Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 68337 

would not create an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that might 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does 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. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, 

which guides the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded that there are no factors 

in this case that would limit the use of 

a categorical exclusion under section 

2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this 

rule is categorically excluded, under 

figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of the 

Instruction, from further environmental 

documentation because it has been 

determined that the promulgation of 

operating regulations for drawbridges 

are categorically excluded. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

Regulations 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 

CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued 

under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 

Stat. 5039. 

■ 2. In § 117.1007, remove paragraphs 

(c)(3) and (c)(4) and revise paragraphs 

(c)(1) and (c)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 117.1007 Elizabeth River—Eastern 

Branch. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) Shall open on signal at any time, 

except from 5 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 

3 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

(2) From 5 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 3 

p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays, shall open at 

any time for commercial vessels with a 

draft of 18 feet or more, provided that 

at least 6 hours advance notice has been 

given to the Berkley Bridge Traffic 

Control room at (757) 494–2490. 

Dated: November 2, 2005. 

L.L. Hereth, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 05–22388 Filed 11–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[R09–OAR–2005–AZ–0007, FRL–7994–6] 

Interim Final Determination to Stay 

and/or Defer Sanctions, Pinal County 

Air Quality Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim 

final determination to stay and/or defer 

imposition of sanctions based on a 

proposed approval of a revision to the 

Pinal County Air Quality Control 

District (PCAQCD) portion of the 

Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

published elsewhere in today’s Federal 

Register. The revisions concern 

PCAQCD Rule 2–8–300. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on November 10, 2005. 

However, comments will be accepted 

until December 12, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number R09–OAR–

2005–AZ–0007, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Agency Website: http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. EPA prefers 

receiving comments through this 

electronic public docket and comment 

system. Follow the on-line instructions 

to submit comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

• E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

• Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at 

http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through the 

agency website, eRulemaking portal, or 

e-mail. The agency website and 

eRulemaking portal are Aanonymous 

access’’ systems, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the public comment. 

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. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub and in 

hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed in the index, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

68338 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

copyrighted material), and some may 

not be publicly available in either 

location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard 

copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al 

Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–

4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. Background 

On April 28, 2004 (69 FR 23103), we 

published a limited approval and 

limited disapproval of PCAQCD Rule 2–

8–300 as adopted locally on June 29, 

1993 and submitted by the State on 

November 27, 1995. We based our 

limited disapproval action a deficiency 

in the submittal. This disapproval 

action started a sanctions clock for 

imposition of offset sanctions 18 months 

after May 28, 2005 and highway 

sanctions 6 months later, pursuant to 

section 179 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

and our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31. 

On May 18, 2005, PCAQCD adopted 

revisions to Rule 2–8–300 that were 

intended to correct the deficiency 

identified in our limited disapproval 

action. On September 12, 2005, the State 

submitted these revisions to EPA. In the 

Proposed Rules section of today’s 

Federal Register, we have proposed 

approval of this submittal because we 

believe it corrects the deficiency 

identified in our April 28, 2004 

disapproval action. Based on today’s 

proposed approval, we are taking this 

final rulemaking action, effective on 

publication, to stay and/or defer 

imposition of sanctions that were 

triggered by our April 28, 2004 limited 

disapproval. 

EPA is providing the public with an 

opportunity to comment on this stay/ 

deferral of sanctions. If comments are 

submitted that change our assessment 

described in this final determination 

and the proposed full approval of 

revised PCAQCD Rule 2–8–300, we 

intend to take subsequent final action to 

reimpose sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.31(d). If no comments are submitted 

that change our assessment, then all 

sanctions and sanction clocks will be 

permanently terminated on the effective 

date of a final rule approval. 

II. EPA Action 

We are making an interim final 

determination to stay and/or defer CAA 

section 179 sanctions associated with 

PCAQCD Rule 2–8–300 based on our 

concurrent proposal to approve the 

State’s SIP revision as correcting a 

deficiency that initiated sanctions. 

Because EPA has preliminarily 

determined that the State has corrected 

the deficiency identified in EPA’s 

limited disapproval action, relief from 

sanctions should be provided as quickly 

as possible. Therefore, EPA is invoking 

the good cause exception under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in 

not providing an opportunity for 

comment before this action takes effect 

(5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However, by this 

action EPA is providing the public with 

a chance to comment on EPA’s 

determination after the effective date, 

and EPA will consider any comments 

received in determining whether to 

reverse such action. 

EPA believes that notice-andcomment rulemaking before the 

effective date of this action is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. EPA has reviewed the State’s 

submittal and, through its proposed 

action, is indicating that it is more likely 

than not that the State has corrected the 

deficiencies that started the sanctions 

clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public 

interest to initially impose sanctions or 

to keep applied sanctions in place when 

the State has most likely done all it can 

to correct the deficiencies that triggered 

the sanctions clocks. Moreover, it would 

be impracticable to go through noticeand-comment rulemaking on a finding 

that the State has corrected the 

deficiencies prior to the rulemaking 

approving the State’s submittal. 

Therefore, EPA believes that it is 

necessary to use the interim final 

rulemaking process to stay and/or defer 

sanctions while EPA completes its 

rulemaking process on the approvability 

of the State’s submittal. Moreover, with 

respect to the effective date of this 

action, EPA is invoking the good cause 

exception to the 30-day notice 

requirement of the APA because the 

purpose of this notice is to relieve a 

restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action stays and/or defers federal 

sanctions and imposes no additional 

requirements. 

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. 

This action is not 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. 

The Administrator certifies that this 

action 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.). 

This rule 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 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 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 rule 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. The requirements of section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(15 U.S.C. 272) do not apply to this rule 

because it imposes no standards. 

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 to Congress and the 

Comptroller General. However, section 

808 provides that any rule for which the 

issuing agency for good cause finds that 

notice and public procedure thereon are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest, shall take effect at 

such time as the agency promulgating 

the rule determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). 

EPA has made such a good cause 

finding, including the reasons therefor, 

and established an effective date of 

November 10, 2005. 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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 68339 

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). 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 appropriate circuit by 

January 9, 2006. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this rule for the purpose of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which 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, Intergovernmental 

regulations, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: October 19, 2005. 

Wayne Nastri, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 05–22378 Filed 11–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[OAR–2005–0150a; FRL–7995–3] 

Designation of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; Arizona; 

Correction of Boundary of Phoenix 

Metropolitan 1-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to correct the boundary of the 

Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area to exclude the Gila 

River Indian Reservation. EPA is taking 

this action under the authority of 

section 110(k)(6) of the Clean Air Act 

and in light of the Federal trust 

responsibility to the Tribes. This action 

is intended to facilitate and support the 

Gila River Indian Community’s efforts to 

develop, adopt and implement a 

comprehensive Tribal Implementation 

Plan by removing unnecessary 

obligations that flow from the erroneous 

inclusion of a portion of the Reservation 

in the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour 

ozone nonattainment area. 

DATES: This action will be effective on 

January 9, 2006, without further notice, 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by December 12, 2005. 

If we receive such comments, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that this rule will not take effect and 

that we will respond to submitted 

comments and take subsequent final 

action. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number OAR–

2005–0150, by one of the following 

methods: 

1. Agency Web site: http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. EPA prefers 

receiving comments through this 

electronic public docket and comment 

system. Follow the on-line instructions 

to submit comments. 

2. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

3. E-mail: tax.wienke@epa.gov. 

4. Mail or deliver: Wienke Tax, Office 

of Air Planning (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at 

http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through the 

agency Web site, eRulemaking portal, or 

e-mail. The agency Web site and 

eRulemaking portal are ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ systems, and EPA will not know 

your identify or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the public comment. 

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. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub and in 

hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed in the index, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material), and some may 

not be publicly available in either 

location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard 

copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wienke Tax, Office of Air Planning, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, (520) 622–1622, e-mail: 

tax.wienke@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, the terms 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Regulatory Context 

II. Gila River Indian Community’s Request for 

a Boundary Change 

III. EPA Review of the Gila River Indian 

Community’s Request 

A. CAA Authority to Correct Area 

Designations 

B. General Physical Description of the 

Phoenix Metropolitan Area and Environs 

C. Contribution by Emission Sources on 

the Reservation 

D. Oxidants/Ozone Air Quality Conditions 

on the Reservation 

E. Ozone Planning Issues 

F. Evaluation and Conclusion 

IV. Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

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. Congressional Review Act 

I. Regulatory Context 

On April 30, 1971 (36 FR 8186), 

pursuant to section 109 of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or Act), as amended in 1970, 

EPA promulgated national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) for six 

criteria pollutants, including 

photochemical oxidants (‘‘oxidants’’). 

EPA set the NAAQS for oxidants 

(measured as ozone) at 0.08 parts per 

million (ppm), 1-hour average. Under 

section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1970, States were 

required to adopt and submit plans that 

provide for implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of the 

NAAQS. These original plans, generally 

submitted and approved in the early 

1970’s, are known as State 

Implementation Plans (SIPs).