# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 70 Fed. Reg. 68339 2005

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Wed Aug 4 16:25:08 2010

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.Federal Register /Vol. 70, No. 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005 /Rules and Regulations 68339

the Federal Register. A majorrule •' cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published inthe Federal Register. This rule is not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe CAA, petitions for judicial review ofthis action mustbe filed in the United States Court of Appeals forthe appropriate circuitby January 9, 2006. Filing apetition for reconsideration by.the Administrator of this finalrule does not affect the finality ofthis rule for the purpose ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time within which petition forjudicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness ofsuch rule

or action. This action may notbe challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (Seesection 307(b)(2)).

List ofSubjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental regulations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 19, 2005. Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrbtor, Region 1K. [FRDec. 05-22378 Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81 [OAR-2005-0150a; FRL-7995-3]
Designation of Areas forAir Quality Planning Purposes; Arizona; Correction of Boundary of Phoenix Metropolitan 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to correct the boundary ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation. EPA is taking this action under the authority of section 110(k)(6) ofthe Clean AirAct and inlight of the Federal trust responsibility to the-Tribes. This action is intended to facilitate and support the Gila River Indian Community's efforts to develop, adopt and implement a comprehensive Tribal Implementation Plan by. removing unnecessary obligations that flow from the erroneous inclusion ofa portion ofthe Reservation inthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour

ozone nonattainment area. DATES: This action will beeffective on January 9, 2006, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by December 12, 2005. Ifwe receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal inthe FederalRegister to notify the public that this rule will not take effect and that we willrespond to submitted
comments and take subsequent final action.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number OAR2005-0150, by one ofthe following methods:

1.Agency Web site: http:// docket.epa.gov/rmepub/.EPA prefers receiving comments through this electronic public docket and comment " system. Follow the on-line instructions
to submit comments.

2. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.Follow the on-line instructions.

3. E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov. 4. Mail or deliver: Wienke Tax, Office ofAir Planning (AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco., CA 94105-3901.

Instructions: All comments willbe included inthe public docket without change and may be made available oniline at http://doclet.epa.govIrmepub/, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI)

or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that youconsider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should notbe submitted through the agency Web site, eRulemakifig portal, or e-mail. The agency Web site and eRulemaking portal are "anonymous access" systems, and EPA will not know your identify or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. Ifyou send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address willbe automatically captured and included as part ofthe public comment. IfEPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact youfor clarification, EPA may notbe able to consider your comment.

Docket:The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepuband in hard copy atEPA Region 9, 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 inthe FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wienke Tax, Office ofAir Planning, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, (520) 622-1622, e-mail:
tax. wienke@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms "we," 'us," and "our" referto EPA.
Table ofContents
I.Regulatory Context II.Gila RiverIndian Community's Request for

a Boundary Change III. EPAReview ofthe Gila RiverIndian Community's Request A. CAAAuthority to Correct Area

Designations B.General Physical Description ofthe

Phoenix Metropolitan Area andEnvirons C. Contribution byEmission Sources on

the Reservation D.Oxidants/Ozone Air Quality Conditions

on the Reservation E.Ozone Planning Issues F. Evaluation and Conclusion IV.Final Action V. Statutory andExecutive OrderReviews

A.Executive Order 12866: Regulatory

Planning andReview B.Paperwork Reduction Act C.Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E.Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation

and Coordination WithIndian Tribal Governments C.Executive Order 13045: Protection of

Children FromEnvironmental Health and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actionsthat

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distkibution, orUse I.National Technology Transfer

Advancement Act J.Congressional Review Act

I. Regulatory Context

OnApril 30, 1971 (36 FR 8186), pursuant to section 109 ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA orAct), as amended in 1970, EPA promulgated national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants, including photochemical oxidants ("oxidants"). EPA set the NAAQS for oxidants (measured as ozone) at 0.08 parts per million (ppm), 1-hour average. Under section 110 ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments of1970, States were required to adopt and submit plans that provide forimplementation, maintenance, and enforcement ofthe NAAQS. These original plans, generally submitted and approved inthe early 1970's, are known as State Implementation Plans (SIPs).

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68339 2005

### 68340. Federal Register/Vol. 70, No... 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005

### /Rules and Regulations

Under EPA regulations promulgated under the 1970 amended Act, States

were required to identify areas (referred
to as "air quality maintenance areas" (AQMAs)) that were violating orthat had the potential to violate the NAAQS by 1985, to submit detailed analyses of the impacts on air quality ofprojected groWth inthese areas, and, where the analysis indicates that the NAAQS will not be maintained, to submit SIP " revisions containing measures to ensure maintenance during-the ensuingperiod. In 1975, EPA approved Arizona's identification ofthe Phoenix Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) as

an AQMA for oxidants. See 40 FR 41942 (September 9, 1975). The Phoenix SMSA includes all ofMaricopa County, which encompasses an area of approximately 9,200 square miles in south-central Arizona, andincludes the northern quarter ofthe GilaRiver Indian Reservation. 1

Atask force consisting of representatives ofFederal, State, and local government agencies as well as community groups (butno Tribal representatives) was created to guide the preparation ofthe detailed air quality maintenance analysis forthe Phoenix AQMA as required under EPA regulations. The air quality maintenance analysis focused on a study area of approximately 1;700 square miles covering the urbanized portions ofthe Phoenix metropolitan area. The study

area was based on the Maricopa Association ofGovernments 2 (MAG) primary planning area, which included only a small portion ofthe Maricopa County portion of theReservation. 3 The final airquality maintenance analysis report was published inJuly 1977.4 This maintenance analysis report identified and evaluated 11 specific control

The GilaRiver Indian Reservation lies south of the urbanized portion ofthe Phoenix metropolitan.

area and stratldles the boundary between Maricopa County and Pinal County. The Reservation encompasses approximately 580 square miles, of which approximately 140 square mileslie within Maricopa County and 440 square miles lie within Pinal County.

2MAG is a Council ofGovernments that serves as the regional agency forthe Phoenix metropolitan

area. MAG was formed in 1967. In 1978, the Governor ofArizona designated MAG as thelead air quality planning agency for Maricopa County. The Gila RiverIndiai Community joined MAG in 1989.

3The portion ofthe Reservation that was included in the Phoenix AQMA study area consists ofarectangular areatraversed byInterstate 10 and defined by theReservation boundaries tothe north and east andby a southward extension ofPriest Drive tothe west and a westward extension ofHunt Highway to the south. This area is about 24 square miles, which represents approximately 17% ofthe Maricopa County portionofthe Reservation.

4Aerovironment Inc.,Air Quality Maintenance Analysisin Phoenix, Arizona,Final Reflort,July
1977. strategies for attaining and maintaining the oxidants standard within the study

area, but wasnot submitted to EPA as

aSIP revision in anticipation of differentplanning requirements and deadlines under amendments to the Clean Air Act then under active consideration by Congress.

Congress did amend the Actin 1977, and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 replaced the AQMA approach with

anew approach, under which all areas ofthe country were designated as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable for each ofthe NAAQS. Under the 1977 amended Act, "nonattainment area" meant an area which is shown by monitored data or which is calculated by air quality modeling (orother methods determined -byEPA to be reliable) to exceed any NAAQS. OnMarch 3, 1978 (43FR 8962), under section 107(d)(2) ofthe 1977 Amended Act, EPA promulgated

area designations for each State with respect to each ofthe NAAQS. The area designations are found in40 CFR part 81. The Clean Air ActAmendments of 1977 required specific types ofSIP, revisions for designated nonattainment

areas and other'types of SIPrevisions for unclassifiable/attainment areas.

Within the State ofArizona, EPA designated Maricopa County as a nonattainment area for the oxigtants NAAQS. See 43 FR 8962, at 8968 (March 3, 1978). EPA designated the rest ofthe State, which included the Pinal County portion ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation, as unclassifiable/ attainment forthe oxidants NAAQS. As such, the northern quarter ofthe Reservation was located inthe Maricopa County nonattainment area and the southern three-quarters was located within the unclassifiable/attainment

area. The following year,EPA approved

a requestby the State ofArizona to reduce the size ofthis county-wide nonattainment area to include only the MAG urban planning area (see 44 FR 16388, March 19, 1979). The MAG urban planning area is approximately 1,950 square miles and is 14 percent larger than the MAG primary planning
area, which had been the study area for the purposes ofthe AQMA arial3sis. The MAG urban planning area also includes the Maricopa County portion (i.e., northern quarter) ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation.

Also in 1979, we established a new

ozone NAAQS to replace the oxidants NAAQS (see 44 FR 8202, February 8, 1979). The new NAAQS was set at 0.12
ppm, 1-hour average. In September 1979, we replaced the Arizona table in 40 CFR part 81 that listed areas and designations for the oxidants NAAQS with atable that listed areas and designations for the then-new 1-hour

ozone NAAQS. See 44FR 54294 (September 19, 1979). In that final rule,

we designated the Tucson area, which had been designated as nonattainment forthe oxidants NAAQS, as unclassifiable/attainment for the ozone NAAQS, butwe reaffirmed the previous
status (nonattainment) and boundary (MAGurban planning area) designation forthe phoenix metropolitan area for the new 1-hour ozone NAAQS ashad been established forthe oxidants NAAQS. We also reaffirmed the unclassifiable/attainment designation for "rest of state."

Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the concept of"nonattainment area" was expanded to include areas that contribute to ambient air quality in

a nearby area that does notmeet a NAAQS as well as the area that actually experiences NAAQS violations. See section 107(d)(1)(A) ofthe Act. Under the 1990 amended Act, the designation of"nonattainment" and boundary (i.e., the MAGurban planning area) forthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area was carried forward by operation oflaw. Further, under the 1990,Act Amendments, the Phoenix

- metropolitan nonattainment area was classified as "moderate" ozone nonattainment. See 56 FR 56694; 56717 (November 6, 1991). On November 6, 1997, the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour

ozone nonattainment area was reclassified to "serious" due to a failure
to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by November 15, 1996. See 62 FR 60001 (November 6, 1997).

In 1997, we established a new 8-hour

ozone NAAQS to replace the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS that we had established in 1979 (see 62 FR 38856, July 18, 1997). The new NAAQS was set at 0.08 ppm, 8-hour average. In 2004, we published final rules that designated all reas of the country with respect to the 8-hour

ozone NAAQS, effective June 15, 2004, and that established June 15, 2005 as the date on whichthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS would berevoked. See 69 FR 23858 and 69FR 23951 (April 30, 2004). In consultation with the State ofArizona and the Gila River Indian Community,

we designated the Phoenix-Mesa area as

anonattainment area for the 8-hour

ozone NAAQS, butthis 8-hour ozone nonattainment area does not include
any portion ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation. See 69 FR 23858, at 23878- 23879 (April 30, 2004). All ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation, i.e., both Maricopa andPinal County portions, lies within the "rest of state" unclassifiable/attainment area for the 8- hour ozone NAAQS. Underthe first 

### 68340° Federal Register/Vol. 70, No.. 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005/Rules and Regulations

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68340 2005

### Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005

### /Rules and Regulations 68341

phase ofthe final rule implementing the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, certain requirements-apply to.former 1-hour

ozone nonattainment areas that are designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (such as the Maricopa Countyportion ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation), such as the preparation and submittal of a:SIP revision consisting ofa plan that. provides for continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years following designation and that includes contingency measures. See 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3); 69 FR 23951, at 23999 (April 30, 2004).

OnMarch 21, 2005 (70 FR 13425), we published a notice in the Federal Register proposing this sameboundary change aspart ofa notice that also proposed approval ofvarious submittals ofrevisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP)and a request by the State ofArizona forredesignation ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-h6ur

ozone nonattainment area to,attainment. Wereceived no comments related to the proposed boundary change, but we decided to withdraw the boundary change portion of the March 21, 2005 proposal. See 70FR 34362 (June 14, 2005). We withdrew the proposed boundary changebecause we decided to review the action as a correction under section 110(k)(6) rather than as a redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(A)

ashad been proposed, based onour preliminary conclusion that we had incorrectly included the northern portion of theGila RiverIndian Reservation in the nonattainment area boundary back in the late 1970's. Inour final rule approving the redesignation request forthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area (70 FR 34362, June 14, 2005),we indicated that

we intended to address the boundary change issue in a separate rulemaking. This notice constitutes that separate rulemaking.

II. Gila River IndianCommunity's Request for a Boundary Change

On March 2, 2005, the Gila River Indian Community, a federallyrecognized tribal government,5 adopted and submitted a resolution requesting EPA to revise the boundary forthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation. 6 The Gila River Indian Community's request includes background information

5See 67 FR 46328, 46329 (July 12, 2002).
6As noted previously, the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area includes the portion oftheReservation that lies within Maricopa County, approximately thenorthern 25 percent of the Reservation: regarding the procedural history leading
to the designation ofthe boundary ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour oxidants (thenozone) nonattainment area, an analysis ofair quality monitoring data existing at the time of and subsequent

• to the original designation in 1978, and

a description ofpopulation, employment, landuse, and traffic associated with the Reservation.

The Gila River Indian Community concludes that inclusion ofthe Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation in the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area was incorrect based on air quality considerations atthe time ofthe original designation and that continued inclusion ofthe Reservation in the nonattainment area will frustrate their
current efforts to regulate air quality on their own lands through preparation, adoption, and implementation ofa comprehensive Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP). The Community's request and supporting documentation are included inthe docket forthis action.

III.EPA Review ofthe Gila River Indian Community's Request

A. CAA AuthorityTo Correct Area Designations
Section 110(k}(6) ofthe Clean AirAct provides, "Whenever the Administrator determines that the Administrator's action approving, disapproving, or promulgating any plan orplan revision (or part thereof), area deiignation, redesignation, classification, or reclassification was in error, the Administrator may inthe same manner

as the approval; disapproval, or

- promulgation revise such action as appropriate without requiring any
further submission from the State. Such determination and the basis thereof shall be provided to the State and public." We interpret this provision to authorize the Agency to make corrections to a promulgated regulation when itis shown to our satisfaction that (1) we clearly erredin failing to' consider orin inappropriately considering information made available
to EPA atthe-time ofthe promulgation,

orthe information made available atthe time ofpromulgation is subsequently demonstrated to have been clearly inadequate, and (2) other information persuasively supports a change inthe regulation. See 57 FR 56762, at 56763 (November 30, 1992).

We have reviewed the documentation submitted by the Gila River Indian Community, and based on that review and an independent assessment ofthe air quality data and circumstances behind our actions designating, redesignating oraffirming air quality planning areas forthe oxidants and

ozone NAAQS, we agree with the Gila River Indian Community that a correction ofthe boundary to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation from the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area is warranted. Our rationale is provided in the following subsections.

B. General PhysicalDescriptionofthe PhoenixMetropolitanAreaand Environs7 -'

The Phoenix metropolitan area is in south-central Arizona.The area occupies an almost-flat alluvial plain studded and surrounded by hills, buttes, and mountain ranges. The elevation of the valley floor is approximately 1,100 feet. Thb dominating mountain ranges around the area include the Sierra Estrella Mountains to the southwest, the White Tank Mountains to the west; the Hieroglyphic and New River Mountains
to the north; the Superstition and Goldfield and Mazatzal Mountains to the east; and the Santan and Sacaton Mountains to the southeast. Elevations
range from 3,000 feet inthe southeast, to.4,000 feet in the west and southwest, and to 5,000 to 7,000 feet inthe north andeast. The principal natural drainages are the Salt River, the Agua FriaRiver, and the Gila River. The Gila River carves aroute between the South Mountains and the Sierra Estrella Mountains and isjoined by the Salt River near the northwest corner ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation. The South Mountains rise to an elevation of approximately 2,700 feetand partially separate the urbanized portions ofthe Phoenix metropolitan areato the north from the Gila River Indian Reservation
to the south.

-

The climate ofthe area varies depending on the occurrence ofthe natural topographic features but is generally a warm, desert type climate with low annual rainfall.and low relative humidity. Summers are usually long and hot, winters short and mild, with gradual temperature transitions in the spring and fall seasons.

The most significant terrain, interm ofinfluence on local wind flow, is located to the north and east ofthe Phoenix area. During the morning and afternoon, sunlight warms thisterrain causing the air immediately above itto rise and pull air from the lower

7Sources ofinformation for this section ofthe notice include theArmy Corps ofEngineers' PhoenixUrbanStudy,Background Information Appendix(February 1977) and the Arizona Department ofEnvironmental Quality's Final SeriousArea Ozone StateImplementationPlan for MaricopaCounty(December 2000).

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68341 2005

### 68342 Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005/Rules and Regulations

elevations in the direction ofthe higher terrain to replace the rising air. In Phoenix, this "valley" breeze (up-valley flow) usually begins around noon with

a west wind that persists until midnight. After sunset, under clear sky conditions, the surface undergoes radiative cooling, lowering the temperatures ofthe air above it and reversing the flow. The "mountain" breeze (down-valley flow), which is out ofthe east formost ofthe Phoenix area, begins about midnight and lasts until noon, when the reversal
to up-valley flow takes over.

The systematic mountain-valley circulation over thePhoenix area directs the timing and geographic distribution of ozone and its precursors. Early morning commute emissions are slowly transported to the westby drainage winds. By afternoon, the flow is' reversed and emissions are transported
to the east, back over the urbanized area, entraining additional surface emissions. During this period ofample sunlight and precursor emissions, the conditions

are conducive forozone formation. As the dayprogresses into late afternoon,

ozone continues to build and is further transported toward the higher terrain, resulting in the maximum ozone concentration typically monitored east

or north ofthe urbanized area.
C. ContributionbyEmissionSourceson theReservation

In general, ambient ozone concentrations are caused byon-road and nonroad mobile emissions sources,

area sources, large stationary sources and biogenic sources that emit ozone precursors (i.e., volatile organic compounds,,orVOC, and oxides of nitrogen oxides, orNOx). The level of mobile source emissions, often the largest part ofthe inventory in a major metropolitan area, can be generally correlated to population density and land use patterns.

The Gila River Indian Community has historically been, and continues to be, primarily arural, agricultural community with few industrial uses and

nomajor population centers. The Gila River Indian Community has an onReservation population of approximately 11,300 people, ofwhich approximately 2,700 people live in the Maricopa Countyportion ofthe Reservation. The on-Reservation population density is approximately 20 persons per square mile. By comparison, the population living within the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone area

as awhole is approximately 3million people with a population density of approximately 1,500persons per square mile, and there are at least six major population centers in the Phoenix nonattainment area, including Phoenix, Mesa, Scottsdale, Glendale, Tempe, and Chandler. Thus, emissions generated by

uses on the Reservation can be assumed
to have essentially no effect on ambient

ozone concentrations inthe urbanized portions ofthe Phoenix metropolitan

area.8 Our assumption in this regard is supported by emissions inventory estimates prepared by the.Gila River Indian Reservation from which we find that ozone precursor emissions associated with the Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation represent less than 0.2% and 0.6% ofVOC and NOx emissions, respectively, oftotal estimated ozone precursor emissions generated within the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area.
D. Oxidants/Ozone Air Quality Conditionson theReservation

The oxidants/ozone designations for the MAG urban planning area in 1978 and 1979 were based on ambient air quality data collected at a small number'. ofmonitoring stations located within the urbanized portions ofMaricopa County.9 Duringthe 1970's,there was

no monitoring station located on the Gila River Indian Reservation. During this period, the ozone monitoring station that was closest to the Gila River Indian Reservation was the "South Phoepix" station located at 4732 South Central Avenue. The South Phoenix station is located north ofthe South Mountains while the Reservation lies south ofthat range. The distance between the South Phoenix station and the closest Reservation boundary is approximately eight miles.We believe that the SouthPhoenix monitor provides data that is sufficiently representative ofconditions in the Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation tojustify its use for the
purposes ofthis correction notice although we recognize that ozone concentrations would generally be

The State ofArizona's Nonattainment AreaPlan forCarbonMonoxideandPhotochemicalOxidants, MaricopaCounty, UrbanPlanning Area(revised February 16, 1979) was based in part on traffic assignments in the MAG primary planning area, which essentially excludes the Maricopa County portion oftheReservation (see footnote 43, above), rather than the largerurban planning area (that defines the nonattainment area and that includes all oftheMaricopa County portion ofthe Reservation) butjustified theuse oftraffic assignments from the smaller areaby concluding that the additional longrange fringe development would contribute negligibly to thehighest carbon monoxide and

ozone concentrations measured in cdntral Phoenix. EPA approved this.plan in 1982. See47 FR 19326 (May 5, 1982).

9No oxidants/ozone dispersion modelingwas conducted duringthis period; instead, the demonstrations ofattainment in the various plans relied upon a linear rollback technique. expected to decrease with increasing distance ina southerly direction from the Phoenix urbanized area given the prevailing mountain-valley (i.e., eastwest) wind circulation characteristic of the area.

Areview ofEPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database and the Arizona Department ofEnvironmental Quality's Nonattainment AreaPlan forCarbon Monoxide andPhotochemicalOxidants, MaricopaCounty UrbanPlanning Area (revisedFebruary 16, 1979)reveals that (1)violations ofthe oxidants NAAQS (0.08 ppm,hourly average) were recorded atthe South Phoenix station during the 1975-1978 period, (2) no violations ofthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS (0.12 ppm) were recorded at the South Phoenix station during this same period, (3) maximum ozone levels atthe South Phoenix station were generally less than those atthe four other stations that were operating continuously through this

same period. Thus, the available data supports the conclusion that, during the mid-to late-1970's, while the Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation may well have experienced violations ofthe oxidants NAAQS, itdid not experience violations ofthe less stringent 1-hour

ozone NAAQS.-'From 1979 through 2004, exceedances ofthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS were measured on only 5 days
at the South Phoenix station: one dayin 1981, two days in 1983, one day in.1990 and one day in 1995..

Since mid-2002, the Gila River Indian Community has operated an ozone monitoring station within the Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation (the St.Johns station) and another in the Pinal County portion ofthe Reservation (theSacaton station). Data have been collected atthese stations frommid2002 through the end ofthe 2004 ozone

season. No exceedances of the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS havebeen recorded at either station.

E. OzonePlanning Issues
Ozone planning efforts for the Phoenix metropolitani area began in
earnest inthe mid-1970's at the direction ofthe PhoenixAQMA Task Force, including the identification and evaluation ofcontrol strategies focused

onthe AQMA study area. The Phoenix AQMA TaskForce included representatives from EPA and various State and local agencies as well as representatives from certain nongovernmental entities such as the Phoenix Chamber ofCommerce and the League ofWomen Voters. The Gila River Indian Community, however, was not a member ofthe AQMA Task Force nor is there any evidence that suggests that the community's views orconcerns were

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68342 2005

### Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 217/Thursday, Novembei 10, 2005/Rules and Regulations 68343

taken into account in identification of the appropriate study area, the analysis ofair quality conditions and projects, or inthe identification and evaluation of possible control strategies, which isdocumented ina final report entitled, AirQualityMaintenance Analysis in Phoenix, Arizona (July 1977). Likewise, there is noevidence that suggests thatthe Gila RiverIndian Community was consulted by EPA, the State ofArizona, orMAG 1o inthe decision-making process leading to the nonattainment designation firston a county-wide basis for oxidants under the Clean AirAct Amendments of 1977, then on a MAG urban planning area boundary basis for the oxidants NAAQS (andlater affirmed forthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS). Ever since this time, the Gila River Indian Reservation has been split into two air quality planning areas for the purposes ofthe 1-hour-ozone

. NAAQS: aMaricopa County portion that is part ofa nonattainment area and

a Pinal County portion that is part ofan "unclassifiable/attainment" area.

Since the late 1970's, EPA has approved various State and local regulations and other control measures that have helped to attain the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix metropolitan nonattainment area and that provided the basisupon whichEPA recently approved the State's redesignation request forthe area to "attainment." See 70FR 34362 (June 14, 2005).It is important to note that,under the CAA, the State and local air pollution control agencies do not have authority to administer airregulatory programs over the Reservation; consequently, the SIPrules that have been adopted and implemented within the non-Tribal port-ions ofthe Phoenix metropolitan area andthat have provided for attainment ofthe 1-hour

ozone NAAQS do not apply within the Gila River Indian Reservation. Furthermore, due to the Reservation's lack of ozone precursor sources, it was

never considered necessary to apply

ozone precursor limits to sources onthe Reservation.

In 2004, we designated all areas ofthe country as nonattainment, attainment,

or unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). In contrast to the process undertaken inconnection with the area designations established inthe late 1970's, we made a significant effortto consult withthe Tribes on the appropriate designations for their lands forthe new (8-hour) ozone NAAQS: In

our final rule establishing area

10The Gila RiverIndian Community became a. member ofMAG in November of 1989. designations forthe 8-hour ozone NAAQS, we agreed with the Gila River Indian Community that the Reservation, including bothMaritopa and Pinal County portions, shouldbe included in the larger area designation of "unclassifiable/ attainment." Thus, in
contrast to the status ofthe Reservation relative to the 1-hour ozone designations, the Gila River Indian Reservation is not split into different air quality planning areas forthe 8-hour

ozone NAAQS, and no part ofthe Reservation is included in the Phoenix metropolitan 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.

Under phase 1 ofour 8-hour ozone implementation rule, areas designated

as "unclassifiable/attainment" for the 8- hour ozone NAAQS that were designated nonattainment for the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS at the time ofthe initial 8-hour ozone designation (i.e., mid2004) are subjectto certain requirements (such as a vehicle inspection and maintenance program, stage II vapor recovery, and a clean fuels fleet program) that applied by virtue oftheir 1-hour ozone nonattainment status and that continueto apply even after revocation ofthe 1-hour ozone standard (which occurred on June 15, 2005). These areas are also subject to a requirement to prepare and submit a plan that provides for continued maintenance ofthe 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10years following designation and that includes contingency measures. See 40 CFR 51.900(f), 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3), 69 FR 23951, at 23979 (April 30, 2004) and 70 FR 30592 (May 26, 2005). The Maricopa County portion ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation is one ofthe areas that was designated asunclassifiable/attainment forthe 8-hour ozone NAAQS but, at the time ofthat designation, was designated "nonattainment" for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

.OnJune 14, 2005, we redesignated the Phoenix "serious" 1-hour ozone nonattainment area (including the Maricopa County portion ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation) to attainment, and our redesignation was predicated

on our finding that all applicable requirements forthat nonattainment

area had been met. See 70 FR 34362 (June 14, 2005). However, because none of the State and local adopted control

measures that were relied upon for redesignation apply within the Gila River Indian Reservation, the obligation
to adopt (at least as contingency measures) the requirements listed in40 CFR 51.900(f) that apply within former "serious" 1-hour ozone nonattainment

areas (such as an enhanced inspection and maintenance program, stage II vapor recovery, and a clean fuels fleet program) remains ineffect for the Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation, notwithstanding the redesignation ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour nonattainment area to attainment, and notwithstanding the revocation ofthe 1-hourozone NAAQS

onJune 15, 2005. In addition,the Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation is subject to the requirement under 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3)
to prepare and submit a plan that provides for continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years following designation and that includes contingency measures. See EPA Memorandum dated May 20, 2005: "Maintenance Plan Guidance for Certain 8-Hour Ozone Areas Under Section 110(a)(1) ofthe Clean Air Act."

Meanwhile, the GilaRiver Indian Community is inthe final stages of preparing, adopting and submitting a Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP)to EPA for approval. The TIP contains several ordinances including permit requirements and fees; administrative appeals procedures; enforcement provisions (civil and criminal); and controls on non-metallic mineral mining; secondary aluminum processing operations; solvent metal cleaning; VOC usage, storage and handling; aerospace manufacturing and rework processes; and openburning and visible emissions. As such, the Gila • River Indian Community is developing

a comprehensive air quality regulatory program, but the Community is doing so with the view that their historic inclusion inthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hourozone nonattainment area was

erroneous. EPA.supports the Community's efforts to manage its own air quality regulatory program through development, adoption and implementation ofthe TIP and recognizes that the control measure and planning antibacksliding obligations that apply to the Maricopa County portion ofthe Reservation under our phase 1implementation rule forthe 8- hour ozone NAAQS (byvirtue ofits inclusion within the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area) represent an obstacle to the Community's objectives in this regard.

F.EvaluationandConclusion

Based on the historic ambient monitoring data and prevailing.wind patterns in the area, we conclude that

we clearly erred in failing to consider data made available at the time of our -September 1979 affirmation ofthe preexisting oxidants nonattainment area boundary (i.e., the MAG urban planning

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68343 2005

### No. 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005/Rules and Regulations

area) as thegeographic basis for the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area. 1' Our September 1979 action affirming the oxidants nonattainment areaboundary for the purposes ofthe i-hour ozone NAAQS had the effect ofincluding aportion of the Gila River Indian Reservation (the Maricopa County portion) that was not experiencing violations ofthe 1-hour

ozone NAAQS into the larger urbanized nonattainment area where violations of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS were relatively frequent and widespread and thereby unnecessarily splittingthe Reservation into two different air quality planning areas.

In support ofthis conclusion, we find that, hadwe considered the available data for the purpose ofdetermining whether the Reservation should be included in the ozone nonattainment

area (as opposed to the oxidants nonattainment area), we would have -concludedbased on data from the South Phoenix station and the prevailing mountain-valley (east-west)wind circulation in the area that no part ofthe Reservation was experiencing violations ofthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and that affirming the pre-existing oxidants nonattainment boundary for the purposes ofthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS and thereby continuing the split ofthe Reservation into two air quality planning areas with different designations would be inappropriate.

We also find that other information persuasively supports a correction in the boundary to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation atthis time: Namely, (1)The Reservation is not a significant

source area for ozone precursor emissions and thus has essentially no effect on ambient ozone concentrations inthe urbanized portions ofthe Phoenix metropolitan area; (2) data from the South Phoenix station indicates that ambient ozone levels on the Reservation, with the possible exception -ofa period in the early 1980's, have

never violated the 1-hour ozone NAAQS; (3) available ambient ozone data collected at the two monitoring stations located on the Reservation indicate that the area currently is not experiencing violations 6fthe 1-hour

ozone NAAQS; and (4) the former nonattainment status ofthe Maricopa

11With respect to our promulgation ofa Countywide designation forthe oxidants NAAQS (in the March 1978) and our approval ofareduction in the size ofthe oxidantsnonattainment area to conform
to theMAG urban planning area boundary (in March 1979), we find that ourinclusion ofthe Maricopa County portion oftheGila River Indian Reservation in thoseareas, while questionable, was not clearly in error because oftheviolations ofthe oxidants NAAQS measured at the South Phoenix station. County portion ofthe Reservation for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS will unnecessarily complicate and frustrate the GilaRiver Indian Community's development and implementation ofa Tribal Implementation Plan.

IV. Final Action

Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(6) ofthe CAA and atthe request ofthe Gila RiverIndian Community, EPA is correcting the boundary ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1 -hour ozone nonattainment areato exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation. 12 This action revises the description ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area inthe table entitled "Arizona-Ozone (1-Hour Standard)" in 40 CFR 81.303.

We do not anticipate any objectionsto this action, so we are finalizing the correction action without proposing it in advance. However, intheProposed Rules section 6fthis Federal Register,

we are simultaneously proposing this

same action to correct the boundary. If

we receive adverse comments by December 12, 2005, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. Ifwe do notreceive timely adverse comments, the direct final action will beeffective without further notice onJanuary 9, 2006.

The effect ofthis action is to attach the Maricopa County portion ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation to the preexisting "unclassifiable/attainment"

area forthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS that consists ofall ofthose portions ofthe State ofArizona (including the rest of the Reservation that lies in Pinal County)that are not designated as a "nonattainment" area or as an "attainment" area subject to a .maintenance plan. Also, this action relieves the Agency and the Gila River Indian Community from any specific obligations that flow from the former nonattainment status ofthe Maricopa County portion ofthe Gila River Indian Reservation under our phase 1 implementation rule forthe 8-hour

ozone NAAQS, including the applicable requirements listed in40 CFR 51.900(f)

2In sodoing, we note the similarities between

our action here andprevious EPAactions in which

we corrected 1-hour ozone nonattainment designations that had originally been established for. the oxidants NAAQS and that were erroneously affirmed forthe purposes ofthe 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 62 FR 14641 (March 27, 1997) (direct final rule correcting ozone nonattainment designations in New Hampshire and Maine); and 61
FR 5707 (February 14, 1996) (final rule correcting

ozone nonattainment designations in Michigan). and the preparation and submittal ofa plan under 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3) that provides for continued maintenance -of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10years following designation and that includes contingency measures for that portion of the Reservation. 13

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order12866:Regulatory Planning andReview
UnderExecutive Order 12866, [58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)] the Agency mustdetermine whether the regulatory action is "significant" and therefore subject to OMB review and the " requirements ofthe Executive Order. The Order defines "significant regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in arule that may: (1)Have an annual effect on the economy of$100 million or more or adversely affect in a material waythe economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, ortribal governments or communities; (2) create

a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;.(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, userfees, orloan .programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal orpolicy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in'the Executive Order."

UnderExecutive Order 12866 (58FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
nota "significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to review by the Office ofManagement and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subjectto Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, orUse" (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely reduces the size ofa nonattainment area for air quality planning purposes.
B. Paperwork ReductionAct
This action does not impose an information collection bi4rden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.Burden

means the total time, effort, or financial

resources expended bypersons to generate, maintain, retain, ordisclose or

13While no longer subject tothe specific

- maintenance planrequirements under40 CFR 51.905(a)(3), the Gila River Indian Reservation, like other areas designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hourozone NAAQS, remains subject to the general requirement to provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement ofthe 8-hour ozone NAAQS under se'ction 110(a)(1) ofthe Act. 

### 68344 Federal Register/Vol. 70,

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68344 2005Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 /Thursday, November 10, 2005/Rules and Regulations 68345

provide information to or for aFederal agency. This includes thetime needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes ofcollecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit orotherwise disclose the information.

This rule does not impose aninformation collection burden under the provisions ofthePaperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44U.S.C. 3501 etseq.). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and

a person is not required to respond to

a collection ofinformation unless it displays a currently valid OMB-control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA'sregulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C.RegulatoryFlexibility Act (RFA)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis ofany rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that this rule will nothave a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall .entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.

Forpurposes of assessing the impacts oftoday's rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1)A small business

as defined by the SmallBusiness Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city,county, town, school district or special districtwith a population ofless than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is anynot-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant inits field.

After considering the economic impacts oftoday's rule on small entities, I certify that this action will nothave a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule 'will not impose any direct requirements on small entities. EPA is taking direct final action to correct the boundary ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation. This action is intended to facilitate and support the Gila River Indian Community's efforts to develop, adopt and implement a comprehensive Tribal Implementation Plan by removing unnecessary obligations that flow from the erroneous inclusion ofa portion ofthe Reservation in the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area.
D. UnfundedMandatesReformAct

Title II ofthe Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 104- 4, establishes requirements forFederal agencies to assess the effects oftheir regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments andthe private
sector. Under section 202 ofthe UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including acost-benefit analysis, forproposed and final rules with "Federal mandates" thatmay result inexpenditures to State, local, and tribalgovernients, in the aggregate,.

or to the private sector, of$100 million

or more in any oneyear.

Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 ofthe UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number ofregulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective orleast burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives ofthe rule.The provisions ofsection 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, -mostcost-effective,or least burdensome alternative ifthe Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative

was not adopted.

Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 ofthe UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan mustprovide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials ofaffected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development ofEPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory_ requirements.

Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (underthe regulatory provisions ofTitle II ofthe UMRA) for State, local, ortribal governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable dutyon any State, local or tribal governments or-the private sector. Inany event, EPA has determined that thisrule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million ormore forState, local, and tribalgovernments, inthe aggregate,

orthe private sector in any oneyear. Thus, today's ruleis not subject to the requirements ofsections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

E.Executive Order13132:Federalism

Executive Order 13132, entitled "Federalism" (64 FR43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure "meaningful and timely input by State and local officials inthe development of regulatory policies that havefederalism implications." "Policies that have federalism implications" is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have "substantial direct effects on the States, onthe relationship between the national government and the States, or onthe distribution of power andresponsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment."

This action also does notfiave Federalism implications because it d6es
nothave substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or

on the distribution ofpower and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely reduces the size ofa nonattainment area for air quality planning purposes and does notalter the relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established in the Clean AirAct.

F.Executive Order13175:Consultation andCoordinationWithIndianTribal Governments

Executive Order 13175, entitled "Consultation and Coordination with IndianTribal Governments" (65FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to

ensure "meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications." "Policies that have tribal implications" are defined inthe Executive Orderto include regulations that have "substantial directeffects on

one or more Indian tribes, onthe relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution ofpower and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes."

Under section 5(b) ofExecutive Order 13175, EPA may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, andthat is notrequired bystatute, unless the Federal government provides

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68345 2005

### 68346 'Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 217/Thursday, November 10, 20"05/Rules and Regulations

the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by tribal governments, or EPA consults with tribal officials early inthe process of developing theproposed regulation. Under section 5(c) ofExecutive Order 13175, EPA may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications.and that preempts tribal law, unless the Agency consults with tribal.officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.

EPA has concluded that this action may have tribalimplications. Representatives ofthe Gila River Indian Community approached EPA two years ago and requested thatEPA make this boundary correction. Consistent with EPA policy, EPA consulted with representatives ofthe community early in the process ofdeveloping this action
to permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development. We agree with the technical and policy rationale that the cbmmiinity provided for this boundary correction, and believe that alltribal concerns have been met. EPA's action corrects the boundary ofthe Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone area to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation. As such, it Will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments,

norpreempt tribal law. Thus, the requirements ofsections 5(b) and 5(c) of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.

G.Executive Order13045:Protectionof. ChildrenFromEnvironmentalHealth andSafetyRisks

Executive Order 13045: "Protection of Children from Environmental health Risks and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1)is determined to be "economically significant''-as defined underExecutive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety riskthat EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meetsboth criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 "Protection ofChildren from Environmental Health Risks and. Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because itis not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this rule present a disproportionate risk to children.

H.Executive Order13211: Actions That Significantly Affect EnergySupply, Distribution, orUse
Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly AffectEnergy Supply, Distribution, or Use" (66FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires EPA to prepare and submit a Statement ofEnergy Effects to the Administrator ofthe Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office ofManagement and Budget, for certain actions identified as "significant energy actions." Section 4(b) of Executive Order 13211 defines "significant energy actions" as "any' actionby an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation ofafinal rule or, regulation, including notices ofinquiry, advance notices ofproposed rulemaking, and notices ofproposed rulemaking: (1)(i) that is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is likely to have a significant adverse effect

on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or (2) that is designated by the Administrator ofthe Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action."

This rule is not subjectto Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because itis
not asignificant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

LNationalTechnologyTransfer AdvancementAct
Section 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer and Advancement Actof 1995 ("NTTAA"), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, testmethods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations whenthe Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

This rule does not involve establishment oftechnical standards, and thus, the requirements ofsection 12(d) ofthe National.Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do notapply to this action.

J.Congressional ReviewAct

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 etseq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,-generally provides that before arule maytake effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of-the rule, to each House ofthe Congress and to the Comptroller General ofthe United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, and the Comptroller General ofthe United States prior topublication oftherule in the Federal Register. Amajor rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published inthe Federal Register. This action is not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean Air Act, petitions forjudicial review of this action mustbe filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit byJanuary 9,2006. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does
not affect the finality ofthisrule forthe purposes ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time within which apetition forjudicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings o enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)

ListofSubjects in40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control,National parks, Wilderness areas.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 etseq. Dated: Novem~ber 3, 2005. Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator. 

### * Part 81, chapter I,title40 oftheCode ofFederal Regulations are amended as follows:



### PART 81--[AMENDED]

m 1.The authoritycitation forpart 81 cqntinues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 etseq. 

### Subpart C-[Amended]

* 2. In § 81.303, thetable entitled "Arizona-Ozone (1-Hour Standard)" i amended byrevising the entry for the Phoenix Areato read as follows: 

### §81.303 Arizona.

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68346 2005

### Federal Register/Vol. 70; No. 217/ Thursday, Noveffiber 10, .2005/Rules and Regulations

ARIZONA-OZONE

[1-Hour Standard]

Designation Classification Designated area Date'! Type Date 1 Type

Phoenix Area: Maricopa County (part)

................................... Phoenix nonattainment Forest area boundary: 1. Commencing at a point which is the intersection.of

the eastern line of Range 7 East, Gila and Salt River Baseline and Meridian, and the southern line of Township 2 South, said point is the southeastern corner of the Maricopa Association of Governments Urban Planning Area, which is the point of beginning; 2. Thence, proceed northerly along the eastern line of

Range 7 East which is the common boundary between Maricopa and Pinal Counties, as described in Arizona Revised Statutes-Section 11-109, to a point where the eastern line of Range 7 East intersects the northern line of Township 1 North, said point is also the intersection of the Maricopa County Line and the Tonto National Forest Boundary, as established by Executive Order 869 dated July 1, 1908, as amended and shown on the U.S. Forest Service 1969 Planimetric Maps; " 3. Thence, westerly along the northern line of Township

1 North to approximately the southwest corner of the southeast quarter of Section 35, Township 2 North,

- Range 7 East, said point being the boundary of the

Tonto National Forest and Usery Mountain Semi-Regional Park; 4. Thence, northerly along the Tonto National Forest

Boundary, which is generally the western line of the east half of Sections 26 and 35 of Township 2 North, Range 7 East, to a point which is where the quarter section line intersects with the northern line of Section 26, Township 2 North, Range 7 East, said point also being the northeast corner- of the Usery Mountain Semi-Regional Park; 5. Thence, westerly along the Tonto National Forest

Boundary, which is generally the south line of Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 and the southern line of the west half of Section 23, Township 2 North, Range 7 East, to a point which is the southwest corner of Section 19, Township 2 North, R&nge 7 East;
6.Thence, northerly along the Tonto National Forest

Boundary to a point where the Tonto National Forest Boundary intersects with the eastern boundary of the Salt River Indian Reservation, generally described as the center line of the Salt River Channel; 7. Thence, northeasterly and northerly along the com-

.mon boundary of the Tonto National Forest and the Salt River Indian Reservation to a point which is the northeast corner of the Salt River Indian Reservation and the southeast corner of the Fort McDowell Indian Reservation, as shown on the plat dated July 22, 1902, and recorded with the U.S. Government on June 15, 1902; 8. Thence, northeasterly along the common boundary

between the Tonto National Forest and the Fort McDowell Indian Reservation to a point which is the northeast corner of the Fort McDowell Indian Reservation; 9. Thence, southwesterly along the northern boundary

of the Fort McDowell Indian Reservation, which line is

a common boundary with the Tonto National Forest,
to a point where the boundary intersects with the eastern line of Section 12, Township 4 North, Range 6 East; 6/14/05 Attainment, 

### 68347

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68347 2005

### 68348 Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005/Rules and Regulations

ARIZONA-OZONE-Continued [1-Hour Standard]

Designation Classification Designated area Date Type Date 1 Type

10. Thence, northerly along the eastern line of Range 6

East to a point where the eastern line of Range 6 East intersects with the southern line of Township 5 North, said. line is the- boundary between the Tonto National Forest and the east boundary of McDowell Mountain Regional Park; 11. Thence, westerly along the southern line of Township 5 North to a point where the southern line intersectswith the eastern line of Range 5East which line is the boundary of Tonto Nationl Forest and the north boundary of McDowell Mountain Regional Park; 12. Thence, northerly along the eastern line of Range 5

East to a point where the eastern line of Range 5 East intersects with the northern line of Township 5 North, which line is the boundary of the Tonto National Forest; 13. Thence, westerly along the northern line of Township 5 North to a point where the northern line of Township 5 North intersects with the easterly line of Range 4 East, said line isthe boundary ofTonto National Forest; 14. Thence, northerly along the eastern line of Range 4

East to a point where the eastern line of Range 4 East intersects with the northern line of Township 6 North, which line is the boundary of the Tonto National Forest; 15. Thence, westerly along the northern line of Townshtip 6 North to a point of intersection with the Marcopa-YaVapai County line, which is generally described in Arizona Revised Statutes Section 11-109
as the center line of the Aqua Fria River (Also the north end of Lake Pleasant); 16.Thence, southwesterly and southerly along the Maricopa-Yavapai County line to a point which is described by Arizona Revised Statutes Section 11-109
as being on the center line of the Aqua. Fria River, two miles southerly and below the mouth of Humbug Creek; 17. Thence, southerly along the center line of Aqua Fria

Riverto the intersection ofthe center line of theAqua Fria River and the center line of Beardsley Canal, said point isgenerally inthe northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 5 North,' Range 1East, as shown
on the U.S. Geological Survey's Baldy Mountain, Arizona Quadrangle Map, 7.5 Minute series (Topographic), dated 1964; 18. Thence, southwesterly and southerly along the center line of Beardsley Canal to a point which is the center line of Beardsley Canal where it intersectswith the center line of Indian School Road; 19. Thence, westerly along the center line of West Indian School Road to a point where the center line of West Indian School Road intersects with the center line of North Jackrabbit Trail; 20.Thence, southerly along the center line of Jackrabbit)

Trail approximately nine and three-quarter miles to a point where the center line of Jackrabbit Trail intersects with the Gila River, said point is generally on the north-south quarter section line of Section 8, Township 1 South, Range 2 West; 21. Thence, northeasterly and easterly up the Gila River

to a point where the Gila River intersects with the northern extension of the western boundary of Estrella Mountain Regional Park, which point is generally the quarter corner of the northern line of Section 31, Township 1North, Range 1West;

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68348 2005

### Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 217/Thursday, November 10, 2005/Rules and Regulations

ARIZONA-OZONE-Oontinued [1-Hour Standard]

Designation Classification Designated area Date1 Type Date1 Type

22. Thence, southerly along the extension of the western boundary and along the western boundary of Estrella Mountain Regional Park to a point where the southern extension of the western boundary of Estrella Mountain Regional Park intersects with the southern line of Township 1South; 23. Thence, easterly along the southern line of Township 1 South to a point where the south line of Township 1South intersectswith the western line of Range 1 East, which line is generally the southern boundary of Estrella Mountain Regional Park; 24. Thence, southerly along the western line of Range 1

East to the southwest corner of Section 18,Township 2 South, Range 1 East, said line is the western boundary of the Gila River Indian Reservation; 25. Thence, easterly along the southern boundary of the

Gila River Indian Reservation which is the southern line of Sections 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, to the boundary between Maricopa and Pinal Counties as described in Arizona Revised Statutes Sections 11-109 and 11-113, which -isthe eastern line of Range 1 East; 26. Thence, northerly along the eastern boundary of

Range 1 East, which is the common boundary between Maricopa and Pinal Counties, to a point where the eastern line of Range 1 East intersects the Gila River; 27. Thence, southerly up the Gila River to a point where

the Gila River intersects with the southern tine of Township 2 South; 2& Thence, easterly along the southern line of Township 2 South to the point of beginning which is a point where the southern line of Township 2 South intersects with the eastern line Range 7 East; 29. Except that portion of the area defined by paragraphs 1 through 28 above that lies within the Gila River Indian Reservation.

This date is October 18, 2000 unless otherwise noted.

[FR Doc. 05-22371 Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 

### 68349

HeinOnline -- 70 Fed. Reg. 68349 2005