Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule; correcting amendment.
On July 11, 2006, EPA published a final rule approving revisions to the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP). In the July 11, 2006, rule EPA inadvertently included an incorrect state effective date for this rule and omitted part of the information in the explanation column of the Constructions Permits Required rule. We are making a correction to the state effective date and to the explanation in this document.
This action is effective October 10, 2006.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551-7942, or by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Throughout this document wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.
On July 11, 2006, EPA published a SIP revision for Missouri that included a revision to rule 10 CSR 10-6.060. In § 52.1320(c), the portion of the table referencing Missouri Chapter 6, the State Effective Date should have been December 30, 2004, and the Explanation column for this rule should have included the statement “This revision incorporates by reference elements of EPA's NSR reform rule published December 31, 2002. Provisions of the incorporated reform rule relating to the Clean Unit Exemption, Pollution Control Projects, and exemption from record keeping provisions for certain sources using the actual-to-projected-actual emissions projections test are not SIP approved. This revision also incorporates by reference the other provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 as in effect on July 1, 2003, which supersedes any conflicting provisions in the Missouri rule. Section 9, pertaining to hazardous air pollutants, is not SIP approved.” This statement was included in the Explanation column of the June 27, 2006 (71 FR 36489) revision to this rule. Therefore, in this correction notice we are adding this information to the table for Chapter 6. Start Printed Page 59384
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 procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that there is such good cause for making today's rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment because we are merely correcting our identification of the effective date of a state rule and reinserting an explanation which was included in a previous action. Thus, notice and public procedure are unnecessary. We find that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). Because the agency has made a good cause finding that this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule merely corrects an incorrect citation in a previous action, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
For the same reason, this rule also does 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 rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely corrects a citation in a State rule in a previous action implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act (CAA). This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, our role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), we have no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. 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. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 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. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This determination must be supported by a brief statement. As stated previously, we made such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefore and established an effective date of October 10, 2006. We 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 correction to the Missouri SIP table is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804 et seq (2).Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
- Environmental protection
- Air pollution control
- Intergovernmental relations
- Nitrogen dioxide
- Particulate mater
- reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Sulfur oxides
- Volatile organic compounds
Dated: September 27, 2006.
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:End Amendment Part Start Part
PART 52—[AMENDED]End Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part
Subpart AA—MissouriStart Amendment Part
2. In § 52.1320(c) the table is amended under Chapter 6 by revising the entry for rule “10-6.060” to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(c) * * *
|Missouri citation||Title||State effective date||EPA approval date||Explanation|
|Missouri Department of Natural Resources|
|* * * * * * *|
|Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the State of Missouri|
|Start Printed Page 59385|
|* * * * * * *|
|10-6.060||Construction Permits Required.||12/30/2004||10/10/2006 [insert FR page number where the document begins ]||This revision incorporates by reference elements of EPA's NSR reform rule published December 31, 2002. Provisions of the incorporated reform rule relating to the Clean Unit Exemption, Pollution Control Projects, and exemption from record keeping provisions for certain sources using the actual-to-projected-actual emissions projections test are not SIP approved. This revision also incorporates by reference the other provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 as in effect on July 1, 2003, which supersedes any conflicting provisions in the Missouri rule. We are conditionally approving references to 10 CSR 10-6.062 contained in the last sentence of Section (1)(B) and all of section (1)(D). Section 9, pertaining to hazardous air pollutants, is not SIP approved.|
|* * * * * * *|
[FR Doc. E6-16700 Filed 10-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P