Rules and Regulations. Final rule; correcting amendment

1,186 words·~5 min read·/register/2005/09/19/05-18427·

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

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [R07-OAR-2005-MO-0003; FRL-7969-6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri; Correction AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule; correcting amendment. SUMMARY: On July 13, 2005, EPA published a final rule approving revisions to the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP). In the July 13, 2005, rule, EPA inadvertently included an incorrect state effective date for the Missouri statewide NO X rule.

The purpose of this action is to correct the state effective date to August 30, 2003. DATES: This action is effective September 19, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Jay at

(913)551-7460, or by e-mail at *jay.michael@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. On July 13, 2005 (70 FR 40193), EPA published a final rule approving a SIP revision for Missouri that included a revision to the statewide NO X rule, 10 CSR 10-6.350 “Emissions Limitations and Emissions Trading of Oxides of Nitrogen.” The purpose of the rule is to reduce the state's contribution to the St. Louis 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. The July 13, 2005, rule inadvertently included an incorrect state effective date for the statewide NO X rule of June 23, 2003. Today's action is necessary to correct the state effective date to August 30, 2003. 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. The correction has no effect on the state rule. 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 state effective date 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 an incorrect state effective date in a previous action in a state rule 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 September 19, 2005. 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). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: September 8, 2005. William Rice, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart AA—Missouri 2. In “ 52.1320(c) the table is amended under Chapter 6 by revising the entry for rule A10-6.350” to read as follows: § 52.1320 Identification of plan.

(c)* * * EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations 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 * * * * * * * 10-6.350 Emissions Limitations and Emissions Trading of Oxides of Nitrogen 08/30/03 09/19/05 [insert FR page number where the document begins] * * * * * * * [FR Doc. 05-18427 Filed 9-16-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 12

Traces to 12 documents

U.S. Code