Extension of Deadline for Action on Section 126 Petition From Delaware, 7820-7823 [E9-3660]
Download as PDF
7820
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it 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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 0023.1 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded under the Instruction
that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical
exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is
categorically excluded, under figure 2–
1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction,
from further environmental
documentation as the rule extends a
temporary safety zone. Under figure 2–
1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction,
an environmental analysis checklist and
a categorical exclusion determination
are required for this rule because it
concerns a safety zone for an emergency
situation of longer than 1 week in
duration. A final ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ and a final
‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’
will be available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
■ For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add temporary § 165.T01–1272 to
read as follows:
■
§ 165.T01–1272 Safety Zone: Underwater
Object, Massachusetts Bay, MA.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All navigable waters, from
surface to bottom, of Massachusetts Bay
within a 500 yard radius of underwater
object, in approximate position
42°24′27″ N, 70°24′14″ W.
(b) Definitions. The following
definition applies to this section:
Designated representative means any
commissioned, warrant, and petty
officers of the Coast Guard on board
Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary,
and local, state, and federal law
enforcement vessels who have been
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
authorized to act on the behalf of the
Captain of the Port Boston.
(c) Regulations. (1) The general
regulations contained in 33 CFR
§ 165.23 apply.
(2) In accordance with the general
regulations in § 165.23 of this part, all
vessels and persons are prohibited from
entering the safety zone without
permission from the Captain of the Port
Boston. In addition all vessels and
persons are prohibited from anchoring,
diving, dredging, dumping, fishing,
trawling, laying cable, or conducting
salvage operations in this zone except as
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain
of the Port Boston.
(3) All persons and vessels shall
comply with the Coast Guard Captain of
the Port Boston or designated
representative.
(4) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast
Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing
light or other means, the operator of the
vessel shall proceed as directed.
(5) Persons desiring to enter the safety
zone may request permission from the
Captain of the Port Boston via VHF
Channel 16 or via telephone at (617)
223–3201.
(d) Enforcement period. This rule will
be enforced from 12:00 a.m. January 15,
2009, until 11:59 p.m. March 14, 2009.
Dated: January 14, 2009.
G.P. Kulisch,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Boston.
[FR Doc. E9–3670 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0017; FRL–8774–6]
Extension of Deadline for Action on
Section 126 Petition From Delaware
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The EPA is extending by 6
months the deadline for EPA to take
action on a petition submitted by the
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control
(DNREC). The petition requests that
EPA make a finding under section
126(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) that
electric generating units (EGUs) in nine
upwind states are emitting air pollutants
in violation of the provisions of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA. Under the
CAA, EPA is authorized to grant a time
extension for responding to the petition
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
if EPA determines that the extension is
necessary, among other things, to meet
the purposes of the CAA’s rulemaking
requirements. By this action, EPA is
making that determination.
DATES: This action is effective on
February 20, 2009.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this rulemaking under Docket
ID number EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0017.
All documents in the docket are listed
in the https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., confidential business information
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the EPA Docket Center is
(202) 566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information, contact Tim Smith,
Air Quality Planning Division, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards,
mail code C539–04, Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone
number: 919–541–4718; fax number:
919–541–0824; e-mail address:
smith.tim@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This is a procedural action to extend
the deadline for EPA to respond to a
petition from Delaware filed under CAA
section 126. EPA received the section
126 petition on December 18, 2008. The
petition requests that EPA make a
finding that EGUs in Maryland,
Michigan, New Jersey, New York, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia,
and West Virginia are emitting air
pollutants in violation of the provision
of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA.
That section provides that each state’s
State Implementation Plan (SIP) shall
contain adequate provisions prohibiting
emissions of any air pollutant in
amounts which will contribute
significantly to nonattainment in, or
interfere with maintenance by, any
other state with respect to any national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
The petition asserts that EGUs in the
nine named states have a significant
impact on Delaware’s air quality and
that this impact would be mitigated by
further regulation of nitrogen oxide and
sulfur dioxide emissions from those
sources.
Section 126(b) authorizes states or
political subdivisions to petition EPA to
find that a major source or group of
stationary sources in upwind states
emits or would emit any air pollutant in
violation of the prohibition of section
110(a)(2)(D), by contributing
significantly to nonattainment or
maintenance problems in downwind
states. If EPA makes such a finding, EPA
is authorized to establish federal
emissions limits for the sources which
so contribute.
Under section 126(b), EPA must make
the finding requested in the petition, or
must deny the petition within 60 days
of its receipt. Under section 126(c), any
existing sources for which EPA makes
the requested finding must cease
operations within three months of the
finding, except that those sources may
continue to operate if they comply with
emission limitations and compliance
schedules that EPA may provide to
bring about compliance with the
applicable requirements.
Section 126(b) further provides that
EPA must allow a public hearing for the
petition. EPA’s action under section 126
is also subject to the procedural
requirements of CAA section 307(d). See
section 307(d)(1)(N). One of these
requirements is notice-and-comment
rulemaking, under section 307(d)(3).
In addition, section 307(d)(10)
provides for a time extension, under
certain circumstances, for rulemaking
subject to section 307(d). Specifically,
section 307(d)(10) provides:
Each statutory deadline for promulgation
of rules to which this subsection applies
which requires promulgation less than six
months after date of proposal may be
extended to not more than six months after
date of proposal by the Administrator upon
a determination that such extension is
necessary to afford the public, and the
agency, adequate opportunity to carry out the
purposes of the subsection.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
Section 307(d)(10) applies to section
126 rulemakings because the 60-day
time limit under section 126(b)
necessarily limits the period after
proposal to less than six months.
II. Final Action
A. Rule
In accordance with section 307(d)(10),
EPA is determining that the 60-day
period afforded by section 126(b) for
responding to the petition from the
Delaware DNREC is not adequate to
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7821
allow the public and the Agency
adequate opportunity to carry out the
purposes of section 307(b). Specifically,
the 60-day period is insufficient for EPA
to develop an adequate proposal and
allow time for notice and comment on
whether the EGUs identified in the
section 126 petition contribute
significantly to nonattainment or
maintenance problems in Delaware.
EPA is in the process of determining
what would be an appropriate schedule
for action on the section 126 petition
from Delaware. This schedule must
afford EPA adequate time to prepare a
proposal that clearly elucidates the
issues to facilitate public comment and
must provide adequate time for the
public to comment prior to issuing the
final rule.
As a result of this extension, the
deadline for EPA to act on the petition
is August 13, 2009.
B. Notice-and-Comment Under the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA)
This document is a final agency
action, but may not be subject to the
notice-and-comment requirements of
the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b). The EPA
believes that, because of the limited
time provided to make a determination
that the deadline for action on the
section 126 petition should be extended,
Congress may not have intended such a
determination to be subject to noticeand-comment rulemaking. However, to
the extent that this determination
otherwise would require notice and
opportunity for public comment, there
is good cause within the meaning of 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) not to apply those
requirements here. Providing for noticeand-comment would be impracticable
because of the limited time provided for
making this determination, and would
be contrary to the public interest
because it would divert Agency
resources from the substantive review of
the section 126 petition.
C. Effective Date Under the APA
This action is effective on February
20, 2009. Under the APA, 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), agency rulemaking may take
effect before 30 days after the date of
publication in the Federal Register if
the agency has good cause to mandate
an earlier effective date. This action—a
deadline extension—must take effect
immediately because its purpose is to
extend by 6 months the deadline for
action on the petition. It is important for
this deadline extension action to be
effective before the original 60-day
period for action elapses. As discussed
above, EPA intends to use the 6-month
extension period to develop a proposal
on the petition and provide time for
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
7822
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
public comment before issuing the final
rule. These reasons support an
immediate effective date.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore
not subject to review under the EO.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320(b). This action
simply extends the date for EPA to take
action on a petition and does not
impose any new obligations or
enforceable duties on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
Therefore, it does not impose an
information collection burden.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final rule is not subject to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), which
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis for any
rule that will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The RFA
applies only to rules subject to noticeand-comment rulemaking requirements
under the APA or any other statute. This
rule is not subject to notice-andcomment requirements under the APA
or any other statute because, although
the rule is subject to the APA, the
Agency has invoked the ‘‘good cause’’
exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
Therefore, it is not subject to the noticeand-comment requirement.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no federal
mandates under the provisions of Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (URMA), 2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538 for state, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. This
action imposes no enforceable duty on
any state, local, or tribal governments or
the private sector. This action simply
extends the date for EPA to take action
on a petition and does not impose any
new obligations or enforceable duties on
any state, local or tribal governments or
the private sector. Therefore, this action
is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of URMA
because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
uniquely affect small governments. This
action simply extends the date for EPA
to take action on a petition and does not
impose any new obligations or
enforceable duties on any small
governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by state
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that 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.’’
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will 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. This rule simply
extends the date for EPA to take action
on a petition and does not impose any
new obligations or enforceable duties on
any state, local or tribal governments or
the private sector. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). It will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175.
This action does not significantly or
uniquely affect the communities of
indian tribal governments. As discussed
above, this action imposes no new
requirements that would impose
compliance burdens. Accordingly, the
requirements of Executive Order 13175
do not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to EO 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because
the Agency does not believe the
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
environmental health risks or safety
risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. This
action is not subject to Executive Order
13045 because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks. This rule
simply extends the deadline for EPA to
take action on a petition and does not
impose any regulatory requirements.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ as defined in Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001)), because it is not likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
Further, we have concluded that this
rule is not likely to have any adverse
effects because this action simply
extends the deadline for EPA to take
action on a petition.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
This action does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898—Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629
(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs,
policies, and activities on minorities
and low-income populations in the
United States.
The EPA has determined that this
final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority or low-income populations
because it simply extends the deadline
for EPA to take action on a petition and
does not impose any regulatory
requirements.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (CRA),
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
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. Section 808 of the
CRA provides an exception to this
requirement. For any rule for which an
agency for good cause finds that notice
and comment are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, the rule may take effect on the
date set by the Agency. The 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 action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
L. Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates
which Federal Courts of Appeal have
venue for petitions of review of final
actions by EPA. This section provides,
in part, that petitions for review must be
filed in the Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (i) when the
agency action consists of ‘‘nationally
applicable regulations promulgated, or
final actions taken, by the
Administrator,’’ or (ii) when such action
is locally or regionally applicable, if
‘‘such action is based on a
determination of nationwide scope or
effect and if in taking such action the
Administrator finds and publishes that
such action is based on such a
determination.’’
Under CAA section 307(b)(1), a
petition to review this action must be
filed in the Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit within 60
days of February 20, 2009.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Electric utilities,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
Dated: February 12, 2009.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9–3660 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
48 CFR Part 1652
RIN 3206–AL66
Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program Acquisition Regulation:
Miscellaneous Clarifications and
Corrections
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is issuing a final
rule to amend the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Acquisition Regulations
(FEHBAR). The rule clarifies the ratesetting process for community-rated
carriers with respect to Similarly Sized
Subscriber Groups (SSSG) and removes
the ban on adjustments based on rate
reconciliation for the final year of
Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program (FEHBP) contracts.
DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edward M. DeHarde, Senior Policy
Analyst at 202–606–0004, or e-mail
Edward.DeHarde@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
purpose of this regulation is to clarify
requirements with respect to the ratesetting process for community-rated
carriers and to require rate
reconciliation for the final contract term
for community-rated carriers that leave
the FEHBP.
In prior years, carriers were not
subjected to rate reconciliation in the
final year of their contracts. Information
technology and electronic transmission
and storage of data now make it possible
to efficiently perform rate reconciliation
for the final contract year. Therefore,
OPM will begin conducting such rate
reconciliation on community-rated
contracts that terminate after January 1,
2009.
A proposed rule was published to
amend 48 CFR part 1652 in the Federal
Register at 73 FR 51260, September 2,
2008. OPM requested comments by
October 2, 2008. We received one set of
comments by that date, from an FEHBP
carrier. The issues raised by the
commenter are discussed below.
The commenter did not have issue
with our change at § 1652.216–70(b)(2)
but suggested that we change
‘‘methodology’’ in the second sentence
to ‘‘established policy’’ to be consistent
with the language used earlier in the
section. We have made this clarifying
edit in the final rule.
The commenter indicated that the
rule at § 1652.216–70(b)(7) would
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7823
encourage carriers to reduce the
discounts given to OPM or eliminate
them entirely. The commentator stated
that some carriers offer discounts to
prevent against errors and changing
assumptions in the rate proposal, such
as changes in assumed Medicare
Advantage or Medicare Part D rates. To
offset these changes or errors, the carrier
can then lower the discount it originally
offered to OPM. The commenter
suggested that we strike the word
‘‘guaranteed’’ from our regulation and
indicate that discounts may be adjusted
only ‘‘if the adjustment results in no
change to the net to carrier rate agreed
to by OPM before the beginning of the
contract year.’’
The proposed rule at § 1652.216–
70(b)(7) is consistent with the
requirements of a fixed price health
benefits contract established under the
principles of community rating. That is,
a plan’s premium as agreed to at time of
proposal may change only to the extent
that it reflects a change that occurs in
the plan’s community. Discounts that
are offered to OPM and guaranteed by
the carrier cannot be adjusted after the
start of the contract period.
Finally, the commenter indicated that
the proposed regulation was too broad
at § 1652.216–70(b)(8), because OPM
sometimes purchases benefits that are
greater than those that the carrier prices
in its community using its ‘‘established
rating method.’’
Nothing in the proposed rule
precludes a carrier from rating for
FEHB-specific provisions or
requirements. The carrier must utilize a
consistent rating method for any FEHBspecific provisions and requirements,
and would need to apply this same
method to its community if such
provisions or requirements are extended
to its community.
Therefore, for the reasons explained
above and in the supplementary
information of the proposed rule, the
proposed rule amending 48 CFR part
1652 published in the Federal Register
at 73 FR 51260, September 2, 2008, is
adopted as final with a minor
clarification at § 1652.216–70(b)(2) to
change ‘‘methodology’’ to ‘‘established
policy.’’
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this regulation will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
because all the small plan FEHBP
contracts fall below the threshold for
submitting cost or pricing data.
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 33 (Friday, February 20, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7820-7823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-3660]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0017; FRL-8774-6]
Extension of Deadline for Action on Section 126 Petition From
Delaware
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is extending by 6 months the deadline for EPA to take
action on a petition submitted by the Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC). The petition requests that
EPA make a finding under section 126(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) that
electric generating units (EGUs) in nine upwind states are emitting air
pollutants in violation of the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of
the CAA. Under the CAA, EPA is authorized to grant a time extension for
responding to the petition
[[Page 7821]]
if EPA determines that the extension is necessary, among other things,
to meet the purposes of the CAA's rulemaking requirements. By this
action, EPA is making that determination.
DATES: This action is effective on February 20, 2009.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under
Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0017. All documents in the docket are
listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential
business information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available
either electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, contact Tim
Smith, Air Quality Planning Division, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, mail code C539-04, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: 919-
541-4718; fax number: 919-541-0824; e-mail address: smith.tim@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This is a procedural action to extend the deadline for EPA to
respond to a petition from Delaware filed under CAA section 126. EPA
received the section 126 petition on December 18, 2008. The petition
requests that EPA make a finding that EGUs in Maryland, Michigan, New
Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and
West Virginia are emitting air pollutants in violation of the provision
of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA. That section provides that each
state's State Implementation Plan (SIP) shall contain adequate
provisions prohibiting emissions of any air pollutant in amounts which
will contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with
maintenance by, any other state with respect to any national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS). The petition asserts that EGUs in the
nine named states have a significant impact on Delaware's air quality
and that this impact would be mitigated by further regulation of
nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions from those sources.
Section 126(b) authorizes states or political subdivisions to
petition EPA to find that a major source or group of stationary sources
in upwind states emits or would emit any air pollutant in violation of
the prohibition of section 110(a)(2)(D), by contributing significantly
to nonattainment or maintenance problems in downwind states. If EPA
makes such a finding, EPA is authorized to establish federal emissions
limits for the sources which so contribute.
Under section 126(b), EPA must make the finding requested in the
petition, or must deny the petition within 60 days of its receipt.
Under section 126(c), any existing sources for which EPA makes the
requested finding must cease operations within three months of the
finding, except that those sources may continue to operate if they
comply with emission limitations and compliance schedules that EPA may
provide to bring about compliance with the applicable requirements.
Section 126(b) further provides that EPA must allow a public
hearing for the petition. EPA's action under section 126 is also
subject to the procedural requirements of CAA section 307(d). See
section 307(d)(1)(N). One of these requirements is notice-and-comment
rulemaking, under section 307(d)(3).
In addition, section 307(d)(10) provides for a time extension,
under certain circumstances, for rulemaking subject to section 307(d).
Specifically, section 307(d)(10) provides:
Each statutory deadline for promulgation of rules to which this
subsection applies which requires promulgation less than six months
after date of proposal may be extended to not more than six months
after date of proposal by the Administrator upon a determination
that such extension is necessary to afford the public, and the
agency, adequate opportunity to carry out the purposes of the
subsection.
Section 307(d)(10) applies to section 126 rulemakings because the 60-
day time limit under section 126(b) necessarily limits the period after
proposal to less than six months.
II. Final Action
A. Rule
In accordance with section 307(d)(10), EPA is determining that the
60-day period afforded by section 126(b) for responding to the petition
from the Delaware DNREC is not adequate to allow the public and the
Agency adequate opportunity to carry out the purposes of section
307(b). Specifically, the 60-day period is insufficient for EPA to
develop an adequate proposal and allow time for notice and comment on
whether the EGUs identified in the section 126 petition contribute
significantly to nonattainment or maintenance problems in Delaware.
EPA is in the process of determining what would be an appropriate
schedule for action on the section 126 petition from Delaware. This
schedule must afford EPA adequate time to prepare a proposal that
clearly elucidates the issues to facilitate public comment and must
provide adequate time for the public to comment prior to issuing the
final rule.
As a result of this extension, the deadline for EPA to act on the
petition is August 13, 2009.
B. Notice-and-Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)
This document is a final agency action, but may not be subject to
the notice-and-comment requirements of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b). The
EPA believes that, because of the limited time provided to make a
determination that the deadline for action on the section 126 petition
should be extended, Congress may not have intended such a determination
to be subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking. However, to the extent
that this determination otherwise would require notice and opportunity
for public comment, there is good cause within the meaning of 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B) not to apply those requirements here. Providing for
notice-and-comment would be impracticable because of the limited time
provided for making this determination, and would be contrary to the
public interest because it would divert Agency resources from the
substantive review of the section 126 petition.
C. Effective Date Under the APA
This action is effective on February 20, 2009. Under the APA, 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3), agency rulemaking may take effect before 30 days
after the date of publication in the Federal Register if the agency has
good cause to mandate an earlier effective date. This action--a
deadline extension--must take effect immediately because its purpose is
to extend by 6 months the deadline for action on the petition. It is
important for this deadline extension action to be effective before the
original 60-day period for action elapses. As discussed above, EPA
intends to use the 6-month extension period to develop a proposal on
the petition and provide time for
[[Page 7822]]
public comment before issuing the final rule. These reasons support an
immediate effective date.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320(b). This action simply extends the date
for EPA to take action on a petition and does not impose any new
obligations or enforceable duties on any state, local or tribal
governments or the private sector. Therefore, it does not impose an
information collection burden.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), which generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis for any rule that will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA applies only
to rules subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements under
the APA or any other statute. This rule is not subject to notice-and-
comment requirements under the APA or any other statute because,
although the rule is subject to the APA, the Agency has invoked the
``good cause'' exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). Therefore, it is not
subject to the notice-and-comment requirement.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (URMA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for state, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector. This action simply extends
the date for EPA to take action on a petition and does not impose any
new obligations or enforceable duties on any state, local or tribal
governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of URMA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action simply
extends the date for EPA to take action on a petition and does not
impose any new obligations or enforceable duties on any small
governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by state and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
This action does not have federalism implications. It will 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. This rule simply extends the date
for EPA to take action on a petition and does not impose any new
obligations or enforceable duties on any state, local or tribal
governments or the private sector. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175.
This action does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities
of indian tribal governments. As discussed above, this action imposes
no new requirements that would impose compliance burdens. Accordingly,
the requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) because the Agency does not believe the environmental health
risks or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental
standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks. This rule simply
extends the deadline for EPA to take action on a petition and does not
impose any regulatory requirements.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Further, we have concluded that this
rule is not likely to have any adverse effects because this action
simply extends the deadline for EPA to take action on a petition.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs,
policies, and activities on minorities and low-income populations in
the United States.
The EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it simply extends
the deadline for EPA to take action on a petition and does not impose
any regulatory requirements.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 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
[[Page 7823]]
copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. Section 808 of the CRA provides an
exception to this requirement. For any rule for which an agency for
good cause finds that notice and comment are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, the rule may take
effect on the date set by the Agency. The 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 action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
L. Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This
section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (i) when the
agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations
promulgated, or final actions taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii)
when such action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action
is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in
taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such
action is based on such a determination.''
Under CAA section 307(b)(1), a petition to review this action must
be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
within 60 days of February 20, 2009.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Electric utilities, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
Dated: February 12, 2009.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-3660 Filed 2-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P