49432 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 156 / Friday, August 13, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Qualifications of Personnel 

A mine operator is responsible for the 

design, construction, operation, and 

maintenance of dams. For an effective 

dam safety program, an operator must 

use personnel who are knowledgeable 

about dam safety. 

19. What qualifications do mine 

operators currently require of persons 

who design, inspect, operate, and 

manage dams? In what capacities are 

engineers used? Please be specific in 

your response. 

20. The Guidelines recommend that 

dams be designed by competent 

engineers. What specific qualifications 

or credentials should persons who 

design dams possess? Please include 

your rationale. 

21. The Guidelines recommend that a 

dam be constructed under the general 

supervision of a competent engineer 

knowledgeable about dam construction. 

What specific qualifications or 

credentials should a person have who 

verifies that a dam is being constructed 

as designed? Please provide your 

rationale. 

22. What training should personnel 

receive who perform frequent, routine 

inspections and who monitor 

instrumentation at dams? In your 

response, please suggest course content 

and the frequency of the training, 

including the rationale for your 

recommendations. 

23. What qualifications or credentials 

should be required of persons who 

perform detailed inspections to evaluate 

the safety of a dam? Please be specific 

and include your rationale. 

Abandonment of Dams 

24. Some regulatory authorities 

require that dam owners obtain 

approval of a plan to cap, breach, or 

otherwise safely abandon dams. What 

actions should mine operators take to 

safely abandon dams? Please include 

specific suggestions and rationale. 

25. How can MSHA verify that a mine 

operator has safely abandoned a dam? 

Economic Impact 

MSHA seeks information to assist the 

Agency in deriving the costs and 

benefits of any regulatory changes for 

dams at metal and nonmetal mines. In 

answering the following questions, 

please indicate the dam’s storage 

capacity, height, and hazard potential 

and characterize the complexity of each 

dam referenced. Also, please include 

the state where each dam is located, and 

the number of employees at the mine. 

26. What are the costs of designing a 

new dam? Please provide details such as 

hours, rates of pay, job titles, and any 

contractual services necessary. How 

often is the design of an existing dam 

changed? What are the costs of a 

redesign? 

27. What are the costs of constructing 

a dam? Please provide details based on: 

Size of dam; labor costs, including 

hours, rates of pay, job titles; costs of 

equipment and materials; and any 

contractual services necessary. 

28. Please describe the oversight you 

provide during dam construction to 

assure it complies with the design plan. 

How much does it cost per year per dam 

for oversight and quality control? What 

special knowledge, qualifications, or 

credentials do you require of those who 

provide oversight? 

29. How often do you add height to 

an existing dam or modify it in some 

other way? Who supervises the design 

and construction of these modifications, 

for example, a professional engineer, 

competent engineer, contractor, etc? 

Please be specific and provide rationale 

for your answer. How much does it 

cost? Please provide details such as 

labor costs, including hours, rates of 

pay, job titles, and costs of equipment 

and materials and any contractual 

services necessary. 

30. How much does it cost per year 

per dam for routine inspections? If you 

incur separate costs for monitoring 

instrumentation, how much is that cost? 

How often do you have a detailed 

inspection conducted? How much does 

it cost per year for these inspections? 

31. Does the state or local jurisdiction 

in which you operate require you to use 

a professional engineer? If so, when is 

a professional engineer specifically 

required? (If you have dams in more 

than one state please identify which 

states require a professional engineer 

and which do not). 

32. What are the costs associated with 

training personnel who conduct 

frequent, routine inspections and 

monitor instrumentation at dams? 

33. What costs are involved in 

capping, breaching, or otherwise 

properly abandoning a dam? Please 

provide details of your experience and 

what was involved when you properly 

abandoned a dam. Describe any impact 

of a properly abandoned dam. 

34. What are the costs to a mine 

operator if a dam fails? Please 

characterize other impacts such as loss 

of life, environmental damage, etc. 

35. Do you have insurance against a 

dam failure? If so, please specify cost 

and coverage. Does the insurance carrier 

require the use of a professional 

engineer for specific dam activities? If a 

professional engineer is not required, 

does the insurance carrier give a 

discount if one is used? Does your 

insurance company have any other 

requirements related to dam safety? 

36. What quantifiable and nonquantifiable costs and benefits for the 

downstream community are involved 

when a dam is properly designed and 

constructed? In addition, MSHA 

welcomes comments on other relevant 

indirect costs and benefits. 

Dated: August 9, 2010. 

Joseph A. Main, 

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety 

and Health. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19960 Filed 8–12–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Part 222 

[Docket ID ED–2010–OESE–0013] 

RIN 1810–AB11 

Impact Aid Programs 

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes to 

amend the regulations governing the 

Impact Aid Discretionary Construction 

Program, which is authorized under 

section 8007(b) of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965, as 

amended (ESEA). Through this program, 

the Department provides competitive 

grants for emergency repairs and 

modernization of school facilities to 

certain eligible local educational 

agencies (LEAs) that receive Impact Aid 

formula funds. The proposed 

regulations amend a provision regarding 

the submission of applications for these 

Federal funds, which the Department 

believes will improve the 

administration and distribution of funds 

under this program. The proposed 

regulations would apply to the grant 

competitions after the competition for 

fiscal year (FY) 2009 funds. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before September 13, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

or via postal mail, commercial delivery, 

or hand delivery. We will not accept 

comments by fax or by e-mail. Please 

submit your comments only one time, in 

order to ensure that we do not receive 

duplicate copies. In addition, please 

include the Docket ID at the top of your 

comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov to submit 

your comments electronically. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 156 / Friday, August 13, 2010 / Proposed Rules 49433 

Information on using Regulations.gov, 

including instructions for accessing 

agency documents, submitting 

comments, and viewing the docket, is 

available on the site under ‘‘How To Use 

This Site.’’ 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery. If you mail or deliver 

your comments about these proposed 

regulations, address them to Catherine 

Schagh, Director, Impact Aid Program, 

U.S. Department of Education, 400 

Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 3E105, 

LBJ, Washington, DC 20202. 

Privacy Note: The Department’s policy for 

comments received from members of the 

public (including those comments submitted 

by mail, commercial delivery, or hand 

delivery) is to make these submissions 

available for public viewing in their entirety 

on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 

commenters should be careful to include in 

their comments only information that they 

wish to make publicly available on the 

Internet. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristen Walls-Rivas, Impact Aid 

Program, U.S. Department of Education, 

400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: 

(202) 260–1357 or by e-mail: 

Kristen.Walls-Rivas@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), call the 

Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 

1–800–877–8339. 

Individuals with disabilities can 

obtain this document in an accessible 

format (e.g., braille, large print, 

audiotape, or computer diskette) on 

request to the contact person listed in 

this section. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Invitation To Comment 

We invite you to submit comments 

regarding these proposed regulations. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Order 12866 

and its overall requirement of reducing 

regulatory burden that might result from 

these proposed regulations. Please let us 

know of any further opportunities we 

should take to reduce potential costs or 

increase potential benefits while 

preserving the effective and efficient 

administration of the program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about these proposed regulations by 

accessing Regulations.gov. You may also 

inspect the comments, in person, in 

Room 3C101, 400 Maryland Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC, between the 

hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., 

Eastern time, Monday through Friday of 

each week except Federal holidays. 

Assistance to Individuals With 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record 

On request, we will supply an 

appropriate aid, such as a reader or 

print magnifier, to an individual with a 

disability who needs assistance to 

review the comments or other 

documents in the public rulemaking 

record for these proposed regulations. If 

you want to schedule an appointment 

for this type of aid, please contact the 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Background 

The Impact Aid Discretionary 

Construction Program is authorized 

under section 8007(b) of the ESEA. 

The purpose of this program is to 

assist certain eligible Impact Aid LEAs 

in meeting the emergency or 

modernization needs of their school 

facilities. The current regulations 

governing the Impact Aid Discretionary 

Construction Program are in 34 CFR 

222.170 through 222.196 and were most 

recently amended on March 15, 2004, to 

govern the FY 2003 and subsequent 

grant competitions (69 FR 12234). 

Through this notice, we are proposing to 

amend § 222.183 governing the 

submission of multiple grant 

applications. The proposed amendment 

is based on our experience in 

implementing this program since the 

most recent regulations were published 

in 2004. 

Significant Proposed Regulations 

Section 222.183 How does an LEA 

apply for a grant? 

Statute: Section 8007(b)(6) of the 

ESEA provides that an LEA that desires 

to receive a grant shall submit an 

application to the Secretary at such 

time, in such manner, and accompanied 

by such information as the Secretary 

may require. 

Current Regulations: Current 

§ 222.183 specifies several application 

requirements, and provides that a local 

educational agency (LEA) may submit 

multiple applications for multiple 

educational facilities in a fiscal year. 

Proposed Regulations: The proposed 

regulations would limit an LEA to 

submitting one application for one 

facility per competition. 

Reasons: In 2004, when the most 

recent Impact Aid Discretionary 

Construction Program regulations were 

issued, the Department did not know 

how many LEAs would qualify for 

funding nor what the magnitude of their 

need would be under this program. 

Accordingly, we originally provided in 

the regulations that an applicant could 

submit multiple applications per 

competition so that the applicant would 

be able to separate into different 

applications different types of projects 

with different levels of urgency. 

Our intent was to make the 

competition flexible and to ensure that 

we received enough high-quality 

applications to enable the Department to 

use the full appropriated amount. 

The competitions under this program 

are based primarily on statutorily 

mandated objective and subjective 

scoring. Objective scores measure: the 

percentage of students in the LEA who 

are eligible under section 8003 of the 

Impact Aid Program; the percentage of 

those students enrolled in the building 

for which funding is sought; the area of 

tax-exempt Federal property in the LEA; 

and the LEA’s assessed value of real 

property and its tax rate. If an LEA 

receives high scores on these objective 

criteria, its proposed projects may rank 

higher on the funding list than the 

condition of its building(s) (i.e., the 

subjective measure) would warrant, and 

LEAs with more urgent facility needs 

would not be funded. This has resulted 

in the unintended consequence of a few 

LEAs receiving high percentages of the 

available funding. For example, from 

the FY 2006 competition, one LEA 

received 13 out of 25 grants and 73 

percent of the funds. 

In addition, since this program was 

first funded and operated under the 

March 15, 2004, final regulations, the 

appropriation levels have decreased 

significantly, from $27 million (in FY 

2003) to approximately $17 million (in 

FY 2009). With this reduction and given 

the scoring structure, if a single 

applicant receives multiple awards, an 

even smaller portion of the remaining 

funds is available for distribution to 

other LEAs, which generally has meant 

that the funds could not reach a larger 

pool of the eligible applicants. 

These proposed regulations would 

give more applicants an opportunity to 

receive grants to remediate urgent 

emergency and modernization needs in 

their school facilities. We seek 

comments on alternative approaches 

that would permit the Department to 

distribute grant funding to a larger 

number of LEAs. 

Executive Order 12866: Under 

Executive Order 12866, the Secretary 

must determine whether the regulatory 

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore 

subject to the requirements of the 

Executive order and subject to review by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 

12866 defines a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as an action likely to result in a 

rule that may (1) Have an annual effect 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
49434 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 156 / Friday, August 13, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

on the economy of $100 million or 

more, or adversely affect a sector of the 

economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, public health or 

safety, or State, local or tribal 

governments or communities in a 

material way (also referred to as an 

‘‘economically significant’’ rule); (2) 

create serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; (3) 

materially alter the budgetary impacts of 

entitlement 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 the 

Executive order, it has been determined 

that this regulatory action is not a 

significant regulatory action subject to 

OMB review under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

Clarity of the Regulations 

Executive Order 12866 and the 

Presidential memorandum on ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing’’ 

require each agency to write regulations 

that are easy to understand. 

The Secretary invites comments on 

how to make these proposed regulations 

easier to understand, including answers 

to questions such as the following: 

• Are the requirements in the 

proposed regulations clearly stated? 

• Do the proposed regulations contain 

technical terms or other wording that 

interferes with their clarity? 

• Does the format of the proposed 

regulations (grouping and order of 

sections, use of headings, paragraphing, 

etc.) aid or reduce their clarity? 

• Would the proposed regulations be 

easier to understand if we divided them 

into more (but shorter) sections? 

• Could the description of the 

proposed regulations in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this preamble be more helpful in 

making the proposed regulations easier 

to understand? If so, how? 

• What else could we do to make the 

proposed regulations easier to 

understand? 

To send any comments that concern 

how the Department could make these 

proposed regulations easier to 

understand, see the instructions in the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

The Secretary certifies that these 

proposed regulations would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The small entities that would be 

affected by these regulations are small 

LEAs receiving Federal funds under this 

program. In the FY 2008 grant 

competition, fewer than 50 applications 

that were eligible to be evaluated by 

field readers were from small entities. In 

addition, we do not believe that the 

regulations would have a significant 

economic impact on the limited number 

of small LEAs affected, because the 

regulations would not impose excessive 

regulatory burdens or require 

unnecessary Federal supervision. 

The proposed regulations would 

benefit both small and large entities in 

that they would provide more equitable 

opportunities for funding of school 

construction needs. 

The proposed regulations would 

impose minimal paperwork burden 

requirements for all applicants and 

minimal requirements with which the 

grant recipients must comply. However, 

the Secretary specifically invites 

comments on the effects of the proposed 

regulations on small entities, and on 

whether there may be further 

opportunities to reduce any potential 

adverse impact or increase potential 

benefits resulting from these proposed 

regulations without impeding the 

effective and efficient administration of 

the Impact Aid Discretionary 

Construction Program. Commenters are 

requested to describe the nature of any 

effect and provide empirical data and 

other factual support for their views to 

the extent possible. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

The proposed amendment to 

§ 222.183 would modify the information 

collection requirements in that section; 

the Department does not believe the 

proposed changes add any new burden 

or decrease any burden to local 

educational agencies. The burden 

associated with § 222.183 was approved 

by OMB under OMB Control Number 

1810–0687, which expires 9/30/2011. 

The proposed amendment would limit 

the number of applications to one per 

LEA. The Department expects that LEAs 

that have in the past scored lower on the 

objective scoring criteria will be 

encouraged to apply and the total 

number of applications will remain the 

same. 

Intergovernmental Review 

This program is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Assessment of Educational Impact 

In accordance with section 411 of the 

General Education Provisions Act, 20 

U.S.C. 1221e–4, the Secretary 

particularly requests comments on 

whether these proposed regulations 

would require transmission of 

information that any other agency or 

authority of the United States gathers or 

makes available. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You can view this document, as well as 

all other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister. To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at this site. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Number 84.041 Impact Aid Discretionary 

Construction Program) 

List of Subjects in 34 CFR Part 222 

Education, Education of children with 

disabilities, Educational facilities, 

Elementary and secondary education, 

Federally affected areas, Grant 

programs-education, Indians— 

education, Public housing, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, School 

construction, Schools. 

Thelma Mele ́ndez de Santa Ana, 

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Secretary proposes to 

amend part 222 of title 34 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations. 

PART 222—IMPACT AID PROGRAMS 

1. The authority citation for part 222 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7701–7714, unless 

otherwise noted. 

2. Section 222.183 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 156 / Friday, August 13, 2010 / Proposed Rules 49435 

§ 222.183 How does an LEA apply for a 

grant? 

(a) To apply for funds under this 

program, an LEA may submit only one 

application for one educational facility 

for each competition. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–20065 Filed 8–12–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 93 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0128; FRL–9188–5] 

RIN 2060–AP57 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Restructuring Amendments 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is 

proposing to restructure several sections 

of the transportation conformity rule so 

that they would apply to any new or 

revised National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) that are established 

in the future for transportation-related 

criteria pollutants. This proposal should 

reduce the need to amend the rule in the 

future for the sole purpose of 

referencing specific new or revised 

NAAQS. EPA is also proposing in this 

action that a near-term year would have 

to be analyzed when using the budget 

test when an area’s attainment date has 

passed, or when an area’s attainment 

date has not yet been established. The 

budget test demonstrates that the total 

on-road emissions projected for a 

metropolitan transportation plan or TIP 

are within the emissions limits 

(‘‘budgets’’) established by the state air 

quality implementation plan (‘‘SIP’’). 

This action also includes several 

administrative proposals and 

clarifications to improve 

implementation of the rule. 

The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires 

federally supported transportation 

plans, transportation improvement 

programs, and projects to be consistent 

with (‘‘conform to’’) the purpose of the 

state air quality implementation plan. 

The U.S. Department of Transportation 

(DOT) is EPA’s Federal partner in 

implementing the transportation 

conformity regulation. EPA has 

consulted with DOT, and they concur 

with this proposed rule. 

DATES: Written comments on this 

proposal must be received on or before 

September 13, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2009–0128, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Air Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009– 

0128. Please include a total of two 

copies. 

• Hand Delivery: Air Docket, 

Environmental Protection Agency: EPA 

West Building, EPA Docket Center 

(Room 3334), 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0128. 

Please include two copies. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009– 

0128. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

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, 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 EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, 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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I. of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, 

EPA West, Room 3334, 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 Air 

and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patty Klavon, State Measures and 

Conformity Group, Transportation and 

Regional Programs Division, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 

Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 

48105, e-mail address: 

klavon.patty@epa.gov, telephone 

number: (734) 214–4476, fax number: 

(734) 214–4052; or Laura Berry, State 

Measures and Conformity Group, 

Transportation and Regional Programs 

Division, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann 

Arbor, MI 48105, e-mail address: 

berry.laura@epa.gov, telephone number: 

(734) 214–4858, fax number: (734) 214– 

4052. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

contents of this preamble are listed in 

the following outline: 

I. General Information 

II. Background on the Transportation 

Conformity Rule 

III. Restructure of 40 CFR 93.109 

IV. Additional Option for Areas That Qualify 

for EPA’s Clean Data Regulations or 

Policies 

V. Baseline Year for Certain Nonattainment 

Areas 

VI. Transportation Conformity Requirements 

for Secondary NAAQS 

VII. Analysis of a Near-Term Year in the 

Budget Test 

VIII. How does this proposal affect 

conformity SIPs? 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1