5174 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

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 submittals, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Given this role, 

absent a prior existing requirement for 

the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submittal for failure 

to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submittal, 

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 April 3, 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: December 22, 2005. 

Jane Diamond, 

Acting for 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 F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c)(337)(i)(B) and 

(c)(342) to read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(337) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(B) Ventura County Air Pollution 

Control District. 

(1) Rule 74.14, adopted on November 

24, 1987 and revised on April 12, 2005. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(342) New and amended regulations 

for the following APCDs were submitted 

on October 20, 2005, by the Governor’s 

designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Yolo-Solano Air Quality 

Management District. 

(1) Rule 2.21, adopted on March 23, 

1994 and revised on September 14, 

2005. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 06–894 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2005–0557c; FRL–8024–9] 

Interim Final Determination to Stay 

and/or Defer Sanctions, Yolo-Solano 

Air Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim 

final determination to stay sanctions 

based on a proposed approval of 

revisions to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality 

Management District (YSAQMD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) published 

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. 

The revisions concern Yolo-Solano Air 

Quality Management District Rule 2.21, 

Organic Liquid Storage and Transfer. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on February 1, 2006. 

However, comments will be accepted 

until March 3, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number [DOCKET 

NUMBER], by one of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), 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 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://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 email directly to EPA, your e-mail 


erjones on PROD1PC61 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 5175 

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: 

Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX, at 

either (415) 947–4111, or 

wamsley.jerry@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. Background 

On January 22, 2004 (69 FR 3012), we 

published a limited approval and 

limited disapproval of Yolo-Solano Air 

Quality Management District Rule 2.21 

as adopted locally on June 12, 2002 and 

submitted by the State on August 6, 

2002. We based our limited disapproval 

action on certain deficiencies in the 

submittal. This disapproval action 

started a sanctions clock for imposition 

of offset sanctions 18 months after 

January 22, 2004 and highway sanctions 

6 months later, pursuant to section 179 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and our 

regulations at 40 CFR 52.31. 

On September 14, 2005, YSAQMD 

adopted revisions to Rule 2.21 that were 

intended to correct the deficiencies 

identified in our limited disapproval 

action. On October 20, 2005, the State 

submitted these revisions to EPA. In the 

Proposed Rules section of today’s 

Federal Register, we have proposed 

approval of this submittal because we 

believe it corrects the deficiencies 

identified in our January 22, 2004 

disapproval action. Based on today’s 

proposed approval, we are taking this 

final rulemaking action, effective on 

publication, to stay sanctions that were 

triggered by our January 22, 2004 

limited disapproval. 

EPA is providing the public with an 

opportunity to comment on this stay of 

sanctions. If comments are submitted 

that change our assessment described in 

this final determination and the 

proposed full approval of revised 

YSAQMD Rule 2.21, we intend to take 

subsequent final action to reimpose 

sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 51.31(d). 

If no comments are submitted that 

change our assessment, then all 

sanctions and sanction clocks will be 

permanently terminated on the effective 

date of a final rule approval. 

II. EPA Action 

We are making an interim final 

determination to stay CAA section 179 

sanctions associated with YSAQMD 

Rule 2.21 based on our concurrent 

proposal to approve the State’s SIP 

revision as correcting deficiencies that 

initiated sanctions. 

Because EPA has determined 

preliminarily that the State has 

corrected the deficiencies identified in 

EPA’s limited disapproval action, relief 

from sanctions should be provided as 

quickly as possible. Therefore, EPA is 

invoking the good cause exception 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) in not providing an opportunity 

for comment before this action takes 

effect (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However, by 

this action, EPA is providing the public 

with a chance to comment on EPA’s 

determination after the effective date, 

and EPA will consider any comments 

received in determining whether to 

reverse such action. 

EPA believes that notice-andcomment rulemaking before the 

effective date of this action is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. EPA has reviewed the State’s 

submittal and is indicating through our 

proposed action that, more likely than 

not, the State has corrected the 

deficiencies that started the sanctions 

clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public 

interest to impose sanctions initially or 

to keep sanctions applied and in place 

when the State has most likely done all 

it can to correct the deficiencies that 

triggered the sanctions clocks. 

Moreover, it would be impracticable to 

go through notice-and-comment 

rulemaking on a finding that the State 

has corrected the deficiencies prior to 

the rulemaking approving the State’s 

submittal. Therefore, EPA believes that 

it is necessary to use the interim final 

rulemaking process to stay while EPA 

completes its rulemaking process on the 

approvability of the State’s submittal. 

Moreover, with respect to the effective 

date of this action, EPA is invoking the 

good cause exception to the 30-day 

notice requirement of the APA because 

the purpose of this notice is to relieve 

a restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action stays federal sanctions 

and imposes no additional 

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 is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is 

not a significant regulatory action. 

The administrator certifies that this 

action 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.). 

This rule 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 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 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 rule 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) do not apply to this rule because 

it imposes no standards. 

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 


erjones on PROD1PC61 with RULES
5176 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

submit a rule report to Congress and the 

Comptroller General. However, section 

808 provides that any rule for which the 

issuing agency for good cause finds that 

notice and public procedure thereon are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest, shall take effect at 

such time as the agency promulgating 

the rule determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). 

EPA has made such a good cause 

finding, including the reasons therefore, 

and established an effective date of 

February 1, 2006. 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 rule 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 April 3, 2006. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this final rule does not affect the 

finality of this rule for the purpose of 

judicial review nor does it extend the 

time within which 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 

regulations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: January 6, 2006. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 06–893 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[DA 06–14; MB Docket No. 03–87; RM–

10686] 

Radio Broadcasting Services; Dilley 

and Pearsall, TX 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Audio Division, at the 

request of Pearsall Radio Works, Ltd., 

reallots Channel 237A from Pearsall to 

Dilley, Texas, and modifies Station 

KVWG–FM’s license accordingly. See 

68 FR 18177, April 15, 2003. Channel 

237A can be allotted to Dilley in 

compliance with the Commission’s 

minimum distance separation 

requirements with a site restriction of 

2.7 kilometers (1.7 miles) east at 

Petitioner’s requested site. The reference 

coordinates for Channel 237A at Dilley 

are 28–39–55 North Latitude and 99–

08–35 West Longitude. Additionally, 

Channel 227A can be allotted to 

Pearsall, Texas, as a replacement service 

with a site restriction of 1.7 kilometers 

(1.1 miles) west at Petitioner’s requested 

site. The reference coordinates for 

Channel 227A at Pearsall are 28–53–13 

North Latitude and 99–06–40 West 

Longitude. See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATON, infra. 

DATES: Effective February 21, 2006. The 

window period for filing applications 

for Channel 227A at Pearsall, Texas, 

will not be opened at time. Instead, the 

issue of opening this allotment for 

auction will be addressed by the 

Commission in a subsequent order. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sharon P. McDonald, Media Bureau, 

(202) 418–2180. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, MB Docket No. 03–87, 

adopted January 4, 2006, and released 

January 6, 2006. The full text of this 

Commission decision is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Information 

Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. 

The complete text of this decision also 

may be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, (800) 378–3160, 

or via the company’s Web site, http:// 

www.bcpiweb.com. The Commission 

will send a copy of this Report and 

Order in a report to be sent to Congress 

and the Government Accountability 

Office pursuant to the Congressional 

Review Act, see U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A). 

Since Pearsall and Dilley are located 

within 320 kilometers (199 miles) of the 

Mexican border, the Commission sought 

Mexican concurrence for the allotment 

of Channel 237A at Dilley and Channel 

227A at Pearsall, Texas. Mexican 

concurrence has been received for 

Channel 227A at Pearsall. However, 

concurrence of the Mexican government 

has not yet been received for Channel 

237A at Dilley. If a construction permit 

for Channel 237A at Dilley, Texas, is 

granted prior to the Commission’s 

receipt of formal concurrence in the 

allotment by the Mexican Government, 

the construction permit will include the 

following condition: ‘‘Use of this 

allotment is subject to suspension, 

modification, or termination without 

right to hearing, if found by the 

Commission to be necessary in order to 

conform to the 1992 USA-Mexico FM 

Broadcast Agreement or if specifically 

objected to by Mexico’s Secretaria de 

Communicaciones Y Transportes.’’

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 

Radio, Radio broadcasting. 

■ Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST 

SERVICES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336. 

§ 73.202 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM 

Allotments under Texas, is amended by 

removing Channel 255C2 and adding 

Channel 255C1, Channel 227A and 

Channel 237A at Dilley and by 

removing Channel 237A at Pearsall. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

John A. Karousos, 

Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media 

Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 06–753 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 73 and 76 

[FCC 05–211] 

Order Staying Effective Date, In the 

Matter of Children’s Television 

Obligations of Digital Television 

Broadcasters 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; stay of effectiveness. 

SUMMARY: This document stays three 

sections of the CFR regarding the 

requirements for Internet Web site 

address displays in children’s television 

programming and the core children’s 

programming processing guideline for 

digital broadcasters in MM Docket 00–

167, until 60 days after publication in 

the Federal Register of the 

Commission’s order on reconsideration 

in that proceeding. These requirements 

were previously scheduled to become 

effective on January 1, 2006. 


erjones on PROD1PC61 with RULES