34358 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 14, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

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 67249, 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 

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 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (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. 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 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 August 15, 2005. 

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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds.

Dated: April 27, 2005. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

■ 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 D—Arizona

■ 2. Section 52.120 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(121) to read as 

follows:

§ 52.120 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(121) A plan revision was submitted 

on April 20, 2005 by the Governor’s 

designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Maricopa County Environmental 

Services Department. 

(1) Permit V98–004, condition 23, 

W.R. Meadows of Arizona, Inc., 

Goodyear, AZ, adopted on February 17, 

2005.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 05–11160 Filed 6–13–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52

[RO4–OAR–2005–GA–0002; RO4–OAR–

2005–GA–0003; R04–OAR–2004–GA–0003–

200517; FRL–7924–2–] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Georgia, 

Determination of Attainment for 

Atlanta 1-Hour Severe Ozone 

Nonattainment Area and Severe Area 

Vehicle Miles Traveled

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is determining that the 

Atlanta area has attained the 1-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS). This determination 

is based on three years of complete, 

quality-assured ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 2002 through 

2004 ozone seasons. Based on this 

determination, EPA is also determining 

that certain attainment demonstration 

and reasonable further progress 

requirements, along with other related 

requirements of part D of title I of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), are not 

applicable to the Atlanta area for so long 

as the area continues to attain the 1-

hour ozone standard. The current 

Atlanta 1-hour severe ozone 

nonattainment area consists of the 

following counties: Cherokee, Clayton, 

Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, 

Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, 

Paulding and Rockdale (Atlanta area). 

Additionally, EPA is granting final 

approval to Georgia’s Severe Area 

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective June 14, 2005.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Regional 

Material in EDocket (RME) ID No. RO4–

OAR–2005—GA–0002; RO4–OAR–

2005–GA–0003; R04–OAR–2004–GA–

0003. All documents in the docket are 

listed in the RME index at http://

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Once in the 

system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then key 

in the appropriate RME Docket 

identification number. Although listed 

in the index, some information is not 

publicly available, i.e., confidential 

business information (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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 14, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 34359

electronically in RME 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:

Scott M. Martin, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, Region 4, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 61 

Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia, 

30303–8960. The telephone number is 

(404) 562–9036. Mr. Martin can also be 

reached via electronic mail at 

martin.scott@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The use of 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ in this document 

refers to EPA.

Table of Contents 

I. What Is the Background for This Action? 

II. What Actions Are We Taking and When 

Are They Effective? 

III. What Comments Did We Receive and 

What Are Our Responses? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

On June 30, 2004, the Georgia 

Environmental Protection Division 

(EPD) submitted a SIP revision 

addressing the Severe Area VMT 

requirement (section 182(d)(1)(A) of the 

Act) for the Atlanta 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area. Section 

182(d)(1)(A) requires severe ozone 

nonattainment areas to submit a SIP 

revision that identifies whether it is 

necessary to adopt transportation 

control measures (TCMs) to offset 

growth in emissions attributable to 

growth in VMT. On April 12, 2005, (70 

FR 19031), EPA published a proposed 

rule proposing to approve Georgia’s 

VMT SIP submittal because the State 

had demonstrated that emissions 

increases from increases in VMT, or the 

numbers of vehicle trips, within the 

Atlanta area did not rise above an 

established ceiling by 2004, the year the 

area attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Please see the proposed rule for a 

detailed discussion of the VMT 

submittal and of EPA’s rationale for its 

proposed approval. 

In addition, on February 1, 2005, EPD 

submitted a request to redesignate the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment area 

of Atlanta, Georgia, to attainment, and a 

request for EPA approval of a Georgia 

SIP revision containing a 10-year 

maintenance plan for the 13-county 

Atlanta area. The 10-year maintenance 

plan includes new motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEB) for the year 

2015. Georgia EPD also requested that 

EPA make a determination that certain 

SIP submittal requirements related to 

attainment demonstrations, contingency 

measures, and reasonable further 

progress are not applicable requirements 

because the Atlanta area has attained 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS based on 

ambient air monitoring data for the 3-

year period including the years 2002, 

2003, and 2004. 

On April 20, 2005, (70 FR 20495), 

EPA published a proposed rule 

proposing four actions: To find that the 

Atlanta area has attained the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS; to find that certain 

attainment demonstration and 

reasonable further progress 

requirements, along with other related 

requirements of part D of title I of the 

CAA, are not applicable to the Atlanta 

area for so long as it continues to attain 

the 1-hour ozone standard; to approve 

the 10-year maintenance plan, including 

the 2015 MVEBs; and to approve the 1-

hour ozone redesignation request for the 

Atlanta area. Please see the proposed 

rule for a detailed discussion of EPD’s 

submittals and of EPA’s rationale for its 

proposed actions.

II. What Actions Are We Taking and 

When Are They Effective? 

Today, EPA is granting final approval 

of two of the four actions proposed by 

EPA on April 20, 2005, (70 FR 20495), 

and granting final approval of EPD’s 

VMT submittal which was proposed by 

EPA on April 12, 2005, (70 FR 19031). 

First, EPA is determining that the 

Atlanta area has attained the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS based on air quality 

monitoring data for the 2002 through 

2004 ozone season. Based on this 

determination, EPA is also determining 

that certain CAA SIP submittal 

requirements related to attainment 

demonstrations and reasonable further 

progress, along with other related 

requirements of part D of title I of the 

CAA, are not currently applicable to the 

Atlanta area because the area is 

attaining the 1-hour ozone standard. If 

an area has in fact attained the 1-hour 

ozone standard, the stated purpose of 

CAA SIP submissions relating to 

attainment demonstrations and 

reasonable further progress (i.e. to 

ensure timely attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone standard) has already been 

fulfilled and there is no need for an area 

to make further submissions containing 

additional measures to achieve 

attainment, so long as the area remains 

in attainment. See Memorandum from 

John S. Seitz, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, entitled, 

‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ dated 

May 10, 1995 (Seitz Memorandum). 

Second, EPA is granting final 

approval to Georgia’s Severe Area VMT 

SIP submittal which satisfies the 

requirements of section 182(d)(1)(A) of 

the Act. 

In this rulemaking, EPA is not taking 

action on its April 20, 2005, proposed 

approval of the redesignation request 

and 10-year maintenance plan for the 

Atlanta area. Final action on the 

redesignation request and 10-year 

maintenance plan will be taken in a 

separate rulemaking. 

A. Determination of Attainment and 

Nonapplicable Requirements 

EPA interprets the CAA’s general 

nonattainment provisions of subpart 1 

of part D of title I (sections 171 and 172) 

and the more specific attainment 

demonstration and related provisions of 

subpart 2 (section 182), relating to SIP 

requirements for ozone nonattainment 

areas to not require the submission of 

SIP revisions concerning reasonable 

further progress (RFP), attainment 

demonstrations, or contingency 

measures for areas where the monitoring 

data show that the area is attaining the 

1-hour ozone standard. See Sierra Club

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

The rationale behind this interpretation 

is discussed in the Seitz Memorandum. 

EPA believes it is reasonable to 

interpret the provisions regarding RFP 

and attainment demonstrations, along 

with other certain related provisions, 

not to require SIP submissions if an 

ozone nonattainment area subject to 

those requirements is monitoring 

attainment of the ozone standard (i.e., 

attainment of the NAAQS demonstrated 

with three consecutive years of 

complete, quality-assured, air quality 

monitoring data). EPA believes this 

interpretation is reasonable because the 

stated purpose of CAA provisions 

addressing or relating to RFP and 

attainment demonstrations is to ensure 

attainment of the standard by the 

applicable attainment date. If an area 

has in fact attained the standard, the 

stated purpose of the requirement will 

have been fulfilled and there will be no 

need for an area to make a further 

submission containing additional 

measures to achieve attainment. EPA 

has explained at length in other actions 

34360 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 14, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

its rationale for the reasonableness of 

this interpretation of the CAA and 

incorporates those explanations by 

reference. See (68 FR 25418) (St. Louis, 

MO., May 12, 2003); (68 FR 4847, 4848) 

(St. Louis, MO., January 30, 2003); (66 

FR 27483, 27486) (Louisville, Kentucky, 

May 17, 2001); (67 FR 49600) 

(Cincinnati-Hamilton, Kentucky, July 

31, 2002); (66 FR 53095) (PittsburghBeaver Valley, Pennsylvania, October 

19, 2001); (65 FR 37879) (CincinnatiHamilton, Ohio and Kentucky, June 19, 

2000); (61 FR 20458) (Cleveland-AkronLorain, Ohio, May 7, 1996); (60 FR 

36723) (Salt Lake and Davis Counties, 

Utah, July 18, 1995); (60 FR 37366) (July 

20, 1995); (61 FR 31832–31833) (June 

21, 1996) (Grand Rapids, MI). The 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

Tenth Circuit has upheld EPA’s 

interpretation. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 

99 F.3d 1551 (10th Cir. 1996); see also 

Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th 

Cir. 2004) (rejecting a challenge to the 

interpretation). 

EPA has reviewed the ambient air 

monitoring data for 1-hour ozone 

(consistent with the requirements 

contained in 40 CFR part 58 and 

recorded in EPA’s Aerometric 

Information Retrieval System (AIRS)) for 

the Atlanta ozone nonattainment area 

from the 2002 through 2004 ozone 

seasons. On the basis of this review, 

EPA is making its final determination 

that the area has attained the 1-hour 

ozone standard during the 2002 through 

2004 period and continues to attain the 

standard. On the basis of this final 

determination of 1-hour ozone 

attainment, the State of Georgia is not 

required to make the following 

submittals for the Atlanta area: section 

172(c)(2) reasonable further progress 

requirements, section 172(c)(9) and 

section 182(c)(9) contingency measures, 

sections 182(b)(1)(A) and 182(c)(2)(B) 

reasonable further progress 

requirements, sections 172(c)(1), 

182(c)(2)(A), and section 182(j) 

attainment demonstration and 

reasonably available control measures 

requirements, section 182(c)(5) 

demonstrations, and section 182(g) 

milestones. See 70 FR 20500–20501 

(April 20, 2005). The Atlanta area does 

not need any other measures to attain 

the 1-hour ozone standard, so long as 

the area continues to monitor 

attainment of the 1-hour standard. 

When and if a violation occurs, the 

requirements referenced above would 

need to be addressed. 

The State of Georgia must continue to 

operate an appropriate network, in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to 

verify the attainment status of the 

Atlanta area. The air quality data relied 

upon to determine that the area is 

attaining the 1-hour ozone standard 

must be consistent with 40 CFR part 58 

requirements and other relevant EPA 

guidance and recorded in EPA’s AIRS. 

B. Severe Area Vehicle Miles Traveled 

On April 12, 2005, (70 FR 19031), 

EPA published a proposed rule 

proposing to find that Georgia’s Severe 

Area VMT SIP revision had addressed 

the requirement of section 182(d)(1)(A) 

of the Act that severe ozone 

nonattainment areas submit a SIP 

revision that identifies whether it is 

necessary to adopt TCMs to offset 

growth in emissions attributable to 

growth in VMT. EPA’s longstanding 

policy is that the purpose of the VMT 

SIP requirement is to prevent a growth 

in motor vehicle emissions from 

canceling out the emissions reduction 

benefits of the federally mandated 

programs of the CAA. See 60 FR 48,896, 

48,897 (Sept. 21, 1995) (EPA final 

approval of Illinois’ VMT SIP). EPA 

interprets this provision to require that 

sufficient measures be adopted so that 

projected motor vehicle volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions will never 

be higher during the ozone season in 

one year than during the ozone season 

in the year before. When growth in VMT 

and vehicle trips would otherwise cause 

a motor vehicle emissions upturn, this 

upturn must be prevented. The 

emissions level at the point of upturn 

becomes a ceiling on motor vehicle 

emissions. This requirement applies to 

projected emissions in the years 

between the submission of the SIP 

revision and the attainment deadline, 

and is above and beyond the separate 

requirements for the RFP and the 

attainment demonstrations. The ceiling 

line is defined, therefore, up to the point 

of upturn, as motor vehicle emissions 

that would occur in the ozone season of 

that year, with VMT growth, if all 

measures for that area in that year were 

implemented as required by the CAA. 

When this curve begins to turn up due 

to growth in VMT or vehicle trips, the 

ceiling becomes a fixed value. The 

ceiling line would include the effects of 

federal measures such as new motor 

vehicle standards, phase II reid vapor 

pressure (RVP) controls, and 

reformulated gasoline, as well as the 

CAA-mandated SIP requirements. 

For each year from 1999 to 2004, 

typical summer day highway mobile 

source emissions inventories were 

estimated for the Atlanta 13-county 1-

hour ozone nonattainment area. These 

inventories, which reflect the most 

recent planning assumptions available 

and include all federal and State mobile 

source control rules, demonstrate that 

motor vehicle emissions of both VOC 

and nitrogen oxide (NOX) decreased 

each year, for a six-year period, through 

the 2004 attainment year for the Atlanta 

severe 1-hour ozone nonattainment area. 

Therefore, pursuant to the Act and EPA 

policy, the adoption of additional TCMs 

is not required for Atlanta to 

demonstrate attainment of the 1-hour 

NAAQS standard for ozone or to satisfy 

the requirements of section 182(d)(1)(A). 

EPA is granting final approval to 

Georgia’s Severe Area VMT SIP revision 

in this action.

C. Effective Date of This Action 

EPA finds that there is good cause for 

the determination of attainment and the 

determination of non-applicability of 

certain CAA SIP submittal requirements 

to become effective June 14, 2005, 

because a delayed effective date is 

unnecessary due to the nature of the 

determinations, which relieve the 

Atlanta area from certain CAA 

requirements that would otherwise 

apply to it for so long as the area 

remains in attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone standard. The expedited effective 

date for these actions is authorized 

under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which 

provides that rulemaking actions may 

become effective less than 30 days after 

publication if the rule ‘‘grants or 

recognizes an exemption or relieves a 

restriction’’ and section 553(d)(3), 

which allows an effective date less than 

30 days after publication ‘‘as otherwise 

provided by the agency for good cause 

found and published with the rule.’’

As indicated above, EPA’s September 

26, 2003, final rule reclassified the 

Atlanta area to a ‘‘severe’’

nonattainment area and established a 

schedule for submission of SIP revisions 

fulfilling the requirements for severe 

ozone nonattainment areas. Upon the 

effective date of this rule, the State of 

Georgia will be relieved of the 

obligation to develop and submit several 

of these SIP revisions, which are 

specifically identified above, for so long 

as the area remains in attainment of the 

1-hour ozone standard. The relief from 

these obligations is sufficient reason to 

allow an expedited effective date of this 

rule under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). In 

addition, Georgia’s relief from these SIP 

submittal obligations provides good 

cause to make this rule effective June 

14, 2005, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

The purpose of the 30-day waiting 

period prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) is 

to give affected parties a reasonable time 

to adjust their behavior and prepare 

before the final rule takes effect. Where, 

as here, the final rule relieves 

obligations rather than imposes 

obligations, affected parties such as the 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 14, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 34361

1A special purpose monitor is a generic term 

used for all monitors other than State and Local Air 

Monitoring Stations (SLAMS), National Air 

Monitoring Stations (NAMS), Photochemical 

Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS), and 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

monitors included in an agency’s monitoring 

network for monitors used in a special study whose 

data area officially reported to EPA.

2A violation of this standard occurs when the 

daily maximum 1-hour average concentration 

measured by a continuous ambient air monitor 

exceeds 0.12 parts per million more than once per 

year, averaged over three consecutive years.

State of Georgia do not need time to 

adjust and prepare before the rule takes 

effect. 

For these same reasons, EPA also 

finds that there is good cause for the 

final approval of Georgia’s Severe Area 

VMT SIP to become effective June 14, 

2005. The final approval relieves 

Georgia from adopting additional TCMs 

to offset growth in emissions 

attributable to growth in VMT. This 

relief is sufficient reason to allow an 

expedited effective date of this 

rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and 

553(d)(3). 

III. What Comments Did We Receive 

and What Are Our Responses? 

Severe Area Vehicles Miles Traveled 

On April 12, 2005, (70 FR 19031), 

EPA published a proposed approval of 

Georgia’s submittal regarding severe 

area VMT for the Atlanta 1-hour severe 

ozone nonattainment area. The 

comment period ended on May 12, 

2005. EPA received no adverse 

comment. 

Proposed Redesignation of the Atlanta 

1-Hour Severe Nonattainment Area to 

Attainment for Ozone 

On April 20, 2005, (70 FR 20495), 

EPA published a proposed rule 

proposing four actions: To find that the 

Atlanta area has attained the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS; to find that certain 

attainment demonstration and 

reasonable further progress 

requirements, along with other related 

requirements of part D of title I of the 

CAA, are not applicable to the Atlanta 

area for so long as it continues to attain 

the 1-hour ozone standard; to approve 

the 10-year maintenance plan; and to 

approve the 1-hour ozone redesignation 

request for the Atlanta area. The 

comment period ended on May 20, 

2005. One comment, discussed below, 

was received regarding the maintenance 

plan portion of EPA’s April 20, 2005, 

proposed rule. The comment, however, 

contained a footnote addressing 

emissions increases and a monitoring 

violation of the 1-hour ozone standard. 

While EPA does not believe that the 

footnote was directly submitted as a 

comment on the attainment 

determination, we are providing the 

following clarification on this footnote 

in this rulemaking. 

The Renewable Fuels Association 

submitted comments with respect to the 

showing of maintenance which will be 

addressed by EPA in a separate 

rulemaking action on the redesignation 

request and maintenance plan. The 

comments included a footnote (footnote 

3) asserting that ‘‘Georgia submitted 

data related to only 11 monitors in ten 

of the thirteen counties. In 2002, 

however, there was a twelfth monitor 

located within the 13-county area—

Waleska in Cherokee County * * * The 

monitoring data show that the ozone 

levels at this monitor were steadily 

increasing from 2000 to 2002, resulting 

in a violation in 2002.’’

In response, EPA notes that there was 

a special purpose monitor (SPM) in 

Cherokee County, Georgia, (Waleska 

site) that operated from 1999–2002.1

This monitor recorded only one 

exceedance of the 1-hour ozone 

standard during this period that 

occurred in 2002. This one exceedance 

does not constitute a violation of the 1-

hour ozone standard.2 The monitor at 

the Waleska site was terminated by the 

State due to siting issues (potential 

interference by trees and a school’s 

chemistry laboratory). The Waleska site 

was designated a SPM, and for this type 

of monitor the states are not required to 

obtain EPA concurrence for its 

termination.

Georgia’s request for redesignation 

and a determination of attainment did 

include data from all ozone monitors in 

the Atlanta area with complete data for 

the period of 2002–2004, showing no 

violations of the 1-hour ozone standard. 

Thus, there were no recorded violations 

of the 1-hour ozone standard omitted 

from Georgia’s redesignation request as 

implied by the commentator. 

IV. 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 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 

(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 67249, 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 

approves a state rule implementing a 

Federal standard, 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.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. 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 CAA. Thus, the requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272) 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 

34362 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 14, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

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 June 14, 2005. 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 August 15, 2005. 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 dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: June 7, 2005. 

J.I. Palmer, Jr., 

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 citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows:

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

■ 2. Section 52.570(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry in numerical order 

for ‘‘20. Severe Area Vehicle Miles 

Traveled (VMT SIP) for the Atlanta 1-

hour severe ozone nonattainment area.’’

to read as follows:

§ 52.570 Identification of Plan.

* * * * *

(e) EPA Approved Georgia 

Nonregulatory Provisions.

Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or

nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date/effective 

date 

EPA approval date 

* * * * * * * 

20. Severe Area Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT SIP) 

for the Atlanta 1-hour severe ozone nonattainment 

area.

Atlanta 1-hour ozone severe nonattainment area.June 30, 2004 June 14, 2005. [Insert first page 

number of publication]. 

[FR Doc. 05–11719 Filed 6–13–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[AZ131–0088; FRL–7901–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Arizona; Redesignation of 

Phoenix to Attainment for the 1-Hour 

Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality’s 

submittals of revisions to the Arizona 

state implementation plan that include 

substitution of the clean fuel fleet 

program requirement with the cleaner 

burning gasoline program, adoption of 

the 1-hour serious area ozone plan and 

adoption of the 1-hour ozone 

maintenance plan for the Phoenix 

metropolitan 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area. We are also 

approving Arizona’s request to 

redesignate the Phoenix metropolitan 1-

hour ozone nonattainment area from 

nonattainment to attainment. EPA is 

taking these actions pursuant to those 

provisions of the Clean Air Act that 

obligate the agency to take action on 

submittals of revisions to state 

implementation plans and requests for 

redesignation.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on June 14, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents 

relevant to this action are available for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at EPA Region 9’s Air 

Planning Office (AIR–2), 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Due to increased security, we suggest 

that you call at least 24 hours prior to 

visiting the Regional Office so that we 

can make arrangements to have 

someone meet you. 

Electronic Availability 

This document and our proposed rule 

which was published in the Federal 

Register on March 21, 2005 are also 

available as electronic files on EPA’s 

Region 9 Web Page at http://

www.epa.gov/region09/air/phoenixoz/

index.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wienke Tax, Office of Air Planning, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, (520) 622–1622, e-mail: 

tax.wienke@epa.gov, or refer to http://

www.epa.gov/region09/air/phoenixoz/

index.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, the terms 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ mean U.S. EPA.

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Response to Comments 

III. EPA’s Final Action

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background 

On March 21, 2005 (70 FR 13425), we 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking for the State of Arizona. The 

notice proposed approval of the State’s 

submittals of revisions to the Arizona 

state implementation plan (SIP) for the 

Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area and the State’s 

redesignation request for this area from 

‘‘nonattainment’’ to ‘‘attainment’’. 

Specifically, we proposed approval of 

three sets of SIP revisions adopted and 

submitted to us by the Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ). First, under sections 

182(c)(4)(B) and 110(k)(3) of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or ‘‘the Act’’), we 

proposed to approve the State of 

Arizona’s 1998 request to ‘‘opt-out’’ of 

the clean fuel fleet (CFF) program and 

to approve the cleaner burning gasoline