Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - [IN 165-1; FRL-7999-6]

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

# ACTION:

Notice of adequacy.

# SUMMARY:

                        In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that EPA has found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets in the Vigo County, Indiana 8-hour ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan are adequate for conformity purposes. On March 2, 1999, the DC Circuit Court ruled that submitted State Implementation Plans (SIPs) cannot be used for conformity determinations until EPA has affirmatively found them adequate. As a result of our finding, Vigo County can use the motor vehicle emissions budgets from the submitted 8-hour ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan for future conformity determinations. These budgets are effective December 7, 2005. The finding and the response to comments will be available at EPA's conformity Web site:                         *http://www.epa.gov/​otaq/​transp.htm*, (once there, click on the “Conformity” button, then look for “Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity”).                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Steven Rosenthal, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section (AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6052,                         *rosenthal.steven@epa.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, whenever “we,” “us” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.

## Background

                    Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have already made. EPA Region 5 sent a letter to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management on October 25, 2005, stating that the motor vehicle emissions budgets for the year 2015, submitted in the Vigo County, Indiana 8-hour ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan, are adequate. This finding has been announced on EPA's conformity Web site:                     *http://www.epa.gov/​otaq/​transp.htm*, (once there, click on the “Conformity” button, then look for “Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity”).                

Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards.

The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.

We've described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in guidance (May 14, 1999 memo titled “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999 Conformity Court Decision”). We followed this guidance in making our adequacy determination.

Dated: November 10, 2005.

Bharat Mathur,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 05-23091 Filed 11-21-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P