03-30043. Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Utah; State Implementation Plan Corrections

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule; technical correction.

SUMMARY:

When EPA approved Utah State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions regarding the numbering and format of the SIP on June 25, 2003, we inadvertently submitted incorrect material for incorporation by reference. EPA is correcting this error with this document.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

This final rule is effective January 2, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laurel Dygowski, EPA, Region 8, [phone].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, wherever “we” or “our” is used it means the EPA.

Section 553 of the Administrative Procedures 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 good cause for making today's rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment because we are merely correcting incorrect text in a previous rulemaking. Thus notice and public procedures are unnecessary. We find that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

I. Correction

Correction to Federal Register Document Published on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744)

On June 25, 2003, we published a final rule approving Utah SIP revisions pertaining to the numbering and format of the SIP (68 FR 37744). When we published this rule, we incorporated by reference changes to Section IX.C.7.h(3) for which the State inadvertently submitted incorrect material. The State has subsequently submitted the correct material for SIP Section IX.C.7.h(3). Therefore, we are correcting this incorporation by reference error by resubmitting the incorporation by reference material for 40 CFR 52.2320(c)(56)(i)(C) to the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center and the Office of the Federal Register.

II. 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. This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Because the agency has made a “good cause” finding that this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure 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 government, as specified in 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.). EPA's compliance with these statutes and Executive Orders for the underlying rules are discussed in the June 25, 2003 rule approving the revisions to the numbering and formatting of the Utah SIP.

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 has made such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefore, and established an effective date of January 2, 2004. 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. These corrections to the identification of plan for Utah is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

• Environmental protection
• Air pollution control
• Carbon monoxide
• Intergovernmental relations
• Lead
• Nitrogen dioxide
• Ozone
• Particulate matter
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Sulfur oxides
• Volatile organic compounds

Dated: November 14, 2003.

Kerrigan G. Clough,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.