Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0525-0039
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Finding of Failure to Attain and Reclassification of Las Vegas Area as Moderate for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard
Posted Date: 2023-01-05T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 3 (Thursday, January 5, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 775-783]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-28319]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0525; FRL-9961-02-R9]

Finding of Failure To Attain and Reclassification of Las Vegas 
Area as Moderate for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) is 
determining that the Las Vegas, Nevada nonattainment area (``Las 
Vegas'') failed to attain the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard (NAAQS) by the applicable attainment date. The effect of 
failing to attain by the applicable attainment date is that Las Vegas 
is being reclassified by operation of law as ``Moderate'' nonattainment 
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS on January 5, 2023, the effective date of this 
final rule. Accordingly, the Nevada Division of Environmental 
Protection (NDEP) must submit State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 
and implement controls to satisfy the statutory and regulatory 
requirements for Moderate areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS according to 
the deadlines established in this final rule.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is January 5, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a public docket for this action at 
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0525. 
Although listed in the docket index, some information is not publicly 
available, e.g., 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 through https://www.regulations.gov, or please 
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance 
in a language other than English or if you are a person with 
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, 
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karina O'Connor, Air Planning Office 
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; 
By

[[Page 776]]

phone: (775) 434-8176 or by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

    The following is an outline of the Preamble.

I. Proposed Actions
    A. Proposed Determination of Failure To Attain by the Attainment 
Date
    B. Proposed Moderate Area SIP Submission and Controls 
Implementation Deadlines
II. Responses to Comments and Final Action
    A. Determination of Failure To Attain and Reclassification
    B. Moderate Area SIP Submission and Implementation Deadlines
    C. Final Action
III. Good Cause Exemption Under the Administrative Procedure Act 
(APA) for Immediate Effective Date
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
    L. Judicial Review

I. Proposed Actions

A. Proposed Determination of Failure To Attain by the Attainment Date

    On July 22, 2022, the EPA proposed to determine that Las Vegas 
failed to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date 
and did not qualify for a 1-year attainment date extension. Under Clean 
Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') section 181, the EPA has a statutory 
obligation to determine whether the Marginal nonattainment area 
attained the 2015 ozone NAAQS by August 3, 2021, the applicable 
attainment date.\1\ The proposed determination was based upon complete, 
quality-assured and certified ozone air quality monitoring data that 
showed that the 8-hour ozone design value (DV) for the area exceeded 
0.070 parts per million (ppm) for the period 2018-2020, i.e., the 
area's DV as of the attainment date. The EPA proposed that Las Vegas 
would be reclassified as a Moderate nonattainment area by operation of 
law on the effective date of a final action finding that the area 
failed to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date 
for Marginal areas.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 87 FR 43764 (July 22, 2022).
    \2\ CAA section 181(b)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Proposed Moderate Area SIP Submission and Controls Implementation 
Deadlines

    In the July 2022 proposal, the EPA solicited comment on adjusting 
the due dates, in accordance with CAA section 182(i), for submission 
and implementation deadlines for all SIP requirements that apply to Las 
Vegas.\3\ Under CAA section 181(b)(2), Marginal nonattainment areas 
that fail to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment 
date will be reclassified as Moderate by operation of law upon the 
effective date of the final determination. Once Las Vegas is 
reclassified as Moderate, NDEP must subsequently submit a SIP revision 
that satisfies the air quality planning requirements for a Moderate 
area under CAA section 182(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 182(a) and (b), and 40 CFR 
51.1300 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA proposed to align the submission deadline for all Moderate 
area SIP elements for Las Vegas with the proposed January 1, 2023, 
deadline for other areas being reclassified from Marginal to Moderate 
in the EPA's national determination for Marginal areas under the 2015 
ozone NAAQS.\4\ The EPA adopted this approach previously for Marginal 
areas reclassified as Moderate for failure to timely attain the 2008 
ozone NAAQS and in recent actions for the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS to 
achieve consistency among required SIP submissions for areas facing a 
similarly compressed timeframe between the effective date of 
reclassification and the Moderate area attainment date.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Proposed Rule--Determinations of Attainment by the 
Attainment Date, Extensions of the Attainment Date, and 
Reclassification of Areas Classified as Marginal for the 2015 Ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (81 FR 21842, April 13, 
2022).
    \5\ Final Rule--Determinations of Attainment by the Attainment 
Date, Extensions of the Attainment Date, and Reclassification of 
Several Areas for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (81 FR 26697, 26705, May 4, 2016). Final Rule--
Determinations of Attainment by the Attainment Date, Extensions of 
the Attainment Date, and Reclassification of Areas Classified as 
Marginal for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(87 FR 60897, October 7, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's implementing regulations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS require 
that, for areas initially classified as Moderate or higher, a state 
shall provide for implementation of reasonable available control 
technology (RACT) as expeditiously as practicable but no later than 
January 1 of the fifth year after the effective date of designation, 
which corresponds with the beginning of the attainment year for 
initially classified Moderate areas (i.e., January 1, 2023).\6\ The 
modeling and attainment demonstration requirements for 2015 ozone NAAQS 
nonattainment areas classified Moderate or higher require that a state 
must provide for implementation of all control measures needed for 
attainment no later than the beginning of the attainment year ozone 
season, notwithstanding any alternative deadline established per 40 CFR 
51.1312.\7\ For reclassified areas, the EPA's implementing regulations 
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS require that the state shall provide for 
implementation of RACT as expeditiously as practicable, but no later 
than the start of the attainment year ozone season associated with the 
area's new attainment deadline, or January 1 of the third year after 
the associated SIP submission deadline, whichever is earlier; or the 
deadline established by the Administrator in the final action issuing 
the area reclassification.\8\ The EPA requested comment on the proposed 
January 1, 2023, reasonably available control measures (RACM)/RACT 
implementation deadline. This proposed deadline is the same as the 
single RACT implementation deadline for all areas initially classified 
Moderate per 40 CFR 51.1312(a)(3) in the national rulemaking and would 
require implementation of any identified RACM/RACT at the beginning of 
the Las Vegas Moderate area's attainment year ozone season (January 1, 
2023) to influence the area's air quality and 2021-2023 attainment DV. 
The proposed RACT implementation deadline would also align with the 
proposed SIP submission deadline of January 1, 2023, and ensure that 
any control measures needed for attainment, including RACM, would be 
submitted no later than when those controls are required to be 
implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 40 CFR 51.1312(a)(3)(i).
    \7\ See 40 CFR 51.1308(d).
    \8\ See 40 CFR 51.1312(a)(3)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A ``Basic'' vehicle inspection and maintenance program (I/M 
program) is required for all urbanized Moderate areas under the 2015 
ozone NAAQS. The Las Vegas nonattainment area is currently operating I/
M programs as part

[[Page 777]]

of its maintenance plan for the 1971 carbon monoxide standard for which 
the area had been classified as Serious nonattainment and subsequently 
redesignated.\9\ With respect to the implementation deadline for any 
revisions to the current I/M program that may be necessary, if Clark 
County Department of Environment and Sustainability (``Clark County 
DES'') and NDEP intend to use emissions reductions from a revised I/M 
program for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, they would need to have such 
revisions fully established and start testing as expeditiously as 
practicable but no later than January 1, 2023. However, if the state 
does not intend to rely upon emissions reductions from a revised I/M 
program in the Moderate area attainment or reasonable further progress 
(RFP) demonstrations, the EPA proposed to allow the I/M program to be 
fully implemented no later than 4 years after the effective date of 
reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See the July 2022 proposal for more background information 
on I/M SIP requirements (87 FR 43764, 43769-43770).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Responses to Comments and Final Action

    The public comment period for the EPA's July 2022 proposal closed 
on August 22, 2022. The EPA requested comment on the determination of 
failure to attain and subsequent reclassification from Marginal to 
Moderate as well as the Moderate area SIP revision and implementation 
deadlines. The two comment letters received during this period can be 
found in the docket for this action. In the first letter, the Clark 
County DES disagrees with the EPA's proposed reclassification and the 
associated timelines for the SIP revision and implementation. In the 
second letter, Earthjustice, on behalf of Sierra Club, supports all 
aspects of the EPA's proposal but expresses a concern about review of 
wildfires under the Exceptional Events Rule (EER).

A. Determination of Failure To Attain and Reclassification

    The EPA received adverse comments on its proposal to determine that 
Las Vegas failed to attain by the applicable attainment date and to 
reclassify the area as Moderate from the Clark County DES.
    Comment: Clark County DES stated opposition to the proposed 
reclassification of Las Vegas as Moderate, indicating that the area is 
heavily impacted by ozone precursors originating from upwind states and 
asserting that as a result, further actions taken by the State to 
address Moderate area planning requirements are unlikely to 
significantly improve air quality in Las Vegas.
    Response: The EPA disagrees that Las Vegas should not be 
reclassified as Moderate. The EPA has a mandatory duty under CAA 
section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine whether Las Vegas attained by its 
attainment date of August 3, 2021, based on the area's design value as 
of the attainment date. The CAA also requires that any area that the 
EPA finds has not attained the standard by the attainment deadline 
shall be reclassified by operation of law to the higher of the next 
``higher'' classification (e.g., Marginal to Moderate, Moderate to 
Serious, etc.) or the classification applicable to the area's DV. 
Further, the Agency's mandatory duty to make determinations of 
attainment or failure to attain the NAAQS exists regardless of the 
nature or effect of transported ozone on monitored air quality in a 
given nonattainment area.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Cf. Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155 (D.C. Cir. 2002) 
(rejecting the EPA's decision not to reclassify a downwind 
nonattainment area that failed to timely attain due to transported 
pollution from upwind states).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, Appendix U, the 2015 
ozone NAAQS is attained at a monitoring site when the three-year 
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour average 
ozone concentration (i.e., the DV) is less than or equal to 0.070 ppm. 
When the DV is less than or equal to 0.070 ppm at each regulatory 
ambient air quality monitoring site within the area, the area is deemed 
to be meeting the NAAQS. If the DV is greater than 0.070 ppm at any 
site in the area, the area is deemed to be violating the NAAQS. Four 
monitoring sites in Las Vegas have design values greater than 0.070 ppm 
(the highest design value measured in the area is 0.074 ppm) for the 
2018-2020 period; \11\ therefore, the EPA must determine that the area 
failed to attain the standard by the August 3, 2021, Marginal 
attainment deadline and reclassify the area as Moderate as required by 
section 181(b)(2) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ AQS report AMP480_2054242.pdf dated 20221025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment: Clark County DES strongly disagreed with the EPA's 
nonconcurrence on exceptional event (EE) demonstrations submitted in 
support of Clark County DES's requested determination of attainment or, 
alternatively, a 1-year attainment date extension for the Las Vegas 
area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
    Response: The EPA disagrees that its nonconcurrence with regard to 
Clark County DES' EE demonstrations was incorrect. The 2016 EER applies 
to data showing exceedances or violations of an air quality standard 
for purposes of qualifying regulatory determinations (i.e., having 
``regulatory significance''), and requires that, if a state 
demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that an exceptional event meets 
the requirements of the EER, the EPA shall exclude the data from use in 
determinations of exceedances and violations with respect to such 
regulatory determinations.\12\ In addition to having regulatory 
significance and meeting certain procedural requirements for submitting 
an EE demonstration, the demonstration must include: (1) a narrative 
conceptual model describing the event(s) causing the exceedance or 
violation, (2) a demonstration of a clear causal relationship between 
the event and the monitored exceedance or violation, (3) analyses 
comparing the event-influenced concentration to concentrations at the 
same monitoring site at other times to support the clear causal 
relationship; (4) a demonstration that the event was both not 
reasonably controllable and not reasonably preventable; and (5) a 
demonstration that the event was caused by human activity that is 
unlikely to recur at a particular location or was a natural event.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 81 FR 68216 (October 3, 2016).
    \13\ See 40 CFR 50.14(c)(3)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Of the seventeen EE demonstrations submitted by Clark County DES, 
the EPA first reviewed three wildfire events and two stratospheric 
ozone intrusion (SOI) events, based on the regulatory significance and 
critical potential effect on design values and 2020 data of these five 
events. As more fully discussed in the EE technical support documents 
included in the docket to this rulemaking, the EPA ultimately found 
that none of the five demonstrations fully satisfied all of the EER 
criteria required for the EPA to concur; specifically, the EPA 
determined that each of the five demonstrations did not sufficiently 
show a clear causal relationship between the specific events and the 
monitored exceedances. This conclusion was based on the technical 
review of extensive information presented in the demonstrations, such 
as meteorological data, fire and stratospheric ozone intrusion 
information and analyses, trajectory analysis, ground level monitoring 
data, and statistical modeling analysis. The technical data and 
analyses presented did not support that event emissions were 
transported to the Clark County

[[Page 778]]

monitoring sites and influenced air quality sufficiently to cause 
exceedances of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, and therefore did not satisfy the 
clear causal relationship criterion of the EER.
    The EPA notified Clark County DES of its decision to nonconcur on 
the five demonstrations on April 11, 2022. As a result of the 
nonconcurrences on the five demonstrations, the remaining 
demonstrations submitted by Clark County DES, even if concurred upon, 
would not have resulted in an attaining DV or air quality that would 
have met the criterion for an attainment date extension. Therefore, the 
remaining EE demonstrations no longer had regulatory significance, as 
required by the 2016 EER, and were not reviewed by the EPA.
    Comment: Clark County DES expressed concerns about the increasing 
impact of western wildfires and associated smoke on air quality in Las 
Vegas, noting that control of wildfires and the transport of the 
emissions were out of their jurisdiction and control. The commenter 
requested that the EPA consider changes to the EER and EE guidance to 
clearly define what qualifies as a wildfire-related EE because normal 
levels of wildfire smoke have changed. Another commenter expressed 
concern that implementation of the EER undermines the goals of the 
attaining the NAAQS because wildfire occurrences are becoming more 
frequent.
    Response: The EPA recognizes that many areas in the West are 
experiencing more intense wildfire activity, in large part driven by 
severe drought conditions that are affecting nearly ninety percent of 
the region.\14\ The EPA recognizes that these wildfire impacts are 
generally outside of the control of local air quality agencies, like 
Clark County DES. Indeed, the purpose of the EER and related guidance 
is to exclude these types of air quality impacts, i.e., naturally 
occurring events that can affect air quality but that are not 
reasonably controllable using techniques that tribal, state or local 
air agencies may implement in order to attain and maintain the NAAQS, 
to avoid imposing unreasonable planning or implementation requirements 
on air quality agencies. Additionally, as noted in 40 CFR 50.1(n), a 
wildfire occuring predominantly on wildland is defined as a natural 
event, and the definition of natural events at 40 CFR 50.1(k) clarifies 
that such events may recur at the same location. Therefore, the EER 
continues to allow for exclusion of data affected by more frequent 
wildfires, presuming those events otherwise meet the requirements of 
the EER.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Fact Sheet: The Biden-Harris Administration Acts to Address 
the Growing Wildfire Threat, The White House (June 30, 2021), 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/30/fact-sheet-the-biden-harris-administration-acts-to-address-the-growing-wildfire-threat/. While heat waves and droughts do not 
directly cause pollutant emissions and are not themselves considered 
exceptional events, they can combine with or exacerbate the effects 
of events that do meet the requirements, provisions, and criteria of 
the EER.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA acknowledges the complexity and intricacies of regional 
conditions prevalent across the country and is committed to continuing 
to provide clarification and assistance to states as the EER is 
implemented and through communications between the Regions and the 
states to ensure that these regional conditions are adequately 
addressed. However, to the extent that the commenters suggest the EPA 
revisit the EER and EE guidance in this rulemaking, either to provide 
additional clarifications or because of a commenter's concern that 
implementation of the EER undermines attainment of the NAAQS, the EPA 
believes that doing so is beyond the scope of this rulemaking to 
determine whether Las Vegas attained by its Marginal area attainment 
date.
    While we acknowledge that wildfires have become more common in the 
West, we reiterate that the EPA carefully examined Clark County DES' EE 
demonstrations, and, as described in more detail above and in the EE 
technical support documents included in the docket to this rulemaking, 
found that the EE demonstrations submitted by Clark County DES did not 
sufficiently establish a clear causal relationship between wildfire 
emissions and ozone concentrations during the three identified wildfire 
exceedance events reviewed by the EPA. The EPA's evaluation of the 
``clear causal relationship'' criterion did not rely on the frequency 
of events, and therefore an increasing frequency or intensity of 
wildfires were not considered in the EPA's nonconcurrence 
determinations issued with respect to the Clark County DES wildfire 
demonstrations.
    Comment: In identifying the local impacts from increased wildfires, 
Clark County DES also highlighted the need for federal action to 
research, prevent, and contain these wildfires.
    Response: We recognize that many areas in the West are experiencing 
more wildfire activity, as well as drought conditions and high 
temperatures. The White House and many executive agencies, including 
the EPA, are committed to devoting federal resources to study and 
reduce these wildfire impacts to the extent possible. For example, land 
managers, landowners, air agencies and communities may be able to 
lessen the impacts of wildfires by working collaboratively to take 
steps to minimize fuel loading in areas vulnerable to fire. There are 
specific Department of the Interior \15\ and United States Forest 
Service \16\ federal plans to increase fuel load minimization efforts 
in areas at high risk of wildfire. The recently passed Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law \17\ and Inflation Reduction Act \18\ further direct 
agencies and provides funding for such efforts at the federal level as 
well as at state, tribal, local and private landowner levels.\19\ For 
example, the White House recently outlined a plan to leverage $8 
billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to improve wildfire 
response capabilities by bolstering the wildland firefighting workforce 
and utilizing data and technology to better detect and respond to 
wildfires, among other tools to strengthen prevention, preparedness, 
mitigation, and response efforts to wildfires.\20\ It is important to 
note that the EPA is not a land management agency, and therefore land 
management techniques to prevent and control wildfires are outside of 
our jurisdiction. However, we work closely with other federal agencies 
including the United States Forest Service on multiple interagency 
groups to discuss the use of prescribed fires and other land management 
control techniques.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/bil-5-year-wildfire-risk-mmt-plan.04.2022.owf_.final_.pdf.
    \16\ See https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Confronting-Wildfire-Crisis.pdf.
    \17\ Inflation Reduction Act, Public Law 117-169 available at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text.
    \18\ Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law 117-58, 
available at https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-117publ58.pdf.
    \19\ Inflation Reduction Act, Public Law 117-169 available at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text.
    \20\ See Fact Sheet: ``The Biden-Harris Administration Acts to 
Address the Growing Wildfire Threat'', The White House (June 30, 
2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/30/fact-sheet-the-biden-harris-administration-acts-to-address-the-growing-wildfire-threat/; Fact Sheet: President Biden 
Signs Executive Order to Strengthen America's Forests, Boost 
Wildfire Resilience, and Combat Global Deforestation The White House 
(April 22, 2022), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/
statements-releases/2022/04/22/fact-sheet-president-biden-signs-
executive-order-to-strengthen-americas-forests-boost-wildfire-
resilience-and-combat-global-deforestation/
#:~:text=To%20strengthen%20America's%20forests20and,growth%%20forests
%20on%20federal%20lands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From an air quality perspective, the EPA has multiple Air Sensor 
Loan Programs to help bolster local air quality monitoring efforts. One 
example of this is the Wildfire Smoke Air Monitoring

[[Page 779]]

Technology (WSMART) Pilot program.\21\ The WSMART program allows state, 
local, or tribal air agencies to loan one of two types of stationary 
sampling systems to supplement air quality data in smoke-impacted 
communities. In addition, the EPA regularly deploys air quality experts 
to large smoke events, where they help predict, analyze, and 
communicate smoke impacts from fires, along with other air experts, to 
the public.\22\ The EPA is also involved in numerous research efforts. 
Current research includes a study on the safety and efficacy of using 
Do-It-Yourself air cleaners, which are in-home air filtration devices 
made by attaching an air filter to a box fan, as an alternative to 
other air cleaners. A second study is research on the use of N95 masks 
to protect against wildfire smoke when used with varying levels of 
instruction.\23\ This research helps us understand the safety and 
efficacy of different tools the public can use to protect themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Wildfire Smoke Air Monitoring Response Technology (WSMART) 
Pilot, EPA, https://www.epa.gov/air-sensor-toolbox/wildfire-smoke-air-monitoring-response-technology-wsmart-pilot.
    \22\ Air Resource Advisor Deployments, Interagency Wildland Fire 
Air Quality Response Program, https://www.wildlandfiresmoke.net/ara/deployments.
    \23\ When research results are published, they will appear on 
the EPA's Wildland Fire Research to Protect Health and the 
Environment page, https://www.epa.gov/air-research/wildland-fire-research-protect-health-and-environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Federal agencies will continue to engage on various fronts to 
address wildfires and the associated impacts, and the EPA will continue 
to incorporate the tools and research information to work with Clark 
County DES and others toward protecting the environment and human 
health.

B. Moderate Area SIP Submission and Implementation Deadlines

    The EPA received one supportive comment from the Sierra Club and 
adverse comments from Clark County DES on our proposed deadlines, which 
are addressed as follows. We acknowledge that meeting a January 1, 
2023, SIP submission and RACM/RACT implementation deadline will be 
challenging. As discussed in our responses, the options for 
establishing deadlines within the CAA framework of attainment 
timeframes and RACT implementation requirements are constrained. We 
also note that a state may at any time request--and the EPA must 
grant--a voluntary reclassification under CAA section 181(b)(3). As a 
general matter, the EPA remains committed to working closely with 
affected states to help them prepare their SIP revisions in a timely 
manner. One additional comment, regarding future contingency measures 
policy is also addressed below.
    Comment: Regarding the EPA's proposed January 1, 2023, SIP 
submission deadline for Clark County's Moderate area SIP revision, the 
commenter states that the deadline was without a rational basis because 
the EPA knows NDEP cannot meet the deadline, and further asserts that 
the proposed deadline is not specifically mandated by the CAA or the 
EPA's regulations. The commenter observed that the proposed deadline 
would be less than three months from final area reclassification, which 
they note is less than the planning timeframe allowed for initially 
designated areas (up to, e.g., 3 years for RFP demonstrations) or for 
reclassified areas under 40 CFR 51.1312(a)(2)(ii), which allows up to 2 
years for RACT SIPs. Clark County DES did not request a specific 
deadline but was concerned that the proposed submission deadline was 
unachievable given the timing and need for development of the plan and 
the need for providing the public with opportunity to comment, also 
noting that the EPA's delayed rulemaking in this action has contributed 
to the planning burden on the nonattainment area.
    The commenter disagrees with the EPA's exercise of discretion under 
CAA section 182(i) to provide for consistency among the required SIP 
submissions by harmonizing the SIP submission and RACT SIP 
implementation deadlines, claiming the EPA has not yet shown that its 
exercise of discretion is ``necessary or appropriate'' under the Act.
    Further, the commenter requests that the EPA use its general 
regulatory authorities under CAA section 301(a)(1) to harmonize the SIP 
submission deadlines and the attainment date on the grounds that 
Congress intended for the EPA to give adequate time for states to 
implement control measures before facing sanctions or additional bump-
ups. The commenter notes that the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has 
held that an agency's statutory interpretation must ``avoid unnecessary 
hardship or surprise to affected parties and remains within the general 
statutory bounds prescribed.''
    Response: The EPA acknowledges the short planning timeframe 
available to NDEP and Clark County DES for the newly reclassified Las 
Vegas Moderate area, and that delays in this rulemaking, including 
additional time needed to review the EE demonstrations described above, 
have contributed to this shortened timeframe. We further acknowledge 
that the available timeframe here will present significant challenges 
to Clark County DES, but we believe that our approach here is 
consistent with prior determination and reclassification actions and 
with the confines of the CAA. Further, we maintain that the aligned SIP 
submission and RACT implementation deadline established in this final 
action best addresses the regulatory requirement under 40 CFR 
51.1312(a)(3)(ii) that RACT be implemented as expeditiously as 
practicable, but no later than the start of the attainment year ozone 
season associated with the area's new attainment deadline--in this 
case, January 1, 2023, for the Las Vegas area.
    We note that first and foremost, the primary purpose of title I of 
the CAA and subpart 2 in particular is the expeditious attainment of 
the NAAQS in all areas. We do not agree that the Act provides support 
for the notion that the overriding goal of these statutory provisions 
is to provide adequate time to states for implementing control 
measures, or that our proposed SIP submission and implementation 
deadlines would result in ``unnecessary hardship or surprise'' that 
exceeds permissible bounds. The plain language of the CAA mandates that 
the Las Vegas area be reclassified as Moderate as a matter of law 
because the area failed to attain the NAAQS by its Marginal attainment 
date. The Act, and its implementing regulations, further mandate that, 
once reclassified, the area's new attainment date is August 3, 2024.
    The State, in this case, has been on notice since December 2020 
that there was a possibility that Las Vegas would be reclassified, 
given the preliminary air quality data for the time period relevant to 
attainment demonstrations (2018-2020). Moreover, the EPA shared with 
the State in April of this year that we did not agree with the state's 
exceptional events demonstrations, paving the way for a finding that 
the area did not attain and would be reclassified. A state need not 
wait until EPA's finding and reclassification is made effective before 
beginning to develop an attainment plan for a higher classification of 
an air quality standard. At the time of the proposed finding and 
reclassification for Las Vegas, there was nearly two full years until 
the area's attainment date, including the entire attainment year ozone 
season of 2023.
    Given these facts and circumstances, we think it is appropriate and 
necessary to establish deadlines that would result in the most 
expeditious schedule for adopting and implementing control

[[Page 780]]

measures, as we have in similarly situated areas all over the country, 
in order to provide Las Vegas with the best chance of timely attainment 
by its new 2024 attainment deadline. It is not appropriate, when there 
is still time to affect whether the area will timely attain, to delay 
the area's SIP submission or implementation deadlines, such that none 
of the controls adopted or implemented could ever affect whether the 
area attained by its next attainment deadline. We also therefore do not 
think CAA section 301(a)(1)'s gap-filling authority is needed or 
appropriate here, where CAA section 182(i) provides the EPA with the 
specific authority to establish new deadlines for areas that are 
reclassified for failing to timely attain by their attainment date.
    Areas initially classified as Moderate under the 2015 ozone NAAQS 
were required to prepare and submit SIP revisions by deadlines relative 
to the effective date of the nonattainment designation (i.e., August 3, 
2018), which ranged from 2 to 3 years after the effective date of 
designation (e.g., 2 years for the RACT SIP, and 3 years for the 
attainment plan with RACM and attainment demonstration). These SIP 
submission deadlines preceded the RACT implementation deadline (i.e., 
as expeditiously as practicable but no later than January 1 of the 5th 
year after the effective date of designations) and have the practical 
effect of ensuring that SIPs requiring control measures needed for 
attainment, including RACM, would be submitted prior to when those 
controls are required to be implemented--in this case, no later than 
the beginning of the Moderate area attainment year. i.e., January 1, 
2023.
    Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA requires that within 6 months 
following the applicable attainment date, the EPA shall determine 
whether an ozone nonattainment area attained the ozone standard, and 
those areas that failed to attain and were not granted a 1-year 
attainment date extension are reclassified by operation of law. 
Although Congress did not articulate specific SIP submission deadlines 
for reclassified areas in the Act, it provided the EPA with authority 
under CAA section 182(i) to adjust any related deadlines for 
requirements under CAA sections 182(b) through (d) ``. . . to the 
extent such adjustment is necessary or appropriate to assure 
consistency among the required submissions.'' Notably, explicitly 
excluded from CAA section 182(i) is authority to adjust attainment 
dates.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ CAA section 182(i)(``. . . the Administrator may adjust any 
applicable deadlines (other than attainment dates) . . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The area classifications and attainment date framework established 
in Table 1 of CAA section 181(a)(1) and interpreted by 40 CFR 51.1303 
inherently constrains the planning and implementation timeframe for 
reclassified areas, particularly for lower area classifications. The 
time increments between the Marginal and Moderate, and the Moderate and 
Serious area statutory attainment dates are only three years. These 
short timeframes are further constrained by the RACT implementation 
deadline for reclassified areas. Consistent with the RACT requirements 
of 40 CFR 51.1312(a)(3)(ii), the EPA proposed a RACT implementation 
deadline for the reclassified Las Vegas Moderate area corresponding 
with the beginning of the area's attainment year ozone season (i.e., 
January 1, 2023). Aligning the RACT implementation and SIP submission 
deadlines ensures that SIPs requiring control measures needed for 
attainment, including RACM, are submitted no later than when those 
controls are required to be implemented.\25\ The combination of 
constraints dictated by the statutory and regulatory requirements for 
reclassified ozone areas, particularly at the lower classifications, 
are a primary cause of the compressed timeframe for SIP development and 
implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See 87 FR 21842, 21856 (April 13, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA also notes that voluntary reclassification provides a way 
for states to anticipate and manage the tight timeframes for SIP 
development for nonattainment areas. An air agency can request--and the 
EPA must grant--a voluntary reclassification under CAA section 
181(b)(3), which resets the area's attainment date into the future, and 
would therefore likely provide more time and flexibility for developing 
and submitting required SIP revisions. Of particular benefit for states 
is the longer timeframe to prepare RACT analyses and adopt SIP 
revisions for voluntarily reclassified areas, which could result in 
states determining that additional controls are reasonable and in turn 
help expedite air quality improvements in these areas.
    Thus, while we recognize that Clark County DES may face difficulty 
in meeting the submission and implementation deadlines in this final 
rule, we continue to believe our proposed approach is consistent with 
the CAA and our regulations. As a reclassified Moderate area, Las Vegas 
is required to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS by August 3, 2024, and per 
Congress's clear statutory instruction in CAA section 182(i), the EPA 
may not alter attainment deadlines for reclassified areas. Given the 
competing considerations outlined above and the remaining planning 
options available for Clark County, we maintain that the deadlines 
imposed by the final action are reasonable, and an appropriate exercise 
of the EPA's discretion under CAA section 182(i).
    Comment: Regarding the proposed January 1, 2023, RACT 
implementation deadline for reclassified Moderate areas, the EPA 
received comments from Clark County DES stating that the deadline was 
unreasonable, and/or the resulting compressed timeframe provided 
insufficient time for RACT SIP development and implementation by 
affected sources. The commenter contended that the RACT implementation 
deadline would not provide enough time for the area to adopt new 
measures and also allow time for the EPA to approve the measures into 
the SIP, making them federally enforceable before the implementation 
deadline. The commentor argued that it is inappropriate to ask sources 
to make capital investments for new control measures before the EPA 
approves the SIP because they could have additional requirements to 
meet. Finally, the commenter considered the EPA's reliance upon the 
Moderate area attainment date to justify the RACT SIP submission 
deadline as not rational because the RACT SIP requirement is 
independent from attainment planning.
    Response: As discussed previously, the EPA considers the compressed 
planning and RACT implementation timeframe for reclassified Moderate 
areas to be largely dictated by the area classifications and attainment 
date framework established in the CAA, and the regulatory RACT 
implementation deadline for reclassified areas--in this case, January 
1, 2023, for the reclassified Las Vegas Moderate area. The EPA 
recognizes that measures that states identify as ``reasonably 
available'' and that affected sources must implement are directly tied 
to the amount of time provided by the EPA in establishing a due date 
within the statutory and regulatory constraints discussed previously, 
which includes the time needed for EPA to approve these measures into 
the SIP. Therefore, an area may be limited to RACM and RACT measures 
that are already on the books or well into the state's adoption process 
and might not generate additional emissions reductions. However, 
delaying the implementation deadline

[[Page 781]]

for RACT will not make it more likely that the area will attain by its 
attainment date. The deadline the EPA is finalizing is already the 
beginning of the last year in that any emissions reductions could 
influence an area's DV as of their next attainment date.
    Moreover, a states' obligation to adopt and implement RACT are not 
conditioned in any way on the EPA's action on those SIP revisions. 
There are no provisions of the CAA that permit states an extension of 
time to adopt SIP revisions or require implementation of control 
measures based on the timing of the EPA's action on the state's 
submissions. It is the state's obligation to adopt control measures and 
to implement those measures in order to attain the NAAQS, and the more 
expeditiously those controls are adopted and implemented, the likelier 
Las Vegas is to timely attain.
    To the extent that the commenter does not think it will be possible 
to implement any controls beyond what has already been federally 
approved and recognizes that additional controls are necessary for that 
area to reach attainment, the area may, as discussed previously, 
exercise the option to request a voluntary reclassification, which the 
EPA must approve. The EPA cannot, under the CAA, reclassify ozone areas 
based on its presumption that an area will not attain or is unlikely to 
attain by the attainment date; but states are fully within their rights 
to recognize this and put themselves in a better position for longer 
planning and implementation timeframes.
    Finally, the EPA disagrees with the commenter that it would be 
irrational to consider the attainment deadline when determining the 
proper RACT implementation deadline. The CAA and the EPA's regulations 
require the agency to consider the attainment date when determining the 
RACT implementation deadline.\26\ Moreover, although the EPA considers 
the requirement to adopt RACT to be generally independent of attainment 
planning requirements, the EPA does not take the position that the RACT 
implementation requirement is fully independent of all other attainment 
planning requirements. The purpose of generally considering the RACT 
implementation requirement independent of attainment planning, 
particularly after reclassification to a higher standard, is to ensure 
continued progress toward and maintenance of attainment for those areas 
with more difficult air quality problems.\27\ A nonattainment area is 
not required to submit certain attainment planning demonstrations, 
e.g., attainment and RFP demonstrations, if the EPA finds that the area 
is in fact attaining the standard, with the caveat that those 
demonstrations will be required if the area again violates the 
standard.\28\ RACT implementation, however, would still be required in 
the event that attainment could be demonstrated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See e.g., Clean Air Act 182(b)(2); 40 CFR 
51.1312(a)(3)(ii).
    \27\ See 81 FR 58010, 58081 (August 24, 2016).
    \28\ See Memo from John Seitz, ``Reasonable Further Progress, 
Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone 
Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard'' (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the Las Vegas area, in contrast, attainment has not 
been demonstrated and the nonattainment area will be required to submit 
all SIP planning requirements for Moderate nonattainment areas in 
addition to RACT implementation. Given this context, considering the 
attainment deadline when determining the optimal timeline for RACT 
implementation is a reasonable exercise of discretion in ensuring 
continued progress towards attainment.
    Comment: In the remaining comment received from Clark County DES, 
the commenter asked that any future guidance on development and 
implementation of contingency measures not be applicable to the Las 
Vegas Moderate SIP for the 2015 ozone standard due to the short 
timeframe for SIP development.
    Response: The EPA recognizes that many states are seeking guidance 
from the EPA on contingency measures, and as noted by the commenter, 
the EPA intends to release draft guidance on contingency measures for 
public review in the coming months. We appreciate the concerns 
expressed by the commenter and note that this comment is outside of the 
scope of this current rulemaking. Clark County DES will have an 
opportunity to comment on the draft guidance when it is released for 
public comment in the future, and the EPA is committed to continuing to 
support Clark County DES during the development of the Moderate area 
plan for Las Vegas.

C. Final Action

    Pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2) and after considering comments 
received, the EPA is finalizing its proposed determination that Las 
Vegas failed to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date of August 3, 2021. Therefore, upon the effective date 
of this final action, Las Vegas will be reclassified, by operation of 
law, as Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Once reclassified as 
Moderate, Las Vegas will be required to attain the standard ``as 
expeditiously as practicable'' but no later than 6 years after the 
initial designation as nonattainment, which in this case would be no 
later than August 3, 2024. If the area attains the 2015 ozone NAAQS 
prior to the Moderate area attainment date, NDEP may request 
redesignation to attainment, provided the state can demonstrate at a 
minimum that the other criteria under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are 
met.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ More information about redesignation is available at 
https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/redesignation-and-clean-data-policy-cdp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to CAA section 182(i) and after considering comments 
received, the EPA is finalizing its proposed deadlines for the Las 
Vegas Moderate area SIP revisions and implementation of RACM/RACT for 
the 2015 ozone NAAQS. SIP revisions required for the newly reclassified 
Las Vegas Moderate area, including the I/M SIP revision, must be 
submitted no later than January 1, 2023, and RACM/RACT for these areas 
must be implemented as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 
the same date.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ In addition to EPA Region 9's technical assistance, the 
EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality recently provided new 
guidance for performance standard modeling that is required for I/M 
SIPs for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. See EPA's I/M website for additional 
information at www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/vehicle-emissions-inspection-and-maintenance-im.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For any revisions to the current I/M program that may be necessary, 
the EPA is finalizing an implementation deadline of no later than 4 
years after the effective date of reclassification if the state does 
not intend to rely upon emissions reductions from a revised Basic I/M 
program in the Moderate area attainment or RFP demonstrations. The EPA 
received no comments on the implementation deadline for the Basic I/M 
program in Las Vegas.

III. Good Cause Exemption Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 
for Immediate Effective Date

    Under APA section 553(d)(3), 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), an agency may make 
a rule immediately effective ``for good cause found and published with 
the rule.'' The EPA believes that there is ``good cause'' to make this 
rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register to avoid any 
additional delay in development and implementation of the SIP 
requirements under 182(b), given the closeness to the beginning of the 
2023 ozone season and the proximity of EPA's final action to the 
submission and implementation deadlines described in this rule. While 
EPA acknowledges and

[[Page 782]]

addresses comments related to the compressed timeline associated with 
this action elsewhere in this notice, the agency believes that 
establishing an effective date of this action simultaneous with the 
date of publication will reconcile the competing statutory interests by 
minimizing a potentially impractical outcome in which the area might 
otherwise be subject to Moderate nonattainment area statutory and 
regulatory deadlines that would already have passed prior to the normal 
30 days post-publication effective date.
    As described above, when 2020 monitoring data became available 
showing that the Las Vegas area may not have attained the 2015 ozone 
NAAQS, nor be eligible for a one-year extension, Clark County DES had 
every reason to anticipate and prepare for reclassification. In 
addition, EPA notified Clark County DES in April 2022 that it did not 
agree with the area's exceptional events demonstrations, published its 
proposed rule for this reclassification on July 22, 2022, and is 
providing direct notice to the state and county of this final action 
simultaneous with signature of this rule. Accordingly, the EPA finds 
that the preparation time actually available to the state and the need 
to reconcile the statutory interest in reclassification with the 
deadlines for submission of Moderate area SIP revisions and compliance 
with RACT implementation requirements, constitute good cause under 5 
U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make this final action effective upon publication.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is exempt from review by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) because it responds to the CAA requirement to determine 
whether areas designated nonattainment for an ozone NAAQS attained the 
standard by the applicable attainment date, and to take certain steps 
for areas that failed to attain.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This rule does not impose any new information collection burden 
under the PRA not already approved by the Office of Management and 
Budget. This action does not contain any information collection 
activities and serves only to make final: (1) determinations that the 
Las Vegas Marginal nonattainment area failed to attain the 2015 ozone 
standards by the August 3, 2021, attainment date where such areas will 
be reclassified as Moderate nonattainment for the 2015 ozone standards 
by operation of law upon the effective date of the final 
reclassification action; and (2) adjust any applicable implementation 
deadlines.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. The 
determination of failure to attain the 2015 ozone standards (and 
resulting reclassifications), do not in and of themselves create any 
new requirements beyond what is mandated by the CAA. This final action 
would require the state to adopt and submit SIP revisions to satisfy 
CAA requirements and would not itself directly regulate any small 
entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action 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. The 
division of responsibility between the federal government and the 
states for purposes of implementing the NAAQS is established under the 
CAA.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    The Las Vegas Tribe of Paiute Indians of the Las Vegas Indian 
Colony have areas of Indian country located within the Las Vegas Valley 
nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has concluded that 
this final rule may have implications for this tribe for the purposes 
of Executive Order 13175 but would not impose substantial direct costs 
upon the tribes, nor would it preempt tribal law. A tribe that is part 
of an area that is reclassified from Marginal to Moderate nonattainment 
is not required to submit a tribal implementation plan revision to 
address new Moderate area requirements.\31\ However, the NNSR major 
source threshold and offset requirements will change for stationary 
sources seeking preconstruction permits in any nonattainment areas 
newly reclassified as Moderate (Section II.D.1 of the proposed rule), 
including on tribal lands within these nonattainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See 87 FR 21842, 21846 (April 13, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the potential implications, the EPA contacted tribal 
officials early in the process of developing our proposed rule to 
provide an opportunity to have meaningful and timely input into its 
development. In a letter dated July 16, 2021, the EPA invited the Las 
Vegas Tribe of Paiute Indians of the Las Vegas Indian Colony to consult 
on our evaluation and determination of whether the Las Vegas 
nonattainment area attained or failed to attain by its Marginal area 
attainment date and notified the Las Vegas Tribe of Paiute Indians of 
the Las Vegas Indian Colony of the proposed action. The tribe did not 
comment or request consultation.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental 
standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 establishes federal executive policy on 
environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to 
the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make

[[Page 783]]

environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and 
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human 
health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and 
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the 
United States. There is no information in the record indicating that 
this action would be inconsistent with the stated goals of Executive 
Order 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, 
low-income populations, and indigenous peoples.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This rule is exempt from the CRA because it is a rule of particular 
applicability. The rule makes factual determinations for specific 
entities and does not directly regulate any entities. The determination 
of failure to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS (and resulting 
reclassification), do not in themselves create any new requirements 
beyond what is mandated by the CAA.

L. 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 March 6, 2023. 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 81

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Designations and classifications, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, and Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 22, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 81, title 40, chapter 
1 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows:

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
2. Section 81.329 is amended in the table for ``Nevada--2015 8-Hour 
Ozone NAAQS [Primary and Secondary]'' by revising the entry for ``Las 
Vegas, NV'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.329  Nevada.

* * * * *

                                                             Nevada--2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                                                 [Primary and Secondary]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Designation                                               Classification
       Designated area \1\        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Date \2\                        Type                        Date \2\                        Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Las Vegas, NV....................  ............................  Nonattainment...............  January 5, 2023.............  Moderate.
    Clark County (part)
    That portion of Clark County
     that lies in hydrographic
     area 212.\3\
    Las Vegas Tribe of Paiute
     Indians of the Las Vegas
     Indian Colony.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise specified. EPA is not determining the boundaries of any area of Indian country
  in this table, including any area of Indian country located in the larger designation area. The inclusion of any Indian country in the designation
  area is not a determination that the state has regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act for such Indian country.
\2\ This date is August 3, 2018, unless otherwise noted.
\3\ Hydrographic areas are shown on the State of Nevada Division of Water Resources' map titled Water Resources and Inter-basin Flows (September 1971).

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-28319 Filed 1-3-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P