Determination of Attainment, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio; Correction, 51567-51568 [E7-17627]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 174 / Monday, September 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by November 9,
2007. Interested parties should
comment in response to the proposed
rule rather than petition for judicial
review, unless the objection arises after
the comment period allowed for in the
proposal. 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 section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 22, 2007.
Ira Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New
England.
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart EE—New Hampshire
2. Section 52.1528 is amended by
adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
I
§ 52.1528 Control strategy: Carbon
monoxide.
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with RULES
*
*
*
*
(d) Approval—On May 30, 2007, the
New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services submitted a
modification to the Nashua maintenance
plan approved in paragraph (c) of this
section. New Hampshire will not
conduct CO monitoring in Nashua, but
instead commits to continue to collect
and review CO monitoring data from
nearby Manchester, NH on an on-going
basis. In the event the second highest
CO concentration in any calendar year
monitored in Manchester reaches 75
percent of the federal 1-hour or 8-hour
national ambient air quality standard for
CO, New Hampshire will, within 9
months of recording such
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:16 Sep 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
[FR Doc. E7–17633 Filed 9–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0046; FRL–8464–3]
Determination of Attainment, Approval
and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans and Designation of Areas for Air
Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio;
Correction
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; correcting
amendment.
AGENCY:
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
I
*
concentrations, re-establish a CO
monitoring site in Nashua consistent
with EPA siting criteria, and resume
analyzing and reporting those data. New
Hampshire commits to implement its
contingency program in Nashua in the
event that a CO violation is monitored
at the re-established Nashua monitoring
site at any time during the maintenance
period. If the Manchester CO monitor
measures a violation of the either the
federal 1-hour or 8-hour NAAQS for CO,
contingency measures will be
implemented in Nashua as well, until a
re-established CO monitor in Nashua
shows that the area is in attainment of
the CO standard.
SUMMARY: This document corrects an
error pertaining to the Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) for Belmont
County, Ohio (Wheeling, WV–OH). The
2009 MVEB for oxides of nitrogen (NOX)
from the proposed rule was incorrect in
the final action. This final rule corrects
that error.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective on September 10, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Marquardt, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–3214,
marquardt.steve@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA
published four notices of final
rulemaking to redesignate Washington
County (Parkersburg-Marietta, WV–OH),
Jefferson County (Steubenville-Weirton,
WV–OH), Belmont County (Wheeling,
WV–OH), Stark County (Canton, OH)
and Allen County (Lima, OH) areas to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard. For each of these counties
EPA had proposed approval of the 2009
and 2018 MVEBs. In each of the final
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51567
rulemaking notices, EPA omitted the
2009 MVEBs from the final rules. A
correction was made to add these 2009
MVEBs. When this correction was made
there was an error in the 2009 MVEB for
NOX for Belmont County, Ohio. This
error is corrected in this action.
Correction
For Belmont County, Ohio, in the
correction notice published in the
Federal Register on July 5, 2007 (72 FR
36599), on page 36599 in the third
column, second full paragraph: ‘‘In
addition, and supported by and
consistent with the ozone maintenance
plan, EPA is approving the 2018 VOC
and NOX MVEBs for transportation
conformity purposes. The 2018 MVEBs
* * *.’’ is to read: ‘‘In addition, and
supported by and consistent with the
ozone maintenance plan, EPA is
approving the 2009 and 2018 VOC and
NOX MVEBs for transportation
conformity purposes. For Belmont
County, Ohio, the 2009 MVEBs are 2.60
tons per day of VOC and 4.69 tons per
day of NOX and the 2018 MVEBs are
1.52 tons per day of VOC and 1.91 tons
per day of NOX. West Virginia develops
MVEBs for its portion of the area.’’
EPA is revising 40 CFR Section
52.1885(ff)(2) to reflect this corrected
2009 MVEB for NOX for Belmont
County, Ohio.
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 error 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 (E.O.) 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
E:\FR\FM\10SER1.SGM
10SER1
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with RULES
51568
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 174 / Monday, September 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:16 Sep 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 are 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
September 10, 2007. 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 part 52 for Ohio is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
48 CFR Parts 639 and 652
[Public Notice: 5929]
RIN 1400–AC31
Department of State Acquisition
Regulation
State Department.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This final rule adds a
solicitation provision and contract
clause to the Department of State
Acquisition Regulation (DOSAR) to
implement Department of State
requirements regarding security issues
for information technology systems, as
required by the Federal Information
Security Management Act of 2002
(FISMA).
Effective Date: This rule is
effective September 10, 2007.
DATES:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 24, 2007.
Richard C. Karl,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gladys Gines, Procurement Analyst,
Office of the Procurement Executive,
2201 C Street, NW., State Annex
Number 6, Room 603, Washington, DC
20522–0602; telephone number: 703–
516–1691; e-mail address:
ginesgg@state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by
revising paragraph (ff)(2) to read as
follows:
The
Department published a proposed rule,
Public Notice 5836 at 72 FR 35023, June
26, 2007, with a request for comments.
The rule was proposed to implement the
information technology (IT) security
policies of the Department for contracts
that include information technology
resources for services in which the
contractor has physical or electronic
access to Department information that
directly supports the mission of the
Department. The rule was discussed in
detail in Public Notice 5836. No public
comments were received. The
Department is now promulgating a final
rule with no changes from the proposed
rule.
§ 52.1885
Regulatory Findings
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart KK—Ohio
I
Control strategy: Ozone.
*
*
*
*
*
(ff) * * *
(2) Belmont County, as submitted on
June 20, 2006, and supplemented on
August 24, 2006, and December 4, 2006.
The maintenance plan establishes 2009
MVEBs for Belmont County of 2.60 tpd
of VOC and 4.69 tpd of NOX, and 2018
MVEBs of 1.52 tpd of VOCs and 1.91
tpd of NOX.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E7–17627 Filed 9–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Administrative Procedure Act
The Department of State does not
consider this rule to be a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866, section 3(f), Regulatory
Planning and Review. In addition, the
Department is exempt from Executive
Order 12866 except to the extent that it
is promulgating regulations in
conjunction with a domestic agency that
are significant regulatory actions. The
Department has nevertheless reviewed
the regulation to ensure its consistency
with the regulatory philosophy and
E:\FR\FM\10SER1.SGM
10SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 174 (Monday, September 10, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51567-51568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17627]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0046; FRL-8464-3]
Determination of Attainment, Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; Ohio; Correction
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; correcting amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document corrects an error pertaining to the Motor
Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) for Belmont County, Ohio (Wheeling,
WV-OH). The 2009 MVEB for oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from the
proposed rule was incorrect in the final action. This final rule
corrects that error.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on September 10,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Marquardt, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-3214, marquardt.steve@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA published four notices of final
rulemaking to redesignate Washington County (Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-
OH), Jefferson County (Steubenville-Weirton, WV-OH), Belmont County
(Wheeling, WV-OH), Stark County (Canton, OH) and Allen County (Lima,
OH) areas to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. For each of
these counties EPA had proposed approval of the 2009 and 2018 MVEBs. In
each of the final rulemaking notices, EPA omitted the 2009 MVEBs from
the final rules. A correction was made to add these 2009 MVEBs. When
this correction was made there was an error in the 2009 MVEB for
NOX for Belmont County, Ohio. This error is corrected in
this action.
Correction
For Belmont County, Ohio, in the correction notice published in the
Federal Register on July 5, 2007 (72 FR 36599), on page 36599 in the
third column, second full paragraph: ``In addition, and supported by
and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is approving the
2018 VOC and NOX MVEBs for transportation conformity
purposes. The 2018 MVEBs * * *.'' is to read: ``In addition, and
supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, EPA is
approving the 2009 and 2018 VOC and NOX MVEBs for
transportation conformity purposes. For Belmont County, Ohio, the 2009
MVEBs are 2.60 tons per day of VOC and 4.69 tons per day of
NOX and the 2018 MVEBs are 1.52 tons per day of VOC and 1.91
tons per day of NOX. West Virginia develops MVEBs for its
portion of the area.''
EPA is revising 40 CFR Section 52.1885(ff)(2) to reflect this
corrected 2009 MVEB for NOX for Belmont County, Ohio.
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 error 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 (E.O.) 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
[[Page 51568]]
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 are
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 September
10, 2007. 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 part 52 for Ohio 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, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: August 24, 2007.
Richard C. Karl,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart KK--Ohio
0
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by revising paragraph (ff)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(ff) * * *
(2) Belmont County, as submitted on June 20, 2006, and supplemented
on August 24, 2006, and December 4, 2006. The maintenance plan
establishes 2009 MVEBs for Belmont County of 2.60 tpd of VOC and 4.69
tpd of NOX, and 2018 MVEBs of 1.52 tpd of VOCs and 1.91 tpd
of NOX.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-17627 Filed 9-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P