### 67327 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Dated: November 4, 2013.

J.G. Lantz, Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.

[FR Doc. 2013–26878 Filed 11–8–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0562; FRL–9902–66– Region 8]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of**  **Colorado; Revised Transportation Conformity Consultation Process** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Colorado on May 11, 2012. The May 11, 2012 submittal addresses updates to Regulation Number 10 ‘‘Criteria for Analysis of Conformity’’ of the Colorado SIP including revisions to transportation conformity requirements, transportation conformity criteria and procedures related to interagency consultation, and enforceability of certain transportation related control and mitigation measures.
The submittal also removes certain provisions from the SIP so that federal rules will govern conformity of general federal actions. EPA is proposing approval of the submission in accordance with the requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before December 12, 2013.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– OAR–2011–0562, by one of the following methods:

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

• Email: russ.tim@epa.gov.

• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado

80202–1129.

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in **FOR FURTHER**

**INFORMATION CONTACT** if you are faxing comments).

• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries are only accepted Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. Special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2011– 0562. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be
made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, 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 email comment directly to EPA, without going through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, 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.
General Information of the

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** section of
this document.

Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the 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 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individual
listed in the **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION**

**CONTACT** section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Tim Russ, Air Program, Mailcode 8P–AR, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, telephone number (303) 312–6479, fax number (303) 312–6064, or email russ.tim@

epa.gov

.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Table of Contents

I. General Information II. What is the purpose of this action? III. What is the State’s process to submit SIP

revisions to EPA? IV. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s May 11,
2012 Submittal V. Consideration of Section 110(l) of the
Clean Air Act VI. Proposed Action VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Definitions

For the purpose of this document, the following definitions apply:

(i) The word Act or initials CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the
context indicates otherwise.

(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

(iii) The initials NAAQS mean national ambient air quality standard.

(iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.

(v) The words State or Colorado mean the State of Colorado, unless the context
indicates otherwise.

I. General Information

What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. 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 CFR part 2.


### 67328 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

1 A conformity SIP includes a state’s specific criteria and procedures for certain aspects of the transportation conformity process consistent with the federal conformity rule. A conformity SIP does not contain motor vehicle emissions budgets, emissions inventories, air quality demonstrations,
or control measures. See EPA’s Guidance for Developing Transportation Conformity State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for further background: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/policy/420b09001.pdf. 2 ‘‘40 CFR 93 Transportation Conformity Rule

PM2.5 and PM 10 Amendments; Final Rule’’, March
24, 2010, 75 FR 14260.

3 ‘‘40 CFR 93 Transportation Conformity Rule Restructuring Amendments; Final Rule’’, March 14,
2012, 77 FR 14979.

4 See: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/policy/420b09001.pdf. 2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, remember

to:

a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

b. Follow directions—The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.

c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.

g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What is the purpose of this action?

EPA is proposing approval of revisions to Colorado’s Regulation Number 10, ‘‘Criteria for Analysis of Conformity,’’ (hereafter, ‘‘Regulation No. 10’’) of the Colorado SIP that address transportation conformity SIP requirements of section 176(c) of the CAA and Title 40, part 51.390(b) of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Specifically, a conformity SIP must address the following transportation conformity requirements: 40 CFR 93.105, which formalizes the consultation procedures; 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), which addresses written
commitments to control measures that are not included in a metropolitan planning organization’s transportation plan and transportation improvement program (TIP) that must be obtained prior to a conformity determination; and 40 CFR 93.125(c), which addresses written commitments to mitigation measures that must be obtained prior to a project-level conformity
determination. 1 EPA notes that the State submitted prior SIP revisions to Regulation No. 10 by a letter dated June 18, 2009. The June 18, 2009 SIP submittal addressed revisions to numerous aspects and sections in Regulation No. 10. Those prior revisions to Regulation No. 10 are contained in the May 11, 2012 revisions to Regulation No. 10. In addition to further clarifying transportation conformity consultation procedures, the May 11, 2012 revision responded to changes in federal law by removing SIP provisions related to general conformity.

EPA had previously determined that the June 18, 2009 revisions to Regulation No. 10 were fully approvable. As EPA has determined that the May 11, 2012 revisions to Regulation No. 10 are also fully approvable, we are, therefore, only acting on the May 11, 2012 Regulation No. 10 revisions as they supersede and replace the June 18, 2009 revisions. By approving these May 11, 2012 revisions to Regulation No. 10, EPA will be making them part of the federally
enforceable SIP for Colorado under the CAA. EPA also notes that the May 11,
2012 SIP submission is also intended to revise and supersede the conformity SIP that was previously approved by EPA in 2001 (66 FR 48561).

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

Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses
our actions on submissions of revisions to a SIP. The CAA requires states to observe certain procedural requirements in developing SIP revisions for submittal to us. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that each SIP revision be adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing. This must occur prior to the revision being submitted by a state

to us.

With regard to the prior June 18, 2009 revisions to Regulation No. 10, the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) held a public hearing for those revisions on November 20, 2008. There were no public comments. The AQCC adopted the revisions to Regulation No. 10 directly after the hearing. This SIP revision became state effective on December 30, 2008, and was submitted by James B. Martin, on behalf of the Governor, to us on June 18, 2009.

For the May 11, 2012 revisions to Regulation No. 10, the AQCC held a public hearing for those revisions on December 15, 2011. There were no public comments. The AQCC adopted the revisions to Regulation No. 10 directly after the hearing. This SIP
revision became state effective on January 30, 2012 and was submitted by Christopher E. Urbina, on behalf of the Governor, to us on May 11, 2012.

We have evaluated the Governor’s May 11, 2012 submittal for Regulation
No. 10 and have determined that the State met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. By operation of law under section 110(k)(1)(B) of the CAA, the Governor’s May 11, 2012 submittal was deemed complete on November 11, 2012.

IV. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s May 11, 2012 Submittal

EPA has reviewed the revisions to Regulation No. 10, which is Colorado’s Transportation Conformity Consultation (Conformity SIP) element of the SIP, that were submitted by the Governor on May 11, 2012 and we have found that our approval is warranted. We reviewed the State’s submittal for consistency with the conformity requirements in 40 CFR 51.390(b), that establish the requirements for conformity consultation SIPs, and with the conformity requirements in 40 CFR sections 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c). 2 3 We also consulted our document ‘‘Guidance for Developing Transportation Conformity State Implementation Plans (SIPs)’’, EPA– 420–B–09–001, dated January, 2009. 4

Our review and conclusions regarding the revisions to Regulation No. 10 are
detailed in a memorandum in the docket and include the following:

(a) Section I ‘‘Requirement to comply
with the Federal rule’’. EPA has reviewed and finds satisfactory the revisions to section I of Regulation No.
10. Section I states that the consultation procedures described in section III address the requirements in 40 CFR 93.105(a) through (e), that the provisions in section IV address the requirements in 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and that the provisions in section V address the requirements in 40 CFR 93.125(c).

(b) Section II ‘‘Definitions’’. EPA has reviewed and finds acceptable the
revisions and clarifications that the
State made to several definitions in section II of Regulation No. 10.

(c) Section III ‘‘Interagency
Consultation’’. For section III we note that 40 CFR 51.390(b) provides that each state is required to address three specific sections in EPA’s transportation


### 67329 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

conformity rule in 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A. The relevant provisions that are required to be addressed are: 93.105 (Consultation), 93.122(a)(4)(ii) (Procedures for determining regional transportation-related emissions), and 93.125(c) (Enforceability of design concept and scope and project-level mitigation and control measures). The following is a summary of the key aspects of Regulation No. 10 to address the above requirements, with our
evaluation and conclusion of each:

(1) 40 CFR 93.105, ‘‘Consultation,’’ contains five subsections, (a) through (e). In summary, the general provisions of 93.105(a) state that a conformity SIP shall include procedures for interagency consultation, conflict resolution, and public consultation. Subsection 93.105(b) provides general requirements and factors for well defined interagency consultation procedures in the implementation plan. Organizations such as metropolitan planning organizations (MPO), state and local air quality planning agencies, and state and local transportation agencies with responsibilities for developing, submitting or implementing provisions of an implementation plan must consult with each other. These organizations must also consult with local or regional offices of EPA, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The provisions of 93.105(c) detail specific processes that must be addressed in interagency consultation procedures. The provisions of 93.105(d) require specific procedures for resolving conflicts, and the provisions of 93.105(e) require specific public consultation procedures.

EPA has concluded that the above requirements are satisfactorily addressed in the revisions to Regulation No. 10 in section III ‘‘Interagency Consultation’’ which includes; section III.A ‘‘Roles and Responsibilities for Transportation Conformity
Determinations and Related SIP Development’’, section III.B ‘‘Establishing a Forum for Regional Conformity Consultation’’, section III.C ‘‘Topics for Consultation’’, section III.D ‘‘Process for assuming the location and design concept and scope of projects disclosed to the MPO as required by paragraph (E) of this section, but whose sponsors have not yet decided these features in sufficient detail to perform the regional emissions analysis according to the requirements of 40 CFR 93.122’’, section III.E ‘‘Process to ensure that plans for construction of regionally significant projects which are not FHWA/FTA projects (including projects for which alternative locations, design concept and scope, or the no-build options are still being considered), including those by recipients of funds designated under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act, are disclosed on a regular basis, and to ensure that any changes to those plans are immediately disclosed’’, section III.F ‘‘Consultation procedures for development of State Implementation Plans’’, section III.G ‘‘Agreements further describing consultation procedures’’, and section III.H ‘‘Review of Conformity Determinations by the public, Air Quality Control Commission, and
resolution of conflicts’’.

(2) 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) requires
enforceable written commitments for
emission reduction credits. Emissions reduction credits from any control
measures that are not included in the transportation plan and TIP, and do not require a regulatory action in order to be implemented, may not be included in the emissions analysis unless the conformity determination includes
written commitments for implementation from the appropriate
entities. EPA has concluded that this requirement is satisfactorily addressed
in section IV ‘‘Emission reduction credit
for certain control measures’’ of Regulation No. 10.

(3) 40 CFR 93.125(c) addresses the enforceability of design concept and scope and project-level mitigation and control measures. Before a conformity determination is made, written commitments must be obtained for any project-level mitigation or control
measures. EPA has concluded that this requirement is satisfactorily addressed in section V ‘‘Enforceability of design concept and scope and project-level mitigation and control measures’’ of Regulation No. 10.

(d) Section VI ‘‘Statements of Basis, Specific Statutory Authority, and Purpose’’. EPA notes this section VI in the State’s regulation merely provides information for the State regarding the SIP revision and is not necessary for an approvable Transportation Conformity
Consultation SIP element revision whose purpose is to meet the requirements of CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) and 40 CFR 51.390. Therefore, EPA is not taking any action
on this section.

(e) The May 11, 2012 revision removes former Part A, ‘‘Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State or Federal Implementation Plans,’’ from the SIP. After amendments to 40 CFR 51.851 that EPA promulgated on April 5, 2010 (75 FR 17254), provisions governing general conformity are now an optional component of a SIP.
The State’s removal of Part A is thus consistent with the 2010 amendments. With the removal of Part A from the SIP, the federal rules in Subpart B of 40 CFR Part 93 will directly govern conformity of general federal actions.

V. Consideration of Section 110(1) of
the Clean Air Act

Section 110(1) of the CAA states that a SIP revision cannot be approved if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress towards attainment of a NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. EPA has
concluded that the above-described revisions to Regulation No. 10 will not interfere with attainment, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.

VI. Proposed Action

EPA is proposing approval of the May 11, 2012 SIP revision that was submitted by Christopher E. Urbina,
Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, and on behalf of the
Governor of the State of Colorado. The May 11, 2012 revision updates sections I, II, III, IV, V of Regulation Number 10 ‘‘Criteria for Analysis of Conformity’’ of
the Colorado SIP so as to meet the federal transportation conformity consultation requirements under section 176 of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.390(b), 40 CFR 93.105(a) through (e), 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 40 CFR 93.125(c). EPA also proposes to approve the removal of former Part A, ‘‘Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State or Federal Implementation Plans,’’ from the SIP. EPA notes that
revisions were also made to Colorado’s Regulation Number 10, section VI ‘‘Statements of Basis, Specific Statutory Authority, and Purpose’’; however, EPA is not taking any action on the revisions
to this section.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:


### 67330 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44

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

• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);

• Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and

• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

Dated: October 28, 2013.

Shaun L. McGrath, Regional Administrator, Region 8.

[FR Doc. 2013–27030 Filed 11–8–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**