53604 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 174 / Friday, September 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

transactions occurring after the date of 

publication in the Federal Register of a 

Treasury Decision adopting these rules 

as final regulations. 

PART 53—FOUNDATION AND SIMILAR 

EXCISE TAXES 

Par. 3. The authority citation for part 

53 continues to read, in part, as follows: 

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. 

Par. 4. In § 53.4958–2, paragraph 

(a)(6) is added to read as follows: 

§ 53.4958–2 Definition of applicable taxexempt organization. 

(a) * * * 

(6) Examples. The following examples 

illustrate the principles of this section, 

which defines an applicable tax-exempt 

organization for purposes of section 

4958: 

Example 1. O is a nonprofit corporation 

formed under state law. O filed its 

application for recognition of exemption 

under section 501(c)(3) within the time 

prescribed under section 508(a). In its 

application, O described its plans for 

purchasing property from some of its 

directors at prices that would exceed fair 

market value. After reviewing the 

application, the IRS determined that because 

of the proposed property purchase 

transactions, O failed to establish that it met 

the requirements for an organization 

described in section 501(c)(3). Accordingly, 

the IRS denied O’s application. While O’s 

application was pending, O engaged in the 

purchase transactions described in its 

application at prices that exceeded the fair 

market value of the property. Although these 

transactions would constitute excess benefit 

transactions under section 4958, because the 

IRS never recognized O as an organization 

described in section 501(c)(3), O was never 

an applicable tax-exempt organization under 

section 4958. Therefore, these transactions 

are not subject to the excise taxes provided 

in section 4958. 

Example 2. O is a nonprofit corporation 

formed under state law. O files its 

application for recognition of exemption 

under section 501(c)(3) within the time 

prescribed under section 508(a). The IRS 

issues a favorable determination letter in 

Year 1 that recognizes O as an organization 

described in section 501(c)(3). Subsequently, 

in Year 5 of O’s operations, O engages in 

certain transactions that constitute excess 

benefit transactions under section 4958 and 

violate the proscription against inurement 

under section 501(c)(3) and § 1.501(c)(3)–

1(c)(2). The IRS examines the Form 990, 

‘‘Return of Organization Exempt From 

Income Tax’’, that O filed for Year 5. After 

considering all the relevant facts and 

circumstances in accordance with 

§ 1.501(c)(3)–1(g), the IRS concludes that O is 

no longer described in section 501(c)(3) 

effective in Year 5. The IRS does not examine 

the Forms 990 that O filed for its first four 

years of operations and, accordingly, does 

not revoke O’s exempt status for those years. 

Although O’s tax-exempt status is revoked 

effective in Year 5, under the lookback rules 

in § 53.4958–2(a)(1) and § 53.4958–3(a)(1) of 

this chapter, for a period of five years prior 

to the excess benefit transactions that 

occurred in Year 5, O was an applicable taxexempt organization and O’s directors were 

disqualified persons as to O. Therefore, the 

transactions between O and its directors 

during Year 5 are subject to the appropriate 

excise taxes provided in section 4958. 

* * * * * 

Mark E. Matthews, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 05–17858 Filed 9–8–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[USCG–2005–22362; Formerly CGD08–05–

046] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf 

Intracoastal Waterway, West Larose, 

LA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

change of address and docket number 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: On September 2, 2005, the 

Coast Guard published a notice and 

requested comments on a proposed 

change to regulations governing the 

operation of the SR 1 (West Larose) 

vertical lift bridge across the Gulf 

Intracoastal Waterway, mile 35.6 west of 

Harvey Lock, at Larose, Louisiana. The 

proposed rule would change the 

bridge’s schedule so that it would 

remain closed to navigation at various 

times on weekdays during the school 

year to facilitate the safe, efficient 

movement of staff, students and other 

residents within the parish. That notice 

was issued August 26, 2005, before 

Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans 

and caused that city to be flooded. We 

have changed the address and docket 

number where comments on the 

proposed rule should be sent because of 

flood conditions in New Orleans. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

November 1, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number USCG–2005–22362 to the 

Docket Management Facility at the U.S. 

Department of Transportation. To avoid 

duplication, please use only one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. 

(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

(3) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(4) Delivery: Room PL–401 on the 

Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 

Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The telephone number is 202–366–

9329. 

(5) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Roger Wiebusch, Bridge Administration 

Branch, telephone 314 539–3900, ext. 

2378. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related material. If you 

do so, please include your name and 

address, identify the docket number for 

this rulemaking (USCG–2005–22362), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. Please submit all comments 

and related material in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying. If you would like 

to know they reached us, please enclose 

a stamped, self-addressed postcard or 

envelope. We will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period. We may change 

this proposed rule in view of them. 

Change of Address and Docket 

The notice of proposed rulemaking 

published September 2, 2005 (70 FR 

52343) entitled, ‘‘Drawbridge Operation 

Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, 

West Larose, LA’’, listed an address in 

New Orleans, LA, as the place to send 

your comments on the proposed rule. 

That rulemaking notice was issued 

August 26, 2005, before Hurricane 

Katrina struck New Orleans and flooded 

that city. We have changed the location 

for receiving comments because of flood 

conditions in New Orleans. If you wish 

to comment on the proposed rule, send 

your comment to the Docket 

Management Facility in Washington, 

DC, by one of the means indicated in the 

ADDRESSES section above in this notice. 

With this change of address, we have 

also changed the docket number to 

USCG–2005–22362. Please use this new 

docket number. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 174 / Friday, September 9, 2005 / Proposed Rules 53605 

Dated: September 2, 2005. 

Stefan G. Venckus, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard. 

[FR Doc. 05–17831 Filed 9–8–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[R05–OAR–2005–IN–0006; FRL–7965–7] 

Determination of Attainment, Approval 

and Promulgation of Implementation 

Plans and Designation of Areas for Air 

Quality Planning Purposes; Indiana; 

Redesignation of the Evansville Area 

to Attainment of the 8-Hour Ozone 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On June 2, 2005, the State of 

Indiana, through the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM), submitted: A 

request for the EPA to redesignate the 

area of Evansville (Vanderburgh and 

Warrick Counties) from nonattainment 

to attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS); and a request for EPA 

approval of an Indiana State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

containing a 10-year maintenance plan 

for the Evansville area. EPA is 

proposing to approve the State’s request 

to redesignate the Evansville area to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

EPA’s proposed approval of the 

redesignation request is based on the 

determination that the Evansville area 

and the State of Indiana have met the 

criteria for redesignation to attainment 

specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA), 

including the determination that the 

Evansville area has attained the 8-hour 

ozone standard. In conjunction with the 

proposed approval of the redesignation 

request for the Evansville area, EPA is 

proposing to approve the State’s plan to 

maintain the attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS through 2015 in this area 

as a revision to the Indiana SIP. EPA is 

also proposing to approve 2015 Volatile 

Organic Compounds (VOC) and Oxides 

of Nitrogen (NOX) Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets (MVEBs), which are 

supported by and consistent with the 

10-year maintenance plan for this area, 

for purposes of transportation 

conformity. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 11, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by Regional Material in 

EDocket (RME) ID No. R05–OAR–2005–

IN–0006, by one of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Agency Web site: http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. RME, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comments 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Once in the 

system, select quick search, then key in 

the appropriate RME Docket 

identification number. Follow the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

Mail: You may send written 

comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

Hand delivery: Deliver your 

comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

RME ID No. R05–OAR–2005–IN–0006. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, including any 

personal information provided, and may 

be made available online at http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, unless the 

comment includes information claimed 

to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through RME, regulations.gov, 

or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and 

the Federal regulations.gov Web site are 

‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through RME or 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the public docket and made 

available on the Internet. If you submit 

an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the RME 

index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., 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 RME or 

in hard copy at Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and 

Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. We 

recommend that you telephone Edward 

Doty, Environmental Scientist, at (312) 

886–6057, before visiting the Region 5 

office. This Facility is open from 8:30 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6057, 

doty.edward@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. EPA’s Proposed Actions 

A. What Actions Is EPA Proposing to Take? 

B. Do These Actions Apply to Me? 

C. What Is the Background for These 

Proposed Actions? 

II. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to 

Attainment? 

III. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Actions? 

IV. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the State’s 

Request? 

V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the End of 

the 10-Year Maintenance Plan (for 2015) 

Which Can Be Used to Support 

Conformity Determinations? 

A. How Are the MVEBs Developed and 

What Are the MVEBs for the Evansville 

Area? 

B. What Is a Safety Margin? 

C. Are the MVEBs Approvable? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews