[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 71 (Friday, April 12, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17939-17944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-8289]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[NV 021-0049a; FRL-7167-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Nevada
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the Steptoe Valley
Central area in Nevada and granting the request submitted by the State
to redesignate this area from nonattainment to attainment for the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide
(SO2). Elsewhere in this Federal Register, we are proposing
approval and soliciting written comment on this action; if adverse
written comments are received, we will withdraw the direct final rule
and address the comments received in a new final rule; otherwise no
further rulemaking will occur on this approval action.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective June 11, 2002, without
further notice, unless we receive adverse comments by May 13, 2002. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Please address your comments to the EPA contact below. You
may inspect and copy the rulemaking docket for this notice at the
following location during normal business hours: Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 9, Air Division, Air Planning Office (AIR-2),
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
Copies of the SIP materials are also available for inspection at
the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, 333 W. Nye Lane,
Carson City, NV 89710.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Valerie Cooper, Grants and Program Integration Office (AIR-8), Air
Division, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901. Telephone: (415) 947-4103. E-mail: [email protected]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Action
II. Introduction
A. What National Ambient Air Quality Standards are Considered in
Today's Rulemaking?
B. What Is a State Implementation Plan?
C. What Is the Background for this Action?
D. What Are the Applicable CAA Provisions for SO2
Nonattainment Area Plans?
E. What Are the Applicable Provisions for SO2
Maintenance Plans and Redesignation Requests?
III. Review of the Nevada State submittals Addressing these
Provisions?
A. Is the Maintenance Plan Approvable?
B. Has the State Met the Remaining Maintenance Plan Provisions?
C. Has the State Met the Redesignation Provisions of CAA Section
107(d)(3)(E)?
IV. Final Action
V. Administrative Requirements
I. Summary of Action
We are approving the maintenance plan for the Steptoe Valley--
Central SO2 nonattainment area (``Steptoe Valley'').\1\ We
are also approving the State of Nevada's request to redesignate the
Steptoe Valley area from nonattainment to attainment for the primary
SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the definition of the Steptoe Valley--Central
nonattainment area, see 40 CFR 81.329. The Northern and Southern
areas of Steptoe Valley hydrographic area 179 are not nonattainment
for the SO2 NAAQS. These areas are designated as ``cannot be
classified.'' Steptoe Valley is a sparsely populated area in White
Pine County in the northeastern portion of Nevada.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Introduction
A. What National Ambient Air Quality Standards Are Considered in
Today's Rulemaking?
Sulfur dioxide is the pollutant that is the subject of this action.
The NAAQS are safety thresholds for certain ambient air pollutants set
to protect public health and welfare. SO2 is among the
ambient air pollutants for which we have established a health-based
standard.
SO2 causes adverse health effects by reducing lung
function, increasing respiratory illness, altering the lung's defenses,
and aggravating existing cardiovascular disease. Children, the elderly,
and people with asthma are the most vulnerable. SO2 has a
variety of
[[Page 17940]]
additional impacts, including acidic deposition, damage to crops and
vegetation, and corrosion of natural and man-made materials.
There are both short- and long-term primary NAAQS for
SO2. The short-term (24-hour) standard of 0.14 parts per
million (ppm) or 365 micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3) is not
to be exceeded more than once per year. The long-term standard
specifies an annual arithmetic mean not to exceed 0.030 ppm (80
g/m3).\2\ The primary standards were established in 1972. (See
40 CFR 50.4 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The secondary SO2 NAAQS (3-hour) of 0.50 ppm
(1,300 ug/m3) is not to be exceeded more than once per year.
Secondary NAAQS are promulgated to protect welfare. The Steptoe
Valley is not classified nonattainment for the secondary standard,
and this action relates only to the primary NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What Is a State Implementation Plan?
The Clean Air Act requires states to attain and maintain ambient
air quality equal to or better than the NAAQS. The state's commitments
for attaining and maintaining the NAAQS are outlined in the State
Implementation Plan (or SIP) for that state. The SIP is a planning
document that, when implemented, is designed to ensure the achievement
of the NAAQS. Each state currently has a SIP in place, and the Act
requires that SIP revisions be made periodically as necessary to
provide continued compliance with the standards.
SIPs include, among other things, the following: (1) An inventory
of emission sources; (2) statutes and regulations adopted by the state
legislature and executive agencies; (3) air quality analyses that
include demonstrations that adequate controls are in place to meet the
NAAQS; and (4) contingency measures to be undertaken if an area fails
to attain the standard or make reasonable progress toward attainment by
the required date.
The state must make the SIP available for public review and comment
through a public hearing, it must be adopted by the state, and
submitted to us by the Governor or his designee. We take federal action
on the SIP submittal thus rendering the rules and regulations federally
enforceable. The approved SIP serves as the state's commitment to take
actions that will reduce or eliminate air quality problems. Any
subsequent revisions to the SIP must go through the formal SIP revision
process specified in the Act.
C. What Is the Background for This Action?
1. When Was the Nonattainment Area Established?
In 1906, a copper smelter was built in the town of McGill, Nevada
by the Nevada Copper Company. This company later became the Nevada
Mines Division of the Kennecott Minerals Company (Kennecott). The
smelter was the largest, and only significant source, of sulfur dioxide
(SO2) in the Steptoe Valley. Steptoe Valley is a discrete
hydrologic unit (Hydrographic Basin 179) in northeastern Nevada and is
divided into three subareas: the central area, the southern area, and
the northern area.
On March 3, 1978, at 43 FR 8962, we designated Steptoe Valley as a
primary SO2 nonattainment area based on monitored violations
of the primary SO2 NAAQS in the area between 1975 and 1977.
Prior to this date, we disapproved the SIP for the Nevada Intrastate
Region (the original name of the area) because the plan did not
adequately provide for attainment and maintenance of the SO2
NAAQS.
Based on dispersion modeling prepared for the State, we proposed to
redesignate the northern and southern portions of the Steptoe Valley on
March 10, 1982 (47 FR 10243) and published the final redesignation on
May 14, 1982 (47 FR 20773). This process formally changed the southern
and northern areas to ``cannot be classified'' or attainment for
SO2.
On the date of enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments,
SO2 areas, including the pre-existing SO2
nonattainment areas, meeting the conditions of section 107(d) of the
Act were designated nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS by
operation of law. Thus, the Steptoe Valley-Central area remained
nonattainment for the primary SO2 NAAQS following enactment
of the 1990 CAA Amendments on November 15, 1990.
2. How Has the SIP Addressed CAA Provisions?
In 1975, we promulgated controls for the Kennecott Copper Company
smelter, the source whose emissions caused the SO2
violations monitored in the area. See 40 CFR 52.1475, promulgated at 40
FR 5511, February 6, 1975, as amended at 51 FR 40676, November 7, 1986.
The smelter was subject to these requirements and to nonferrous smelter
orders issued by the State.
3. What is the Current Status of the Area?
On June 16, 1983, the smelter ceased all operation. On July 10,
1987, Kennecott allowed all air quality permits to expire. Subsequently
all copper smelting equipment was removed from the McGill facility in
November of 1990, and the building that housed the smelter operation
was dismantled in May of 1990. Finally, on September 6, 1993, Kennecott
demolished the 750 foot stack which was the last remaining vestige of
copper smelting operation. The smelter tailings piles have been re-
vegetated and pose no threat of emissions. The area remains sparsely
settled, and there are no industrial or commercial activities in or
near the nonattainment area.
Ambient air quality monitoring from 1979 to 1983 indicates there
were no violations during the last years of the smelter operation. The
monitor was removed when the smelter shut down.
D. What Are the Applicable CAA Provisions for SO2
Nonattainment Area Plans?
The air quality planning requirements for SO2
nonattainment areas are set out in subparts 1 and 5 of title I of the
Act. We have issued guidance in a General Preamble describing our views
on how we will review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under title I of
the Act, including those containing SO2 nonattainment area
and maintenance area SIP provisions. 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57
FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). The General Preamble discusses our
interpretation of the title I requirements, and lists SO2
policy and guidance documents.
1. What Statutory Provisions Apply?
CAA Sections 191 and 192 address requirements for SO2
nonattainment areas designated subsequent to enactment of the 1990 CAA
Amendments and areas lacking fully approved SIPs immediately before
enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Steptoe Valley falls
into neither of these categories and is therefore subject to the
requirements of subpart 1 of title I of the CAA (Sections 171-179B).\3\
Section 172 of this subpart contains provisions for nonattainment plans
in general; these provisions were not significantly changed by the 1990
[[Page 17941]]
CAA Amendments. Among other requirements, CAA Section 172 provides that
SIPs must assure that reasonably available control measures (RACM)
(including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the
area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of
reasonably available control technology (RACT)) shall be implemented as
expeditiously as practicable and shall provide for attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In 1975, we disapproved Nevada's Article 8.1.3 and the
control strategy for the Nevada Intrastate Region and promulgated
regulations for the smelter (40 CFR 51.1475). Later, Nevada issued a
nonferrous smelter order pursuant to Section 119 of the CAA as
amended in 1977, and the smelter was permanently closed shortly
after the State issued a second order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. What Are the Applicable Provisions for SO2 Maintenance
Plans and Redesignation Requests?
1. What Are the Statutory Provisions?
a. CAA Section 107(d)(3)(E).
The 1990 CAA Amendments revised section 107(d)(3)(E) to provide
five specific requirements that an area must meet in order to be
redesignated from nonattainment to attainment:
(1) The area must have attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) The area has met all relevant requirements under section 110
and Part D of the Act;
(3) The area has a fully approved SIP under section 110(k) of the
Act;
(4) The air quality improvement must be permanent and enforceable;
and,
(5) The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant
to section 175A of the Act.
b. CAA Section 175A.
CAA section 175A provides the general framework for maintenance
plans. The maintenance plan must provide for maintenance of the NAAQS
for at least 10 years after redesignation, including any additional
control measures as may be necessary to ensure such maintenance. In
addition, maintenance plans are to contain such contingency provisions
as we deem necessary to assure the prompt correction of a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The contingency measures
must include, at a minimum, a requirement that the state will implement
all control measures contained in the nonattainment SIP prior to
redesignation. Beyond these provisions, however, CAA section 175A does
not define the content of a maintenance plan.
2. What General EPA Guidance Applies to Maintenance Plans?
Our primary general guidance on maintenance plans and redesignation
requests is a September 4, 1992 memo from John Calcagni, entitled
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment'' (``Calcagni Memo''). Specific guidance on SO2
redesignations also appears in a January 26, 1995 memo from Sally L.
Shaver, entitled ``Attainment Determination Policy for Sulfur Dioxide
Nonattainment Areas'' (``Shaver Memo'').
3. What Are the Requirements for Redesignation of Single-Source
SO2 Nonattainment Areas in the Absence of Monitored Data?
Our historic redesignation policy for SO2 has called for
8 quarters of clean ambient air quality data as a necessary
prerequisite to redesignation of any area to attainment. On October 18,
2000, we issued a policy to provide guidance on SO2
maintenance plan requirements for an area lacking monitored ambient
data, if the area's historic violations were caused by a major point
source that is no longer in operation. See memo from John S. Seitz,
entitled ``Redesignation of Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Areas in the
Absence of Monitored Data'' (``Seitz Memo''). In order to allow for
these areas to qualify for redesignation to attainment, this policy
requires that the maintenance plan address otherwise applicable
provisions, and include:
(1) Emissions inventories representing actual emissions when
violations occurred; current emissions; and emissions projected to the
10th year after redesignation;
(2) Dispersion modeling showing that no NAAQS violations will occur
over the next 10 years and that the shutdown source was the dominant
cause of the high concentrations in the past;
(3) Evidence that if the shutdown source resumes operation it would
be considered a new source and be required to obtain a permit under the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration provisions of the CAA; and
(4) A commitment to resume monitoring before any major
SOX source commences operation.
III. Review of the Nevada State Submittals Addressing these
Provisions
A. Is the Maintenance Plan Approvable?
1. Did the State Meet the CAA Procedural Provisions?
On February 14, 1995, the Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection (NDEP) submitted to EPA the ``Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for the National Sulfur Dioxide Standard--Central
Steptoe Valley'' (``Maintenance Plan''). The State adhered to its SIP
adoption procedures. This submittal became complete by operation of law
6 months later. A supplement to the Maintenance Plan was provided in
the form of a letter from Allen Biaggi, Administrator, Nevada Division
of Environmental Protection, to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator,
EPA Region IX, dated February 27, 2002 (``Biaggi letter'').
2. Does the Area Qualify for Review under the Seitz Memo?
a. Were the Area's Violations Caused by a Major Point Source of
SOX Emissions That Is No Longer in Operation?
As discussed above, the only non-negligible source of
SOX emissions within the Steptoe Valley nonattainment area
was the Kennecott McGill copper smelter, which ceased operation in
1983. NDEP removed the SO2 monitor at that time, the smelter
operating permits expired in 1987, the smelting equipment was removed
over a period of years, and the smelter stack was demolished in 1993.
No new sources of SO2 have located in the area. Thus, the
Steptoe Valley meets this criterion for review under the Seitz Memo.
b. Has the State Met the Requirements of the Seitz Memo?
As discussed below, the State has addressed the requirements in the
Seitz Memo for emissions inventories, modeling, permitting of major new
sources, and agreement to commence monitoring if a new major source
locates in the area. Therefore, the State has met the special criteria
in the Seitz Memo for approval of maintenance plans and redesignation
requests.
(1) Emissions Inventory. The State provided the 3 emissions
inventories specified in the Seitz Memo for the sources in, and within
50 kilometers of, the Steptoe Valley nonattainment area. For a
representative year when the copper smelter was in operation (1978),
direct SOX emissions from smelting operations were 71,754
tons per year (tpy), and fugitive SOX emissions were
estimated to be 7,000 tpy. NDEP identified no SOX emissions
in, or within 50 kilometers of, the nonattainment area in 2001, and
NDEP projected no SOX emissions in, or within 50 kilometers
of, Steptoe Valley in the 10th year after redesignation (2012) (Biaggi
letter). We conclude that the inventories are complete, accurate, and
consistent with applicable CAA provisions and the Seitz Memo.
(2) Modeling. The Maintenance Plan includes modeling prepared by
Dames and Moore in 1982 (Appendix Five). The analysis uses the VALLEY
model to predict SO2 annual and 24-hour concentrations in
the nonattainment area during peak smelter operation. The modeling
predicted violations of both the annual and 24-hour NAAQS when the
smelter was fully operating. Because there are no longer any sources of
SO2
[[Page 17942]]
in the nonattainment area or within 50 kilometers of the area, however,
the State predicts no current or projected SO2
concentrations in Steptoe Valley. We find that the modeling in the
Maintenance Plan meets CAA requirements and our applicable guidance,
including the Seitz Memo.
(3) Permitting of New Sources. The NDEP has confirmed that the
State would consider that any source resuming operation at the site of
the copper smelter (or at any other location within the nonattainment
area) to be a ``new'' SOX source subject to applicable
permitting requirements, including the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program if the source is a major source (Biaggi
letter). We delegated PSD permitting authority to NDEP on May 27, 1983,
and the State has been administering the PSD program successfully since
that date. The State's commitment to treat any major source at the
Kennecott site as ``new'' under the PSD program satisfies the
provisions of the Seitz Memo.
(4) Monitoring. NDEP has confirmed that the State has the authority
to ensure that monitoring is required if a major SO2 source
applies for a permit to construct and operate. The State also
reaffirmed its intention to resume ambient monitoring before any major
source of SOX emissions commences operation (Biaggi letter).
This addresses the monitoring provision of the Seitz Memo.
c. Has the State Met the Remaining Maintenance Plan Provisions?
As discussed above, CAA Section 175A sets forth the statutory
requirements for maintenance plans, and the Calcagni and Shaver memos
cited above contain specific EPA guidance. The only maintenance plan
element not covered by the Seitz Memo is the contingency provision. CAA
Section 175A provides that maintenance plans ``contain such contingency
provisions as the Administrator deems necessary to assure that the
State will promptly correct any violation of the standard which occurs
after the redesignation of the area as an attainment area.''
The Steptoe Valley Maintenance Plan includes the State's commitment
to continue to implement and enforce measures necessary to maintain the
SO2 NAAQS. If these measures prove insufficient to protect
against violations, the State also committed to adopt and implement
additional control measures as necessary.
The Calcagni Memo emphasizes the importance of specific contingency
measures, schedules for adoption, and action levels to trigger
implementation of the contingency plan. Since there are no remaining
SO2 sources and no SO2 monitoring in the Steptoe
Valley area, we agree with the State that this level of specificity is
not appropriate, and we conclude that the State's commitment
satisfactorily addresses the CAA provisions.
B. Has the State Met the Redesignation Provisions of CAA Section
107(d)(3)(E)?
1. Has the Area Attained the 24-Hour and Annual SO2 NAAQS?
As discussed above, the normal prerequisite for redesignation is
submittal of quality-assured ambient data with no violations of the
SO2 NAAQS for the last 8 consecutive quarters. However, the
Seitz Memo recognizes that states should be provided an opportunity to
request redesignation where there is no longer monitoring but where
there is no reasonable basis for assuming that SO2
violations persist after closure of the sources that were the primary
or sole cause of these violations. Steptoe Valley is such an area, and
the State has submitted convincing evidence that no major or minor
stationary sources of SOX emissions remain in operation in
or within 50 kilometers of the area.
2. Has Each Area Met All Relevant Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D of the Act?
CAA Section 110(a)(2) contains the general requirements for SIPs
(enforceable emission limits, ambient monitoring, permitting of new
sources, adequate funding, etc.) and Part D contains the general
provisions applicable to SIPs for nonattainment areas (emissions
inventories, reasonably available control measures, demonstrations of
attainment, etc.). Over the years, we have approved Nevada's SIP as
meeting the basic requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2), and the CAA
Part D requirements for Steptoe Valley were addressed primarily by the
regulations applicable to the Kennecott facility during the period of
its operation. The State has thus met the basic SIP requirements of the
CAA.
3. Does Each Area Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the
Act?
The Nevada SIP for this area originally had a single deficiency--
the State's regulation for the smelter--which led first to the
promulgation of a Federal regulation, and then to the issuance of a
nonferrous smelter order (NSO). The FIP and NSO were mooted by the
permanent shutdown of the source, which left no remaining SIP
deficiencies.
4. Has the State Shown That the Air Quality Improvement in Each Area Is
Permanent and Enforceable?
The Maintenance Plan shows that the exclusive cause of past
SO2 NAAQS violations (the Kennecott copper smelter at
McGill) no longer exists. As a result, there would be no reason to
expect that SO2 ambient concentrations would exceed
background levels.
5. Does Each Area Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to
Section 175A of the Act?
As discussed above, we are approving the Steptoe Valley Maintenance
Plan in this action.
IV. Final Action
We are approving the Maintenance Plan for the Steptoe Valley area
under CAA Sections 110 and 175A. We are also approving the State's
request to redesignate the Steptoe Valley--Central area to attainment
of the primary SO2 NAAQS.
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the State plan and redesignate the
area if relevant adverse comments are filed. This rule will be
effective June 11, 2002 without further notice unless relevant adverse
comments are received by May 13, 2002. If we receive such comments,
this action will be withdrawn before the effective date. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. We will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this action will be effective June 11, 2002.
V. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves State law as meeting federal requirements and imposes
no additional
[[Page 17943]]
requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under State law
and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does 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 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a State rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045,
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the 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 April 29, 2002. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule 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
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: March 24, 2002.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DD--Nevada
2. Section 52.1470 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(39) and
(c)(40) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(39) The following plan was submitted on February 14, 1995, by the
Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the National
Sulfur Dioxide Standard--Central Steptoe Valley, adopted by Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection on February 14, 1995.
(40) The following plan supplement was submitted on February 27,
2002, by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Supplement to the Maintenance Plan for the National Sulfur
Dioxide Standard--Central Steptoe Valley (Letter from Allen Biaggi,
Administrator, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, to Wayne
Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, dated February 27,
2002).
* * * * *
PART 81--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. In Sec. 81.329 the SO2 table is amended by revising
the entry for the Steptoe Valley--Central area to read as follows:
Sec. 81.329 Nevada.
* * * * *
[[Page 17944]]
Nevada--SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does not meet Does not meet Better than
Designated area primary secondary Cannot be national
standards standards classified standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
Steptoe Valley (179)(10-29N, 61-67E): Central. .............. .............. .............. X
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-8289 Filed 4-11-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P