Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 13021 

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 May 15, 2006. 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: February 22, 2006. 

Alan J. Steinberg, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

■ Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart FF—New Jersey 

■ 2. Section 52.1570 is amended by 

adding new paragraph (c)(80) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1570 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(80) Revision to the New Jersey State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone 

concerning the control of nitrogen 

oxides from the Schering Corporation’s 

CoGEN II cogeneration facility located 

in Union County submitted by the New 

Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection (NJDEP), dated March 31, 

2005. 

(i) Incorporation by reference: 

(A) Conditions of Approval, 

Alternative Maximum Emission Rate 

For NOX, Schering Corporation, Union, 

Union County, New Jersey facility 

identification number 40084 approved 

March 9, 2005. 

[FR Doc. 06–2428 Filed 3–13–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0041; FRL–8045–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Designation of 

Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; State of Arizona; Particulate 

Matter of 10 Microns or Less; Finding 

of Attainment for Yuma Nonattainment 

Area; Determination Regarding 

Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action under the Clean Air Act to 

determine that the Yuma nonattainment 

area in Arizona has attained the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10). 

This determination is based upon 

monitored air quality data for the PM10

NAAQS during the years 1998–2000. 

EPA also finds that the Yuma area is 

currently in attainment of the PM10

NAAQS, and based on this finding, EPA 

is determining that certain Clean Air 

Act requirements are not applicable for 

so long as the Yuma area continues to 

attain the PM10 NAAQS. 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 15, 

2006, without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

April 13, 2006. If adverse comment is 

received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA-R09- 

OAR–2006–0041, by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

(2) E-mail: rosen.rebecca@epa.gov. 

(3) Mail or deliver: Rebecca Rosen 

(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through the 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

www.regulations.gov is an anonymous 

access system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the public comment. 

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. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rebecca Rosen, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4152, rosen.rebecca@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. What National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) Are Considered in 

Today’s Finding? 

B. What Is the Designation and Classification 

of This PM10 Nonattainment Area? 

C. How Do We Make Attainment 

Determinations? 

II. What Is the Basis for EPA’s Determination 

That the Yuma Nonattainment Area Has 

Attained the PM10 NAAQS? 

III. What Are the Applicable Planning 

Requirements for the Yuma 

Nonattainment Area As a Result of EPA’s 

Attainment Determination? 

IV. EPA’s Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. What National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) Are Considered in 

Today’s Finding? 

Particulate matter with an 

aerodynamic diameter of less than or 

equal to 10 micrometers (PM10) is the 

subject of this action. The NAAQS are 

limits for certain ambient air pollutants 

set by EPA to protect public health and 

welfare. PM10 is among the ambient air 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
13022 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

1Arizona submitted a moderate area plan for the 

Yuma area on November 14, 1991; EPA found this 

plan to be incomplete on May 14, 1992. Arizona 

submitted a revised plan for Yuma on July 12, 1994. 

EPA found the revised plan to be complete but has 

not taken action on it. 

2However, as explained in more detail in the 

following section of this notice, EPA guidelines 

allow for data substitution only under 

circumstances where data capture is at least 50 

percent but less than 75 percent. 

3Arizona Department of Economic Security, 

2006. 

pollutants for which EPA has 

established a health-based standard. 

PM10 causes adverse health effects by 

penetrating deep into the lungs, 

aggravating the cardiopulmonary 

system. Children, the elderly, and 

people with asthma and heart 

conditions are the most vulnerable. 

On July 1, 1987 (52 FR 24634), EPA 

revised the NAAQS for particulate 

matter with an indicator that includes 

only those particles with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 10 micrometers. See 40 

CFR 50.6. The 24-hour primary PM10

standard is 150 micrograms per cubic 

meter μg/m3 with no more than one 

expected exceedance per year. The 

annual primary PM10 standard is 50 μg/ 

m3 as an annual arithmetic mean. The 

secondary PM10 standards, promulgated 

to protect against adverse welfare 

effects, are identical to the primary 

standards. 

B. What Is the Designation and 

Classification of This PM10

Nonattainment Area? 

Upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air 

Act Amendments (CAA or ‘‘Act’’), PM10

areas meeting the requirements of either 

(i) or (ii) of section 107(d)(4)(B) of the 

Act were designated nonattainment for 

PM10 by operation of law and classified 

‘‘moderate.’’ These areas included all 

former Group I PM10 planning areas 

identified in 52 FR 29383 (August 7, 

1987) and further clarified in 55 FR 

45799 (October 31, 1990), and any other 

areas violating the NAAQS for PM10

prior to January 1, 1989 (many of these 

areas were identified by footnote 4 in 

the October 31, 1990 Federal Register 

document). A Federal Register notice 

announcing the areas designated 

nonattainment for PM10 upon enactment 

of the 1990 Act Amendments, known as 

‘‘initial’’ PM10 nonattainment areas, was 

published on March 15, 1991 (56 FR 

11101). A subsequent Federal Register 

document correcting some of these areas 

was published on August 8, 1991 (56 FR 

37654). These nonattainment 

designations and moderate area 

classifications were codified in 40 CFR 

part 81 in a Federal Register document 

published on November 6, 1991 (56 FR 

56694). All other areas in the nation not 

designated nonattainment at enactment 

were designated unclassifiable (see 

section 107(d)(4)(B)(iii) of the Act). 

The Yuma planning area was listed by 

EPA as a Group I area (see 52 FR 29383, 

August 7, 1987) and was designated 

nonattainment for PM10 by operation of 

law and classified ‘‘moderate.’’ In 

accordance with section 189(a)(2) of the 

CAA, Arizona was to submit a state 

implementation plan (SIP) by November 

15, 1991 demonstrating attainment of 

the PM10 standards by December 31, 

1994 for the Yuma area.1

C. How Do We Make Attainment 

Determinations? 

Pursuant to sections 179(c)(1) and 

188(b)(2) of the Act, we have the 

responsibility of determining within six 

months of the applicable attainment 

date whether, based on air quality data, 

PM10 nonattainment areas attained the 

NAAQS by that date. The ‘‘applicable 

attainment date’’ is December 31, 1994 

for areas, such as Yuma, that were 

designated as ‘‘moderate’’

nonattainment for PM10 by operation of 

law under the 1990 Amended Act. 

Determinations under section 179(c)(1) 

of the Act are to be based upon an area’s 

‘‘air quality as of the attainment date.’’

Section 188(b)(2) is consistent with this 

requirement. 

Generally, we will determine whether 

an area’s air quality meets the PM10

NAAQS for purposes of section 

179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) based upon data 

gathered at established state and local 

air monitoring stations (SLAMS) and 

national air monitoring stations (NAMS) 

in the nonattainment area and entered 

into the EPA’s Air Quality System 

(AQS) database. Data entered into the 

AQS has been determined to meet 

federal monitoring requirements (see 40 

CFR 50.6; 40 CFR part 50, appendix J; 

40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR part 58, 

appendices A and B) and may be used 

to determine the attainment status of 

areas. We will also consider air quality 

data from other air monitoring stations 

in the nonattainment area provided that 

the stations meet the federal monitoring 

requirements for SLAMS. All data are 

reviewed to determine the area’s air 

quality status in accordance with our 

guidance at 40 CFR part 50, Appendix 

K. 

Attainment of the annual PM10

standard is achieved when the annual 

arithmetic mean PM10 concentration 

over a three-year period is equal to or 

less than 50 μg/m3. Attainment of the 

24-hour standard is determined by 

calculating the expected number of days 

in a year with PM10 concentrations 

greater than 150 μg/m3. The 24-hour 

standard is attained when the expected 

number of days per year with levels 

above 150 μg/m3 (averaged over a threeyear period) is less than or equal to one. 

Three consecutive years of air quality 

data are necessary to show attainment of 

the 24-hour and annual standards for 

PM10. See 40 CFR part 50 and appendix 

K. A complete year of air quality data, 

as referred to in 40 CFR part 50 

Appendix K, includes all 4 calendar 

quarters with each quarter containing 

data from at least 75 percent of the 

scheduled sampling days.2

II. What Is the Basis for EPA’s 

Determination That the Yuma 

Nonattainment Area Has Attained the 

PM10 NAAQS? 

The Yuma PM10 nonattainment area is 

located in the lower Colorado River 

Valley in the southwestern portion of 

Yuma County. The PM10 nonattainment 

area consists of 456 square miles, which 

is roughly eight percent of the land area 

of Yuma County (5,500 square miles). 

Yuma County is located in the 

southwestern portion of Arizona that 

borders California and Mexico. The 

cities of Yuma and Somerton are the 

largest population centers in the Yuma 

PM10 nonattainment area. The city of 

Yuma, the county seat, is located below 

the convergence of the Gila and 

Colorado Rivers on the far western side 

of the PM10 nonattainment area. The 

city of Somerton is located in the 

southwestern portion of the PM10

nonattainment area. Agriculture is the 

primary industry in Yuma County. The 

Arizona Department of Economic 

Security predicts that Yuma County’s 

population is expected to increase by 

37.5 percent from 138,025 in 2000 to 

189,783 in 2015.3 Approximately onehalf of the county’s year-round 

population resides in the city of Yuma. 

During the winter, Yuma County’s 

population increases significantly due 

to seasonal residents. 

The Yuma PM10 nonattainment area 

has one SLAMS monitor operated by the 

Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality (ADEQ). This monitor was 

located at the Yuma County Juvenile 

Center in the city of Yuma from 1988 

until the second quarter of 2002, after 

which time it was relocated to the 

nearby Yuma County Courthouse, 

which is also located in the city of 

Yuma. ADEQ measures ambient (24- 

hour-average) PM10 concentrations in 

Yuma at a frequency of once every six 

days. 

Table 1 summarizes the PM10 data 

collected in Yuma from 1992–2005 and 

reported by ADEQ to the AQS database. 

Table 1 also indicates which years had 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 13023 

4The regulatory requirement for data capture in 

40 CFR part 50, Appendix K, is 75 percent on a 

quarterly basis. According to the ‘‘Guideline on 

Exceptions to Data Requirements for Determining 

Attainment of Particulate Matter Standards’’ (see 

EPA document 450/4–87–005, April 1987), when 

data capture is at least 50 percent but less than 75 

percent, data may be substituted for the missing 

data. Per the above-referenced guideline, 

monitoring data from the same quarter in any one 

of the years used to determine attainment may be 

substituted for missing PM10 data. The maximum 

PM10 value that was observed in that quarter over 

the last three years is substituted for missing 

scheduled sampling days. 

5On August 18, 2002, ADEQ measured 170 μg/ 

m3, 24-hour-average, at the Yuma monitoring 

station; however, EPA concurred with ADEQ on the 

exclusion of this data from design value 

calculations due to a high wind event that occurred 

on that date. ADEQ has prepared a Natural Events 

Action Plan (NEAP) in response to that event. The 

NEAP includes the development and 

implementation of Best Available Control Measures 

(BACM) for anthropogenic PM10 sources that 

contributed to the event. 

6 ‘‘General Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990’’

(57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992, as supplemented 57 

FR 18070, April 28, 1992). 

four complete quarters of data 

(including any allowable data 

substitution 4), making the data from 

that year eligible for use in determining 

whether the area has attained the PM10

NAAQS, if that year is followed by two 

consecutive years also with four 

complete quarters of data. As shown in 

Table 1, no exceedances of the 24-hour 

PM10 NAAQS of 150 μg/m3 were 

measured in Yuma during the 1992–

1994 period and the annual-average 

PM10 concentrations measured during 

that period were well below the 

corresponding standard of 50 Fg/m3. 

However, even with allowable data 

substitution, the data capture for Yuma 

was not sufficient for the 1992–1994 

period to allow us to make a finding of 

attainment for the applicable attainment 

date of December 31, 1994. 

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF 24 HOUR AND ANNUAL PM10 CONCENTRATIONS (μG/M3) FOR YUMA, 1992–2005 1

Year 

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Highest 24-hour-average ........................ 62 65 66 75 103 108 112 100 132 2 150 125 127 114 86 

Annual average ...................................... 29.0 33.9 37.3 41.5 52.1 42.4 39.7 36.7 3 54.3 41.2 51.8 38.1 45.0 30.8 

Four complete quarters? ........................ Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes 4 NA 

1The data summary in Table 1 includes substituted data and was analyzed according to the ‘‘Guideline on Exceptions to Data Requirements 

for Determining Attainment of Particulate Matter Standards.’’ See footnote 4. The fourth quarter in 1994, the second quarter in 1997, and the first 

and fourth quarters in 2001 were not eligible for data substitution. The incomplete data from these quarters was included in the calculation of the 

annual average for each of these years. 2The highest measured 24-hour-average concentration in 2001 was 150 μg/m3, which is equal to the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS, but which is not 

considered an ‘‘exceedance.’’ Under EPA regulations, an exceedance of the 24-hour-average standard represents concentrations of 155 μg/m3

or greater. See 40 CFR 50, appendix K. 3 Data substitution results in a conservative estimate of the annual average. See footnote 4. For example, the annual average for 2000 of 54.3 

μg/m3 would be reduced to 42.3 μg/m3 if data substition was not used. The method of data substitution was used to calculate annual averages 

for 1993–1997, 2000–2002, and 2004. 4We have received AQS data from ADEQ through September 30, 2005. States are required to report data to AQS on a rolling basis and have 

until 90 days from the end of a given quarter to submit quality-assured monitoring data into AQS. See 40 CFR 58.28. 

NA: Not Applicable. 

Like the 1992–1994 period, the series 

of three-year periods immediately 

following 1992–1994 also show no 

exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS but an 

incomplete data set in 1997 prevents us 

from making an attainment finding until 

1998–2000, the first three-year period 

after the applicable attainment date with 

sufficient data capture to make an 

attainment finding consistent with 40 

CFR Part 50, Appendix K. 

As noted above, the 24-hour PM10

standard is attained when the expected 

number of days per year with levels 

above 150 μg/m3 (averaged over a threeyear period) is less than or equal to one. 

When we apply data substitution per 

the above-referenced guideline for the 

period 1998–2000, we find no 

exceedances of the 24-hour PM10

NAAQS for the 1998–2000 period and 

thus the expected number of days per 

year with levels above 150 μg/m3

(averaged over that three-year period) is 

zero. As such, pursuant to sections 

179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) of the Act, we 

find that Yuma has attained the 24-hour 

PM10 NAAQS. Since 2000, there is one 

year (2001) in which four complete 

quarters of data are not available, but 

because the data from the most recent 

three-year period (2002–2004) are 

complete and show no exceedances,5

and because the latest available 

information for 2005 also reveals no 

exceedances, we conclude that Yuma is 

currently in attainment of the 24-hour 

PM10 NAAQS. 

Also as noted above, attainment of the 

annual PM10 standard is achieved when 

the annual arithmetic mean PM10

concentration over a three-year period is 

equal to or less than 50 μg/m3. Review 

of the data for calendar years 1998–2000 

reveals an arithmetic average of 43.6 μg/ 

m3. As such, pursuant to sections 

179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) of the Act, we 

find that Yuma has attained the annual 

PM10 NAAQS. As noted previously, the 

data set for year 2001 is not complete, 

but the data from the most recent 

complete three-year period (2002–2004) 

show that Yuma is currently in 

attainment of the annual PM10 NAAQS. 

III. What Are the Applicable Planning 

Requirements for the Yuma 

Nonattainment Area as a Result of 

EPA’s Attainment Determination? 

The air quality planning requirements 

for moderate PM10 nonattainment areas, 

such as the Yuma nonattainment area, 

are set out in part D, subparts 1 and 4 

of title I of the Act. We have issued 

guidance in a General Preamble 6

describing how we will review SIPs and 

SIP revisions submitted under title I of 

the Act, including those containing 

moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP 

provisions. 

In nonattainment areas where 

monitored data demonstrates that the 

NAAQS have already been achieved, 

EPA has determined that certain 

requirements of part D, subparts 1 and 

2 of title I of the Act (with respect to 1- 

hour ozone) do not apply. Therefore, we 

do not require certain submissions for 

an area that has attained the NAAQS. 

These include reasonable further 

progress (RFP) requirements, attainment 

demonstrations and contingency 

measures, because these provisions have 

the purpose of helping achieve 

attainment of the NAAQS. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
13024 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

7Three U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals have 

upheld EPA rulemakings applying its interpretation 

of subparts 1 and 2 with respect to ozone. Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 99 F.3d 1551 (10th Cir. 1996); Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); Our 

Children’s Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 04–73032 

(9th Cir. June 28, 2005) (memorandum opinion). 

8Note, however, that on January 17, 2006, EPA 

published proposed revisions to the NAAQS for 

particulate matter. See http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/ 

EPA-AIR/2006/January/Day-17/. The proposed 

revisions address two categories of particulate 

matter: fine particles which are particles 2.5 

micrometers in diameter and smaller; and 

‘‘inhalable coarse’’ particles which are particles 

between 2.5 and 10 micrometers (PM10–2.5). Upon 

finalization of a primary 24-hour standard for 

PM10–2.5, EPA proposes to revoke the current 24- 

hour PM10 standard in all areas of the country 

except in areas where there is at least one monitor 

located in an urbanized area (as defined by the U.S. 

Bureau of the Census) with a minimum population 

of 100,000 that violates the current 24-hour PM10

standard based on the most recent three years of 

data. In addition, EPA proposes to revoke the 

current annual PM10 standard upon finalization of 

a primary 24-hour standard for PM10–2.5. 

This interpretation of the CAA is 

known as the Clean Data Policy and is 

the subject of two EPA memoranda. EPA 

also finalized the statutory 

interpretation set forth in the policy in 

a final rule, 40 CFR 51.918, as part of 

its ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard—Phase 2’’ (Phase 2 Final 

Rule). See discussion in the preamble to 

the rule at 70 FR 71612, 71645–46 

(November 29, 2005). EPA believes that 

the legal bases set forth in detail in our 

Phase 2 Final Rule, our May 10, 1995 

memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

entitled ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ and our 

December 14, 2004 memorandum from 

Stephen D. Page entitled ‘‘Clean Data 

Policy for the Fine Particle National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ are 

equally pertinent to the interpretation of 

provisions of subparts 1 and 4 

applicable to PM10. Our interpretation 

that an area that is attaining the 

standards is relieved of obligations to 

demonstrate RFP and to provide an 

attainment demonstration and 

contingency measures pursuant to part 

D of the CAA, pertains whether the 

standard is PM10, ozone or PM2.5.7

It has been EPA’s longstanding 

interpretation that the general 

provisions of part D, subpart 1 of the 

Act (sections 171 and 172) do not 

require the submission of SIP revisions 

concerning RFP for areas already 

attaining the ozone NAAQS because the 

stated purpose of RFP is to ensure 

attainment by the applicable date. 57 FR 

at 13564. EPA believes the same 

reasoning applies to the PM10 provisions 

of part D, subpart 4. CAA section 

189(c)(1), applicable to PM10

nonattainment areas, states that 

revisions shall contain milestones 

which are to be achieved until the area 

is redesignated to attainment, such 

milestones are designed to show 

reasonable further progress ‘‘toward 

attainment by the applicable date,’’ as 

defined by section 171. Thus, it is clear 

that once the area has attained the 

standard, no further milestones are 

necessary or meaningful. 

With respect to the attainment 

demonstration requirements of section 

189(a)(1)(B) an analogous rationale leads 

to the same result. CAA section 

189(a)(1)(B), requires that the plan 

provide for ‘‘a demonstration (including 

air quality modeling) that the [SIP] will 

provide for attainment by the applicable 

attainment date * * *’’ As with the RFP 

requirements, if an area is already 

monitoring attainment of the standards, 

EPA believes there is no need for an 

area to make a further submission 

containing additional measures to 

achieve attainment. This is also 

consistent with the interpretation of the 

section 172(c) requirements provided by 

EPA in the General Preamble (57 at 

13564), the December 14, 2004 

memorandum, and the section 182(b) 

and (c) requirements set forth in the 

May 10, 1995 memorandum. 

Other SIP submission requirements 

are linked with these attainment 

demonstration and RFP requirements, 

and similar reasoning applies to them. 

These requirements include the 

contingency measure requirements of 

section 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9). We have 

interpreted the contingency measure 

requirements of section 172(c)(9) and 

182(c)(9) as no longer applying when an 

area has attained the standard because 

those ‘‘contingency measures are 

directed at ensuring RFP and attainment 

by the applicable date.’’ (57 FR at 

13564); May 10, 1995 memorandum at 

5–6. 

Here, as in both our Phase 2 Final 

Rule and ozone and PM2.5 clean data 

memoranda, we emphasize that the 

suspension of a requirement to submit 

SIP revisions concerning these RFP, 

attainment demonstration, contingency, 

and other related requirements exists 

only for as long as a nonattainment area 

continues to monitor attainment of the 

standard. If such an area experiences a 

violation of the NAAQS, the basis for 

the requirements being suspended 

would no longer exist. Therefore, 

should EPA at some future time 

determine that an area that had clean 

data, but which has not yet been 

redesignated as attainment for a 

NAAQS, has violated the relevant 

standard, the State would again be 

required to submit the pertinent CAA 

requirements for the area. 

With respect to the Yuma PM10

nonattainment area, based on the 

finding made herein that Yuma is 

currently in attainment of the PM 10

NAAQS and based on the rationale 

given above, we have determined that 

the part D, subpart 4 obligations to 

provide an attainment demonstration 

pursuant to section 189(a)(1)(B), the RFP 

provisions established by section 

189(c)(1), and the attainment 

demonstration, RFP and contingency 

measure provisions of part D, subpart 1 

contained in section 172 of the Act are 

not applicable for so long as the Yuma 

area continues to monitor attainment of 

the PM10 NAAQS. If measurements of 

ambient PM10 concentrations in the 

Yuma area reveal a violation of the PM10

NAAQS, then the State of Arizona 

would again be required to submit the 

pertinent CAA requirements for this 

nonattainment area.8

IV. EPA’s Final Action 

Based on quality-assured data meeting 

the requirements of 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix K, we find that the Yuma, 

Arizona nonattainment area has attained 

the PM10 NAAQS. This action is a 

finding of attainment under sections 

179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) of the Clean Air 

Act and not a redesignation to 

attainment under CAA section 107(d)(3) 

because we have not yet approved a 

maintenance plan meeting the 

requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA or determined that the area has 

met the other CAA requirements for 

redesignation. The classification and 

designation status in 40 CFR part 81 

will remain moderate nonattainment for 

this area until such time as Arizona 

meets the CAA requirements for 

redesignation of the Yuma PM10 area to 

attainment. 

EPA also finds that, because the Yuma 

‘‘moderate’’ nonattainment area is 

currently in attainment of the PM10

NAAQS, the following CAA 

requirements are not applicable for so 

long as the area continues to attain the 

PM10 NAAQS: the part D, subpart 4 

obligations to provide an attainment 

demonstration pursuant to section 

189(a)(1)(B), the RFP provisions 

established by section 189(c)(1), and the 

attainment demonstration, RFP and 

contingency measure provisions of part 

D, subpart 1 contained in section 172 of 

the Act. 

We are publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial action 

and anticipates no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 13025 

of this Federal Register publication, 

EPA is publishing a separate document 

that will serve as the proposal should 

adverse comments be filed. This action 

will be effective May 15, 2006, without 

further notice unless the EPA receives 

relevant adverse comments by April 13, 

2006. 

If we receive such comments, then we 

will publish a document withdrawing 

the final rule and informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. All 

public comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. We will not 

institute a second comment period. 

Parties interested in commenting should 

do so at this time. If no such comments 

are received, the public is advised that 

this rule will be effective on May 15, 

2006 and no further action will be taken 

on the proposed rule. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely makes a 

determination based on air quality data 

and does not impose any additional 

requirements. 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 does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty, it 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). 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 97249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have federalism 

implications because it does 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). This action merely 

makes a determination based on air 

quality data and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

CAA. This rule also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

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. 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. 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. 804(2). 

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by May 15, 2006. 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 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: March 1, 2006. 

Wayne Nastri, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 06–2430 Filed 3–13–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 2 

Frequency Allocations and Radio 

Treaty Matters 

CFR Correction 

In Title 47 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, parts 0 to 19, revised as of 

October 1, 2005, on page 474, § 2.1 is 

corrected by adding the following 

definitions to read as follows: 

§ 2.1 Terms and definitions. 

* * * * * 

Harmful Interference. Interference 

which endangers the functioning of a 

radionavigation service or of other 

safety services or seriously degrades, 

obstructs, or repeatedly interrupts a 

radiocommunication service operating 

in accordance with [the ITU] Radio 

Regulations. (CS) 

High Altitude Platform Station 

(HAPS). A station located on an object 

at an altitude of 20 to 50 km and at a 

specified, nominal, fixed point relative 

to the Earth. (RR) 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 06–55513 Filed 3–13–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 060216044–6044–01; I.D. 

030906A] 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in Statistical 

Area 630 of the Gulf of Alaska 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed 

fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 

630 of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This 

action is necessary to prevent exceeding 

the B season allowance of the 2006 total 

allowable catch (TAC) of pollock for 

Statistical Area 630 of the GOA. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES