Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries
Final Rule; Stay Of Effective Date.
On June 24, 2008, EPA published in the Federal Register final amendments to the current standards of performance for petroleum refineries and separate standards of performance for new, modified, or reconstructed process units at petroleum refineries. Both of these final rules had an effective date of June 24, 2008. This document stays the effective date of the rule for the newly promulgated standards of performance for new, modified, or reconstructed process units at petroleum refineries to September 26, 2008 to be consistent with sections 801 and 808 of the Congressional Review Act, enacted as part of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, 808. The effective date for the final rule promulgating amendments to the current standards of performance for petroleum refineries is not changing and remains June 24, 2008.
7 actions from May 14th, 2007
May 14th, 2007
June 28th, 2007
- NPRM Comment Period Extended
July 13th, 2007
- NPRM Comment Period End
August 27th, 2007
- NPRM Comment Period Extended To
June 24th, 2008
- Final Rule
December 22nd, 2008
Table of Contents Back to Top
DATES: Back to Top
The effective date of this rule is July 28, 2008. Title 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja, consisting of §§ 60.100a through 60.109a, is stayed until September 26, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Back to Top
Mr. Robert B. Lucas, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143-01), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number: (919) 541-0884; fax number: (919) 541-0246; e-mail address: email@example.com.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Back to Top
I. Background Back to Top
The Environmental Protection Agency published a final rule on June 24, 2008 that contained the following: (1) Final amendments to the existing refineries New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) in 40 CFR part 60, subpart J; and (2) a new refineries NSPS in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja (73 FR 35838). The preamble to that rule contained an incorrect effective date and contained an error in the Congressional Review Act (CRA) statement in the Statutory and Executive Order Reviews section. The preamble incorrectly classified all amendments to the CFR in that rule document as “non-major” rules and provided for an effective date of June 24, 2008. The amendments to existing NSPS subpart J in that document are properly classified as a “non-major rule;” however, the amendment that added the new NSPS subpart Ja is a “major” rule under the CRA. Section 801 of the CRA precludes a major rule from taking effect until the later of 60 days after the date of publication of the rule in the Federal Register or 60 days after each House of Congress and the Comptroller General of the Government Accountability Office receive a copy of a rule report. While EPA did submit the above rule as required, because NSPS subpart Ja is a “major” rule, the effective date of June 24, 2008 does not comply with sections 801 and 808 of the CRA. Today's rule stays the effective date of NSPS subpart Ja consistent with the provisions of the CRA; the effective date of NSPS subpart Ja is September 26, 2008. The amendments in NSPS subpart J are not affected by today's action and remain effective from June 24, 2008.
Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), provides that when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, an agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA has determined that there is good cause for making today's rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment because EPA is merely correcting the effective date of the promulgated rule to be consistent with the congressional review requirements of the CRA as a matter of law and has no discretion in this matter. Thus, notice and public procedure are unnecessary. The Agency finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Back to Top
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and, therefore, is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. 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). In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), or require prior consultation with State officials as specified by Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993), or involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Because this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 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. 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.). EPA's compliance with these statutes and Executive Orders for the underlying rule is discussed in the June 24, 2008 Federal Register document.
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
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 United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Dated: July 22, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 60—[AMENDED] Back to Top
1.The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Subpart Ja—[Stayed] Back to Top
2.Subpart Ja, consisting of §§ 60.100a through 60.109a, is stayed until September 26, 2008.
[FR Doc. E8-17220 Filed 7-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P