
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 106 (Friday, June 1, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32481-32483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13344]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2010-0912; FRL-9680-2]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision submitted by the State of Oregon (the State) on October 6, 
2010, and an August 31, 2011, supplementary letter, for the purpose of 
establishing transportation conformity criteria and procedures related 
to interagency consultation, and enforceability of certain 
transportation related control and mitigation measures.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 2, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2010-0912, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov.: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
     Mail: Claudia Vergnani Vaupel, U.S. EPA Region 10, Office 
of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 
Seattle, Washington 98101
     Hand Delivery: US EPA Region 10 Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Attention: Claudia Vergnani 
Vaupel, Office of Air Waste, and Toxics (AWT-107). Such deliveries are 
only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-
2010-0912. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov 
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' 
system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through 
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured 
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket 
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic 
comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other 
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or 
CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not 
be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use 
of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any 
defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste 
and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 
98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claudia Vergnani Vaupel at telephone 
number: (206) 553-6121, email address: vaupel.claudia@epa.gov, or the 
above EPA, Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. Information is organized 
as follows:

Table of Contents

I. What is the purpose of this action?
II. What is the background for this proposed action?
III. What is the State's process to submit SIP revisions to EPA?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Oregon's SIP revision?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the purpose of this action?

    EPA is proposing to approve revisions to Oregon Administrative 
Rules (OAR), Division 252 ``Transportation Conformity'' of the Oregon 
SIP that address the requirements of section 176 of the CAA and 40 CFR 
51.390(b). By approving these revisions to OAR Division 252, EPA is 
making them part of the federally enforceable SIP for Oregon under the 
CAA.

[[Page 32482]]

II. What is the background for this proposed action?

    Transportation conformity is required under section 176(c) of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) to ensure that federally supported highway, 
transit projects, and other activities are consistent with (``conform 
to'') the purpose of the SIP. Transportation conformity currently 
applies to areas that are designated nonattainment, and to areas that 
have been redesignated to attainment after 1990 (maintenance areas) 
with plans developed under section 175A of the Act, for the following 
transportation related criteria pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter 
(PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide, and nitrogen 
dioxide.
    Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that transportation 
activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant criteria 
pollutants, also known as national ambient air quality standards 
(NAAQS). The transportation conformity regulation is found in 40 CFR 93 
and provisions related to transportation conformity SIPs are found in 
40 CFR 51.390.
    EPA promulgated the Federal transportation conformity criteria and 
procedures (``Transportation Conformity Rule'') on November 24, 1993 
(58 FR 62188). On August 10, 2005, the ``Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users'' (SAFETEA-LU) 
was signed into law. SAFETEA-LU revised section 176(c) of the CAA 
transportation conformity provisions. One of the changes streamlines 
the requirements for conformity SIPs. Under SAFETEA-LU, states are 
required to address and tailor only three sections of the rules in 
their conformity SIPs: 40 CFR 93.105, 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and, 40 
CFR 93.125(c). In general, states are no longer required to submit 
conformity SIP revisions that address the other sections of the 
conformity rule. These changes took effect on August 10, 2005, when 
SAFETEA-LU was signed into law. Oregon's SIP revision updates the 
State's transportation conformity provisions, OAR Division 252, to be 
consistent with the CAA as amended by SAFETEA-LU and EPA regulations 
(40 CFR Part 93 and 40 CFR 51.390). Oregon's SIP revision also adds a 
provision that requires approval by the air quality agency in order for 
an MPO to shorten the timeframe of a conformity determination (OAR-340-
252-0070).

III. What is the State's process to submit SIP revisions to EPA?

    Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses EPA's process to act on State 
submissions that would revise a SIP. The CAA requires States to observe 
certain procedural requirements in developing SIP revisions for 
submittal to us. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that each SIP 
revision be adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing. This 
must occur prior to the revision being submitted by a State to us.
    The submission includes evidence that the Oregon Department of 
Environmental Quality (ODEQ) provided adequate public notice of the 
revisions to OAR 340, Division 252 and held a public hearing on 
November 23, 2009. The Oregon Department of Transportation submitted 
comments on three aspects of the proposed rules and ODEQ provided a 
response on December 4, 2009. This SIP revision became State effective 
on February 18, 2010, and was submitted to EPA on October 6, 2010.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of Oregon's SIP revision?

    EPA has evaluated this SIP submission and finds that the State has 
addressed the requirements of the Federal transportation conformity 
rule as described in 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart T and 40 CFR Part 93, 
Subpart A. The transportation conformity rule requires the states to 
develop their own processes and procedures for interagency consultation 
and resolution of conflicts meeting the criteria in 40 CFR 93.105. The 
SIP revision must include processes and procedures to be followed by 
the MPO, state DOT, and U.S. DOT in consulting with the state and local 
air quality agencies and EPA before making transportation conformity 
determinations. The transportation conformity SIP must also include 
processes and procedures for the state and local air quality agencies 
and EPA to coordinate the development of applicable SIPs with MPOs, 
state DOTs, and U.S. DOT, and requires written commitments to control 
measures and mitigation measures.
    EPA has reviewed the submittal to assure consistency with the CAA 
as amended by SAFETEA-LU and EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 93 and 40 CFR 
51.390) governing state procedures for transportation conformity and 
interagency consultation and has concluded that the submittal is 
approvable with the exception of an example in OAR-340-252-0070 for 
shortening the conformity timeframe. Details of our review are set 
forth in a technical support document (TSD), which has been included in 
the docket for this action. Specifically, in the TSD, we identify how 
the submitted procedures, as clarified by the State's August 31, 2011, 
supplementary letter, satisfy our requirements under 40 CFR 93.105 for 
interagency consultation with respect to the development of 
transportation plans and programs, SIPs, and conformity determinations, 
the resolution of conflicts, and the provision of adequate public 
consultation, and our requirements under 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 
93.125(c) for enforceability of control measures and mitigation 
measures.

V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing approval of the SIP revision that was submitted by 
the State of Oregon on October 6, 2010. The SIP revision updates OAR, 
Division 252 ``Transportation Conformity'' of the Oregon SIP so as to 
meet the Federal transportation conformity consultation requirements as 
described in section 176 of the CAA 42 U.S.C. 7506 and in 40 CFR 
51.390(b), 40 CFR 93.105(a) through (e), 40 CFR 93 122(a)(4)(ii), and 
40 CFR 125(c).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);

[[Page 32483]]

     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: May 22, 2012.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-13344 Filed 5-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


