Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 71375

(4) Proceed straight west for 0.2 mile 

on State Route 240 to its intersection 

with Kuehne Road at the 207-foot 

benchmark, section 47, T3S, R3W 

(Dundee Quadrangle); then 

(5) Proceed southerly for about 1.9 

miles on Kuehne Road to its intersection 

with Abbey Road, section 50, T3S, R3W 

(Dundee Quadrangle); then 

(6) Proceed southerly 1.4 miles on 

Abbey Road to its intersection with the 

200-foot elevation line, north of the 174-

foot elevation point, section 52, T3S, 

R3W (Dundee Quadrangle); then 

(7) Proceed southwesterly for about 

2.1 miles along the meandering 200-foot 

elevation line to Lafayette Cemetery on 

the Carlton map in section 1, T4S, R4W, 

and turning northerly along the 200-foot 

elevation line, continue along the 

elevation line for about 6 miles, crossing 

to and from the Dundee map, to the 200-

foot elevation line’s intersection with 

Stag Hollow Road, north of Hendricks 

Road and 190-foot elevation point, 

section 24, T3S, R4W (Carlton 

Quadrangle); then 

(8) Continue westerly along the 

meandering 200-foot elevation line, 

turning northeasterly as the elevation 

line passes through the Carlton Lakes 

State Wildlife Refuge, then westerly as 

the elevation line crosses Stag Hollow 

Creek in section 47, T3S, R4W, then 

southerly as the elevation line crosses 

the North Yamhill River on the Fairdale 

map in section 43, T2S, R5W, then, 

returning to the Carlton map, continue 

southerly on the 200-foot elevation line 

to its intersection with Meadow Lake 

Road near the southwest corner of 

section 55, T3S, R4W (Carlton 

Quadrangle); 

(9) Continue westerly along the 

meandering 200-foot elevation line, 

crossing onto the Fairdale map, to the 

elevation line’s intersection with the 

123°17′30′′ longitude line (north of 

Panther Creek) in the western extension 

of section 22, T3S, R5W (Fairdale 

Quadrangle); then

(10) Proceed 0.2 mile straight south 

along the 123°17′30′′ longitude line, 

crossing Panther Creek, to the line’s 

intersection with the 200-foot elevation 

line south of the creek in the western 

extension of section 22, T3S, R5W 

(Fairdale Quadrangle); then 

(11) Proceed easterly and then 

southeasterly along the meandering 200-

foot elevation line, crossing onto the 

Carlton map, then the McMinnville 

map, to the elevation line’s third 

intersection with an unnamed light-duty 

road, southwest of the Henderson 

Benchmark in section 87, T4S, R4W 

(McMinnville Quadrangle); 

(12) Continue southerly and then 

westerly along the meandering 200-foot 

elevation line, crossing onto the Muddy 

Valley map, to the elevation line’s 

intersection with Baker Creek Road 

(very near Baker Creek Road’s 

intersection with High Heaven Road) in 

section 54, T4S, R5W (Muddy Valley 

Quadrangle); then 

(13) Proceed west-southwest for 0.8 

mile on Baker Creek Road to its 

intersection with the 123°17′30′′

longitude line in Happy Valley, section 

54, T4S, R5W (Muddy Valley 

Quadrangle); then 

(14) Proceed straight north 13.4 miles 

on the 123°17′30′′ longitude line, 

passing through the Fairdale map and 

crossing onto the Turner Creek map, to 

the longitude line’s intersection with 

the 1,000-foot elevation line in the 

northwestern quadrant of section 10, 

T2S, R5W, approximately one mile 

diagonally northwest of the footbridge 

in Menefee Park (Turner Creek 

Quadrangle); then 

(15) Proceed easterly and then 

northerly for 4.1 miles along the 

meandering 1,000-foot elevation line to 

its intersection with the WashingtonYamhill County line at northern 

boundary of section 3, T2S, R5W (also 

the common T1S/T2S boundary line) 

(Turner Creek Quadrangle); then 

(16) Proceed straight east 3.9 miles 

along the Washington-Yamhill County 

line, crossing onto the Gaston map, to 

the county line’s intersection with 

South Road, just east of Mt. Richmond 

Road, section 60, T2S, R4W (Gaston 

Quadrangle); then 

(17) Proceed east-northeast for 1.8 

miles on South Road to its intersection 

with the 200-foot elevation line, 0.3 

mile west of the Gaging Station, section 

34, T1S, R4W (Gaston Quadrangle); then 

(18) Proceed easterly 1.9 miles along 

the 200-foot elevation line and return to 

the beginning point within the village of 

Gaston.

Signed: November 1, 2004. 

Arthur J. Libertucci, 

Administrator.

Approved: November 18, 2004. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy).

[FR Doc. 04–27016 Filed 12–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P

PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION

35 CFR Chapter I 

Panama Canal Regulations 

Vacation of Title 

Editorial Note: Under section 121 of 

Public Law 108–309, the Panama Canal 

Commission (PCC) and its Office of 

Transition Administration (OTA) 

terminated on October 1, 2004. A letter 

from the General Attorney for the PCC 

OTA to the Office of the Federal 

Register has confirmed that PCC 

regulations should be removed from the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 

Therefore, the Director of the Federal 

Register, pursuant to his authority to 

maintain an orderly system of 

codification under 44 U.S.C. 1510 and 1 

CFR 8.2 hereby removes from the CFR, 

Title 35, Chapter I consisting of Parts 1 

to 299. 

Accordingly, Title 35 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is hereby vacated. 

[FR Doc. 04–55526 Filed 12–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52

[R05–OAR–2004–MN–0002; FRL–7846–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans: Minnesota: 

Minneapolis-St. Paul Carbon Monoxide 

Maintenance Plan Update

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to 

the Minnesota State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for the maintenance of the 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) submitted 

on November 10, 2004. Specifically, 

EPA is approving Minnesota’s revised 

1996 and 2009 CO emissions 

inventories and 2009 Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets (MVEB) recalculated 

using MOBILE6 for the Minneapolis-St. 

Paul CO maintenance area.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 

24, 2005, unless EPA receives relevant 

adverse written comments by January 

10, 2005. If adverse comment is 

received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the rule in the Federal 

Register and inform the public that the 

rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. R05–OAR–

2004–MN–0002 by one of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

E-mail: bortzer.jay@epa.gov.

Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

Mail: You may send written 

comments to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 

Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

71376 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

Hand delivery: Deliver your 

comments to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 

Air Programs Branch, (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No.R05–OAR–2004–MN–

0002. 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 the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

the related proposed rule which is 

published in the proposed rule section 

of this Federal Register. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in an index. Although listed 

in the index, some information is not 

publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Publicly available 

docket materials are available in hard 

copy at Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. (We recommend 

that you telephone Michael Leslie, 

Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353–

6680 before visiting the Region 5 office.) 

This Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Leslie, Environmental 

Engineer, Criteria Pollutants Section 

(AR–18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and 

Radiation Division, United States 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680, 

leslie.michael@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section is organized as follows:

I. General Information 

A. Does This Action Apply to Me? 

B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document 

and Other Related Information? 

C. How and To Whom Do I Submit 

Comments? 

II. Background 

III. What Is The MOBILE Model and 

MOBILE6? 

IV. What Is Transportation Conformity? 

V. What Is a Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budget? 

VI. What Is the Purpose and Content of 

Minnesota’s Submittal? 

VII. What Are the Revised CO Emissions 

Inventories? 

VIII. What Is Minneapolis-St. Paul Revised 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget?

IX. EPA Action. 

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information 

A. Does This Action Apply to Me? 

This action is a non-regulatory 

planning document designed to ensure 

that ambient concentrations of CO in the 

Minneapolis-St. Paul area are 

maintained at levels that comply with 

the NAAQS. 

B. How Can I Get Copies of This 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

1. The Regional Office has established 

an electronic public rulemaking file 

available for inspection at Regional 

Material in EDocket (RME) under RME 

ID No. R05–OAR–2004–MN–0002, and a 

hard copy file which is available for 

inspection at the Regional Office. The 

official public file consists of the 

documents specifically referenced in 

this action, any public comments 

received, and other information related 

to this action. Although a part of the 

official docket, the public rulemaking 

file does not include Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. The official public 

rulemaking file is the collection of 

materials that is available for public 

viewing at the Air Programs Branch, Air 

and Radiation Division, EPA Region 5, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to schedule your 

inspection. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

excluding Federal holidays. 

2. Electronic Access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the 

regulations.gov Web site located at 

http://www.regulations.gov where you 

can find, review, and submit comments 

on Federal rules that have been 

published in the Federal Register, the 

government’s legal newspaper, and are 

open for comment. 

For public commenters, it is 

important to note that EPA’s policy is 

that public comments, whether 

submitted electronically or in paper, 

will be made available for public 

viewing at the EPA Regional Office, as 

EPA receives them and without change, 

unless the comment contains 

copyrighted material, CBI, or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. When EPA 

identifies a comment containing 

copyrighted material, EPA will provide 

a reference to that material in the 

version of the comment that is placed in 

the official public rulemaking file. The 

entire printed comment, including the 

copyrighted material, will be available 

at the Regional Office for public 

inspection. 

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit 

Comments? 

You may submit comments 

electronically, by mail, or through hand 

delivery/courier. To ensure proper 

receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate 

rulemaking identification number by 

including the text ‘‘Public comment on 

proposed rulemaking Region 5 Air 

Docket ‘‘R05–OAR–2004–MN–0002’’ in 

the subject line on the first page of your 

comment. Please ensure that your 

comments are submitted within the 

specified comment period. Comments 

received after the close of the comment 

period will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not 

required to consider these late 

comments. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting public comments and on 

what to consider as you prepare your 

comments see the ADDRESSES section 

and the section I General Information of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of the related proposed rule which is 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 71377

published in the Proposed Rules section 

of this Federal Register. 

II. Background 

The Minnesota Pollution Control 

Agency (MPCA) is required to develop 

and periodically update a maintenance 

plan to ensure that ambient 

concentrations of CO in the 

Minneapolis-St. Paul area are 

maintained at levels that comply with 

the NAAQS. The CO Maintenance Plan 

for Minneapolis-St. Paul is a component 

of Minnesota’s SIP for the NAAQS. The 

CO maintenance plan established a 

MVEB which is used in transportation 

conformity. 

On January 29, 2002, EPA officially 

released the MOBILE6 motor vehicle 

emissions factor model (67 FR 4254). 

The primary purpose of this submittal is 

to use the MOBILE6 model to help 

MPCA update the CO Maintenance 

Plan’s MVEB. The on-road mobile, point 

and area, and non-road portions of the 

maintenance plan’s CO emissions 

inventory have been updated as well. 

III. What Is the MOBILE Model and 

MOBILE6? 

MOBILE is an EPA emissions factor 

model used for estimating pollution 

from on-road motor vehicles. MOBILE 

calculates emissions of volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and carbon monoxide (CO) from 

passenger cars, motorcycles, buses, and 

light-duty and heavy-duty trucks. The 

model accounts for changes in vehicle 

emission standards, changes in vehicle 

populations and activity, and variation 

in local conditions such as temperature, 

humidity, fuel quality, and air quality 

programs. 

MOBILE is used to calculate current 

and future inventories of motor vehicle 

emissions at the national and local 

level. Inventories based on MOBILE are 

also used to meet the federal Clean Air 

Act’s SIP and transportation conformity 

requirements. 

MOBILE6 is the first major update of 

the MOBILE model since 1993. The 

MOBILE model was first developed in 

1978. It has been updated many times 

to reflect changes in the vehicle fleet 

and fuels, to incorporate EPA’s growing 

understanding of vehicle emissions, and 

to cover new emissions regulations and 

modeling needs. Although some minor 

updates were made in 1996 with the 

release of MOBILE5b, MOBILE6 is the 

first major revision to MOBILE since 

MOBILE5a was released in 1993. 

IV. What Is Transportation Conformity?

Transportation conformity means that 

the level of emissions from the 

transportation sector (cars, trucks and 

buses) must be consistent with the 

requirements in the SIP to attain and 

maintain the air quality standards. The 

Clean Air Act, in section 176(c), 

requires conformity of transportation 

plans, programs and projects to an 

implementation plan’s purpose of 

attaining and maintaining the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards. EPA 

published rules (40 CFR part 93 subpart 

A) establishing criteria and procedures 

for determining whether transportation 

plans, programs and projects funded or 

approved under title 23 U.S.C. or the 

Federal Transit Act conform to the SIP. 

The transportation conformity rules 

require a CO maintenance area, such as 

Minneapolis-St. Paul, to compare the 

actual projected emissions from cars, 

trucks and buses on the highway 

network, to the MVEB established by a 

maintenance plan. The Minneapolis-St. 

Paul area has an approved CO 

maintenance plan. This submittal 

established the new MVEB for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

V. What Is a Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budget? 

An MVEB is the projected level of 

controlled emissions from the 

transportation sector (on-road mobile 

sources) that is estimated in the SIP. 

The SIP controls emissions through 

regulations, for example, on fuels and 

exhaust levels for cars. The emissions 

budget concept is further explained in 

the preamble to the November 24, 1993, 

transportation conformity rule (58 FR 

62188). The preamble also describes 

how to establish the MVEB in the SIP 

and how to revise the emissions budget. 

The transportation conformity rule 

allows changing the MVEB as long as 

the total level of emissions from all 

sources remains below the attainment 

level. 

VI. What Is the Purpose and Content of 

Minnesota’s Submittal? 

In this submittal, Minnesota provided 

1996 and 2009 CO emissions 

inventories based on the MOBILE6 

model. The purpose of this submittal is 

to update the CO Maintenance Plan 

MVEB to reflect the updated 

inventories. EPA officially released the 

MOBILE6 motor vehicle emissions 

factor model on January 29, 2002 (67 FR 

4254). The November 10, 2004, 

submittal demonstrates that the new 

levels of motor vehicle emissions 

calculated using MOBILE6 continue to 

support maintenance of the CO NAAQS 

for Minneapolis-St. Paul area. 

VII. What Are the Revised CO 

Emissions Inventories? 

The MPCA contracted with the 

Sonoma Technology Incorporated (STI) 

consultants to develop the emissions 

inventory for the maintenance plan. 

Table 1 below summarizes the revised 

CO emissions inventories in tons per 

winter day. EPA is approving these 

revised 2009 emissions inventories. The 

CO emission inventory includes on-road 

mobile sources, point and area sources, 

and non-road mobile sources.

TABLE 1.—MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL CO 

EMISSIONS (TONS/WINTER DAY) 

Source category 1996 2009 

On-Road Mobile ............... 1,872 1,311 

Point and Area .................. 297 127 

Non-Road Mobile .............. 337 418 

Totals ......................... 2,506 1,856 

On-Road Mobile Sources 

On-road mobile sources represent the 

majority of CO emissions for the 

Minneapolis-St Paul CO maintenance 

area. The revised inventories were 

developed using the latest planning 

assumptions, including updated vehicle 

registration data and age distribution, 

vehicle miles traveled (VMT), speeds, 

fleet mix, and SIP control measures. 

The VMT data used for the 1996 onroad mobile source inventories were 

generated from the data that was 

reported annually to the United States 

Department of Transportation’s 

Highway Performance Monitoring 

System (HPMS). Because HPMS data are 

annual average daily traffic (AADT) 

data, these data need to be adjusted for 

wintertime inventories. The Minnesota 

Department of Transportation estimated 

a scaling factor of 0.87 for converting 

annual VMT to wintertime VMT, and 

this factor was applied to all HPMS 

data. 

For future years, VMT data were 

estimated using a traffic demand model 

(TDM) recently developed by the 

Metropolitan Council. This model 

estimates VMT on freeways, including 

some but not all ramps and arterials and 

collectors. To estimate the total VMT on 

freeways (i.e., including all ramps), a 

default assumption from MOBILE6 that 

total freeway VMT is 92% nonramp and 

8% ramp was used. 

For the 1996 emission inventory, the 

speeds were assumed for each 

functional class (interstate, arterial, and 

collectors), with the exception that local 

systems (urban and rural) were modeled 

as local roadways in MOBILE6, and 

therefore had fixed average speeds of 

12.9 mph. Information was not available 

71378 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

to break the speed data down into 

separate averages for AM peak, PM 

peak, and off-peak periods, or to 

determine the statistical distribution of 

different speeds. For freeways and 

interstates, the speeds were assumed to 

be the VMT weighted average of ramp 

and nonramp speeds. The MOBILE6 

defaults for freeway ramp VMT and 

freeway nonramp VMT were assumed. 

The TDM calculates speeds for future 

years, but the speed calculation 

methods were not developed for 

purposes of emissions modeling. In 

most transportation models, speed is 

estimated primarily to allocate travel 

across the roadway network. Speed is 

used as a measure of impedance to 

travel rather than as a prediction of 

accurate travel times. For this reason, 

speed results from most travel demand 

models must be adjusted to properly 

estimate actual average speeds. 

As a result, rather than using the 

speeds calculated by the TDM, speeds 

were calculated in accordance with EPA 

guidance. The EPA guidance identifies 

eight different methodologies for 

estimating speed of which one involves 

the use of a post-processor. For each 

TDM run, the post-processor was 

applied to each roadway link for each 

hour of the day. The number of roadway 

links differed among TDM runs; and 

therefore the interpolation of linkspecific speed data between TDM runs 

(as was done for VMT data) would not 

have been straightforward for 2009 and 

2019. The interagency consultation 

group decided that it was reasonable to 

estimate that 2009 average speeds 

would be approximately the same as 

those estimated from the 2010 TDM run, 

and 2019 average speeds would be 

approximately the same as those 

estimated from the 2020 TDM run. VMT 

weighted average speeds were 

calculated for each county, MOBILE6 

roadway type (i.e., freeway and arterial/

collector), and time period (AM peak, 

PM peak, or off-peak). 

The distribution of VMT across 

different vehicle types is referred to as 

the ‘‘VMT mix.’’ MOBILE6 includes 

default VMT mixes for past, current, 

and future years, taking into account 

projected changes in VMT mix over 

time. Although past VMT mix 

information could have been updated 

based on HPMS data, this is not possible 

for future years. For this reason, 

MOBILE6 defaults for VMT mix were 

used to generate emissions.

Although the MOBILE6 model 

includes default vehicle age 

distributions, which are usually 

assumed to not change over time, 

MOBILE6 results can depend heavily on 

the distribution of vehicle ages used. 

STI obtained vehicle registration data 

from the Minnesota Department of 

Public Safety. For each vehicle, these 

data included a vehicle identification 

number (VIN) and the county of 

registration. These data were used to 

determine age distributions for lightduty passenger vehicles and light-duty 

trucks (LDVs and LDTs) in the 8-county 

Minneapolis-St. Paul area. STI used 

MOBILE6 defaults for heavy-duty 

vehicle age distributions. Heavy-duty 

vehicle traffic in Minneapolis-St. Paul is 

likely to have a significant contribution 

from vehicles registered outside the 

eight counties, and possibly outside the 

state, thus indicating that national 

default data were more appropriate for 

heavy-duty vehicles than for light-duty 

vehicles. 

For light-duty cars, the MinneapolisSt. Paul age distribution is very similar 

to the default national age distribution 

included in MOBILE6; but LDTs in the 

8-county region were significantly 

newer than the MOBILE6 default age 

distribution with the exception that 

Class 1 LDTs were significantly older 

than the MOBILE6 default age 

distribution. 

Point and Area Sources 

The emission inventories for 

stationary and area sources were based 

on MPCA’s emissions estimates for 1996 

and 2002. Information gaps in the 2002 

inventory were filled with estimates 

acquired from the Central Regional Air 

Planning Association, the Lake 

Michigan Air Directors’ Consortium, 

and the preliminary draft version of the 

EPA’s 2002 National Emission Inventory 

(NEI). Emissions were projected from 

2002 forward to 2009 (and, when 

needed, back to 1996) by applying 

growth factors from EPA’s Economic 

Growth Analysis System (EGAS) model 

or other appropriate growth surrogates. 

For example, STI applied survey data 

that indicated declining trends in the 

numbers of fireplaces per household 

and the consumption of wood per 

fireplace, as well as increasing trends in 

the estimated numbers of housing units 

(historical and forecasted) to project 

emissions for residential wood 

combustion. Finally, STI applied 

seasonal profiles to estimate emissions 

for a typical winter day. 

The specific information sources used 

for 1996 and 2002 emissions estimates, 

growth projection factors, and seasonal 

profiles applied for each emissions 

source category (designated by source 

classification code [SCC]) were included 

in an appendix to the submittal. In 

addition, some of the stationary source 

estimates reflect local data. 

Non-Road Sources 

Non-road emissions result from the 

use of fuel in a diverse collection of 

vehicles and equipment such as 

recreational vehicles, agricultural 

equipment, and construction 

equipment. STI used the newest version 

of EPA’s NONROAD model to estimate 

emissions from all non-road sources 

except commercial marine vessels 

(CMVs), locomotives, and aircraft. 

NONROAD was run for the 1996 and 

2009 winters in the 8-county area, using 

weekday activity information. The most 

recent version of this model is 

NONROAD2004 released on May 11, 

2004. 

Some of the seasonal activity factors 

in NONROAD2004 were adjusted to 

account for local information. For the 

Minneapolis-St. Paul area, it was 

determined the wintertime activity for 

some types of lawn and garden 

equipment (and golf carts) should be 

0%. Aircraft ground support equipment 

and terminal tractors are excluded from 

the non-road emissions because these 

emissions were included in MPCA’s 

emission inventory for airports. 

In winter, emissions from CMVs in 

the Minneapolis-St. Paul area are 

negligible due to frozen waterways. Year 

2002 emissions from airport groundsupport equipment at the MinneapolisSt. Paul airport and emissions from 

aircraft were acquired from the MPCA 

point source inventory. Emissions from 

ground-support equipment were 

projected to 1996 and 2009 by using 

EGAS growth factors. Emissions for 

aircraft were projected by using 

historical aircraft operations data, 

forecasts of operations by the 

Metropolitan Council, or forecasts of 

operations by the Federal Aviation 

Administration whenever available. 

Historical data and forecasts were not 

readily available for a few small 

airports; therefore, EGAS growth factors 

were applied instead. Aircraft at these 

airports accounted for approximately 

12% of total emissions from aircraft in 

2002.

Emissions from locomotives were 

estimated to be quite low 

(approximately one ton per winter day) 

in the 1998 Maintenance Plan, and a 

recent evaluation of locomotive 

emissions conducted by STI for 

calendar year 2002 confirmed that these 

emissions were approximately correct. 

Therefore, the 1996 locomotive 

emission estimates in the 1998 

Maintenance Plan were retained. For 

2009, locomotive emissions were 

assumed to be identical, since EPA has 

projected no growth in locomotive fuel 

usage and no CO emission reductions 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 71379

associated with its locomotive 

emissions regulations. 

VIII. What Is Minneapolis-St. Paul 

Revised Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budget? 

MPCA submitted an emissions 

inventory for the Minneapolis-St. Paul 

maintenance area for the base year of 

1996. The year 1996 was selected for the 

inventory as no excursions or violations 

of the standard occurred. Emissions 

were then projected for 2009. The 

MOBILE6 emissions model was used for 

on-road mobile sources. These revised 

inventories were developed using the 

latest planning assumptions, including 

updated vehicle registration data from 

1996 through 2009, VMT, speeds, fleet 

mix, and SIP control measures. The 

emission inventory amounts are shown 

in the table below.

TABLE 2.—MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL CO 

EMISSIONS (TONS/WINTER DAY) 

Source category 1996 2009 

On-Road Mobile ............... 1,872 1,311 

Point and Area .................. 297 127 

Non-Road Mobile .............. 337 418 

Totals ......................... 2,506 1,856 

A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference 

between the attainment level of 

emissions (from all sources) and the 

projected level of emissions (from all 

sources) in the maintenance plan. The 

attainment level of emissions is the 

level of emissions during one of the 

years in which the area met the air 

quality health standard. For example: 

The emissions from point, area and 

mobile sources for the Minneapolis-St. 

Paul area in 1996 equaled 2506 tons per 

winter day of CO. The projected 

emissions for 2009 totaled 1856 tons per 

winter day of CO from all sources. The 

safety margin for the Minneapolis-St. 

Paul area is the difference between these 

amounts, or 650 tons per winter day of 

CO. 

Minnesota has submitted a complete 

and accurate emissions inventory of CO 

for the Minneapolis-St. Paul 

maintenance area and we are approving 

the emissions inventory. Based upon the 

updated emissions inventory, the 

revised maintenance plan contains a 

new budget (or limit) for motor vehicle 

emissions resulting from transportation 

plans for the Minneapolis-St. Paul 

maintenance area. We have reviewed 

the budget and have found that the 

budgets meet all of the adequacy criteria 

in section 93.118 of the transportation 

conformity rule. These criteria include: 

(1) The SIP was endorsed by the 

Governor (or his designee) and was 

subject to a state public hearing; (2) 

consultation among federal, state, and 

local agencies occurred; (3) the 

emissions budget is clearly identified 

and precisely quantified; (4) the MVEB, 

when considered together with all other 

emissions, is consistent with 

attainment; and (5) the MVEB is 

consistent with and clearly related to 

the emissions inventory and control 

strategy in the SIP. We are also required 

to consider comments submitted to the 

state at the public hearing. No 

significant comments were received by 

the state on the transportation 

conformity budget. The new area-wide 

CO budget is shown in the table below:

TABLE 3.—MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL’S

MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGET

Source category 

2009 CO

emissions

(tons/winter

day) 

On-Road Mobile ................... 1,311 

Safety Margin ....................... 650 

Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budget ............................... 1,961 

This new MVEB is to be used in all 

subsequent conformity determinations 

concerning transportation plans in the 

Minneapolis-St. Paul maintenance area. 

We believe that the MVEB is consistent 

with the control measures identified in 

this maintenance plan and that this plan 

demonstrates maintenance with the CO 

standard. 

The above demonstrates the 2009 

emissions will still maintain the total 

emissions for the area at or below the 

maintenance level. For this reason, EPA 

is approving the new projected MVEB 

for 2009. 

IX. EPA Action 

EPA is approving the Minnesota SIP 

revision submitted on November 10, 

2004. This submittal revises 

Minnesota’s 1996 and 2009 CO emission 

inventories and 2009 MVEB using 

MOBILE6 for the Minneapolis-St. Paul 

CO maintenance area. 

EPA is publishing this action without 

prior proposal, because EPA views this 

as a noncontroversial revision and 

anticipates no adverse comments. 

However, in a separate document in this 

Federal Register publication, EPA is 

proposing to approve the SIP revision 

should adverse written comments be 

filed. This action will be effective 

without further notice unless EPA 

receives relevant adverse written 

comments by January 10, 2005. Should 

the Agency receive such comment, we 

will publish a final rule informing the 

public that this action will not take 

effect. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. If we do not receive 

comments, this action will be effective 

on January 24, 2005. An effective date 

45 days from the date of publication in 

the Federal Register has been selected 

in consideration of section 553 of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553). Section 553(d)allows us to make 

this action effective in 45 days because 

this action relieves a restriction on the 

funding of transportation projects in 

Minnesota which would occur and 

continue without the approval of this 

plan revision.

X. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

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. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

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). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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.). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule approves preexisting 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). 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

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 

71380 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

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). 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

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. 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

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. 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

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. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

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.). 

Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by 

the Small 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. section 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 February 7, 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.

Dated: November 30, 2004. 

Bharat Mathur, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

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 Y—Minnesota

■ 2. Section 52.1237 is amended by 

adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 52.1237 Control strategy: Carbon 

monoxide.

* * * * *

(d) Approval—On November 10, 

2004, Minnesota submitted a revision to 

the Carbon Monoxide (CO) maintenance 

plan for the Minneapolis-St. Paul area. 

These plans revised 1996 and 2009 

motor vehicle emission inventories and 

2009 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

(MVEB) recalculated using the 

emissions factor model MOBILE6. The 

MVEB for transportation conformity 

purposes for the Minneapolis-St. Paul 

maintenance area is 1961 tons per 

winter day of CO.

[FR Doc. 04–27026 Filed 12–8–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 2 and 15 

[ET Docket No. 01–278; FCC 04–262] 

Radio Frequency Device Rules

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document addresses 

three petitions for reconsideration of 

various aspects of the rule changes 

adopted in the Second Report and Order 

and Memorandum Opinion and Order

(Second Report and Order) in this 

proceeding. In particular, the 

Commission: Grants a request to permit 

compliance information statements for 

self-authorized equipment to be 

provided in alternative formats; grants a 

request to permit longer duration 

transmissions during the setup of 

security systems; and denies a requests 

to permit electronic labeling of selfauthorized equipment, to further relax 

the equipment authorization 

requirements for low frequency 

intentional radiators and to require 

foreign regulators to accept 

accreditations of United States 

laboratories.

DATES: Effective January 10, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Hugh VanTuyl, Office of Engineering 

and Technology, (202) 418–7506, TTY 

(202) 418–2989, e-mail: 

Hugh.VanTuyl@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s 

Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET 

Docket No. 01–278, FCC 04–262, 

adopted November 5, 2004 and released 

November 9, 2004. The full text of this 

document is available on the 

Commission’s Internet site at 

www.fcc.gov. It is also available for 

inspection and copying during regular 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th 

Street., SW., Washington, DC 20554. 

The full text of this document also may 

be purchased from the Commission’s 

duplication contractor, Best Copy and 

Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th St., 

SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 

20554; telephone (202) 488–5300; fax 

(202) 488–5563.