50988 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

involving a single ignition and no more 

than 8 ounces of accelerant to a 

maximum of 300 cubic feet of records 

destroyed by fire. Section 1228.242 

specifies how to document compliance 

with this requirement. 

■ 7. Amend § 1228.232 by revising the 

introductory text of paragraph (b) and 

paragraph (c) to read: 

§ 1228.232 What are the requirements for 

environmental controls for records storage 

facilities? 

* * * * * 

(b) Nontextual temporary records. 

Nontextual temporary records, 

including microforms and audiovisual 

and electronic records, must be stored 

in records storage space that is designed 

to preserve them for their full retention 

period. New records storage facilities 

that store nontextual temporary records 

must meet the requirements in this 

paragraph (b) beginning on September 

28, 2005. Existing records storage 

facilities that store nontextual 

temporary records must meet the 

requirements in this paragraph (b) no 

later than October 1, 2009. At a 

minimum, nontextual temporary 

records must be stored in records 

storage space that meets the 

requirements for medium term storage 

set by the appropriate standard in this 

paragraph (b). In general, medium term 

conditions as defined by these standards 

are those that will ensure the 

preservation of the materials for at least 

10 years with little information 

degradation or loss. Records may 

continue to be usable for longer than 10 

years when stored under these 

conditions, but with an increasing risk 

of information loss or degradation with 

longer times. If temporary records 

require retention longer than 10 years, 

better storage conditions (cooler and 

drier) than those specified for medium 

term storage will be needed to maintain 

the usability of these records. The 

applicable standards are: 

* * * * * 

(c) Paper-based permanent, 

unscheduled and sample/select records. 

Paper-based permanent, unscheduled, 

and sample/select records must be 

stored in records storage space that 

provides 24 hour/365 days per year air 

conditioning (temperature, humidity, 

and air exchange) equivalent to that 

required for office space. See ASHRAE 

Standard 55–1992, Thermal 

Environmental Conditions for Human 

Occupancy, and ASHRAE Standard 62–

1989, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor 

Air Quality, for specific requirements. 

New records storage facilities that store 

paper-based permanent, unscheduled, 

and/or sample/select records must meet 

the requirement in this paragraph (c) 

beginning on September 28, 2005. 

Existing storage facilities that store 

paper-based permanent, unscheduled, 

and/or sample/select records must meet 

the requirement in this paragraph (c) no 

later than October 1, 2009. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Amend § 1228.236 by revising 

paragraph (a)(2) to read: 

§ 1228.236 How does an agency request a 

waiver from a requirement in this subpart? 

(a) * * * 

(2) Existing agency records centers 

that met the NARA standards in effect 

prior to January 3, 2000, but do not meet 

a new standard required to be in place 

on September 28, 2005; and 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Amend § 1228.240 by revising 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 1228.240 How does an agency request 

authority to establish or relocate records 

storage facilities? 

* * * * * 

(c) Contents of requests for agency 

records centers. Requests for authority 

to establish or relocate an agency 

records center, or to use an agency 

records center operated by another 

agency, must be submitted in writing to 

the Director, Space and Security 

Management Division (NAS), National 

Archives and Records Administration, 

8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 

20740–6001. The request must identify 

the specific facility and, for requests to 

establish or relocate the agency’s own 

records center, document compliance 

with the standards in this subpart. 

Documentation requirements for 

§ 1228.230(s) are specified in 

§ 1228.242. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 1228.242 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) to read: 

§ 1228.242 What does an agency have to 

do to certify a fire-safety detection and 

suppression system? 

(a) * * * 

(2) A report of the results of 

independent live fire testing (Factory 

Mutual, Underwriters Laboratories or 

Southwest Research Institute); or 

(3) A report under seal of a licensed 

fire protection engineer that: 

(i) Describes the design intent of the 

fire suppression system to limit the 

maximum anticipated loss in any single 

fire event involving a single ignition and 

no more than 8 fluid ounces of 

petroleum-type hydrocarbon accelerant 

(such as, for example, heptanes or 

gasoline) to a maximum of 300 cubic 

feet of Federal records destroyed by fire. 

The report need not predict a maximum 

single event loss at any specific number, 

but rather should describe the design 

intent of the fire suppression system. 

The report may make reasonable 

engineering and other assumptions such 

as that the fire department responds 

within XX minutes (the local fire 

department’s average response time) 

and promptly commences suppression 

actions. In addition, any report prepared 

under this paragraph should assume 

that the accelerant is saturated in a 

cotton wick that is 3 inches in diameter 

and 6 inches long and sealed in a plastic 

bag and that the fire is started in an aisle 

at the face of a carton at floor level. 

Assumptions must be noted in the 

report; 

(ii) Details the characteristics of the 

system; and 

(iii) Describes the specific measures 

beyond the minimum features required 

by the applicable building code that 

have been incorporated to limit 

destruction of records. The report 

should make specific references to 

industry standards used in the design, 

such as those issued by the National 

Fire Protection Association, and any 

testing or modeling or other sources 

used in the design. 

* * * * * 

Dated: June 29, 2005. 

Allen Weinstein, 

Archivist of the United States. 

[FR Doc. 05–17097 Filed 8–26–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[OAR–2003–0090; FRL–7959–2] 

[RIN 2060–AN04] 

Extension of the Deferred Effective 

Date for 8-Hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Early Action Compact Areas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final Rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is finalizing the 

extension of the deferred effective date 

of air quality designations for 14 areas 

of the country that have entered into 

Early Action Compacts. Early Action 

Compact areas have agreed to reduce 

ground-level ozone pollution earlier 

than the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires. 

On April 30, 2004, EPA published an 

action designating all areas of the 

country for the 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50989 

1Out of 31 active compact areas, 17 were meeting 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time of designation 

in April 2004 and were designated attainment with 

an effective date of June 15,2004. This final rule 

only addresses the 14 areas that were designated in 

the April 2004 rule as nonattainment with a 

deferred effective date of September 30, 2005. 

2Haywood and Putnam Counties, TN decided to 

withdraw from the compact arrangement. 

(NAAQS). In the designation rule, EPA 

deferred the effective date of the 

nonattainment designation for 14 areas 

that had entered into Early Action 

Compacts until September 30, 2005. The 

EPA is now extending the deferred 

effective date of the nonattainment 

designation for all 14 Early Action 

Compact areas until December 31, 2006. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 28, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

no. OAR–2003–0090 (Early Action 

Compacts). All documents in the docket 

are listed in the EDOCKET index at 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material is 

not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in EDOCKET or in hard 

copy at the Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the Office of Air and 

Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. In 

addition, we have placed a copy of the 

rule and a variety of materials relevant 

to Early Action Compact areas on EPA’s 

website at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ 

naaqs/ozone/eac/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Barbara Driscoll, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

Code C504–02, Research Triangle Park, 

NC 27711, phone number (919) 541–

1051 or by e-mail at: 

driscoll.barbara@epa.gov or Mr. David 

Cole, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mail Code C539–02, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

phone number (919) 541–5565 or by 

e-mail at: cole.david@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

The following is an outline of the 

preamble. 

I. What is the Purpose of this 

Document? 

II. What Action has EPA Taken to Date 

for Early Action Compact Areas? 

A. What progress are compact areas 

making toward completing their 

milestones? 

B. What is today’s final action for 

compact areas? 

C. What is EPA’s schedule for taking 

further action to further defer the 

effective date of nonattainment 

designation for compact areas? 

D. What comments did EPA receive on 

the June 8, 2005 proposal to extend the 

deferral of the effective date of the 

nonattainment designations for 14 Early 

Action Compact areas? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

I.What is the Purpose of this Document? 

The purpose of this document is to 

finalize the extension of the deferred 

effective date of the 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment designations for 14 

participants in Early Action Compacts. 

The new effective designation date is 

December 31, 2006. 

II. What Action has EPA Taken to Date 

for Early Action Compact Areas? 

This section discusses EPA’s actions 

to date with respect to deferring the 

effective date of nonattainment 

designations for certain areas of the 

country that are participating in the 

Early Action Compact program. The 

EPA’s April 30, 2004 air quality 

designation rule (68 FR 70108) provides 

a description of the compact approach, 

the requirements for areas participating 

in the program and the impacts of the 

program on those areas. 

On December 31, 2002, we entered 

into compacts with 33 communities. To 

receive the first deferral, these Early 

Action Compact areas agreed to reduce 

ground-level ozone pollution earlier 

than the CAA would require. On 

December 16, 2003 (68 FR 70108), we 

published a proposed rule to defer until 

September 30, 2005, the effective date of 

designation for Early Action Compact 

areas that did not meet the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. Fourteen of the 33 compact 

areas did not meet the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

The final designation rule published 

April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858) as 

amended June 18, 2004 (69 FR 34080), 

included the following actions for 

compact areas: deferred the effective 

date of nonattainment designation for 14 

compact areas until September 30, 2005; 

detailed the progress compact areas had 

made toward completing their 

milestones; described the actions 

required for compact areas in order to 

remain eligible for a deferred effective 

date for a nonattainment designation; 

detailed EPA’s schedule for taking 

further action to determine whether to 

further defer the effective date of 

nonattainment designations; and 

described the consequences for compact 

areas that do not meet a milestone.1

On June 8, 2005 (70 FR 33409), we 

proposed to extend the deferred 

effective date for those same 14 areas 

from September 30, 2005 to December 

31, 2006, and provided an update on the 

progress the compact areas had been 

making. 

A. What progress are compact areas 

making toward completing their 

milestones? 

Since the April 2004 designations, 

two EAC areas that were designated 

attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

have withdrawn from the compact 

process.2

In this section, we describe the status 

of the Early Action Compact areas’

progress toward meeting their 

milestones. In general, the remaining 29 

compact areas have made progress 

toward timely completion of their 

milestones. A compiled list of local 

measures is found on EPA’s website for 

compact areas at: http://www.epa.gov/ 

ttn/naaqs/ozone/eac/. By December 31, 

2004, all States with compacts were 

required to submit to EPA State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

with locally adopted measures which if 

50990 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

approved by EPA, are federally 

enforceable. Notices for each of the 

proposed SIP revisions were published 

in the Federal Register by the respective 

EPA Regional Office. For each of the 14 

EAC areas with a deferred 

nonattainment designation date of 

September 30, 2005, EPA has taken final 

action approving the SIP revisions as 

meeting the EAC Protocol and EPA’s 

EAC regulations at 40 CFR 81.300 as 

indicated in Table 1. 

TABLE 1. REGIONAL OFFICES ISSUING FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES ON EARLY ACTION COMPACT SIP REVISIONS

Regional Offices States Date SIP Revision Signed 

Makeba Morris, Branch Chief, Air Quality Planning 

Branch, EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2187, (215) 814–2187 

Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia August 9, 2005 

Richard A. Schutt, Chief, Regulatory Development 

Section, EPA Region IV, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, 12th Floor, Atlanta, GA 30303, (404) 562–9033 

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, 

North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee 

August 15, 2005 

Rebecca Weber, Associate Director, Air Programs, 

EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 

75202, (214) 665–6656 

Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and 

Texas 

August 12, 2005 

Richard R. Long, Director, Air and Radiation Program, EPA Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 

300, Denver, CO 80202–2466, (303) 312–6005 

Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Utah, and Wyoming 

August 2, 2005 

B. What is today’s final action for 

compact areas? 

Today, we are extending the deferred 

effective date of the nonattainment 

designation for 14 compact areas. In 

final rulemaking actions taken by the 

EPA regional offices, as indicated in 

Table 1, we have concluded that these 

14 areas have met all required compact 

milestones including the December 31, 

2004 submission. Because these areas 

have met these milestones, they are 

eligible for a further deferral of their 

nonattainment designation for the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 

81.300(e)(4)(ii). We are further deferring 

until December 31, 2006 the effective 

date of the 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

designation for the compact area 

counties listed in Table 2 and are 

revising 40 CFR part 81 to reflect this 

extension. 

TABLE 2. COMPACT AREAS WHICH QUALIFY FOR A DEFERRED EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECEMBER 31, 2006 

NOTE: NAME OF DESIGNATED 8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA IS IN PARENTHESES. 

State Compact Area (Designated Area) Counties with designation deferred to 

December 31, 2006 

Counties which are part of compacts and are designated 

unclassifiable/attainment 

EPA Region 3 

VA Northern Shenandoah Valley Region 

(Frederick County, VA), adjacent to Washington, 

DC–MD–VA 

Winchester City 

Frederick County 

VA Roanoke Area 

(Roanoke, VA) 

Roanoke County 

Botetourt County 

Roanoke City 

Salem City 

MD Washington County 

(Washington County Hagerstown, MD), adjacent 

to Washington, DC–MD–VA 

Washington County 

WV The Eastern Pan Handle Region (Berkeley & 

Jefferson Counties, WV), Martinsburg area 

Berkeley County 

Jefferson County 

EPA Region 4 

NC Unifour 

(Hickory–Morganton–Lenoir, NC) 

Catawba County 

Alexander County 

Burke County (part) 

Caldwell County (part) 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50991 

TABLE 2. COMPACT AREAS WHICH QUALIFY FOR A DEFERRED EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECEMBER 31, 2006—Continued 

NOTE: NAME OF DESIGNATED 8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA IS IN PARENTHESES. 

State Compact Area (Designated Area) Counties with designation deferred to 

December 31, 2006 

Counties which are part of compacts and are designated 

unclassifiable/attainment 

NC Triad 

(Greensboro–Winston–Salem–High Point, NC) 

Randolph County 

Forsyth County 

Davie County 

Alamance County 

Caswell County 

Davidson County 

Guilford County 

Rockingham County 

Surry County 

Yadkin County 

Stokes County 

NC Cumberland County 

(Fayetteville, NC) 

Cumberland County 

SC Appalachian – A 

(Greenville–Spartanburg–Anderson, SC) 

Spartanburg County 

Greenville County 

Anderson County 

Cherokee County 

Pickens County 

Oconee County 

SC Central Midlands – I 

(Columbia area) 

Richland County (part) 

Lexington County (part) 

Newberry County 

Fairfield County 

TN/GA Chattanooga 

(Chattanooga, TN–GA) 

Hamilton County,TN 

Meigs County, TN 

Catoosa County, GA 

Marion County, TN 

Walker County, GA 

TN Nashville 

(Nashville, TN) 

Davidson County 

Rutherford County 

Williamson County 

Wilson County 

Sumner County 

Robertson County 

Cheatham County 

Dickson County 

TN Johnson City–Kingsport–Bristol Area 

(TN portion only) 

Sullivan Co, TN 

Hawkins County, TN 

Washington Co, TN 

Unicoi County, TN 

Carter County, TN 

Johnson County, TN 

EPA Region 6 

TX San Antonio Bexar County 

Comal County 

Guadalupe County 

Wilson County 

EPA Region 8 

CO Denver 

(Denver–Boulder–Greeley–Ft. Collins–Love, CO) 

Denver County 

Boulder County (includes part of 

Rocky Mtn Nat. Park) 

Jefferson County 

Douglas County 

Broomfield 

Adams County 

Arapahoe County 

Larimer County (part) 

Weld County (part) 

C. What is EPA’s schedule for taking 

further action to further defer the 

effective date of nonattainment 

designation for compact areas? 

Following promulgation of this 

extension, we would propose and as 

appropriate, promulgate a further 

extension of the deferred effective date 

until April 15, 2008, for those areas that 

continue to meet all compact milestones 

through December 31, 2006. No later 

than April 15, 2008, we will determine 

whether the compact areas that received 

a deferred effective date of April 15, 

2008 have attained the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by December 31, 2007, and 

have met all compact milestones. If the 

area has not attained the standard, the 

nonattainment designation will take 

effect. If the compact area has attained 

the standard, EPA will designate the 

area as attainment. Any compact area 

that has not attained the NAAQS and 

thus has an effective nonattainment 

designation will be subject to the full 

planning requirements of title I, part D 

of the CAA, and the area will be 

required to submit a revised attainment 

demonstration SIP within 1 year of the 

effective date of designation. 

D. What comments did EPA receive on 

the June 8, 2005 proposal to extend the 

deferral of the effective date of the 

nonattainment designations for 14 Early 

Action Compact areas? 

We received a number of comments 

on the proposed rule to extend the 

50992 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

deferred effective date of the 

nonattainment designations for 14 Early 

Action Compact areas to December 31, 

2006. We have responded to the 

significant comments in this section. 

There are additional comments to which 

we do not respond in this notice; 

however, all comments and responses 

are included in the docket for this 

rulemaking (OAR–2003–0090). 

Comment: Several commenters 

expressed support for the compact 

process, the goal of clean air sooner, the 

incentives and flexibility the program 

provides for encouraging early 

reductions of ozone-forming pollution, 

and the deferred effective date of 

nonattainment designation. However, a 

number of commenters opposed the 

Early Action Compact program. Several 

of these commenters expressed concern 

about various legal aspects of the 

program, primarily the deferral of the 

effective date of the nonattainment 

designation for these areas. Although 

some of these commenters were 

supportive of the goal of proactively 

addressing the public health concerns 

associated with ozone pollution, the 

commenters state that the program is 

not authorized by the CAA. All of these 

commenters indicated that EPA lacks 

authority under the CAA to defer the 

effective date of a nonattainment 

designation. In addition, these 

commenters state that EPA lacks 

authority to enter into Early Action 

Compacts with areas and lacks authority 

to allow areas to be relieved of 

obligations under title I, part D of the 

CAA while these areas are violating the 

8-hour ozone standard or are designated 

nonattainment for that standard. One 

comment submitted by several groups 

attached comments that the commenters 

had submitted on EPA’s December 16, 

2003, proposed rule to defer the 

nonattainment designation for EAC 

areas that had met the EAC milestones. 

Response: We have determined that 

the compact program, as designed, gives 

local areas the flexibility to develop 

their own approach to meeting the 

8-hour ozone standard. The 

participating communities are serious in 

their commitment and have made good 

progress implementing State and local 

measures for controlling emissions from 

local sources earlier than the CAA 

would otherwise require. By involving 

diverse stakeholders, including 

representatives from industry, local and 

State governments, and local 

environmental and citizens groups, a 

number of these communities are, for 

the first time, cooperating on a regional 

basis to solve environmental problems 

that affect the health and welfare of 

their citizens. People living in these 

areas realize reductions in pollution 

levels sooner and will enjoy the health 

benefits of cleaner air sooner than might 

otherwise occur. With respect to the 

commenter who attached comments that 

were submitted on EPA’s initial 

proposal to defer the effective date of a 

nonattainment designation of EAC areas 

meeting compact milestones, we refer 

back to our response to those comments 

in the April 2004 designation rule (69 

FR 23858). 

Comment: One commenter disagreed 

with.....‘‘EPA’s assessment that the 

proposed rule does not constitute a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ (see 70 

FR 33412)’’..... The 

commenter.....‘‘believes that condition 4 

of that finding has been met (raise novel 

legal or policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates, the President’s priorities, or 

the principles set forth in the Executive 

Order.)’’

Response: The Office of Management 

and Budget which has responsibility for 

implementing Executive Order 12866, 

has determined that the June 8, 2005 

proposed rule (70 FR 33409) is not a 

significant regulatory action. 

Comment: One commenter also had 

several very specific comments on the 

contents of the South Carolina SIP 

related to such items as maintenance 

and growth tracking, need to show 

satisfactory progress, air quality 

protection and growth review. 

Response: A detailed response to 

these comments is included in the 

Response to Comments document for 

this rulemaking which is in the docket 

(OAR–2003–0090). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action finalizes the extension of 

the deferred effective date of the 

nonattainment designation for 14 

compact areas until December 30, 2006. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency 

must determine whether the regulatory 

action is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, 

subject to Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) review and the 

requirements of the Executive Order. 

The Order defines ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as one that is likely 

to result in a rule that may: 

(1) have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or Tribal 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, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order. 

It has been determined that this rule 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the terms of Executive Order 

12866 and is therefore not subject to 

OMB review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This final 

rule does not require the collection of 

any information. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or 

financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose 

or provide information to or for a 

Federal agency. This includes the time 

needed to review instructions; develop, 

acquire, install, and utilize technology 

and systems for the purposes of 

collecting, 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 or otherwise 

disclose the information. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an Agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedures Act or any 

other statute unless the Agency certifies 

the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of today’s final rule on small entities, 

small entity is defined as: (1) a small 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50993 

business that is a small industrial entity 

as defined in the Small Business 

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 district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s final rule on small 

entities, I certify that this rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This final rule will not impose any 

requirements on small entities. Rather, 

this rule would extend the deferred 

effective date of the nonattainment 

designation for areas that implement 

control measures and achieve emissions 

reductions earlier than otherwise 

required by the CAA in order to attain 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and Tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost–benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures to State, local, 

and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or to the private sector, of 

$100 million or more in any 1 year. 

Before promulgating an EPA rule for 

which a written statement is needed, 

section 205 of the UMRA generally 

requires EPA to identify and consider a 

reasonable number of regulatory 

alternatives and adopt the least costly, 

most cost-effective or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule. The provisions of section 

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, most cost-effective or least 

burdensome alternative if the 

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 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

The EPA has determined that this 

final rule does not contain a Federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for State, local, 

and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 

year. In this final rule, EPA is deferring 

the effective date of nonattainment 

designations for certain areas that have 

entered into compacts with us. Thus, 

today’s final rulemaking is not subject to 

the requirements of sections 202 and 

205 of the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), 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.’’

This final rule does not have 

federalism implications. It 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. The CAA 

establishes the scheme whereby States 

take the lead in developing plans to 

meet the NAAQS. This final rule would 

not modify the relationship of the States 

and EPA for purposes of developing 

programs to implement the NAAQS. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to this proposed rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

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.’’ This final rule does not 

have ‘‘Tribal implications’’ as specified 

in Executive Order 13175. It does not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian Tribes, since no Tribe has 

implemented a CAA program to attain 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS at this time or 

has participated in a compact. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

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 

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. 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that are based on 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the Order has the potential to influence 

the regulation. This final rule is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not establish an 

environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not a subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer Advancement Act 

of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104–

113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS) 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, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA 

directs EPA to provide Congress, 

50994 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

through OMB, explanations when the 

Agency decides not to use available and 

applicable VCS. 

This final rule does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, EPA is 

not considering the use of any VCS. 

The EPA will encourage States that 

have compact areas to consider the use 

of such standards, where appropriate, in 

the development of their SIPs. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 requires that 

each Federal agency make achieving 

environmental justice part of its mission 

by identifying and addressing, as 

appropriate, disproportionate high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects of its programs, policies, and 

activities on minorities and low-income 

populations. 

The EPA believes that this final rule 

should not raise any environmental 

justice issues. The health and 

environmental risks associated with 

ozone were considered in the 

establishment of the 8-hour, 0.08 ppm 

ozone NAAQS. The level is designed to 

be protective with an adequate margin 

of safety. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

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. The EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. A major rule cannot take effect 

until 60 days after it is published in the 

Federal Register. This action is not a 

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). This rule will be effective 

September 28, 2005. 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit by October 28, 2005. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review must 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 CAA 

Section 307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7408; 42 U.S.C. 7410; 

42 U.S.C. 7501–7511f; 42 U.S.C. 7601(a)(1). 

Dated: August 16, 2005. 

Stephen L. Johnson, 

Administrator. 

■ 40 CFR Part 81 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. 

Subpart C – Section 107 Attainment 

Status Designations 

■ 2. Section 81.300 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and 

(e)(3)(ii)(B) and (C) to read as follows: 

§ 81.300 Scope. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) General. Notwithstanding clauses (i) 

through (iv) of section 107(d)(1)(B) of 

the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 

7407(d)(1)(B)), the Administrator shall 

defer until December 31, 2006 the 

effective date of a nonattainment 

designation of any area subject to a 

compact that does not meet (or that 

contributes to ambient air quality in a 

nearby area that does not meet) the 

8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standard if the Administrator 

determines that the area subject to a 

compact has met the requirements in 

paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (iii) of this 

section. 

(ii) * * * 

(B) Prior to expiration of the deferred 

effective date on December 31, 2006, if 

the Administrator determines that an 

area or the State subject to a compact 

has not met either requirement in 

paragraphs (e)(2)(iv) and (v) of this 

section, the nonattainment designation 

shall become effective as of the deferred 

effective date, unless EPA takes 

affirmative rulemaking action to further 

extend the deadline. 

(C) If the Administrator determines that 

an area subject to a compact and/or 

State has not met any requirement in 

paragraphs (e)(2)(iv) through (vi) of this 

section, the nonattainment designation 

shall become effective as of the deferred 

effective date, unless EPA takes 

affirmative rulemaking action to further 

extend the deadline. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In §81.306, the table entitled 

‘‘Colorado–Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is 

amended by revising footnote 2 to read 

as follows: 

§ 81.306 Colorado. 

* * * * * 

Colorado Ozone (8-Hour Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In §81.311, the table entitled 

‘‘Georgia–Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is 

amended by revising footnote 2 to read 

as follows: 

§ 81.311 Georgia. 

* * * * * 

Georgia Ozone (8-Hour Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In §81.321, the table entitled 

‘‘Maryland–Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’

is amended by revising footnote 2 to 

read as follows: 

§ 81.321 Maryland. 

* * * * * 

Maryland Ozone (8-Hour Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. In §81.334, the table entitled 

‘‘North Carolina–Ozone (8-Hour 

Standard)’’ is amended by revising 

footnote 2 to read as follows: 

§ 81.334 North Carolina. 

* * * * * 

North Carolina Ozone (8-Hour 

Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. In §81.341, the table entitled 

‘‘South Carolina–Ozone (8-Hour 

Standard)’’ is amended by revising 

footnote 2 to read as follows: 

§ 81.341 South Carolina. 

* * * * * 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50995 

South Carolina Ozone (8-Hour 

Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. In §81.343, the table entitled 

‘‘Tennessee–Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’

is amended by revising footnote 2 to 

read as follows: 

§ 81.343 Tennessee. 

* * * * * 

Tennessee Ozone (8-Hour Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 9. In §81.344, the table entitled 

‘‘Texas–Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is 

amended by revising footnote 2 to read 

as follows: 

§ 81.344 Texas. 

* * * * * 

Texas Ozone (8-Hour Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. In §81.347, the table entitled 

‘‘Virginia–Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is 

amended by revising footnote 2 to read 

as follows: 

§ 81.347 Virginia. 

* * * * * 

Virginia Ozone (8-Hour Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. In §81.349, the table entitled 

‘‘West Virginia–Ozone (8-Hour 

Standard)’’ is amended by revising 

footnote 2 to read as follows: 

§ 81.349 West Virgina. 

* * * * * 

West Virginia Ozone (8-Hour Standard) 

* * * * * * * 

2Early Action Compact Area, effective 

date deferred until December 31, 2006. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–17038 Filed 8–26–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 041126332–5039–02; I.D. 

082305B] 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Yellowfin Sole in the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

Management Area 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; prohibition of 

retention. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting retention 

of yellowfin sole in the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands management area 

(BSAI). NMFS is requiring that catch of 

yellowfin sole in this area be treated in 

the same manner as prohibited species 

and discarded at sea with a minimum of 

injury. This action is necessary because 

the 2005 total allowable catch (TAC) of 

yellowfin sole in the BSAI has been 

reached. 

DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local 

time (A.l.t.), August 24, 2005, until 2400 

hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh 

Keaton, 907–586–7228. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS 

manages the groundfish fishery in the 

BSAI exclusive economic zone 

according to the Fishery Management 

Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea 

and Aleutian Islands Management Area 

(FMP) prepared by the North Pacific 

Fishery Management Council under 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act. Regulations governing fishing by 

U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP 

appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 

and 50 CFR part 679. 

The 2005 TAC of yellowfin sole in the 

BSAI was established as 83,883 metric 

tons by the 2005 and 2006 final harvest 

specifications for groundfish in the 

BSAI (70 FR 8979, February 24, 2005) 

and the apportionment of the nonspecified reserve to the yellowfin sole 

TAC on July 28, 2005 (70 FR 43644, July 

28, 2005). 

In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the 

Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, 

has determined that the yellowfin sole 

TAC in the BSAI has been reached. 

Therefore, NMFS is requiring that 

further catches of yellowfin sole in the 

BSAI be treated as a prohibited species 

in accordance with § 679.21(b). 

Classification 

This action responds to the best 

available information recently obtained 

from the fishery. The Assistant 

Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, 

(AA), finds good cause to waive the 

requirement to provide prior notice and 

opportunity for public comment 

pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such a requirement 

is impracticable and contrary to the 

public interest. This requirement is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest as it would prevent NMFS from 

responding to the most recent fisheries 

data in a timely fashion and would 

delay the prohibition of retention of 

yellowfin sole in the BSAI. NMFS was 

unable to publish a notice providing 

time for public comment because the 

most recent, relevant data only became 

available as of August 22, 2005. 

The AA also finds good cause to 

waive the 30-day delay in the effective 

date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3). This finding is based upon 

the reasons provided above for waiver of 

prior notice and opportunity for public 

comment. 

This action is required by § 679.20 

and is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: August 23, 2005. 

Alan D. Risenhoover, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–17141 Filed 8–24–05; 2:52 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S