Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 67819

(3) Limitations. For subcutaneous ear 

implantation in steers and heifers only. 

Safety and effectiveness have not been 

established in veal calves. A withdrawal 

period has not been established for this 

product in preruminating calves. Do not 

use in calves to be processed for veal.

Dated: November 10, 2004.

Steven D. Vaughn,

Director, Office of New Animal Drug 

Evaluation, Center for Veterinary Medicine.

[FR Doc. 04–25877 Filed 11–19–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[OR–04–002; FRL–7835–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA approves numerous 

revisions to the Oregon State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) in the State 

of Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 

relating to the inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) of motor vehicles. 

These revisions were submitted to EPA 

by the Director of the Oregon 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ODEQ) on November 5, 1999, 

September 15, 2000, November 27, 

2000, January 10, 2003, and April 22, 

2004. 

The revisions were submitted in 

accordance with the requirements of 

section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

(hereinafter CAA or Act). 

EPA is also approving the renumbering of the Motor Vehicle section 

of the Oregon Administrative Rules. 

Two non-SIP related rules are also 

removed from the SIP in this action.

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective on January 21, 2005, without 

further notice, unless EPA receives 

comment by December 22, 2004. If 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. OR–04–002, 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: R10aircom@epa.gov.

• Fax: (206)–553–0110. 

• Mail: Office of Air, Waste, and 

Toxics, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Mail code: OAWT–107, 1200 

Sixth Ave., Seattle, Washington 98101. 

• Hand Delivery: Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air, Waste, 

and Toxics, OAWT–107, 9th Floor, 1200 

Sixth Ave., Seattle, Washington 98101. 

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. OR–04–002. EPA’s policy 

is that all comments received will be 

included in the public docket without 

change, 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 regulations.gov, or email. The federal 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 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 instructions on 

submitting comments, go to A. General 

Information of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Docket: Publicly available docket 

materials are available in hard copy at 

the Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics, 

EPA Region 10, Mail code: OAQ–107, 

1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, Washington 

98101; open from 8 a.m.—4:30 p.m. 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number is (206) 

553–1463.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wayne Elson, Office of Air, Waste and 

Toxics, EPA Region 10, Mail code: 

OAWT–107, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle 

WA 98101, telephone number: (206) 

553–1463, or e-mail address: 

elson.wayne@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

The information in this section is 

organized as follows:

A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My 

Comments for EPA? 

B. What SIP Amendments Is EPA Approving? 

C. What Are I/M Programs? 

D. What Changes Have Been Made to 

Oregon’s I/M Program That EPA Is 

Approving? 

E. What Is the Enhanced Test Waiver and 

Why Is It Needed? 

F. What Is a Qualified Household for the 

Enhanced Test Waiver? 

G. Will This Waiver Affect Air Quality? 

H. What Is On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) 

Testing? 

I. What Is On-Site Vehicle Testing? 

J. What Is Clean-Screen Testing? 

K. What Is the Self-Service Test? 

L. Are Clean Screen Testing and Self-Service 

Testing Required Tests? 

M. Why Is EPA Taking No Action on Clean 

Screen Testing and the Self Service Test? 

N. How Will These Approvals Change 

Ongoing Air Quality Planning in 

Oregon?

A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting Confidential Business 

Information (CBI). Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

CFR part or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

67820 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified.

B. What SIP Amendments Is EPA 

Approving? 

The following table outlines the 

submittals EPA received and is 

approving in this action:

Date of submittal to EPA Items revised 

11–5–1999 ........................... —Renumbering of the Motor Vehicles Rule from Division 24 to Division 256 of the OAR. 

9–15–2000 ........................... Submitted rule changes were superceded by rule revisions in later submittals listed below. 

11–27–2000 ......................... —OAR 340–256–0355 Emissions Control Test Method for OBD Test Program. 

—OAR 340–256–0440 Criteria for Qualifications of Persons Eligible to Inspect Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle 

Pollution Control Systems and Execute Certificates. 

—OAR 340–256–0465 Test Equipment Licensing Criteria for OBD Test Program. 

1–10–2003 ........................... —OAR 340–256–0356 Emissions Control Test Method for On-Site Vehicle Testing for Automobile Dealerships. 

4–22–2004 ........................... —OAR 340–256–0010 Definitions. 

—OAR 340–256–0300 Scope. 

—SIP Volume 2, Section 5.4 Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance. 

The SIP revisions cover the addition 

of new rules and revisions to existing 

rules for I/M requirements in Division 

256 Motor Vehicles (formerly Division 

024). The submittal dated September 15, 

2000 contained rules that were 

subsequently revised in later ODEQ 

submittals. Only the current version of 

each rule is being approved. 

In addition to the rule revisions 

submitted by ODEQ, EPA is also 

approving rule renumbering for the 

Motor Vehicle Division 256 of the OAR. 

On November 5, 1999, ODEQ submitted 

a complete rule renumbering to EPA for 

approval into the SIP, with an effective 

date under State law of October 14, 

1999. EPA approved portions of this 

submittal, but did not take action on 

Division 256 Motor Vehicles since the 

rules in this division had been 

subsequently revised by ODEQ. The rule 

renumbering is non-substantive. 

EPA is removing the old rules 

(formerly Division 024) from the current 

SIP that are replaced and approved 

under the renumbering. 

EPA is removing previously approved 

rules relating to noise emissions from 

the SIP in this action. These noise 

emissions rules were incorrectly 

approved into the SIP under a previous 

action. EPA also is removing the fee 

schedule for motor vehicle inspections.

Excess emissions rule revisions by the 

Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority 

(LRAPA) were submitted with the 

January 10, 2003 submittal. EPA is 

taking no action on the Excess 

Emissions Rules at this time. 

ODEQ submitted two new rules for 

testing methods which include Clean 

Screen and Self Service testing. The 

rules state the possibility of 

implementation of this testing, but 

procedures and methods for 

implementation have not been 

developed and are currently not in 

place. Therefore, EPA is taking no 

action on these rules at this time. 

The most salient aspects of approved 

rule changes include: revised rules for 

testing requirements based on vehicle 

model year, the introduction of the OBD 

test for 1996 and newer vehicles in the 

Portland and Medford area vehicle 

inspection programs, providing a waiver 

from the enhanced vehicle inspection 

testing requirements for vehicles owned 

by qualified households in the Portland 

vehicle inspection area, establishing an 

on-site vehicle testing program for used 

vehicles sold by auto dealers in the 

Portland and Medford areas, and revised 

rules for qualifications for testing 

personnel. 

C. What Are I/M Programs? 

In local areas I/M programs are 

designed to reduce motor vehicle 

emissions by requiring that vehicles 

periodically pass a tailpipe emissions 

test or, depending on the model year, a 

check of the OBD system. Vehicles 

emissions are reduced when vehicles 

are repaired in order to pass these tests. 

D. What Changes Have Been Made to 

Oregon’s I/M Program That EPA Is 

Approving? 

Current SIP approved rules include 

the basic and enhanced test 

requirements. This approval adds the 

OBD test as a requirement for certain 

vehicles in the Portland Vehicle 

Inspection (VI) Area and MedfordAshland Air Quality Maintenance Area 

(AQMA). The emission control test 

method for the OBD test and OBD test 

equipment licensing criteria are also 

included in these rule changes. 

This approval also includes a waiver 

from the enhanced vehicle test for 

qualified households in the Portland VI 

Area. Households eligible for the waiver 

would still be required to take the basic 

emissions test. Qualifications for the 

waiver are based on household income. 

EPA is also approving an on-site 

vehicle testing program for used 

vehicles sold by auto dealers in the 

Portland and Medford area. This is a 

voluntary program that allows on-site 

testing by ODEQ employees for 

manufacturer franchised auto dealers 

only. 

This approval also includes revisions 

made to the criteria for qualifications for 

persons eligible to inspect motor 

vehicles to include qualifications for 

administering testing for new vehicle 

tests and test methods. 

SIP Volume 2, Section 5.4 is a 

programmatic description of the Oregon 

I/M program including boundaries, 

performance standards, network type, 

tools, test frequency, quality control, 

waivers, and compliance, data 

collection, inspector training, and repair 

effectiveness. This description has been 

updated to reflect the changes to the 

program. EPA reviewed these changes 

and will approve this section. 

E. What Is the Enhanced Test Waiver 

and Why Is It Needed? 

This provision allows the waiver of 

some households from the enhanced 

vehicle emissions test. The waiver 

program is only for the Portland VI 

Area. The waiver would be granted 

based on household income. These 

households would still be required to 

take the basic emissions test. This 

waiver benefits households by reducing 

vehicle repair costs to meet emission 

standards. In a two-year pilot program, 

repair costs to meet the enhanced 

vehicle tests were higher than the cost 

of repairs to comply with the basic 

emissions test. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 67821

F. What Is a Qualified Household for the 

Enhanced Test Waiver? 

A qualified household, under the 

enhanced test waiver program, has a net 

income of less than or equal to 1.3 times 

the Federal Poverty Guidelines for the 

year 2000. After the year 2000, the 

annual income requirement will be 

adjusted annually, using the Oregon 

Consumer Price Index for the Portland 

Metro Regional area. 

G. Will This Waiver Affect Air Quality? 

In order to amend the SIP to include 

this provision, the ODEQ must 

demonstrate that the waiver program 

will not result in an exceedance of air 

quality standards. The information 

collected from a two-year pilot waiver 

program has shown that the number of 

vehicles granted waivers under this 

program would have a negligible effect 

on air quality.

H. What Is On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) 

Testing? 

OBD is a term describing a vehicle’s 

on-board computer that monitors how 

certain vehicle components function. 

The OBD system alerts drivers of 

malfunctions in systems that affect 

exhaust emissions such as the oxygen 

sensor, exhaust gas re-circulation 

system, fuel system, catalytic converter, 

etc. The OBD system continuously 

monitors engine systems and detects 

problems early. 

If a vehicle’s computer system detects 

a malfunction, the computer stores a 

code that can aid in diagnosis of vehicle 

problems that can affect air quality. 

During emissions testing, a computer 

checks for these stored trouble codes by 

downloading the vehicle’s computer, 

and the dashboard malfunction light is 

also checked. 

I. What Is On-Site Vehicle Testing? 

On-site testing is vehicle emissions 

testing that takes place at an auto 

dealer’s location, instead of at a ODEQ 

vehicle testing facility. ODEQ will 

perform the on-site testing using a 

traveling van equipped with OBD 

testing equipment. The OBDII test will 

be given to 1996 and newer model year 

vehicles equipped with OBDII systems. 

If a vehicle fails the test, the vehicle 

must be repaired before being re-tested. 

Auto dealers may elect to take 

vehicles to ODEQ centralized testing 

locations if they decide not to 

participate in the on-site testing. 

J. What Is Clean-Screen Testing? 

The clean screen test evaluates 

vehicle emissions while on the roadway 

to determine whether a vehicle has 

acceptable emissions. Clean screen 

testing may be administered using 

several methods. One technique would 

optically measure emissions using 

ultraviolet and infrared light beams 

directed across lane of traffic. Another 

technique would intercept a broadcast 

electronic OBD signal from a vehicle 

whose owner has volunteered for the 

program. 

The clean screening test would be 

administered just prior to registration 

expiration. Clean vehicles would be 

issued a certificate of compliance and 

would not be required to undergo the 

traditional vehicle inspection test at a 

testing facility. 

The clean-screen testing rule requires 

ODEQ to establish specific testing 

processes before implementing this type 

of testing. This testing program is 

developmental and the rule requires 

ODEQ develop documentation that this 

method would provide equal or greater 

accuracy in identifying vehicles that 

would pass or fail the required emission 

test. 

K. What Is the Self-Service Test? 

The self-service testing would provide 

a testing method for the vehicle owner 

or owner’s representative to perform the 

emissions test at a designated location. 

The test performed will be either a 

remote sensing optical quantification of 

tailpipe pollutants, a remote or 

computer connected OBD test, or other 

means as developed by ODEQ.

The self-service test rule requires 

ODEQ to establish specific testing 

processes before implementing this type 

of testing. This testing program is 

developmental and the rule requires 

ODEQ develop documentation that this 

method would provide equal or greater 

accuracy in identifying vehicles that 

would pass or fail the required emission 

test. 

L. Are Clean Screen Testing and SelfService Testing Required Tests? 

No. Both testing options are 

voluntary, and, if implemented, would 

be offered as an alternative to the 

standard emissions testing at ODEQ 

testing facilities. Vehicle owners would 

still be able to have their vehicles tested 

at the ODEQ test centers. 

M. Why Is EPA Taking No Action on 

Clean Screen Testing and the Self 

Service Test? 

EPA is taking no action on these rules 

at this time because procedures for these 

tests have not yet been developed, and 

the testing programs are not ready to 

implement on a wide scale. However, 

this does not prevent ODEQ from 

developing these testing programs and 

later submitting the procedures to EPA 

for approval into the SIP. 

N. How Will These Approvals Change 

Ongoing Air Quality Planning in 

Oregon? 

ODEQ is proposing revisions to the 

Oregon SIP to maintain air quality in 

compliance with federal air quality 

standards for carbon monoxide and 

ozone. The I/M program is an important 

and integral part of the ongoing air 

quality control measures of the SIP. EPA 

approval will support and strengthen 

the I/M program. 

These rule changes provide additional 

vehicle testing options that could make 

vehicle testing more convenient. 

Improvements in customer service 

could increase participation in the I/M 

program. 

II. Summary of Action 

A. EPA Is Approving the Following 

Sections Into the SIP 

Chapter 340–256 Motor Vehicles 

Sections –0010, –0200, –0300, –0310, 

–0330, –0340, –0350, –0355, –0356, 

–0370, –0380, –0390, –0400, –0410, 

–0420, –0440, –0450, –0460, –0465, and 

–0470 and SIP Volume 2, Section 5.4. 

B. EPA Is Removing the Following Old 

Sections From the Current SIP Because 

They Are Replaced by the Rules in 

Section A Above 

Chapter 340 Division 024 Sections 

–0100, –0300, –0301, –0305, –0306, 

–0308, –0309, –0312, –0318, –0320, 

–0325, –0330, –0332, –0335, –0340, 

–0355, –0357, and –0360 and SIP 

Volume 2, Section 5.4. 

C. EPA Is Removing the Following Rules 

From the Current IBR’d SIP Because 

They Are Not Appropriate for Inclusion 

in the SIP 

Chapter 340 Division 024 Sections 

0314 Motorcycle Noise Emission 

Control Test Method, 0337 Motor 

Vehicle Propulsion Exhaust Noise 

Standards, and 0307 Motor Vehicle 

Inspection Program Fee Schedule.

D. EPA Is Taking No Action at This 

Time on the Following Rules 

Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority 

Excess Emissions Rules, OAR 340–256–

0357 Emissions Control Test Method for 

Clean Screen Testing Program, and 340–

356–0358 Emissions Control Test 

Method for Self-Service Testing 

Program. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register

67822 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should adverse comments be filed. This 

rule will be effective January 21, 2005, 

without further notice unless the 

Agency receives adverse comments by 

December 22, 2004. 

If the EPA receives such comments, 

then EPA will publish a notice 

withdrawing the final rule in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. All 

public comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. The EPA 

will not institute a second comment 

period on this action. Parties interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If no such comments are received, 

the public is advised that this rule will 

be effective on January 21, 2005, and no 

further action will be taken on the 

proposed rule. Please note that if we 

receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

III. Oregon Notice Provision 

During EPA’s review of a SIP revision 

involving Oregon’s statutory authority, a 

problem was detected which affected 

the enforceability of point source permit 

limitations. EPA determined that, 

because the five-day advance notice 

provision required by ORS 468.126(1) 

(1991) bars civil penalties from being 

imposed for certain permit violations, 

ORS 468 fails to provide the adequate 

enforcement authority that a state must 

demonstrate to obtain SIP approval, as 

specified in section 110 of the Clean Air 

Act and 40 CFR 51.230. Accordingly, 

the requirement to provide such notice 

would preclude Federal approval of a 

section 110 SIP revision. 

To correct the problem the Governor 

of Oregon signed into law new 

legislation amending ORS 468.126 on 

September 3, 1993. This amendment 

added paragraph ORS 468.126(2)(e) 

which provides that the five-day 

advance notice required by ORS 

468.126(1) does not apply if the notice 

requirement will disqualify a state 

program from Federal approval or 

delegation. ODEQ responded to EPA’s 

understanding of the application of ORS 

468.126(2)(e) and agreed that, because 

Federal statutory requirements preclude 

the use of the five-day advance notice 

provision, no advance notice will be 

required for violations of SIP 

requirements contained in permits. 

IV. Scope of EPA Approval 

Oregon has not demonstrated 

authority to implement and enforce the 

Oregon Administrative Rules within 

‘‘Indian Country’’ as defined in 18 

U.S.C. 1151.1 1 ‘‘Indian country’’ is 

defined under 18 U.S.C. 1151 as: (1) All 

land within the limits of any Indian 

reservation under the jurisdiction of the 

United States Government, 

notwithstanding the issuance of any 

patent, and including rights-of-way 

running through the reservation, (2) all 

dependent Indian communities within 

the borders of the United States, 

whether within the original or 

subsequently acquired territory thereof, 

and whether within or without the 

limits of a State, and (3) all Indian 

allotments, the Indian titles to which 

have not been extinguished, including 

rights-of-way running through the same. 

Under this definition, EPA treats as 

reservations trust lands validly set aside 

for the use of a Tribe even if the trust 

lands have not been formally designated 

as a reservation. Therefore, this SIP 

approval does not extend to ‘‘Indian 

Country’’ in Oregon. See CAA sections 

110(a)(2)(A) (SIP shall include 

enforceable emission limits), 

110(a)(2)(E)(i) (State must have adequate 

authority under State law to carry out 

SIP), and 172(c)(6) (nonattainment SIPs 

shall include enforceable emission 

limits). This is consistent with EPA’s 

previous approval of Oregon’s PSD 

program, in which EPA specifically 

disapproved the program for sources 

within Indian Reservations in Oregon 

because the State had not shown it had 

authority to regulate such sources. See

40 CFR 52.1987(c). It is also consistent 

with EPA’s approval of Oregon’s title V 

operating permits program. See 59 FR 

61820, 61827 (December 2, 1994) 

(interim approval does not extend to 

Indian Country); 60 FR 50106, 50106 

(September 28, 1995) (full approval does 

not extend to Indian Country). 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

rule approves pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it 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). 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have federalism 

implications because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

approves a state rule implementing a 

Federal standard, and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

Clean Air Act. This rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not economically 

significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. This rule does 

not impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 67823

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by January 21, 2005. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements.

Dated: October 26, 2004. 

Julie M. Hagensen, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

■ Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart MM—Oregon

■ 2. Section 52.1970 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c) (142) to read as 

follows:

§ 52.1970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * * 

(142) The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) approves various 

amendments to the Oregon State 

Implementation Plan which are 

contained in four separate submittals to 

EPA, dated November 5, 1999, 

November 27, 2000, January 10, 2003 

and April 19, 2004 which include 

revisions to the inspection and 

maintenance program. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) The following sections of the 

Oregon Administrative Rules 340: 256–

0200, 256–0310, 256–0330, 256–0340, 

256–0350, 256–0370, 256–0380, 256–

0390, 256–0400, 256–0410, 256–0420, 

256–0450, 256–0460, and 256–0470, as 

effective October 14, 1999; 256–0355, 

256–0440, and 256–0465, as effective 

October 25, 2000; 256–0356, as effective 

October 4, 2001; and 256–0010, 256–

0300, as effective October 24, 2003. 

(B) Remove the following old sections 

of the Oregon Administrative Rules 340 

from the current incorporation by 

reference: 024–100, 024–300, 024–301, 

024–305, 024–306, 024–307, 024–308, 

024–309, 024–312, 024–314, 024–318, 

024–320, 024–325, 024–330, 024–332, 

024–335, 024–337, 024–340, 024–355, 

024–357, and 024–360. 

(ii) Additional Material: 

(A) Oregon SIP Volume 2, Section 5.4, 

as effective October 24, 2003.

[FR Doc. 04–25629 Filed 11–19–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 2, 22, 24, 74, 78 and 90 

[WT Docket No. 02–55; ET Docket No. 00–

258; ET Docket No. 95–18, RM–9498; RM–

10024; FCC 04–168] 

Private Land Mobile Services; 800 MHz 

Public Safety Interference Proceeding

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: In this document the 

Commission amends its rules to adopt 

objective technical standards defining 

‘‘unacceptable interference’’ to noncellular licensees operating in the 800 

MHz band and procedures detailing 800 

MHz licensees’ responsibilities and 

expectations regarding abatement of 

such interference. The Commission also 

adopts rules reconfiguring the 800 MHz 

band and designating ten megahertz of 

spectrum in the 1.9 GHz band available 

for the provision of commercial mobile 

radio services (CMRS). The Commission 

took these steps to solve the problem of 

increasing interference to public safety 

communications in the 800 MHz band. 

These rules are intended to abate this 

interference as well as making 

additional spectrum available for the 

provision of new services.

DATES: Effective January 21, 2005, 

except for §§ 22.972, 22.973, 90.674, 

90.675, 90.676 and 90.677 which 

contain information collection 

requirements that have not been 

approved by the Office of Management 

and Budget. The Commission will 

publish a document in the Federal 

Register announcing the effective date 

for these sections.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Technical information: Brian Marenco, 

Brian.Marenco@FCC.gov, Public Safety 

and Critical Infrastructure Division, 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 

(202) 418–0680, or TTY (202) 418–7233. 

Legal information: Roberto Mussenden, 

Esq. Roberto.Mussenden@FCC.gov, 

Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure 

Division, Wireless Telecommunications 

Bureau (202) 418–0680, or TTY (202) 

418–7233. For additional information 

concerning the Paperwork Reduction 

Act information collection requirements 

contained in this document, contact 

Judith B. Herman at (202) 418–0214, or 

via the Internet at JudithB.Herman@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document summarizes the Federal 

Communications Commission’s Report 

and Order, Fifth R&O, Fourth MO&O, 

and Order, FCC 04–168, adopted on July 

8, 2004, and released on August 6, 2004. 

The full text of this document is 

available for inspection and copying 

during normal business hours in the 

FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20554. The 

complete text may be purchased from 

the Commission’s copy contractor, Best 

Copy and Printing Inc., 445 12th Street, 

SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 

20554. The full text may also be 

downloaded at http://www.fcc.gov/wtb. 

Alternative formats are available to 

persons with disabilities by contacting 

Brian Millin at (202) 418–7426 or TTY 

(202) 418–7365 or at bmillin@fcc.gov. 

Summary of Report and Order 

1. In the Report and Order, the 

Commission adopts changes to parts 2, 

22 and 90 of the Commission’s rules 

that were either proposed in or 

suggested in response to the Notice of 

Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) and 

subsequent Public Notices in this 

proceeding. The NPRM, released on 

March 15, 2002, 67 FR 16351–02 (April 

5, 2002), sought to explore all available 

options and alternatives for improving 

the spectrum environment for public 

safety operations in the 800 MHz Band 

and to ensure that public safety agencies 

have access to adequate spectrum 

resources in the 800 MHz band to 

support their critical missions. On