SIP. 

B. PM10 Surrogate and Grandfather 

Policy Repeal 

In the NSR PM2.5 Rule,7 EPA finalized 

regulations to establish the framework 

for implementing preconstruction 

permit review for the PM2.5 NAAQS in 

both attainment and nonattainment 

areas. This rule included a grandfather 

provision that allowed PSD applicants 

that submitted their complete permit 

application prior to the July 15, 2008, 

effective date of the NSR PM2.5 Rule to 

continue to rely on the 1997 PM10

Surrogate Policy rather than amend 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

11892 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

their application to demonstrate 

compliance directly with the new PM2.5

requirements. See 73 FR 28321. On May 

12, 2011, Mississippi submitted a SIP 

revision that excluded the PM10

surrogate grandfathering provision at 40 

CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi) from the state’s PSD 

regulations. EPA approved portions of 

Mississippi’s May 12, 2011, SIP revision 

on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59095). 

On May 18, 2011, EPA took final action 

to repeal the PM2.5 grandfathering 

provision at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi). See 

76 FR 28646. Mississippi’s February 10, 

2012, SIP revision IBR the version of 40 

CFR 52.21 that includes the PM10

Surrogate and Grandfathering Rule 

Repeal and removes the May 12, 2011, 

PM10 surrogate exclusion language from 

the PSD regulations at APC–S–5. 

II. This Action 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

Mississippi’s February 10, 2012, SIP 

submission that updates the IBR date in 

Mississippi’s SIP (at APC–S–5) to 

November 4, 2011, for 40 CFR 52.21 and 

portions of 51.166, to include PSD 

provisions promulgated in the PM10

Surrogate and Grandfather Policy 

Repeal and Reasonable Possibility Rule. 

As stated above and in EPA’s August 6, 

2014, proposed rulemaking, EPA is not 

approving the CO2 Biomass Deferral 

Rule into the Mississippi SIP because of 

the D.C. Circuit court’s July 12, 2013, 

decision to vacate the rule. Accordingly, 

on October 22, 2014, MDEQ submitted 

a letter to EPA requesting that the CO2

Biomass Deferral Rule provisions in the 

February 10, 2012, SIP submission be 

withdrawn from EPA consideration; 

therefore these provisions are no longer 

before EPA for consideration. Regarding 

the 2007 Reasonable Possibility Rule, 

Mississippi’s February 10, 2012, SIP 

revision removes the ‘‘reasonable 

possibility’’ exclusion at APC–S–5(2.6) 

and IBR EPA’s December 21, 2007, 

revised definition of ‘‘reasonable 

possibility.’’ 

Mississippi’s February 10, 2012, SIP 

submittal also incorporates into the 

Mississippi SIP the version of 40 CFR 

52.21 as of November 4, 2011, which 

includes the May 18, 2011, PM10

Surrogate and Grandfather Policy 

Repeal. Thus, the language previously 

approved into Mississippi SIP at APC– 

S–5(2.7) that excludes the 

grandfathering provision is no longer 

necessary. Mississippi’s February 10, 

2012, SIP submittal removes this 

unnecessary language. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

Mississippi’s February 10, 2012, SIP 

revision that (1) updates the IBR date in 

APC–S–5 to November 4, 2011, for the 

Federal PSD permitting regulations at 40 

CFR 52.21 and portions of 51.166 to 

include the Reasonable Possibility Rule 

and the PM10 Surrogate and Grandfather 

Policy Repeal, and (2) removes language 

from the SIP at APC–S–5 pertaining to 

the PM10 Surrogate and Grandfather 

Policy and the Reasonable Possibility 

Rule that is no longer relevant. EPA has 

made the determination that these 

changes to Mississippi’s SIP are 

approvable because they are consistent 

with section 110 of the CAA and EPA’s 

PSD permitting regulations. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, 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 CAA. 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved to 

apply on any Indian reservation land or 

in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by May 4, 2015. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this final rule does not affect the 

finality of this action for the purposes of 

judicial review nor does it extend the 

time within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: February 13, 2015. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 11893 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart Z—Mississippi 

■ 2. Section 52.1270(c), is amended by 

revising the entries under the heading 

‘‘APC–S–5’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1270 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA APPROVED MISSISSIPPI REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

APC–S–5 Regulations for Prevention of Significant Deterioration for Air Quality 

All ...................... ........................... 12/14/2011 3/5/2015 [Insert 

Federal Register 

citation].

The approval does not include incorporation by reference of 

the CO2 Biomass Deferral which was withdrawn by the 

State on October 22, 2014. On 9–26–2012, EPA approved 

a revision to APC–S–5 which incorporated by reference the 

regulations found at 40 CFR 52.21 as of March 22, 2011. 

This approval did not include Mississippi’s revision to IBR 

(at Rule APC–S–5) the term ‘‘particulate matter emissions’’ 

(as promulgated in the May 16, 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule (at 

40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi)) and the PM2.5 SILs threshold and 

provisions (as promulgated in the October 20, 2010 PM2.5

PSD Increment-SILs–SMC Rule at 40 CFR 52.21(k)(2)). 

Note: On October 22, 2014, Mississippi withdrew the PM2.5

SILs provision from Mississippi’s May 18, 2011 SIP Submission. 

On December 29, 2010, EPA approved a revision to APC–S– 

5 which incorporated by reference the regulations found at 

40 CFR 52.21 as of September 13, 2010. See 75 FR 

81858. That action approved the incorporation by reference 

with the exception of the phrase ‘‘except ethanol production 

facilities producing ethanol by natural fermentation under 

the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

codes 325193 or 312140,’’ APC–S–5 incorporated by reference from 40 CFR 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a) and (b)(1(iii)(t). Additionally, that final EPA action did not incorporate by reference, into the Mississippi SIP, the administrative regulations that were amended in the Fugitive Emissions Rule (73 

FR 77882) and are stayed through October 3, 2011. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–05072 Filed 3–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 64 

[Docket ID FEMA–2015–0001; Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–8373] 

Suspension of Community Eligibility 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule identifies 

communities where the sale of flood 

insurance has been authorized under 

the National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP) that are scheduled for 

suspension on the effective dates listed 

within this rule because of 

noncompliance with the floodplain 

management requirements of the 

program. If the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) receives 

documentation that the community has 

adopted the required floodplain 

management measures prior to the 

effective suspension date given in this 

rule, the suspension will not occur and 

a notice of this will be provided by 

publication in the Federal Register on a 

subsequent date. Also, information 

identifying the current participation 

status of a community can be obtained 

from FEMA’s Community Status Book 

(CSB). The CSB is available at http://

www.fema.gov/fema/csb.shtm. 

DATES: The effective date of each 

community’s scheduled suspension is 

the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the 

third column of the following tables. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you want to determine whether a 

particular community was suspended 

on the suspension date or for further 

information, contact Bret Gates, Federal 

Insurance and Mitigation 

Administration, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4133. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP 

enables property owners to purchase 

Federal flood insurance that is not 

otherwise generally available from 

private insurers. In return, communities 

agree to adopt and administer local 

floodplain management measures aimed 

at protecting lives and new construction 

from future flooding. Section 1315 of 

the National Flood Insurance Act of 

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

prohibits the sale of NFIP flood 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES