35994 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules

3. ‘‘Estelast’’

IV. Proposed Definition

The Commission proposes the

following definition for Teijin’s new

fiber:

A manufactured fiber in which the

fiber-forming substance is a long-chain

synthetic polymer composed of at least

50% by weight of aliphatic polyether

and at least 35% by weight of polyester,

as defined in 16 CFR 303.7(c).

V. Invitation to Comment

The Commission is soliciting

comment on Teijin’s application

generally, but is especially interested in

comments on whether the application

meets the following criteria, which the

Commission has identified as grounds

for granting applications for new generic

names:

[T]he Commission, in the interest of

elucidating the grounds on which it has

based this decision and shall base future

decisions as to the grant of generic names for

textile fibers, sets out the following criteria

for grant of such generic names.

1. The fiber for which a generic name is

requested must have a chemical composition

radically different from other fibers, and that

distinctive chemical composition must result

in distinctive physical properties of

significance to the general public.

2. The fiber must be in active commercial

use or such use must be immediately

foreseen.

3. The grant of the generic name must be

of importance to the consuming public at

large, rather than to a small group of

knowledgeable professionals such as

purchasing officers for large Government

agencies.

The Commission believes it is in the public

interest to prevent the proliferation of generic

names, and will adhere to a stringent

application of the above-mentioned criteria

in consideration of any future applications

for generic names and in a systematic review

of any generic names previously granted

which no longer meet these criteria.

* * * * *

In addition, [the Commission] notes that

where appropriate, in considering

applications for new generic names for fibers

that are of the same general chemical

composition as those for which a generic

name already has been established, rather

than of a chemical composition that is

radically different, but that have distinctive

properties of importance to the general

public as a result of a new method of

manufacture of their substantially

differentiated physical characteristics, such

as their fiber structure, it may allow such

fiber to be designated in required information

disclosures by either its generic name, or

alternatively, by its ‘‘subclass’’ name. The

Commission will consider this disposition

when the distinctive feature or features of the

subclass fiber make it suitable for uses for

which other fibers under the established

generic name would not be suited or would

be significantly less well suited.

60 FR 62352, 62353 (Dec. 6, 1995)

(reaffirming and clarifying criteria first

announced at 38 FR 34114 (Nov. 12,

1973)).

The Commission additionally

requests comments on the suggested

names and proposed definition, set out

above.

Before deciding whether to amend

Rule 7, the Commission will consider

any written comments submitted to the

Secretary of the Commission within the

above-mentioned comment period.

Comments that are submitted will be

available for public inspection, in

accordance with the Freedom of

Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, and

Commission Regulation, 16 CFR 4, on

normal business days between the hours

of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. at the Public

Reference Room, Room 130, Federal

Trade Commission, 6th & Pennsylvania

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act relating to an initial

regulatory analysis (5 U.S.C. 603–604)

are not applicable to this proposal

because the Commission believes that

the amendment, if promulgated, will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

The Commission has tentatively reached

this conclusion with respect to the

proposed amendment because the

amendment would impose no

additional obligations, penalties, or

costs. The amendment would simply

allow covered companies to use a new

generic name for a new fiber that may

not appropriately fit within current

generic names and definitions. The

amendment would impose no

additional labeling requirements.

To ensure, however, that no

substantial economic impact is being

overlooked, public comment is

requested on the effect of the proposed

amendment on costs, profits, and

competitiveness of, and employment in

small entities. Subsequent to the receipt

of public comments, the Commission

will decide whether the preparation of

a final regulatory flexibility analysis is

warranted. Accordingly, based on

available information, the Commission

hereby certifies, pursuant to the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.

605(b)), that the proposed amendment,

if promulgated, would not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed amendment does not

constitute a ‘‘collection of information’’

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 109 Stat. 163) and

its implementing regulations (5 CFR

part 1320).

The collection of information

imposed by the procedures for

establishing generic names (Rule 8, 16

CFR 303.8) has been submitted to OMB

and has been assigned a control number

of 3084–0101.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 303

Labeling, Textile, Trade practices.

Authority: Sec. 7(c) of the Textile Fiber

Products Identification Act (15 U.S.C. 70e(c)).

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–17468 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 93

[FRL–5527–9]

RIN 2060–AG16

Transportation Conformity Rule

Amendment and Solicitation for

Participation in the Transportation

Conformity Pilot Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to amend

the transportation conformity rule to

allow EPA to create and implement a

conformity pilot program. The

conformity rule requires that

transportation activities conform to state

air quality implementation plans and

establishes the criteria and procedures

for determining whether or not they do.

Conformity to an air quality plan means

that transportation activities will not

produce new air quality violations,

worsen existing violations, or delay

timely attainment of national ambient

air quality standards.

The pilot program would exempt up

to six areas from some of the existing

rule’s requirements. After EPA approval,

the areas will experiment with

alternative conformity procedures for

the three-year duration of the program.

Today’s notice invites applications for

participation in the pilot program and

presents the application and selection

process, which will be finalized in the

final rule.

Along with recent amendments to the

conformity rule, the pilot program is

part of an EPA strategy to provide states

and localities greater flexibility in

meeting federal transportation

conformity requirements while

reinforcing Clean Air Act commitments.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules 35995

This strategy results from experience

gained in implementing the conformity

rule.

The conformity pilot program would

allow state and local transportation and

air quality agencies the additional

flexibility to seek out and test the

conformity procedures that work best in

their area. Participating areas’

experiences will be evaluated and it is

possible that successful pilot programs

may ultimately lead to further changes

in the conformity rule.

DATES: Comments on this action must be

received by August 8, 1996.

Applications may be submitted

beginning July 9, 1996. EPA requests

expressions of interest by August 23,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may

submit written comments (in duplicate,

if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket

and Information Center, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Attention: Docket No. A–95–55, 401 M.

Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460.

Materials relevant to this proposal

have been placed in Public Docket A–

95–55 by EPA. The docket is located at

the above address in room M–1500

Waterside Mall (ground floor) and may

be inspected from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, including all

non-governmental holidays.

For informational purposes, areas

which submit expressions of interest

and applications will be listed on the

EPA’s Technology Transfer Network

(TTN) bulletin board, on the Office of

Mobile Sources (OMS) bulletin board

under the Rulemaking: Transportation:

Conformity file area. TTN files can be

accessed on the first call to (919) 541–

5742 or through the internet at TELNET

ttnbbs.rtpnc.epa.gov. TTN is off-line

every Monday from 8:00 a.m.–12 Noon,

and the TTN voice help line is (919)

541–5384.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth Cummings, Transportation

and Market Incentives Group, Regional

and State Programs Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 2565

Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105,

(313) 741–7857 or Lucy Garliauskas,

Environmental Analysis Division, Office

of Environment and Planning, Federal

Highway Administration, 400 Seventh

Street S.W., Washington, DC 20590,

(202) 366–2068.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

Entities potentially regulated by the

conformity rule are those which adopt,

approve, or fund transportation plans,

programs, or projects under the

Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act or Federal Transit Laws.

Regulated categories and entities

include:

Category Examples of regulated entities

Local government ...... Local transportation

and air quality

agencies.

State government ...... State transportation

and air quality

agencies.

Federal government EPA and Department

of Transportation

(Federal Highway

Administration and

Federal Transit Administration).

This table is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

affected by this action. This table lists

the types of entities that EPA is now

aware could potentially be regulated by

the conformity rule. Other types of

entities not listed in the table could also

be affected. If you have questions

regarding the applicability of this action

to a particular entity, consult the person

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section.

The contents of today’s preamble are

listed in the following outline:

I. Background of Transportation Conformity

II. Transportation Conformity Pilot Program

A. Program Objective

B. Exemptions from Certain Conformity

Requirements

C. Eligibility

D. Submission of Applications

E. Selection Criteria

F. Selection Process

III. Conformity SIPs

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Administrative Designation

B. Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

D. Unfunded Mandates

I. Background of Transportation

Conformity

The transportation conformity rule,

‘‘Criteria and Procedures for

Determining Conformity to State or

Federal Implementation Plans of

Transportation Plans, Programs, and

Projects Funded or Approved Under

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

Act,’’ was published November 24, 1993

(58 FR 62188) and amended 40 CFR

Parts 51 and 93. It was subsequently

amended on August 7, 1995 (60 FR

40098) and November 14, 1995 (60 FR

57179). In addition, EPA is proposing a

third set of conformity amendments to

further streamline and simplify the

conformity rule.

Required under section 176(c) of the

Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, the

transportation conformity rule

established the criteria and procedures

by which the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), the Federal

Transit Administration (FTA), and

metropolitan planning organizations

(MPOs) determine the conformity of

federally funded or approved highway

and transit plans, programs, and

projects to state implementation plans

(SIPs). The Clean Air Act requires that

federally supported activities conform

to the implementation plan’s purpose of

expeditiously attaining and of

maintaining the national ambient air

quality standards.

Since publication of the

transportation conformity rule in

November 1993, EPA, the Department of

Transportation (DOT), and state and

local air and transportation officials

have had considerable experience

implementing the criteria and

procedures in the rule. It is that mutual

experience which has lead EPA and

DOT to undertake a number of

initiatives to streamline the

transportation conformity rule. In

addition to significant revisions of the

conformity rule through three sets of

amendments, today’s proposal would

provide further flexibility through the

creation and implementation of a

transportation conformity pilot program.

II. Conformity Pilot Program

The purpose of this notice is to

propose an amendment to 40 CFR Parts

51 and 93 to create a transportation

conformity pilot program. This

amendment would allow EPA and DOT

to select up to six areas to participate in

the program and would allow EPA to

exempt the selected areas from certain

provisions of the transportation

conformity regulation for a period of

three years. This notice also describes

the pilot program’s objectives,

application and selection process, and

participation requirements, and solicits

applications for the program.

A. Conformity Pilot Program Objective

The overall objective of the

conformity pilot program would be to

seek out and test innovative methods of

streamlining regulatory requirements

while ensuring that Clean Air Act

objectives and requirements are met.

EPA and DOT are committed to

continuing to encourage procedures

which improve the conformity process.

Under the pilot program, state and local

air and transportation agencies could

identify the conformity processes and

procedures that work best for their area,

and EPA and DOT would select the

applications expected to lead to a more

effective conformity process. It is
35996 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules

possible that successful pilot projects

may ultimately lead to further changes

in the federal transportation conformity

regulation.

The pilot program would enable as

many as six areas to exercise flexibility

in meeting certain requirements of the

conformity regulation in three areas:

modeling, consultation, and

coordination of the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)

schedules and procedures with

conformity deadlines and schedules.

EPA would also consider proposals

from applicants to extend this flexibility

to other aspects of the conformity

requirements.

During the third year of the pilot

program, EPA and DOT would conduct

a national evaluation to see if

transportation policy, project selection

and investment choices changed as a

result of a more flexible approach to

meeting the Clean Air Act conformity

requirements; if interagency

consultation and public participation

improved as a result of new procedures;

and if Clean Air Act compliance costs

were reduced and efficiencies

implemented while still ensuring that

Clean Air Act goals and requirements

were met. Pilot program areas would

also propose methods for self-evaluation

of their conformity pilot program and

cooperate with the national evaluation.

B. Exemption From Certain Conformity

Requirements

This proposal would allow EPA and

DOT to exempt no more than six areas

for no more than three years from

certain requirements of 40 CFR Parts 51

and 93, if these areas are selected to

participate in this conformity pilot

program. EPA and DOT approval of the

alternative requirements developed by

the applicant areas would be required

for selection to participate in the pilot

program. In order to obtain EPA and

DOT approval, each area would be

required to provide an opportunity for

public comment on its proposed

alternative conformity requirements.

The alternative conformity requirements

would be proposed to achieve results

equivalent to or better than the

requirements of 176(c) of the Clean Air

Act. Areas selected to participate in the

pilot program must comply with their

final project agreements. After the threeyear duration of the pilot program has

expired, the selected areas would again

be subject to all of the requirements of

40 CFR Parts 51 and 93. However, EPA

may revise 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 to

incorporate elements of effective pilot

programs based on results from

evaluating the first two years of program

implementation.

C. Eligibility

Up to six areas currently subject to the

requirements of the transportation

conformity regulation would be selected

by EPA and DOT to participate in the

pilot program. Applications may be

submitted by either an MPO, a local air

quality agency, a state air quality

agency, or a state department of

transportation acting as a lead contact

for purposes of the pilot program. When

submitting its application, the lead

agency must demonstrate that its

proposal is endorsed by all state and

local air and transportation agencies

that participate in the area’s interagency

consultation process. In certain cases,

for example, an MPO that covers more

than one nonattainment area or a

nonattainment area that covers more

than one state, EPA and DOT may

subsequently request further

endorsement from additional agencies

affected by the proposal.

D. Submission of Applications

Applications may be submitted to

Elizabeth Cummings, Transportation

and Market Incentives Group, Regional

and State Programs Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 2565

Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105.

Applications will be accepted beginning

July 9, 1996. EPA will begin accepting

applications prior to final action on this

rule amendment. If the final rule is

different than this proposal, due to

public comment received, areas that

have already submitted applications

may be asked to supplement their

application materials.

EPA requests that areas considering

applying to the pilot program submit a

non-binding ‘‘expression of interest’’

before August 23, 1996. The ‘‘expression

of interest’’ letter could be submitted by

the lead agency and would not need to

include any preliminary description or

endorsement of the application. This

would provide EPA and DOT with an

approximate number of applications to

expect. EPA would list the areas that

have submitted expressions of interest

and applications on EPA’s Technology

Transfer Network (TTN) bulletin board.

EPA would also place copies of the

submitted applications in the public

docket. (See ADDRESSES for information

on the TTN bulletin board and the

public docket.)

Once EPA has taken final action on

this proposal, EPA and DOT would be

able to jointly select up to six pilot

program participants on a rolling basis

until six participants are selected,

unless the agencies decide to select

fewer than six participants. If fewer than

six participants are selected in the first

iteration of the selection process, EPA

and DOT would continue to process

applications on a rolling basis.

The following information will enable

EPA and DOT to consider an

application: (1) A particular proposal for

flexibility in applying elements of the

conformity regulation; (2) the rationale

for change, including: (i) The particular

problems in the existing requirements

that the proposal intends to address,

and (ii) the benefits that the alternative

proposal would create (e.g., air quality

benefits, resource savings); (3) a

description of the alternative methods

and/or procedures to be used in meeting

conformity requirements; (4) the

proposed schedule for making

conformity determinations during the

pilot program (for a period of up to three

years); (5) evidence that sufficient

resources to conduct the pilot program

will be available (e.g., some of the pilot

program activities may be eligible for

title 23 State Planning and Research

Funds (SPR) or Planning (PL) funds); (6)

discussion of any potential

implementation issues that must be

overcome for the pilot program to be

successful; (7) suggestions for selfevaluation of the pilot program; (8)

evidence that the proposal is endorsed

by all the state and local air and

transportation agencies; and (9)

evidence that key stakeholders have

been or will be consulted and that

appropriate public participation

procedures will be undertaken, which

may be incorporated into the area’s

normal interagency consultation

process.

Applications should be in narrative

form and should be concise while still

containing sufficient information to

fully describe the proposal. It is EPA

and DOT’s intent to use the application

to conduct preliminary reviews. Further

details of the proposal would be

incorporated during the consultation

stage of the selection process and would

be subject to the project agreement, as

described below. The extent to which

the application addresses the

information requested and the

application length will depend upon the

proposal’s complexity.

E. Selection Criteria

Applications would be assessed

according to the following criteria: (1)

Whether the proposed flexibilities fulfill

all the statutory requirements for

transportation conformity; (2) the degree

to which the application fulfills the

pilot program’s goals of testing

innovative methods and streamlining

the regulatory process, including, but

not limited to, the specified areas of

modeling, interagency/public
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules 35997

consultation, and coordination of ISTEA

and Clean Air Act requirements; (3) the

degree of key stakeholder and public

support in the geographic area covered

by the proposal; (4) whether the

applicant has the resources necessary to

effectively implement and evaluate the

proposed conformity pilot program; (5)

whether the area has adequately

demonstrated its intent to comply with

Clean Air Act objectives; and (6) the

degree to which data and analysis will

be provided to help assess air quality,

resource savings, public participation,

and other program benefits.

In order to assure that the pilot

program provides an opportunity to test

innovative approaches to conformity in

a broad range of circumstances, EPA

and DOT would attempt to select a

group of participants that is diverse in

terms of geographic distribution,

nonattainment pollutants,

nonattainment classifications, and rural

and urban development.

F. Selection Process

The selection process would have

three stages: application review,

applicant consultation, and project

agreement finalization. First, EPA and

DOT will review submitted

applications. Applications not selected

by the agencies during the initial

application review will be notified; all

other applications will proceed to the

consultation stage.

In the consultation stage, EPA and

DOT will schedule a conference call

with each applicant to clarify any

questions about the applicant’s

proposal, permit the federal agencies to

clarify their understanding of what the

proposed conformity pilot program

would entail, and to evaluate further the

suitability of the proposal for inclusion

in the pilot program. Then EPA and

DOT will arrange for a subset of these

applicants to present their proposals in

a review session with federal agency

staff. Representatives of the lead agency

submitting the pilot program

application and other public agencies

involved in the applicant’s geographic

area would participate in the

presentation. Based upon the

information presented in the application

and consultation stages, EPA and DOT

could select up to six applicants to

participate in the pilot program.

In the final stage, and following

finalization of this rule amendment,

EPA, DOT and the applicant agencies

would negotiate the final project

agreement, which would formalize each

area’s selection as a pilot program

participant. Before EPA and DOT

approve the final project agreement, the

lead agency would be required to

demonstrate that it has provided a

public comment period of not less than

30 days on its proposed alternative

conformity requirements. The lead

agency would also be required to

demonstrate how it solicited and took

into account any public comments

during the public comment period.

Upon finalization, the project agreement

would be fully enforceable under the

Clean Air Act.

III. Conformity SIPs

Although this proposal would exempt

pilot program participants from certain

conformity rule requirements, it could

not exempt a pilot program participant

from requirements in its approved

conformity SIP. Once EPA has approved

the conformity SIP, the federal

conformity rule no longer applies to

those subjects covered by the

conformity SIP, and the requirements in

the conformity SIP have the force of

federal and state law. Therefore, if an

area’s submitted conformity SIP has

already been approved by EPA, a new

SIP would need to be submitted and

approved in order for an area to

participate in the pilot program and be

relieved of certain of its conformity SIP

requirements. The area’s final project

agreement under the pilot program

could be submitted as its new

conformity SIP.

If a pilot program participant has

already submitted a conformity SIP

which EPA has not yet approved, then

the conformity SIP (or certain portions

of the conformity SIP applicable to the

particular area) would need to be

withdrawn for the duration of the pilot

program in order to ensure that the area

could be governed by the final project

agreement.

Areas that are selected to participate

in the pilot program and have not yet

submitted a conformity SIP would be

exempted from the requirements of

§ 51.396 (‘‘Implementation plan

revision’’) so that they would not be

required to submit a conformity SIP for

the area for the duration of participation

in the pilot program. In addition, areas

that are selected to participate in the

pilot program would be exempted for

the duration of the pilot program from

the requirement to submit a SIP revision

in response to conformity rule

amendments.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR

51735 (October 4, 1993)) the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to OMB review and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

The Order 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 $100 million or more, or

otherwise adversely affect in a material

way the economy, a sector of the

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 or entitlements, grants, user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof;

(4) Raise novel or policy issues arising

out of legal mandates, the President’s

priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

It has been determined that this rule

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the terms of Executive Order

12866. EPA has submitted this action to

OMB for review. Changes made in

response to OMB suggestions or

recommendations will be documented

in the public record.

B. Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements

This rule does not contain any

information collection requirements

from EPA which require approval by

OMB under the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980

requires federal agencies to identify

potentially adverse impacts of federal

regulations upon small entities. In

instances where significant impacts are

possible on a substantial number of

these entities, agencies are required to

perform a Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis (RFA).

EPA has determined that today’s

regulations will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. This regulation affects federal

agencies and metropolitan planning

organizations, which by definition are

designated only for metropolitan areas

with a population of at least 50,000.

These organizations do not constitute

small entities.

Therefore, as required under section

605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5

U.S.C. 601 et seq., I certify that this

regulation does not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.
35998 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules

1 The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act

made significant changes to the Act. See Pub. L. No.

101–549, 104 Stat. 2399. References herein are to

the Clean Air Act, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). The

Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, in the U.S.

Code at 42 U.S.C. sections 7401, et seq.

2 Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to

nonattainment areas generally and subpart 4

contains provisions specifically applicable to PM–

10 nonattainment areas. At times, subpart 1 and

subpart 4 overlap or conflict. EPA has attempted to

clarify the relationship among these provisions in

the ‘‘General Preamble’’ and, as appropriate, in

today’s notice and supporting information.

D. Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector, or to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

EPA has determined that to the extent

this rule imposes any mandate within

the meaning of the Unfunded Mandates

Act, this final action does not include a

mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate or to the private sector.

Therefore, EPA has not prepared a

statement with respect to budgetary

impacts.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Particulate matter, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile

organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 93

Administrative practice and

procedure, Air pollution control, Carbon

monoxide, Intergovernmental relations,

Ozone.

Dated: June 21, 1996.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, title 40, chapter I, Parts 51

and 93 of the Code of Federal

Regulations are proposed to be amended

as follows.

PARTS 51 AND 93—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for parts 51

and 93 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. Parts 51 and 93 are proposed to be

amended by adding identical §§ 51.446

and 93.137 to read as follows:

§ . Special exemptions from

conformity requirements for pilot program

areas.

EPA and DOT may exempt no more

than six areas for no more than three

years from certain requirements of this

subpart if these areas are selected to

participate in a conformity pilot

program and have developed alternative

requirements that have been approved

by EPA and DOT. In order to obtain EPA

and DOT approval on its final project

agreement, each area must provide a 30-

day public comment period and address

comments received on its proposed

alternative conformity requirements.

The alternative conformity requirements

must be proposed to fulfill all of the

requirements of and achieve results

equivalent to or better than section

176(c) of the Clean Air Act. Areas

selected to participate in the pilot

program must comply with their final

project agreements. After the three-year

duration of the pilot program has

expired, areas will be subject to the

requirements of this subpart.

[FR Doc. 96–16591 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[WA3–1–5479; FRL–5534–9]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans: Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: In this action, Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) invites public

comment on its proposed approval of

certain elements of the Spokane PM–10

attainment plan, including control

measures, and the granting of a

temporary waiver of the attainment date

for the Spokane, Washington particulate

nonattainment area. This is based on

EPA’s review of the State

implementation plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of Washington

for the purpose of attaining the national

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)

for particulate matter with an

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal

to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM–10).

The implementation plan was submitted

by the State to satisfy certain federal

Clean Air Act requirements for an

approvable moderate nonattainment

area PM–10 SIP for Spokane,

Washington due on November 15, 1991.

DATES: Comments on this proposed

action must be postmarked by August 8,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: Montel Livingston, SIP

Manager, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality

(OAQ 107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,

Washington 98101.

Copies of the State’s submittals and

other information supporting this

proposed action are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations: United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality, 1200

Sixth Avenue (AT–082), Seattle,

Washington 98101, and the State of

Washington Department of Ecology, 300

Desmond Drive, Lacey, Washington

98503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Lauderdale, Office of Air Quality

(OAQ 107), US Environmental

Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553–

6511.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Spokane, Washington, area was

designated nonattainment for PM–10

and classified as moderate under

sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the

Clean Air Act, by operation of law upon

enactment of the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990.1 See 56 FR 56694

(Nov. 6, 1991)(official designation

codified at 40 CFR 81.348). The air

quality planning requirements for

moderate PM–10 nonattainment areas

are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of Part

D, Title I of the Act.2 The EPA has

issued a ‘‘General Preamble’’ describing

EPA’s preliminary views on how EPA

intends to review SIP’s and SIP

revisions submitted under Title I of the

Act, including those State submittals

containing provisions to implement the

moderate PM–10 nonattainment area

SIP requirements [see generally 57 FR

13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070

(April 28, 1992)]. Because EPA is

describing its interpretations here only

in broad terms, the reader should refer

to the General Preamble for a more

detailed discussion of the

interpretations of Title I advanced in

this proposal and the supporting

rationale. In this rulemaking action on

the Washington moderate area PM–10

SIP revision for the Spokane

nonattainment area, EPA is proposing to

apply its interpretations, taking into

consideration the specific factual issues

presented. Additional information

supporting EPA’s action on this

particular area is available for

inspection at the address indicated

above. EPA will consider any timely