69302 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

(s) Gaming machines. 

(1) Except as otherwise provided in 

paragraphs (s)(2) and (s)(3) of this 

section, gaming machines offering a 

payout of more than $250,000 shall be 

monitored and recorded by a dedicated 

camera(s) to provide coverage of: 

* * * * * 

(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (s)(1) 

of this section, if the gaming machine is 

a multi-game machine, the Tribal 

gaming regulatory authority, or the 

gaming operation subject to the 

approval of the Tribal gaming regulatory 

authority, may develop and implement 

alternative procedures to verify payouts. 

* * * * * 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 1st day of 

November, 2005. 

Philip N. Hogen, 

Chairman. 

Nelson Westrin, 

Vice Chairman. 

Cloyce Choney, 

Commissioner. 

[FR Doc. 05–22506 Filed 11–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7565–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 51 and 52 

[FRL–7997–4] 

RIN 2060–AK74 

Public Hearing and Extension of Public 

Comment Period for Proposed Rule To 

Implement the Fine Particle National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Announcement of public 

hearing and extension of public 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is announcing that 

a public hearing for the proposed rule 

to implement the fine particle national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

will be held on November 30, 2005 in 

Washington, DC. The proposed rule was 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 1, 2005 (70 FR 65984) and is 

also available at http://www.epa.gov/ 

pmdesignations. The hearing will be at 

the Capitol Hilton Hotel in Washington, 

DC and will begin at 9 a.m. The EPA is 

also extending the public comment 

period for this proposed rule to January 

31, 2006. 

DATES: The public hearing will be held 

on November 30, 2005. The public 

comment period for this proposed rule 

is extended to January 31, 2006. Please 

refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

additional information on the hearing. 

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be 

held at the Capitol Hilton Hotel, located 

at 1001 16th Street, NW., Washington, 

DC 20036, phone 202–393–1000. (The 

hotel is within walking distance of three 

Metro stations: The Farragut North, 

Farragut West, and McPherson Square 

stations.) Written comments on the 

proposed rule may also be submitted to 

EPA electronically, by mail, by 

facsimile, or through hand delivery/ 

courier. Please refer to the proposal for 

the addresses and detailed instructions. 

Documents relevant to this action are 

available for public inspection at the 

EPA Docket Center, located at 1301 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B102, 

Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and 

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

excluding legal holidays. A reasonable 

fee may be charged for copying. 

Documents are also available through 

EPA’s electronic Docket system at 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. The EPA 

Web site for the rulemaking is http:// 

www.epa.gov/pmdesignations. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you would like to speak at the public 

hearing or have questions concerning 

the public hearing, please contact Joann 

Allman of EPA (see contact information 

under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). 

Questions concerning PM 2.5

implementation issues should be 

addressed to Richard Damberg, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, Mail Code C504–02, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

phone number (919) 541–5592 or by email at: damberg.rich@epa.gov. 

Questions concerning the new source 

review program revisions to address the 

PM 2.5 standards should be addressed to 

Raj Rao, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, Mail Code C339–03, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

phone number (919) 541–5344 or by email at: rao.raj@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Hearing. The public hearing 

will provide interested parties the 

opportunity to present data, views, or 

arguments concerning the proposed 

rule. The EPA may ask clarifying 

questions during the oral presentations, 

but will not respond to the 

presentations at that time. Written 

statements and supporting information 

submitted during the comment period 

will be considered with the same weight 

as any oral comments and supporting 

information presented at the public 

hearing. Written comments must be 

postmarked by January 31, 2006. 

If you would like to present oral 

testimony at the hearing, please notify 

Joann Allman of the U.S. EPA, Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air 

Quality Strategies and Standards 

Division, C539–02, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541–

1815, e-mail allman.joann@epa.gov, by 

12 p.m. Eastern time on November 28, 

2005. She will provide you with a 

specific time to provide your comments. 

Oral testimony will be limited to 5 

minutes for each commenter. The EPA 

encourages commenters to provide EPA 

with a copy of their oral testimony 

electronically (via e-mail, computer 

disk, or CD) or in hard copy form. 

The public hearing will begin at 9 

a.m. and continue until 5 p.m., if 

necessary, depending on the number of 

speakers. The EPA may end the hearing 

early (no earlier than 2 p.m.) if all 

registered speakers have had an 

opportunity to speak. Persons wishing 

to present oral testimony that have not 

made arrangements in advance can 

register by 2 p.m. on the day of the 

hearing. We will provide equipment for 

commenters to show overhead slides or 

make computerized slide presentations 

if we receive special requests in 

advance. Commenters should notify 

Joann Allman if they will need specific 

equipment. The hearing schedule, 

including lists of speakers, will be 

posted on EPA’s Web site: http:// 

www.epa.gov/pmdesignations. Verbatim 

transcripts of the hearings and written 

statements will be included in the 

rulemaking docket. 

Extension of public comment period. 

The proposed rule was signed by the 

Administrator on September 8, 2005 

and published in the Federal Register 

on November 1, 2005. Since the 60-day 

public comment period would have 

concluded on December 31, 2005, EPA 

has decided to extend the comment 

period until January 31, 2006 in order 

to avoid the December holiday period 

and allow interested parties to have 

additional time to prepare their 

comments. 

How Can I Get Copies of This 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

The EPA has established the official 

public docket for the Rule to Implement 

the Fine Particle National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards under Docket ID No. 

OAR–2003–0062. Also, the proposed 

rule was published in the Federal 

Register on November 1, 2005 and is 

available at http://www.epa.gov/ 

pmdesignations. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 15, 2005 / Proposed Rules 69303 

Dated: November 9, 2005. 

Mary E. Henigin, 

Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards. 

[FR Doc. 05–22694 Filed 11–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To List the Uinta 

Mountainsnail as Endangered 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition 

finding. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 

90-day finding on a petition to list the 

Uinta mountainsnail (Oreohelix 

eurekensis uinta) as endangered under 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). We find that the petition 

does not present substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

listing O. e. uinta may be warranted. 

This finding is based on our 

determination that there is insufficient 

evidence to indicate that O. e. uinta is 

a valid subspecies, and, therefore, 

cannot be considered a listable entity 

pursuant to section 3(15) of the Act. 

Therefore, we will not initiate a status 

review in response to this petition. 

However, the public may submit to us 

new information concerning the status 

of or threats to O. e. uinta at any time. 

DATES: The finding announced in this 

document was made on November 7, 

2005. 

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this 

finding is available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

normal business hours at the Utah Fish 

and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 2369 West Orton 

Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, Utah 

84119. Submit new information, 

materials, comments, or questions 

concerning the status of or threats to 

this taxon to us at the above address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Henry Maddux, Field Supervisor, Utah 

Fish and Wildlife Office (see 

ADDRESSES) (telephone 801–975–3330; 

facsimile 801–975–3331). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we 

make a finding on whether a petition to 

list, delist, or reclassify a species 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information to indicate that 

the petitioned action may be warranted. 

We are to base this finding on 

information provided in the petition 

and other information that is readily 

available to us (e.g., in our files). To the 

maximum extent practicable, we are to 

make this finding within 90 days of our 

receipt of the petition, and publish our 

notice of this finding promptly in the 

Federal Register. 

Our standard for substantial 

information within the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90- 

day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of 

information that would lead a 

reasonable person to believe that the 

measure proposed in the petition may 

be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we 

find that substantial information was 

presented, we are required to promptly 

commence a review of the status of the 

species, if one has not already been 

initiated under our internal candidate 

assessment process. 

In making this finding, we relied on 

information provided by the petitioners 

and evaluated that information in 

accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). We 

also reviewed additional, readily 

available information pertinent to O. e. 

uinta to clarify certain points raised in 

the petition. We did not conduct 

additional research or subject the 

petition to rigorous critical review. Our 

process of coming to a 90-day finding 

under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 

section 424.14(b) of our regulations is 

limited to a determination of whether 

the information in the petition meets the 

‘‘substantial information’’ threshold. 

On August 29, 2001, we received a 

formal petition from the Utah 

Environmental Congress (UEC) to list O. 

e. uinta as an endangered species 

pursuant to section 4 of the Act. 

Although O. e. uinta was once thought 

extinct, a small number had been found 

in the Ashley National Forest, Uinta 

County, Utah, in 1998. The August 21, 

2001, petition was based largely on this 

discovery. The petition cited threats 

from grazing, prescribed fire, logging, 

and sedimentation from U.S. Forest 

Service (USFS) road-building 

operations. The petition also requested 

that critical habitat be designated 

simultaneously with the listing of O. e. 

uinta as endangered. 

In letters dated September 17 and 

October 3, 2001, we denied emergency 

listing because of measures taken by the 

Ashley National Forest to protect the 

population. On July 13, 2004, we 

received a 60-day notice of intent to sue 

from UEC and other groups. On January 

25, 2005, we received a complaint 

regarding our failure to make the 90-day 

and 12-month findings. In light of these 

legal actions, we discussed various 

options with the plaintiffs and 

tentatively agreed to submit a completed 

90-day finding to the Federal Register 

by November 7, 2005. 

Species Information 

Oreohelix eurekensis uinta is in the 

genus Oreohelix, commonly called the 

‘‘Mountain Snail.’’ This genus of land 

snails is endemic to western North 

America, with distributions ranging 

from southwestern Canada, including 

southern Saskatchewan and British 

Columbia, to western Chihuahua in 

northern Mexico (Pilsbry 1939). In terms 

of the biogeographical distribution of 

land snails, North America is generally 

split into Eastern and Western American 

‘‘Divisions’’ (Pilsbry 1939), while each 

division is further divided into land 

snail provinces (Frest 2002). The 

biogeographical distribution of 

Oreohelix includes the Rocky Mountain, 

Washingtonian, and Southwestern 

Provinces of the Western Division of 

North America (Frest 2002). 

Factors determining habitat 

preferences of land snails include cover, 

effective moisture availability, and 

geologic history (Frest 2002). Most land 

snail species are calciphiles, meaning 

they are usually restricted to limestone, 

dolomite, or other substrates containing 

high levels of the element calcium (Frest 

2002). Moist soil conditions are favored 

and soil pH may be a factor in 

determining suitable habitat (Frest 

2002). Desiccation is the primary factor 

in mortality (Frest 2002). Moist forests, 

slope bases, north slopes, springs and 

seeps, edges of floodplains, and rock 

talus (a sloping mass of loose rock 

debris at the base of a cliff) are areas of 

land snail concentration (Frest 2002). 

Areas with vegetation or other forms of 

cover (e.g., rock overhangs and caves) 

that provide shade also are usually 

preferred by land snails; abundant 

downed woody debris is also important 

(Frest 2002). 

Western land snails are typically 

herbivores, but some may consume 

animal matter. Land snails contribute 

substantially to nutrient recycling, 

breaking down plant detritus and 

animal waste (Frest 2002). They are 

preyed upon extensively by small 

mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds, 

and insects (Frest 2002). 

Land snails are ‘‘exceptional 

indicators’’ of ecosystem health (Frest 

2002). They are present in many 

environments, have specialized habitat 

needs, and are essentially sessile