71446 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

expected to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects 

is not required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

No environmental impact statement is 

required for this rule since agency 

decisions on proposed State AMLR 

plans and revisions thereof are 

categorically excluded from compliance 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act (42 U.S.C. 4331 et seq.) by the 

Manual of the Department of the Interior 

(516 DM 6, appendix 8, paragraph 

8.4B(29)). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not contain 

information collection requirements that 

require approval by OMB under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

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.). The State submittal, 

which is the subject of this rule, is based 

upon counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an economic analysis was 

prepared and certification made that 

such regulations would not have a 

significant economic effect upon a 

substantial number of small entities. In 

making the determination as to whether 

this rule would have a significant 

economic impact, the Department relied 

upon the data and assumptions for the 

counterpart Federal regulations. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: (a) Does not have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million; 

(b) will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions; (c) does not have 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S. based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. 

This determination is based upon the 

fact that the State submittal which is the 

subject of this rule is based upon 

counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an analysis was prepared and a 

determination made that the Federal 

regulation was not considered a major 

rule. 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rule will not impose an 

unfunded Mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of $100 million or more in any given 

year. This determination is based upon 

the fact that the State submittal, which 

is the subject of this rule, is based upon 

counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an analysis was prepared and a 

determination made that the Federal 

regulation did not impose an unfunded 

mandate. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 950 

Abandoned mine reclamation 

programs, Intergovernmental relations, 

Surface mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: October 7, 2005. 

Allen D. Klein, 

Regional Director, Western Region. 

[FR Doc. 05–23399 Filed 11–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[R04–OAR–2005–GA–0005–200537; FRL–

8003–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Georgia: 

Approval of Revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a correction 

to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

for the State of Georgia regarding the 

State’s general ‘‘nuisance’’ rule. EPA has 

determined that this rule, Georgia Rule 

391–3–1.02(2)(a)1, was erroneously 

incorporated into the SIP. EPA is 

proposing to remove this rule from the 

approved Georgia SIP because the rule 

is not related to the attainment and 

maintenance of the national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 29, 

2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Regional Material in 

EDocket (RME) ID No. R04–OAR–2005–

GA–0005, by one of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Agency Web site: http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ RME, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

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. 

3. E-mail: lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

4. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

5. Mail: ‘‘R04–OAR–2005–GA–0005’’, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Sean Lakeman, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division 12th floor, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 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 to 4:30, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

RME ID No. R04–OAR–2005–GA–0005. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received 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 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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules 71447 

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 the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9043. 

Mr. Lakeman can also be reached via 

electronic mail at 

lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The first 

significant amendments to the CAA 

occurred in 1970 and 1977. Following 

these amendments, a large number of 

SIPs were submitted to EPA to fulfill 

new federal requirements. In many 

cases, states and districts submitted 

their entire programs, including many 

elements not required pursuant to the 

Act. Due to resource constraints during 

this timeframe, EPA’s review of these 

submittals focused primarily on the 

required technical, legal, and 

enforcement elements of the submittals. 

At the time, EPA did not perform a 

detailed review of the numerous 

provisions submitted to determine if 

each provision was related to the 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS. However, provisions approved 

as part of states’ SIPs should generally 

be related to attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS, consistent 

with the authority in section 110 of the 

Act under which these plans are 

approved by EPA. 

During the process of responding to a 

recent citizen petition of a title V 

operating permit in Georgia, EPA 

determined that a provision of the 

State’s rules, approved as part of the SIP 

on January 3, 1980, (45 FR 780), is not 

related to the attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS. This State 

rule, ‘‘Georgia Air Quality Control Rule 

391–3–1–.02(2)(a)1,’’ is a general 

nuisance provision. In addition, Georgia 

has never used this rule as part of a 

federal air quality standard attainment 

or maintenance plan. Georgia has also 

not relied on or attributed any emission 

reductions from this rule to any such 

plans (October 31, 2005, e-mail from 

Ron Methier, Georgia Environmental 

Protection Division, to Dick Schutt, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency). For 

these reasons, EPA’s 1980 approval of 

this provision into the Georgia SIP was 

in error and EPA is, therefore, proposing 

to remove the provision from the 

approved SIP under the authority of 

section 110(k)(6) of the Act. Section 

110(k)(6) provides: ‘‘Whenever the 

Administrator determines that the 

Administrator’s action approving, 

disapproving, or promulgating any plan 

or plan revision (or part thereof), area 

designation, redesignation, 

classification, or reclassification was in 

error, the Administrator may in the 

same manner as the approval, 

disapproval, or promulgation revise 

such action as appropriate without 

requiring any further submission from 

the State. Such determination and the 

basis thereof shall be provided to the 

State and public.’’

Proposed Action 

Since the State’s ‘‘nuisance’’

provision is not directed at the 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS, EPA has found that its prior 

approval of this particular rule (into the 

SIP) was in error. Consequently, in 

order to correct this error, EPA is 

proposing to remove Georgia Rule 391–

3–1–.02(2)(a)1 from the approved 

Georgia SIP pursuant to section 

110(k)(6) of the Act and to codify this 

deletion by revising the appropriate 

paragraph under 40 CFR part 52, 

subpart L, § 52.570 (Identification of 

Plan). 

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

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 proposed action merely 

proposes to remove an erroneously 

approved State rule from the SIP and 

imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 

that this proposed 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 

proposes to remove an erroneously 

approved State rule from the SIP 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 proposed 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 

proposes to remove an erroneously 

approved State rule from the SIP, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. This proposed 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. This proposed 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.). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: November 21, 2005. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 05–23417 Filed 11–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P