2010-30482. Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina: Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point; Determination of Attaining Data for the 1997 Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Correction

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule; correcting amendment.

SUMMARY:

On January 4, 2010, EPA published a final rule determining that the Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the “Greensboro Area”) has attaining data for the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This action corrects a typographical error in the regulatory language in paragraph (e) of EPA's January 4, 2010, final rule.

DATES:

This action is effective December 6, 2010.

ADDRESSES:

Copies of the documentation used in the action being corrected are available for inspection during normal business hours at the following location: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Benjamin can be reached at 404-562-9040, or via electronic mail at [e-mail].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This action corrects a typographical error in the regulatory language for an entry that appears in paragraph (e) of North Carolina's Identification of Plan at 40 CFR 52.1781. The final action, which determined that the Greensboro Area has attaining data for the 1997 PM_2.5 NAAQS, was approved by EPA on January 4, 2010 (75 FR 56). However, EPA inadvertently cited 40 CFR 52.1004(c) as the section of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) that suspends the requirements for areas attaining the 1997 PM_2.5 NAAQS to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning state implementation plans related to attainment of the PM_2.5 NAAQS. The correct citation is 40 CFR 51.1004(c). Therefore, EPA is correcting this typographical error by inserting 51.1004(c) into paragraph (e) of 40 CFR 52.1781.

EPA has determined that today's action falls under the “good cause” exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) which, upon finding “good cause,” authorizes agencies to dispense with public participation where public notice and comment procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. Public notice and comment for this action are unnecessary because today's action to correct an inadvertent error contained in paragraph (e) of 40 CFR 52.1781 of the rulemaking and has no substantive impact on EPA's January 4, 2010, approval. In addition, EPA can identify no particular reason why the public would be interested in being notified of the correction, or in having the opportunity to comment on the correction prior to this action being finalized, since this correction action does not change the meaning of EPA's analysis or action to approve the addition of paragraph (e) to 40 CFR 52.1781.

EPA also finds that there is good cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for this correction to become effective on the date of publication of this action. Section 553(d)(3) of the APA allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication “as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.” 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in APA section 553(d)(3) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Today's rule, however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes effect. Rather, today's action merely corrects a typographical error in paragraph (e) of a prior rulemaking by correcting the citation as identified above in 40 CFR 52.1781 in a revision, which EPA approved on January 4, 2010. For these reasons, EPA finds good cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for this correction to become effective on the date of publication of this action.

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). This action merely corrects a typographical error in paragraph (e) of a prior rulemaking by correcting the citation as identified above in 40 CFR 52.1781, which EPA approved on January 4, 2010, and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule merely corrects an inadvertent error in paragraph (e) of a prior rule, and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, 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).

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 rule 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 merely corrects a typographical error in paragraph (e) of a prior rulemaking by correcting the citation as identified above in 40 CFR 52.1781 in a revision, which EPA approved on January 4, 2010, 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 addition, this rule 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. This rule also 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, 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 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. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 4, 2011. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

• Environmental protection
• Air pollution control
• Incorporation by reference
• Particulate matter

Dated: November 17, 2010.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

40 CFR part 52 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 II—North Carolina

2. Section 52.1781 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:

§ 52.1781

Control strategy: Sulfur oxides and particulate matter.

* * * * *

(e) Determination of Attaining Data. EPA has determined, as of January 4, 2010, the Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, North Carolina, nonattainment area has attaining data for the 1997 PM_2.5 NAAQS. This determination, in accordance with 40 CFR 51.1004(c), suspends the requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to attainment of the standard for as long as this area continues to meet the 1997 PM_2.5 NAAQS.

* * * * *