06-3355. Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Hazelwood SO2

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Direct final rule; correction.

SUMMARY:

On July 21, 2004 (69 FR 43522) EPA published a Federal Register notice redesignating the Hazelwood SO₂ Nonattainment Area and the Monongahela River Valley Unclassifiable Area to attainment of the sulfur dioxide (SO₂) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). In the July 21, 2004 final rulemaking document, two areas were inadvertently omitted from the revised designated area listing. This document corrects that error.

DATES:

Effective Date: April 7, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ellen Wentworth, [phone], or by e-mail at [e-mail].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document wherever “we,” or “our” are used we mean EPA. On July 21, 2004 (69 FR 43522), we published a final rulemaking announcing our approval of the redesignation of the Hazelwood SO₂ Nonattainment Area and the Monongahela River Valley Unclassifiable Area, located in the Allegheny Air Basin in Allegheny County to attainment of the NAAQS for SO₂ and approved a combined maintenance plan for both areas as a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision. This action pertained to the redesignation of the Hazelwood and Monongahela River Valley areas (V.(B)(1) and V.(B)(2), respectively, of part 81, section 81.339, to attainment. This action was not intended to affect the area within a two-mile radius of the Bellevue monitor (V.(B)(3), or the remaining portions of the Allegheny County Air Basin (V.(B)(4). In the July 21, 2004 rulemaking document, these areas were inadvertently removed in the Pennsylvania SO₂ Table in part 81, section 81.339. Therefore, this correction action restores the entries which were inadvertently removed.

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).

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 April 7, 2006. 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 81.339 for Pennsylvania is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Dated: March 30, 2006.

Donald S. Welsh,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 81 is amended as follows:

PART 81—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

2. In § 81.339, the table for “Pennsylvania—SO ₂,” is amended by revising the entry for the Allegheny County Air Basin to read as follows:

§ 81.339

Pennsylvania.

* * * * *

Pennsylvania.—SO₂

Designated area	Does not meet primary standards	Does not meet secondary standards	Cannot be classified	Better than national standards
*         *         *         *         *         *         *
V. Southwest Pennsylvania Intrastate AQCR:
*         *         *         *         *         *         *
(B) Allegheny County Air Basin:
(1) The areas within a two-mile radius of the Hazelwood monitor				X
(2) That portion of Allegheny County within an eight-mile radius of the Duquesne Golf Association Club House in West Mifflin excluding the nonattainment area (#1)				X
(3) The area within a two-mile radius of the Bellevue monitor			X
(4) The remaining portions of the Allegheny County Air Basin				X
*         *         *         *         *         *         *

* * * * *