20780 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule 

involves the establishment of a security 

zone. 

An environmental analysis checklist 

and a categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T13–136 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T13–136 Security Zone; Portland 

Rose Festival Fleet Week, Willamette River, 

Portland, Oregon. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

security zone: All waters of the 

Willamette River, from surface to 

bottom, between the Hawthorne and 

Steel Bridges. 

(b) Regulations. Under 33 CFR part 

165, subpart D, no person or vessel may 

enter or remain in the security zone 

created by this section without the 

authorization of the Captain of the Port 

or his designated representatives. 

Subpart D has other requirements 

applicable to the security zone created 

by this section. Permission to enter the 

security zone created by this section 

may be requested by contacting the 

Captain of the Port at 503–240–9311 or 

on VHF channels 16 or 22. 

(c) Effective period. This section is 

effective from June 2, 2010, through 

June 7, 2010. 

Dated: April 9, 2010. 

F.G. Myer, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Portland. 

[FR Doc. 2010–9185 Filed 4–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0502–201011; FRL– 

9139–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Revisions to the 

Kentucky State Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve the transportation conformity 

revisions to the Kentucky State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the Commonwealth of Kentucky, 

through the Kentucky Energy and 

Environment Cabinet’s Division of Air 

Quality (KY DAQ). This addition 

consists of transportation conformity 

criteria and procedures related to 

interagency consultation and 

enforceability of certain transportationrelated control measures and mitigation 

measures. The intended effect is to 

establish the transportation conformity 

criteria and procedures in the Kentucky 

SIP. This action is being taken pursuant 

to section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be 

effective May 21, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2010–0502. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 

Business Information or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 20781 

electronically through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality 

Modeling and Transportation Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. 

Somerville’s telephone number is 404– 

562–9025. She can also be reached via 

electronic mail at 

Somerville.amanetta@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Today’s Action 

II. Background 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Today’s Action 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

the transportation conformity section of 

the SIP revision, submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Kentucky, through 

KDAQ, on December 31, 2008 for the 

purpose of establishing transportation 

conformity criteria and procedures in 

the Kentucky SIP. This approval action 

is based on EPA’s analysis that 

Kentucky’s request complies with 

section 176(c) of the CAA. 

In a December 4, 2009, rulemaking 

notice, EPA proposed approval of the 

aforementioned revision to the 

Kentucky SIP. The comment period 

closed on January 4, 2010, and no 

comments were received. A detailed 

discussion of Kentucky’s submittal and 

EPA’s rationale for approval of the 

December 31, 2008, Kentucky SIP 

revision may be found in the proposed 

rulemaking notice (74 FR 63697). EPA is 

finalizing the approval as proposed 

based on the rationale stated in the 

proposal and in this final action. 

II. Background for This Action 

A. Transportation Conformity 

Transportation conformity (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘conformity’’) is required 

under section 176(c) of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or Act) to ensure that 

federally supported highway, transit 

projects, and other activities are 

consistent with (‘‘conform to’’) the 

purpose of the SIP. Conformity 

currently applies to areas that are 

designated nonattainment, and to areas 

that have been redesignated to 

attainment after 1990 (maintenance 

areas) with plans developed under 

section 175A of the Act, for the 

following transportation related criteria 

pollutants: ozone, particulate matter 

(PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide, and 

nitrogen dioxide. 

Conformity to the purpose of the SIP 

means that transportation activities will 

not cause new air quality violations, 

worsen existing violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the relevant criteria 

pollutants, also known as national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 

The transportation conformity 

regulation is found in 40 CFR Part 93 

and provisions related to conformity 

SIPs are found in 40 CFR 51.390. 

B. Federal Requirements 

EPA promulgated the Federal 

transportation conformity criteria and 

procedures (‘‘Conformity Rule’’) on 

November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188). 

Among other things, the rule required 

states to address all provisions of the 

conformity rule in their SIPs frequently 

referred to as ‘‘conformity SIPs.’’ Under 

40 CFR 51.390, most sections of the 

conformity rule were required to be 

copied verbatim. States were also 

required to tailor all or portions of the 

following three sections of the 

conformity rule to meet their state’s 

individual circumstances: 40 CFR 

93.105, which addresses consultation 

procedures; 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), 

which addresses written commitments 

to control measures that are not 

included in a metropolitan planning 

organization’s (MPO’s) transportation 

plan and transportation improvement 

program that must be obtained prior to 

a conformity determination, and the 

requirement that such commitments, 

when they exist, must be fulfilled; and 

40 CFR 93.125(c), which addresses 

written commitments to mitigation 

measures that must be obtained prior to 

a project-level conformity 

determination, and the requirement that 

project sponsors must comply with such 

commitments, when they exist. 

On August 10, 2005, the ‘‘Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users’’ (SAFETEA–LU) was signed into 

law. SAFETEA–LU revised section 

176(c) of the CAA transportation 

conformity provisions. One of the 

changes streamlines the requirements 

for conformity SIPs. Under SAFETEA– 

LU, states are required to address and 

tailor only three sections of the rule in 

their conformity SIPs: 40 CFR 93.105, 40 

CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 40 CFR 

93.125(c), described above. In general, 

states are no longer required to submit 

conformity SIP revisions that address 

the other sections of the conformity 

rule. These changes took effect on 

August 10, 2005, when SAFETEA–LU 

was signed into law. 

C. SIP Submission 

On December 31, 2008, the 

Commonwealth of Kentucky, through 

the KY DAQ, submitted the 

Commonwealth’s transportation 

conformity and consultation interagency 

rule to EPA as an addition to the SIP. 

The interagency consultation 

procedures for the transportation 

conformity partners are outlined in the 

document, Transportation Conformity: 

A Guide for Interagency Consultation, 

which is referenced in the Kentucky 

transportation conformity rule. 

The Commonwealth of Kentucky 

developed its consultation rule based on 

the elements contained in 40 CFR 

93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c). 

As a first step, the Commonwealth 

worked with the existing transportation 

planning organization’s interagency 

committee that included representatives 

from Kentucky’s air quality agency, 

Kentucky Department of Transportation 

(DOT), U.S. DOT (i.e., Federal Highway 

Administration—Kentucky Division, 

Federal Transit Administration), the 

MPOs of the maintenance and 

nonattainment areas of Kentucky, and 

EPA. The interagency committee met 

regularly and drafted the consultation 

rules considering elements in 40 CFR 

93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c), 

and integrated the local procedures and 

processes into the rule. The proposed 

rule provides additional information 

regarding Kentucky’s analysis and 

applicable nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

the December 31, 2008, SIP revision 

request from Kentucky for the purpose 

of establishing transportation 

conformity criteria and procedures in 

the Kentucky SIP. This SIP revision is 

consistent with section 176(c) of the 

CAA. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
20782 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

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 proposed 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. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by June 21, 2010. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: April 1, 2010. 

Beverly H. Banister, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart S—Kentucky 

■ 2. Section 52.920(c) is amended by 

adding an entry for ’’401 KAR 50:066’’ to 

Table 1 to read as follows: 

§ 52.920 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1—EPA-APPROVED KENTUCKY REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

Chapter 50 Division for Air Quality; General Administrative Procedures 

* * * * * * * 

401 KAR 50:066 ........................... Conformity of transportation 

plans, programs, and projects. 

(Amendment).

11/12/2008 04/21/2010 ...................................

[Insert citation of publication] .......

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–8933 Filed 4–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES