21412 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Proposed Rules

create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SIP approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-state relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2) and 7410(k)(3).

Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’) (signed

into law on March 22, 1995) requires

that the EPA prepare a budgetary impact

statement before promulgating a rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in expenditure by State,

local, and tribal governments, in

aggregate, or by the private sector, of

$100 million or more in any one year.

Section 203 requires the EPA to

establish a plan for obtaining input from

and informing, educating, and advising

any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely affected by the

rule.

Under section 205 of the Unfunded

Mandates Act, the EPA must identify

and consider a reasonable number of

regulatory alternatives before

promulgating a rule for which a

budgetary impact statement must be

prepared. The EPA must select from

those alternatives the least costly, most

cost-effective, or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule, unless the EPA explains why

this alternative is not selected or the

selection of this alternative is

inconsistent with law.

Because this proposed rule is

estimated to result in the expenditure by

State, local, and tribal governments or

the private sector of less then $100

million in any one year, the EPA has not

prepared a budgetary impact statement

or specifically addressed the selection of

the least costly, most cost-effective, or

least burdensome alternative. Because

small governments will not be

significantly or uniquely affected by this

rule, the EPA is not required to develop

a plan with regard to small

governments. It imposes no additional

requirements. The Office of

Management and Budget has exempted

this action rule from Executive Order

12866 review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Nitrogen Oxide, Ozone, Volatile Organic

Compound.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: April 29, 1996.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–11758 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[WI67–01–7276; FRL–5501–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plan; Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This notice proposes approval

of a revision to the Wisconsin State

Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the

requirements of the EPA transportation

conformity rule set forth at 40 CFR part

51 subpart T—Conformity to State or

Federal Implementation Plans of

Transportation Plans, Programs, and

Projects Developed, Funded or

Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the

Federal Transit Act. The transportation

conformity SIP revision will enable the

State of Wisconsin to implement and

enforce the Federal transportation

conformity requirements at the State or

local level in accordance with 40 CFR

51.396(b). This notice of approval is

limited only to 40 CFR part 51, subpart

T (transportation conformity). SIP

revisions submitted under 40 CFR part

51, subpart W, relating to conformity of

general Federal actions, will be

addressed in a separate EPA notice. This

notice provides the rationale for the

proposed approval and other

information.

DATES: Comments on this proposed

action must be received by June 10,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,

Regulation Development section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), USEPA,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604–3590. Copies of

the SIP revision, public comments and

EPA’s responses are available for

inspection at the following address:

United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is

recommended that you telephone

Michael Leslie at (312) 353–6680 before

visiting the Region 5 Office.)

A copy of this SIP revision is

available for inspection at the following

location: Office of Air and Radiation

(OAR) Docket and Information Center

(Air Docket 6102), room M1500, United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street S.W., Washington,

D.C. 20460, (202) 260–7548.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael G. Leslie, Regulation

Development Section (AR–18J), Air

Programs Branch, Air and Radiation

Division, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604, Telephone Number (312) 353–

6680.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act

(CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7506(c), provides

that no Federal department, agency, or

instrumentality shall engage in, support

in any way or provide financial

assistance for, license or permit, or

approve any activity which does not

conform to a SIP which has been

approved or promulgated pursuant to

the CAA. Conformity is defined as

conformity to the SIP’s purpose of

eliminating or reducing the severity and

number of violations of the National

Ambient Air Quality Standards and

achieving expeditious attainment of

such standards, and that such activities

will not: (1) Cause or contribute to any

new violation of any standard in any

area, (2) increase the frequency or

severity of any existing violation of any

standard in any area, or (3) delay timely

attainment of any standard or any

required interim emission reductions or

other milestones in any area.

Section 176(c)(4)(A) of the CAA

requires EPA to promulgate criteria and

procedures for determining conformity

of all Federal actions (transportation

and general) to applicable SIPs. The

EPA published the final transportation

conformity rules in the November 24,

1993, Federal Register and codified

them at 40 CFR part 51 subpart T—

Conformity to State or Federal

Implementation Plans of Transportation

Plans, Programs, and Projects

Developed, Funded or Approved Under

Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit

Act. The conformity rules require States

and local agencies to adopt and submit

to the EPA a transportation conformity

SIP revision not later than November 24,

1994. This notice does not address the

conformity requirements applicable to

general Federal actions which are set

forth at 40 CFR part 51 subpart W. The

EPA will take action on SIP revisions
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Proposed Rules 21413

relating to those requirements in a

separate notice.

II. Evaluation of the State’s Submittal

Pursuant to the requirements under

section 176(c)(4)(C) of the CAA, the

Wisconsin Department of Natural

Resources (WDNR) submitted a SIP

revision to the EPA on November 23,

1994, and supplemented this submittal

on June 14, 1995. In its submittal, the

State included provisions required by

the EPA transportation conformity rule

(40 CFR part 51, subpart T), and

Memoranda of Agreements (MOA)

between the affected agencies.

Transportation conformity is required

for all areas which are designated

nonattainment or maintenance for any

transportation related criteria

pollutants. The State of Wisconsin

currently has 11 counties designated as

nonattainment for ozone. The areas for

which transportation conformity

determinations are required and which

are included as part of Wisconsin’s

submittal include the following

nonurbanized counties: Door,

Keewaunee, and Manitowoc. The

urbanized areas include: MilwaukeeRacine Consolidated Metropolitan

Statistical Area (MSA) (Kenosha,

Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Walworth,

Washington, and Waukesha Counties),

and Sheboygan MSA (Sheboygan

County).

The WDNR held a public hearing on

its transportation conformity submittal

on January 11 and 12, 1995. Minor

modifications were made in response to

the comments and addressed in the final

submittal.

The consultation section of the EPA

transportation conformity rule (40 CFR

51.402) requires that the SIP revision

include procedures for interagency

consultation among the Federal, State,

and local agencies and for resolution of

conflicts in accordance with the criteria

set forth in 40 CFR 51.402. Specifically,

the SIP revision must include processes

and procedures to be undertaken by

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

(MPO), State departments of

transportation, and the United States

Department of Transportation (USDOT)

with State and local air quality agencies

and EPA before making a conformity

determination, and by State and local

air quality agencies and EPA with

MPOs, State departments of

transportation, and USDOT in

developing applicable SIPs.

In order to satisfy these requirements,

the WDNR developed an ad hoc multiagency committee, which included

representatives from the WDNR,

Wisconsin Department of

Transportation (WDOT), USDOT, and

MPOs. This group developed the final

consultation rule by integrating the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.402 and 23

CFR part 450 with the local procedures

and processes. Wisconsin’s final

consultation rule outlines the roles and

responsibilities of each of the affected

agencies for the process for determining

conformity. The consultation rule

further outline the procedures for

conflict resolution in the transportation

conformity process, for implementation

of the public participation process, and

for the submission of documentation

relating to a conformity determination.

The conformity SIP revision submitted

by Wisconsin has adequately addressed

all provisions of 40 CFR 51.402 and thus

meets the EPA SIP requirements.

Section 51.396(c) of the transportation

conformity rule states that to be

approvable by the EPA, the SIP revision

submitted to EPA must address all

requirements of the transportation

conformity rule in a manner which

gives them full legal effect. In particular,

the revision must incorporate the

provisions of the following sections of

the rule in verbatim form, except insofar

as needed to give effect to a stated intent

in the revision to establish criteria and

procedure more stringent than the

requirements stated in these sections:

51.392, 51.394, 51.398, 51.400, 51.404,

51.410, 51.412, 51.414, 51.416, 51.418,

51.420, 51.422, 51.424, 51.426, 51.428,

51.430, 51.432, 51.434, 51.436, 51.438,

51.440, 51.442, 51.444, 51.446, 51.448,

51.450, 51.460, and 51.462. The State of

Wisconsin submittal incorporated all of

the above sections in verbatim form,

except for §§ 51.424, 51.434, 51.442,

51.444, and 51.446. The omitted

sections apply only to criteria and

procedures for localized Carbon

Monoxide hot spots, Particulate Matter

areas, and Nitrogen Dioxide areas.

Noting this, these sections of the

transportation conformity rule are not

applicable to the State of Wisconsin,

which contains nonattainment areas for

ozone.

On August 7, 1995, EPA finalized an

amendment to section 51.448. It should

be noted that additional sections of the

conformity rule are scheduled to be

amended. The EPA cannot approve

sections into the SIP where

inconsistencies exist between the

submittal and the final rule. After EPA

further amends the conformity rule, the

State of Wisconsin will be required to

update the SIP to address the rule

changes.

The WDNR and the WDOT concluded

that this SIP revision in the form of a

MOA will be enforceable through

section 144.31(1)(e) and section

144.371, Wis. Stats. The MOA, which is

a binding agreement among the affected

agencies, outlined each agency’s roles

and responsibilities in the

transportation conformity process. A

total of three MOA were included in the

SIP revision; two MOAs between the

local MPO, MDOT and MDNR for the

two metropolitan areas, and one MOA

between WDOT and WDNR for the

remaining rural areas.

Section 85.02, Wis. Stats. requires all

agencies involved in transportation

related activities to follow the

recommendations of the WDOT. The

WDOT has the authority over the

approval of all Transportation

Improvement Programs (TIP) and the

approval of Federal and State funds for

transportation projects, programs, or

plans. The WDOT will not approve any

MPO TIP that contains a nonconforming

project in the State TIP. Furthermore,

the WDOT will not approve Federal or

State funding for any nonconforming

projects, programs, or plans and may

withhold moneys for failure to follow

conformity procedures.

Section 30.12(4), Wis. Stats., gives the

transportation conformity agreements

between WDNR and WDOT full legal

effect in Wisconsin. This law requires

WDOT to follow its agreement with

WDNR or be subject to the prohibitions

or permit or approval requirements

under sections 29.29, 30.11, 30.12,

30.123, 30.195, 30.20, 59.971, 61.351,

62.231, 87.30 and chapters 144 and 147,

Wis. Stats.

Section 1.11, Wis. Stats., the

Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act,

may be enforced by citizens with regard

to activities of WDNR and WDOT.

III. EPA Action

The EPA is proposing approval the

transportation conformity SIP revision

for the State of Wisconsin. The EPA has

evaluated this SIP revision and has

determined that the State has fully

adopted the provisions of the Federal

transportation conformity rules in

accordance with 40 CFR part 51 subpart

T. The appropriate public participation

and comprehensive interagency

consultations have been undertaken

during development and adoption of

this SIP revision.

IV. Miscellaneous

A. Applicability to Future SIP Decisions

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting, allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. The EPA

shall consider each request for revision

to the SIP in light of specific technical,

economic, and environmental factors
21414 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Proposed Rules

and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

B. Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603

and 604). Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

This approval does not create any

new requirements. Therefore, I certify

that this action does not have a

significant impact on any small entities

affected. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-State relationship under the

Act, preparation of the regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of the State action. The

Act forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976).

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact

statement to accompany any proposed

or final rule that includes a Federal

mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate; or to the

private sector, of $100 million or more.

Under section 205, the EPA must select

the most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves

the objectives of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements.

section 203 requires the EPA to

establish a plan for informing and

advising any small governments that

may be significantly or uniquely

impacted by the rule.

The EPA has determined that the

approval action promulgated today does

not include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector.

This Federal action approves preexisting requirements under State or

local law, and imposes no new Federal

requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or the private sector,

result from this action.

D. Petitions for Judicial Review

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

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by July 9, 1996. Filing a petition

for reconsideration by the Administrator

of this final rule does not affect the

finality of this rule 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, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Transportation conformity,

Transportation-air quality planning,

Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: April 26, 1996.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–11759 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 63

[AD–FRL–5503–2]

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Amendment

to Regulations Governing Equivalent

Emission Limitations by Permit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On May 20, 1994, the Agency

promulgated a rule in the Federal

Register (59 FR 26429) governing the

establishment of equivalent emission

limitations by permit, pursuant to

section 112(j) of the Clean Air Act (Act).

After the effective date of a Title V

permit program in a State, each owner

or operator of a major source in a source

category for which the EPA was

scheduled to, but failed to promulgate a

section 112(d) emission standard will be

required to obtain an equivalent

emission limitation by permit. The

permit application must be submitted to

the Title V permitting authority 18

months after the EPA’s missed

promulgation date. This action proposes

to amend the original Regulations

Governing Equivalent Emission

Limitations by Permit rule to delay the

section 112(j) permit application

deadline for all 4-year source categories

listed in the regulatory schedule by 180

days until November 15, 1996. This

action is needed to alleviate

unnecessary paperwork for both major

source owners or operators and

permitting agencies. Because the

changes are merely to delay the permit

application deadline for all 4 year

source categories, the EPA does not

anticipate receiving adverse comments.

Consequently the revisions are also

being issued as a direct final rule in the

final rules section of this Federal

Register. If no significant adverse

comments are timely received, no

further action will be taken with respect

to this proposal, and the direct final rule

will become final on the date provided

in that action.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be

received on or before June 10, 1996,

unless a hearing is requested by May 20,

1996. If a hearing is requested, written

comments must be received by June 24,

1996.

Public Hearing. Anyone requesting a

public hearing must contact the EPA no

later than May 20, 1996. If a hearing is

held, it will take place on May 28, 1996,

beginning at 10:00 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments

should be submitted (in duplicate, if

possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket

and Information Center (6102),

Attention Docket No. A–93–32 (see

docket section below), Room M–1500,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.

20460. The EPA requests that a separate

copy also be sent to the contact person

listed below.

Public Hearing. If a public hearing is

held, it will be held at the EPA’s Office

of Administration Auditorium, Research

Triangle Park, North Carolina. Persons

interested in attending the hearing or

wishing to present oral testimony

should notify Ms. Yvonne Chandler,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711,

telephone (919) 541–5627.

Docket. Docket No. A–93–32,

containing the supporting information

for the original Regulations Governing

Equivalent Emission Limitations by

Permit rule is available for public

inspection and copying between 8:00