Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules 21727

distribution of power and

responsibilities between the Federal

Government and Indian tribes, as

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will

it 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 rule implementing a

federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also

is not subject to Executive Order 13045

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because

it is not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s

role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the

absence of a prior existing requirement

for the State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

to disapprove a SIP submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the

requirements of section 12(d) of the

National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.

272 note) do not apply. As required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing

this proposed rule, EPA has taken the

necessary steps to eliminate drafting

errors and ambiguity, minimize

potential litigation, and provide a clear

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA

has complied with Executive Order

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by

examining the takings implications of

the rule in accordance with the

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk

and Avoidance of Unanticipated

Takings’ issued under the executive

order. This rule does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur oxides.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: April 19, 2001.

Patricia D. Hull,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.

[FR Doc. 01–10806 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 099–0032b; FRL–6967–9]

Revisions to the Arizona State

Implementation Plan, Pinal-Gila

Counties Air Quality Control District

and Pinal County Air Quality Control

District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action to approve revisions to the PinalGila Counties Air Quality Control

District (PGCAQCD) and Pinal County

Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD)

portions of the Arizona State

Implementation Plan (SIP). These

revisions concern the recision of all of

the remaining SIP rules from the

obsolete PGCAQCD and the recision of

certain PCAQCD SIP Rules. We are

approving the recision of local rules that

no longer regulate permitting

procedures and various emission

sources under the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: Any comments on this proposal

must arrive by May 31, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andrew

Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR–

4), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

You can inspect copies of the

submitted rule revisions and EPA’s

technical support documents (TSDs) at

our Region IX office during normal

business hours. You may also see copies

of the submitted rule revisions at the

following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), Ariel Rios Building,

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality, 3033 North Central Avenue,

Phoenix, AZ 85012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al

Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR–4),

Air Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105; (415)744–1135.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

proposal addresses the recisions of

defunct SIP rules from the PGCAQCD.

In the Rules and Regulations section of

this Federal Register, we are approving

the recision of these rules in a direct

final action without prior proposal

because we believe this SIP revision is

not controversial. If we receive adverse

comments, however, we will publish a

timely withdrawal of the direct final

rule and address the comments in

subsequent action based on this

proposed rule. We do not plan to open

a second comment period, so anyone

interested in commenting should do so

at this time. If we do not receive adverse

comments, no further activity is

planned. For further information, please

see the direct final action.

Dated: March 20, 2001.

Mike Schulz,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

[FR Doc. 01–10652 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 01–931; MM Docket No. 01–91; RM–

10096]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Hugo,

CO

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document requests

comments on a petition for rule making

filed by Alan Olson, requesting the

allotment of Channel 222A to Hugo,

Colorado, as that community’s first local

aural transmission service. Coordinates

used for this proposal are those of the

city reference at 39–08–10 NL and 103–

28–10 WL.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before June 4, 2001, and reply

comments on or before June 19, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission,

Washington, DC 20554. In addition to

filing comments with the FCC,

interested parties should serve the

petitioner, as follows: Alan Olson, 934

E. Vermijo Ave., Colorado Springs, CO

80903.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, MM Docket No.

01–91, adopted April 4, 2001, and

released April 13, 2001. The full text of