# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 72 Fed. Reg. 15046 2007

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Tue Nov 6 13:51:06 2012

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.Fedetal Register/.Vol. 72, No. 61 /Fridiy, March 30, 2007/Rttlbs 

### anid Regulatisn&

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,

as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order13132:Federalism

This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does
not have substantial direct effects on the states, onthe relationship between the national government and the states, or
on the distribution ofpower and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state ruleimplementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established in the Clean AirAct.

ExecutiveOrder13045:Protectionof ChildrenFromEnvironmental Health andSafetyRisks

This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 "Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
NationalTechnology Transfer AdvancementAct

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided thafthey meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, inthe absence ofa prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. Itwould thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provigions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements ofsection 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. Paperwork ReductionAct
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.). Congressional ReviewAct
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 etseq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides thatbefore a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy ofthe rule, to each House ofthe Congress and to the Comptroller General ofthe United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, and the Comptroller General ofthe United States prior to publication ofthe rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days afterit is published inthe Federal Register. This action is not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under Section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean Air Act, petitions forjudicial review of this action mustbe filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by May 29, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does
not affect the finality ofthis rule for the purposes ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition forjudicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.This action may not be challenged laterin proceedings to enforce its requirements. (SeeSection 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: March 6,2007. Mary A. Gade, Regional Administrator, Region5.

mFor thereasons stated inthe preamble, part 52, chapter I, oftitle 40 of the Code ofFederal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

a 1.The authority citation forpart 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart KK-Ohio

* 2. Section 52.1870'is amended by adding paragraph (c)(135) to read as follows:
§52.1870 Identification ofplan.

(c) * * * (135) On May 9, 2006, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency submitted several volatile organic compound rules for approval into the Ohio State Implementation Plan.

(i)Incorporation by reference. (A) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-01 Definitions: Paragraphs (D)Ind (Z), adopted 1/31/ 2006, effective 2/10/2006.. •

.(B) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-04 Attainunent dates and compliance time schedules: Paragraph (C)(16)(c), adopted 1/31/2006, effective 2/10/2006.

(C) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-09 Control ofemissions of volatile organic compounds from stationary sources and perchloroethylene from drycleaning facilities: Paragraphs (O)(2)(e),(O)(6)(b),(T)(4),(Y), (HH), (RR), and (VV), adopted 3/2/2006, effective 3/ 12/2006.

(D) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-17: Portable Fuel Containers, adopted 1/31/2006, effective 2/10/2006. (E) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-18: Commercial Motor-Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Refinishing Operations, adopted 1/31/2006, effective 2/10/2006. [FR Doc. E7-5800 Filed 3-29-07; 8:45 am]

BILUNG CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

40CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2005-AZ-0009; FRL-8284- 2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPP4. ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is approving two revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan submitted bythe Arizona Department ofEnvironmental Quality. These revisions consist of: changes to Arizona's Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection Programs to exempt collectible vehicles in the Phoenix metropolitan area, and collectible vehicles and motorcycles in the Tucson metropolitan area, from emissions testingrequirements; an updated performance standard evaluation for the vehicle emissions inspection program in the Phoenix area; and new contingency measures. EPA is approving these two state implementation plan revisions-because they meet all applicable requirements of the Clean AirAct and EPA's regulations and because the exemptions will not interfere with attainment or maintenance ofthe national ambient air quality standards in the two affected

areas. EPAis finalizing this action 15046

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15046 2007Federal Register 

### /Vol. 72, No. 61/Friday, March 30, 2007/Rules and Regulations

underthe Clean Air Actobligation to take action on State submittals of revisions to state implementation plans. The intended-effect is to exempt these vehicle categories fromthe emissions 

### testingrequirements ofthe State's vehicle emissions inspection Orograms

as approved forthe Phoenix andTucson

areas but alsoto provide a mechanism toreinstate the requirements in the event ofa violation ofthe carbon monoxide national ambient air quality standard inthe Phoenix or Tucson area. DATES: Effective Date:Thisrule is effective on April 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: Copies ofthe documents relevant to this action are available for public inspection duringnormal businesshours at EPARegion 9'sAir Planning Office (AIR-2), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA, 94105-3901. Due toincreased security, we suggest thatyou call at least 24 hoursprior to visiting the Regional Office so that we

can make arrangements tohave

someone meet you. Electronic Availability.

This document and our proposed rule which was published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2006 are also available as electronic files onEPA's Region 9 webpage at http:// www.epa.gov/regionO9/air/actions/ az.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wienke Tax, Office ofAir Planning, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, (520) 622-1622, e-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov,or refer to http:// www.epa.gov/regionO9/airlactions/ az.html.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms "we", "us", and "our" refer toEPA.
Table ofContents I.Background 1I.

Response toComments 

### III. EPA's Final Action IV. Statutory andExecutive Order Reviews


### I.Background

On December 28, 2006 (71 FR 78115),

weproposed toapprove, under the Clean AirAct (CAA or "Act"), two revisions submitted bythe Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 

### (ADEQ)ofthe Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). Both SIP revisions relate toArizona's Basic and

- 

### Enhanced VehicleEmissions Inspection/Maintenance (VEI) Programs implemented in theTucson and Phoenix areas, respectively.

ADEQ submitted the first VEI SIP revision onDecember 23, 2005 ("VEI SIP Revision"). The VEI SIPRevision submittal includes theSIP revision itself, divided into a non-regulatory portion, "Final Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Basic andEnhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection/Maintenance Programs" (December 2005), and a regulatory portion, House Bill (HB) 2357, as well

as supporting materials related to legal authority, adoption, publicprocess and technical analysis.

HB 2357 amends Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) Section 49-542 by exempting vehicles that are at least 15
years old or are ofa unique and rare design and that carry collectible vehicle insurance thatrestricts th'mileage and/

or use ofthe vehicle ("collectible vehicles") from emission testing inboth Area A (i.e., the Phoenix area) and Area B (i.e., theTucson area). In addition, HB 2357 exempts motorcycles inthe Tucson area from emissions testing. Specifically, the amendments to ARS 49-542 are found in paragraphs or subparagraphs (J)(2)(k), (J)(2)(1), (Y), and (Z) ofthat section of code. The changes "
toARS Section 49-542 are selfimplementing, which means thatthey become effective upon EPA approval ai

a revision to the Arizona SIP.

Among the technical materials included inthe VEISIP Revision submittal package is a report 1 prepared by ADEQthat evaluates the impacts of exempting three vehicle categories (vehicles 25 model years old and older, motorcycles, and collectible vehicles) from the emissions testing requirements

on ambient air quality and onthe ability ofAreas A and B (i.e.,Phoenix and Tucson, respectively) tomaintain or attainthe national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The report concluded thatthe testing andrepair of these vehicle categories as awhole does provide a significant air quality benefit. The analysis, however, also identified a subset ofvehicle categories (collectible vehicles inPhoenix andTucson plus motorcycles inTucson) for which the emissions testing requirement does not provide a significant air quality benefit and for which exemption would not interfere with continued maintenance of the CO NAAQS or progresstowards the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. HB 2357 was a Legislative response to the findings in this report.

In consultation with EPA concerning the VEI SIP Revision, ADEQ prepared

an updated performance standard evaluation for the VEI program inthe Phoenix area to reflect the new

l"Report on Potential Exemptions from Vehicle Emissions TestingforMotorcycles, Collectible Vehicles, and Vehicles 25 Model Years Old and Older" (December 2004). exemption for collectible vehicles, and developed new contingency measures that are intended to provide for reinstatement ofemissions testing for the newly exempt vehicle categories in the eventthat aviolation ofthe carbonmonoxide NAAQS were to be recorded in the Phoenix orTucson area. On October 3, 2006, ADEQ adopted and submitted the updated performance standard evaluation andnew contingency measures in a second SIP revision, entitled, "Supplement toFinal Arizona State Implemeptation Plan Revision, Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection/Maintenance , *Programs,December 2005" (September 2006) ("VEI SIP Supplement"). As part of the submittal of-the VEI SIP Supplement, ADEQ documented the public participation process that was conducted byADEQprior to adoption and submittal to EPA.

Our December 28, 2006 proposed rule provides our evaluation ofthese two SIP submittals and our rationale for concluding that the submittals meet all relevant CAA requirements including SIP revision procedural requirements, vehicle inspection and maintenance program requirements, requirements under CAA section 110(1) related to non-interference with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, and contingency provisionrequirements under CAA section 175A(d). Please see
our December 28, 2006 proposed rule formore information concerning the SIP revision submittals, our evaluation of them, and our rationale for proposing approval.
11. Response to Comments

Our December 28, 2006 proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment period. We received comments from 40
commenters on our proposed rule during the public comment period. Most

were supportive ofour proposed action. We are responding tothe five
commenters who disagreed with our action.

Comment.One commenter agrees with theproposal but states that vehicles 25 years old orolder should alsobe exempt. "

Response.Arizona House Bill (HB) 2501, as amended by HB 2294, required ADEQ toevaluate whether vehicles 25 years old and older in combination with collectible vehicles ormotorcycles couldbe exempt from emissions testing, The report concluded that the testing andrepair ofthese vehicle categories as

awhole doesprovide sigificant air quality benefit. The analysis, however, alsoidentified a subset ofvehicle categories (collectible vehicles in Phoenix andTucson and motorcycles in 

### 15047

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15047 2007

### Federal'Register/Vol. 72, No. 61/Friday, March 30, 2007/Rules and Regulations

Tucson) for which the emissions testing requirement does not provide a significant air quality benefit and for which exemption would not interfere with continued maintenance ofthe CO NAAQS orprogress towards the 8-hour

ozone NAAQS. HB 2357 (i.e., the regulatory portion ofthe VEI SIP Revision) was a Legislative response to the findings in this report.

Comment.One commenter suggests various changes to the new statutory exemption for collectible vehicles that would make the exemption less restrictive and thereby allow a greater number ofcollectors to fall within.the exemption.

Response. Inreviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet minimum criteria setby the Clean Air Act orany applicable EPAregulations. Anychanges to Arizona law expanding the exemption for collectible vehicles would need firstto be introduced as a
newbill inthe Arizona Legislature. If passed and approved bythe Governor, such a statutory change would then need tobe submitted by ADEQ to EPA forapproval with documentation showing continued compliance with all relevant CAA and EPA requirements including ademonstration ofnoninterference with the ambient air quality standards under section 110(1) ofthe CAA.

Comment.One commenter states that motorcycles should not be exempt from the vehicle emissions inspection program in Tucson, unless EPA has solid evidence that very few, ifany, motorcycles pose a pollution problem,

orthat the Tucson inspection program passes essentially all motorcycles, so providing little environmental benefit.

Response. ADEQ's statistics about the VEI program indicate that between 2003 *and2006, from 91.3 to 94.9 percent of motorcycles in the Tucson area passed the vehicle emissions test on their initial pass on an annual basis :These statistics provide further support for our conclusion that exemption of motorcycles from emissions testing requirements ofthe VEI program would
not interfere with attainment or maintenance ofthe NAAQS in the Tucson area.

Comment.The fourth commenter
states that heopposes this type of "reverse regulation" (removing of grandfathering) of old, collectible cars. He states that making people retrofit emissions equipment on older vehicles is infeasible, costly, and that owners are unlikely to comply.

Response.This commenter appears to have misunderstood EPA's action. We

are approving an exemption to Arizona's vehicle inspection program for owners ofcollectible vehicles which meet certain requirements, including collectible insurance which limits the

use or annual mileage ofthe collectible vehicle. We are not requiring existing older vehicles to be retrofit with emissions control technology.

Comment.The fifth commenter states that the law establishing the new exemption for collectible vehicles is poorly crafted in that the requirements ofthe law, as written bythe Arizona legislature, are both vague and do not have sufficient enforcement methods to insure that the net result falls within the assumptions tkat were madeby the ADEQto validate this exemption. Specifically, the commenter questions the estimate ofthe number ofcollectible vehicles used by ADEQin estimating the emissions impact of the exemption and also questions the methods that will be relied upon to limit the exemption onlyto qualifying vehicles. Furthermore, the commenter requests additional requirements in the law to limit the possible abuse ofthe exemption.

Response.As noted above, EPA's role in reviewing SIP submissions is to approve state choices, provided that they meet minimum criteria ofthe Clean Air Actand EPA's regulations. EPA is not responsible for drafting changes to state laws. Nonetheless, this comment raises questions about the validity ofthe assumptions underlying the emissions impact analysis and the enforcement methods that will be relied upon to limit the exemptions to qualifying vehicles.

ADEQ estimates that collectible vehicles represent 0.4% to 0.5% ofthe total tested fleet ofvehicles in the Tucson and Phoenix areas, respectively. ADEQ developed these estimates on the basis of a survey conducted byADEQ in coordination with carclubs in Arizona and information received from two of the four major insurance companies specializing in selling collectible car insurance inArizona, taking into account the number of such vehicles that are already exempt (i.e., pre-1967 model year vehicles) from emission testing requirements. See appendix 2b ("Technical Support Document, Evaluating Emissions Impacts of Exempting Collectible Vehicles from Vehicle Emissions Inspections") of Appendix B ("Report on Potential Exemptions from Vehicle Emissions Testing for Motorcycles, Collectible Vehicles andVehicles 25 Model Years Old and Older") ofthe VEI SIP revision. We believe that ADEQ's methods provide a reasonable basis forestimating the number ofvehicles that wouldbe newlyexempt as "collectible vehicles" underHB 2357 and the corresponding emissions impact fromexemption of those vehicles from VEI emissions testingrequirements.

We also continue to believe that the compliance enforcement methods, including the collectible vehicle insurance and registration procedures, thatwill be relied upon to limit the exemption to qualifying vehicles are reasonably calculated to do so. See pages 4-5 and appendix C ("Collectible Vehicle Insurance and Registration Procedures") ofthe VEI SIP Revision and our discussion ofthe compliance enforcement issue in our proposed rule
at 71 FR at 78118. 

### M. EPA's Final Action

No comments were submitted that change our assessment ofthe VEI SIP revisions as set forth in our proposed rule. Therefore, pursuant to section 110(k)(3) ofthe CAA andfor the reasons set forth inthe proposed rule, EPA is approving the revisions to the Arizona SIP submitted by the Statq, ofArizona on December 23, 2005 and October 3, 2006 concerning the Arizona VEI programs implemented in the Phoenix and Tucson areas because we find that the revisions are consistent with the requirements ofthe CAA and EPA's regulations.

Specifically, we are approving exemptions from emissions testing requirements for collectible vehicles in the Phoenix area and collectible vehicles andmotorcycles in the Tucson

area as set forth inthe "Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection/Maintenance Programs" (December 2005) and ARS Section 49- 542 as amended in section 1 ofArizona House Bill 2357,-47th Legislature, 1st Regular Session (2005) and approved by the Governor on April 13, 2005; andthe updated performance standard evaluation forthe Phoenix area and new contingency measures as set forth in the "Supplement to Final Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection/Maintenance Programs, December 2005" (September 2006).

IV.Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management andBudget. For this reason, this action is also not subject toExecutive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 15048

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15048 2007Federal Register/ Vol. 72; No. 61/Friday, March 30, 2007 /Rules and Regulations

Distribution, orUse" (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). This action merely approves changes to state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 etseq.). Because this rule approves changes to state law and does not impose any additional enforceable dutybeyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded.Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

This rule also doesnot have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, onthe relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes,

as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000), nor will ithave substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government andthe States,

or onthe distribution ofpower and 'responsibilitiesamong the various levels ofgovernment, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR43255, August 10, 1999), because itmerely approves changes to state law implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established in the Clean AirAct. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 "Protection of Children fromEnvironmental Health and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it finalizes approval ofa state rule implementing aFederal Standard.

Inreviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence ofa prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. Itwould thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when itreviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place ofa SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements ofsection 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.This rule does
not impose an information collection burden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.). "

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 etseq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before arule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes acopy of the rule, to each House ofthe Congress and tothe Comptroller General ofthe United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, and the Comptroller General ofthe United States prior to publication ofthe rule in the Federal Register. A majorrule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a (major rule(as defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean AirAct, petitions forjudicial review of this action mustbe filed inthe United States Court of Appeals forthe appropriate circuitby May 29, 2007. Filing a petition forreconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does
notaffect the finality of thisrule for the purposes ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time withinwhich a petition forjudicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of suchrule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
ListofSubjects in 40 CFR Part52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation byreference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: March 20, 2007. Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, Region 9.

mPart52, chapter I, title40 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations are amended as follows:

PART 52-[AMENDED]
m1. The authority citation forpart52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C..7401 etseq. Subpart D-Arizona

m2. Section 52.120 is amendedby adding paragraphs (c)(133) and (c)(134)
to read asfollows:
§52.120 Identificationofplan. C) * * * (133) The following statute andplan

were submitted on December 23, 2005 by the Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation byreference. (A) Arizona Revised Statutes. (1)Section 49-542 as amended in section 1 ofthe Arizona House Bill 2357, 47th Legislature, 1stRegular Session (2005) and approved bythe Governor on April 13, 2005.

(ii) Additional material. (A)Arizona Department of' Environmental Quality.

(1)Final Arizona State Implementation PlanRevision, Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection/Maintenance Programs (December 2005), adopted bythe Arizona Department ofEnvironmental Quality on December 23, 2005, excluding appendices.

(134) The following plan was submitted on October 3, 2006 bythe Governor's designee.

(i)Incorporation byreference. (A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

. (1) September 2006 Supplement to Final Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection/ Maintenance Programs, December 2005, adopted bythe Arizona Department of Environmental Quality on October 3, 2006, excluding appendices. [FRDoc.E7-5558 Filed 3-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

49 CFR Part 624 [Docket No. FTA-2006-24708]
RIN 2132-AA91

Clean Fuels Grant Program

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT. AClON: Final rule.

SUMMARY: OnJune 9, 1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) was enacted requiring the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)to establish the Clean Fuels Formula Grant Program (the program). The program was developed
to assistnon-attainment and maintenance areas inachieving or maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone and carbon monoxide (CO). Additionally, the program supports emerging clean fuel and advanced propulsion technologies 

### 15049

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15049 2007i rfl~n Fedr1alR Reinster/Vol. 72. No. 61/Friday. March 30, 2007/Rules and.Regulations Fadeal 0---erV-l-72 No

- 1FiaMrh3,20/ue neuain

for transitbuses and markets forthose technologies. Although the program was authorized as a formula grant program from itsinception, Congress did not fund theprogram. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: ALegacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) changed the grant
program from a formula-based to a discretionary grant program. The
program, however, retains its initial
purpose. FTA is publishing this final rule to revise the existing regulations to reflect the amendments made by SAFETEA-LU. DATES: This rule is effective April 30,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
program issues, Kimberly Sledge, Office of Program Management, (202) 366-
2053 (telephone); (202) 366-7951 (fax);

or Kimberly.Sledge@dot.gov(e-mail).
For legal issues, Scheryl Portee, Office ofthe ChiefCounsel, (202) 366-4011 (telephone); (202) 366-3809 (fax); or Scheryl.Portee@dot.gov(e-mail). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability ofthe Final Rule

You may download this rule from the Department's Docket Management System (https://dms.dot.gov) by entering docket number 24708 in the search field

or from the Government Printing Office's Federal Register Main Page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/frl index.htm. Users may also download

an electronic copy ofthis document using a modem and suitable communications software from the GPO Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 512-1661.

I. Background

The Clean Fuels Formula Grant Program is a transit grant program established pursuant to Section 3008 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) as amended, Public Law 105-178, and codified at 49 U.S.C. 5308. This legislation established the basic parameters ofthe program. Section 3010 of SAFTEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, (2005) changed the grant
program from a formula-based to a discretionary grant program.

In SAFETEA-LU, Congress earmarked approximately $18 million in FY 2006 graduating to approximately $22 million in FY 2009 for specific projects. However, during the FY 2006 and FY 2007 appropriations process, Congress transferred the remaining clean fuels
program funds not earmarked pursuant
to SAFETEA-LU to the Bus and Bus Facilities Program. Thus, there are no discretionary funds available for the Clean Fuels Program to date. The focus ofthis rulemaking is torevise 49 CFR Part 624 to reflect the amendments madeby SAFETEA-LU establishing a discretionary program and ensuring procedures are in place when funding is provided for the program. This final rule also addresses criteria for the allocation ofdiscretionary program fumds, issues raised in the NPRM and the comments made in response tothe NPRM.

II. Discussion ofComments

FTA received a total oftwo comments
to this rulemaking. We discuss the

. comments received and explain any changes made to the regulations in the following paragraphs. FTA considered all comments filed.Each commenter expressed support for the rulemaking while offering recommendations to improve this statutory program. A written copy ofeach comment is available at the DOT Docket Manager's Web site: http://www.dms.dot.gov. 1.American Public Transportation Association (APTA) indicates that it
agrees with FTA's approach to flexible eligibility and selection criteria for implementation ofthe regulation. APTA suggested that FTApublish proposed annual criteria in conjunction with the annual "apportionment and allowances notice," which includes FTA programmatic changes. APTAbelieved that such a procedure would allow public comment on the criteria priorto the Federal Register Notice ofFunding Availability, thus permitting the latter
announcement tobe limited to solicitation ofgrant applications based

on already publicly vetted criteria..

2. Metro Regional Transit Authority of Akron, Ohio (Metro) expresses support for the majority ofthe proposed changes
to the Clean Fuels Grant Program as an improvement tothe overall initiative. Metro recommends thatthe total project
cost shouldbe an eligible federal
expense for those projects thathave an evaluation and dissemination component, in order to encourage additional research and development of alternative fuels. Metrorecommends that FTA only fund truly alternative
energy sources such as hydrogen fuel cells stating that otherprojects will continue dependence on fossil fuel and foreign oil.

Metro believes that "clean diesel buses" are not an appropriate expenditure for this program andthat these buses should be purchased with Congestion Mitigation Air Quality or section 5307 funds. The Clean Fuels
program should focus its limited

resources on. projects that canbe replicated or advance the technology for buses. Another recommendation by Metro is thatFTA consider thereporting evaluation proposal as part ofthe grant process, including a pure science component for each funded project.

II. Section by SectionAnalysis

Inthis section, FTA provides a section by section analysis and
comments in response where applicable.

A. Eligible Recipients

-As noted in the NPRM, SAFETEA-LU
amended the term "recipient" to now include smaller urbanized areas with populations ofless than 200,000. Accordingly, we are amending section 624.1 to define eligible applicants as (1) designated recipients, as defined in 49 U.S.C. 5307(a)(2); and (2) recipients in urbanized areas with populations ofless than 200,000.

A "designated recipient" is-an entity designated to receive Federal urbanized formula funds under 49 U.S.C. 5307, in accordance with the applicable metropolitan and statewide transportation planning processes, by the chiefexecutive officer ofa State, responsible local officials, and publicly owned operators ofpublic transportation. For an urbanized area with a population of lessthan 200,000, however, SAFETEA-LU requires the smaller urbanized area's respective State
to act asthe recipient.

Further, allrecipients mustmeet one ofthe following criteria: (1) Be designated as an ozone or carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area as established by section 107(d) ofthe Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7407(d)); or (2) be designated as a maintenance area for

ozone or CO. Amaintenance area is a previously designated nonattainment

area thathas been redesignated to attainment status by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

B. Eligible Activity

A commenter indicated that additional criteria not found in the
statute should also be considered. FTA is not permitted to expand the selection criteria beyond thatfound in the statute. For similarreasons, FTA may not restrict vehicles that use clean diesel as

an eligible activity asrecommended by the commenter. Further, a commenter suggested that an experimental project shouldreceive Federal funds at the 100% level. FTAhas no statutory authority to support 100% funding of total project costs of eligible activities. The final rulecontains the funding share foreligible projects-that complies with the requirements of49 U.S.C. 5308
and the Clean Air Act. 1RNRN

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15050 2007

### Federal 'Register /VoL'-.72, "No. 61/Friday,.,March .30, 2007/.Rules and;Reutati6ns'

FTAis amending section 624.3 in ., : paragraph (a)and removeiparagraphs (c)(4) and (c)(5) to exclude repowering and retrofitting ofpre-1993 buses. Both activities were specifically authorized as eligible projects under TEA-21; however, SAFETEA-LU repealed those provisions. Accordingly, we have determined that such activities cannot be authorized under this program. In addition, we amend paragraph (c) by renumbering the current paragraph (c)(6) as anew (c)(3), and adding new paragraphs (c)(4), (5), and (6)to reflect SAFETEA-LU amendments applicable to eligible projects.

a.We are amending paragraph (a)to reflect the provisions in 49 U.S.C. 5323(i), which SAFETEA-LU amended to include facilities as well asvehicles. Accordingly, the Federal share for eligible projects cannot exceed 90 percent ofthe net cost to comply with

or maintain compliance with the Clean Air Act. Further, the Administrator is authorized to administratively determine the net cost ofsuch equipment or facilities attributable t compliance withthe Clean Air Act. FTA has administratively determined that the composite Federal share for vehicles and vehicle related equipment shall be 83 percent. For facilities, however, the 90 percent share would apply to the actual incremental costs of improvements for compliance with the Clean Air Act and recipients wouldbe requested to provide supporting documentation.

Wenoted in the NPRM that the

- President's Budget forFiscal Year 2007 proposed that FTA grants awarded during Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 should reflect 100 percent ofthe net capital costs of factory-installed or retrofitted hybrid-electric propulsion systems and any equipment related to such systems. This budget proposal provided for administrative discretion to determine costs attributable to such systems and related-equipment. This provision was notincluded in the FY 2007 appropriations legislation, and therefore not authorized.

Paragraph (c)(5) ofsection 624.3 is amended to reflect the statutory mandate under section 5308(c) that not

more than 25 percent ofthefunds available to carry outthe clean fuels program each fiscal yearmay be made available to fund clean diesel buses. On January 18, 2001, EPA published a final rule establishing a comprehensive national control program to regulate heavy-duty vehicles and its fuel as a single system.As part ofthis program,
new emission standards will-start to take effect in modelyear 2007, andwill apply to heavy-duty highway engines. andvehicles. These standards aebased

on the use ofhigh-efficiency catalytic exhaust emission control devices or comparably effective advanced technologies. The EPA standards are codified at 40 CFR Parts 69, 80, and 86. (See 66 FR 5001 (January 18, 2001).). Accordingly, FTA interprets "clean diesel" to mean diesel engines certified
to meet EPA's heavy-duty engine emissions standards for model-years 2007 and later.

The final rule amends paragraph (c)(6) ofsection 624.3 to reflect that funds designated foreligible projects will remain available for obligation for three fiscal years, which includes the year ofappropriation plus two additional fiscal years. C.ApplicationProcess

Since the program is now a discretionary grant program, the preapplication included in Appendix A no longer applies. Accordingly, we ares removing Appendix Afrom Part 624 andrevising sebtion 624.5 to reflect that applications will be requested in a G"- Federal Register notice each fiscal yorn' that discretionary funds are provided by Congress for the program. FTA considered a comment to change the procedures but determined that since technological innovations continue to evolve, webelieve the criteria for selecting eligible projects should be flexible. Accordingly, we are revising section 624.5 to reflect general criteria for selection ofeligible profects. More specific selection criteria may be published in the Federal Register with

a Notice ofFunding Availability each fiscal year that discretionary funding is provided by Congress for the program.
D. Certifications

We retain the current certification process in section 624.7. Each vehicle purchased with a grant under this program will be operated by the grantee using only clean fuels. The certification will be included with the Federal Register notice announcing our annual certifications and assurances. This is consistent with our policy of one-stop filing for all required certifications and

assurances. Transit operators planning
to apply for the Clean Fuels Grant Program would indicate compliance with thisceitification when .submitting the annual certifications and assurances. Additionally, grantees purchasing or leasing "clean diesel" buses must certify that the buses would be operated using only ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel.
E.StatutoryCross-Cutting Requirements
Since the program is now a discretionary grant program, we are amending section 624.9 by removing the. grant formula because it no longer applies. Section 5308, as amended by SAFETEA-LU, requires that agrant under this program be subject to the applicable requirements of49 U.S.C. •5307. Accordingly, we are amending

section 624.9 byinserting the applicable statutory requirements from 49 U.S.C. 5307. Many ofthese requirements are also contained in FTA Circular 9030.1C, which is available on the FTA website
at (htip://www.fta.dot.gov).

Further, all FTA grants provided under chapter 53 oftitle 49 ofthe United States Code are subject to applicable requirements ofthe FTA Master Agreement (MA), which is incorporated by reference in the grant agreement. Additional projeCt management guidelines and requirements may also be found inFTA Circular 5010.1C. This Circular and the MA:*die also available onthe FTAWeb site dt,(http://www.fta.dot.gov).

F.Reporting

With respectto the comment on reporting as part ofthe grant process, FTA is interested in program level evaluation. We will usethese reporting components to analyze national programmatic effects. However, we encourage local areas touse criteria that best suits theirlocal needs.

As FTA supports the development and deployment ofclean fuel and advanced propulsion technologies for transitbuses, we remain interested in collecting relevant information on the operations andperformance ofthese clean fuel technology buses tohelp

assess the reliability, benefits, and costs ofcertain technologies compared to conventional vehicle technologies. Accordingly, FTA retains thereporting requirements in section 624.11, which require grantees receiving program funds forhybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell vehicles to provide information to us on the operations, performance, and maintenance ofthose vehicles purchased or leased with program funds.

We have determined, however, that semiannual instead of quarterly reporting forthe first three years ofthe useful life ofthe vehicle is sufficient for this objective; thus, we areproviding administrative reliefby extending the reporting requirements in section 624.11 from quarterly to semiannually. Submission ofdataon the operation of the vehicle beyond the three-year period would continue to be voluntary.

Likewise, we encourage transit agencies acquiring other types of alternative fuel buses (e.g., compressed 15051

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15051 2007

### Federal -Register/Vol. 72, No. 61/Frfday, March 30, 2007/Rules" Ad Regulations

natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), etc.) to voluntarily report similar information. However, recipients acquiring clean diesel vehicles arenot required to report the data requested under section 624.11 because we believe that sufficient information about this technology has been compiled.

FTA willbe requesting fromthe Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act approval to collect information from recipients receiving Federal financial assistance under the Clean Fuels program. We intend tocollect information such as vehicle miles traveled, fuel costs, vehicle fuel/energy consumption and oil consumption, road calls orbreakdowns resulting from clean fuel and advanced propulsion technology systems, and maintenance costs associated with these systems. Data collected will be used to provide

more accurate information to transit agencies for future clean fuel and advanced propulsion vehicle acquisitions.
IV. Regulatory Analyses andNotices

Executive Order12866

Under Executive Order 12866, the Department ofTransportation (DOT)
must examine whether this rule is a "significant regulatory action." A significant regulatory action is subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order (E.O.). E.O. 12866 defines "significant regulatory action"

as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of$120 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector ofthe economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact ofentitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations ofrecipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out oflegal mandates, the President's priorities, or theprinciples set forth inthe E.O.

. Thisrule amends an existing grant program and is notexpected to impose any new compliance costs. Specifically,

we are amending the existing program from aformula program to a discretionary grant program in accordance with section 3010 of SAFETEA-LU. Webelieve that the industry costs andbenefits of the Clean Fuels Grant Program donot warrant designating this as a significant rule under E.O. 12866 because it involves grant application procedures and will
not cost more than $120 million annually. Additionally, we provide administrative reliefin the reporting criteria by decreasing the reporting period fromquarterly to semiannually. For thesereasons, we have determined that this rule is a no significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by OMB.

Executive Order13132

This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13132 (Federalism). Thisrule does not include any provisions that have substantial direct effect on the States, the relationship between the national government and the States, or the
-distribution ofpower and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment. Therefore, the consultation and fundingrequirements ofE.O. 13132 do notapply because this rule only sets forth application procedures foran-existingformula grant program thathas been statutorily amended to a discretionary grant program.
Executive Order13175

This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria ofE.O. 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments). Because the proposal does not have tribal implications and does not impose direct compliance costs, the funding and consultation requirements ofE.O. 13175 do not apply.

Executive Order13272 andthe RegulatoryFlexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), requires each agency to analyze regulations and proposals to

assess their impact on small businesses and other small entities to determine whether the rule or proposal will have

a significant economic impact ona substantial number of small entities.

We evaluated the effects of thisrule

on small ejitities and determined that it will not have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities. 'This ruleimposes no new costsbecause itmerely modifies the application procedures for an existing grant program. Paperwork ReductionAct
This rule includes information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. OMB previously approved our information collection'request under the Clean Fuels Formula Grant Program, 2132-0560. However, that approval expired on August 31, 2003, because funding was not allocated fortlhe program.

Since Congress may provide funding in future fiscal years, we will submit a
new information collection requestto OMB. The affected public under this rulemaking remains public transportation providers who apply for Federal funds under this program. Our

new information collection requestwill not include any new reporting requirements. In fact, therule decreases reporting because we modify the reporting period from quarterly to semiannually. UnfundedMandatesReform Actof1,995

This rule does not propose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded MandatesReform Act of 1995. The rule will not result in costs of$100 million

or more (adjusted for inflation), inthe aggregate, to any ofthe following: State, local, or Native American tribal governments, or the private sector.
NationalEnvironmentalPolicy Act

.The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), requires Federal agencies to consider the consequences ofmajor federal actions and prepare a detailed statement

on actions significantly affecting the quality ofthe human environment. Since this rule promotes the use ofclean fuels invehicles used for public transportation, itpotentially may have a positive impact onthe environment. Alternatively, there are no significant environmental impacts associated with this proposed rule.

List ofSubjects in 49 CFRPart624

Grant Programs-Transportation, Public transportation, Reporting and record keeping requirements.

mForthereasons setforth inthe preamble, FTA amends 49 CFR part 624

as follows:.

PART 624-CLEAN FUELS GRANT
PROGRAM

n 1. The authority citation forpart 624 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5308; 49 U.S.C. 5334(a); 49 CFR 1.51.



### m2. The headingtopart 624 isrevised toread as set forth above.

a 3. Revise §624.1 toread as follows: 

### §624.1 Eligibleapplicant.

(a) An eligible applicant is: 

## 15o52

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15052 2007

### Federal Register IVol. 72,. No, 61/Friday, March 30, 2007/Rules and Regulations

(1) A designated recipient (designated recipient has the same meaning as in49 U.S.C. 5307(a)(2)); or

(2) Arecipient for an urbanized area with a population of less than 200,000 (smallerurbanized area). The State in which the smaller urbanized area is located shall act as the recipient.

-

(b) An eligible applicant, as defined in paragraph (a) ofthis section, shall operate in an area that is either:

(1) An ozone or carbon monoxide nonattainment area as specified under section 107(d) ofthe CleanAir Act (42 U.S.C. 7407(d)); or

(2) A maintenance area for ozone or carbon monoxide. E 4. Amend § 624.3 byrevising paragraph (a) and (c) (3) through (6) to read as follows:
§624.3 Eligibleactivities.

(a) Eligible activities include purchasing or leasing clean fuel buses and constructing new or improving existing public transportation facilities to accommodate clean fuel buses."- t

* * * * *TT

(c) * * * (3) At the discretion ofthe Administrator, projects relating to clean fuel, biodiesel, hybrid electric, or zero emissions technology buses that exhibit equivalent or superior emissions reductions to existing clean fuel or hybrid" electric technologies. (4) The Federal share for eligible activities undertaken forthe purpose of complying with or maintaining compliance with the Clean Air Act under thisprogram shall be limited to 90 percent of the net (incremental) cost ofthe activity.

(i)The Administrator may exercise discretion and determine the percentage ofthe Federal share for eligible activities tobe less than 90 percent.

(ii) An administrative determination per this subsection will be published in accordance with § 624.5(a).

(5) Funding for clean diesel buses shallbe limited to not more than 25 percent ofthe amount made available each fiscal year to carry outthe program. (6)Any amount made available for this section shall remain available to an eligible activity for two years afterthe fiscal year for which the amount is provided. Any amount that remains unobligated at the end of the three-yearperiod shall be added to the amount made available to carry out the program in the following fiscal year. 0 5. Revise §624.5 toread asfollows: 

### §624.5 Applicationprocess.

(a) FTA shall publish a Notice of Funding Availability in theFederal Register each fiscal year that funding is made available for the Clean Fuels program. The notice shall provide the criteria bywhich the eligible projects will be evaluated for selection and the Administrator's determination of the net Federal share for projects funded under this Part.

(b) The Administrator shall determine the criteria for selecting proposed projects for funding, which may include, but are not limited to the following factors:

(1)Whether the proposed project is a transportation control measure in an approved State Implementation Plan;

(2) The benefits ofthe proposed project inreducing transportationrelated pollutants;

(3) Consistency with therecipient's fleet management plan;

(4) The applicant's ability to implement the project and facilities to maintain and fuel the proposed vehicles;

(5) The applicant's coordination ofthe proposed project with other public transportation entities or other related projects within the applicant's Metropolitan Planning Organization or the geographic region within which the proposed project will operate.

(6) The proposed project's abilityto support emerging clean fuels technologies or advanced technologies fortransit buses. N6. Revise § 624.9 toread asfollows:
§624.9 Grant requirements.

A grant under this section shall be subject tothe following requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5307(d):

(a) General.All recipients shall maintain and report financial and operating information on an annual basis, as prescribed in 49 CFR part 630, andthe most recentNational Transit Database Reporting Manual.

(b)Laborstandards. As a condition of financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5308, the interests ofemployees affected by thu assistance shall be protected under arrangements that the Secretary of Labor concludes are fair and equitable.

(c) Satisfactorycontinuingcontrol.An FTA grantee shall:

(1)Maintain control over federally funded property;

(i) Ensure that it is used in transit service; and

(ii) Dispose ofit in accordance with Federal requirements.

a (2) Under thisparagraph (c), ifthe .grantee leases federally funded property to another party, the lease must provide the grantee satisfactory continuing control over the use ofthat property as determined intwo areas: realproperty (land) and facilities; and personal property (equipment androlling stock, bothrevenue and non-revenue).

(d)Maintenance. The grant applicant shall certify annually that pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5307(d)(1)(C), it will maintain (federally funded) facilities and equipment. In addition, the grantee shall keep equipment and facilities acquired with Federal assistance in good operating order, which includes maintenance ofrolling stock (revenue and non-revenue), machinery and equipment, and facilities.

(e)Rateschargedelderlyand persons with disabilities duringnonpeakhours. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5307(d)(1)(D), the grant applicant shall certify that the rates charged the elderly and persons with disabilities during nonpeak hours for fixed-route transportation using facilities and equipment financed with Federal assistance from FTAwill not exceed oneThalf ofthe rates generally applicable to other persons at peak hours, whether the operation is by the applicant orby another entity under lease or otherwise.

(f) Use ofcompetitiveprocurements. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5307(d)(1)(E), the grant applicant shallcertify that itwill

use competitive procurements and will notuse procurements employing exclusionary or discriminatory specifications.

(g) Compliancewith BuyAmerica provisions.The grant applicant shall certify that in carrying out a procurement authorized for this program, the applicant will comply with applicable Buy America laws.

(h) Certificationthatlocal funds are available fortheproject.The grant applicant shall certify thatthe local funds are or will be available to carry outthe project.

(i) Compliancewith national policy concerningelderlypersonsand individualswith disabilities. The grant applicant shall certify that itwill comply with the requirements of49 U.S.C. 5301(d) concerning the rights of elderly persons and persons with disabilities.

(j) FTA Master Agreement.The grant applicant shall comply with applicable provisions ofthe FTAMaster Agreement which is incorporated by reference inthe grant agreement. * 7.Amend § 624.11 byrevising paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (c) to read as -follows:
§624.11 Reporting.

(a)Recipients offinancial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5308 who purchase or lease hybrid electric, battery electric and fuel cell vehicles shall report semiannually the following information
to the appropriate FTA Regional Office 

### 15053

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15053 2007

### Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 61/Friday, March 30, 2007/Rules and Regulations

for the first three years ofthe useful life ofthe vehicle:

(c) Recipients offinancial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5308 that purchase or lease clean diesel vehicles are not required to report information beyond FTA grant reporting requirements for capital projects. Appendix A toPart 624 [Removed]

m8. Remove Appendix AtoPart 624.

Issued in Washington, DC, this 26th day of March 2007. James S. Simpson,
Administrator. [FR Doc.E7-5879 Filed 3-29-07; 8:45 amn]

BILLING CODE 4910-57-P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 070213032-7032-01; I.D. 032607F]

Fisheries ofthe Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pollockin Statistical Area 620 ofthe Gulf ofAlaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NQAA), Commerce. ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 620 ofthe Gulf ofAlaska (GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the B season allowance ofthe 2007 fotal allowable catch (TAC) ofpollock for Statistical Area 620 ofthe GOA. DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), March 27, 2007, through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., August 25, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Hogan, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fishery inthe GOA exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish ofthe Gulfof Alaska (FMP)prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

The B season allowance ofthe 2007 TAC ofpollock in Statistical Area 620 ofthe GOA is 8,924 metric tons (mt)as established by the 2007 and 2008 harvest specifications for groundfish of the GOA (72 FR 9676, March 5, 2007). In accordance with § 679.20(a)(5)(iv)(B) the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), hereby increases the B season pollock allowance by 1,785 mt, the remaining
amount ofthe A season allowance for pollock in Statistical Area 620. Therefore, the revised B season allowance ofthe pollock TAC in Statistical Area 620 is therefore 10,709 mt (8,924 mt plus 1,785 mt).

In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), the Regional Administrator has determined that the B season allowance ofthe 2007 TAC ofpollock in Statistical Area 620 oftheGOA will soon be reached. Therefore, the Regional Administrator is establishing a directed fishing allowance of10,659 mt, and is setting aside the remaining 50 mt as bycatch to support other anticipated groundfish fisheries. In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional Administrator finds that this directed fishing allowance has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing forpollock in Statistical Area 620 ofthe GOA. After the.effective date ofthis closure the maximum retainable amounts at §679.20(e) and (f) apply atany time during atrip.

Classification

This action responds to thebest available information recently obtained fromthe fishery. The Assistant Administrator forFisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for.public comment pursuantto the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary tothe public interest. Thisrequirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding tothe most recent fisheries datain a timely fashion andwould delay the closure ofpollock in Statistical Area 620 ofthe GOA. NMFS

was unable to publish a notice providing timefor public comment because the most recent, relevant data onlybecame available as ofMarch 26, 2007.

The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30 day delay in the effective date ofthis action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above forwaiver of prior notice and opportunity for public
comment.

This action is required by §679.20 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

Authority: 16U.S.C. 1801 etseq. Dated: March 26, 2007. James P.Burgess, ActingDirector,Officeof Sustainable Fisheries, National MarineFisheries Service. [FR Doc.07-1579 Filed 3-27-07; 3:07 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S 

### 15054

HeinOnline -- 72 Fed. Reg. 15054 2007