SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

EPA published four notices of final rulemaking to redesignate Washington County (Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH), Jefferson County, (Steubenville-Weirton, WV-OH), Belmont County (Wheeling, WV-OH), Stark County (Canton, OH) and Allen County (Lima, OH) areas to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. For each of these counties EPA had proposed approval of the 2009 and 2018 MVEBs. In each of the final rulemaking notices, EPA omitted the 2009 MVEBs from the final rules. This is a correction to add these 2009 MVEBs.

Correction

For Allen County, and Stark County, Ohio, in the final rule published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2007 (70 FR 27647), on page 27649 in the first column, first paragraph: “In addition, and supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2018 VOC and NO_X MVEBs for each county for transportation conformity purposes. The 2018 motor vehicle * * *” is corrected to read: “In addition, and supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2009 and 2018 VOC and NO_X MVEBs for each county for transportation conformity purposes. The 2009 MVEB for Allen County, Ohio are 5.08 tons per day of VOC and 8.28 tons per day of NO_X . The 2018 MVEBs for Allen County are 2.89 tons per day VOC and 3.47 tons per day of NO_X . For Stark County, Ohio, the 2009 MVEB area 10.02 tons per day of VOC and 18.03 tons per day of NO_X and the 2018 MVEBs are 5.37 tons per day of VOC and 7.08 tons per day of NO_X.

For Belmont County, Ohio, in the final rule published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2007 (70 FR 27644), on page 27645 in the first column, first paragraph: “In addition, and supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2018 VOC and NO_X MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes. The 2018 MVEBs * * *” is corrected to read: “In addition, and supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2009 and 2018 VOC and NO_X MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes. For Belmont County, Ohio, the 2009 MVEBs are 2.60 tons per day of VOC and 2.22 tons per day of NO_X and the 2018 MVEBs are 1.52 tons per day of VOC and 1.91 tons per day of NO_X. West Virginia develops MVEBs for its portion of the area.”

For Jefferson County, Ohio, in the final rule published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2007 (70 FR 27640), on page 27641 in the first column, first paragraph: “In addition, and supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2018 volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO_X) MVEBs for Jefferson County for transportation conformity purposes. The 2018 MVEBs * * *” is corrected to read: “In addition, and supported by and ( printed page 36600) consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2009 and 2018 volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO_X) MVEBs for Jefferson County for transportation conformity purposes. The 2009 MVEBs are 2.63 tons per day of VOC and 4.10 tons per day of NO_X and the 2018 MVEBs are 1.37 tons per day of VOC and 1.67 tons per day of NO_X.”

For Washington County, Ohio, in the final rule published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2007 (70 FR 27652), on page 27653 in the first column, first paragraph: “In addition, and supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2018 volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO_X) MVEBs for Washington County for transportation conformity purposes. The 2018 MVEBs * * *” is corrected to read: “In addition, and supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 2009 and 2018 volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO_X) MVEBs for Washington County for transportation conformity purposes. The 2009 MVEBs are 2.59 tons per day of VOC and 3.58 tons per day of NO_X and the 2018 MVEBs are 1.67 tons per day of VOC and 1.76 tons per day of NO_X. West Virginia develops MVEBs for its portion of the area.”

EPA is also making changes to 40 CFR 52.1885(ff) in order to include the 2009 MVEBs for the Ohio Counties.

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, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that there is good cause for making today's rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment because we are merely correcting an omission 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 is therefore 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 or any other statute as indicated in the Supplementary Information section above, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C 601 et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments or impose a significant intergovernmental mandate, as described in sections 203 and 204 of UMRA. 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), nor will it 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 governments, as specified by Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

This technical correction action does not involve technical standards; 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. The rule also does not involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, as required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996). EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1998) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. 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. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated previously, EPA had made such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefore, and established an effective date of July 5, 2007. 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 . This correction to 40 CFR part 52 for Ohio is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Parts 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 52.1885 is amended by revising paragraphs (ff) introductory text and (ff)(1) through (4) to read as follows: