60362 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 11, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

SUMMARY: On August 7, 2000, the Postal

Service announced an interim rule in

the Federal Register (65 FR 48171)

providing a 5 percent discount off the

regular postage for all Express Mail

International Service (EMS) shipments

paid by an Express Mail Corporate

Account (EMCA). The Postal Service

hereby gives notice that it is

implementing the interim rule on a

permanent basis.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to the Manager, International

Products, International Business, U.S.

Postal Service, 1735 N Lynn Street,

Arlington VA 22209–6026. Copies of all

written comments will be available for

public inspection between 9 a.m. and 4

p.m., Monday through Friday, in

International Business, Second Floor, at

that address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Angus MacInnes, (703) 292–3601.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal

Service proposed changes in conditions

for certain mailing categories to

automatically reduce every payment

transaction by 5 percent for all EMS

purchased at basic published prices and

paid through an EMCA.

An EMCA is an advanced deposit

account developed for Express Mail that

enables customers to deposit funds with

the Postal Service for payment of

anticipated future Express Mail

mailings. Express Mail Corporate

Accounts can be used for domestic and

international Express Mail. The

discount is available only for Express

Mail sent internationally. Federal

agencies are eligible for the discount.

The discount is deducted from the total

postage amount on the mailer’s monthly

account, rather than for each piece.

The 5 percent discount is offered on

postage only; it does not apply to

pickup fees, any special fees, nor

postage for shipments being made under

an International Customized Mail

agreement.

As required under the Postal

Reorganization Act, this change results

in conditions of mailing that do not

apportion the costs of service, so the

overall value of the service to its users

is fair and reasonable, and not unduly

or unreasonably discriminatory or

preferential.

The Postal Service received no

comments in response to its proposal

published in the Federal Register on

August 7, 2000 (65 FR 48171).

Accordingly, the Postal Service hereby

implements the 5 percent discount and

amends the International Mail Manual

(IMM), which is incorporated by

reference in the Code of Federal

Regulations. See 39 CFR 20.1.

List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 20

Foreign relations, international postal

services.

PART 20—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 39 CFR

Part 20 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 401,

404, 407, 408.

2. Revise the International Mail

Manual as set forth below:

2 Conditions for Mailing

210 Express Mail International

Service

* * * * *

212 Postage

212.1 Rates

212.11 Country Rates

See the Individual Country Listings

for countries that offer Express Mail

International Service.

212.12 Express Mail Corporate

Account Discount Rates

Express Mail International Service

(EMS) rates will be reduced by 5 percent

for all payments made through an

Express Mail Corporate Account

(EMCA) or through the federal agency

payment system. The discount applies

only to the postage portion of EMS rates.

It does not apply to pickup service

charges (212.24), additional

merchandise insurance coverage fees

(211.51), or shipments made under an

International Customized Mail

agreement.

* * * * *

Stanley F. Mires,

Chief Counsel, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 00–25981 Filed 10–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–12–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[CA–029–EXTa; FRL–6872–8]

Clean Air Act Promulgation of

Extension of Attainment Date for the

San Diego, California Serious Ozone

Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is extending the

attainment date for the San Diego

serious ozone nonattainment area from

November 15, 1999, to November 15,

2000. This extension is based in part on

monitored air quality readings for the 1-

hour national ambient air quality

standard (NAAQS) for ozone during

1999. Accordingly, we are updating the

table concerning attainment dates for

the State of California. In this action, we

are approving the State’s request

through a ‘‘direct final’’ rulemaking.

Elsewhere in this Federal Register, we

are proposing approval and soliciting

written comment on this action; if

adverse written comments are received,

we will withdraw the direct final rule

and address the comments received in

a new final rule; otherwise no further

rulemaking will occur on this

attainment date extension request.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

December 11, 2000 unless before

November 13, 2000 adverse comments

are received. If adverse comment is

received, EPA will publish a timely

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the

Federal Register, and inform the public

that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Please address your

comments to the EPA contact below.

You may inspect and copy the

rulemaking docket for this notice at the

following location during normal

business hours. We may charge you a

reasonable fee for copying parts of the

docket. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 9, Air Division, Air

Planning Office (AIR–2), 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Copies of the SIP materials are also

available for inspection at the addresses

listed below:

California Air Resources Board, 2020 L

Street, Sacramento, CA 92123–1095

San Diego County Air Pollution Control

District, 9150 Chesapeake Drive, San

Diego, CA 92123–1096

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dave Jesson, Air Planning Office (AIR–

2), Air Division, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105–3901. Telephone: (415) 744–

1288. E-mail: jesson.david@epa.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Attainment Date Extension

for the San Diego Area

On May 15, 2000, the State of

California requested a one-year

attainment date extension for the San

Diego serious ozone nonattainment area.

This area, which consists of San Diego

County, is currently designated a

serious ozone nonattainment area. The

statutory ozone attainment date, as

prescribed by section 181(a) of the Clean

Air Act as amended in 1990 (‘‘the Act’’),

was November 15, 1999.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 11, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 60363

1AIRS Data Monitor Values Reports are available

electronically at http://www.epa.gov/airsdata/

monvals.htm

CAA Requirements Concerning

Designation and Classification

Section 107(d)(4) of the Act required

the States and EPA to designate areas as

attainment, nonattainment, or

unclassifiable for ozone as well as other

pollutants for which national ambient

air quality standards (NAAQS) have

been set. Section 181(a)(1) required that

ozone nonattainment areas be classified

as marginal, moderate, serious, severe,

or extreme, depending on their air

quality.

In a series of Federal Register

documents, we completed this process

by designating and classifying all areas

of the country for ozone. See, e.g., 56 FR

58694 (Nov. 6, 1991), and 57 FR 56762

(Nov. 30, 1992). San Diego County was

originally classified as severe, but was

reclassified as serious based upon our

determination that the ozone value used

in the original classification was

incorrect. See 60 FR 3771 (Jan. 19,

1995).

Areas designated nonattainment for

ozone are required to meet attainment

dates specified under the Act. As noted,

the San Diego ozone nonattainment area

was reclassified as serious. By this

classification, its attainment date

became November 15, 1999. A

discussion of the attainment dates is

found in EPA’s General Preamble for

Implementation of Title I of the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990. See 57 FR

13498 (April 16, 1992).

CAA Requirements Concerning Meeting

the Attainment Date

Section 181(b)(2)(A) requires the

Administrator, within six months of the

attainment date, to determine whether

ozone nonattainment areas attained the

NAAQS. For ozone, we determine

attainment status on the basis of the

expected number of exceedances of the

NAAQS over the three-year period up

to, and including, the attainment date.

See General Preamble, 57 FR 13506. In

the case of serious ozone nonattainment

areas, the three-year period is 1997–

1999.

A review of the actual ambient air

quality ozone data from the EPA

Aerometric Information Retrieval

System (AIRS) shows that three air

quality monitors located in the San

Diego ozone nonattainment area

recorded exceedances of the NAAQS for

ozone during the three-year period from

1997 to 1999.1 (See Table 1.) There were

9 exceedances at the Alpine monitor, an

average of more than 1.0 over the threeyear period, which constitutes a

violation of the ozone NAAQS for the

San Diego area during this three-year

period. Thus, the area did not meet the

November 15, 1999 attainment date.

TABLE 1.—EXCEEDANCES OF THE 1-HOUR OZONE NAAQS IN SAN DIEGO 1997–1999

[Source: AIRS]

Monitoring Station

Exceedances

1997 1998 1999 Total

Chula Vista ...................................................................................................................................................... 0 0 0 0

El Cajon ........................................................................................................................................................... 0 1 0 1

Oceanside ........................................................................................................................................................ 0 0 0 0

San Diego (Overland) ...................................................................................................................................... 0 1 0 1

Del Mar ............................................................................................................................................................ 0 0 0 0

Escondido ........................................................................................................................................................ 0 0 0 0

Alpine ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 8 0 9

San Diego (12th St.) ........................................................................................................................................ 0 0 0 0

Camp Pendleton .............................................................................................................................................. 0 0 0 0

Otay Mesa ....................................................................................................................................................... 0 0 0 0

CAA Provisions Authorizing a OneYear Extension of the Attainment Date

CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) states that,

for areas classified as marginal,

moderate, or serious, if the

Administrator determines that the area

did not attain the standard by its

attainment date, the area must be

reclassified upwards. However, CAA

section 181(a)(5) provides an exemption

from these bump up requirements.

Under this exemption, we may grant up

to 2 one-year extensions of the

attainment date under specified

conditions:

Upon application by any State, the

Administrator may extend for 1

additional year (hereinafter referred to

as the ‘‘Extension Year’’) the date

specified in table 1 of paragraph (1) of

this subsection if—

(A) the State has complied with all

requirements and commitments

pertaining to the area in the applicable

implementation plan, and

(B) no more than 1 exceedance of the

national ambient air quality standard

level for ozone has occurred in the area

in the year preceding the Extension

Year.

No more than 2 one-year extensions

may be issued under this paragraph for

a single nonattainment area.

We interpret this provision to

authorize the granting of a one-year

extension under the following minimum

conditions: (1) The State requests a oneyear extension; (2) all requirements and

commitments in the EPA-approved SIP

for the area have been complied with;

and (3) the area has no more than one

measured exceedance of the NAAQS

during the year at any one monitor that

includes the attainment date (or the

subsequent year, if a second one-year

extension is requested).

We have determined that the

requirements for a one-year extension of

the attainment date have been fulfilled

as follows:

(1) California has formally submitted

the attainment date extension request,

in a letter dated May 15, 2000, from

Michael P. Kenny, Executive Officer,

California Air Resources Board, to P.

Kenny, Executive Officer, California Air

Resources Board, to Felicia Marcus, EPA

Regional Administrator, Region 9.

(2) California is currently

implementing the EPA-approved SIP.

The State’s letter, cited above, discusses

implementation of State measures in the

SIP, and shows that these measures plus

new State measures have achieved an

overall surplus of emission reductions

beyond those assumed in the SIP. The

State also attached a letter dated March

60364 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 11, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

13, 2000, from R. J. Sommerville,

Director, San Diego County Air

Pollution Control District, which

provides evidence that all District SIP

rules have been fully implemented.

(3) California has certified that the

area has monitored no exceedances

during 1999. This is also reflected in the

quality-assured ambient ozone data

shown in Table 1 above.

Because the statutory provisions have

been satisfied, we approve California’s

attainment date extension request for

the San Diego ozone nonattainment

area. As a result, the chart in 40 CFR

81.305 entitled ‘‘California—Ozone’’ is

being modified to extend the attainment

date for the San Diego ozone

nonattainment area from November 15,

1999, to November 15, 2000.

We are approving the attainment date

extension without prior proposal

because the Agency views this as a

noncontroversial amendment and

anticipates no adverse comments.

However, elsewhere in the proposed

rule section of today’s Federal Register

we are publishing a proposal to approve

this part 81 action should adverse or

critical comments be filed. This action

will be effective December 11, 2000

unless before November 13, 2000

adverse or critical comments are

received.

If we receive such comments, this

action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. We will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this action should do so at this time.

If no such comments are received, the

public is advised that this action will be

effective on December 11, 2000.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any state

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from Executive Order 12866,

entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and

Review.’’

B. Executive Order 13045

Executive Order 13045, entitled

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 under Executive

Order 12866; and (2) concerns an

environmental health or safety risk that

EPA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If

the regulatory action meets both 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 because it does not involve

decisions intended to mitigate

environmental health or safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084,

Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may

not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly

affects or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal

governments, and that imposes

substantial direct compliance costs on

those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal

governments. If the mandate is

unfunded, EPA must provide to the

Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the

preamble to the rule, a description of

the extent of EPA’s prior consultation

with representatives of affected tribal

governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement

supporting the need to issue the

regulation.

In addition, Executive Order 13084

requires EPA to develop an effective

process permitting elected and other

representatives of Indian tribal

governments ‘‘to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of

regulatory policies on matters that

significantly or uniquely affect their

communities.’’ Today’s rule does not

significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of Indian tribal

governments. Accordingly, the

requirements of section 3(b) of

Executive Order 13084 do not apply to

this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132, entitled

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999) revokes and replaces Executive

Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875,

Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership. Executive Order 13132

requires EPA to develop an accountable

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and

timely input by State and local officials

in the development of regulatory

policies that have federalism

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have

federalism implications’’ is defined in

the Executive Order to include

regulations that 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.’’ Under

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not

issue a regulation that has federalism

implications, that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs, and that is not

required by statute, unless the Federal

government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by State and local

governments, or EPA consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation. EPA also may not issue a

regulation that has federalism

implications and that preempts State

law unless the Agency consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation.

This rule will not have substantial

direct effects on the States, on the

relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it merely

approves a state request for an

attainment date extension, and does not

alter the relationship or the distribution

of power and responsibilities

established in the Clean Air Act. Thus,

the requirements of section 6 of the

Executive Order do not apply to this

rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to conduct

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements unless the

agency certifies that the rule will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses,

small not-for-profit enterprises, and

small governmental jurisdictions.

Extension of an area’s attainment date

under the CAA does not impose any

new requirements on small entities.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 11, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 60365

Extension of an attainment date is an

action that affects a geographical area

and does not impose any regulatory

requirements on sources. EPA certifies

that the approval of the attainment date

extension will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

F. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated annual costs to

State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to private sector, of $100

million or more. Under Section 205,

EPA must select the most cost-effective

and least burdensome alternative that

achieves the objectives of the rule and

is consistent with statutory

requirements. Section 203 requires EPA

to establish a plan for informing and

advising any small governments that

may be significantly or uniquely

impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the

promulgated attainment date extension

does not include a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated annual costs of

$100 million or more to either State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate, or to the private sector. This

Federal action imposes no new

requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

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 rule is not a ‘‘major’’ rule as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

H. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

Section 12 of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal

agencies to evaluate existing technical

standards when developing a new

regulation. To comply with NTTAA,

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available

and applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing so

would be inconsistent with applicable

law or otherwise impractical.

The EPA believes that VCS are

inapplicable to this action. Today’s

action does not require the public to

perform activities conducive to the use

of VCS.

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 December 11,

2000. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule

or action. This action may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

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

Dated: September 8, 2000.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 81 of chapter I, title 40 of the

Code of Federal Regulations is amended

as follows:

PART 81—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

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

2. In § 81.305 the ‘‘California—ozone’’

table is amended by revising the entry

for San Diego area to read as follows:

§ 81.305 California.

* * * * *

CALIFORNIA—OZONE

[1-Hour Standard]

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

*******

San Diego Area:

San Diego County ............................................................ 11/15/90 Nonattainment 2/21/95 Serious 2

*******

1This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

2Attainment date is extended to November 15, 2000.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–25926 Filed 10–10–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P