Je veux savoir à propos de…

41420

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 145 / Monday, August 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

NAAQS in the nonattainment or maintenance area.26
Under the conformity rule, areas submitting an LMP for the second 10year maintenance plan may demonstrate conformity without a regional emissions analysis as outlined in 40 CFR
93.109e. When the EPA approves an LMP, the EPA is concluding that a budget may be treated as essentially not constraining for the length of the maintenance period. Areas that qualify for an LMP may demonstrate conformity without a regional emissions analysis because it is unreasonable to expect that such an area will experience so much growth in the 10-year period of the LMP
that a violation of the CO NAAQS
would result.27 All actions that would require transportation conformity determinations for the Las Vegas Valley area under the transportation conformity rule provisions would be considered to have already satisfied the regional emissions analysis and budget test requirements in 40 CFR 93.118 as a result of our final approval of the 2019
LMP.
However, because LMP areas are still maintenance areas, approval of the 2019
LMP would not relieve transportation agencies of certain determinations still required for transportation plans, programs, and projects. Specifically, RTPs, TIPs and transportation projects must still demonstrate that they are fiscally constrained,28 meet the criteria for consultation,29 and provide for timely implementation of transportation control measures from the applicable implementation plan.30 Conformity determinations for RTPs and TIPs must also be determined no less frequently than every four years, and conformity of plan and TIP amendments and transportation projects demonstrated in accordance with the timing requirements specified in 40 CFR
93.104. For projects to be approved they must be listed in a currently conforming RTP and TIP.31 In addition, projects in LMP areas are required to meet the applicable criteria for CO hot spot analyses to satisfy project level conformity determinations,32 which must also incorporate the latest 26 Further information concerning the EPAs interpretations regarding MVEBs can be found in the preamble to the EPAs November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule. See 58 FR 62193
62196, November 24, 1993.
27 Paisie Memo, 34.
28 40 CFR 93.108.
29 40 CFR 93.105 and 40 CFR 93.112.
30 40 CFR 93.113.
31 40 CFR 93.114 and 93.115.
32 40 CFR 93.116 and 40 CFR 93.123.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:46 Jul 30, 2021

Jkt 253001

planning assumptions and models available.33
If the area should monitor CO
concentrations at or above the limited maintenance eligibility criteria, or 7.65
ppm, then that maintenance area would no longer qualify for a LMP and would revert to a full maintenance plan. In this event, the LMP would remain applicable for conformity purposes only until the full maintenance plan is submitted and the EPA has either found its motor vehicle emissions budget adequate for conformity purposes or approves the full maintenance plan SIP
revision. At that time regional emissions analyses would resume as a transportation conformity criterion.
The EPA posted Las Vegas Valleys 2019 LMP for CO on its adequacy review website on June 23, 2021.34 The EPA will accept comments from the public for up to 30 days after the LMP
has been posted on the website. The EPA will consider the comments and then may elect to proceed with finding the 2019 LMP adequate for transportation conformity purposes either as part of the SIPs final approval or in a separate notice of adequacy. The EPAs adequacy review process is described in 40 CFR part 93.118f.
If finalized, our approval of the 2019
LMP would effectively affirm our adequacy finding such that no regional emissions analysis for future transportation CO conformity determinations are required for the 2019
LMP period and beyond. The other transportation conformity requirements listed above would continue to apply.
In addition to transportation conformity, approval of the 2019 LMP
would have implications for general conformity.35 Federal actions subject to general conformity would be presumed to conform under a limited maintenance plan as actions in this area will automatically satisfy the budget test of 40 CFR 93.158a5iA, as described in in an EPA memorandum entitled Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas on limited maintenance plans for CO nonattainment areas.36
V. Proposed Action and Public Comment Under section 110k3 of the CAA, the EPA is proposing to approve the 2019 LMP as a revision to the Nevada SIP because we find that it satisfies the 33 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111, respectively. See 40 CFR 93.109b, Table 1.
34 https www.epa.gov/state-and-localtransportation/adequacy-review-stateimplementation-plan-sip-submissions-conformity.
35 40 CFR part 93 Subpart B.
36 Paisie Memo, 45.

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

requirements of section 175A of the CAA.
The 2019 LMP adequately demonstrates maintenance of the CONAAQS well below the standard through documentation of monitoring data showing the historical CO design values of the area. It also satisfies the other core provisions of an LMP: It has an accurate and comprehensive emissions inventory representing attainment, a contingency plan, and a commitment to continue operation of an acceptable ambient monitoring network to verify continued attainment over the second 10-year period. We find the 2019
LMP to be sufficient to provide for maintenance of the CO NAAQS in the Las Vegas Valley area over the second 10-year maintenance period through 2030 and thereby satisfy the requirements for such a plan under CAA
section 175Ab.
The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this notice. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal for the next 30 days and will consider these comments before taking final action.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, 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. 7410k;
40 CFR 52.02a. Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPAs role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve 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 Orders 12866 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993 and 13563 76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011;
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. 1044;
Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive
E:FRFM02AUP1.SGM

02AUP1