58978 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 11, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS 

ADMINISTRATION 

36 CFR Part 1230 

Micrographic Records Management 

CFR Correction 

In Title 36 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 300 to End, revised as 

of July 1, 2005, on page 889, § 1230.1 is 

corrected by removing the last sentence 

of the first paragraph, the following 

undesignated paragraph, and paragraphs 

(a), (b), and (c). 

[FR Doc. C5–55514 Filed 10–7–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[TX–126–1–7685; FRL–7982–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Texas; Speed 

Limits Local Measure for the Dallas/ 

Fort Worth Ozone Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for 

the State of Texas to reduce some speed 

limits in the Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) 

ozone nonattainment area. This measure 

reduces speed limits in a nine county 

area from 70 miles per hour to 65 miles 

per hour and from 65 miles per hour to 

60 miles per hour. This measure was 

submitted on April 25, 2000, and EPA 

proposed approval on January 28, 2001. 

These speed limit reductions are 

designed to reduce nitrogen oxides in 

the DFW area as part of a strategy to aid 

the area in attaining of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards. 

The EPA is also making a technical 

correction to ensure that it is clear that 

the measure applies to a nine county 

area. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 10, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents 

relevant to this action are in the official 

file which is available at the Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 

inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review 

Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal 

holidays. Contact the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below to make an 

appointment. If possible, please make 

the appointment at least two working 

days in advance of your visit. There will 

be a 15 cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

Copies of any State submittals and 

EPA’s technical support document are 

also available for public inspection at 

the State Air Agency listed below 

during official business hours by 

appointment: 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, Office of Air Quality, 12124 

Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Herbert R. Sherrow, Jr., Air Planning 

Section (6PD–L), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–

2733, telephone (214) 665–7237; fax 

number 214–665–7263; e-mail address 

sherrow.herb@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

the EPA. 

Outline 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking? 

II. What Is the Background for This Action? 

III. What Technical Correction Are We 

Making? 

IV. What Comments Were Received During 

the Public Comment Period, January 18, 

2001, to March 19, 2001? 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking? 

EPA is approving the speed limit local 

measure for the DFW ozone 

nonattainment area submitted on April 

25, 2000. 

II. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

We proposed approval of this SIP 

element on January 28, 2001. 

The Texas Department of 

Transportation (TxDOT) revised 

regulations relating to speed limits to 

allow the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to 

submit a request to change speed limits 

for environmental reasons when 

justified. (Please see adopted rules, 25 

TexReg 5686, June 9, 2000; and 

proposed rules, 25 TexReg 2018, March 

10, 2000). Consequently, TxDOT 

lowered all 70 mile per hour (mph) 

speed limits to 65 mph, and all 65 mph 

speed limits to 60 mph in the DFW nine 

county area (Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, 

Denton, Parker, Johnson, Ellis, 

Kaufman, and Rockwall Counties). 

These slower speeds are anticipated to 

reduce the emissions of NOX and 

improve air quality. The slower speed 

limits were implemented September 1, 

2001. This approval will add a new 

local measure to the SIP for the DFW 

ozone nonattainment area. Since the 

slower speeds are anticipated to reduce 

NOX emissions, this local measure will 

not cause an increase in the criteria 

pollutants or their precursors. As such, 

the State’s revision meets and complies 

with the requirements of section 110(l) 

of the Clean Air Act. 

Please refer to 66 FR 4756, January 18, 

2001, and its Technical Support 

Document for details on the speed limit 

measure. 

III. What Technical Correction Are We 

Making? 

We incorrectly stated that the speed 

limits would apply to the four county 

DFW area instead of the nine county 

area in the Speed Limits Reduction 

section of our proposed rule (see 66 FR 

4756, page 4760) and in the Technical 

Support Document (TSD) page 35. In 

other references in the Emissions 

Control Strategy, Local Measures section 

(66 FR 4756, page 4760; TSD page 32) 

and the What are the Local Initiatives 

and are They Approvable? section (66 

FR 4756, page 4760; TSD, page 35) we 

correctly stated that the measure applies 

to the nine county area. The purpose of 

this technical correction is to ensure 

that it is clear that the measure applies 

to the nine county area. 

IV. What Comments Were Received 

During the Public Comment Period, 

January 18, 2001, to March 19, 2001? 

Three commentors stated that speed 

limit reductions was not a measure 

which was effective or a reasonable 

approach to clean air. 

Response: We disagree with the 

comment. Computer modeling used by 

the TCEQ to assess the effectiveness of 

control strategies to improve air quality 

in the DFW area showed that speed 

limit reductions would result in 

substantial emissions reductions in the 

DFW area. The technical analysis 

submitted showed a reduction of over 5 

tons per day of Nitrogen Oxides and 1⁄2

ton per day of volatile organic 

compounds. In addition, the measure 

would result in reducing the severity of 

traffic accidents and in fuel savings. 

Two commentors stated that the 

speed limits would not be effective 

without additional enforcement. One 

commentor asked if there was funding 

available for additional police officers to 

enforce the new speed limits. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 11, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58979 

Response: We agree that the reduced 

speed limits should be adequately 

enforced. The speed limit reduction 

measure will be enforced through State 

and Local speed limit enforcement 

regulations and practices. The TCEQ has 

committed to working with other State 

and Local agencies to ensure adequate 

enforcement and funding for 

enforcement of this measure. We realize 

that not all drivers comply with speed 

limits and the emissions reductions 

associated with the measure have been 

developed accordingly. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is approving the speed limit local 

measure for the DFW nine county area 

(Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Parker, 

Johnson, Ellis, Kaufman, and Rockwall 

Counties) submitted on April 25, 2000. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

rule approves pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it does not 

contain any unfunded mandate or 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4). 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does 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). This action 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 rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (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. 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.). 

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 action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

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

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 12, 

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 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 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 21, 2005. 

Lawrence E. Starfield, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart SS—Texas 

■ 2. In § 52.2270, the table in paragraph 

(e) entitled ‘‘EPA approved 

nonregulatory provisions and quasiregulatory measures’’ is amended by 

adding one new entry to the end of the 

table to read as follows: 

§ 52.2270 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

58980 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 11, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State approval/submittal date 

EPA approval date Comments 

* * * * * * * 

Approval of the Speed Limits Local Initiative 

Measure in the DFW nine county area. Affected counties are Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, 

Denton, Parker, Johnson, Ellis, Kaufman, 

Rockwall.

Dallas-Fort Worth ......... 4/25/2000 10/11/2005 ...................

[Insert FR page number 

where document begins].

[FR Doc. 05–20337 Filed 10–7–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

48 CFR Parts 204, 215, 252, and 

Appendix F to Chapter 2 

[DFARS Case 2003–D009] 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Payment and 

Billing Instructions 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD has issued a final rule 

amending the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to improve payment and 

billing instructions in DoD contracts. 

This final rule is a result of a 

transformation initiative undertaken by 

DoD to dramatically change the purpose 

and content of the DFARS. 

DATES: Effective October 11, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Bill Sain, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations Council, OUSD (AT&L) 

DPAP (DAR), IMD 3C132, 3062 Defense 

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–3062. 

Telephone (703) 602–0293; facsimile 

(703) 602–0350. Please cite DFARS Case 

2003–D009. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

DFARS Transformation is a major 

DoD initiative to dramatically change 

the purpose and content of the DFARS. 

The objective is to improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of the 

acquisition process, while allowing the 

acquisition workforce the flexibility to 

innovate. The transformed DFARS will 

contain only requirements of law, DoDwide policies, delegations of FAR 

authorities, deviations from FAR 

requirements, and policies/procedures 

that have a significant effect beyond the 

internal operating procedures of DoD or 

a significant cost or administrative 

impact on contractors or offerors. 

Additional information on the DFARS 

Transformation initiative is available at 

http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/ 

dfars/transformation/index.htm. 

This final rule is a result of the 

DFARS Transformation initiative. The 

DFARS changes include—

Æ Deletion of text at DFARS 204.201, 

204.202, 204.7103–2, 204.7104–2, 

204.7107, and 204.7108 addressing 

distribution of contracts and 

modifications; numbering of contract 

line items, subline items, and 

accounting classification references; and 

inclusion of payment instructions in 

contracts. Text on these subjects has 

been relocated to the new DFARS 

companion resource, Procedures, 

Guidance, and Information (PGI), 

available at http://www.acq.osd.mil/ 

dpap/dars/pgi. In addition, the related 

PGI text contains a menu of standard 

payment instructions from which the 

contracting officer will make a selection 

for inclusion in Section G of the 

contract. 

Æ Clarification of the definition of 

‘‘accounting classification reference 

number’’ at DFARS 204.7101. 

Æ Amendment of DFARS 204.7103–1 

to add text addressing contract type in 

the establishment of contract line items. 

Æ Amendment of DFARS 204.7106 to 

clarify that contract modifications 

decreasing the amount obligated shall 

not be issued unless sufficient 

unliquidated obligation exists or the 

purpose is to recover monies owed to 

the Government. 

Æ Addition of a clause addressing 

contract line item information needed in 

contractor payment requests. 

Æ Amendment of Material Inspection 

and Receiving Report instructions to 

address electronic submissions. 

DoD published a proposed rule at 69 

FR 35564 on June 25, 2004. Five sources 

submitted comments on the proposed 

rule. A discussion of the comments is 

provided below: 

1. Comment: The proposed text at 

DFARS 204.7103–1 should include 

labor-hour and/or time-and-materials 

line items. 

DoD Response: Concur. DFARS 

204.7103–1 has been expanded to 

include time-and-materials/labor-hour 

line items to ensure that proper 

payment is applied to each line item. 

Since a time-and-materials/labor-hour 

contract contains some elements of a 

fixed-price contract and some elements 

of a cost-reimbursement contract, 

specifying time-and-materials/laborhour line items will avoid potential 

confusion as to whether these are 

classified as fixed-price or costreimbursement. 

2. Comment: The proposed text at 

DFARS 204.7103–1 conflicts with the 

current text at DFARS 215.204–2(g). 

Recommend that the text at 215.204–

2(g) be deleted or revised to be 

consistent with the proposed text at 

204.7103–1. 

DoD Response: Concur. The final rule 

deletes the text at DFARS 215.204–2(g). 

3. Comment: Delete the proposed text 

at DFARS 204.7106(b)(3)(i) and (ii) 

concerning modification coordination 

and funding, because they are 

supplementing the wrong part. Per 

DFARS 204.7100, the scope of this 

subpart is to prescribe policies and 

procedures for assigning contract line 

item numbers. Further, it is 

recommended that the language not be 

included at all in the DFARS, because 

the text proposed at DFARS 

204.7106(b)(3)(i) increases the 

administrative burden on contracting 

officers by imposing coordination 

between the administrative contracting 

officer (ACO) and the procuring 

contracting officer (PCO) regardless of 

the authority already granted in the 

regulations (FAR 1.602–1; 42.302(a)), 

and any contracting officer may gain 

additional information through 

coordination with other offices or 

research on the numerous data bases 

(MOCAS, NAFI, EDA). Additionally, 

DFARS 204.7106(b)(3)(ii) reiterates the 

requirement for the contracting officer 

to ensure that sufficient funds are 

available before executing any 

contractual action (FAR 1.602–2(a), 

32.703, 43.105(a)) and the processes in