Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0502-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky: Revisions to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan
Posted Date: 2009-12-04T05:00Z

[Federal Register: December 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 232)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 63697-63701]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04de09-39]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0502; FRL-9088-9]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky: 
Revisions to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky on December 31, 
2008, for the purpose of establishing transportation conformity 
criteria and procedures related to interagency consultation, and 
enforceability of certain transportation related control and mitigation 
measures for the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 4, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2009-0502, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: Somerville.Amanetta@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: 404-562-9019.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0502,'' Air Quality Modeling and 
Transportation Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality 
Modeling and Transportation Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional 
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2009-0502. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured

[[Page 63698]]

and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket 
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic 
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact 
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you 
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to 
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special 
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or 
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the 
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all 
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's 
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality 
Modeling and Transportation Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960. Ms. Somerville's telephone number is 404-562-9025. She can 
also be reached via electronic mail at Somerville.amanetta@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Transportation Conformity
II. Background for this Action
III. Proposed Action
    A. Federal Requirements
    B. Clarksville-Hopkinsville Conformity SIP
    C. Huntington-Ashland Conformity SIP
    D. Louisville Conformity SIP
    E. Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati Conformity SIP
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Transportation Conformity

    Transportation conformity (hereafter referred to as ``conformity'') 
is required under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) to 
ensure that federally supported highway, transit projects, and other 
activities are consistent with (``conform to'') the purpose of the SIP. 
Conformity currently applies to areas that are designated 
nonattainment, and to areas that have been redesignated to attainment 
after 1990 (maintenance areas) with plans developed under section 175A 
of the Act, for the following transportation related criteria 
pollutants: ozone, particulate matter (PM2.5 and 
PM10), carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide.
    Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that transportation 
activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant criteria 
pollutants, also known as national ambient air quality standards 
(NAAQS). The transportation conformity regulation is found in 40 CFR 
Part 93 and provisions related to conformity SIPs are found in 40 CFR 
51.390.

II. Background for This Action

A. Federal Requirements

    EPA promulgated the Federal transportation conformity criteria and 
procedures (``Conformity Rule'') on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188). 
Among other things, the rule required states to address all provisions 
of the conformity rule in their SIPs frequently referred to as 
``conformity SIPs.'' Under 40 CFR 51.390, most sections of the 
conformity rule were required to be copied verbatim. States were also 
required to tailor all or portions of the following three sections of 
the conformity rule to meet their state's individual circumstances: 40 
CFR 93.105, which addresses consultation procedures; 40 CFR 
93.122(a)(4)(ii), which addresses written commitments to control 
measures that are not included in a metropolitan planning 
organization's (MPO's) transportation plan and transportation 
improvement program that must be obtained prior to a conformity 
determination, and the requirement that such commitments, when they 
exist, must be fulfilled; and 40 CFR 93.125(c), which addresses written 
commitments to mitigation measures that must be obtained prior to a 
project-level conformity determination, and the requirement that 
project sponsors must comply with such commitments, when they exist.
    On August 10, 2005, the ``Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users'' (SAFETEA-LU) was signed 
into law. SAFETEA-LU revised section 176(c) of the CAA transportation 
conformity provisions. One of the changes streamlines the requirements 
for conformity SIPs. Under SAFETEA-LU, states are required to address 
and tailor only three sections of the rule in their conformity SIPs: 40 
CFR 93.105, 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and, 40 CFR 93.125(c), described 
above. In general, states are no longer required to submit conformity 
SIP revisions that address the other sections of the conformity rule. 
These changes took effect on August 10, 2005, when SAFETEA-LU was 
signed into law.

B. SIP Submission

    On December 31, 2008, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the 
Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet's Department of Air Quality (KY 
DAQ), submitted the Commonwealth's transportation conformity and 
consultation interagency rule to EPA as an addition to the SIP. The 
interagency consultation procedures for the transportation conformity 
partners are outlined in the document Transportation Conformity: A 
Guide for Interagency Consultation, which is referenced in the Kentucky 
transportation conformity rule.
    The Commonwealth of Kentucky developed its consultation rule based 
on the elements contained in 40 CFR 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 
93.125(c). As a first step, the Commonwealth worked with the existing 
transportation planning organization's interagency committee that 
included representatives from Kentucky's air quality agency, Kentucky 
Department of Transportation (DOT), U.S. DOT (i.e., Federal Highway 
Administration--Kentucky Division, Federal Transit Administration), the 
MPOs of the maintenance and nonattainment areas of Kentucky, and EPA. 
The interagency committee met regularly and drafted the consultation 
rules considering elements in 40 CFR 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 
93.125(c), and integrated the local procedures and processes into the 
rule. The consultation process developed in this rule is for the 
Commonwealth of Kentucky.

C. Section Description of Nonattainment Areas

    Currently, in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, there are 3 maintenance 
areas and 1 nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and 
3 nonattainment areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. 
The conformity SIP has been developed to include all necessary partners 
in each of the areas listed.

[[Page 63699]]

Below provides the details for all of these areas.
1. Clarksville-Hopkinsville Conformity SIP
    Effective June 15, 2004, EPA designated Christian County, Kentucky 
and Montgomery County, Tennessee in the bi-state Clarksville-
Hopkinsville area, as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 
(69 FR 23858). On January 25, 2006, EPA redesignated the Kentucky 
portion of the Clarksville-Hopkinsville nonattainment area to 
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (71 FR 4047). In a separate 
action, the Tennessee portion of this area was also redesignated from 
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    The Clarksville Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization 
(CUAMPO) is the MPO for most of the bi-state Clarksville-Hopkinsville 
1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area. CUAMPO's planning boundary includes 
most of Christian County, Kentucky and Montgomery County, Tennessee in 
the Clarksville-Hopkinsville area. The areas outside the MPO's planning 
boundary in Christian County, Kentucky and Montgomery County, Tennessee 
are considered ``donut'' \a\ areas for the purposes of implementing 
transportation conformity in this area. Per the Transportation 
Conformity Rule, the MPO's conformity determination is not complete 
without a regional analysis that considers the projects in the MPO area 
as well as the donut areas that are within the nonattainment/
maintenance area. For the purposes of implementing the 1997 8-hour 
ozone transportation conformity requirements, CUAMPO serves as the lead 
agency for the preparation, consultation, and distribution of the 
conformity determinations. The ``donut'' areas are included in CUAMPO's 
travel demand model and CUAMPO coordinated the inputs for the model 
with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and the Tennessee DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \a\ Donut areas are geographic areas outside a metropolitan 
planning area boundary, but inside the boundary of a nonattainment 
or maintenance area that contains any part of a metropolitan area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Christian County, Kentucky, which is a part of the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville bi-state maintenance area, does not have a previous 
conformity SIP. The state of Tennessee will establish conformity 
procedures for Montgomery County, Tennessee as part of the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville maintenance area in their individual conformity SIP. The 
SIP revision includes the conformity procedures for the Christian 
County, Kentucky portion of the Clarksville-Hopkinsville bi-state 
maintenance area.
2. Huntington-Ashland
    Effective June 15, 2004, EPA designated Boyd County in Kentucky; 
and Cabell and Wayne counties in West Virginia as nonattainment for the 
1997 8-hour ozone standard. This area is known as the bi-state 
Huntington-Ashland 1997 8-hour ozone area. The bi-state Huntington-
Ashland 1997 8-hour ozone area was designated nonattainment under 
Subpart 1 of the Act and as such is referred to as a ``basic'' 8-hour 
ozone nonattainment area. On August 3, 2007, EPA published the 
redesignation of the Kentucky portion of the Huntington-Ashland (Boyd 
County) 8-hr ozone nonattainment area to attainment in the Federal 
Register (72 FR 43172). In a separate action, the West Virginia portion 
of this area was also redesignated from nonattainment to attainment for 
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    Effective April 5, 2005, EPA designated the whole counties of Boyd 
County in Kentucky, Cabell and Wayne County in West Virginia, and 
Lawrence and Scioto County in Ohio, as nonattainment for the 1997 
PM2.5 annual standard. Partial counties of Lawrence County 
in Kentucky; Mason County in West Virginia; and Adams and Gallia 
Counties in Ohio were also designated nonattainment for the 1997 
PM2.5 annual standard as part of the Huntington-Ashland 
area. The current designation status of the Huntington-Ashland area is 
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard.
    There are two MPOs that are responsible for transportation planning 
for areas within the Huntington-Ashland 8-hour ozone maintenance and 
PM2.5 nonattainment area. The Five County Area Development 
District (FIVCO) is the MPO responsible for transportation planning in 
Boyd County, Kentucky. KYOVA is the other MPO. KYOVA's planning 
boundary includes Lawrence County, Ohio; and Cabell and Wayne Counties 
in West Virginia. The partial counties of Lawrence County, Kentucky; 
Adams and Gallia Counties in Ohio; and Mason County, West Virginia are 
not within either MPO's planning boundary, and are considered ``donut'' 
areas for the purposes of implementing transportation conformity in 
this area. Per the Transportation Conformity Rule, the MPO's conformity 
determination is not complete without a regional analysis that 
considers the projects in the MPO area(s) as well as the donut areas 
that are within the nonattainment/maintenance area. For the purposes of 
implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 PM2.5 annual 
transportation conformity requirements, FIVCO serves as the lead agency 
for the preparation, consultation, and distribution of the conformity 
determinations for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard for Boyd County. 
FIVCO and KYOVA serve as co-leads for the preparation, consultation, 
and distribution of the conformity determinations for the 1997 
PM2.5 annual standard for the entire Huntington Ashland 
nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard.
    Boyd County and the partial county of Lawrence, Kentucky which are 
a part of the Huntington-Ashland area do not have a previous conformity 
SIP. The states of Ohio and West Virginia will establish conformity 
procedures for their respective state in their individual conformity 
SIPs for Lawrence County, Ohio; and Cabell and Wayne Counties in West 
Virginia; and the partial counties of Adams and Gallia in Ohio; and 
Mason County, West Virginia. The SIP revision at issue now includes the 
conformity procedures for both the partial county of Lawrence and Boyd 
County, Kentucky in its entirety, for the Huntington-Ashland area.
3. Louisville Conformity SIP
    Effective June 15, 2004, EPA designated Clark and Floyd Counties in 
Indiana; and Bullitt, Jefferson, and Oldham Counties in Kentucky, in 
the bi-state Louisville area, as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone standard. On July 5, 2007, EPA redesignated the Kentucky portion 
of the Louisville nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS (72 FR 36601). In a separate action, the Indiana portion of 
this area was also redesignated from nonattainment to attainment for 
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    Effective April 5, 2005, EPA designated Madison Township of 
Jefferson County; and Clark and Floyd Counties in Indiana; and Bullitt 
and Jefferson Counties in Kentucky, in the bi-state Louisville area, as 
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard. The 
current designation status of the Louisville bi-state area is 
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard.
    The Kentuckiana Regional Planning & Development Agency (KIPDA) is 
the MPO for the entire bi-state Louisville 1997 8-hour ozone area, and 
for most of the bi-state Louisville 1997 PM2.5 annual area. 
KIPDA's planning boundary includes Clark and Floyd Counties in Indiana; 
and Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham Counties in Kentucky. Madison

[[Page 63700]]

Township of Jefferson County, Indiana is not within the KIPDA planning 
boundary, and thus is considered a ``donut'' area for the purposes of 
implementing transportation conformity in this area. Per the 
Transportation Conformity Rule, the MPO's conformity determination is 
not complete without a regional analysis that considers the projects in 
the MPO area as well as the donut areas that are within the 
nonattainment/maintenance area. For the purposes of implementing the 
1997 8-hour ozone and the PM2.5 annual transportation 
conformity requirements, KIPDA serves as the lead agency for the 
preparation, consultation, and distribution of the conformity 
determinations. KIPDA coordinated with the Indiana DOT for travel-
related information for Madison Township.
    Bullitt, Jefferson, and Oldham Counties in Kentucky which are a 
part of the Louisville bi-state area do not have a previous conformity 
SIP. The State of Indiana will establish conformity procedures for the 
counties that make up the Indiana portion of the bi-state Louisville 
area in their individual conformity SIP. The SIP revision at issue now 
includes the conformity procedures for the Bullitt, Jefferson, and 
Oldham Counties in Kentucky which are a part of the Louisville bi-state 
area.
4. Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati Conformity SIP
    Effective June 15, 2004, EPA designated the Ohio counties of 
Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Hamilton and Warren; the Kentucky counties 
of Boone, Campbell and Kenton; and a portion of Dearborn County in 
Indiana in the tri-state Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati area, as 
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The tri-state 
Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati 1997 8-hour ozone area was designated 
nonattainment under Subpart 1 of the CAA and as such is referred to as 
a ``basic'' 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
    Effective April 5, 2005, EPA designated the Ohio counties of 
Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Hamilton and Warren; the Kentucky counties 
of Boone, Campbell and Kenton; and a portion of Dearborn County in 
Indiana in the tri-state Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati area, as 
nonattainment for the PM2.5 standard. The current 
designation status of both the tri-state Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati 
1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 areas is nonattainment.
    The Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI) 
is the MPO for most of the Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati 1997 8-hour 
ozone and PM2.5 areas. OKI's planning boundary includes the 
Ohio counties of Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren; the Kentucky 
counties of Boone, Campbell and Kenton; and Dearborn County, Indiana. 
Clinton County, Ohio is not within the OKI's planning boundary, and 
thus is considered a ``donut'' area for the purposes of implementing 
transportation conformity in this area. Per the Transportation 
Conformity Rule, the MPO's conformity determination is not complete 
without a regional analysis that considers the projects in the MPO area 
as well as the donut areas that are within the nonattainment/
maintenance area. For the purposes of implementing the 1997 8-hour 
ozone and 1997 PM2.5 annual transportation conformity 
requirements, OKI served as the lead agency for the preparation, 
consultation, and distribution of the conformity determinations. OKI 
coordinated with the Ohio DOT for travel-related information for 
Clinton County.
    Boone, Campbell and Kenton Counties in Kentucky which are a part of 
the Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati tri-state area do not have a previous 
conformity SIP. The States of Indiana and Ohio will establish 
conformity procedures for the counties that make up the Indiana and 
Ohio portions of the Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati area in their 
individual conformity SIPs. The SIP revision at issue now includes the 
conformity procedures for Boone, Campbell and Kenton Counties in 
Kentucky which are a part of the Northern Kentucky-Cincinnati tri-state 
area.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Kentucky SIP revision consisting of 
the transportation conformity section. This addition consists of 
transportation conformity criteria and procedures related to 
interagency consultation and enforceability of certain transportation-
related control measures and mitigation measures. The intended effect 
is to establish the transportation conformity criteria and procedures 
in the Kentucky SIP.
    On December 31, 2008, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the 
Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet's KY DAQ, submitted the State's 
transportation conformity and consultation interagency rule to EPA as 
an addition to the SIP. The Kentucky transportation conformity rule 
establishes procedures for interagency consultation for existing and 
future nonattainment and maintenance areas for certain transportation-
related pollutants.
    The Commonwealth of Kentucky developed its consultation rule based 
on the elements contained in 40 CFR 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 
93.125(c). As a first step, the Commonwealth worked with the existing 
transportation planning organization's interagency committee that 
included representatives from the State air quality agency, State DOT, 
Federal Highway Administration--Kentucky Division, Federal Transit 
Administration, the MPOs of the maintenance and nonattainment areas of 
Kentucky, and EPA. The interagency committee met regularly and drafted 
the consultation rules considering elements in 40 CFR 93.105, 
93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c), and integrated the local procedures 
and processes into the rule. The consultation process developed in this 
rule is for the Commonwealth of Kentucky. On July 29, 2008, KY DAQ held 
a public hearing for the transportation conformity rulemaking.
    EPA has evaluated this SIP and has determined that the Commonwealth 
has met the requirements of Federal transportation conformity rule as 
described in 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart T and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A. 
KY DAQ has satisfied the public participation and comprehensive 
interagency consultation requirement during development and adoption of 
the consultation procedures at the local level. Therefore, EPA is 
proposing to approve the rule as an addition to the Kentucky SIP. EPA's 
rule requires the states to develop their own processes and procedures 
for interagency consultation among the Federal, state, and local 
agencies, and resolution of conflicts meeting the criteria in 40 CFR 
93.105. The SIP revision must include processes and procedures to be 
followed by the MPO, state DOT, and U.S. DOT in consulting with the 
state and local air quality agencies and EPA before making 
transportation conformity determinations. The transportation conformity 
SIP addition must also include processes and procedures for the state 
and local air quality agencies and EPA to coordinate the development of 
applicable SIPs with MPOs, state DOTs, and U.S. DOT. Kentucky's 
revision includes these required elements.
    EPA has reviewed the submittal to assure consistency with the CAA 
as amended by SAFETEA-LU and EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 93 and 40 CFR 
51.390) governing state procedures for transportation conformity and 
interagency consultation and has concluded that the submittal is

[[Page 63701]]

approvable. Details of our review are set forth in a technical support 
document (TSD), which has been included in the docket for this action. 
Specifically, in the TSD, we identify how the submitted procedures 
satisfy our requirements under 40 CFR 93.105 for interagency 
consultation with respect to the development of transportation plans 
and programs, SIPs, and conformity determinations, the resolution of 
conflicts, and the provision of adequate public consultation, and our 
requirements under 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 93.125(c) for 
enforceability of control measures and mitigation measures.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: November 20, 2009.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E9-28970 Filed 12-3-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P