Proposed Rules. Final rule; correcting amendment

956 words·~4 min read·/register/2001/02/12/01-3504

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [DC-2025, MD-3064, VA-5052; FRL-6943-9] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia; Post 1996 Rate-of-Progress Plans, One-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstrations and Attainment Date Extension for the Metropolitan Washington D.C. Ozone Nonattainment Area; Correction AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule; correcting amendment.

SUMMARY: This document corrects an error in the amendatory instruction in a final rule pertaining to EPA's approval of the Maryland portion of the post 1996 rate-of-progress plans, one-hour ozone attainment demonstrations and attainment date extension for the Metropolitan Washington D.C. Ozone Nonattainment Area. EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 2001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA published a document on January 3, 2001 (66 FR 586) inadvertently adding paragraph

(d)to § 52.1076 when that paragraph already existed. The intent of that rule was to amend that section by adding a paragraph (e). This document corrects the erroneous amendatory language. Correction In the final rule (FR Docket 01-61) published in the **Federal Register** on January 3, 2001 (66 FR 586), on page 632 in the first column, the fifth amendatory instruction is revised to read—“5. Section 52.1076 is amended by adding paragraphs

(e)and

(g)to read as follows:” and the added paragraph text originally designated as

(d)is now correctly designated as paragraph (e). 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 incorrect citation 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). Administrative Requirements 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. 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 February 2, 2001. 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 52.1076(e) for Maryland is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Dated: February 5, 2001. Thomas C. Voltaggio, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region III. [FR Doc. 01-3504 Filed 2-9-01; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 13

Traces to 13 documents

U.S. Code