[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 92 (Thursday, May 11, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30358-30362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11813]



[[Page 30358]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AL-53-200019(a); FRL-6605-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans--Alabama: 
Approval of Revisions to the Alabama State Implementation Plan: 
Transportation Conformity Interagency Memorandum of Agreement

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to the Alabama State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) that contains the transportation conformity 
rule pursuant to sections 110(k) and 176 of the Clean Air Act as 
amended in 1990 (Act). The transportation conformity rule assures that 
projected emissions from transportation plans and projects in air 
quality nonattainment or maintenance areas stay within the motor 
vehicle emissions ceiling contained in the SIP. The transportation 
conformity SIP revision enables the State to implement and enforce the 
Federal transportation conformity requirements at the State level per 
regulations on Conformity to State or Federal Implementation Plans of 
Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects Developed, Funded or 
Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. of the Federal Transit Laws. This EPA 
approval action streamlines the conformity process and allows direct 
consultation among agencies at the local level. This final approval 
action is limited to certain regulations on Transportation Conformity. 
Rationale for approving this SIP revision is provided in the 
Supplementary Information Section of this action.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on July 10, 2000, without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 12, 2000. 
If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 
the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that 
this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to Kelly Sheckler at the 
EPA, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, 
Georgia 30303.
    Copies of the state submittal are available at the following 
addresses for inspection during normal business hours:

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Building, N.W., Washington, 
DC 20460.
Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, Region 4 Air 
Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104. 
Attn: Kelly Sheckler, (404) 562-9042.
Alabama Department of Environmental Management, Post Office Box 301463, 
1400 Coliseum Boulevard, Montgomery, Alabama 36130-1463.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, at 404/562-9042, E-
mail: [email protected].


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Outlined below are the contents of this 
document:

I. Background
    A. What is a SIP?
    B. What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
    C. What is transportation conformity?
    D. Why must the State submit a transportation conformity SIP?
    E. How does transportation conformity work?
II. Approval of the State Transportation Conformity Rule
    A. What did the State submit?
    B. What is EPA approving today and why?
    C. How did the State satisfy the interagency consultation 
process (40 CFR 93.105)?
    D. How does the State's submittal address the United States 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruling 
overturning the grace period for new nonattainment areas (40 CFR 
93.102(d)) in the Sierra Club v. Environmental Protection Agency 
lawsuit?
    E. What other parts of the rule are excluded?
III. Opportunity for Public Comments
IV. Administrative Requirements

I. Background

A. What Is a SIP?

    The states, under section 110 of the Act, must develop air 
pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state air 
quality meets the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 
established by EPA. The Act, under section 109, established these NAAQS 
which currently address six criteria pollutants. These pollutants are: 
carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate matter, and 
sulfur dioxide.
    Each state must send these regulations and control strategies to 
EPA for approval and incorporation into the Federally enforceable SIP, 
which protects air quality and contains emission control plans for 
NAAQS nonattainment areas. These SIPs can be extensive, containing 
state regulations or other enforceable documents and supporting 
information such as emission inventories, monitoring networks, and 
modeling demonstrations.

B. What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?

    The states must formally adopt the regulations and control 
strategies consistent with state and Federal laws for incorporating the 
state regulations into the Federally enforceable SIP. This process 
generally includes a public notice, public comment period, public 
hearing, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking body.
    Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the 
state will send these provisions to EPA for inclusion in the Federally 
enforceable SIP. EPA must then determine the appropriate Federal 
action, provide public notice, and request additional public comment on 
the action. The possible Federal actions include: approval, 
disapproval, conditional approval and limited approval/disapproval. If 
adverse comments are received, EPA must consider and address the 
comments before taking final action.
    EPA incorporates state regulations and supporting information (sent 
under section 110 of the Act) into the Federally approved SIP through 
the approval action. EPA maintains records of all such SIP actions in 
the CFR at Title 40, Part 52, entitled ``Approval and Promulgation of 
Implementation Plans.'' The EPA does not reproduce the text of the 
Federally approved state regulations in the CFR. They are 
``incorporated by reference,'' which means that the specific state 
regulation is cited in the CFR and is considered a part of the CFR the 
same as if the text were fully printed in the CFR.

C. What Is Transportation Conformity?

    Conformity first appeared as a requirement in the Act's 1977 
amendments (Pub. L. 95-95). Although the Act did not define conformity, 
it stated that no Federal department could engage in, support in any 
way or provide financial assistance for, license or permit, or approve 
any activity which did not conform to a SIP which has been approved or 
promulgated.
    The 1990 Amendments to the Act expanded the scope and content of 
the conformity concept by defining conformity to a SIP. Section 176(c) 
of the Act defines conformity as conformity to the SIP's purpose of 
eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the 
NAAQS and achieving expeditious attainment of

[[Page 30359]]

such standards. Also, the Act states that no Federal activity will: (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. The requirements of section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act apply to 
all departments, agencies and instrumentalities of the Federal 
government. Transportation conformity refers only to the conformity of 
transportation plans, programs and projects that are funded or approved 
under title 23 U.S.C. of the Federal Transit Act.

D. Why Must the State Submit a Transportation Conformity SIP?

    A transportation conformity SIP is a plan which contains criteria 
and procedures for the Department of Transportation (DOT), Metropolitan 
Planning Organizations (MPOs), and other state or local agencies to 
assess the conformity of transportation plans, programs and projects to 
ensure that they do not cause or contribute to new violations of a 
NAAQS in the area substantially affected by the project, increase the 
frequency or severity of existing violations of a standard in such area 
or delay timely attainment. 40 CFR Part 51.390, subpart T requires 
states to submit a SIP that establishes criteria for conformity to EPA. 
40 CFR Part 93, subpart A, provides the criteria the SIP must meet to 
satisfy 40 CFR Part 51.390.
    EPA was required to issue criteria and procedures for determining 
conformity of transportation plans, programs, and projects to a SIP by 
section 176(c) of the Act. The Act also required the procedure to 
include a requirement that each state submit a revision to its SIP 
including conformity criteria and procedures. EPA published the first 
transportation conformity rule in the November 24, 1993, Federal 
Register (FR), and it was codified at 40 CFR Part 51, subpart T and 40 
CFR Part 93, subpart A. EPA required the states to adopt and submit a 
transportation conformity SIP revision to the appropriate EPA Regional 
Office by November 25, 1994. The State of Alabama submitted a 
transportation conformity SIP to the EPA Region 4 on November 15, 1994. 
EPA did not take action on this SIP because the Agency was in the 
process of revising the transportation conformity requirements. EPA 
revised the transportation conformity rule on August 7, 1995 (60 FR 
40098), November 14, 1995 (60 FR 57179), and August 15, 1997 (62 FR 
43780), and codified the revisions under 40 CFR Part 51, subpart T and 
40 CFR Part 93, subpart A--Conformity to State or Federal 
Implementation Plans of Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects 
Developed, Funded or Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. of the Federal 
Transit Laws (62 FR 43780). EPA's action of August 15, 1997, required 
the states to change their rules and submit a SIP revision to EPA by 
August 15, 1998. States may choose to develop in place of regulations, 
a memorandum of agreement (MOA) which establishes the roles and 
procedures for transportation conformity. The MOA includes the detailed 
consultation procedures developed for that particular area. The MOA's 
are enforceable through the signature of all the transportation and air 
quality agencies, including the Federal Highway Administration, Federal 
Transit Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency.

E. How Does Transportation Conformity Work?

    The Federal or state transportation conformity rule applies to all 
NAAQS nonattainment and maintenance areas in the state. The 
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO), the State Department of 
Transportation (DOT) (in absence of a MPO), and U.S. Department of 
Transportation (USDOT) make conformity determinations. These agencies 
make conformity determinations on programs and plans such as 
transportation improvement programs (TIP), transportation plans, and 
projects. The MPOs calculate the projected emissions that will result 
from implementation of the transportation plans and programs and 
compare those calculated emissions to the motor vehicle emissions 
ceiling established in the SIP. The calculated emissions must be 
smaller than the Federally approved motor vehicle emissions ceiling in 
order for USDOT to make a positive conformity determination with 
respect to the SIP.

II. Approval of the State Transportation Conformity Rule

A. What Did the State Submit?

    The State of Alabama chose to address the transportation conformity 
SIP requirement through the development of an MOA. On April 3, 2000, 
the State of Alabama, through the Department of Environmental 
Management (ADEM), submitted the State's transportation conformity and 
consultation interagency MOA to EPA as a revision to the SIP. The 
Alabama Administrative Code Chapter 335-3-17 Conformity of Federal 
Actions to State Implementation Plans and Code of Alabama 1975, 
sections 22-28-14, 22-22A-5, 22-22A-6, 22-22A-8, and 41-22-9 effective 
April 27, 1995 and amended November 21, 1996 and March 27, 1998 adopted 
by the Alabama General Assembly in 1992, contains the necessary 
authority for the revision to the SIP. ADEM held a public hearing on 
December 21, 1999 and no comments from the general public were 
received. The MOA was developed with appropriate interagency 
consultation.

B. What Is EPA Approving Today and Why?

    EPA is approving the Alabama transportation conformity MOA that 
establishes procedures for interagency consultation and adoption of 
Chapter 335-3-17 as amended by the state on March 27, 1998, that 
incorporates by reference the Environmental Protection Agency 
regulations in 40 CFR 93 Subpart A (July 1, 1997), and 62 FR 43780 [08/
15/97; amendments] Transportation Conformity and Subpart B General 
Conformity, that the Director of the ADEM submitted to the Region 4 
office of the EPA on April 3, 2000, except for the following sections 
for incorporation by reference: 40 CFR Parts 93.102(c), 93.104(d), 
93.109(c)-(f), 93.118(e), 93.120(a)(2), 93.121(a)(1), and 93.124(b). 
The rationale for exclusion of these sections is discussed in Section 
II.E of this action. The ADEM Transportation Conformity MOA only 
contains the detailed interagency consultation procedure as required by 
93.105.
    EPA has evaluated this SIP revision and has determined that the 
State 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. The ADEM has satisfied the public participation and 
comprehensive interagency consultation requirement during development 
and adoption of the MOA at the local level. Therefore, EPA is approving 
the MOA as a revision to the Alabama SIP and Chapter 335-3-17-.01 and 
.02 Conformity of Federal Actions to State Implementation Plans.

C. How Did the State Satisfy the Interagency Consultation Process (40 
CFR 93.105)?

    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 USDOT in

[[Page 30360]]

consulting with the state and local air quality agencies and EPA before 
making conformity determinations. The transportation conformity SIP 
revision 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 USDOT.
    The State of Alabama developed its consultation rule based on the 
elements contained in 40 CFR 93.105, and included it in the MOA, 
Exhibit 1. As a first step, the State worked with the existing 
transportation planning organization's interagency committee that 
included representatives from the State air quality agency, State 
Department of Transportation, the Birmingham Regional Planning 
Commission (BRPC), Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), 
Federal Highway Administration--Alabama Division, Federal Transit 
Administration, Jefferson County Department of Health (JCDH), Jefferson 
County Transit Authority (B-JCTA), and EPA. The interagency committee 
met regularly and drafted the consultation rules considering elements 
in 40 CFR Part 93.105 and 23 CFR Part 450, and integrated the local 
procedures and processes into the consultation MOA. The consultation 
process developed in this MOA is unique to the State of Alabama. The 
MOA is enforceable against the parties by their consent in the MOA to 
allow the Attorney General for the State of Alabama to sue any or all 
of the agencies for specific performance or other relief on behalf of 
the citizens of Alabama in paren. patrial. We have determined that the 
State adequately included all elements of 40 CFR Part 93.105 and that 
the MOA meets the EPA SIP requirements.

D. How the State's Submittal Addresses the United States Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Ruling Overturning the 
Grace Period for New Nonattainment Areas (40 CFR 93.102(d)) in Sierra 
Club v. Environmental Protection Agency Lawsuit?

    The Sierra Club challenged this section of the second set of 
amendments to the transportation conformity rule arguing that allowing 
a 120 day grace period was unlawful under the Act. On November 4, 1997, 
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 
held in Sierra Club v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 96-1007, 
determined that EPA's grace period violates the plain terms of the Act 
and, therefore, is unlawful. Based on this court action, the State has 
excluded this section from its rule. EPA agrees with the State's action 
as it is consistent with the United States Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit ruling. Further, the exclusion of 40 CFR 
93.102(d) will not prevent EPA from approving the State transportation 
conformity SIP.

E. What Other Parts of the Rule Are Excluded?

    EPA promulgated the third set amendments to the transportation 
conformity rule on August 15, 1997. On March 2, 1999, the United States 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its 
opinion in Environmental Defense Fund v. Environmental Protection 
Agency, No. 97-1637. The Court granted the environmental group's 
petition for review and ruled that sections 40 CFR 93.102(c)(1), 
93.121(a)(1), and 93.124(b) are unlawful and remanded 40 CFR 93.118(e) 
and 93.120(a)(2) to EPA for revision to harmonize these provisions with 
the requirements of the Act for an affirmative determination that 
Federal actions will not cause or increase violations or delay 
attainment. The sections of the rule that were impacted by this 
decision were:
    (a) 40 CFR 93.102(c)(1) which allowed certain projects for which 
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process has been completed 
by the DOT to proceed toward implementation without further conformity 
determinations during a conformity ``lapse''. A lapse is a situation in 
which the conformity determination for the transportation plan or TIP 
has expired, and there is no currently conforming transportation plan 
and TIP. As such, there are restrictions on proceeding with federally 
funded and regionally significant projects.
    (b) 40 CFR 93.118(e) which allowed use of motor vehicle emissions 
budgets (budgets) in the submitted SIPs after 45 days if EPA had not 
declared them inadequate;
    (c) 40 CFR 93.120(a)(2) which allowed use of the budgets in a 
disapproved SIP for 120 days after disapproval;
    (d) 40 CFR 93.121(a)(1) which allowed the nonfederally funded, 
regionally significant projects to proceed if included in the first 
three years of the most recent conforming transportation plan and 
transportation improvement program, even if conformity status is 
currently lapsed; and
    (e) 40 CFR 93.124(b) which allowed areas to use a submitted SIP 
that allocated portions of a safety margin to transportation activities 
for conformity purposes before EPA approval.
    States were required to submit transportation conformity SIPs to 
satisfy the requirements for the third set of amendments to the 
transportation conformity rule by August 15, 1998. Many of these SIP 
submittals, developed prior to the March 2, 1999 Court ruling, included 
provisions from the transportation conformity rule verbatim. As such, 
the State of Alabama's SIP revision included sections which the Court 
ruled unlawful or remanded for consistency with the Act. Therefore, in 
accordance with the Court's ruling, EPA can not approve the request to 
incorporate by reference those portions of the Transportation 
conformity rule affected by the March 2, 1999 Court ruling. All other 
portions of the rule are incorporated by reference are approved by 
this.
    The State of Alabama submitted additional information which has 
complied with the EPA requirements for a transportation conformity SIP 
and has adopted the Federal rules in an MOA which were in effect at the 
time that the transportation conformity SIP was due to the EPA. If the 
Court had issued its ruling before adoption and SIP submittal by the 
ADEM, EPA believes the ADEM would have removed these sections from its 
rule which incorporates 40 CFR Part 93, subparts A and B. The ADEM has 
expended its resources and time to prepare this SIP and meet the 
statutory deadline, and EPA acknowledges the agency's good faith effort 
in submitting the transportation conformity SIP in a timely manner.
    The ADEM will be required to submit a SIP revision in the future 
when EPA revises its rule to comply with the Court decision. Because 
the Court decision has invalidated the aforementioned affected 
provisions, EPA believes that it is reasonable to exclude the 
corresponding sections of the State rules from this SIP approval 
action. As a result, EPA is not taking any SIP action on the following 
Sections of the Alabama Chapter 335-3-17 to incorporate by reference 40 
CFR 93, Subpart A and B: sections 93.102(c), 93.104(d), 93.109(c)-(f), 
93.118(e), 93.120(a)(2), 93.121(a)(1), and 93.124(b). The conformity 
determinations affected by these sections should comply with the 
relevant requirements of the statutory provisions of the Act underlying 
the Court's decision on these issues. EPA will be issuing guidance on 
how to implement these provisions in the interim prior to EPA's 
amendment of the Federal transportation conformity rule. Once this 
Federal rule has been revised, conformity determinations in Alabama 
should comply with the

[[Page 30361]]

requirements of the revised Federal rule until corresponding provisions 
of the Alabama conformity SIP have been approved by EPA.

III. Opportunity for Public Comments

    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no 
adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve this SIP revision if adverse 
comments are filed. This rule will be effective on July 10, 2000, 
without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 12, 
2000. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule 
will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a 
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

IV. Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action 
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). For the same reason, 
this rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 
13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will not have substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it 
merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is 
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 
because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings' issued under the executive order. 
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as 
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this 
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House 
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States 
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule 
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
section 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 10, 2000. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 28, 2000.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority for citation for part 52 continues to read as 
follows:

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

Subpart--Alabama

    2. Section 52.50 is amended by adding a new entry at the end of the 
table in paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.50  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) EPA approved Alabama regulatory provisions.

                                                      EPA Approved Alabama Regulations for Alabama
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                              Federal Register
         State citation             Title subject       Adoption date     EPA approval date        notice
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                   *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
Chapter No. 335-3-17, Section    Transportation      March 27, 1998....  May 11, 2000......  65 FR 30361
 335-3-1-.01.                     Conformity.

[[Page 30362]]

 
Chapter No. 335-3-17, Section    General Conformity  March 27, 1998....  May 11, 2000......  65 FR 30362
 335-3-1-.02.
 
                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                    *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    3. Section 52.50 is amended by adding a new entry at the end of the 
table in paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.50  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) EPA-approved Alabama non-regulatory provisions.

                                                      EPA Approved Alabama Non-Regulatory Provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Provision                State effective date      EPA approval date               Federal Register notice                 Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                   *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
Alabama Interagency Transportation   January 20, 2000......  May 11, 2000..........  65 FR 30362.................................
 Conformity Memorandum of Agreement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[FR Doc. 00-11813 Filed 5-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P