Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Hazelwood SO2, 17750-17752 [06-3355]

Download as PDF 17750 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 2006 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 7 TO SUBPART NNNNN OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART NNNNN— Continued [As stated in § 63.9065, you must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following] Applies to subpart NNNNN Citation Requirement § 63.10(c) ................... Yes ............... Applies as modified by § 63.9005 (d). § 63.10(d)(1) .............. Additional recordkeeping requirements for sources with CMS. General reporting requirements .............................. Yes ............... § 63.10(d)(2) .............. § 63.10(d)(3) .............. Performance test results ......................................... Opacity or visible emissions observations .............. Yes ............... No ................ § 63.9050 specifies additional reporting requirements. § 63.9045(f) specifies submission date. Subpart NNNNN does not specify opacity or visible emission standards. § 63.10(d)(4) .............. Yes. § 63.10(d)(5) .............. § 63.10(e)(1) .............. § 63.10(e)(2)(i) ........... § 63.10(e)(2) .............. Progress reports for sources with compliance extensions. SSM reports ............................................................ Additional CMS reports—general ........................... Results of CMS performance evaluations .............. Results of COMS performance evaluations ........... § 63.10(e)(3) .............. § 63.10(e)(4) .............. Excess emissions/CMS performance reports ......... Continuous opacity monitoring system data reports Yes. No ................ § 63.10(f) .................... § 63.11 ....................... Recordkeeping/reporting waiver ............................. Control device requirements—applicability ............. Yes. No ................ § 63.12 ....................... State authority and delegations .............................. Yes ............... § 63.13 ....................... § 63.14 ....................... Addresses ............................................................... Incorporation by reference ...................................... Yes. Yes ............... § 63.15 ....................... Availability of information/confidentiality ................. Yes. [FR Doc. 06–3309 Filed 4–6–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 81 [PA209–4302; FRL–8055–8] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Hazelwood SO2 Nonattainment and the Monongahela River Valley Unclassifiable Areas to Attainment and Approval of the Maintenance Plan; Correction Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). AGENCY: wwhite on PROD1PC65 with RULES 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:05 Apr 06, 2006 Jkt 208001 Yes. Yes ............... Yes ............... No ................ Explanation Applies as modified by § 63.9005(d). Applies as modified by § 63.9005(d). Subpart NNNNN does not require the use of COMS. Subpart NNNNN does not require the use of COMS. Facilities subject to subpart NNNNN do not use flares as control devices. § 63.9070 lists those sections of subparts NNNNN and A that are not delegated. Subpart NNNNN does not incorporate any material by reference. area listing. This document corrects that error. DATES: Effective Date: April 7, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Wentworth, (215) 814–2034, or by e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov. 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, PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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 E:\FR\FM\07APR1.SGM 07APR1 17751 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 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. I 40 CFR part 81 is amended as follows: PART 81—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment Status Designations 2. In § 81.339, the table for ‘‘Pennsylvania—SO2,’’ is amended by revising the entry for the Allegheny County Air Basin to read as follows: I § 81.339 * Pennsylvania. * * * * PENNSYLVANIA.—SO2 Does not meet primary standards Designated area * * V. Southwest Pennsylvania Intrastate AQCR: * * wwhite on PROD1PC65 with RULES VerDate Aug<31>2005 * 16:05 Apr 06, 2006 * Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Fmt 4700 Better than national standards * * * * * ........................ ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ X ........................ X ........................ X * Frm 00061 Cannot be classified * * * * * (B) Allegheny County Air Basin: (1) The areas within a two-mile radius of the Hazelwood monitor ........... (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) ........................................................................ (3) The area within a two-mile radius of the Bellevue monitor ................ (4) The remaining portions of the Allegheny County Air Basin ................ * Does not meet secondary standards * Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07APR1.SGM * 07APR1 * 17752 * * Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 2006 / Rules and Regulations * * * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 06–3355 Filed 4–6–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 571 [Docket No. NHTSA–2005–22093] RIN 2127–AJ31 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Theft Protection National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation. ACTION: Final rule. wwhite on PROD1PC65 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: Our safety standard on theft protection specifies vehicle performance requirements intended to reduce the incidence of crashes resulting from theft and accidental rollaway of motor vehicles. As a result of technological advances in the area of theft protection, the terminology used in the regulatory text of the Standard has become outdated and confusing with respect to key-locking systems that employ electronic codes to lock and unlock the vehicle, and to enable engine activation. This final rule amends and reorganizes the regulatory text of the Standard so that it better correlates to modern theft protection technology and reflects the agency’s interpretation of the existing requirements. The new language does not impose any new substantive requirements on vehicle manufacturers. DATES: This rule becomes effective September 1, 2007. Early voluntary compliance is permitted. Petitions: Petitions for reconsideration of the final rule must be received not later than May 22, 2006, and should refer to this docket and the notice number of this document and be submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 7th Street, SW., Room 5220, Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Ms. Gayle Dalrymple, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, NVS–123, NHTSA, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366–5559. E-Mail: Gayle.Dalrymple@nhtsa.dot.gov. For legal issues: Mr. George Feygin, Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC–112, NHTSA, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366–5834. E-Mail: George.Feygin@nhtsa.dot.gov. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:05 Apr 06, 2006 Jkt 208001 Table of Contents I. Background II. Recent Letters of Interpretation Regarding FMVSS No. 114 III. VW Petition for Rulemaking IV. Summary of the NPRM V. Comments on the NPRM and the Agency’s Response VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) C. Executive Order 13045 D. Civil Justice Reform E. Regulatory Flexibility Act F. Paperwork Reduction Act G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act I. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) J. Privacy Act K. National Environmental Policy Act L. Vehicle Safety Act I. Background FMVSS No. 114, Theft protection, specifies vehicle performance requirements intended to reduce the incidence of crashes resulting from theft and accidental rollaway of motor vehicles. The standard applies to all passenger cars, and to trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a GVWR of 4536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. The standard first became effective on January 1, 1970.1 The purpose of the standard was to prevent crashes caused by unauthorized use of unattended motor vehicles. Thus, the standard sought to ensure that the vehicle could not be easily operated without the key, and that the vehicle operator would not forget to remove the key from the ignition system upon exiting the vehicle. In response to the problem of accidental rollaway crashes resulting from children inadvertently moving the automatic transmission lever to a neutral position when a stationary vehicle is parked on a slope, NHTSA later amended FMVSS No. 114 to require that the automatic transmission lever be locked in the ‘‘park’’ position before the key can be removed from the ignition system.2 Subsequently, NHTSA amended these new requirements to permit an override device that would enable the vehicle operator to remove the key without the transmission being locked in ‘‘park,’’ and to move the transmission lever without using the key, under certain circumstances. The purpose of these override provisions was to address certain situations when it may be necessary to remove the key 1 See 2 See PO 00000 33 FR 6471 (April 24, 1968). 55 FR 21868, (May 30, 1990). Frm 00062 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 without shifting the transmission lever because the vehicle has become disabled.3 While FMVSS No. 114 evolved to address not only theft protection, but also accidental rollaway prevention, the terminology used in the regulatory text has remained unchanged since its introduction more than 35 years ago. However, theft protection technology has advanced considerably during that time. As a result, certain provisions of the Standard have become increasingly ambiguous when applied to modern theft protection technology not contemplated by the Standard when it first went into effect. For example, a number of vehicles now feature electronic systems. Typically, this involves a card or a similar device that is carried in an occupant’s pocket or purse. The card carries an electronic code that acts as the key when it is transmitted to the vehicle’s onboard locking system. The vehicle has a sensor that automatically unlocks the door and allows the vehicle operator to activate the engine, when it receives the code. The code-carrying device (i.e., card or otherwise) never has to leave the vehicle operator’s pocket or purse and is not inserted into the ignition module. In response to manufacturers’ requests, NHTSA issued a series of interpretation letters explaining how the Standard applied to various key-locking systems that did not utilize conventional keys, but instead relied on electronic codes to lock and unlock the vehicle, and to enable engine activation. II. Recent Letters of Interpretation Regarding FMVSS No. 114 As noted above, the agency has received several requests for legal interpretation of the requirements of FMVSS No. 114, as they apply to keylocking systems using various remote access devices. In response, the agency has stated that the electronic code transmitted from a remote device to the vehicle can be considered a ‘‘key’’ for the purposes of FMVSS No. 114.4 We have also elaborated on how other provisions of the standard apply to electronic codes. For example, the agency stated that the narrow provisions related to electrical failure do not apply to electronically coded cards or other means used to enter an electronic key code into the locking system because those provisions were specifically crafted in the context of traditional 3 See 56 FR 12464 (March 26, 1991). https://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/ interps/files/GF001689.html and https:// www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/ 7044.html. 4 See E:\FR\FM\07APR1.SGM 07APR1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 67 (Friday, April 7, 2006)]
[Unknown Section]
[Pages 17750-17752]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-3355]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[PA209-4302; FRL-8055-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Hazelwood SO2 Nonattainment and the
Monongahela River Valley Unclassifiable Areas to Attainment and
Approval of the Maintenance Plan; Correction

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, (215) 814-2034, or by
e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.

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

[[Page 17751]]

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.

0
40 CFR part 81 is amended as follows:

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
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

0
2. In Sec. 81.339, the table for ``Pennsylvania--SO2,'' is
amended by revising the entry for the Allegheny County Air Basin to
read as follows:

Sec. 81.339 Pennsylvania.

* * * * *

Pennsylvania.--SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does not meet Does not meet Better than
Designated area primary secondary Cannot be national
standards standards classified standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
V. Southwest Pennsylvania Intrastate AQCR:

* * * * * * *
(B) Allegheny County Air Basin:
(1) The areas within a two-mile radius of .............. .............. ............... X
the Hazelwood monitor....................
(2) That portion of Allegheny County .............. .............. ............... X
within an eight-mile radius of the
Duquesne Golf Association Club House in
West Mifflin excluding the nonattainment
area (1)........................
(3) The area within a two-mile radius of .............. .............. X ...............
the Bellevue monitor.....................
(4) The remaining portions of the .............. .............. ............... X
Allegheny County Air Basin...............

* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 17752]]

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-3355 Filed 4-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.