[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1537-1543]
[FR Doc No: 2023-00328]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0957; FRL-10543-01-R9]

Partial Approval, Conditional Approval, and Partial Disapproval
of Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Nevada; Infrastructure
Requirements for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve in part, conditionally approve
in part, and disapprove in part a state implementation plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Nevada pursuant to the requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the 2015 national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for ozone. As part of this action, we are proposing
to reclassify a region of the State for emergency episode planning
purposes with respect to ozone. Finally, we are proposing to approve a
regulatory revision into the Nevada SIP. We are taking comments on this
proposal and, after considering any comments submitted, plan to take
final action.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 10,
2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2022-0957 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. 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: Nicole Law, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The EPA's Approach to the Review of Infrastructure SIP
Submissions
II. Background
    A. Statutory Framework
    B. Regulatory History
III. State Submittal
    A. Infrastructure SIP Submittal
    B. Revised Rule
    C. Commitment Letters
IV. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
    A. Proposed Approvals and Partial Approvals
    B. Conditional Approvals
    C. Proposed Partial Disapprovals
    D. Prior Action and Deferred Action
    E. Proposed Reclassification for Emergency Episode Planning
    F. Request for Public Comments
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The EPA's Approach to the Review of Infrastructure SIP Submissions

    The EPA is proposing action on a SIP submittal from Nevada that
addresses the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The requirement for states to
submit a SIP revision of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1).
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submittals ``within
3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe)
after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality
standard (or any revision thereof),'' and these SIP submittals are to
provide for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of
such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make
these SIP submittals, and the requirement to make the submittals is not
conditioned upon the EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a
new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific
elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submittal must address.
    The EPA has historically referred to these SIP submittals made for
the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submittals. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, the EPA uses the
term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submittal from
submittals that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under
the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment SIP'' submittals
to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I
of the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submittals required to address the
visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and
nonattainment new source review (NSR) permit program submittals to
address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
    Historically, the EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make
recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases
conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in other
cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and
applied to individual SIP submittals for particular elements.\1\ The
EPA most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September
13, 2013 (``2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance'').\2\ The EPA developed
this document to provide states with up-to-date guidance for
infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised NAAQS. Within this guidance,
the EPA describes the duty of states to make infrastructure SIP
submittals to meet basic structural SIP requirements within three years
of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. The EPA also made
recommendations about many specific subsections of section 110(a)(2)
that are relevant in the context of infrastructure SIP submittals.\3\
The guidance also discusses the substantively important issues that are
germane to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2). Significantly, the
EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that
infrastructure SIP submittals need to address certain issues and need
not address others. Accordingly, the EPA reviews each infrastructure
SIP submittal for compliance with the applicable statutory provisions
of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We note, however, that nothing in the CAA requires the EPA
to provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure
SIP submittals. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the
submittal of infrastructure SIP submittals, regardless of whether or
not the EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such
submittals. The EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist
states, as appropriate.
    \2\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),''
Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.
    \3\ The EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance did not make
recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submittals to
address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). The EPA issued the guidance
shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C.
Circuit decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which
had interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In
light of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, the EPA
elected not to provide additional guidance on the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither
binding nor required by statute, whether the EPA elects to provide
guidance on a particular section has no affect on a state's CAA
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of
section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submittals. Under this
element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128,
which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement
orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, the
EPA reviews infrastructure SIP submittals to ensure that the state's
SIP appropriately addresses the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance
explains the EPA's interpretation that there may be a variety of ways
by which states can appropriately address these substantive statutory
requirements, depending on the structure of an individual state's
permitting or enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and
enforcement

orders are approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an
executive agency). However they are addressed by the state, the
substantive requirements of section 128 are necessarily included in the
EPA's evaluation of infrastructure SIP submittals because section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) explicitly requires that the state satisfy the
provisions of section 128.
    As another example, the EPA's review of infrastructure SIP
submittals with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD
program requirements contained in part C, title I of the Act and the
EPA's PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include
provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated
sources and regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases
(GHGs). By contrast, structural PSD program requirements do not include
provisions that are not required under EPA's regulations at 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.166 but are merely available as an option
for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of complete
permit applications with respect to the 2012 NAAQS for particulate
matter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5). Accordingly, the
latter optional provisions are types of provisions the EPA considers
irrelevant in the context of an infrastructure SIP action.
    For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, the EPA's review of
a state's infrastructure SIP submittal focuses on assuring that the
state's SIP meets basic structural requirements. For example, section
110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a
program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, the EPA evaluates whether
the state has a SIP-approved minor NSR program and whether the program
addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of
acting on an infrastructure SIP submittal, however, the EPA does not
think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision
of a state's existing minor source program (i.e., already in the
existing SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and the
EPA's regulations that pertain to such programs.
    With respect to certain other issues, the EPA does not believe that
an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submittal is necessarily the
appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in
a state's existing SIP. These issues include existing provisions
related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's discretion'' that
may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to
SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not
requiring further approval by the EPA and existing provisions for PSD
programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of the
EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186, December 31, 2002,
as amended by 72 FR 32526, June 13, 2007 (``NSR Reform''). Thus, the
EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP submittal without
scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for such potentially
deficient provisions and may approve the submittal even if it is aware
of such existing provisions.\4\ It is important to note that the EPA's
approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submittal should not be
construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any existing
potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three specific
issues just described.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ By contrast, the EPA notes that if a state were to include a
new provision in an infrastructure SIP submittal that contained a
legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions
during SSM events, then the EPA would need to evaluate that
provision for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA
requirements in the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP submittals
is to identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to
that submittal. The EPA believes that this approach to the review of a
particular infrastructure SIP submittal is appropriate, because it
would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section
110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of
each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all
requirements in the CAA and the EPA regulations merely for purposes of
assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements
for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have
grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory
requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded
provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully
up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the
purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a new
or revised NAAQS when the EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure
SIP submittal. The EPA believes that a better approach is for states
and the EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2)
of the CAA most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors.
    For example, the EPA's 2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance gives
simpler recommendations with respect to carbon monoxide than other
NAAQS pollutants to meet the visibility requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon monoxide does not affect
visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP submittal for any future
new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need only state this fact in
order to address the visibility prong of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
    Finally, the EPA believes that its approach with respect to
infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues
and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing
SIPs. These other statutory tools allow the EPA to take appropriately
tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged
SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes the EPA to issue a ``SIP
call'' whenever the Agency determines that a state's SIP is
substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate
interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.\5\ Section
110(k)(6) authorizes the EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as
past approvals of SIP submittals.\6\ Significantly, the EPA's
determination that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submittal
is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential existing
SIP deficiencies does not preclude the EPA's subsequent reliance on
provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to
correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it
may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing
inappropriate director's discretion provisions in the course of acting
on an infrastructure SIP submittal, the EPA believes that section
110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that the EPA relies upon
in the

course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For example, the EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address
specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of
excess emissions during SSM events. See ``Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State
Implementation Plan Revisions,'' 76 FR 21639, April 18, 2011.
    \6\ The EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past
actions on SIP submittals related to PSD programs. See ``Limitation
of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation
Plans; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536, December 30, 2010. The EPA has
previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove
numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had
approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664, July 25, 1996 and 62 FR
34641, June 27, 1997 (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona,
California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062, November 16, 2004
(corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051, November 3, 2009
(corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
    \7\ See, e.g., the EPA's disapproval of a SIP submittal from
Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's
discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including
section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344, July 21, 2010
(proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76 FR
4540, January 26, 2011 (final disapproval of such provisions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

A. Statutory Framework

    Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that
``[e]ach such plan'' submission must include. The infrastructure SIP
elements required by section 110(a)(2) are as follows:
     Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control
measures.
     Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data
system.
     Section 110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control
measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate pollution transport.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate pollution abatement
and international air pollution.
     Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority,
conflict of interest, and oversight of local government and regional
agencies.
     Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and
reporting.
     Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
     Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
     Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government
officials, public notification, PSD, and visibility protection.
     Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submittal
of modeling data.
     Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and participation by
affected local entities.
    Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by
the three-year submittal deadline of section 110(a)(1) and are
therefore not addressed in this action. These two elements are: Section
110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to permit programs required under
part D (nonattainment NSR), and Section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the
nonattainment planning requirements of part D. As a result, this action
does not address requirements for the nonattainment NSR portion of
section 110(a)(2)(C) or the whole of section 110(a)(2)(I).

B. Regulatory History

    On October 26, 2015, the EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone,
(``the 2015 ozone NAAQS''), triggering a requirement for states to
submit infrastructure SIPs within three years of promulgation of the
revised NAAQS. The 2015 ozone NAAQS revised the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
by lowering the primary and secondary 8-hour ozone standards from 75
parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. State Submittal

A. Infrastructure SIP Submittal

    The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) submitted a
SIP revision addressing the infrastructure SIP requirements for the
2015 ozone NAAQS on September 28, 2018 (``Nevada's Infrastructure SIP
Submittal'').\9\ It included separate sections for Clark County \10\
and Washoe County.\11\ We refer to each individual section as that
agency's or County's portion of the submittal. In accordance with CAA
section 110(k)(1)(B), the infrastructure SIP became complete by
operation of law on March 28, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Although NDEP submitted Nevada's Infrastructure SIP
Submittal electronically on September 28, 2018, the submittal letter
is dated October 1, 2018, from Greg Lovato, Administrator, Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection, to Mike Stoker, Regional
Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX, RE: ``The Nevada State
Implementation Plan for the 2015 Primary and Secondary Ozone
NAAQS.''
    \10\ Letter dated September 12, 2018, from Marci Henson,
Director, Clark County Department of Air Quality, to Greg Lovato,
Administrator, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, RE:
``Clark County Portion of the Nevada Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS.''
    \11\ Letter dated August 28, 2018, from Charlene Albee,
Director, Washoe County Health District Air Quality Management
Division, to Greg Lovato, Administrator, Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection, Subject: ``2015 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted in each respective portion of the submittal, NDEP, Clark
County, and Washoe County all provided public notice and an opportunity
for public comment prior to finalizing each portion of the
infrastructure SIP submittal. Additionally, each agency either held or
offered to hold a public hearing as part of the public notice and
comment period. Notice, hearing, and adoption dates for each portion of
the submittal are shown in Table 1. We find that these submittals meet
the procedural requirements for public participation under CAA section
110(a)(2) and 40 CFR 51.102.

                                      Table 1--Notification and Opportunities for Public Comment on the Nevada SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Agency                         Submittal              Start of public notice             Hearing date                Adoption date
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NDEP...............................  The Nevada Division of       July 19, 2018...............  None \a\...................  August 29, 2018.
                                      Environmental Protection
                                      Portion of the Nevada
                                      State Implementation Plan
                                      for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS:
                                      Demonstration of Adequacy.
Clark County Board of Commissioners  The Clark County Portion of  July 2, 2018................  August 21, 2018............  August 21, 2018.
                                      the State Implementation
                                      Plan to Meet the Ozone
                                      Infrastructure SIP
                                      Requirements of Clean Air
                                      Act Section 110(a)(2).
Washoe County District Board of      The Washoe County Portion    June 20, 2018...............  July 26, 2018..............  July 26, 2018.
 Health.                              of the Nevada State
                                      Implementation Plan to
                                      Meet the Ozone
                                      Infrastructure SIP
                                      Requirements of Clean Air
                                      Act Section 110(a)(2).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The hearing was tentatively scheduled for August 29, 2018, but cancelled because no one requested a hearing.

B. Revised Rule

    In Nevada's Infrastructure SIP Submittal, NDEP included a revised
version of Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 445B.22097 for
incorporation into the Nevada SIP.\12\ For the revised rule, NDEP
included documentation of the public comment period; the public hearing
on February 21, 2018; and proof adoption by the State Environmental
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Enclosure NDEP 2015 Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure SIP,
October 1, 2018, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Proof
of Adoption of the 2015 Ozone Standard into the Nevada
Administrative Code (NAC) for Approval into the Applicable Nevada
SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. What Rule Did the State Submit
    NDEP adopted an amendment to NAC 445B.22097, ``Standards of quality
for ambient air'' on February 21, 2018 and submitted it to the EPA on
September 28, 2018. On October 20, 2022, the EPA proposed approval into
the SIP of a version of the rule adopted on October 27, 2015.\13\ A
revision to NAC 445B.22097 was last approved into the SIP on March 27,
2006.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 87 FR 63744 (October 20, 2022).
    \14\ 71 FR 15040 (March 27, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revision
    The regulation was amended ``to align [Nevada's regulations] with
the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) currently in
effect.'' \15\ The change to NAC 445B.22097 submitted with Nevada's
Infrastructure SIP Submittal would lower the State's 8-hour ozone
standard from 0.075 to 0.070 parts per million (ppm), consistent with
the 2015 Ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, which
includes the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, State
Environmental Commission, Notice of Regulatory Hearing Adoption of
Regulations and Other Matters Before the State Environmental
Commission Public Notice, SEC Public Hearing February 21, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Commitment Letters

    In addition to the submittals identified in Table 1, NDEP and
Washoe County submitted letters committing to develop, adopt, and
submit rules meeting the public notice requirements of CAA section 127,
which are cross-referenced in CAA section 110(a)(2)(J), within one year
of our final action conditionally approving both agencies for the
requirement.\16\ CAA section 127 requires that each state's EPA-
approved SIP contain measures to notify the public of instances where
any NAAQS is exceeded, advise the public of health hazards related to
any exceedance, and provide information on ways to prevent such
standards from being exceeded in the future. While NDEP and Washoe
County provide notifications to the public in the event of a NAAQS
exceedance, neither agency's EPA-approved SIP contains measures
requiring such notifications. CAA section 110(k)(4) authorizes the EPA
to conditionally approve a plan revision based on a commitment by the
state to adopt specific enforceable measures by a date certain but not
later than one year after the date of the plan approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Letter dated September 9, 2022, from Greg Lovato,
Administrator Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, to Martha
Guzman, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX, Re: ``Request
for Conditional Approval of Nevada's Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards.'' and Letter dated September
2, 2022, from Greg Lovato, Administrator Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection to Martha Guzman, Regional Admin, Re:
Nevada's Infrastructure State Implementation Plan for the 2012
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard dated
September 9, 2022 that enclosed the letter from Francisco Vega,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, Washoe County Health
Division to Greg Lovato, Administrator, Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection and Martha Guzman, EPA, Re: ``Request for
Conditional Approval of Nevada's Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. Proposed Approvals and Partial Approvals

1. Infrastructure SIP
    We have evaluated Nevada's Infrastructure SIP Submittal and the
existing provisions of the Nevada SIP for compliance with the
infrastructure SIP requirements (or ``elements'') of CAA section
110(a)(2) and applicable regulations in 40 CFR part 51 (``Requirements
for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of State Implementation
Plans''). The Technical Support Document (TSD), available in the docket
to this proposed rulemaking, includes our evaluation of all of the
elements and rationale for our proposed action, as well as our
evaluation of various statutory and regulatory provisions. For some
requirements, we refer to prior notices and TSDs for Nevada
Infrastructure SIP submissions, which are included in the docket for
this rulemaking.
    Based on the analysis in this document and discussed in detail in
our TSD, we propose to approve Nevada's Infrastructure SIP Submittal
with respect to the following Clean Air Act requirements: \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ All approvals are full approvals for NDEP, Clark County,
and Washoe County except where noted otherwise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
     110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
     110(a)(2)(C) (in part): Program for enforcement of control
measures (full approval), and regulation of new stationary sources
(approval for Clark County only) and minor sources (full approval).
     110(a)(2)(D) (in part, see below): Interstate Pollution
Transport.
    [cir] 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (in part)--interference with PSD (prong
3) (approval for Clark County only).
    [cir] 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) (in part)--interstate pollution abatement
(approval for Clark County only) and international air pollution.
     110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority, conflict
of interest, and oversight of local governments and regional agencies.
     110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and reporting.
     110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
     110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
     110(a)(2)(J) (in part): Consultation with government
officials, public notification (conditional approval for NDEP and
Washoe County, full approval for Clark County), and PSD and visibility
protection (full approval for Clark County only).
     110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submission of
modeling data.
     110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.
2. Proposed Approval of State Provisions Into the Nevada SIP
    As part of our proposed approval of Nevada's Infrastructure SIP
Submittal, we are also proposing to approve a state regulation into the
Nevada SIP. Specifically, we propose to approve into the SIP a new
version of NAC 445B.22097, which revises the 8-hour ozone standard in
the Nevada standards table from 0.075 to 0.070 parts per million (ppm)
to be consistent with the 2015 ozone NAAQS and deletes the ``National
Standards'' and ``Method'' columns because both are for reference only
and are often out-of-date compared to the referenced federal
regulations.
    As a general matter, rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA
section 110(a)(2)), must not interfere with applicable requirements
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or other CAA
requirements (see CAA section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP
control requirements in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent
or greater emissions reductions (see CAA section 193). We have
evaluated NDEP's revised rule for compliance with CAA requirements for
SIPs, set forth in CAA section 110(a)(2),

and for compliance with CAA requirements for SIP revisions in CAA
sections 110(l) and 193. In general, the rule strengthens the SIP, as
discussed in section III.B.2. of this document. Based upon our
analysis, we propose to find NAC 445B.22097 meets the requirements of
CAA sections 110(a)(2), 110(l), and 193. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to approve the submitted revision to NAC 445B.22097 into the
Nevada SIP.

B. Conditional Approvals

1. Conditional Approvals
    CAA section 110(k)(4) authorizes the EPA to conditionally approve a
plan revision based on a commitment by the state to adopt specific
enforceable measures by a date certain but not later than one year
after the date of the plan approval. In letters dated September 2, 2022
and September 9, 2022, NDEP and Washoe County committed to adopt and
submit specific enforceable measures to address the identified
deficiencies under CAA section 110(a)(2)(J) discussed in Sections
III.C. and IV.A. of this proposed rulemaking and in our TSD.\18\
Accordingly, pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the Act, the EPA is
proposing a conditional approval of the NDEP and Washoe County portions
of Nevada's Infrastructure SIP Submittal addressing the public
notification requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2015
Ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Clark County has satisfied this requirement through Air
Quality Regulation 4.5, approved into the SIP in a rule published on
April 21, 2022 (87 FR 23765).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If NDEP and Washoe County meet their commitments to submit the
required revisions within 12 months of the EPA's final action on this
SIP submittal, and the EPA approves the submission, then the
deficiencies listed above will be cured. However, if NDEP and/or Washoe
County fail to submit these revisions within the required timeframe,
the conditional approvals shall become disapprovals.

C. Proposed Partial Disapprovals

    The EPA proposes to disapprove Nevada's Infrastructure SIP
Submittal with respect to the following infrastructure SIP
requirements:
     110(a)(2)(C) (in part): Regulation of new and modified
stationary sources (disapproval for NDEP and Washoe County).
     110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (in part): interference with PSD
(prong 3) (disapproval for NDEP and Washoe County).
     110(a)(2)(D)(ii) (in part): interstate pollution abatement
(disapproval for NDEP and Washoe County).
     110(a)(2)(J) (in part): PSD (disapproval for NDEP and
Washoe County).
    As explained more fully in our TSD, we are proposing to disapprove
the NDEP and Washoe County portions of Nevada's Infrastructure SIP
Submittal with respect to the PSD-related requirements of sections
110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), and 110(a)(2)(J).
The Nevada SIP does not fully satisfy the statutory and regulatory
requirements for PSD permit programs under part C, title I of the Act,
because NDEP and Washoe County do not currently have SIP-approved PSD
programs. Although the NDEP and Washoe County portions of the SIP
remain deficient with respect to PSD requirements, there would be no
further consequences if the action is finalized as proposed, as both
agencies already implement the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21 for
all regulated NSR pollutants, pursuant to delegation agreements with
the EPA.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See 40 CFR 52.1485. The EPA fully delegated the
implementation of the federal PSD programs to NDEP on October 19,
2004 (``Agreement for Delegation of the Federal Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Program by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 to the Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection''), as updated on September 15, 2011 and
November 7, 2012, and to Washoe County on March 13, 2008
(``Agreement for Delegation of the Federal Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) Program by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 9 to the Washoe County District Health
Department'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Prior Action and Deferred Action

    The EPA is addressing the following Clean Air Act Requirements in
separate rulemakings: \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 87 FR 20036 (April 6, 2022), 87 FR 29108 (May 12, 2022), 87
FR 31485 (May 24, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(D) (in part, see below): Interstate Pollution
Transport.
    [cir] 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--significant contribution to a
nonattainment area (prong 1).
    [cir] 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--significant contribution to a maintenance
area (prong 2).
    Additionally, on August 12, 2022, NDEP withdrew its submittal of
the Prong 4 element in Nevada's Infrastructure SIP Submittal and
submitted a revised Prong 4 element with the State's Regional Haze Plan
for the 2nd Planning Period.\21\ The EPA intends to act on the revised
Prong 4 element when we act on Nevada's Regional Haze Plan for the 2nd
Planning Period and is therefore not acting on the requirement as part
of this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See letter dated August 12, 2022, from Greg Lovato,
Administrator, Nevada Department of Environmental Protection, to
Martha Guzman, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, re: ``The
Nevada State Implementation Plan for the Regional Haze Rule for the
Second Planning Period; Withdrawal and Replacement of Elements of
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and 2015 Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure
SIPs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Proposed Reclassification for Emergency Episode Planning

    The priority thresholds for classification of air quality control
regions are listed in 40 CFR 51.150, and the specific classifications
of air quality control regions in Nevada are listed at 40 CFR 52.1471.
Consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR 51.153, reclassification of an
air quality control region must rely on the most recent three years of
air quality data. Under 40 CFR 51.151 and 51.152, regions classified
Priority I are required to have SIP-approved emergency episode
contingency plans, while those classified Priority III are not required
to have such plans.\22\ We interpret 40 CFR 51.153 as establishing the
means for states to review air quality data and request a higher or
lower classification for any given region and as providing the
regulatory basis for the EPA to reclassify such regions, as
appropriate, under the authorities of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(G) and
301(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 40 CFR 51.151 and 51.152.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The priority classification threshold for ozone under 40 CFR 51.150
is 195 micrograms per cubic meter, equivalent to 0.10 parts per million
(ppm), calculated as a one-hour maximum. Regions with one-hour ozone
concentrations greater than 0.10 ppm are classified as Priority I for
ozone under 40 CFR 51.150. All other regions are classified as Priority
III for ozone. Nevada's regional priority classifications for ozone
under 40 CFR 51.150 are located at 40 CFR 52.1471. Currently, the Las
Vegas Intrastate air quality control region (AQCR) is classified as
Priority I for ozone. The Northwest Nevada Intrastate AQCR and Nevada
Intrastate AQCR are currently classified as Priority III for ozone.
    Air quality data from 2019-2021 indicate that the maximum one-hour
ozone concentrations monitored in two Nevada regions exceed the
Priority I threshold for one-hour ozone. The maximum one-hour ozone
concentration measured in the Las Vegas Intrastate AQCR in this period
was 0.104 ppm; the maximum one-hour ozone concentration measured in the
Northwest Nevada Intrastate AQCR in this period was 0.106 ppm. We are
proposing to reclassify the Northwest Nevada Intrastate AQCR from
Priority III

to Priority I for ozone and to retain the classification of the Las
Vegas Intrastate AQCR as Priority I.
    Air quality data from 2019-2021 also indicate that the maximum one-
hour ozone concentration monitored in the Nevada Intrastate AQCR does
not exceed the Priority I threshold for one-hour ozone. The maximum
one-hour ozone concentration monitored in this region from 2019-2021
was 0.099 ppm. We are therefore not reclassifying the Nevada Intrastate
AQCR priority classification and it remains as Priority III for ozone.
    If finalized as proposed, the reclassification of the Northwest
Nevada Intrastate AQCR from Priority III to Priority I for ozone will
not generate new requirements for Nevada to submit an emergency episode
contingency plan because NDEP and Washoe County--the two agencies with
jurisdiction over the AQCR--already have SIP-approved emergency episode
plans. Thus, our proposed reclassification of the Northwest Nevada
Intrastate AQCR for ozone also does not affect our proposed approval of
the Nevada SIP with respect to CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.

F. Request for Public Comments

    The EPA is soliciting public comments on this proposed rulemaking.
We will accept comments from the public for the next 30 days. We will
consider any comments received before taking final action.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the NDEP rule described in section III.B.1. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these documents generally available
electronically in the docket for this rulemaking at https://www.regulations.gov.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

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

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.

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 beyond those
imposed by state law.

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. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.

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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP is not approved to apply on any
Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only 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 impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

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)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.

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

    The state did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal. There is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goals of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and
indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Approval and promulgation of implementation plans, Air pollution
control, Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: January 5, 2023.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023-00328 Filed 1-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 38027]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15078]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL13-72-000]

ISO New England Inc.; Notice of Initiation of Proceeding and
Refund Effective Date

    On June 14, 2013, the Commission issued an order that initiated a
proceeding in Docket No. EL13-72-000, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2006), to determine the
justness and reasonableness of section III.A.15 of Appendix A of ISO
New England Inc.'s existing tariff. Dominion Energy Marketing, Inc. and
ISO New England Inc., 143 FERC ] 61,233 (2013).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL13-72-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Dated: June 14, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15078 Filed 6-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 134 (Thursday, July 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 42176]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15055]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP22-227-000]

Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Schedule for the
Preparation of an Environmental Assessment for the Coco B Wells
Replacement Project

    On April 26, 2022, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia) filed
an application in Docket No. CP22-227-000 requesting a Certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to Section 7(b) and 7(c) of
the Natural Gas Act to abandon, construct, and operate certain natural
gas pipeline facilities. The proposed project is known as the Coco B
Wells Replacement Project (Project) which Columbia states would
maintain the integrity of the Coco B storage field in West Virginia, as
well as Columbia's certificated facilities and services.
    On May 10, 2022, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
environmental document for the Project.
    This notice identifies Commission staff's intention to prepare an
environmental assessment (EA) for the Project and the planned schedule
for the completion of the environmental review.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 40 CFR 1501.10 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Schedule for Environmental Review

    Issuance of EA October 20, 2022.
    90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline \2\ January 18,
2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission's deadline applies to the decisions of other
federal agencies, and state agencies acting under federally
delegated authority, that are responsible for federal
authorizations, permits, and other approvals necessary for proposed
projects under the Natural Gas Act. Per 18 CFR 157.22(a), the
Commission's deadline for other agency's decisions applies unless a
schedule is otherwise established by federal law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Project's progress.

Project Description

    Columbia proposes to construct and operate two new Injection and
Withdrawal Wells and related pipeline and appurtenances in a new well
pad, and proposes to plug and abandon four existing Injection and
Withdrawal wells and related pipeline and appurtenances within the Coco
B Storage Field in Kanawha County, West Virginia.

Background

    On June 14, 2022, the Commission issued a Notice of Scoping Period
Requesting Comments on Environmental Issues for the Proposed Coco B
Wells Replacement Project (Notice of Scoping). The Notice of Scoping
was sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local government
agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups;
Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries
and newspapers. All substantive comments received in response to the
Notice of Scoping will be addressed in the EA.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets, the
Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This service
provides automatic notification of filings made to subscribed dockets,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to register for eSubscription.
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov). Using the ``eLibrary'' link, select
``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date
range and ``Docket Number'' excluding the last three digits (i.e.,
CP22-227), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to
eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY (202) 502-
8659, or at [email protected]. The eLibrary link on the FERC
website also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by
the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: July 8, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-15055 Filed 7-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 50949]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21925]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4398-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001]

Guam; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the territory of Guam (FEMA-4398-DR), dated October 1,
2018, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued October 1, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated October 1, 2018, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage to the territory of Guam
resulting from Typhoon Mangkhut during the period of September 10 to
September 11, 2018, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.
(the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major
disaster exists in the territory of Guam.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the territory.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the
eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage
under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for
Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford
Act.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Benigno Bern Ruiz, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the territory of Guam have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    The territory of Guam for Public Assistance.
    All areas within the territory of Guam are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-21925 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-11-P