You are on page 1of 3

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No.

117 / Monday, June 19, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 35159

(3) Rule 1309.1, adopted on May 3, copy at the EPA, Region 10, Office of II. What Comments Did We Receive on
2002. Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT–107), 1200 the Proposed Action?
* * * * * Sixth Avenue, Seattle WA. EPA requests
that, if at all possible, you contact the We received one comment on the
[FR Doc. 06–5508 Filed 6–16–06; 8:45 am] proposed rulemaking. This comment
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P was from the Oregon Division of the
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
Federal Highway Administration
schedule your inspection. The Regional
(FHWA). FHWA’s comment and our
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Office’s official hours of business are
response are summarized as follows:
AGENCY Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30
excluding legal holidays. Comment: The commenter expressed
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 concern that the language stating that
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ‘‘the motor vehicle emissions budget is
[EPA–R10–OAR–2006–0010; FRL–8179–5] Donna Deneen, Office of Air, Waste and established for all years’’ could be
Toxics (AWT–107), EPA Region 10, interpreted to mean that a budget for
Approval and Promulgation of Air 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101; Lakeview is created for each year, 2006
Quality Implementation Plans; telephone number: (206) 553–6706; fax through 2017. The commenter added
Lakeview PM10 Maintenance Plan and number: (206) 553–0110; e-mail address: that since transportation conformity
Redesignation Request deneen.donna@epa.gov. requires a demonstration of meeting
AGENCY: Environmental Protection SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
budgets for every year a budget is
Agency (EPA). Throughout this document wherever established, requiring the Department of
ACTION: Final rule. ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean Transportation to demonstrate meeting a
EPA. budget for each year through 2017
SUMMARY: On March 22, 2006, EPA seems to be overly burdensome and
published a direct final rule to approve Table of Contents return little value. The commenter
a PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) I. What Is the Background of This concluded that demonstrating that the
maintenance plan revision for the Rulemaking? 2017 budget is met, as well as any
Lakeview, Oregon nonattainment area II. What Comments Did We Receive on the required interim years, meets the
and to redesignate the area from Proposed Action? purpose of the Clean Air Act and this
nonattattainment to attainment for III. What Is Our Final Action? SIP.
PM10. PM10 air pollution is suspended IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Response: EPA’s statement that the
particulate matter with a nominal motor vehicle emissions budget is
diameter less than or equal to a nominal I. What Is the Background of This
established for all years is in the
ten micrometers. We stated in the direct Rulemaking?
preamble to our rulemaking at 71 FR
final rule that if EPA received adverse On October 25, 2005, the State of 14404 (March 22, 2006). Because this
comment, we would publish a timely Oregon Department of Environmental statement is based on information in the
withdrawal of the direct final rule. We Quality (DEQ or State) submitted a SIP State’s SIP submittal, we asked DEQ to
received adverse comment on the direct revision and redesignation request for clarify the period for which the motor
final rule, and, therefore, in a separate the Lakeview, Oregon PM10 vehicle emissions budget is established.
action, are withdrawing our direct final nonattainment area. On March 22, 2006, In a letter to EPA, dated May 2, 2006,
rule. In a parallel notice of proposed EPA published a direct final rule to DEQ clarified that the motor vehicle
rulemaking, also published on March approve this SIP revision and request on emissions budget is established for the
22, 2006, we stated that if we received the basis that the State’s submission Lakeview PM10 nonattainment area for
adverse comments we would address all adequately demonstrated that the 2017 and that DEQ never intended to
public comments in a subsequent final control measures being implemented in require a yearly transportation
rule based on the proposed rule. This the Lakeview area result in maintenance conformity analysis. DEQ added that
final action addresses the adverse of the PM10 National Ambient Air analysis years are determined by the
comments we received and finalizes our Quality Standards (NAAQS) and all conformity rule and through interagency
approval of the SIP revision and other requirements of the Clean Air Act consultation and that DEQ does not
redesignation request for the Lakeview (the Act) for redesignation to attainment believe that its language could be, or
PM10 nonattainment area. are met. 71 FR 14399. We stated in the should be, interpreted to mean that an
DATES: This final rule is effective July direct final rule that if EPA received analysis must be conducted every year.
19, 2006. adverse comment, we would publish a The phrase ‘‘for all years’’ makes clear
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a timely withdrawal of the direct final that if, as a result of conformity rules
docket for this action under Docket ID rule. We received adverse comment on and interagency consultation, an
No. EPA–R10–OAR–2006–0010. All the direct final rule, and, therefore, in a intervening year conformity
documents in the docket are listed on separate action, are withdrawing our determination is required or needed,
the http://www.regulations.gov Web direct final rule. In a parallel notice of then the budget established for 2017
site. Although listed in the index, some proposed rulemaking, also published on governs.
information is not publicly available, March 22, 2006, we stated that if we Based on the comment from FHWA,
e.g., CBI or other information whose received adverse comments we would the clarifying letter from DEQ, the SIP
disclosure is restricted by statute. address all public comments in a revision for the Lakeview PM10
Certain other material, such as subsequent final rule based on the nonattainment area, and 40 CFR
copyrighted material, is not placed on proposed rule. 71 FR 14438. This final 93.118(b)(2)(i), which sets the minimum
the Internet and will be publicly action addresses the adverse comments years for which a regional emissions
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES

available only in hard copy form. we received and finalizes our approval analyses must be conducted, we are
Publicly available docket materials are of the State’s SIP revision and clarifying that the motor vehicle
available either electronically through redesignation request for the Lakeview emissions budget for Lakeview is
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard PM10 nonattainment area. established for 2017. Accordingly, the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Jun 16, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM 19JNR1
35160 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 117 / Monday, June 19, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

motor vehicle emissions budget for (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This appropriate circuit by August 18, 2006.
Lakeview is as follows: action also does not have Federalism Filing a petition for reconsideration by
implications because it does not have the Administrator of this final rule does
LAKEVIEW PM10 MOTOR VEHICLE substantial direct effects on the States, not affect the finality of this rule for the
EMISSIONS BUDGET FOR 2017 on the relationship between the national purposes of judicial review nor does it
[Pounds PM10/24-hour winter day] government and the States, or on the extend the time within which a petition
distribution of power and for judicial review may be filed, and
Year .............................................. 2017 responsibilities among the various shall not postpone the effectiveness of
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 311 levels of government, as specified in such rule or action. This action may not
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, be challenged later in proceedings to
III. What Is Our Final Action? August 10, 1999). This action merely enforce its requirements. (See section
approves a state rule implementing a 307(b)(2).)
EPA is taking final action to approve Federal standard, and does not alter the
a PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) relationship or the distribution of power List of Subjects
maintenance plan revision for the and responsibilities established in the
Lakeview, PM10 nonattainment area 40 CFR Part 52
Clean Air Act. This rule also is not
and to redesignate the area from subject to Executive Order 13045 Environmental protection, Air
nonattattainment to attainment for ‘‘Protection of Children from pollution control, Incorporation by
PM10. EPA is approving the SIP Environmental Health Risks and Safety reference, Intergovernmental relations,
revision and redesignation request Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), Particulate matter, Reporting and
because the State adequately because it is not economically recordkeeping requirements.
demonstrates that the control measures significant. 40 CFR Part 81
being implemented in the Lakeview area In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
result in maintenance of the PM10 role is to approve state choices, Environmental protection, Air
National Ambient Air Quality Standards provided that they meet the criteria of pollution control, National parks,
and all other requirements of the Clean the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the Wilderness areas.
Air Act for redesignation to attainment absence of a prior existing requirement Dated: May 23, 2006.
are met. for the State to use voluntary consensus Richard B. Parkin,
IV. Statutory and Executive Order standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
Reviews to disapprove a SIP submission for
■ Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Federal Regulations is amended as
inconsistent with applicable law for
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is follows:
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
therefore is not subject to review by the PART 52—[AMENDED]
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
Office of Management and Budget. For the Clean Air Act. Thus, the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
this reason, this action is also not requirements of section 12(d) of the continues to read as follows:
subject to Executive Order 13211, National Technology Transfer and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 272 note) do not apply. This rule does Subpart MM—Oregon
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May not impose an information collection
22, 2001). This action merely approves burden under the provisions of the ■ 2. Section 52.1970 is amended by
state law as meeting Federal Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 adding paragraph (c)(147) to read as
requirements and imposes no additional U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). follows:
requirements beyond those imposed by The Congressional Review Act, 5
state law. Accordingly, the § 52.1970 Identification of plan.
U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by
Administrator certifies that this rule the Small Business Regulatory * * * * *
will not have a significant economic Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, (c) * * *
impact on a substantial number of small generally provides that before a rule (147) On October 25, 2005, the Oregon
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility may take effect, the agency Department of Environmental Quality
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this promulgating the rule must submit a submitted a PM10 maintenance plan
rule approves pre-existing requirements rule report, which includes a copy of and requested redesignation of the
under state law and does not impose the rule, to each House of the Congress Lakeview PM10 nonattainment area to
any additional enforceable duty beyond and to the Comptroller General of the attainment for PM10. The State’s
that required by state law, it does not United States. EPA will submit a report maintenance plan and the redesignation
contain any unfunded mandate or containing this rule and other required request meet the requirements of the
significantly or uniquely affect small information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. Clean Air Act.
governments, as described in the House of Representatives, and the (i) Incorporation by reference.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Comptroller General of the United (A) The following sections of Oregon
(Pub. L. 104–4). States prior to publication of the rule in Administrative Rule 340: 204–0030,
This rule also does not have tribal the Federal Register. A major rule 204–0040, 224–0060 (2)(d) and 225–
implications because it will not have a cannot take effect until 60 days after it 0020(8), as effective September 9, 2005.
substantial direct effect on one or more is published in the Federal Register. ■ 3. Section 52.1973 is amended by
Indian tribes, on the relationship This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as adding paragraph (e)(4) to read as
between the Federal Government and
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES

defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2). follows:


Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
power and responsibilities between the Air Act, petitions for judicial review of § 52.1973 Approval of plans.
Federal Government and Indian tribes, this action must be filed in the United * * * * *
as specified by Executive Order 13175 States Court of Appeals for the (e) * * *

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Jun 16, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM 19JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 117 / Monday, June 19, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 35161

(4) EPA approves as a revision to the PART 81—[AMENDED] revising the entry for ‘‘Lakeview (the
Oregon State Implementation Plan, the Urban Growth Boundary Area)’’ to read
Lakeview PM10 maintenance plan ■ 4. The authority citation for part 81 as follows:
adopted by the Oregon Environmental continues to read as follows:
Quality Commission on August 11, 2005 § 81.338 Oregon.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
and submitted to EPA on October 25, * * * * *
2005. ■ 5. In § 81.338, the table entitled
* * * * * ‘‘Oregon PM–10’’ is amended by

OREGON—PM–10
Designation Classification
Designated area
Date Type Date Type

* * * * * * *
Lakeview (the Urban Growth Boundary area) ...................................................... 7/19/06 Attainment.

* * * * * * *

* * * * * DATES: This final rule is effective July I. What is the Background of This
[FR Doc. 06–5511 Filed 6–16–06; 8:45 am] 19, 2006. Rulemaking?
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ADDRESSES: EPA has established a On October 25, 2005, the State of
docket for this action under Docket ID Oregon Department of Environmental
No. EPA–R10–OAR–2006–0050. All Quality (DEQ or State) submitted a SIP
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION documents in the docket are listed on revision and redesignation request for
AGENCY the http://www.regulations.gov Web the La Grande, Oregon PM10
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 site. Although listed in the index, some nonattainment area. On March 22, 2006,
information is not publicly available, EPA published a direct final rule to
[EPA–R10–OAR–2006–0050; FRL–8179–4] e.g., CBI or other information whose approve this SIP revision and request on
disclosure is restricted by statute. the basis that the State’s submission
Approval and Promulgation of Air Certain other material, such as adequately demonstrated that the
Quality Implementation Plans; La copyrighted material, is not placed on control measures being implemented in
Grande PM10 Maintenance Plan and the Internet and will be publicly the La Grande area result in
Redesignation Request available only in hard copy form. maintenance of the PM10 National
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Publicly available docket materials are Ambient Air Quality Standards
Agency (EPA). available either electronically through (NAAQS) and all other requirements of
ACTION: Final rule. http://www.regulations.gov or in hard the Clean Air Act (the Act) for
copy at the EPA, Region 10, Office of redesignation to attainment are met. 71
SUMMARY: On March 22, 2006, EPA Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT–107), 1200 FR 14393. We stated in the direct final
published a direct final rule to approve Sixth Avenue, Seattle WA. EPA requests rule that if EPA received adverse
a PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) that, if at all possible, you contact the comment, we would publish a timely
maintenance plan revision for the La individual listed in the FOR FURTHER withdrawal of the direct final rule. We
Grande, Oregon nonattainment area and INFORMATION CONTACT section to received adverse comment on the direct
to redesignate the area from schedule your inspection. The Regional final rule, and, therefore, in a separate
nonattainment to attainment for PM10. Office’s official hours of business are action, are withdrawing our direct final
PM10 air pollution is suspended Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to rule. In a parallel notice of proposed
particulate matter with a nominal 4:30 p.m. excluding legal holidays. rulemaking, also published on March
diameter less than or equal to a nominal 22, 2006, we stated that if we received
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ten micrometers. We stated in the direct adverse comments we would address all
final rule that if EPA received adverse Donna Deneen, Office of Air, Waste and
Toxics (AWT–107), EPA Region 10, public comments in a subsequent final
comment, we would publish a timely rule based on the proposed rule. 71 FR
withdrawal of the direct final rule. We 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101;
telephone number: (206) 553–6706; fax 14438. This final action addresses the
received adverse comment on the direct adverse comments we received and
final rule, and, therefore, in a separate number: (206) 553–0110; e-mail address:
deneen.donna@epa.gov. finalizes our approval of the State’s SIP
action, are withdrawing our direct final revision and redesignation request for
rule. In a parallel notice of proposed SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the La Grande PM10 nonattainment
rulemaking, also published on March Throughout this document wherever area.
22, 2006, we stated that if we received ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean
adverse comments we would address all EPA. II. What Comments Did We Receive on
public comments in a subsequent final the Proposed Action?
Table of Contents
rule based on the proposed rule. This We received one comment on the
I. What Is the Background of This
final action addresses the adverse proposed rulemaking. This comment
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES

Rulemaking?
comments we received and finalizes our II. What Comments Did We Receive on the was from the Oregon Division of the
approval of the SIP revision and Proposed Action? Federal Highway Administration
redesignation request for the La Grande III. What Is Our Final Action? (FHWA). FHWA’s comment and our
PM10 nonattainment area. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews response are summarized as follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Jun 16, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM 19JNR1