Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 63575 

Engineer, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6052, 

rosenthal.steven@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule, and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: September 30, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26340 Filed 10–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 93 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0393; FRL–9477–9] 

RIN 2060–AR03 

Transportation Conformity Rule: 

MOVES Regional Grace Period 

Extension 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to extend 

the grace period before the MOtor 

Vehicle Emission Simulator model 

(currently MOVES2010a) is required for 

regional emissions analyses for 

transportation conformity 

determinations (‘‘regional conformity 

analyses’’). This proposal would 

provide an additional year to the 

previously established two-year 

conformity grace period, so that 

MOVES2010a would not be required for 

regional conformity analyses until 

March 2, 2013. This proposal would not 

affect EPA’s previous approval of the 

use of MOVES in official state air 

quality implementation plan (SIP) 

submissions or the existing grace period 

before MOVES2010a is required for 

carbon monoxide and particulate matter 

hot-spot analyses for project-level 

conformity determinations. 

DATES: Written comments on this 

proposal must be received on or before 

November 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–OAR– 

2011–0393, by one of the following 

methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744 

• Mail: Air Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– 

0393. Please include a total of two 

copies. 

• Hand Delivery: Air Docket, 

Environmental Protection Agency: EPA 

West Building, EPA Docket Center 

(Room 3334), 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0393. 

Please include two copies. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– 

0393. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I. of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, 

EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

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

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744 

and the telephone number for the Air 

and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meg 

Patulski, State Measures and Conformity 

Group, Transportation and Regional 

Programs Division, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood 

Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone 

number: (734) 214–4842; fax number: 

(734) 214–4052; e-mail address: 

patulski.meg@epa.gov; or Astrid Larsen, 

State Measures and Conformity Group, 

Transportation and Regional Programs 

Division, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann 

Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: 

(734) 214–4812; fax number: (734) 214– 

4052; e-mail address: 

larsen.astrid@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

content of this preamble are listed in the 

following outline: 

I. General Information 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
63576 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

II. Background 

III. Extension of MOVES2010a Regional 

Conformity Grace Period 

IV. Conformity SIPs 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Availability of MOVES2010a and 

Support Materials 

Copies of the official version of the 

MOVES2010a motor vehicle emissions 

model, along with user guides and 

supporting documentation, are available 

on EPA’s MOVES Web site: http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/ 

index.htm. Guidance on how to apply 

MOVES2010a for SIPs and 

transportation conformity purposes, 

including ‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use 

of MOVES2010 for State 

Implementation Plan Development, 

Transportation Conformity, and Other 

Purposes’’ (EPA–420–B–09–046, 

December 2009) and ‘‘Technical 

Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for 

Emission Inventory Preparation in State 

Implementation Plans and 

Transportation Conformity’’ (EPA–420– 

B–10–023, April 2010) can be found on 

the EPA’s transportation conformity 

Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/policy.htm. 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities potentially regulated by the 

transportation conformity rule are those 

that adopt, approve, or fund 

transportation plans, programs, or 

projects under title 23 U.S.C. or title 49 

U.S.C. Chapter 53. Regulated categories 

and entities affected by today’s action 

include: 

Category Examples of regulated entities 

Local government ........................ Local transportation and air quality agencies, including metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). 

State government ........................ State transportation and air quality agencies. 

Federal government .................... Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA)). 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this proposal. This table lists 

the types of entities of which EPA is 

aware that potentially could be 

regulated by the transportation 

conformity rule. Other types of entities 

not listed in the table could also be 

regulated. To determine whether your 

organization is regulated by this action, 

you should carefully examine the 

applicability requirements in 40 CFR 

93.102. If you have questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the persons 

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI 

Do not submit this information to EPA 

through http://www.regulations.gov or 

e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of 

the information that you claim to be 

CBI. For CBI information in a disk or 

CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark 

the outside of the disk or CD–ROM as 

CBI and then identify electronically 

within the disk or CD–ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The Agency 

may ask you to respond to specific 

questions or organize comments by 

referencing a Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part or section 

number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree, 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

3. Docket Copying Costs 

You may be required to pay a 

reasonable fee for copying docket 

materials. 

C. How do I get copies of this proposed 

rule and other documents? 

1. Docket 

EPA has established an official public 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0393. You can 

get a paper copy of this Federal Register 

document, as well as the documents 

specifically referenced in this action, 

any public comments received, and 

other information related to this action 

at the official public docket. See the 

ADDRESSES section for its location. 

2. Electronic Access 

You may access this Federal Register 

document electronically through EPA’s 

Transportation Conformity Web site at 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/index.htm. 

You may also access this document 

electronically under the Federal 

Register listings at http://www.epa.gov/ 

fedrgstr/. 

An electronic version of the official 

public docket is available through 

http://www.regulations.gov. You may 

use http://www.regulations.gov to 

submit or view public comments, access 

the index listing of the contents of the 

official public docket, and to access 

those documents in the public docket 

that are available electronically. Once in 

the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in 

the appropriate docket identification 

number. 

Certain types of information will not 

be placed in the electronic public 

docket. Information claimed as CBI and 

other information for which disclosure 

is restricted by statute is not available 

for public viewing in the electronic 

public docket. EPA’s policy is that 

copyrighted material will not be placed 

in the electronic public docket but will 

be available only in printed, paper form 

in the official public docket. 

To the extent feasible, publicly 

available docket materials will be made 

available in the electronic public 

docket. When a document is selected 

from the index list in EPA Dockets, the 

system will identify whether the 

document is available for viewing in the 

electronic public docket. Although not 

all docket materials may be available 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 63577 

1 40 CFR 93.102(b)(1) defines PM2.5 and PM10 as 

particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or 

equal to a nominal 2.5 and 10 micrometers, 

respectively. 

2EPA announced the release of MOBILE6.2 in 

2004 (69 FR 28830). 

3Some states also purchased computers with 

additional capacity and features for running 

MOVES. 

4To date, EPA and DOT staff have provided a 

2-day hands-on MOVES course for regional 

emissions inventories (including regional 

conformity analyses) at over 30 locations around 

the country. 

electronically, you may still access any 

of the publicly available docket 

materials through the docket facility 

identified in the ADDRESSES section. 

EPA intends to provide electronic 

access in the future to all of the publicly 

available docket materials through the 

electronic public docket. 

Public comments submitted on 

computer disks that are mailed or 

delivered to the docket will be 

transferred to the electronic public 

docket. Public comments that are 

mailed or delivered to the docket will be 

scanned and placed in the electronic 

public docket. Where practical, physical 

objects will be photographed, and the 

photograph will be placed in the 

electronic public docket along with a 

brief description written by the docket 

staff. 

For additional information about the 

electronic public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

II. Background 

A. What is transportation conformity? 

Transportation conformity is required 

under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 

176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) to ensure that 

transportation plans, transportation 

improvement programs (TIPs), and 

federally supported highway and transit 

projects are consistent with the purpose 

of the SIP. Conformity to the purpose of 

the SIP means that transportation 

activities will not cause or contribute to 

new air quality violations, worsen 

existing violations, or delay timely 

attainment of the relevant national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) 

or required interim milestones. 

Transportation conformity (hereafter, 

‘‘conformity’’) applies to areas that are 

designated nonattainment, and those 

areas redesignated to attainment after 

1990 (‘‘maintenance areas’’) for 

transportation-related criteria 

pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter 

(PM2.5 and PM10) 1, carbon monoxide 

(CO), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). EPA’s 

conformity rule (40 CFR Parts 51 and 

93) establishes the criteria and 

procedures for determining whether 

transportation activities conform to the 

SIP. EPA first promulgated the 

conformity rule on November 24, 1993 

(58 FR 62188) and subsequently 

published several other amendments. 

The Department of Transportation 

(DOT) is EPA’s federal partner in 

implementing the conformity 

regulation. EPA has coordinated with 

DOT, and they concur with this 

proposal. 

B. What is MOVES2010a, and how has 

it been implemented to date? 

The MOtor Vehicle Emission 

Simulator model (MOVES) is EPA’s 

state-of-the-art model for estimating 

emissions from highway vehicles, based 

on analyses of millions of emission test 

results and considerable advances in the 

Agency’s understanding of vehicle 

emissions. MOVES is currently EPA’s 

official emissions model for state and 

local agencies to estimate volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen 

oxides (NOX), PM, CO, and other 

precursors from cars, trucks, buses, and 

motorcycles for SIP purposes and 

conformity determinations outside of 

California. MOVES’ database-centered 

design allows EPA to update emissions 

data more frequently and allows users 

much greater flexibility in organizing 

input and output data. 

MOVES2010a is the latest official 

version of MOVES that EPA has 

approved for SIP and conformity 

purposes. EPA originally announced the 

release of MOVES2010 in the Federal 

Register on March 2, 2010 (75 FR 9411) 

and subsequently released 

MOVES2010a on September 8, 2010. 

MOVES2010a includes minor revisions 

that enhance model performance and 

did not significantly affect criteria 

pollutant emissions results. Since these 

are minor revisions to MOVES2010, 

MOVES2010a is not considered a ‘‘new 

model’’ under section 93.111 of the 

conformity rule, as described further 

below. 

MOVES2010a is a significant 

improvement over the previous 

emissions model, MOBILE6.2,2 in terms 

of quality of results and overall 

functionality. It incorporates the latest 

emissions data, more sophisticated 

calculation algorithms, increased user 

flexibility, new software design, and 

significant new capabilities. While these 

changes improve the quality of on-road 

mobile source inventories, the overall 

degree of change in the model’s function 

also adds to the start-up time required 

for the transition from MOBILE6.2 to 

MOVES2010a. 

EPA developed MOVES as a 

completely new model. Whereas 

MOBILE6.2 was written in FORTRAN 

and used simple text files for data input 

and output, MOVES2010a is written in 

JAVA and uses a relational database 

structure in MYSQL to handle input and 

output as data tables. These changes 

make MOVES more flexible, and the 

analysis of new data incorporated 

within MOVES will enhance state and 

local agency understanding of how onroad mobile sources contribute to 

emissions inventories and the relative 

effectiveness of various control 

strategies. However, this new model 

framework has created a significant 

learning curve for state and local agency 

staff that are required to use MOVES.3

In addition to the challenges of 

learning new software, state and local 

agencies also have to make substantial 

changes in the processes they have 

developed to create model input and 

apply model output. While there were 

incremental changes between each 

previous version of the MOBILE model, 

the basic input and output structure of 

that model was essentially unchanged 

since the early 1980s. Over time, state 

and local agencies developed their own 

methods for incorporating local inputs 

in MOBILE format and for postprocessing MOBILE results for 

inventory development and air quality 

modeling. To help state and local 

agencies with this part of the current 

transition, EPA created a number of 

tools that take input data formatted for 

MOBILE6.2 and convert that data for 

use in MOVES2010a. 

EPA anticipated many of these 

challenges when it released MOVES. In 

order to assist in this model transition, 

EPA and DOT have already provided 

hands-on MOVES training in many 

states.4 Additional MOVES training for 

regional inventories has been requested, 

and will continue to be offered for the 

foreseeable future. EPA continues to 

provide other technical assistance to 

state and local agencies via on-going 

conference calls with user groups, 

e-mail and phone support, a frequently 

asked questions web page, and webbased presentations. All of these efforts 

are helping state and local agencies 

make the transition to MOVES2010a, 

and many agencies are making 

significant progress in applying the 

model for official purposes. However, 

other state and local agencies are still 

developing the technical capacity to use 

MOVES2010a, and need more time to 

transition to the model and then 

evaluate whether SIPs and their motor 

vehicle emissions budgets, or 

transportation plans and TIPs, should be 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
63578 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

5MPOs conduct regional conformity analyses to 

demonstrate that transportation plans and TIPs are 

consistent with the air quality purposes of the SIP. 

Regional conformity analyses are also conducted in 

‘‘isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance 

areas’’ (defined by 40 CFR 93.101). 

6MOVES is not approved for use in California. 

EPA approved and announced the latest version of 

California’s EMFAC model (EMFAC2007) for SIP 

development and regional conformity analyses in 

that state on January 18, 2008 (73 FR 3464). 

7See ‘‘EPA Releases MOVES2010a Mobile Source 

Emissions Model Update: Questions and Answers’’ 

(EPA–420–F–10–050, August 2010) at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/MOVES2010a/ 

420f10050.pdf. 

revised for future conformity 

determinations. 

C. Why is EPA conducting this 

rulemaking? 

If finalized, today’s action would 

provide additional time that may be 

critical for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas to learn and apply 

MOVES2010a for regional conformity 

analyses.5 EPA has been contacted by 

several state and local transportation 

and air quality agencies and 

associations that are concerned that 

there has not been sufficient transition 

time for using MOVES2010a in regional 

conformity analyses. These concerns 

revolve around the time needed to build 

technical capacity for using 

MOVES2010a as well as completing 

necessary SIP and/or transportation 

plan/TIP changes to assure conformity 

in the future. Further details on today’s 

action are provided below. 

Today’s proposal would not affect 

EPA’s previous approval of 

MOVES2010a for official SIP 

submissions developed outside of 

California.6 Today’s rulemaking would 

also not affect the existing grace period 

before MOVES2010a is required for 

PM2.5, PM10, and CO hot-spot analyses 

for project-level conformity 

determinations (75 FR 79370). EPA 

coordinated closely with DOT in 

developing today’s action, and DOT 

concurs on this proposed rule. 

III. Extension of MOVES2010a Regional 

Conformity Grace Period 

A. Background 

CAA section 176(c)(1) states that 

‘‘* * * [t]he determination of 

conformity shall be based on the most 

recent estimates of emissions, and such 

estimates shall be determined from the 

most recent population, employment, 

travel, and congestion estimates * * *.’’ 

To meet this requirement, section 

93.111 of the conformity rule requires 

that conformity determinations be based 

on the latest motor vehicle emissions 

model approved by EPA. When EPA 

approves a new emissions model, EPA 

consults with DOT to establish a grace 

period before the model is required for 

conformity analyses (40 CFR 93.111(b)). 

EPA must consider many factors when 

establishing a grace period for 

conformity determinations (40 CFR 

93.111(b)(2)). The length of the grace 

period will depend on the degree of 

change in the model and the scope of replanning likely to be necessary for 

MPOs in order to assure conformity. 

The conformity rule provides for a grace 

period for new emissions models of 

between three and 24 months (40 CFR 

93.111(b)(1)). 

In the preamble to the original 1993 

conformity rule, EPA articulated its 

intentions for establishing the length of 

conformity grace period for a new 

emissions model (58 FR 62211): 

‘‘EPA and DOT will consider extending the 

grace period if the effects of the new 

emissions model are so significant that 

previous SIP demonstrations of what 

emission levels are consistent with 

attainment would be substantially affected. 

In such cases, states should have an 

opportunity to revise their SIPs before MPOs 

must use the model’s new emissions factors. 

EPA encourages all agencies to inform EPA 

of the impacts of new emissions models in 

their area, and EPA may pause to seek such 

input before determining the length of the 

grace period.’’ 

Section 93.111 conformity requirements 

have not changed since 1993, and have 

been implemented successfully for 

many previous model transitions. 

On March 2, 2010, EPA announced 

the official release of MOVES2010 and 

established a two-year grace period 

before this model was required for new 

regional conformity analyses (75 FR 

9411). Although the original grace 

period was established for MOVES2010, 

EPA clarified in September 2010 that 

the same grace period for regional 

conformity analyses also applies to 

MOVES2010a.7 EPA based its decision 

to establish a two-year conformity grace 

period on the factors under section 

93.111(b)(2), and advised areas to use 

the interagency consultation process to 

examine the impact of using MOVES in 

their future regional conformity 

analyses. 

Without further EPA action, 

MOVES2010a would be required for 

regional conformity analyses that begin 

after March 2, 2012. As discussed 

further in today’s action, the special 

circumstances of the transition from 

MOBILE to MOVES2010a require a 

reevaluation of the length of this 

conformity grace period. 

B. Description of Proposed Rule 

In today’s action, EPA is proposing to 

provide an additional year before 

MOVES2010a is required for regional 

conformity analyses. If finalized, 

MOVES2010a would be required for 

new regional conformity analyses that 

begin after March 2, 2013. State and 

local agencies outside California would 

use MOVES2010a for regional 

conformity analyses earlier than March 

2, 2013, if desired, and would be 

required to do so under limited 

circumstances such as after 

MOVES2010a SIP motor vehicle 

emissions budgets have been found 

adequate or approved for conformity 

purposes. 

Due to the unique circumstances 

presented by the transition from 

MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010a, EPA is 

proposing to add a new paragraph (b)(3) 

to section 93.111 of the conformity rule. 

This provision would only apply to 

MOVES2010a and any future minor 

revisions to this model that EPA 

releases before March 2, 2013. Such 

minor revisions would not start a new 

grace period for regional conformity 

analyses and could include performance 

enhancements that reduce MOVES run 

time or model improvements to reduce 

errors in operating the model. Any 

major model updates, such as an update 

that significantly changes MOVES 

results for criteria pollutant emissions, 

would be evaluated separately as a 

‘‘new model’’ under conformity rule 

section 93.111, pursuant to previously 

established requirements. 

Before the end of the extended 

conformity grace period (March 2, 

2013), areas would use the interagency 

consultation process to examine how 

MOVES2010a would impact their future 

MPO transportation plan/TIP 

conformity determinations. Isolated 

rural areas would also consider the 

impact of using MOVES2010a on future 

regional conformity analyses. If 

finalized, agencies should carefully 

consider whether the SIP and its motor 

vehicle emissions budgets should be 

revised with MOVES2010a or if 

transportation plans and TIPs should be 

revised before the end of the conformity 

grace period, since doing so may be 

necessary to ensure conformity in the 

future. 

The proposal would allow regional 

conformity analyses that are started 

during the grace period to be based on 

either MOBILE6.2 or MOVES2010a. If 

the grace period ended on March 2, 

2013, MOVES2010a would become the 

only approved motor vehicle emissions 

model for regional conformity analyses 

outside California at that time. This 

would mean that all new regional 

conformity analyses started after the end 

of the grace period must be based on 

MOVES2010a, even if the SIP is based 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 63579 

8 ‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for 

State Implementation Plan Development, 

Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes’’ 

(EPA–420–B–09–046, December 2009) can be found 

on the EPA’s transportation conformity Web site at: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/ 

policy.htm. 

9See Questions 5, 6, and 11 of ‘‘Policy Guidance 

on the Use of MOVES2010 for State Implementation 

Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and 

Other Purposes’’ (EPA–420–B–09–046, December 

2009). 

10A conformity SIP is required by the CAA and 

contains a state’s conformity requirements, 

including the state’s specific interagency 

consultation procedures. 11The conformity SIP may contain provisions 

more stringent than the federal requirements, and 

in these cases, states would specify this intention 

in its original conformity SIP submission. 

on MOBILE6.2 or earlier versions of 

MOBILE. 

For complete explanations of how 

MOVES2010a is to be implemented for 

transportation conformity, including 

details about using MOVES2010a during 

the grace period, refer to EPA’s existing 

MOVES policy guidance.8

C. Rationale 

MOVES2010a is EPA’s best tool for 

estimating criteria pollutant emissions, 

and it is a significant improvement over 

previous MOBILE models. State and 

local agencies have made significant 

progress to date in using MOVES2010a, 

and EPA supports these efforts and 

encourages that they continue. 

However, as discussed above, 

challenges related to start-up and model 

application have been much greater in 

the transition to MOVES2010a, 

compared to past transitions between 

MOBILE model versions. As a result, 

EPA has determined that a one-year 

extension of the MOVES2010a grace 

period is necessary for state and local 

agencies to complete the current 

transition. Today’s action would ensure 

that state and local governments have 

the necessary time to implement the 

conformity rule as originally intended. 

Since 1993, the fundamental purpose 

of section 93.111(b) of the conformity 

rule has been to provide a sufficient 

amount of time for MPOs and other state 

and local agencies to adapt to using new 

emissions tools. As discussed above, the 

transition to a new emissions model for 

conformity involves more than learning 

to use the new model and preparing 

input data and model output. After 

model start-up is complete, state and 

local agencies also need to consider how 

the model affects regional conformity 

analysis results and whether SIP and/or 

transportation plan/TIP changes are 

necessary to assure future conformity 

determinations. EPA believes that the 

proposed one-time extension of the 

current MOVES2010a regional grace 

period is critical to assure future 

conformity determinations based on 

MOVES2010a. 

EPA has the discretion to establish an 

extended grace period for MOVES2010a, 

and today’s action is consistent with 

CAA section 176(c)(1) requirements. 

EPA believes that the proposal to 

provide one additional year is 

appropriate due to this unique 

transition from MOBILE6.2 to 

MOVES2010a. This decision is 

consistent with the existing conformity 

criteria in section 93.111(b)(2) of the 

conformity rule that requires the length 

of the grace period to be based on ‘‘the 

degree of change in the model and the 

scope of re-planning likely to be 

necessary by MPOs in order to assure 

conformity.’’ 

Today’s proposal would not delay the 

use of MOVES2010a in SIP 

development or slow down past 

progress toward using the new model 

for regional conformity analyses. As 

noted above, many state and local 

agencies are already learning and 

applying MOVES2010a. Some are 

revising existing SIP budgets using the 

new model, while others may be 

incorporating MOVES2010a into new 

maintenance plans or clean data 

determinations. Under EPA’s existing 

MOVES policy guidance, new or revised 

SIP budgets must still be based on 

MOVES2010a. For example, 

MOVES2010a continues to be required 

for attainment SIPs for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Under the proposal, 

MOVES2010a would also be required 

for any regional conformity analyses 

prior to March 2, 2013 if SIP budgets 

based on MOVES2010 or MOVES2010a 

are approved or found adequate sooner.9

In addition, today’s action would not 

change the current MOVES2010a grace 

period for new PM2.5, PM10, and CO hotspot analyses for project-level 

conformity determinations. EPA noted 

previously that a two-year conformity 

grace period was necessary to apply 

MOVES2010a for hot-spot analyses (75 

FR 79370). However, the transition to 

MOVES2010a for project-level hot-spot 

analyses does not involve the 

complexity associated with the regional 

level, where SIP budgets and/or 

transportation plans/TIPs may need to 

be revised before regional conformity 

analyses based on MOVES2010a can be 

completed. 

Finally, in issuing this proposal, EPA 

is not proposing to proceed pursuant to 

or reopen as a general matter the process 

and length of conformity grace periods 

for future emissions model approvals, 

which were previously established in 

1993 (58 FR 62211). The unique set of 

circumstances involved in the current 

transition warrants the proposed 

additional state and local flexibility 

before MOVES2010a is required for 

regional conformity analyses. 

IV. Conformity SIPs 

The proposed MOVES2010a regional 

grace period extension would apply on 

the effective date of a final rule in all 

nonattainment and maintenance areas. 

Section 51.390(a) of the conformity rule 

states that the federal rule applies for 

the portion of the requirements that are 

not included in a state’s approved 

conformity SIP.10 Section 51.390(b) 

further allows state conformity 

provisions to contain criteria and 

procedures that are more stringent than 

the federal requirements. However, in 

the case of states with conformity SIPs 

that include the grace period provision 

in 40 CFR 93.111(b)(1), EPA concludes 

that such states did not intend to require 

a shorter grace period than EPA, in 

consultation with DOT, believes is 

needed. Therefore, since the 

MOVES2010a grace period extension 

would be a new provision being added 

to the conformity rule, it is not included 

in any current state conformity SIP and 

therefore would apply immediately, if 

finalized, in all areas pursuant to 

section 51.390(a). 

In addition, section 51.390(c) of the 

conformity rule requires states to submit 

a new or revised conformity SIP to EPA 

within 12 months of the Federal 

Register publication date of final 

conformity rules in certain situations. 

States with approved conformity SIPs 

that are prepared in accordance with 

current CAA requirements would not be 

required to submit new conformity SIP 

revisions under a final rule, since 

section 93.111 of the conformity rule is 

not contained in these SIPs. A 

conformity SIP prepared in accordance 

with current CAA requirements 

contains only the state’s criteria and 

procedures for interagency consultation 

(40 CFR 93.105) and two additional 

provisions related to written 

commitments for certain control and 

mitigation measures (40 CFR 

93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 93.125(c)). However, 

states with approved conformity SIPs 

that include section 93.111 from a 

previous rulemaking would be required 

to submit a SIP revision within 12 

months of the publication date of any 

final rule, although EPA strongly 

encourages these states to submit a SIP 

revision with only the three required 

provisions.11 A state without an 

approved conformity SIP would not be 

required to submit a new conformity SIP 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
63580 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

within one year of a final rule, but 

previous conformity SIP deadlines 

continue to apply. 

For additional information on 

conformity SIPs, please refer to the 

January 2009 guidance entitled, 

‘‘Guidance for Developing 

Transportation Conformity State 

Implementation Plans’’ available on 

EPA’s Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/ 

otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/ 

420b09001.pdf. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a 

‘‘significant regulatory action.’’ 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011) and any changes made 

in response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket for 

this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action would not impose any 

new information collection burden. The 

information collection requirements of 

EPA’s existing transportation 

conformity regulations and the 

proposed revisions in today’s action are 

already covered by EPA information 

collection request (ICR) entitled, 

‘‘Transportation Conformity 

Determinations for Federally Funded 

and Approved Transportation Plans, 

Programs and Projects.’’ OMB has 

previously approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the 

existing regulations at 40 CFR Part 93 

under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0561. The OMB control numbers 

for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are 

listed in 40 CFR Part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an Agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of rules 

subject to notice-and-comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the Agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small not-forprofit organizations and small 

government jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of today’s proposal on small entities, 

small entity is defined as: (1) A small 

business as defined by the Small 

Business Administration’s (SBA) 

regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a 

small governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) 

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise that is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s proposed rule on 

small entities, I certify that this action 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This proposal would directly 

affect federal agencies and MPOs that, 

by definition, are designated under 

federal transportation laws only for 

metropolitan areas with a population of 

at least 50,000. These organizations do 

not constitute small entities within the 

meaning of the RFA. Therefore, this 

proposal would not impose any 

requirements on small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This proposal does not contain a 

Federal mandate that may result in 

expenditures of $100 million or more 

for state, local, and tribal governments, 

in the aggregate, or the private sector in 

any one year. This rule would merely 

implement already established law that 

imposes conformity requirements and 

would not itself impose requirements 

that may result in expenditures of $100 

million or more in any year. Thus, 

today’s proposal is not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 and 205 of 

the UMRA. 

This proposal is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

proposal would not significantly or 

uniquely impact small governments 

because it directly affects federal 

agencies and MPOs that, by definition, 

are designated under federal 

transportation laws only for 

metropolitan areas with a population of 

at least 50,000. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This proposal does not have 

federalism implications. It would not 

have substantial direct effects on states, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. The CAA 

requires conformity to apply in certain 

nonattainment and maintenance areas 

as a matter of law, and today’s action 

would merely revise one provision for 

transportation planning entities in 

subject areas to follow in meeting their 

existing statutory obligations. Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this proposal. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). The CAA requires transportation 

conformity to apply in any area that is 

designated nonattainment or 

maintenance by EPA. Because today’s 

proposal would not significantly or 

uniquely affect the communities of 

Indian tribal governments, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This proposal is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, and because the 

Agency does not believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposal is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ as defined in Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 18355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. It 

would not create a serious inconsistency 

or otherwise interfere with an action 

taken or planned by another agency 

regarding energy. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13211 

because it does not have any adverse 

energy effects. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– 

113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

material specifications, test methods, 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 63581 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. This 

proposal does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA is not 

considering the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this action 

would not have disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations. The proposed 

rule involves a minor revision that 

provides administrative relief but does 

not change the conformity rule’s 

underlying requirements for regional 

conformity analyses. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 93 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air pollution control, Carbon 

monoxide, Clean Air Act, 

Environmental protection, Highways 

and roads, Intergovernmental relations, 

Mass transportation, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Transportation, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: October 4, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26346 Filed 10–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

46 CFR Parts 530 and 531 

[Docket No. 11–17] 

RIN 3072–AC47 

Certainty of Terms of Service 

Contracts and NVOCC Service 

Arrangements 

AGENCY: Federal Maritime Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Maritime 

Commission proposes to amend its rules 

regarding certainty of terms of service 

contracts and non-vessel-operating 

common carrier service arrangements. 

The proposed rule is intended to 

provide common carriers and their 

customers with certainty and flexibility 

if they decide to use long-term contracts 

that adjust based on a freight rate index 

that reflects changes in market 

conditions. 

DATES: Comments or suggestions due on 

or before November 28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments 

concerning this proposed rule to: Karen 

V. Gregory, Secretary, Federal Maritime 

Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20573–0001, 

Phone: (202) 523–5725. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Submit 

Comments: Submit an original and five 

(5) copies in paper form, and if possible, 

send a PDF of the document by e-mail 

to secretary@fmc.gov. Include in the 

subject line: Docket No. 11–17, 

Comments on Certainty of Terms of 

Service Contracts and NSAs. 

Background 

The Federal Maritime Commission 

(FMC or Commission) has found that an 

increasing number of service contracts 

filed with the Commission reference 

freight rate indices. These indices 

include, for example, the China 

Containerized Freight Index (CCFI), the 

Shanghai Containerized Freight Index 

(SCFI), the Drewry Freight Insight 

Index, and the Transpacific 

Stabilization Agreement (TSA) Index. 

The ocean freight rates in these 

negotiated service contracts adjust in 

increments based upon the changes in 

the referenced index levels or their 

annual or quarterly averages. It appears 

that some carriers and shippers in the 

ocean transportation industry are 

seeking stability through long-term 

contracts, while trying to preserve 

flexibility to adjust contract rates 

reflecting changes in market conditions. 

Questions have arisen, however, 

whether references to these indices in 

service contracts are consistent with the 

Commission’s current regulations. The 

Commission’s regulations with respect 

to terms of service contracts and NonVessel-Operating Common Carrier 

(NVOCC) service arrangements (NSAs) 

state that the terms, if they are not 

explicitly contained in the contracts, 

must be ‘‘contained in a publication 

widely available to the public and well 

known within the industry.’’ 46 CFR 

530.8(c)(2), 531.6(c)(2). 

The Commission has received 

inquiries from the industry as to 

whether certain freight rate indices meet 

the Commission’s standard, particularly 

its ‘‘widely available to the public’’ 

requirement. For example, until August 

2011, the TSA index was not available 

to the public, even though some service 

contracts referenced TSA index before 

its publication. In addition, CCFI, SCFI, 

and Drewry indices make their current 

index levels available to the public 

without charge, but access to their 

historical data requires payment of 

subscription fees that can reach several 

thousand dollars per year. 

As the Commission began to consider 

whether these service contracts 

referencing freight indices comport with 

its regulation, it decided to do a more 

fundamental assessment of whether the 

regulation in its current form is more 

restrictive than is necessary to protect 

the shipping public and carry out the 

purposes of the Shipping Act. 

When adopting the rules for 

‘‘[c]ertainty of terms’’ of service 

contracts, the Commission recognized 

that through the Ocean Shipping Reform 

Act of 1998, Congress intended, by 

lifting the requirements that tariffs be 

filed with the Commission, to allow 

parties to service contracts more 

freedom and flexibility in their 

commercial arrangements. See 63 FR 

71062, 71066 (Dec. 23, 1998). More 

recently, the President has directed 

federal agencies to review their 

regulations and to reduce burdens and 

promote flexibility where appropriate. 

See Exec. Order 13563, 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 

21, 2011); Exec. Order 13579, 76 FR 

41587 (Jul. 14, 2011). 

Proposed Change 

Consistent with Congressional intent 

and the President’s directives in 

Executive Orders 13563 and 13579, the 

Commission seeks to revise its 

regulations so that they are not 

unnecessarily burdensome and do not 

impede innovation and flexibility in 

commercial arrangements, while 

ensuring continued compliance with the 

Shipping Act’s requirements. 

The proposed change would facilitate 

references to indices in service contracts 

and NSAs so that contracting parties can 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1