Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60661 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRMs should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory 

Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking Distribution System, which 

describes the application procedure. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is proposing an amendment 

to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations 

(14 CFR) Part 71 by establishing Class E 

airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface at Kasigluk 

Airport, Kasigluk, AK. Controlled 

airspace is necessary to accommodate 

aircraft using the new RNAV (GPS) 

standard instrument approach 

procedures at Kasigluk Airport, and 

would enhance the safety and 

management of instrument flight rules 

operations at the airport. 

Class E airspace designations are 

published in paragraph 6005, of FAA 

Order 7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012, 

and effective September 15, 2012, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

part 71.1. The Class E airspace 

designation listed in this document will 

be published subsequently in this 

Order. 

The FAA has determined this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. 

Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified this proposed rule, when 

promulgated, would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 

Section 106, describes the authority for 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. This rulemaking is 

promulgated under the authority 

described in Subtitle VII, Part A, 

Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of the airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority as it would 

modify controlled airspace at Kasigluk 

Airport, Kasigluk, AK. 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1E, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final 

regulatory action. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me, the Federal 

Aviation Administration proposes to 

amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR Part 71.1 of the Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9 W, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 8, 2012, and 

effective September 15, 201 is amended 

as follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

AAL AK E5 Kasigluk, AK [New] 

Kasigluk Airport, AK 

(Lat. 60°52′24′′ N., long. 162°31′27.50′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 7.0-mile 

radius of Kasigluk Airport. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on 

September 20, 2012. 

John Warner, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Western 

Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2012–23879 Filed 10–3–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0536; FRL–9737–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; 

South Bend-Elkhart, Indiana Ozone 

Maintenance Plan Revision To 

Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

Indiana’s request to revise the South 

Bend-Elkhart, Indiana 1997 8-hour 

ozone maintenance air quality State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) by replacing 

the previously approved motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (budgets) with 

budgets developed using EPA’s Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) 

2010a emissions model. Indiana 

submitted this request to EPA for 

parallel processing with a letter dated 

June 15, 2012, and followed up with a 

final submittal after the state public 

comment period ended on July 18, 2012. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 5, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2012–0536, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312)692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2012– 

0536. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60662 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means 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 instructions on 

submitting comments, go to section I of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the 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 Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

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

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Patricia 

Morris, Environmental Scientist at (312) 

353–8656 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Morris, Environmental 

Scientist, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8656, 

patricia.morris@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

II. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

III. What is the background for this action? 

a. SIP Budgets and Transportation 

Conformity 

b. Prior Approval of Budgets 

c. The MOVES Emissions Model and 

Regional Transportation Conformity 

Grace Period 

d. Submission of New Budgets Based on 

MOVES2010a 

IV. What are the criteria for approval? 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittal? 

a. The Revised Inventories 

b. Approvability of the MOVES2010aBased Budgets 

c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-Based 

Budgets 

VI. What action is EPA taking? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

2. Follow directions—EPA may ask 

you to respond to specific questions or 

organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

4. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

5. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

6. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

7. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

8. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period. 

II. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to approve new 

MOVES2010a-based budgets for the 

South Bend-Elkhart, Indiana 1997 8- 

hour ozone maintenance area. The 

South Bend-Elkhart, Indiana area was 

redesignated to attainment of the 1997 

8-hour ozone standard effective July 19, 

2007 (72 FR 39577), and the 

MOBILE6.2-based budgets were 

approved in that action. If EPA finalizes 

this proposed approval, the newly 

submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets 

will replace the existing MOBILE6.2- 

based budgets in the state’s 1997 8-hour 

ozone maintenance plan and must then 

be used in future transportation 

conformity analyses for the area. At that 

time, the previously approved 

MOBILE6.2-based budgets would no 

longer be applicable for transportation 

conformity purposes. 

If EPA approves the MOVES2010abased budgets, the South Bend-Elkhart 

1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area 

must use the MOVES2010a-based 

budgets starting on the effective date of 

the final approval. See the official 

release of the MOVES2010 Emissions 

Model (75 FR 9411) for background and 

section III(c) below for details. 

III. What is the background for this 

action? 

a. SIP Budgets and Transportation 

Conformity 

Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), states 

are required to submit, at various times, 

control strategy SIP revisions and 

maintenance plans for nonattainment 

and maintenance areas for a given 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). These emission control 

strategy SIP revisions (e.g., reasonable 

further progress (RFP) and attainment 

demonstration SIP revisions) and 

maintenance plans include budgets of 

on-road mobile source emissions for 

criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars, trucks, and other on-road vehicles. 

These motor vehicle SIP budgets are the 

portions of the total emissions that are 

allocated to on-road vehicle use that, 

together with emissions from other 

sources in the area, will provide for 

attainment or maintenance, if they are 

not exceeded. The budget serves as a 

ceiling on emissions from an area’s 

planned transportation system. For 

more information about budgets, see the 

preamble to the November 24, 1993, 

transportation conformity rule (58 FR 

62188). 

Under CAA section 176(c), 

transportation plans, Transportation 

Improvement Programs (TIPs), and 

transportation projects must ‘‘conform’’ 

to (i.e., be consistent with) the SIP 

before they can be adopted or approved. 

Conformity to the SIP means that 

transportation activities will not cause 

new air quality violations, worsen 

existing air quality violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the NAAQS or 

delay an interim milestone. The 

transportation conformity regulations 

can be found at 40 CFR parts 51 and 93. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60663 

1Upon the release of MOVES2010, EPA 

established a two-year grace period before MOVES 

is required to be used for regional conformity 

analyses (75 FR 9411). EPA subsequently 

promulgated a final rule on February 27, 2012 to 

provide an additional year before MOVES is 

required for these analyses (77 FR 11394). In this 

case the grace period ends on March 2, 2013. 

In general, before budgets can be used 

in conformity determinations, EPA must 

affirmatively find the budgets adequate. 

However, budgets that are replacing 

approved budgets must be found 

adequate and approved before the 

budgets can replace the older budgets. 

Therefore, EPA cannot just find these 

replacement budgets adequate because 

adequate budgets do not supersede 

approved budgets for the same CAA 

purpose. If the submitted SIP budgets 

are meant to replace budgets for the 

same purpose, as is the case with 

Indiana’s MOVES2010a 1997 8-hour 

ozone maintenance plan budgets, EPA 

must approve the revised SIP and 

budgets, and must affirm that they are 

adequate at the same time. Once EPA 

approves the budgets in the SIP, the 

revised budgets must be used by state 

and Federal agencies in determining 

whether transportation activities 

conform to the SIP as required by 

section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA’s 

substantive criteria for determining the 

adequacy of budgets are set out in 40 

CFR 93.118(e)(4). 

b. Prior Approval of Budgets 

EPA had previously approved budgets 

for the South Bend-Elkhart, 8-hour 

ozone maintenance area for volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the year 2020 

on July 19, 2007 (72 FR 39577). These 

budgets were based on EPA’s 

MOBILE6.2 emissions model. The ozone 

maintenance plan established 2020 

budgets for the South Bend-Elkhart, 

Indiana area of 6.64 tons per day (tpd) 

for VOCs and 7.73 tpd for NOX. These 

budgets demonstrated a reduction in 

emissions from the monitored 

attainment year and included a margin 

of safety. 

c. The MOVES Emissions Model and 

Regional Transportation Conformity 

Grace Period 

The MOVES model is EPA’s state-ofthe-art tool for estimating highway 

emissions. The model is based on 

analyses of millions of emission test 

results and considerable advances in the 

agency’s understanding of vehicle 

emissions. MOVES incorporates the 

latest emissions data, more 

sophisticated calculation algorithms, 

increased user flexibility, new software 

design, and significant new capabilities 

relative to those reflected in 

MOBILE6.2. 

EPA announced the release of 

MOVES2010 in March 2010 (75 FR 

9411). EPA subsequently released two 

minor model revisions: MOVES2010a in 

September 2010 and MOVES2010b in 

April 2012. Both of these minor 

revisions enhance model performance 

and do not significantly affect the 

criteria pollutant emissions results from 

MOVES2010. 

MOVES will be required for new 

regional emissions analyses for 

transportation conformity 

determinations (‘‘regional conformity 

analyses’’) outside of California that 

begin after March 2, 2013, or when EPA 

approves MOVES-based budgets, 

whichever comes first.1 Prior to March 

2, 2013, areas can continue to use 

MOBILE6 unless the area has approved 

MOVES budgets. The grace period for 

regional conformity analyses applies to 

both the use of MOVES2010 and 

approved minor revisions (e.g., 

MOVES2010a and MOVES2010b). For 

more information, see EPA’s ‘‘Policy 

Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 

and Subsequent Minor Model Revisions 

for State Implementation Plan 

Development, Transportation 

Conformity, and Other Purposes’’ (April 

2012), available online at: www.epa.gov/ 

otaq/stateresources/transconf/ 

policy.htm#models. 

EPA encouraged areas to examine 

how MOVES would affect future 

transportation plan and TIP conformity 

determinations so, if necessary, SIPs 

and budgets could be revised with 

MOVES or transportation plans and 

TIPs could be revised (as appropriate) 

prior to the end of the regional 

transportation conformity grace period. 

EPA also encouraged state and local air 

agencies to consider how the release of 

MOVES would affect analyses 

supporting SIP submissions under 

development (77 FR 9411 and 77 FR 

11394). 

The Michiana Council of 

Governments (MACOG), which is the 

Metropolitan Planning Organization 

(MPO) for the South Bend-Elkhart area, 

has used MOVES2010a emission rates 

with the transportation network 

information to estimate emissions in the 

years of the transportation plan and also 

for the SIP. Indiana is revising the 

budgets at this time using the latest 

planning assumptions including 

population and employment updates. In 

addition, newer vehicle registration data 

has been used to update the age 

distribution of the vehicle fleet. Since 

MOVES2010 (or a minor model 

revision) will be required for conformity 

analyses after the grace period ends, 

Indiana has concluded that updating the 

budgets with MOVES2010a will prepare 

the areas for the transition to using 

MOVES for conformity analyses and 

determinations. The interagency 

consultation group has had extensive 

consultation on the requirements and 

need for new budgets. 

d. Submission of New Budgets Based on 

MOVES2010a 

On June 15, 2012, Indiana submitted 

to EPA, for parallel processing, 

replacement budgets based on 

MOVES2010a for the South BendElkhart area. Indiana provided public 

review and comment which ended on 

July 18, 2012. There were no comments. 

Indiana submitted the final SIP revision 

request on August 17, 2012. 

The MOVES2010a budgets are 

proposed to replace the prior approved 

MOBILE6.2 budgets and are for the 

same years and pollutants/precursors. 

The new MOVES2010a budgets are for 

the year 2020 for both VOCs and NOX

and are detailed in a Table in section 

V(b) of this notice. Indiana has also 

provided the total emissions including 

mobile emissions based on 

MOVES2010a for the attainment year of 

2004, the interim year 2010 and the 

2020 maintenance year. The total safety 

margin available in 2020 for NOX is 

54.42 tpd and for VOC is 7.94 tpd. This 

information is detailed in the submittal 

and provided in the following table. The 

safety margin is defined as the reduction 

in emissions from the base year (in this 

case the 2004 attainment year) to the 

final year of the maintenance plan (in 

this case the 2020 year). The total 

emissions includes point, area, nonroad, and on-road mobile sources. 

TABLE OF TOTAL EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010a EMISSIONS

Year 2004 2010 2020 Safety 

margin 

VOC ................................................................................................................. 96.83 84.65 88.89 7.94 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60664 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE OF TOTAL EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010a EMISSIONS—Continued 

Year 2004 2010 2020 Safety 

margin 

NOX .................................................................................................................. 91.48 60.04 37.06 54.42 

The submittal demonstrates how all 

emissions decline from the attainment 

year of 2004. In 2004, the total estimated 

NOX emissions from all sources 

(including mobile, point, area, and nonroad sources) is 91.48 tpd and the total 

VOC emissions, for the 2004 attainment 

year, from all sources is 96.83 tpd. The 

2020 estimated emissions for total NOX

from all sources is 37.06 tpd and the 

total VOC emissions from all sources is 

88.89 tpd. This is further discussed in 

section V of this notice and detailed in 

a table. This reduction in emissions 

demonstrates that the area will continue 

below the attainment level of emissions 

and maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. The motor vehicle emissions, 

when included with point, area, and 

non-road sources continue to 

demonstrate maintenance of the 

attainment level of emissions in the 

South Bend-Elkhart area. 

No additional control measures were 

needed to maintain the 1997 ozone 

standard in the South Bend-Elkhart 

area. An appropriate safety margin for 

NOX and VOCs was discussed by the 

interagency consultation group (the 

interagency consultation group as 

required by the state conformity 

agreement, consists of Federal Highway 

Administration, the Indiana Department 

of Transportation, Indiana Department 

of Environmental Management, EPA, 

and the local MPO). The allocation of 

safety margin is included in Table 5.2– 

A of the Indiana submittal. The on-road 

MOVES2010a based budgets are in 

Table 5.2–A of the submittal and are 

listed as 13.95 tpd for NOX and 6.73 tpd 

for VOCs in the year 2020. These 

budgets will continue to keep emissions 

in the South Bend-Elkhart area below 

the calculated attainment year of 

emissions. 

IV. What are the criteria for approval? 

EPA has always required that 

revisions to existing SIPs and budgets 

continue to meet applicable 

requirements (i.e., RFP, attainment, or 

maintenance). States that revise their 

existing SIPs to include MOVES budgets 

must therefore show that the SIP 

continues to meet applicable 

requirements with the new level of 

motor vehicle emissions contained in 

the budgets. The SIP must also meet any 

applicable SIP requirements under CAA 

section 110. 

In addition, the transportation 

conformity rule (at 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4)(iv)) requires that ‘‘the 

budgets, when considered together with 

all other emissions sources, is consistent 

with applicable requirements for RFP, 

attainment, or maintenance (whichever 

is relevant to the given implementation 

plan submission).’’ This and the other 

adequacy criteria found at 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4) must be satisfied before 

EPA can find submitted budgets 

adequate or approve them for 

conformity purposes. 

In addition, EPA has stated that areas 

can revise their budgets and inventories 

using MOVES without revising their 

entire SIP if (1) the SIP continues to 

meet applicable requirements when the 

previous motor vehicle emissions 

inventories are replaced with MOVES 

base year and milestone, attainment, or 

maintenance year inventories, and (2) 

the state can document that growth and 

control strategy assumptions for nonmotor vehicle sources continue to be 

valid and any minor updates do not 

change the overall conclusions of the 

SIP. For example, the first criterion 

could be satisfied by demonstrating that 

the emissions reductions between the 

baseline/attainment year and 

maintenance year are the same or 

greater using MOVES than they were 

previously. The Indiana submittal meets 

this requirement, as described below in 

section V. 

For more information, see EPA’s latest 

‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of 

MOVES2010 for SIP Development, 

Transportation Conformity, and Other 

Purposes’’ (April 2012). 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittal? 

a. The Revised Inventories 

The Indiana SIP revision request for 

South Bend-Elkhart 1997 ozone 

maintenance seeks to revise only the onroad mobile source inventories and not 

the non-road inventories, area source 

inventories, or point source inventories 

for the 2020 year for which the SIP 

revises the budgets. IDEM has certified 

that the control strategies remain the 

same as in the original SIP, and that no 

other control strategies are necessary. 

Attainment of the ozone standard with 

current control strategies is confirmed 

by the monitoring data for South BendElkhart, IN, which continues to monitor 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. The area is also monitoring 

attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

standard. Thus, the current control 

strategies are continuing to keep the 

area in attainment of the NAAQS. 

EPA has reviewed the emission 

estimates for point, area, and non-road 

sources and concluded that no major 

changes to the projections need to be 

made, as discussed further below. 

Indiana finds that growth and control 

strategy assumptions for non-mobile 

sources (i.e., area, non-road, and point) 

have not changed significantly from the 

original submittal for the years 2004, 

2010, and 2020. As a result, the growth 

and control strategy assumptions for the 

non-mobile sources for the years 2004, 

2010, and 2020 continue to be valid and 

do not affect the overall conclusions of 

the plan. 

Indiana confirms that the SIP 

continues to demonstrate its purpose of 

maintaining the 1997 ozone standard 

because the emissions are continuing to 

decrease from the attainment year to the 

final year of the maintenance plan. The 

total emissions in the revised SIP 

(which includes MOVES2010a 

emissions from mobile sources) are 

91.48 tpd for NOX and 96.83 tpd for 

VOCs in the 2004 attainment year. The 

total emissions from all sources in the 

2020 year are 37.06 tpd for NOX and 

88.89 tpd for VOCs. These totals 

demonstrate that emissions in the South 

Bend-Elkhart area are continuing to 

decline and remain below the 

attainment levels. 

Indiana has submitted MOVES2010abased budgets for the South BendElkhart area that are clearly identified in 

Table 5.2–A of the submittal. The onroad budgets for 2020 are 13.95 tpd for 

NOX and 6.73 tpd for VOCs. These are 

the budgets that are being proposed for 

approval. 

b. Approvability of the MOVES2010aBased Budgets 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

MOVES2010a-based budgets submitted 

by the state for use in determining 

transportation conformity in the South 

Bend-Elkhart 1997 ozone maintenance 

area. EPA is making this proposal based 

on our evaluation of these budgets using 

the adequacy criteria found in 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4) and our in-depth evaluation 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 60665 

of the State’s submittal and SIP 

requirements. EPA has determined, 

based on its evaluation, that the area’s 

maintenance plan would continue to 

serve its intended purpose with the 

submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets 

and that the budgets themselves meet 

the adequacy criteria in the conformity 

rule at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). 

The adequacy criteria found in 40 

CFR 93.118(e)(4) are as follows: 

• The submitted SIP was endorsed by 

[the Governor/Governor’s designee] and 

was subject to a state public hearing 

(§ 93.118(e)(4)(i)); 

• Before the control strategy 

implementation plan was submitted to 

EPA, consultation among Federal, state, 

and local agencies occurred, and the 

state fully documented the submittal 

(§ 93.118(e)(4)(ii)); 

• The budgets are clearly identified 

and precisely quantified 

(§ 93.118(e)(4)(iii)); 

• The budgets, when considered 

together with all other emissions 

sources, are consistent with applicable 

requirements for RFP, attainment, or 

maintenance (§ 93.118(e)(4)(iv)); 

• The budgets are consistent with and 

clearly related to the emissions 

inventory and control measures in the 

control strategy implementation plan 

(§ 93.118(e)(4)(v); and 

• The revisions explain and 

document changes to the previous 

budgets, impacts on point and area 

source emissions and changes to 

established safety margins and reasons 

for the changes (including the basis for 

any changes related to emission factors 

or vehicle miles traveled) 

(§ 93.118(e)(4)(vi). 

Our review finds that Indiana has met 

all of the adequacy criteria. The final 

submittal is dated August 17, 2012, and 

signed by the governor’s designee. All 

public hearing materials were submitted 

with the formal SIP revision request. 

The interagency consultation group, 

which is comprised of the state air 

agency, state Department of 

Transportation, Federal Highway 

Administration, EPA, and the MPOs for 

the area, have discussed and reviewed 

the budgets developed with 

MOVES2010a and the safety margin 

allocation. The budgets are clearly 

identified and precisely quantified in 

the submittal in table 5.2–A. The 

budgets when considered with other 

emissions sources (point, area, nonroad) are consistent with continued 

maintenance of the 1997 ozone 

standard. The budgets are clearly related 

to the emissions inventory and control 

measures in the SIP. The changes from 

the previous budgets are clearly 

explained with the change in the model 

from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010a and 

the revised and updated planning 

assumptions. The inputs to the model 

are detailed in the Appendix to the 

submittal. EPA has reviewed the inputs 

to the MOVES2010a modeling and 

participated in the consultation process. 

The Federal Highway Administration— 

Indiana Division and the Indiana 

Department of Transportation have 

taken a lead role in working with the 

MPO and contractor to provide accurate, 

timely information and inputs to the 

MOVES2010a model runs. The MACOG 

network model provided the vehicle 

miles of travel and other necessary data 

from the travel demand network model. 

The CAA requires that revisions to 

existing SIPs and budgets continue to 

meet applicable requirements (in this 

case, maintenance). Therefore, states 

that revise existing SIPs with MOVES 

must show that the SIP continues to 

meet applicable requirements with the 

new level of motor vehicle emissions 

calculated by the new model. 

To that end, Indiana’s submitted 

MOVES2010a budgets meet EPA’s two 

criteria for revising budgets without 

revising the entire SIP: 

(1) The SIP continues to meet 

applicable requirements when the 

previous motor vehicle emissions 

inventories are replaced with 

MOVES2010a base year and milestone, 

attainment, or maintenance year 

inventories, and 

(2) The state can document that 

growth and control strategy assumptions 

for non-motor vehicle sources continue 

to be valid and any minor updates do 

not change the overall conclusions of 

the SIP. 

The State has documented that 

growth and control strategy assumptions 

continue to be valid and do not change 

the overall conclusions of the 

maintenance plan. The emission 

estimates for point, area and non-road 

sources have not changed. Indiana finds 

that growth and control strategy 

assumptions for non-mobile sources 

(i.e., area, non-road, and point) from the 

original submittal for the years 2004, 

2010, and 2020 were developed before 

the downturn in the economy over the 

last several years. Because of this, the 

factors included in the original 

submittal may project more growth than 

actual into the future. As a result, the 

growth and control strategy assumptions 

for the non-mobile sources for the years 

2004, 2010, and 2020 continue to be 

valid and do not affect the overall 

conclusions of the plan. 

Indiana confirms that the SIP 

continues to demonstrate its purpose of 

maintaining the 1997 ozone standard 

because the emissions are continuing to 

decrease from the attainment year to the 

final year of the maintenance plan. The 

total emissions in the revised SIP 

(which includes MOVES2010a 

emissions for mobile sources) decrease 

from the 2004 attainment year to the 

year 2020 (the last year of the 

maintenance plan). These totals 

demonstrate that emissions in the South 

Bend-Elkhart area are continuing to 

decline and remain below the 

attainment levels. The table below 

shows total emissions in the South 

Bend-Elkhart area including point, area, 

non-road, and mobile sources and 

demonstrates the declining emissions 

from the 2004 attainment year. 

TABLE OF TOTAL EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010a MOBILE EMISSIONS

Year 2004 2010 2020 

VOC ............................................................................................................................................. 96.83 84.65 88.89 

NOX .............................................................................................................................................. 91.48 60.04 37.06 

The following table displays the 

submitted budgets that are proposed in 

the notice to be approved. The budgets 

include an appropriate margin of safety 

while still maintaining total emissions 

below the attainment level. 

TABLE OF MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION

BUDGETS (MOVES) SOUTH BENDELKHART, INDIANA FOR YEAR 2020 

VOC (tpd) ....................................... 6.73 

NOX (tpd) ........................................ 13.95 

Based on our review of the SIP and 

the new budgets provided, EPA has 

determined that the SIP will continue to 

meet its requirements if the revised 

motor vehicle emissions inventories are 

replaced with MOVES2010a 

inventories. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60666 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 193 / Thursday, October 4, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2For more information, see EPA’s ‘‘Policy 

Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 and 

Subsequent Minor Revisions for State 

Implementation Plan Development, Transportation 

Conformity, and Other Purposes’’ (April 2012). 

c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-Based 

Budgets 

Pursuant to the State’s request, EPA is 

proposing that, if we finalize the 

approval of the revised budgets, the 

state’s existing MOBILE6.2-based 

budgets will no longer be applicable for 

transportation conformity purposes 

upon the effective date of that final 

approval. 

In addition, once EPA approves the 

MOVES2010a-based budgets, the 

regional transportation conformity grace 

period for using MOBILE6 instead of 

MOVES2010 (and subsequent minor 

revisions) for the pollutants included in 

these budgets will end for the South 

Bend-Elkhart ozone maintenance area 

on the effective date of that final 

approval.2

VI. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing in this action that 

the South Bend-Elkhart, Indiana 

existing approved budgets for VOCs and 

NOX for 2020 for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan, that were based on 

the MOBILE6.2 emissions model, be 

replaced with new budgets based on the 

MOVES2010a emissions model. Once 

this proposal is finalized, future 

transportation conformity 

determinations would use the new, 

MOVES2010a-based budgets and would 

no longer use the existing MOBILE6.2- 

based budgets. EPA is also proposing to 

find that the South Bend-Elkhart area’s 

maintenance plan would continue to 

meet its requirements as set forth under 

the CAA when these new budgets are 

included. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA 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 CAA. 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: 

• 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 CAA; 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: September 21, 2012. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2012–24512 Filed 10–3–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 1 

[MD Docket No. 12–201; FCC 12–77] 

Procedures for Assessment and 

Collection of Regulatory Fees; 

Assessment and Collection of 

Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2008 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of reply comment date. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission), via the Office of 

Managing Director, seeks comment on a 

report released by the Government 

Accountability Office Report on 

September 12, 2012, entitled, Federal 

Communications Commission, 

Regulatory Fee Process Needs To Be 

Updated. In addition, this document 

extends the reply comment date in 

response to the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment 

on proposals to reform the 

Commission’s policies and procedures 

for assessing and collecting regulatory 

fees. 

DATES: The comment period is reopened 

and the reply comment period is 

extended for the proposed rule 

published August 17, 2012, at 7 FR 

49749. Interested parties may submit 

comments in response to the GAO 

Regulatory Fees Reform Report on or 

before October 9, 2012, and reply 

comments in response to both the GAO 

Regulatory Fees Reform Report and 

Regulatory Fees Reform Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking on or before 

October 23, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by MD Docket No. 12–201, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web Site: http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– 

418–0432. 

• Email: ecfs@fcc.gov. Include MD 

Docket No. 12–201 in the subject line of 

the message. 

• Mail: Commercial overnight mail 

(other than U.S. Postal Service Express 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS