+(,121/,1(

Citation: 69 Fed. Reg. 34076 2004 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Thu Mar 17 17:02:58 2011

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance

 of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license

 agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from 

 uncorrected OCR text.
Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 117/Friday, June 18, 2004/Rules and Regulations

17, 2002, is adopted as a final rule

without change.

[FR Doc. 04-13764 Filed 6-17-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[OAR-2003-0083; FRL-7775-5]

Air Quality Designations and

Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone;

National Ambient Air Quality

Standards; Deferral of Effective Date

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is granting a deferral

of the effective date, to September 13,

2004, of the 8-hour ozone

nonattainment designation for Clark

County, Nevada. This deferral is based

on additional information submitted by

the State demonstrating that, due to the

late finding of nonattainment in the

State, the State did not have sufficient

time to recommend an appropriate

boundary for the Las Vegas

nonattainment area. EPA believes the

relevant factors for defining a

nonattainment area may support a

different boundary recommendation

than the one submitted by the State on

April 12, 2004, and a short deferral will

provide the State and EPA time to

determine whether such an adjustment

is appropriate. At the same time, it is

certain that at least some portion of

Clark County will be designated

nonattainment. As such, we do not

intend to use this extension of the

effective date of the designation to affect

the deadline for submittal of the State

implementation plan that would

otherwise apply if the effective date

were not deferred and further believe

the extension should not delay

attainment of the ozone standard or the

ability of the State to achieve attainment

as expeditiously as practicable.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is

effective on June 15, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established

dockets for this action under Docket ID

No. OAR-2003-0083 (Designations). All

documents in the docket are listed in

the EDOCKET index at http://

www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed

in the index, some information is not

publicly available, i.e., Confidential

Business Information (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 EDOCKET or in hard

copy at the Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,

Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave.,

NW., Washington, DC. The Public

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to

4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The telephone

number for the Public Reading Room is

(202) 566-1744, and the telephone

number for the Office of Air and

Radiation Docket and Information

Center is (202) 566-1742. In addition,

we have placed a copy of the rule and

a variety of materials regarding

designations on EPA's designation Web

site at: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqpsl

glo/designations and on the Tribal Web

site at: http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal. In

addition, the public may inspect the

rule and technical support at the

following locations:

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 9, Air Division,

Planning Office, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, California 94105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven Barhite, Chief, Planning Office,

Air Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 9, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,

California 94105. The telephone number

is (415) 972-3980. Mr. Barhite can also

be reached via electronic mail at

barhite.steven@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

The EPA is deferring the effective date

of the nonattainment designation for

Clark County, Nevada (County). This

action modifies the effective date for

Clark County provided in our final 8-

hour ozone designations rule published

April 30, 2004. 69 FR 23858. In that

final rule we noted that the effective

date for the Clark County nonattainment

designation would be June 15, 2004. See

69 FR at 23919-20 (revising 40 CFR

§ 81.329). With today's action, the new

effective date for the County's

nonattainment designation will be

September 13, 2004. We are not

changing the designation of the County

at this time, but, as explained below,

believe the deferral is necessary to allow

the State of Nevada (State) to account

for newly discovered information and

accurately define the appropriate

nonattainment area boundaries.

II. What Is the Background for This

Action?

On April 15, 2004, the EPA

Administrator signed a final rule

announcing designations under the 8-

hour ozone national ambient air quality

standards (NAAQS).' In that action we

designated Clark County as

nonattainment and provided that this

designation would become effective on

June 15, 2004. Since that notice, the

State has submitted additional

information explaining that the State's

recommendation on the area to be

designated nonattainment should be

reconsidered and that such an

evaluation was not possible prior to

EPA's April 15, 2004 deadline for

signing the 8-hour ozone designations.

Letter from Allen Biaggi, Administrator,

Nevada Division of Environmental

Protection, to Michael 0. Leavitt,

Administrator, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (June 9, 2004).2 In

the June 9, 2004 letter the State explains

that it did not have time to make an

appropriate recommendation regarding

the boundaries of the nonattainment

area in Clark County because it was not

discovered until late February 2004 that

any portion of Nevada would be

designated nonattainment.

The unusual history of the Clark

County designation supports the State's

claim. In July 2003, the State submitted

its recommended designations for the 8-

hour ozone designations. See letter from

Allen Biaggi, Administrator, Nevada

Division of Environmental Protection, to

Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator,

U.S. EPA, Region IX (July 10, 2003).

Based on the monitoring data provided

to the State for the period of 2000

through 2002, the State concluded that

all monitors within the State were

showing compliance with the 8-hour

ozone NAAQS. On December 3, 2003,

EPA agreed with the State's

recommendation not to designate any

Nevada area as nonattainment for the 8-

hour ozone standard. See Letter from

Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator,

U.S. EPA, Region IX, to Hon. Kenny C.

Guinn, Governor of Nevada (December

3, 2004). In that letter EPA noted that

the final designation determination

would be based on monitoring data and

design values for the period 2001

through 2003, but that based on our

preliminary review of the air quality

monitoring data for the 2003 ozone

season, there were no areas in Nevada

violating the 8-hour ozone standard. Id.

In mid-February 2004, EPA discovered

that the July 10, 2003 recommendation

from the State had failed to include

' This signature date was a deadline for EPA

action in accordance with a consent decree. The

final rule was published on April 30, 2004. 69 FR

23875.

2 This letter supplements an earlier letter dated

May 21, 2004, from Governor Kenny C. Guinn to

Administrator Leavitt.

34076

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 34076 2004
Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 117/Friday, June 18, 2004/Rules and Regulations

complete monitoring data for 2001. This

overlooked data, in combination with

the new 2003 data, resulted in a 2001-

03 design value over the applicable

standard at one of the monitors (Joe

Neal) in the Las Vegas area of Clark

County. EPA contacted the State and

described that, by default, the

metropolitan statistical area (MSA) that

included Clark and Nye Counties in

Nevada and Mohave County in Arizona

should be recommended for designation

as nonattainment. Arizona and Nevada

were able to prepare an analysis of the

ozone problem in the area that

supported the exclusion of Nye and

Mohave Counties from the

nonattainment area. See Letter from

Allen Biaggi, Administrator, Nevada

Division of Environmental Protection, to

Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator,

U.S. EPA, Region IX (April 12, 2004)

(transmitting Nevada Division of

Environmental Protection (NDEP) report

entitled "Nevada Air Quality

Designations and Boundary

Recommendations for the 8-Hour Ozone

National Ambient Air Quality

Standard" (March 26, 2004)); Letter

from Stephen A. Owens, Director,

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality, to Wayne Nastri, Regional

Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region IX

(March 26, 2004) (transmitting report

entitled "Arizona Boundary

Recommendations for the 8-Hour Ozone

National Ambient Air Quality

Standard" (March 26, 2004)). As a

result, three days before the EPA

deadline for making designations, the

State recommended that Clark County

be designated nonattainment. Id. As the

State has subsequently explained, had

NDEP and Clark County discovered

earlier that the County should be

designated nonattainment, it would

have further analyzed the appropriate

boundaries within the 8000-square mile

County for the nonattainment area.

Given the late discovery, however, the

State and County could not provide the

necessary analysis and defaulted to the

County boundaries.3 Given the size of

the County, the geographic features of

the area, the location of sources and the

monitoring data collected in the

outlying portions of the County, it is

reasonable to conclude that further

analysis could have supported an

alternate boundary for the

nonattainment area.

In the June 9, 2004 letter, the State

further explains why the missing

3 The May 21, 2004 letter from Governor Guinn

and the June 9, 2004 letter from Allen Biaggi both

note that the State has contracted with the Desert

Research Institute to assist in assessing the

appropriate boundaries.

monitoring data were not discovered

until late February, 2004. The

monitoring data in question are from the

new Joe Neal monitoring station, which

began operation in 2000. As a result, it

was not until the end of 2003 that three

complete years of data were available

upon which to calculate a design value.

The State's recommendation had not

included the 2003 data, so it had not

focused attention on this monitor

because, at the time, it had mistakenly

assumed the monitor had not been in

existence long enough to have an effect

on design values. According to the

State, the State and County had an

expectation that the 2001 data would

not affect the design value for the 8-hour

ozone designation. See June 9 Letter

from Allen Biaggi. The County

apparently did not realize certain 2001

data had not been added to the Air

Quality System-the system used to

support the designation

recommendations. Management at the

County and State, and within EPA,

looking at the monitoring data in the Air

Quality System could not see that

additional data were available that

would have changed the designation

conclusion. The State and County have

demonstrated to our satisfaction that

until late February 2004, they were not

aware that the area should be designated

nonattainment and, as noted above, by

that time did not have time to

adequately evaluate the appropriate

boundaries for the nonattainment area.

III. What Action Is EPA Taking To

Defer the Effective Date of

Nonattainment Designations for Clark

County?

Effective June 15, 2004, EPA will

defer until September 13, 2004, the

effective date of nonattainment

designations for Clark County, Nevada

by modifying 40 CFR 81.329. EPA is

making this change without notice and

comment in accordance with section

107(d)(2) of the Clean Air Act, which

exempts the promulgation of these

designations from the notice and

comment provisions of the

Administrative Procedure Act.

We are making this deferral action

effective on June 15, 2004, which is the

date the nonattainment designation

would otherwise become effective.

Section 553(d) of the Administrative

Procedure Act generally provides that

rulemakings shall not be effective less

than 30 days after publication unless the

agency finds good cause for an earlier

date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). EPA is invoking

the good cause exception to make the

effective date of today's action June 15,

2004. This notice explains why the

current effective date of the

nonattainment designation for Las Vegas

should be deferred. Today's action must

take effect by June 15, 2004 in order to

achieve that deferral and avoid

unnecessary confusion.

EPA does not intend to extend the

deadline for state implementation plan

submission for the Las Vegas

nonattainment area. EPA will address

this deadline in a subsequent action but

believes it is reasonable to require

submission according to the same

schedule to which the area would be

subject without today's deferral of the

effective date. Likewise, the time by

which attainment occurs should not be

affected by this action. Today's deferral

of the designation effective date should

not delay the attainment of the 8-hour

ozone NAAQS because it is clear a core

area will still be designated

nonattainment and attainment is

required as expeditiously as practicable.

IV. Final Action

The EPA is deferring the effective date

to September 13, 2004, of the

nonattainment designation for Clark

County, Nevada, based on additional

information submitted by the State. We

are amending 40 CFR § 81.329 to reflect

the modified effective date for the

County.

V. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory

Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is "significant" and, therefore,

subject to Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) review and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

The Order defines "significant

regulatory action" as one that is likely

to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an

annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more or adversely affect in a

material way the economy, a sector of

the economy, productivity, competition,

jobs, the environment, public health or

safety, or State, local, or Tribal

governments or communities; (2) create

a serious inconsistency or otherwise

interfere with an action taken or

planned by another agency; (3)

materially alter the budgetary impact of

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan

programs or the rights and obligations of

recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or

the principles set forth in the Executive

Order. Pursuant to the terms of

Executive Order 12866, it has been

determined that this rule is not a

34077

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 34077 2004
Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 117/Friday, June 18, 2004/Rules and Regulations

"significant regulatory action" because

none of the above factors applies. As

such, this final rule was not formally

submitted to OMB for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This rule

changes the effective date of a

nonattainment designation for Clark

County, Nevada that was promulgated

on April 15, 2004. The present final rule

does not establish any new information

collection burden apart from that

required by law. Burden means the total

time, effort, or financial resources

expended by persons to generate,

maintain, retain, or disclose or provide

information to or for a Federal agency.

This includes the time needed to review

instructions; develop, acquire, install,

and utilize technology and systems for

the purposes of collecting, validating,

and verifying information, processing

and maintaining information, and

disclosing and providing information;

adjust the existing ways to comply with

any previously applicable instructions

and requirements; train personnel to be

able to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information. An agency

may not conduct or sponsor, and a

person is not required to respond to a

collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number. The OMB control numbers for

EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed

in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements under the

Administrative Procedures Act or any

other statute unless the agency certifies

the rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small

organizations, and small governmental

jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing

the impacts of today's final rule on

small entities, small entity is defined as:

(1) A small business that is a small

industrial entity as defined in the U.S.

Small Business Administration (SBA)

size standards. (See 13 CFR 121.); (2) a

small governmental jurisdiction that is a

government of a city, county, town,

school district or special district with a

population of less than 50,000; and (3)

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently

owned and operated and is not

dominant in its field. This rule defers

the effective date of the nonattainment

designation. The deferral of the effective

date will not impose any requirements

on small entities. After considering the

economic impacts of today's final rule

on small entities, I certify that this rule

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104-4, establishes requirements for

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions on State, local,

and Tribal governments and the private

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,

EPA generally must prepare a written

statement, including a cost-benefit

analysis, for proposed and final rules

with "Federal mandates" that may

result in expenditures to State, local,

and Tribal governments, in the

aggregate, or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more in any 1 year.

Before promulgating an EPA rule for

which a written statement is needed,

section 205 of the UMRA generally

requires EPA to identify and consider a

reasonable number of regulatory

alternatives and adopt the least costly,

most cost-effective or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule. The provisions of section

205 do not apply when they are

inconsistent with applicable law.

Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to

adopt an alternative other than the least

costly, most cost-effective or least

burdensome alternative if the

Administrator publishes with the final

rule an explanation why that alternative

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes

any regulatory requirements that may

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, including Tribal

governments, it must have developed

under section 203 of the UMRA a small

government agency plan. The plan must

provide for notifying potentially

affected small governments, enabling

officials of affected small governments

to have meaningful and timely input in

the development of EPA regulatory

proposals with significant Federal

intergovernmental mandates, and

informing, educating, and advising

small governments on compliance with

the regulatory requirements. Today's

final action does not include a Federal

mandate within the meaning of UMRA

that may result in expenditures of $100

million or more in any 1 year by either

State, local, or Tribal governments in

the aggregate or to the private sector,

and therefore, is not subject to the

requirements of sections 202 and 205 of

the UMRA. It does not create any

additional requirements beyond those of

the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone (62 FR

38894; July 18, 1997), therefore, no

UMRA analysis is needed. In this rule,

EPA is deferring the effective date of

nonattainment designation for Clark

County, Nevada. The EPA believes that

no new controls will be imposed as a

result of this action. Thus, this Federal

action will not impose mandates that

will require expenditures of $100

million or more in the aggregate in any

1 year.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

Executive Order 13132, entitled

"Federalism" (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999), requires EPA to develop an

accountable process to ensure 'meaningful and timely input by State

and local officials in the development of

regulatory policies that have federalism

implications." "Policies that have

federalism implications" is defined in

the Executive Order to include

regulations that 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." This

final rule does not have federalism

implications. It will 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. The CAA

establishes the scheme whereby States

take the lead in developing plans to

meet the NAAQS. This rule will not

modify the relationship of the States

and EPA for purposes of developing

programs to implement the NAAQS.

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not

apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation

and Coordination with Indian Tribal

Governmen ts

Executive Order 13175, entitled

"Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments" (65 FR

67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA

to develop an accountable process to

ensure "meaningful and timely input by

tribal officials in the development of

regulatory policies that have tribal

implications." This final rule does not

have "Tribal implications" as specified

in Executive Order 13175. This rule

concerns the deferral of the effective

date of the nonattainment designation

for Clark County, Nevada. This final

34078

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 34078 2004
Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 117/Friday, June 18, 2004/Rules and Regulations

rule does not have Tribal implications

as defined by Executive Order 13175. It

does not have a substantial direct effect

on one or more Indian Tribes, since no

Tribe has implemented a CAA program

to attain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS at

this time. Furthermore, this rule does

not affect the relationship or

distribution of power and

responsibilities between the Federal

government and Indian Tribes. The

CAA and the TAR establish the

relationship of the Federal government

and Tribes in developing plans to attain

the NAAQS, and this rule does nothing

to modify that relationship. Because this

rule does not have Tribal implications,

Executive Order 13175 does not apply.

Although Executive Order 13175 does

not apply to this rule,prior to

designations action promulgated on

April 15, 2004, EPA did outreach to

Tribal representatives regarding the

designations. The EPA supports a

national "Tribal Designations and

Implementation Work Group" which

provides an open forum for all Tribes to

voice concerns to EPA about the

designation and implementation process

for the NAAQS, including the 8-hour

ozone standard. These discussions

informed EPA about key Tribal concerns

regarding designations as the rule was

under development.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of

Children From Environmental Health

and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045: "Protection of

Children From Environmental Health

and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April

23, 1997) applies to any rule that (1) is

determined to be "economically

significant" as defined under Executive

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an

environmental health or safety risk that

EPA has reason to believe may have

disproportionate effect on children. If

the regulatory action meets both criteria,

the Agency must evaluate the

environmental health or safety effects of

the planned rule on children, and

explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective

and reasonably feasible alternatives

considered by the Agency. The final

rule is not subject to Executive Order

13045 because it is not economically

significant as defined in Executive

Order 12866, and because the Agency

does not have reason to believe the

environmental health risks or safety

risks addressed by this rule present a

disproportionate risk to children.

Nonetheless, we have evaluated the

environmental health or safety effects of

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS on children.

The results of this risk assessment are

contained the National Ambient Air

Quality Standards for Ozone, Final Rule

(62 FR 38855-38896, July 18, 1997;

specifically, 62 FR 38854, 62 FR 38860

and 62 FR 38865).

H. Executive Order 13211:Actions That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use

This rule is not subject to Executive

Order 13211, "Actions That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use," (66 FR 28355,

May 22, 2001) because it is not a

significant regulatory action under

Executive Order 12866. Information on

the methodology and data regarding the

assessment of potential energy impacts

is found in Chapter 6 of U.S. EPA 2002,

Cost, Emission Reduction, Energy, and

Economic Impact Assessment of the

Proposed Rule Establishing the

Implementation Framework for the 8-

Hour, 0.08 ppm Ozone National

Ambient Air Quality Standard, prepared

by the Innovative Strategies and

Economics Group, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Research

Triangle Park, NC, April 24, 2003.

L National Technology Transfer

Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer Advancement Act

of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-

113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS) in its regulatory

activities unless to do so would be

inconsistent with applicable law or

otherwise impractical. Voluntary

consensus standards are technical

standards (e.g., materials specifications,

test methods, sampling procedures, and

business practices) that are developed or

adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA

directs EPA to provide Congress,

through OMB, explanations when the

Agency decides not to use available and

applicable VCS. This action does not

involve technical standards. Therefore,

EPA did not consider the use of any

VCS.

J. Congressional Review Act

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. The 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 on or before

the effective date of this rule. 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). This

rule will be effective June 15, 2004.

K. Judicial Review

Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates

which Federal Courts of Appeal have

venue for petitions of review of final

actions by EPA. This Section provides,

in part, that petitions for review must be

filed in the Court of Appeals for the

District of Columbia Circuit (i) when the

agency action consists of "nationally

applicable regulations promulgated, or

final actions taken, by the

Administrator," or (ii) when such action

is locally or regionally applicable, if

"such action is based on a

determination of nationwide scope or

effect and if in taking such action the

Administrator finds and publishes that

such action is based on such a

determination." The rule designating

areas for the 8-hour ozone standard was "nationally applicable" within the

meaning of section 307(b)(1) since it

established designations for all areas of

the United States for the 8-hour ozone

NAAQS. Since this final action defers

the effective date of one of the

designations made in that nationwide

rulemaking, any petitions for review

must be filed in the Court of Appeals for

the District of Columbia Circuit. At the

core of the designations rulemaking is

EPA's interpretation of the definition of

nonattainment under section 107(d)(1)

of the CAA. In determining which areas

should be designated nonattainment (or

conversely, should be designated

unclassifiable/attainment), EPA used a

set of 11 factors that it applied

consistently across the United States.

For the same reasons, the Administrator

also determined that the final

designations are of nationwide scope

and effect for purposes of section

307(b)(1). This is particularly

appropriate because in the report on the

1977 Amendments that revised section

307(b)(1) of the CAA, Congress noted

that the Administrator's determination

that an action is of "nationwide scope

or effect" would be appropriate for any

action that has "scope or effect beyond

a single judicial circuit." H.R. Rep. No.

95-294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977

U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402-03. Here, the scope

and effect of the designations

rulemaking extend to numerous judicial

circuits since the designations apply to

all areas of the country. In these

circumstances, section 307(b)(1) and its

legislative history calls for the

Administrator to find the rule to be of

"nationwide scope or effect" and for

34079

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 34079 2004
Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 117/Friday, June 18, 2004/Rules and Regulations

venue to be in the D.C. Circuit. Thus,

any petitions for review of this final

action must be filed in the Court of

Appeals for the District of Columbia

Circuit within 60 days from the date

final action is published in the Federal

Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: June 14, 2004.

Michael 0. Leavitt,

Administrator.

* For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 40 CFR part 81 is amended as

follows:

PART 81-[AMENDED]

m 1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C-[Amended]

* 2. In § 81.329, the table entitled

"Nevada-Ozone (8-Hour Standard)" is

amended by revising the entry for "Clark

County" to read as follows:

§ 81.329 Nevada.

NEVADA-OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD)

Designation a Category/classification

Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

Las Vegas, NV: Clark County ................................................. (2) Nonattainm ent ............... (2) Subpart 1.

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.

1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 2 Effective date deferred until September 13, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04-13851 Filed 6-17-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[OAR-2003-0083-1; FRL-7774-8]

Air Quality Designations and

Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone;

National Ambient Air Quality

Standards; Early Action Compact

Areas With Deferred Effective Dates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is granting a deferral

of the effective date, to September 30,

2005, of the nonattainment designation

for Hamilton and Meigs Counties,

Tennessee, and Catoosa County,

Georgia, based on additional

information submitted by this area. The

basis for this action is an updated

modeling analysis completed by this

area that demonstrates attainment of the

8-hour ozone National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS) by

December 31, 2007. In addition, in a

letter dated May 27, 2004, from the

Mayors of the City of Chattanooga and

Hamilton County to EPA, the area has

fully committed to adopt and

implement additional local measures on

a schedule consistent with requirements

for Early Action Compact (EAC) areas.

These measures are also included in the

updated modeling analysis.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is

effective on June 15, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established

dockets for this action under Docket ID

No. OAR-2003-0083 (Designations) and

OAR-2003-0090 (Early Action

Compacts). All documents in the docket

are listed in the EDOCKET index at

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although

listed in the index, some information is

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential

Business Information (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 EDOCKET or in hard

copy at the Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,

Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave.,

NW., Washington, DC. The Public

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to

4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The telephone

number for the Public Reading Room is

(202) 566-1744, and the telephone

number for the Office of Air and

Radiation Docket and Information

Center is (202) 566-1742. In addition,

we have placed a copy of the rule and

a variety of materials regarding

designations on EPA's designation Web

site at: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqpsl

glo/designations and on the Tribal Web

site at: http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal.

Materials relevant to EAC areas are on

EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.govl

ttn/naaqs/ozone/eac/

w1040218_eac resources.pdf. In

addition, the public may inspect the

rule and technical support at the

following locations: Regulatory

Development Section, Air Planning

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics

Management Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,

Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dick

Schutt, Regulatory Development

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,

Pesticides and Toxics Management

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street,

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The

telephone number is (404) 562-9033.

Mr. Schutt can also be reached via

electronic mail at schutt.dick@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

The EPA is reinstating the EAC and

deferring the effective date of the

nonattainment designation for Hamilton

County, TN; Meigs County, TN; and

Catoosa County, GA, as a result of

additional measures being taken by

Chattanooga to improve air quality in

the area. The additional measures being

implemented in Hamilton County

include a seasonal open burning ban

and a vehicle inspection and

maintenance program (I/M program).

These measures have been included in

the area's modeling demonstration and

result in modeled attainment by

December 2007.

II. What Is the Background for This

Action?

The EPA entered into EACs with 33

communities on December 31, 2002,

including the Chattanooga, TN-GA area.

This area successfully completed the

34080

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 34080 2004