[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 117 (Friday, June 18, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34076-34080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13851]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

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


Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8-Hour 
Ozone; National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Deferral of Effective 
Date

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is granting a deferral of the effective date, to 
September 13, 2004, of the 8-hour ozone nonattainment designation for 
Clark County, Nevada. This deferral is based on additional information 
submitted by the State demonstrating that, due to the late finding of 
nonattainment in the State, the State did not have sufficient time to 
recommend an appropriate boundary for the Las Vegas nonattainment area. 
EPA believes the relevant factors for defining a nonattainment area may 
support a different boundary recommendation than the one submitted by 
the State on April 12, 2004, and a short deferral will provide the 
State and EPA time to determine whether such an adjustment is 
appropriate. At the same time, it is certain that at least some portion 
of Clark County will be designated nonattainment. As such, we do not 
intend to use this extension of the effective date of the designation 
to affect the deadline for submittal of the State implementation plan 
that would otherwise apply if the effective date were not deferred and 
further believe the extension should not delay attainment of the ozone 
standard or the ability of the State to achieve attainment as 
expeditiously as practicable.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on June 15, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket 
ID No. OAR-2003-0083 (Designations). All documents in the docket are 
listed in the EDOCKET index at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although 
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 
copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard 
copy at the Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution 
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the 
telephone number for the Office of Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center is (202) 566-1742. In addition, we have placed a 
copy of the rule and a variety of materials regarding designations on 
EPA's designation Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/glo/designations and on the Tribal Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal. In addition, the public may inspect the rule and technical 
support at the following locations:
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, Air Division, 
Planning Office, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Barhite, Chief, Planning 
Office, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105. The telephone 
number is (415) 972-3980. Mr. Barhite can also be reached via 
electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    The EPA is deferring the effective date of the nonattainment 
designation for Clark County, Nevada (County). This action modifies the 
effective date for Clark County provided in our final 8-hour ozone 
designations rule published April 30, 2004. 69 FR 23858. In that final 
rule we noted that the effective date for the Clark County 
nonattainment designation would be June 15, 2004. See 69 FR at 23919-20 
(revising 40 CFR Sec.  81.329). With today's action, the new effective 
date for the County's nonattainment designation will be September 13, 
2004. We are not changing the designation of the County at this time, 
but, as explained below, believe the deferral is necessary to allow the 
State of Nevada (State) to account for newly discovered information and 
accurately define the appropriate nonattainment area boundaries.

II. What Is the Background for This Action?

    On April 15, 2004, the EPA Administrator signed a final rule 
announcing designations under the 8-hour ozone national ambient air 
quality standards (NAAQS).\1\ In that action we designated Clark County 
as nonattainment and provided that this designation would become 
effective on June 15, 2004. Since that notice, the State has submitted 
additional information explaining that the State's recommendation on 
the area to be designated nonattainment should be reconsidered and that 
such an evaluation was not possible prior to EPA's April 15, 2004 
deadline for signing the 8-hour ozone designations. Letter from Allen 
Biaggi, Administrator, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, to 
Michael O. Leavitt, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(June 9, 2004).\2\ In the June 9, 2004 letter the State explains that 
it did not have time to make an appropriate recommendation regarding 
the boundaries of the nonattainment area in Clark County because it was 
not discovered until late February 2004 that any portion of Nevada 
would be designated nonattainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This signature date was a deadline for EPA action in 
accordance with a consent decree. The final rule was published on 
April 30, 2004. 69 FR 23875.
    \2\ This letter supplements an earlier letter dated May 21, 
2004, from Governor Kenny C. Guinn to Administrator Leavitt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The unusual history of the Clark County designation supports the 
State's claim. In July 2003, the State submitted its recommended 
designations for the 8-hour ozone designations. See letter from Allen 
Biaggi, Administrator, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, to 
Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region IX (July 10, 
2003). Based on the monitoring data provided to the State for the 
period of 2000 through 2002, the State concluded that all monitors 
within the State were showing compliance with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
On December 3, 2003, EPA agreed with the State's recommendation not to 
designate any Nevada area as nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone 
standard. See Letter from Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, U.S. 
EPA, Region IX, to Hon. Kenny C. Guinn, Governor of Nevada (December 3, 
2004). In that letter EPA noted that the final designation 
determination would be based on monitoring data and design values for 
the period 2001 through 2003, but that based on our preliminary review 
of the air quality monitoring data for the 2003 ozone season, there 
were no areas in Nevada violating the 8-hour ozone standard. Id. In 
mid-February 2004, EPA discovered that the July 10, 2003 recommendation 
from the State had failed to include

[[Page 34077]]

complete monitoring data for 2001. This overlooked data, in combination 
with the new 2003 data, resulted in a 2001-03 design value over the 
applicable standard at one of the monitors (Joe Neal) in the Las Vegas 
area of Clark County. EPA contacted the State and described that, by 
default, the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) that included Clark 
and Nye Counties in Nevada and Mohave County in Arizona should be 
recommended for designation as nonattainment. Arizona and Nevada were 
able to prepare an analysis of the ozone problem in the area that 
supported the exclusion of Nye and Mohave Counties from the 
nonattainment area. See Letter from Allen Biaggi, Administrator, Nevada 
Division of Environmental Protection, to Wayne Nastri, Regional 
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region IX (April 12, 2004) (transmitting 
Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) report entitled 
``Nevada Air Quality Designations and Boundary Recommendations for the 
8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard'' (March 26, 2004)); 
Letter from Stephen A. Owens, Director, Arizona Department of 
Environmental Quality, to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, U.S. 
EPA, Region IX (March 26, 2004) (transmitting report entitled ``Arizona 
Boundary Recommendations for the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard'' (March 26, 2004)). As a result, three days before 
the EPA deadline for making designations, the State recommended that 
Clark County be designated nonattainment. Id. As the State has 
subsequently explained, had NDEP and Clark County discovered earlier 
that the County should be designated nonattainment, it would have 
further analyzed the appropriate boundaries within the 8000-square mile 
County for the nonattainment area. Given the late discovery, however, 
the State and County could not provide the necessary analysis and 
defaulted to the County boundaries.\3\ Given the size of the County, 
the geographic features of the area, the location of sources and the 
monitoring data collected in the outlying portions of the County, it is 
reasonable to conclude that further analysis could have supported an 
alternate boundary for the nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The May 21, 2004 letter from Governor Guinn and the June 9, 
2004 letter from Allen Biaggi both note that the State has 
contracted with the Desert Research Institute to assist in assessing 
the appropriate boundaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the June 9, 2004 letter, the State further explains why the 
missing monitoring data were not discovered until late February, 2004. 
The monitoring data in question are from the new Joe Neal monitoring 
station, which began operation in 2000. As a result, it was not until 
the end of 2003 that three complete years of data were available upon 
which to calculate a design value. The State's recommendation had not 
included the 2003 data, so it had not focused attention on this monitor 
because, at the time, it had mistakenly assumed the monitor had not 
been in existence long enough to have an effect on design values. 
According to the State, the State and County had an expectation that 
the 2001 data would not affect the design value for the 8-hour ozone 
designation. See June 9 Letter from Allen Biaggi. The County apparently 
did not realize certain 2001 data had not been added to the Air Quality 
System--the system used to support the designation recommendations. 
Management at the County and State, and within EPA, looking at the 
monitoring data in the Air Quality System could not see that additional 
data were available that would have changed the designation conclusion. 
The State and County have demonstrated to our satisfaction that until 
late February 2004, they were not aware that the area should be 
designated nonattainment and, as noted above, by that time did not have 
time to adequately evaluate the appropriate boundaries for the 
nonattainment area.

III. What Action Is EPA Taking To Defer the Effective Date of 
Nonattainment Designations for Clark County?

    Effective June 15, 2004, EPA will defer until September 13, 2004, 
the effective date of nonattainment designations for Clark County, 
Nevada by modifying 40 CFR 81.329. EPA is making this change without 
notice and comment in accordance with section 107(d)(2) of the Clean 
Air Act, which exempts the promulgation of these designations from the 
notice and comment provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act.
    We are making this deferral action effective on June 15, 2004, 
which is the date the nonattainment designation would otherwise become 
effective. Section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act generally 
provides that rulemakings shall not be effective less than 30 days 
after publication unless the agency finds good cause for an earlier 
date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). EPA is invoking the good cause exception to 
make the effective date of today's action June 15, 2004. This notice 
explains why the current effective date of the nonattainment 
designation for Las Vegas should be deferred. Today's action must take 
effect by June 15, 2004 in order to achieve that deferral and avoid 
unnecessary confusion.
    EPA does not intend to extend the deadline for state implementation 
plan submission for the Las Vegas nonattainment area. EPA will address 
this deadline in a subsequent action but believes it is reasonable to 
require submission according to the same schedule to which the area 
would be subject without today's deferral of the effective date. 
Likewise, the time by which attainment occurs should not be affected by 
this action. Today's deferral of the designation effective date should 
not delay the attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS because it is clear 
a core area will still be designated nonattainment and attainment is 
required as expeditiously as practicable.

IV. Final Action

    The EPA is deferring the effective date to September 13, 2004, of 
the nonattainment designation for Clark County, Nevada, based on 
additional information submitted by the State. We are amending 40 CFR 
Sec.  81.329 to reflect the modified effective date for the County.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and, therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines 
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of 
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or 
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere 
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter 
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) 
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the 
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive 
Order. Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is not a

[[Page 34078]]

``significant regulatory action'' because none of the above factors 
applies. As such, this final rule was not formally submitted to OMB for 
review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
This rule changes the effective date of a nonattainment designation for 
Clark County, Nevada that was promulgated on April 15, 2004. The 
present final rule does not establish any new information collection 
burden apart from that required by law. Burden means the total time, 
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, 
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a 
Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; 
develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the 
purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, 
processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing 
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously 
applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to 
respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete 
and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise 
disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a 
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless 
it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control 
numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedures Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes 
of assessing the impacts of today's final rule on small entities, small 
entity is defined as: (1) A small business that is a small industrial 
entity as defined in the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) size 
standards. (See 13 CFR 121.); (2) a small governmental jurisdiction 
that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or 
special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small 
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. This 
rule defers the effective date of the nonattainment designation. The 
deferral of the effective date will not impose any requirements on 
small entities. After considering the economic impacts of today's final 
rule on small entities, I certify that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including Tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements. Today's final action does not include a Federal mandate 
within the meaning of UMRA that may result in expenditures of $100 
million or more in any 1 year by either State, local, or Tribal 
governments in the aggregate or to the private sector, and therefore, 
is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. 
It does not create any additional requirements beyond those of the 8-
hour NAAQS for ozone (62 FR 38894; July 18, 1997), therefore, no UMRA 
analysis is needed. In this rule, EPA is deferring the effective date 
of nonattainment designation for Clark County, Nevada. The EPA believes 
that no new controls will be imposed as a result of this action. Thus, 
this Federal action will not impose mandates that will require 
expenditures of $100 million or more in the aggregate in any 1 year.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final 
rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132. The CAA establishes the scheme 
whereby States take the lead in developing plans to meet the NAAQS. 
This rule will not modify the relationship of the States and EPA for 
purposes of developing programs to implement the NAAQS. Thus, Executive 
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have 
``Tribal implications'' as specified in Executive Order 13175. This 
rule concerns the deferral of the effective date of the nonattainment 
designation for Clark County, Nevada. This final

[[Page 34079]]

rule does not have Tribal implications as defined by Executive Order 
13175. It does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian Tribes, since no Tribe has implemented a CAA program to attain 
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS at this time. Furthermore, this rule does not 
affect the relationship or distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal government and Indian Tribes. The CAA and the TAR 
establish the relationship of the Federal government and Tribes in 
developing plans to attain the NAAQS, and this rule does nothing to 
modify that relationship. Because this rule does not have Tribal 
implications, Executive Order 13175 does not apply. Although Executive 
Order 13175 does not apply to this rule,prior to designations action 
promulgated on April 15, 2004, EPA did outreach to Tribal 
representatives regarding the designations. The EPA supports a national 
``Tribal Designations and Implementation Work Group'' which provides an 
open forum for all Tribes to voice concerns to EPA about the 
designation and implementation process for the NAAQS, including the 8-
hour ozone standard. These discussions informed EPA about key Tribal 
concerns regarding designations as the rule was under development.

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

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. The final 
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not 
economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental 
health risks or safety risks addressed by this rule present a 
disproportionate risk to children. Nonetheless, we have evaluated the 
environmental health or safety effects of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS on 
children. The results of this risk assessment are contained the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, Final Rule (62 FR 
38855-38896, July 18, 1997; specifically, 62 FR 38854, 62 FR 38860 and 
62 FR 38865).

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

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866. Information on the methodology and data 
regarding the assessment of potential energy impacts is found in 
Chapter 6 of U.S. EPA 2002, Cost, Emission Reduction, Energy, and 
Economic Impact Assessment of the Proposed Rule Establishing the 
Implementation Framework for the 8-Hour, 0.08 ppm Ozone National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard, prepared by the Innovative Strategies and 
Economics Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research 
Triangle Park, NC, April 24, 2003.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer Advancement Act 
of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, 
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available 
and applicable VCS. This action does not involve technical standards. 
Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any VCS.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States on or 
before the effective date of this rule. A major rule cannot take effect 
until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This 
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule 
will be effective June 15, 2004.

K. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of 
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This 
Section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in 
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (i) when the 
agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations 
promulgated, or final actions taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii) 
when such action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action 
is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in 
taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such 
action is based on such a determination.'' The rule designating areas 
for the 8-hour ozone standard was ``nationally applicable'' within the 
meaning of section 307(b)(1) since it established designations for all 
areas of the United States for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Since this final 
action defers the effective date of one of the designations made in 
that nationwide rulemaking, any petitions for review must be filed in 
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. At the core 
of the designations rulemaking is EPA's interpretation of the 
definition of nonattainment under section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. In 
determining which areas should be designated nonattainment (or 
conversely, should be designated unclassifiable/attainment), EPA used a 
set of 11 factors that it applied consistently across the United 
States. For the same reasons, the Administrator also determined that 
the final designations are of nationwide scope and effect for purposes 
of section 307(b)(1). This is particularly appropriate because in the 
report on the 1977 Amendments that revised section 307(b)(1) of the 
CAA, Congress noted that the Administrator's determination that an 
action is of ``nationwide scope or effect'' would be appropriate for 
any action that has ``scope or effect beyond a single judicial 
circuit.'' H.R. Rep. No. 95-294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977 
U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402-03. Here, the scope and effect of the designations 
rulemaking extend to numerous judicial circuits since the designations 
apply to all areas of the country. In these circumstances, section 
307(b)(1) and its legislative history calls for the Administrator to 
find the rule to be of ``nationwide scope or effect'' and for

[[Page 34080]]

venue to be in the D.C. Circuit. Thus, any petitions for review of this 
final action must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date final action is published 
in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: June 14, 2004.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 81 is amended as 
follows:

PART 81--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart C--[Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  81.329, the table entitled ``Nevada-Ozone (8-Hour 
Standard)'' is amended by revising the entry for ``Clark County'' to 
read as follows:


Sec.  81.329  Nevada.

* * * * *

                                                             Nevada--Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Designation \a\                                      Category/classification
            Designated area             ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Date \1\                       Type                      Date \1\                      Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Las Vegas, NV: Clark County............        (\2\)   Nonattainment............................        (\2\)   Subpart 1.
 
                                                                     * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Effective date deferred until September 13, 2004.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-13851 Filed 6-17-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P