71774 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), 

this rule is exempt from the initial and 

final regulatory flexibility analysis 

requirements of sections 603 and 604. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

There are no applicable Catalog of 

Federal Domestic Assistance program 

numbers. 

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism, 

Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug 

abuse, Foreign relations, Government 

contracts, Grant programs-health, Grant 

programs-veterans, Health care, Health 

facilities, Health professions, Health 

records, Homeless, Medical and dental 

schools, Medical devices, Medical 

research, Mental health programs, 

Nursing homes, Philippines, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Scholarships and fellowships, Travel 

and transportation expenses, Veterans. 

Approved: July 15, 2005. 

R. James Nicholson, 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

■ For the reasons set out above, 38 CFR 

part 17 is amended to read as follows: 

PART 17—MEDICAL 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 1721, and as 

stated in specific sections. 

■ 2. Section 17.32 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising the section heading and 

authority citation. 

■ b. In paragraph (a), adding a new 

definition in alphabetical order. 

■ c. Adding paragraph (h) immediately 

following paragraph (g)(4). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 17.32 Informed consent and advance 

health care planning. 

(a) * * * 

Advance Directive. Specific written 

statements made by a patient who has 

decision-making capacity regarding 

future health care decisions in any of 

the following: 

(i) VA Living Will. A written statement 

made by a patient on an authorized VA 

form which sets forth the patient’s 

wishes regarding the patient’s health 

care treatment preferences including the 

withholding and withdrawal of lifesustaining treatment. 

(ii) VA Durable Power of Attorney for 

Health Care. A written instruction on a 

VA form which designates the patient’s 

choice of health care agent. 

(iii) State-Authorized Advance 

Directive. A non-VA living will, durable 

power of attorney for health care, or 

other advance health care planning 

document, the validity of which is 

determined pursuant to applicable State 

law. For the purposes of this paragraph 

and paragraph (h) of this section, 

‘‘applicable State law’’ means the law of 

the State where the advance directive 

was signed, the State where the patient 

resided when the advance directive was 

signed, the State where the patient now 

resides, or the State where the patient is 

receiving treatment. VA will resolve any 

conflict between those State laws 

regarding the validity of the advance 

directive by following the law of the 

State that gives effect to the expressed 

wishes in the advance directive. 

* * * * * 

(h) Advance health care planning. 

Subject to the provisions of paragraphs 

(h)(1) through (h)(4) of this section, VA 

will follow the wishes of a patient 

expressed in an Advance Directive 

when the attending physician 

determines and documents in the 

patient’s medical record that the patient 

lacks decision-making capacity and is 

not expected to regain it. An advance 

directive that is valid in one or more 

States under applicable State law, as 

defined in paragraph (a) of this section, 

will be recognized throughout the VA 

health care system. 

(1) Witnesses. A VA Advance 

Directive: Living Will and Durable 

Power of Attorney for Health Care must 

be signed by the patient in the presence 

of two witnesses. Neither witness may 

to the witness’ knowledge be named in 

the patient’s will, appointed as health 

care agent in the advance directive, or 

financially responsible for the patient’s 

care. VA employees of the Chaplain 

Service, Psychology Service, Social 

Work Service, or nonclinical employees 

(e.g., Medical Administration Service, 

Voluntary Service, or Environmental 

Management Service) may serve as 

witnesses. Other individuals employed 

by the VA facility in which the patient 

is being treated may not sign as 

witnesses to the advance directive. 

Witnesses are attesting only to the fact 

that they saw the patient sign the form. 

(2) Instructions in critical situations. 

VA will follow the unambiguous verbal 

or non-verbal instructions regarding 

future health care decisions of a patient 

who has decision-making capacity when 

the patient is admitted to care when 

critically ill and loss of capacity may be 

imminent and the patient is not 

physically able to sign an advance 

directive form, or the appropriate form 

is not readily available. The patient’s 

instructions must have been expressed 

to at least two members of the health 

care team. The substance of the patient’s 

instructions must be recorded in a 

progress note in the patient’s medical 

record and must be co-signed by at least 

two members of the health care team 

who were present and can attest to the 

wishes expressed by the patient. These 

instructions will be given effect only if 

the patient loses decision-making 

capacity during the presenting situation. 

(3) Revocation. A patient who has 

decision-making capacity may revoke an 

advance directive or instructions in a 

critical situation at any time by using 

any means expressing the intent to 

revoke. 

(4) VA policy and disputes. Neither 

the treatment team nor surrogate may 

override a patient’s clear instructions in 

an Advance Directive or in instructions 

in critical situations, except that those 

portions of an Advance Directive or 

instructions given in a critical situation 

that are not consistent with VA policy 

will not be given effect. 

* * * * * 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7331 through 7334) 

[FR Doc. 05–23505 Filed 11–29–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[Region 2 Docket No. R02–OAR–2005–NJ–

0002, FRL–7999–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New Jersey 

Architectural Coatings Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to 

the New Jersey State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for ozone concerning the 

control of volatile organic compounds. 

The SIP revision consists of 

amendments to Subchapter 23 

‘‘Prevention of Air Pollution From 

Architectural Coatings’’ of 7:27 of the 

New Jersey Administrative Code, which 

are needed to meet the shortfall in 

emissions reduction identified by EPA 

in New Jersey’s 1-hour ozone attainment 

demonstration SIP. The intended effect 

of this action is to approve a control 

strategy required by the Clean Air Act, 

which will result in emission reductions 

that will help achieve attainment of the 

national ambient air quality standard for 

ozone. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be 

effective December 30, 2005. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 71775 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Regional 

Material in EDocket (RME) Docket ID 

Number R02–OAR–2005–NJ–0002. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the Regional Material in EDocket (RME) 

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

once in the system, select ‘‘quick 

search,’’ then key in the appropriate 

RME Docket identification number. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in 

Regional Material in EDocket or in hard 

copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs 

Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New 

York, New York 10007–1866. Copies of 

the documents relevant to this action 

are also available for public inspection 

during normal business hours, by 

appointment at the Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Room B–108, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC; and the 

New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection, Office of Air 

Quality Management, Bureau of Air 

Pollution Control, 401 East State Street, 

CN027, Trenton, New Jersey 08625. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Truchan, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10278, (212) 637–3711. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? 

EPA is approving a revision to New 

Jersey’s ozone State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) submitted on July 28, 2004. 

This SIP incorporates adopted rule 

amendments to Title 7, Chapter 27, 

Subchapter 23 ‘‘Prevention of Air 

Pollution from Architectural Coatings’’

which was adopted on May 21, 2004. 

This adoption was published in the 

New Jersey Register on June 21, 2004 

and became effective on July 20, 2004. 

The Subchapter 23 amendments are 

applicable to the entire State of New 

Jersey. The reader is referred to the 

proposed rulemaking (July 21, 2005, 70 

FR 42019) for additional details. 

Subchapter 23 contains provisions 

allowing for limited exemptions and 

variances where such exemptions and 

variances have been approved by other 

states with equivalent regulations. 

While these provisions are acceptable, 

each specific application of those 

provisions will only be recognized as 

meeting Federal requirements after the 

specific exemption or variance is 

approved by EPA as a SIP revision. 

Therefore, EPA is approving the 

regulation as part of the New Jersey SIP 

with the exception that any specific 

application of provisions associated 

with variances or exemptions, must be 

submitted as SIP revisions. 

II. What Comments Were Received and 

How Has EPA Responded to Them? 

EPA received no comments on the 

proposal. 

III. What Role Does This Rule Play in 

the Ozone SIP? 

When EPA evaluated New Jersey’s 1- 

hour ozone attainment demonstrations, 

EPA determined that additional 

emission reductions were needed for the 

State’s two severe nonattainment areas 

in order for the State to attain the 1-hour 

ozone standard with sufficient surety 

(December 16, 1999, 64 FR 70380). EPA 

provided that the states in the Ozone 

Transport Region could achieve these 

emission reductions through local or 

regional control programs. New Jersey 

decided to participate with the other 

states in the Northeast in an Ozone 

Transport Commission (OTC) regulatory 

development effort which developed six 

model control measures. This 

rulemaking incorporates one of the OTC 

model control measures into the New 

Jersey ozone SIP: architectural coatings. 

The emission reductions from this 

control measure will provide a portion 

of the additional emission reductions 

needed to attain the 1-hour ozone 

standard. The emission reductions from 

this measure will also help to attain the 

8-hour ozone standard. 

IV. What Are EPA’s Conclusions? 

EPA has evaluated the submitted 

Subchapter 23 submission for 

consistency with EPA regulations, 

policy and guidance. Consistent with 

EPA policy and guidance, EPA is 

approving the rule submitted as part of 

the New Jersey SIP with the exception 

that any specific application of 

provisions associated with variances or 

exemptions, must be submitted as SIP 

revisions for EPA approval. This rule 

will strengthen the SIP by providing for 

additional VOC reductions. 

Accordingly, EPA is approving the 

Subchapter 23 revisions as adopted on 

May 21, 2004 and effective on July 20, 

2004 with the limitation identified 

above. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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), because it 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 

71776 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

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 January 30, 2006. 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: November 8, 2005. 

Alan J. Steinberg, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

■ Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations 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 FF—New Jersey 

■ 2. Section 52.1570 is amended by 

adding new paragraph (c)(78) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1570 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

* * * * * 

(78) Revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan submitted on July 

28, 2004 by the State of New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protection 

that establishes an expanded control 

program for architectural coatings. 

(i) Incorporation by reference: 

(A) Regulation Subchapter 23 of Title 

7, Chapter 27 of the New Jersey 

Administrative Code, entitled 

‘‘Prevention of Air Pollution From 

Architectural Coatings,’’ adopted on 

May 21, 2004 and effective on July 20, 

2004. 

(ii) Additional material: 

(A) Letter from State of New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protection 

dated July 28, 2004, requesting EPA 

approval of a revision to the Ozone SIP 

which contains amendments to the 

Subchapter 23 ‘‘Prevention of Air 

Pollution From Architectural Coatings.’’

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 52.1605 is amended by 

revising the entry under Title 7, Chapter 

27 for Subchapter 23 in the table to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.1605 EPA—approved New Jersey 

regulations. 

State regulation State effective date EPA approved date Comments 

* * * * * * * 

Title 7, Chapter 27.

* * * * * * * 

Subchapter 23, Prevention of Air Pollution 

From Architectural Coatings.

July 20, 2004 ............. November 30, 2005 ... Variances or exemptions approved by the 

State pursuant to Subchapter 23.3(j) become applicable only if approved by EPA 

as a SIP revision. 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–23418 Filed 11–29–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[R09–OAR–2005–CA–0010; FRL–8002–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; California; Carbon 

Monoxide Maintenance Plan Update for 

Ten Planning Areas; Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets; Technical 

Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a State 

Implementation Plan revision, 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board on November 8, 2004, 

that includes the 2004 Revision to the 

California State Implementation Plan 

for Carbon Monoxide, Updated 

Maintenance Plan for Ten Federal 

Planning Areas. This revision will 

provide a ten-year update to the carbon 

monoxide maintenance plan, as well as 

replace existing and establish new 

carbon monoxide motor vehicle 

emissions budgets for the purposes of 

determining transportation conformity, 

for the following ten areas: Bakersfield 

Metropolitan Area, Chico Urbanized 

Area, Fresno Urbanized Area, Lake