Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Arizona; Correction of Boundary of Phoenix Metropolitan 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area, 68339-68349 [05-22371]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
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.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
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.
DATES:
Submit comments,
identified by docket number OAR–
2005–0150, by one of the following
methods:
1. Agency Web site: https://
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:
https://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
https://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
https://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
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68339
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).
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
68340
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Under EPA regulations promulgated
under the 1970 amended Act, States
were required to identify areas (referred
to as ‘‘air quality maintenance areas’’
(AQMAs)) that were violating or that
had the potential to violate the NAAQS
by 1985, to submit detailed analyses of
the impacts on air quality of projected
growth in these areas, and, where the
analysis indicates that the NAAQS will
not be maintained, to submit SIP
revisions containing measures to ensure
maintenance during the ensuing period.
In 1975, EPA approved Arizona’s
identification of the Phoenix Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) as
an AQMA for oxidants. See 40 FR 41942
(September 9, 1975). The Phoenix
SMSA includes all of Maricopa County,
which encompasses an area of
approximately 9,200 square miles in
south-central Arizona, and includes the
northern quarter of the Gila River Indian
Reservation.1
A task force consisting of
representatives of Federal, State, and
local government agencies as well as
community groups (but no Tribal
representatives) was created to guide the
preparation of the detailed air quality
maintenance analysis for the Phoenix
AQMA as required under EPA
regulations. The air quality maintenance
analysis focused on a study area of
approximately 1,700 square miles
covering the urbanized portions of the
Phoenix metropolitan area. The study
area was based on the Maricopa
Association of Governments 2 (MAG)
primary planning area, which included
only a small portion of the Maricopa
County portion of the Reservation.3 The
final air quality maintenance analysis
report was published in July 1977.4 This
maintenance analysis report identified
and evaluated 11 specific control
1 The Gila River Indian Reservation lies south of
the urbanized portion of the Phoenix metropolitan
area and straddles the boundary between Maricopa
County and Pinal County. The Reservation
encompasses approximately 580 square miles, of
which approximately 140 square miles lie within
Maricopa County and 440 square miles lie within
Pinal County.
2 MAG is a Council of Governments that serves as
the regional agency for the Phoenix metropolitan
area. MAG was formed in 1967. In 1978, the
Governor of Arizona designated MAG as the lead
air quality planning agency for Maricopa County.
The Gila River Indian Community joined MAG in
1989.
3 The portion of the Reservation that was
included in the Phoenix AQMA study area consists
of a rectangular area traversed by Interstate 10 and
defined by the Reservation boundaries to the north
and east and by a southward extension of Priest
Drive to the west and a westward extension of Hunt
Highway to the south. This area is about 24 square
miles, which represents approximately 17% of the
Maricopa County portion of the Reservation.
4 Aerovironment Inc., Air Quality Maintenance
Analysis in Phoenix, Arizona, Final Report, July
1977.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
strategies for attaining and maintaining
the oxidants standard within the study
area, but was not submitted to EPA as
a SIP revision in anticipation of
different planning requirements and
deadlines under amendments to the
Clean Air Act then under active
consideration by Congress.
Congress did amend the Act in 1977,
and the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1977 replaced the AQMA approach with
a new approach, under which all areas
of the country were designated as
attainment, nonattainment, or
unclassifiable for each of the NAAQS.
Under the 1977 amended Act,
‘‘nonattainment area’’ meant an area
which is shown by monitored data or
which is calculated by air quality
modeling (or other methods determined
by EPA to be reliable) to exceed any
NAAQS. On March 3, 1978 (43 FR
8962), under section 107(d)(2) of the
1977 Amended Act, EPA promulgated
area designations for each State with
respect to each of the NAAQS. The area
designations are found in 40 CFR part
81. The Clean Air Act Amendments of
1977 required specific types of SIP
revisions for designated nonattainment
areas and other types of SIP revisions
for unclassifiable/attainment areas.
Within the State of Arizona, EPA
designated Maricopa County as a
nonattainment area for the oxidants
NAAQS. See 43 FR 8962, at 8968
(March 3, 1978). EPA designated the rest
of the State, which included the Pinal
County portion of the Gila River Indian
Reservation, as unclassifiable/
attainment for the oxidants NAAQS. As
such, the northern quarter of the
Reservation was located in the Maricopa
County nonattainment area and the
southern three-quarters was located
within the unclassifiable/attainment
area. The following year, EPA approved
a request by the State of Arizona to
reduce the size of this county-wide
nonattainment area to include only the
MAG urban planning area (see 44 FR
16388, March 19, 1979). The MAG
urban planning area is approximately
1,950 square miles and is 14 percent
larger than the MAG primary planning
area, which had been the study area for
the purposes of the AQMA analysis. The
MAG urban planning area also includes
the Maricopa County portion (i.e.,
northern quarter) of the Gila River
Indian Reservation.
Also in 1979, we established a new
ozone NAAQS to replace the oxidants
NAAQS (see 44 FR 8202, February 8,
1979). The new NAAQS was set at 0.12
ppm, 1-hour average. In September
1979, we replaced the Arizona table in
40 CFR part 81 that listed areas and
designations for the oxidants NAAQS
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
with a table that listed areas and
designations for the then-new 1-hour
ozone NAAQS. See 44 FR 54294
(September 19, 1979). In that final rule,
we designated the Tucson area, which
had been designated as nonattainment
for the oxidants NAAQS, as
unclassifiable/attainment for the ozone
NAAQS, but we reaffirmed the previous
status (nonattainment) and boundary
(MAG urban planning area) designation
for the Phoenix metropolitan area for
the new 1-hour ozone NAAQS as had
been established for the oxidants
NAAQS. We also reaffirmed the
unclassifiable/attainment designation
for ‘‘rest of state.’’
Under the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990, the concept of ‘‘nonattainment
area’’ was expanded to include areas
that contribute to ambient air quality in
a nearby area that does not meet a
NAAQS as well as the area that actually
experiences NAAQS violations. See
section 107(d)(1)(A) of the Act. Under
the 1990 amended Act, the designation
of ‘‘nonattainment’’ and boundary (i.e.,
the MAG urban planning area) for the
Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area was carried forward
by operation of law. Further, under the
1990 Act Amendments, the Phoenix
metropolitan nonattainment area was
classified as ‘‘moderate’’ ozone
nonattainment. See 56 FR 56694, 56717
(November 6, 1991). On November 6,
1997, the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area was
reclassified to ‘‘serious’’ due to a failure
to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by
November 15, 1996. See 62 FR 60001
(November 6, 1997).
In 1997, we established a new 8-hour
ozone NAAQS to replace the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS that we had established
in 1979 (see 62 FR 38856, July 18, 1997).
The new NAAQS was set at 0.08 ppm,
8-hour average. In 2004, we published
final rules that designated all areas of
the country with respect to the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, effective June 15, 2004,
and that established June 15, 2005 as the
date on which the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
would be revoked. See 69 FR 23858 and
69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004). In
consultation with the State of Arizona
and the Gila River Indian Community,
we designated the Phoenix-Mesa area as
a nonattainment area for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, but this 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area does not include
any portion of the Gila River Indian
Reservation. See 69 FR 23858, at 23878–
23879 (April 30, 2004). All of the Gila
River Indian Reservation, i.e., both
Maricopa and Pinal County portions,
lies within the ‘‘rest of state’’
unclassifiable/attainment area for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. Under the first
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
phase of the final rule implementing the
8-hour ozone NAAQS, certain
requirements apply to former 1-hour
ozone nonattainment areas that are
designated as attainment/unclassifiable
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (such as
the Maricopa County portion of the Gila
River Indian Reservation), such as the
preparation and submittal of a SIP
revision consisting of a plan that
provides for continued maintenance of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years
following designation and that includes
contingency measures. See 40 CFR
51.905(a)(3); 69 FR 23951, at 23999
(April 30, 2004).
On March 21, 2005 (70 FR 13425), we
published a notice in the Federal
Register proposing this same boundary
change as part of a notice that also
proposed approval of various submittals
of revisions to the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP) and a request
by the State of Arizona for redesignation
of the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area to attainment.
We received no comments related to the
proposed boundary change, but we
decided to withdraw the boundary
change portion of the March 21, 2005
proposal. See 70 FR 34362 (June 14,
2005). We withdrew the proposed
boundary change because we decided to
review the action as a correction under
section 110(k)(6) rather than as a
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(A)
as had been proposed, based on our
preliminary conclusion that we had
incorrectly included the northern
portion of the Gila River Indian
Reservation in the nonattainment area
boundary back in the late 1970’s. In our
final rule approving the redesignation
request for the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area (70 FR
34362, June 14, 2005), we indicated that
we intended to address the boundary
change issue in a separate rulemaking.
This notice constitutes that separate
rulemaking.
II. Gila River Indian Community’s
Request for a Boundary Change
On March 2, 2005, the Gila River
Indian Community, a federallyrecognized tribal government,5 adopted
and submitted a resolution requesting
EPA to revise the boundary for the
Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area to exclude the Gila
River Indian Reservation.6 The Gila
River Indian Community’s request
includes background information
5 See
67 FR 46328, 46329 (July 12, 2002).
6 As noted previously, the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area includes the
portion of the Reservation that lies within Maricopa
County, approximately the northern 25 percent of
the Reservation.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
regarding the procedural history leading
to the designation of the boundary of the
Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour oxidants
(then ozone) nonattainment area, an
analysis of air quality monitoring data
existing at the time of and subsequent
to the original designation in 1978, and
a description of population,
employment, land use, and traffic
associated with the Reservation.
The Gila River Indian Community
concludes that inclusion of the
Maricopa County portion of the
Reservation in the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area was
incorrect based on air quality
considerations at the time of the original
designation and that continued
inclusion of the Reservation in the
nonattainment area will frustrate their
current efforts to regulate air quality on
their own lands through preparation,
adoption, and implementation of a
comprehensive Tribal Implementation
Plan (TIP). The Community’s request
and supporting documentation are
included in the docket for this action.
III. EPA Review of the Gila River
Indian Community’s Request
A. CAA Authority To Correct Area
Designations
Section 110(k)(6) of the Clean Air Act
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.’’ We interpret this provision to
authorize the Agency to make
corrections to a promulgated regulation
when it is shown to our satisfaction that
(1) we clearly erred in failing to
consider or in inappropriately
considering information made available
to EPA at the time of the promulgation,
or the information made available at the
time of promulgation is subsequently
demonstrated to have been clearly
inadequate, and (2) other information
persuasively supports a change in the
regulation. See 57 FR 56762, at 56763
(November 30, 1992).
We have reviewed the documentation
submitted by the Gila River Indian
Community, and based on that review
and an independent assessment of the
air quality data and circumstances
behind our actions designating,
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68341
redesignating or affirming air quality
planning areas for the oxidants and
ozone NAAQS, we agree with the Gila
River Indian Community that a
correction of the boundary to exclude
the Gila River Indian Reservation from
the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area is warranted. Our
rationale is provided in the following
subsections.
B. General Physical Description of the
Phoenix Metropolitan Area and
Environs 7
The Phoenix metropolitan area is in
south-central Arizona. The area
occupies an almost-flat alluvial plain
studded and surrounded by hills, buttes,
and mountain ranges. The elevation of
the valley floor is approximately 1,100
feet. The dominating mountain ranges
around the area include the Sierra
Estrella Mountains to the southwest, the
White Tank Mountains to the west; the
Hieroglyphic and New River Mountains
to the north; the Superstition and
Goldfield and Mazatzal Mountains to
the east; and the Santan and Sacaton
Mountains to the southeast. Elevations
range from 3,000 feet in the southeast,
to 4,000 feet in the west and southwest,
and to 5,000 to 7,000 feet in the north
and east. The principal natural
drainages are the Salt River, the Agua
Fria River, and the Gila River. The Gila
River carves a route between the South
Mountains and the Sierra Estrella
Mountains and is joined by the Salt
River near the northwest corner of the
Gila River Indian Reservation. The
South Mountains rise to an elevation of
approximately 2,700 feet and partially
separate the urbanized portions of the
Phoenix metropolitan area to the north
from the Gila River Indian Reservation
to the south.
The climate of the area varies
depending on the occurrence of the
natural topographic features but is
generally a warm, desert type climate
with low annual rainfall and low
relative humidity. Summers are usually
long and hot, winters short and mild,
with gradual temperature transitions in
the spring and fall seasons.
The most significant terrain, in term
of influence on local wind flow, is
located to the north and east of the
Phoenix area. During the morning and
afternoon, sunlight warms this terrain
causing the air immediately above it to
rise and pull air from the lower
7 Sources of information for this section of the
notice include the Army Corps of Engineers’
Phoenix Urban Study, Background Information
Appendix (February 1977) and the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality’s Final
Serious Area Ozone State Implementation Plan for
Maricopa County (December 2000).
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
68342
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
elevations in the direction of the higher
terrain to replace the rising air. In
Phoenix, this ‘‘valley’’ breeze (up-valley
flow) usually begins around noon with
a west wind that persists until midnight.
After sunset, under clear sky conditions,
the surface undergoes radiative cooling,
lowering the temperatures of the air
above it and reversing the flow. The
‘‘mountain’’ breeze (down-valley flow),
which is out of the east for most of the
Phoenix area, begins about midnight
and lasts until noon, when the reversal
to up-valley flow takes over.
The systematic mountain-valley
circulation over the Phoenix area directs
the timing and geographic distribution
of ozone and its precursors. Early
morning commute emissions are slowly
transported to the west by drainage
winds. By afternoon, the flow is
reversed and emissions are transported
to the east, back over the urbanized area,
entraining additional surface emissions.
During this period of ample sunlight
and precursor emissions, the conditions
are conducive for ozone formation. As
the day progresses into late afternoon,
ozone continues to build and is further
transported toward the higher terrain,
resulting in the maximum ozone
concentration typically monitored east
or north of the urbanized area.
C. Contribution by Emission Sources on
the Reservation
In general, ambient ozone
concentrations are caused by on-road
and nonroad mobile emissions sources,
area sources, large stationary sources
and biogenic sources that emit ozone
precursors (i.e., volatile organic
compounds, or VOC, and oxides of
nitrogen oxides, or NOX). The level of
mobile source emissions, often the
largest part of the inventory in a major
metropolitan area, can be generally
correlated to population density and
land use patterns.
The Gila River Indian Community has
historically been, and continues to be,
primarily a rural, agricultural
community with few industrial uses and
no major population centers. The Gila
River Indian Community has an onReservation population of
approximately 11,300 people, of which
approximately 2,700 people live in the
Maricopa County portion of the
Reservation. The on-Reservation
population density is approximately 20
persons per square mile. By comparison,
the population living within the
Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone area
as a whole is approximately 3 million
people with a population density of
approximately 1,500 persons per square
mile, and there are at least six major
population centers in the Phoenix
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
nonattainment area, including Phoenix,
Mesa, Scottsdale, Glendale, Tempe, and
Chandler. Thus, emissions generated by
uses on the Reservation can be assumed
to have essentially no effect on ambient
ozone concentrations in the urbanized
portions of the Phoenix metropolitan
area.8 Our assumption in this regard is
supported by emissions inventory
estimates prepared by the Gila River
Indian Reservation from which we find
that ozone precursor emissions
associated with the Maricopa County
portion of the Reservation represent less
than 0.2% and 0.6% of VOC and NOX
emissions, respectively, of total
estimated ozone precursor emissions
generated within the Phoenix
metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area.
D. Oxidants/Ozone Air Quality
Conditions on the Reservation
The oxidants/ozone designations for
the MAG urban planning area in 1978
and 1979 were based on ambient air
quality data collected at a small number
of monitoring stations located within
the urbanized portions of Maricopa
County.9 During the 1970’s, there was
no monitoring station located on the
Gila River Indian Reservation. During
this period, the ozone monitoring
station that was closest to the Gila River
Indian Reservation was the ‘‘South
Phoenix’’ station located at 4732 South
Central Avenue. The South Phoenix
station is located north of the South
Mountains while the Reservation lies
south of that range. The distance
between the South Phoenix station and
the closest Reservation boundary is
approximately eight miles. We believe
that the South Phoenix monitor
provides data that is sufficiently
representative of conditions in the
Maricopa County portion of the
Reservation to justify its use for the
purposes of this correction notice
although we recognize that ozone
concentrations would generally be
8 The State of Arizona’s Nonattainment Area Plan
for Carbon Monoxide and Photochemical Oxidants,
Maricopa County, Urban Planning Area (revised
February 16, 1979) was based in part on traffic
assignments in the MAG primary planning area,
which essentially excludes the Maricopa County
portion of the Reservation (see footnote #3, above),
rather than the larger urban planning area (that
defines the nonattainment area and that includes all
of the Maricopa County portion of the Reservation)
but justified the use of traffic assignments from the
smaller area by concluding that the additional longrange fringe development would contribute
negligibly to the highest carbon monoxide and
ozone concentrations measured in central Phoenix.
EPA approved this plan in 1982. See 47 FR 19326
(May 5, 1982).
9 No oxidants/ozone dispersion modeling was
conducted during this period; instead, the
demonstrations of attainment in the various plans
relied upon a linear rollback technique.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
expected to decrease with increasing
distance in a southerly direction from
the Phoenix urbanized area given the
prevailing mountain-valley (i.e., eastwest) wind circulation characteristic of
the area.
A review of EPA’s Air Quality System
(AQS) database and the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality’s
Nonattainment Area Plan for Carbon
Monoxide and Photochemical Oxidants,
Maricopa County Urban Planning Area
(revised February 16, 1979) reveals that
(1) violations of the oxidants NAAQS
(0.08 ppm, hourly average) were
recorded at the South Phoenix station
during the 1975–1978 period, (2) no
violations of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
(0.12 ppm) were recorded at the South
Phoenix station during this same period,
(3) maximum ozone levels at the South
Phoenix station were generally less than
those at the four other stations that were
operating continuously through this
same period. Thus, the available data
supports the conclusion that, during the
mid-to late-1970’s, while the Maricopa
County portion of the Reservation may
well have experienced violations of the
oxidants NAAQS, it did not experience
violations of the less stringent 1-hour
ozone NAAQS. From 1979 through
2004, exceedances of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS were measured on only 5 days
at the South Phoenix station: one day in
1981, two days in 1983, one day in 1990
and one day in 1995.
Since mid-2002, the Gila River Indian
Community has operated an ozone
monitoring station within the Maricopa
County portion of the Reservation (the
St. Johns station) and another in the
Pinal County portion of the Reservation
(the Sacaton station). Data have been
collected at these stations from mid2002 through the end of the 2004 ozone
season. No exceedances of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS have been recorded at
either station.
E. Ozone Planning Issues
Ozone planning efforts for the
Phoenix metropolitan area began in
earnest in the mid-1970’s at the
direction of the Phoenix AQMA Task
Force, including the identification and
evaluation of control strategies focused
on the AQMA study area. The Phoenix
AQMA Task Force included
representatives from EPA and various
State and local agencies as well as
representatives from certain nongovernmental entities such as the
Phoenix Chamber of Commerce and the
League of Women Voters. The Gila River
Indian Community, however, was not a
member of the AQMA Task Force nor is
there any evidence that suggests that the
community’s views or concerns were
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
taken into account in identification of
the appropriate study area, the analysis
of air quality conditions and projects, or
in the identification and evaluation of
possible control strategies, which is
documented in a final report entitled,
Air Quality Maintenance Analysis in
Phoenix, Arizona (July 1977).
Likewise, there is no evidence that
suggests that the Gila River Indian
Community was consulted by EPA, the
State of Arizona, or MAG 10 in the
decision-making process leading to the
nonattainment designation first on a
county-wide basis for oxidants under
the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977,
then on a MAG urban planning area
boundary basis for the oxidants NAAQS
(and later affirmed for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS). Ever since this time, the Gila
River Indian Reservation has been split
into two air quality planning areas for
the purposes of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS: a Maricopa County portion
that is part of a nonattainment area and
a Pinal County portion that is part of an
‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ area.
Since the late 1970’s, EPA has
approved various State and local
regulations and other control measures
that have helped to attain the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix
metropolitan nonattainment area and
that provided the basis upon which EPA
recently approved the State’s
redesignation request for the area to
‘‘attainment.’’ See 70 FR 34362 (June 14,
2005). It is important to note that, under
the CAA, the State and local air
pollution control agencies do not have
authority to administer air regulatory
programs over the Reservation;
consequently, the SIP rules that have
been adopted and implemented within
the non-Tribal portions of the Phoenix
metropolitan area and that have
provided for attainment of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS do not apply within the
Gila River Indian Reservation.
Furthermore, due to the Reservation’s
lack of ozone precursor sources, it was
never considered necessary to apply
ozone precursor limits to sources on the
Reservation.
In 2004, we designated all areas of the
country as nonattainment, attainment,
or unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 69 FR 23858 (April 30,
2004). In contrast to the process
undertaken in connection with the area
designations established in the late
1970’s, we made a significant effort to
consult with the Tribes on the
appropriate designations for their lands
for the new (8-hour) ozone NAAQS. In
our final rule establishing area
10 The Gila River Indian Community became a
member of MAG in November of 1989.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
designations for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, we agreed with the Gila River
Indian Community that the Reservation,
including both Maricopa and Pinal
County portions, should be included in
the larger area designation of
‘‘unclassifiable/ attainment.’’ Thus, in
contrast to the status of the Reservation
relative to the 1-hour ozone
designations, the Gila River Indian
Reservation is not split into different air
quality planning areas for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, and no part of the
Reservation is included in the Phoenix
metropolitan 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area.
Under phase 1 of our 8-hour ozone
implementation rule, areas designated
as ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ for the 8hour ozone NAAQS that were
designated nonattainment for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS at the time of the initial
8-hour ozone designation (i.e., mid2004) are subject to certain requirements
(such as a vehicle inspection and
maintenance program, stage II vapor
recovery, and a clean fuels fleet
program) that applied by virtue of their
1-hour ozone nonattainment status and
that continue to apply even after
revocation of the 1-hour ozone standard
(which occurred on June 15, 2005).
These areas are also subject to a
requirement to prepare and submit a
plan that provides for continued
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for 10 years following
designation and that includes
contingency measures. See 40 CFR
51.900(f), 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3), 69 FR
23951, at 23979 (April 30, 2004) and 70
FR 30592 (May 26, 2005). The Maricopa
County portion of the Gila River Indian
Reservation is one of the areas that was
designated as unclassifiable/attainment
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS but, at the
time of that designation, was designated
‘‘nonattainment’’ for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS.
On June 14, 2005, we redesignated the
Phoenix ‘‘serious’’ 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area (including the
Maricopa County portion of the Gila
River Indian Reservation) to attainment,
and our redesignation was predicated
on our finding that all applicable
requirements for that nonattainment
area had been met. See 70 FR 34362
(June 14, 2005). However, because none
of the State and local adopted control
measures that were relied upon for
redesignation apply within the Gila
River Indian Reservation, the obligation
to adopt (at least as contingency
measures) the requirements listed in 40
CFR 51.900(f) that apply within former
‘‘serious’’ 1-hour ozone nonattainment
areas (such as an enhanced inspection
and maintenance program, stage II vapor
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68343
recovery, and a clean fuels fleet
program) remains in effect for the
Maricopa County portion of the
Reservation, notwithstanding the
redesignation of the Phoenix
metropolitan 1-hour nonattainment area
to attainment, and notwithstanding the
revocation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
on June 15, 2005. In addition, the
Maricopa County portion of the
Reservation is subject to the
requirement under 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3)
to prepare and submit a plan that
provides for continued maintenance of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years
following designation and that includes
contingency measures. See EPA
Memorandum dated May 20, 2005:
‘‘Maintenance Plan Guidance for Certain
8-Hour Ozone Areas Under Section
110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act.’’
Meanwhile, the Gila River Indian
Community is in the final stages of
preparing, adopting and submitting a
Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP) to
EPA for approval. The TIP contains
several ordinances including permit
requirements and fees; administrative
appeals procedures; enforcement
provisions (civil and criminal); and
controls on non-metallic mineral
mining; secondary aluminum
processing operations; solvent metal
cleaning; VOC usage, storage and
handling; aerospace manufacturing and
rework processes; and open burning and
visible emissions. As such, the Gila
River Indian Community is developing
a comprehensive air quality regulatory
program, but the Community is doing so
with the view that their historic
inclusion in the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area was
erroneous. EPA supports the
Community’s efforts to manage its own
air quality regulatory program through
development, adoption and
implementation of the TIP and
recognizes that the control measure and
planning antibacksliding obligations
that apply to the Maricopa County
portion of the Reservation under our
phase 1 implementation rule for the 8hour ozone NAAQS (by virtue of its
inclusion within the Phoenix
metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area) represent an
obstacle to the Community’s objectives
in this regard.
F. Evaluation and Conclusion
Based on the historic ambient
monitoring data and prevailing wind
patterns in the area, we conclude that
we clearly erred in failing to consider
data made available at the time of our
September 1979 affirmation of the
preexisting oxidants nonattainment area
boundary (i.e., the MAG urban planning
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
68344
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
area) as the geographic basis for the
Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area.11 Our September
1979 action affirming the oxidants
nonattainment area boundary for the
purposes of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
had the effect of including a portion of
the Gila River Indian Reservation (the
Maricopa County portion) that was not
experiencing violations of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS into the larger urbanized
nonattainment area where violations of
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS were
relatively frequent and widespread and
thereby unnecessarily splitting the
Reservation into two different air
quality planning areas.
In support of this conclusion, we find
that, had we considered the available
data for the purpose of determining
whether the Reservation should be
included in the ozone nonattainment
area (as opposed to the oxidants
nonattainment area), we would have
concluded based on data from the South
Phoenix station and the prevailing
mountain-valley (east-west) wind
circulation in the area that no part of the
Reservation was experiencing violations
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and that
affirming the pre-existing oxidants
nonattainment boundary for the
purposes of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
and thereby continuing the split of the
Reservation into two air quality
planning areas with different
designations would be inappropriate.
We also find that other information
persuasively supports a correction in
the boundary to exclude the Gila River
Indian Reservation at this time: Namely,
(1) The Reservation is not a significant
source area for ozone precursor
emissions and thus has essentially no
effect on ambient ozone concentrations
in the urbanized portions of the Phoenix
metropolitan area; (2) data from the
South Phoenix station indicates that
ambient ozone levels on the
Reservation, with the possible exception
of a period in the early 1980’s, have
never violated the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS; (3) available ambient ozone
data collected at the two monitoring
stations located on the Reservation
indicate that the area currently is not
experiencing violations of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS; and (4) the former
nonattainment status of the Maricopa
IV. Final Action
Therefore, as authorized in section
110(k)(6) of the CAA and at the request
of the Gila River Indian Community,
EPA is correcting the boundary of the
Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area to exclude the Gila
River Indian Reservation.12 This action
revises the description of the Phoenix
metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area in the table entitled
‘‘Arizona—Ozone (1-Hour Standard)’’ in
40 CFR 81.303.
We do not anticipate any objections to
this action, so we are finalizing the
correction action without proposing it
in advance. However, in the Proposed
Rules section of this Federal Register,
we are simultaneously proposing this
same action to correct the boundary. If
we receive adverse comments by
December 12, 2005, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register to notify the public that the
direct final approval will not take effect
and we will address the comments in a
subsequent final action based on the
proposal. If we do not receive timely
adverse comments, the direct final
action will be effective without further
notice on January 9, 2006.
The effect of this action is to attach
the Maricopa County portion of the Gila
River Indian Reservation to the preexisting ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’
area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS that
consists of all of those portions of the
State of Arizona (including the rest of
the Reservation that lies in Pinal
County) that are not designated as a
‘‘nonattainment’’ area or as an
‘‘attainment’’ area subject to a
maintenance plan. Also, this action
relieves the Agency and the Gila River
Indian Community from any specific
obligations that flow from the former
nonattainment status of the Maricopa
County portion of the Gila River Indian
Reservation under our phase 1
implementation rule for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, including the applicable
requirements listed in 40 CFR 51.900(f)
11 With respect to our promulgation of a Countywide designation for the oxidants NAAQS (in the
March 1978) and our approval of a reduction in the
size of the oxidants nonattainment area to conform
to the MAG urban planning area boundary (in
March 1979), we find that our inclusion of the
Maricopa County portion of the Gila River Indian
Reservation in those areas, while questionable, was
not clearly in error because of the violations of the
oxidants NAAQS measured at the South Phoenix
station.
12 In so doing, we note the similarities between
our action here and previous EPA actions in which
we corrected 1-hour ozone nonattainment
designations that had originally been established for
the oxidants NAAQS and that were erroneously
affirmed for the purposes of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 62 FR 14641 (March 27, 1997) (direct
final rule correcting ozone nonattainment
designations in New Hampshire and Maine); and 61
FR 5707 (February 14, 1996) (final rule correcting
ozone nonattainment designations in Michigan).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
County portion of the Reservation for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS will
unnecessarily complicate and frustrate
the Gila River Indian Community’s
development and implementation of a
Tribal Implementation Plan.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and the preparation and submittal of a
plan under 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3) that
provides for continued maintenance of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years
following designation and that includes
contingency measures for that portion of
the Reservation.13
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866, [58 FR
51735 (October 4, 1993)] the Agency
must determine whether the regulatory
action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) create
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.’’
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 reduces
the size of a nonattainment area for air
quality planning purposes.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden
means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to
generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
13 While no longer subject to the specific
maintenance plan requirements under 40 CFR
51.905(a)(3), the Gila River Indian Reservation, like
other areas designated as unclassifiable/attainment
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, remains subject to the
general requirement to provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS under section 110(a)(1) of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
provide information to or for a Federal
agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting,
validating, and verifying information,
processing and maintaining
information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
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.). An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. The OMB control numbers for
EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed
in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of today’s rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
as defined by the Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s rule on small entities,
I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will not impose any direct
requirements on small entities. 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. This action is intended to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
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.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 104–
4, establishes requirements for Federal
agencies to assess the effects of their
regulatory actions on State, local, and
tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any one year.
Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires EPA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. The provisions of section
205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law.
Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to
adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted.
Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or
uniquely affect small governments,
including tribal governments, it must
have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan.
The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments,
enabling officials of affected small
governments to have meaningful and
timely input in the development of EPA
regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates,
and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
Today’s rule contains no Federal
mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for
State, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. The rule imposes no
enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
In any event, EPA has determined that
this rule does not contain a Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68345
mandate that may result in expenditures
of $100 million or more for State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or the private sector in any one year.
Thus, today’s rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that 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.’’
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
reduces the size of a nonattainment area
for air quality planning purposes and
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ are defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes.’’
Under section 5(b) of Executive Order
13175, EPA may not issue a regulation
that has tribal implications, that
imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute,
unless the Federal government provides
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
68346
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by tribal
governments, or EPA consults with
tribal officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
Under section 5(c) of Executive Order
13175, EPA may not issue a regulation
that has tribal implications and that
preempts tribal law, unless the Agency
consults with tribal officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation.
EPA has concluded that this action
may have tribal implications.
Representatives of the Gila River Indian
Community approached EPA two years
ago and requested that EPA make this
boundary correction. Consistent with
EPA policy, EPA consulted with
representatives of the community early
in the process of developing this action
to permit them to have meaningful and
timely input into its development. We
agree with the technical and policy
rationale that the community provided
for this boundary correction, and
believe that all tribal concerns have
been met. EPA’s action corrects the
boundary of the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone area to exclude the Gila
River Indian Reservation. As such, it
will neither impose substantial direct
compliance costs on tribal governments,
nor preempt tribal law. Thus, the
requirements of sections 5(b) and 5(c) of
the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:
(1) is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of
the planned rule on children, and
explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency.
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 as defined in Executive
Order 12866, and because the Agency
does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
addressed by this rule present a
disproportionate risk to children.
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply to this
action.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001), requires EPA to prepare and
submit a Statement of Energy Effects to
the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, for
certain actions identified as ‘‘significant
energy actions.’’ Section 4(b) of
Executive Order 13211 defines
‘‘significant energy actions’’ as ‘‘any
action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that
promulgates or is expected to lead to the
promulgation of a final rule or
regulation, including notices of inquiry,
advance notices of proposed
rulemaking, and notices of proposed
rulemaking: (1)(i) that is a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy; or (2) that is designated by the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs as a
significant energy action.’’
This rule 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 under
Executive Order 12866.
J. Congressional Review Act
I. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No.
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
This rule does not involve
establishment of technical standards,
and thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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. section 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 9, 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 CAA
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 3, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
Part 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations are amended as
follows:
I
PART 81—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C—[Amended]
2. In § 81.303, the table entitled
‘‘Arizona—Ozone (1-Hour Standard)’’ is
amended by revising the entry for the
Phoenix Area to read as follows:
I
§ 81.303
*
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
*
Arizona.
*
10NOR1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
ARIZONA—OZONE
[1-Hour Standard]
Designation
Classification
Designated area
Date 1
Phoenix Area: Maricopa County (part) ...................................
Phoenix nonattainment Forest area boundary:
1. Commencing at a point which is the intersection of
the eastern line of Range 7 East, Gila and Salt River
Baseline and Meridian, and the southern line of
Township 2 South, said point is the southeastern corner of the Maricopa Association of Governments
Urban Planning Area, which is the point of beginning;
2. Thence, proceed northerly along the eastern line of
Range 7 East which is the common boundary between Maricopa and Pinal Counties, as described in
Arizona Revised Statutes Section 11–109, to a point
where the eastern line of Range 7 East intersects the
northern line of Township 1 North, said point is also
the intersection of the Maricopa County Line and the
Tonto National Forest Boundary, as established by
Executive Order 869 dated July 1, 1908, as amended
and shown on the U.S. Forest Service 1969 Planimetric Maps;
3. Thence, westerly along the northern line of Township
1 North to approximately the southwest corner of the
southeast quarter of Section 35, Township 2 North,
Range 7 East, said point being the boundary of the
Tonto National Forest and Usery Mountain Semi-Regional Park;
4. Thence, northerly along the Tonto National Forest
Boundary, which is generally the western line of the
east half of Sections 26 and 35 of Township 2 North,
Range 7 East, to a point which is where the quarter
section line intersects with the northern line of Section
26, Township 2 North, Range 7 East, said point also
being the northeast corner of the Usery Mountain
Semi-Regional Park;
5. Thence, westerly along the Tonto National Forest
Boundary, which is generally the south line of Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 and the southern line of the
west half of Section 23, Township 2 North, Range 7
East, to a point which is the southwest corner of Section 19, Township 2 North, Range 7 East;
6. Thence, northerly along the Tonto National Forest
Boundary to a point where the Tonto National Forest
Boundary intersects with the eastern boundary of the
Salt River Indian Reservation, generally described as
the center line of the Salt River Channel;
7. Thence, northeasterly and northerly along the common boundary of the Tonto National Forest and the
Salt River Indian Reservation to a point which is the
northeast corner of the Salt River Indian Reservation
and the southeast corner of the Fort McDowell Indian
Reservation, as shown on the plat dated July 22,
1902, and recorded with the U.S. Government on
June 15, 1902;
8. Thence, northeasterly along the common boundary
between the Tonto National Forest and the Fort
McDowell Indian Reservation to a point which is the
northeast corner of the Fort McDowell Indian Reservation;
9. Thence, southwesterly along the northern boundary
of the Fort McDowell Indian Reservation, which line is
a common boundary with the Tonto National Forest,
to a point where the boundary intersects with the
eastern line of Section 12, Township 4 North, Range
6 East;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Type
6/14/05
Fmt 4700
Date 1
Attainment.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Type
68347
68348
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
ARIZONA—OZONE—Continued
[1-Hour Standard]
Designation
Classification
Designated area
Date 1
Type
Date 1
10. Thence, northerly along the eastern line of Range 6
East to a point where the eastern line of Range 6
East intersects with the southern line of Township 5
North, said line is the boundary between the Tonto
National Forest and the east boundary of McDowell
Mountain Regional Park;
11. Thence, westerly along the southern line of Township 5 North to a point where the southern line intersects with the eastern line of Range 5 East which line
is the boundary of Tonto National Forest and the
north boundary of McDowell Mountain Regional Park;
12. Thence, northerly along the eastern line of Range 5
East to a point where the eastern line of Range 5
East intersects with the northern line of Township 5
North, which line is the boundary of the Tonto National Forest;
13. Thence, westerly along the northern line of Township 5 North to a point where the northern line of
Township 5 North intersects with the easterly line of
Range 4 East, said line is the boundary of Tonto National Forest;
14. Thence, northerly along the eastern line of Range 4
East to a point where the eastern line of Range 4
East intersects with the northern line of Township 6
North, which line is the boundary of the Tonto National Forest;
15. Thence, westerly along the northern line of Township 6 North to a point of intersection with the Maricopa-Yavapai County line, which is generally described in Arizona Revised Statutes Section 11–109
as the center line of the Aqua Fria River (Also the
north end of Lake Pleasant);
16. Thence, southwesterly and southerly along the Maricopa-Yavapai County line to a point which is described by Arizona Revised Statutes Section 11–109
as being on the center line of the Aqua Fria River,
two miles southerly and below the mouth of Humbug
Creek;
17. Thence, southerly along the center line of Aqua Fria
River to the intersection of the center line of the Aqua
Fria River and the center line of Beardsley Canal,
said point is generally in the northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 5 North, Range 1 East, as shown
on the U.S. Geological Survey’s Baldy Mountain, Arizona Quadrangle Map, 7.5 Minute series (Topographic), dated 1964;
18. Thence, southwesterly and southerly along the center line of Beardsley Canal to a point which is the
center line of Beardsley Canal where it intersects with
the center line of Indian School Road;
19. Thence, westerly along the center line of West Indian School Road to a point where the center line of
West Indian School Road intersects with the center
line of North Jackrabbit Trail;
20. Thence, southerly along the center line of Jackrabbit
Trail approximately nine and three-quarter miles to a
point where the center line of Jackrabbit Trail intersects with the Gila River, said point is generally on
the north-south quarter section line of Section 8,
Township 1 South, Range 2 West;
21. Thence, northeasterly and easterly up the Gila River
to a point where the Gila River intersects with the
northern extension of the western boundary of
Estrella Mountain Regional Park, which point is generally the quarter corner of the northern line of Section 31, Township 1 North, Range 1 West;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Type
68349
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
ARIZONA—OZONE—Continued
[1-Hour Standard]
Designation
Classification
Designated area
Date 1
Date 1
Type
Type
*
*
22. Thence, southerly along the extension of the western boundary and along the western boundary of
Estrella Mountain Regional Park to a point where the
southern extension of the western boundary of
Estrella Mountain Regional Park intersects with the
southern line of Township 1 South;
23. Thence, easterly along the southern line of Township 1 South to a point where the south line of Township 1 South intersects with the western line of Range
1 East, which line is generally the southern boundary
of Estrella Mountain Regional Park;
24. Thence, southerly along the western line of Range 1
East to the southwest corner of Section 18, Township
2 South, Range 1 East, said line is the western
boundary of the Gila River Indian Reservation;
25. Thence, easterly along the southern boundary of the
Gila River Indian Reservation which is the southern
line of Sections 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18, Township
2 South, Range 1 East, to the boundary between
Maricopa and Pinal Counties as described in Arizona
Revised Statutes Sections 11–109 and 11–113, which
is the eastern line of Range 1 East;
26. Thence, northerly along the eastern boundary of
Range 1 East, which is the common boundary between Maricopa and Pinal Counties, to a point where
the eastern line of Range 1 East intersects the Gila
River;
27. Thence, southerly up the Gila River to a point where
the Gila River intersects with the southern line of
Township 2 South;
28. Thence, easterly along the southern line of Township 2 South to the point of beginning which is a point
where the southern line of Township 2 South intersects with the eastern line Range 7 East;
29. Except that portion of the area defined by paragraphs 1 through 28 above that lies within the Gila
River Indian Reservation.
*
1 This
*
*
*
*
*
*
date is October 18, 2000 unless otherwise noted.
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–22371 Filed 11–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:46 Nov 09, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 217 (Thursday, November 10, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68339-68349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22371]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: https://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: https://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 https://
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 https://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).
[[Page 68340]]
Under EPA regulations promulgated under the 1970 amended Act,
States were required to identify areas (referred to as ``air quality
maintenance areas'' (AQMAs)) that were violating or that had the
potential to violate the NAAQS by 1985, to submit detailed analyses of
the impacts on air quality of projected growth in these areas, and,
where the analysis indicates that the NAAQS will not be maintained, to
submit SIP revisions containing measures to ensure maintenance during
the ensuing period. In 1975, EPA approved Arizona's identification of
the Phoenix Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) as an AQMA
for oxidants. See 40 FR 41942 (September 9, 1975). The Phoenix SMSA
includes all of Maricopa County, which encompasses an area of
approximately 9,200 square miles in south-central Arizona, and includes
the northern quarter of the Gila River Indian Reservation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Gila River Indian Reservation lies south of the
urbanized portion of the Phoenix metropolitan area and straddles the
boundary between Maricopa County and Pinal County. The Reservation
encompasses approximately 580 square miles, of which approximately
140 square miles lie within Maricopa County and 440 square miles lie
within Pinal County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A task force consisting of representatives of Federal, State, and
local government agencies as well as community groups (but no Tribal
representatives) was created to guide the preparation of the detailed
air quality maintenance analysis for the Phoenix AQMA as required under
EPA regulations. The air quality maintenance analysis focused on a
study area of approximately 1,700 square miles covering the urbanized
portions of the Phoenix metropolitan area. The study area was based on
the Maricopa Association of Governments \2\ (MAG) primary planning
area, which included only a small portion of the Maricopa County
portion of the Reservation.\3\ The final air quality maintenance
analysis report was published in July 1977.\4\ This maintenance
analysis report identified and evaluated 11 specific control strategies
for attaining and maintaining the oxidants standard within the study
area, but was not submitted to EPA as a SIP revision in anticipation of
different planning requirements and deadlines under amendments to the
Clean Air Act then under active consideration by Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ MAG is a Council of Governments that serves as the regional
agency for the Phoenix metropolitan area. MAG was formed in 1967. In
1978, the Governor of Arizona designated MAG as the lead air quality
planning agency for Maricopa County. The Gila River Indian Community
joined MAG in 1989.
\3\ The portion of the Reservation that was included in the
Phoenix AQMA study area consists of a rectangular area traversed by
Interstate 10 and defined by the Reservation boundaries to the north
and east and by a southward extension of Priest Drive to the west
and a westward extension of Hunt Highway to the south. This area is
about 24 square miles, which represents approximately 17% of the
Maricopa County portion of the Reservation.
\4\ Aerovironment Inc., Air Quality Maintenance Analysis in
Phoenix, Arizona, Final Report, July 1977.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress did amend the Act in 1977, and the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1977 replaced the AQMA approach with a new approach,
under which all areas of the country were designated as attainment,
nonattainment, or unclassifiable for each of the NAAQS. Under the 1977
amended Act, ``nonattainment area'' meant an area which is shown by
monitored data or which is calculated by air quality modeling (or other
methods determined by EPA to be reliable) to exceed any NAAQS. On March
3, 1978 (43 FR 8962), under section 107(d)(2) of the 1977 Amended Act,
EPA promulgated area designations for each State with respect to each
of the NAAQS. The area designations are found in 40 CFR part 81. The
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 required specific types of SIP
revisions for designated nonattainment areas and other types of SIP
revisions for unclassifiable/attainment areas.
Within the State of Arizona, EPA designated Maricopa County as a
nonattainment area for the oxidants NAAQS. See 43 FR 8962, at 8968
(March 3, 1978). EPA designated the rest of the State, which included
the Pinal County portion of the Gila River Indian Reservation, as
unclassifiable/attainment for the oxidants NAAQS. As such, the northern
quarter of the Reservation was located in the Maricopa County
nonattainment area and the southern three-quarters was located within
the unclassifiable/attainment area. The following year, EPA approved a
request by the State of Arizona to reduce the size of this county-wide
nonattainment area to include only the MAG urban planning area (see 44
FR 16388, March 19, 1979). The MAG urban planning area is approximately
1,950 square miles and is 14 percent larger than the MAG primary
planning area, which had been the study area for the purposes of the
AQMA analysis. The MAG urban planning area also includes the Maricopa
County portion (i.e., northern quarter) of the Gila River Indian
Reservation.
Also in 1979, we established a new ozone NAAQS to replace the
oxidants NAAQS (see 44 FR 8202, February 8, 1979). The new NAAQS was
set at 0.12 ppm, 1-hour average. In September 1979, we replaced the
Arizona table in 40 CFR part 81 that listed areas and designations for
the oxidants NAAQS with a table that listed areas and designations for
the then-new 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 44 FR 54294 (September 19, 1979).
In that final rule, we designated the Tucson area, which had been
designated as nonattainment for the oxidants NAAQS, as unclassifiable/
attainment for the ozone NAAQS, but we reaffirmed the previous status
(nonattainment) and boundary (MAG urban planning area) designation for
the Phoenix metropolitan area for the new 1-hour ozone NAAQS as had
been established for the oxidants NAAQS. We also reaffirmed the
unclassifiable/attainment designation for ``rest of state.''
Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the concept of
``nonattainment area'' was expanded to include areas that contribute to
ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet a NAAQS as well
as the area that actually experiences NAAQS violations. See section
107(d)(1)(A) of the Act. Under the 1990 amended Act, the designation of
``nonattainment'' and boundary (i.e., the MAG urban planning area) for
the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area was carried
forward by operation of law. Further, under the 1990 Act Amendments,
the Phoenix metropolitan nonattainment area was classified as
``moderate'' ozone nonattainment. See 56 FR 56694, 56717 (November 6,
1991). On November 6, 1997, the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area was reclassified to ``serious'' due to a failure to
attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by November 15, 1996. See 62 FR 60001
(November 6, 1997).
In 1997, we established a new 8-hour ozone NAAQS to replace the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS that we had established in 1979 (see 62 FR 38856, July
18, 1997). The new NAAQS was set at 0.08 ppm, 8-hour average. In 2004,
we published final rules that designated all areas of the country with
respect to the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, effective June 15, 2004, and that
established June 15, 2005 as the date on which the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
would be revoked. See 69 FR 23858 and 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004). In
consultation with the State of Arizona and the Gila River Indian
Community, we designated the Phoenix-Mesa area as a nonattainment area
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, but this 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
does not include any portion of the Gila River Indian Reservation. See
69 FR 23858, at 23878-23879 (April 30, 2004). All of the Gila River
Indian Reservation, i.e., both Maricopa and Pinal County portions, lies
within the ``rest of state'' unclassifiable/attainment area for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. Under the first
[[Page 68341]]
phase of the final rule implementing the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, certain
requirements apply to former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas that are
designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(such as the Maricopa County portion of the Gila River Indian
Reservation), such as the preparation and submittal of a SIP revision
consisting of a plan that provides for continued maintenance of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years following designation and that includes
contingency measures. See 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3); 69 FR 23951, at 23999
(April 30, 2004).
On March 21, 2005 (70 FR 13425), we published a notice in the
Federal Register proposing this same boundary change as part of a
notice that also proposed approval of various submittals of revisions
to the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) and a request by the
State of Arizona for redesignation of the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area to attainment. We received no comments related
to the proposed boundary change, but we decided to withdraw the
boundary change portion of the March 21, 2005 proposal. See 70 FR 34362
(June 14, 2005). We withdrew the proposed boundary change because we
decided to review the action as a correction under section 110(k)(6)
rather than as a redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(A) as had been
proposed, based on our preliminary conclusion that we had incorrectly
included the northern portion of the Gila River Indian Reservation in
the nonattainment area boundary back in the late 1970's. In our final
rule approving the redesignation request for the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area (70 FR 34362, June 14, 2005), we
indicated that we intended to address the boundary change issue in a
separate rulemaking. This notice constitutes that separate rulemaking.
II. Gila River Indian Community's Request for a Boundary Change
On March 2, 2005, the Gila River Indian Community, a federally-
recognized tribal government,\5\ adopted and submitted a resolution
requesting EPA to revise the boundary for the Phoenix metropolitan 1-
hour ozone nonattainment area to exclude the Gila River Indian
Reservation.\6\ The Gila River Indian Community's request includes
background information regarding the procedural history leading to the
designation of the boundary of the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour oxidants
(then ozone) nonattainment area, an analysis of air quality monitoring
data existing at the time of and subsequent to the original designation
in 1978, and a description of population, employment, land use, and
traffic associated with the Reservation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 67 FR 46328, 46329 (July 12, 2002).
\6\ As noted previously, the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area includes the portion of the Reservation that lies
within Maricopa County, approximately the northern 25 percent of the
Reservation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Gila River Indian Community concludes that inclusion of the
Maricopa County portion of the Reservation in the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area was incorrect based on air quality
considerations at the time of the original designation and that
continued inclusion of the Reservation in the nonattainment area will
frustrate their current efforts to regulate air quality on their own
lands through preparation, adoption, and implementation of a
comprehensive Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP). The Community's request
and supporting documentation are included in the docket for this
action.
III. EPA Review of the Gila River Indian Community's Request
A. CAA Authority To Correct Area Designations
Section 110(k)(6) of the Clean Air Act 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.'' We interpret this provision to authorize the Agency to
make corrections to a promulgated regulation when it is shown to our
satisfaction that (1) we clearly erred in failing to consider or in
inappropriately considering information made available to EPA at the
time of the promulgation, or the information made available at the time
of promulgation is subsequently demonstrated to have been clearly
inadequate, and (2) other information persuasively supports a change in
the regulation. See 57 FR 56762, at 56763 (November 30, 1992).
We have reviewed the documentation submitted by the Gila River
Indian Community, and based on that review and an independent
assessment of the air quality data and circumstances behind our actions
designating, redesignating or affirming air quality planning areas for
the oxidants and ozone NAAQS, we agree with the Gila River Indian
Community that a correction of the boundary to exclude the Gila River
Indian Reservation from the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area is warranted. Our rationale is provided in the
following subsections.
B. General Physical Description of the Phoenix Metropolitan Area and
Environs 7
The Phoenix metropolitan area is in south-central Arizona. The area
occupies an almost-flat alluvial plain studded and surrounded by hills,
buttes, and mountain ranges. The elevation of the valley floor is
approximately 1,100 feet. The dominating mountain ranges around the
area include the Sierra Estrella Mountains to the southwest, the White
Tank Mountains to the west; the Hieroglyphic and New River Mountains to
the north; the Superstition and Goldfield and Mazatzal Mountains to the
east; and the Santan and Sacaton Mountains to the southeast. Elevations
range from 3,000 feet in the southeast, to 4,000 feet in the west and
southwest, and to 5,000 to 7,000 feet in the north and east. The
principal natural drainages are the Salt River, the Agua Fria River,
and the Gila River. The Gila River carves a route between the South
Mountains and the Sierra Estrella Mountains and is joined by the Salt
River near the northwest corner of the Gila River Indian Reservation.
The South Mountains rise to an elevation of approximately 2,700 feet
and partially separate the urbanized portions of the Phoenix
metropolitan area to the north from the Gila River Indian Reservation
to the south.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Sources of information for this section of the notice
include the Army Corps of Engineers' Phoenix Urban Study, Background
Information Appendix (February 1977) and the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality's Final Serious Area Ozone State
Implementation Plan for Maricopa County (December 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The climate of the area varies depending on the occurrence of the
natural topographic features but is generally a warm, desert type
climate with low annual rainfall and low relative humidity. Summers are
usually long and hot, winters short and mild, with gradual temperature
transitions in the spring and fall seasons.
The most significant terrain, in term of influence on local wind
flow, is located to the north and east of the Phoenix area. During the
morning and afternoon, sunlight warms this terrain causing the air
immediately above it to rise and pull air from the lower
[[Page 68342]]
elevations in the direction of the higher terrain to replace the rising
air. In Phoenix, this ``valley'' breeze (up-valley flow) usually begins
around noon with a west wind that persists until midnight. After
sunset, under clear sky conditions, the surface undergoes radiative
cooling, lowering the temperatures of the air above it and reversing
the flow. The ``mountain'' breeze (down-valley flow), which is out of
the east for most of the Phoenix area, begins about midnight and lasts
until noon, when the reversal to up-valley flow takes over.
The systematic mountain-valley circulation over the Phoenix area
directs the timing and geographic distribution of ozone and its
precursors. Early morning commute emissions are slowly transported to
the west by drainage winds. By afternoon, the flow is reversed and
emissions are transported to the east, back over the urbanized area,
entraining additional surface emissions. During this period of ample
sunlight and precursor emissions, the conditions are conducive for
ozone formation. As the day progresses into late afternoon, ozone
continues to build and is further transported toward the higher
terrain, resulting in the maximum ozone concentration typically
monitored east or north of the urbanized area.
C. Contribution by Emission Sources on the Reservation
In general, ambient ozone concentrations are caused by on-road and
nonroad mobile emissions sources, area sources, large stationary
sources and biogenic sources that emit ozone precursors (i.e., volatile
organic compounds, or VOC, and oxides of nitrogen oxides, or
NOX). The level of mobile source emissions, often the
largest part of the inventory in a major metropolitan area, can be
generally correlated to population density and land use patterns.
The Gila River Indian Community has historically been, and
continues to be, primarily a rural, agricultural community with few
industrial uses and no major population centers. The Gila River Indian
Community has an on-Reservation population of approximately 11,300
people, of which approximately 2,700 people live in the Maricopa County
portion of the Reservation. The on-Reservation population density is
approximately 20 persons per square mile. By comparison, the population
living within the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone area as a whole is
approximately 3 million people with a population density of
approximately 1,500 persons per square mile, and there are at least six
major population centers in the Phoenix nonattainment area, including
Phoenix, Mesa, Scottsdale, Glendale, Tempe, and Chandler. Thus,
emissions generated by uses on the Reservation can be assumed to have
essentially no effect on ambient ozone concentrations in the urbanized
portions of the Phoenix metropolitan area.\8\ Our assumption in this
regard is supported by emissions inventory estimates prepared by the
Gila River Indian Reservation from which we find that ozone precursor
emissions associated with the Maricopa County portion of the
Reservation represent less than 0.2% and 0.6% of VOC and NOX
emissions, respectively, of total estimated ozone precursor emissions
generated within the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The State of Arizona's Nonattainment Area Plan for Carbon
Monoxide and Photochemical Oxidants, Maricopa County, Urban Planning
Area (revised February 16, 1979) was based in part on traffic
assignments in the MAG primary planning area, which essentially
excludes the Maricopa County portion of the Reservation (see
footnote 3, above), rather than the larger urban planning
area (that defines the nonattainment area and that includes all of
the Maricopa County portion of the Reservation) but justified the
use of traffic assignments from the smaller area by concluding that
the additional long-range fringe development would contribute
negligibly to the highest carbon monoxide and ozone concentrations
measured in central Phoenix. EPA approved this plan in 1982. See 47
FR 19326 (May 5, 1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Oxidants/Ozone Air Quality Conditions on the Reservation
The oxidants/ozone designations for the MAG urban planning area in
1978 and 1979 were based on ambient air quality data collected at a
small number of monitoring stations located within the urbanized
portions of Maricopa County.\9\ During the 1970's, there was no
monitoring station located on the Gila River Indian Reservation. During
this period, the ozone monitoring station that was closest to the Gila
River Indian Reservation was the ``South Phoenix'' station located at
4732 South Central Avenue. The South Phoenix station is located north
of the South Mountains while the Reservation lies south of that range.
The distance between the South Phoenix station and the closest
Reservation boundary is approximately eight miles. We believe that the
South Phoenix monitor provides data that is sufficiently representative
of conditions in the Maricopa County portion of the Reservation to
justify its use for the purposes of this correction notice although we
recognize that ozone concentrations would generally be expected to
decrease with increasing distance in a southerly direction from the
Phoenix urbanized area given the prevailing mountain-valley (i.e.,
east-west) wind circulation characteristic of the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ No oxidants/ozone dispersion modeling was conducted during
this period; instead, the demonstrations of attainment in the
various plans relied upon a linear rollback technique.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A review of EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database and the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality's Nonattainment Area Plan for
Carbon Monoxide and Photochemical Oxidants, Maricopa County Urban
Planning Area (revised February 16, 1979) reveals that (1) violations
of the oxidants NAAQS (0.08 ppm, hourly average) were recorded at the
South Phoenix station during the 1975-1978 period, (2) no violations of
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (0.12 ppm) were recorded at the South Phoenix
station during this same period, (3) maximum ozone levels at the South
Phoenix station were generally less than those at the four other
stations that were operating continuously through this same period.
Thus, the available data supports the conclusion that, during the mid-
to late-1970's, while the Maricopa County portion of the Reservation
may well have experienced violations of the oxidants NAAQS, it did not
experience violations of the less stringent 1-hour ozone NAAQS. From
1979 through 2004, exceedances of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS were measured
on only 5 days at the South Phoenix station: one day in 1981, two days
in 1983, one day in 1990 and one day in 1995.
Since mid-2002, the Gila River Indian Community has operated an
ozone monitoring station within the Maricopa County portion of the
Reservation (the St. Johns station) and another in the Pinal County
portion of the Reservation (the Sacaton station). Data have been
collected at these stations from mid-2002 through the end of the 2004
ozone season. No exceedances of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS have been
recorded at either station.
E. Ozone Planning Issues
Ozone planning efforts for the Phoenix metropolitan area began in
earnest in the mid-1970's at the direction of the Phoenix AQMA Task
Force, including the identification and evaluation of control
strategies focused on the AQMA study area. The Phoenix AQMA Task Force
included representatives from EPA and various State and local agencies
as well as representatives from certain non-governmental entities such
as the Phoenix Chamber of Commerce and the League of Women Voters. The
Gila River Indian Community, however, was not a member of the AQMA Task
Force nor is there any evidence that suggests that the community's
views or concerns were
[[Page 68343]]
taken into account in identification of the appropriate study area, the
analysis of air quality conditions and projects, or in the
identification and evaluation of possible control strategies, which is
documented in a final report entitled, Air Quality Maintenance Analysis
in Phoenix, Arizona (July 1977).
Likewise, there is no evidence that suggests that the Gila River
Indian Community was consulted by EPA, the State of Arizona, or MAG
\10\ in the decision-making process leading to the nonattainment
designation first on a county-wide basis for oxidants under the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1977, then on a MAG urban planning area boundary
basis for the oxidants NAAQS (and later affirmed for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS). Ever since this time, the Gila River Indian Reservation has
been split into two air quality planning areas for the purposes of the
1-hour ozone NAAQS: a Maricopa County portion that is part of a
nonattainment area and a Pinal County portion that is part of an
``unclassifiable/attainment'' area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Gila River Indian Community became a member of MAG in
November of 1989.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the late 1970's, EPA has approved various State and local
regulations and other control measures that have helped to attain the
1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix metropolitan nonattainment area and
that provided the basis upon which EPA recently approved the State's
redesignation request for the area to ``attainment.'' See 70 FR 34362
(June 14, 2005). It is important to note that, under the CAA, the State
and local air pollution control agencies do not have authority to
administer air regulatory programs over the Reservation; consequently,
the SIP rules that have been adopted and implemented within the non-
Tribal portions of the Phoenix metropolitan area and that have provided
for attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS do not apply within the Gila
River Indian Reservation. Furthermore, due to the Reservation's lack of
ozone precursor sources, it was never considered necessary to apply
ozone precursor limits to sources on the Reservation.
In 2004, we designated all areas of the country as nonattainment,
attainment, or unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR
23858 (April 30, 2004). In contrast to the process undertaken in
connection with the area designations established in the late 1970's,
we made a significant effort to consult with the Tribes on the
appropriate designations for their lands for the new (8-hour) ozone
NAAQS. In our final rule establishing area designations for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, we agreed with the Gila River Indian Community that the
Reservation, including both Maricopa and Pinal County portions, should
be included in the larger area designation of ``unclassifiable/
attainment.'' Thus, in contrast to the status of the Reservation
relative to the 1-hour ozone designations, the Gila River Indian
Reservation is not split into different air quality planning areas for
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and no part of the Reservation is included in
the Phoenix metropolitan 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
Under phase 1 of our 8-hour ozone implementation rule, areas
designated as ``unclassifiable/attainment'' for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
that were designated nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS at the
time of the initial 8-hour ozone designation (i.e., mid-2004) are
subject to certain requirements (such as a vehicle inspection and
maintenance program, stage II vapor recovery, and a clean fuels fleet
program) that applied by virtue of their 1-hour ozone nonattainment
status and that continue to apply even after revocation of the 1-hour
ozone standard (which occurred on June 15, 2005). These areas are also
subject to a requirement to prepare and submit a plan that provides for
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years following
designation and that includes contingency measures. See 40 CFR
51.900(f), 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3), 69 FR 23951, at 23979 (April 30, 2004)
and 70 FR 30592 (May 26, 2005). The Maricopa County portion of the Gila
River Indian Reservation is one of the areas that was designated as
unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS but, at the time
of that designation, was designated ``nonattainment'' for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.
On June 14, 2005, we redesignated the Phoenix ``serious'' 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area (including the Maricopa County portion of the
Gila River Indian Reservation) to attainment, and our redesignation was
predicated on our finding that all applicable requirements for that
nonattainment area had been met. See 70 FR 34362 (June 14, 2005).
However, because none of the State and local adopted control measures
that were relied upon for redesignation apply within the Gila River
Indian Reservation, the obligation to adopt (at least as contingency
measures) the requirements listed in 40 CFR 51.900(f) that apply within
former ``serious'' 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas (such as an
enhanced inspection and maintenance program, stage II vapor recovery,
and a clean fuels fleet program) remains in effect for the Maricopa
County portion of the Reservation, notwithstanding the redesignation of
the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour nonattainment area to attainment, and
notwithstanding the revocation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS on June 15,
2005. In addition, the Maricopa County portion of the Reservation is
subject to the requirement under 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3) to prepare and
submit a plan that provides for continued maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for 10 years following designation and that includes
contingency measures. See EPA Memorandum dated May 20, 2005:
``Maintenance Plan Guidance for Certain 8-Hour Ozone Areas Under
Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act.''
Meanwhile, the Gila River Indian Community is in the final stages
of preparing, adopting and submitting a Tribal Implementation Plan
(TIP) to EPA for approval. The TIP contains several ordinances
including permit requirements and fees; administrative appeals
procedures; enforcement provisions (civil and criminal); and controls
on non-metallic mineral mining; secondary aluminum processing
operations; solvent metal cleaning; VOC usage, storage and handling;
aerospace manufacturing and rework processes; and open burning and
visible emissions. As such, the Gila River Indian Community is
developing a comprehensive air quality regulatory program, but the
Community is doing so with the view that their historic inclusion in
the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area was erroneous.
EPA supports the Community's efforts to manage its own air quality
regulatory program through development, adoption and implementation of
the TIP and recognizes that the control measure and planning
antibacksliding obligations that apply to the Maricopa County portion
of the Reservation under our phase 1 implementation rule for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS (by virtue of its inclusion within the Phoenix metropolitan
1-hour ozone nonattainment area) represent an obstacle to the
Community's objectives in this regard.
F. Evaluation and Conclusion
Based on the historic ambient monitoring data and prevailing wind
patterns in the area, we conclude that we clearly erred in failing to
consider data made available at the time of our September 1979
affirmation of the preexisting oxidants nonattainment area boundary
(i.e., the MAG urban planning
[[Page 68344]]
area) as the geographic basis for the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area.\11\ Our September 1979 action affirming the
oxidants nonattainment area boundary for the purposes of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS had the effect of including a portion of the Gila River
Indian Reservation (the Maricopa County portion) that was not
experiencing violations of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS into the larger
urbanized nonattainment area where violations of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
were relatively frequent and widespread and thereby unnecessarily
splitting the Reservation into two different air quality planning
areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ With respect to our promulgation of a County-wide
designation for the oxidants NAAQS (in the March 1978) and our
approval of a reduction in the size of the oxidants nonattainment
area to conform to the MAG urban planning area boundary (in March
1979), we find that our inclusion of the Maricopa County portion of
the Gila River Indian Reservation in those areas, while
questionable, was not clearly in error because of the violations of
the oxidants NAAQS measured at the South Phoenix station.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In support of this conclusion, we find that, had we considered the
available data for the purpose of determining whether the Reservation
should be included in the ozone nonattainment area (as opposed to the
oxidants nonattainment area), we would have concluded based on data
from the South Phoenix station and the prevailing mountain-valley
(east-west) wind circulation in the area that no part of the
Reservation was experiencing violations of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and
that affirming the pre-existing oxidants nonattainment boundary for the
purposes of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and thereby continuing the split of
the Reservation into two air quality planning areas with different
designations would be inappropriate.
We also find that other information persuasively supports a
correction in the boundary to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation
at this time: Namely, (1) The Reservation is not a significant source
area for ozone precursor emissions and thus has essentially no effect
on ambient ozone concentrations in the urbanized portions of the
Phoenix metropolitan area; (2) data from the South Phoenix station
indicates that ambient ozone levels on the Reservation, with the
possible exception of a period in the early 1980's, have never violated
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS; (3) available ambient ozone data collected at
the two monitoring stations located on the Reservation indicate that
the area currently is not experiencing violations of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS; and (4) the former nonattainment status of the Maricopa County
portion of the Reservation for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS will
unnecessarily complicate and frustrate the Gila River Indian
Community's development and implementation of a Tribal Implementation
Plan.
IV. Final Action
Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(6) of the CAA and at the
request of the Gila River Indian Community, EPA is correcting the
boundary of the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area to
exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation.\12\ This action revises the
description of the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area
in the table entitled ``Arizona--Ozone (1-Hour Standard)'' in 40 CFR
81.303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In so doing, we note the similarities between our action
here and previous EPA actions in which we corrected 1-hour ozone
nonattainment designations that had originally been established for
the oxidants NAAQS and that were erroneously affirmed for the
purposes of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 62 FR 14641 (March 27, 1997)
(direct final rule correcting ozone nonattainment designations in
New Hampshire and Maine); and 61 FR 5707 (February 14, 1996) (final
rule correcting ozone nonattainment designations in Michigan).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We do not anticipate any objections to this action, so we are
finalizing the correction action without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing this same action to correct the boundary. If
we receive adverse comments by December 12, 2005, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the
direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the
comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do
not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final action will be
effective without further notice on January 9, 2006.
The effect of this action is to attach the Maricopa County portion
of the Gila River Indian Reservation to the pre-existing
``unclassifiable/attainment'' area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS that
consists of all of those portions of the State of Arizona (including
the rest of the Reservation that lies in Pinal County) that are not
designated as a ``nonattainment'' area or as an ``attainment'' area
subject to a maintenance plan. Also, this action relieves the Agency
and the Gila River Indian Community from any specific obligations that
flow from the former nonattainment status of the Maricopa County
portion of the Gila River Indian Reservation under our phase 1
implementation rule for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, including the
applicable requirements listed in 40 CFR 51.900(f) and the preparation
and submittal of a plan under 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3) that provides for
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 10 years following
designation and that includes contingency measures for that portion of
the Reservation.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ While no longer subject to the specific maintenance plan
requirements under 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3), the Gila River Indian
Reservation, like other areas designated as unclassifiable/
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, remains subject to the
general requirement to provide for implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS under section 110(a)(1) of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866, [58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)] the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive Order.''
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 reduces the size of a nonattainment area for air quality
planning purposes.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
[[Page 68345]]
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
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.). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule
will not impose any direct requirements on small entities. 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. 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.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L.
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year.
Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is
needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted.
Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable duty
on any State, local or tribal governments or the private sector. In any
event, EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
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 reduces the size of a nonattainment area
for air quality planning purposes and does not alter the relationship
or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and
the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal government and Indian tribes.''
Under section 5(b) of Executive Order 13175, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has tribal implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides
[[Page 68346]]
the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by
tribal governments, or EPA consults with tribal officials early in the
process of developing the proposed regulation. Under section 5(c) of
Executive Order 13175, EPA may not issue a regulation that has tribal
implications and that preempts tribal law, unless the Agency consults
with tribal officials early in the process of developing the proposed
regulation.
EPA has concluded that this action may have tribal implications.
Representatives of the Gila River Indian Community approached EPA two
years ago and requested that EPA make this boundary correction.
Consistent with EPA policy, EPA consulted with representatives of the
community early in the process of developing this action to permit them
to have meaningful and timely input into its development. We agree with
the technical and policy rationale that the community provided for this
boundary correction, and believe that all tribal concerns have been
met. EPA's action corrects the boundary of the Phoenix metropolitan 1-
hour ozone area to exclude the Gila River Indian Reservation. As such,
it will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal
governments, nor preempt tribal law. Thus, the requirements of sections
5(b) and 5(c) of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
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 as
defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not have
reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by
this rule present a disproportionate risk to children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires EPA to prepare and submit a Statement of
Energy Effects to the Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, for certain
actions identified as ``significant energy actions.'' Section 4(b) of
Executive Order 13211 defines ``significant energy actions'' as ``any
action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that
promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule
or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance notices of
proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking: (1)(i) that is
a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any
successor order, and (ii) is likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or (2) that is
designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action.''
This rule 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 under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This rule does not involve establishment of technical standards,
and 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
to this action.
J. Congressional Review Act
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.
section 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 9, 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 CAA section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 3, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
Part 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are
amended as follows:
PART 81--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--[Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 81.303, the table entitled ``Arizona--Ozone (1-Hour
Standard)'' is amended by revising the entry for the Phoenix Area to
read as follows:
Sec. 81.303 Arizona.
* * * * *
[[Page 68347]]
Arizona--Ozone
[1-Hour Standard]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated area ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phoenix Area: Maricopa County (part).... 6/14/05 Attainment...............................
Phoenix nonattainment Forest area
boundary:
1. Commencing at a point which is
the intersection of the eastern
line of Range 7 East, Gila and Salt
River Baseline and Meridian, and
the southern line of Township 2
South, said point is the
southeastern corner of the Maricopa
Association of Governments Urban
Planning Area, which is the point
of beginning;
2. Thence, proceed northerly along
the eastern line of Range 7 East
which is the common boundary
between Maricopa and Pinal
Counties, as described in Arizona
Revised Statutes Section 11-109, to
a point where the eastern line of
Range 7 East intersects the
northern line of Township 1 North,
said point is also the intersection
of the Maricopa County Line and the
Tonto National Forest Boundary, as
established by Executive Order 869
dated July 1, 1908, as amended and
shown on the U.S. Forest Service
1969 Planimetric Maps;
3. Thence, westerly along the
northern line of Township 1 North
to approximately the southwest
corner of the southeast quarter of
Section 35, Township 2 North, Range
7 East, said point being the
boundary of the Tonto National
Forest and Usery Mountain Semi-
Regional Park;
4. Thence, northerly along the Tonto
National Forest Boundary, which is
generally the western line of the
east half of Sections 26 and 35 of
Township 2 North, Range 7 East, to
a point which is where the quarter
section line intersects with the
northern line of Section 26,
Township 2 North, Range 7 East,
said point also being the northeast
corner of the Usery Mountain Semi-
Regional Park;
5. Thence, westerly along the Tonto
National Forest Boundary, which is
generally the south line of
Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 and the
southern line of the west half of
Section 23, Township 2 North, Range
7 East, to a point which is the
southwest corner of Section 19,
Township 2 North, Range 7 East;
6. Thence, northerly along the Tonto
National Forest Boundary to a point
where the Tonto National Forest
Boundary intersects with the
eastern boundary of the Salt River
Indian Reservation, generally
described as the center line of the
Salt River Channel;
7. Thence, northeasterly and
northerly along the common boundary
of the Tonto National Forest and
the Salt River Indian Reservation
to a point which is the northeast
corner of the Salt River Indian
Reservation and the southeast
corner of the Fort McDowell Indian
Reservation, as shown on the plat
dated July 22, 1902, and recorded
with the U.S. Government on June
15, 1902;
8. Thence, northeasterly along the
common boundary between the Tonto
National Forest and the Fort
McDowell Indian Reservation to a
point which