Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida; Section 128 and 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and (G) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Correction, 70687-70689 [2012-28589]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 632–4603.
(This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April
18, 2012, VA published in the Federal
Register, 77 FR 23128, a direct final rule
to amend, in 38 CFR part 3, § 3.103(a)
and (c)(1), and, in 38 CFR part 20,
§ 20.706 and Appendix A to repeal
amendments made by RIN 2900–AO06,
‘‘Rules Governing Hearings Before the
Agency of Original Jurisdiction and the
Board of Veterans’ Appeals;
Clarification,’’ a final rule that had been
published in the Federal Register on
August 23, 2011. As discussed in the
preamble to the direct final rule, RIN
2900–AO06 altered language upon
which the United States Court of
Appeals for Veterans Claims (Veterans
Court) relied in Bryant v. Shinseki, 23
Vet. App. 488 (2010), which applied the
provisions of § 3.103(c)(2) to a Board
hearing. The Bryant Court held that the
provisions of § 3.103(c)(2) require a
‘‘Board hearing officer’’ to ‘‘fully explain
the issues still outstanding that are
relevant and material to substantiating
the claim’’ and to ‘‘suggest that a
claimant submit evidence on an issue
material to substantiating the claim
when the record is missing any
evidence on that issue or when the
testimony at the hearing raises an issue
for which there is no evidence in the
record.’’ Id. at 496–97.
VA determined that RIN 2900–AO06
should have followed the notice-andcomment procedure of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)
and (c) of the Administrative Procedure
Act and published the direct final rule
to return the regulations to the language
in effect before August 23, 2011. The
direct final rule provided a 30-day
comment period that ended on May 18,
2012. No significant adverse comment
was received. VA received only one
comment on May 17, 2012, from the
National Organization of Veterans’
Advocates, Inc. (NOVA). In pertinent
part, NOVA stated, ‘‘[T]he full,
retroactive repeal of the invalid
[amendments made by RIN 2900–AO06]
should move forward regardless of
whether the ‘VA receives a significant
adverse comment by May 18, 2012.’
* * * VA has a responsibility to repeal
the rule as quickly as possible. Doing so
will help ensure that any veterans
harmed by the invalid rule will be able
to obtain appropriate relief.’’
Accordingly, under the direct final rule
procedures that were described in RIN
2900–AO43, the direct final rule became
effective on June 18, 2012, because no
significant adverse comment was
received within the comment period.
We take this opportunity to address
three points made by NOVA in its
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:41 Nov 26, 2012
Jkt 229001
comment. NOVA criticized the direct
final rule procedure because it was
‘‘conditional rather than mandatory.’’
As we anticipated when we published
the direct final rule, no significant
adverse comment was received by VA,
and the direct final rule became
effective on June 18, 2012. Accordingly,
NOVA’s concern about the action being
conditional is moot.
NOVA also urged that the ‘‘repeal of
[the amendments made by RIN 2900–
AO06 be] retroactive to August 23,
2011.’’ In the direct final rule, we stated
that we were ‘‘repealing’’ those
amendments but provided only an
effective date—June 18, 2012. We did
not provide an applicability date.
Accordingly, in this document we have
added, in the DATES section above, an
Applicability Date paragraph, stating,
‘‘This final rule shall apply to decisions
issued by the Board on or after August
23, 2011.’’
Finally, NOVA also encouraged VA to
‘‘clarify that any veteran who suffered
any harm as a result of the invalid rule
is now entitled to obtain relief.’’ In this
regard, appellants have a statutory right
to appeal a Board decision to the
Veterans Court within 120 days after the
date on which the appellant is notified
of the Board’s decision. See 38 U.S.C.
7266(a). Additionally, VA regulations
permit appellants whose claims have
been denied by the Board to file with
the Board at any time a motion for
reconsideration of the decision. See 38
CFR 20.1001. If the Chairman of the
Board denies a motion for
reconsideration, that denial and the
underlying Board decision may be
appealed to the Veterans Court if a
timely appeal was previously filed with
the Veterans Court with respect to that
underlying Board decision. See Mayer v.
Brown, 37 F.3d 618, 620 (Fed. Cir.
1994), overruled in part by Bailey v.
West, 160 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (en
banc). Also, the Board’s decision may be
appealed to the Veterans Court if the
appellant filed the motion for
reconsideration not later than 120 days
after being notified of the Board’s
decision and then appeals to the
Veterans Court not later than 120 days
after reconsideration is denied. Rosler v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 241, 249 (1991);
see also Linville v. West, 165 F.3d 1382,
1385–86 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Additionally,
the 120-day period to appeal a Board
decision to the Veterans Court is subject
to the doctrine of equitable tolling
within certain parameters. See Bove v.
Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 136, 140 (2011).
These procedures provide adequate
avenues of relief to any claimants who
may have been adversely affected by the
repealed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70687
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or
designee, approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs. John
R. Gingrich, Chief of Staff, Department
of Veterans Affairs, Department of
Veterans Affairs, approved this
document on November 20, 2012, for
publication.
Dated: November 20, 2012.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Regulation Policy and Management,
Office of the General Counsel, Department
of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2012–28621 Filed 11–26–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0809; FRL–9754–5]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Florida; Section
128 and 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and (G)
Infrastructure Requirements for the
1997 8-hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards; Correction
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule, correction.
AGENCY:
EPA published in the Federal
Register of July 30, 2012, a final rule
approving portions of the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Florida,
through the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) on
May 24, 2012, as demonstrating that the
State met the SIP requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) for the
1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). In that final
rule, EPA approved Florida’s
infrastructure submission, provided to
EPA on May 24, 2012, which included
state statues to be incorporated into the
SIP to address infrastructure
requirements regarding state boards and
emergency powers. While EPA
discussed in the final rulemaking that it
was taking action to approve certain
state statues into the Florida SIP to
address the state board requirements
and emergency powers, EPA
inadvertently did not list these state
statues in the regulatory text of the July
30, 2012, final rule. Accordingly, this
rulemaking corrects that inadvertent
regulatory text omission.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27NOR1.SGM
27NOR1
70688
DATES:
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Effective November 27, 2012.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nacosta C. Ward, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9140.
Ms. Ward can be reached via electronic
mail at ward.nacosta@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
action corrects an inadvertent omission
in the regulatory language in a July 30,
2012, final rulemaking where EPA
approved certain state statues into the
Florida SIP to address section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) regarding state boards
and 110(a)(2)(G) regarding emergency
powers for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 77 FR 29581. In the July
30, 2012, final rule, EPA inadvertently
did not list these state statues in the
regulatory text. Accordingly, this
rulemaking corrects that inadvertent
regulatory text omission.
EPA has determined that today’s
action falls under the ‘‘good cause’’
exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
which, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’
authorizes agencies to dispense with
public participation where public notice
and comment procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest. Public notice and
comment for this action is unnecessary
because today’s action to correct an
inadvertent regulatory text omission
included with EPA’s July 30, 2012, final
rule is consistent with the substantive
revisions to the Florida SIP described in
the May 18, 2012, proposed rule for the
July 30, 2012, final rule. See 77 FR
29581. As such, public notice and
comment has been provided for these
revisions and additional notice and
comment procedures are unnecessary.
In addition, EPA can identify no
particular reason why the public would
be interested in being notified of the
correction, or in having the opportunity
to comment on the correction prior to
this action being finalized, since this
correction action does not change the
meaning of EPA’s analysis or action to
approve certain state statues as
addressing the state board and
emergency episode requirements for
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS into the
Florida SIP. EPA also finds that there is
good cause under APA section 553(d)(3)
for this correction to become effective
on the date of publication of this action.
Section 553(d)(3) of the APA allows an
effective date less than 30 days after
publication ‘‘as otherwise provided by
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:41 Nov 26, 2012
Jkt 229001
the agency for good cause found and
published with the rule.’’ 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). The purpose of the 30-day
waiting period prescribed in APA
section 553(d)(3) is to give affected
parties a reasonable time to adjust their
behavior and prepare before the final
rule takes effect. Today’s rule, however,
does not create any new regulatory
requirements such that affected parties
would need time to prepare before the
rule takes effect. Rather, today’s action
merely corrects an inadvertent omission
for the regulatory text of a prior
rulemaking by listing these state statues
in the regulatory text for the Florida SIP.
For these reasons, EPA finds good cause
under APA section 553(d)(3) for this
correction to become effective on the
date of publication of this action.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is 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). This action merely corrects an
inadvertent omission for the regulatory
text of EPA’s July 30, 2012, final rule to
approve certain state statues as
addressing the state board and
emergency episode requirements for
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS into the
Florida SIP, and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
rule merely corrects an inadvertent
omission for the regulatory text of EPA’s
July 30, 2012, final rule to approve
certain state statues as addressing the
state board and emergency episode
requirements for 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS into the Florida SIP, and does
not impose any additional enforceable
duty beyond that required by state law,
it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
rule also does not have Federalism
implications because it does 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 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This rule merely
corrects an inadvertent omission for the
regulatory text of EPA’s July 30, 2012,
final rule to approve certain state statues
as addressing the state board and
emergency episode requirements for
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS into the
Florida SIP, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
CAA. This rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant. In addition,
this rule 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. This rule also does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. section 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. 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. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by January 28, 2013.
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
E:\FR\FM\27NOR1.SGM
27NOR1
70689
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See CAA
section 307(b)(2).
PART 52—[APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS]
Dated: November 14, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
■
Subpart K—Florida
2. Section 52.520(c), is amended by
adding in numerical order a new entry
for ‘‘State Statutes,’’ at the end of the
table to read as follows:
■
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
§ 52.520
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
*
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED FLORIDA REGULATIONS
State citation
(Section)
Title/subject
*
*
*
State effective
date
*
State Statutes
EPA approval date
*
*
112.3143(4) .............................
Voting Conflict ........................
4/19/2012
7/30/2012 77 FR 44485 .........
112.3144 .................................
Full and Public Disclosure of
Financial Interests.
4/19/2012
7/30/2012 77 FR 44485 .........
403.131 ...................................
Injunctive relief, remedies ......
4/19/2012
7/30/2012 77 FR 44485 .........
120.569 ...................................
Decisions which affect substantial interests.
4/19/2012
7/30/2012 77 FR 44485 .........
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–28589 Filed 11–26–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2009–0786; FRL–9752–5]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Tennessee;
Regional Haze State Implementation
Plan; Best Available Retrofit
Technology Requirements for Eastman
Chemical Company
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is finalizing approval of
the Best Available Retrofit Technology
(BART) requirements for the Eastman
Chemical Company (Eastman) that were
provided in a revision to the Tennessee
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submitted by the State of Tennessee,
through the Tennessee Department
Environment and Conservation (TDEC),
on April 4, 2008, as later modified and
supplemented on May 14, 2012, and
May 25, 2012. EPA previously proposed
action on the BART requirements for
Eastman in association with action on
Tennessee’s April 4, 2008, regional haze
SIP revision. On April 24, 2012, EPA
took final action on all aspects of the
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:41 Nov 26, 2012
Jkt 229001
April 4, 2008, SIP revision to address
regional haze in the State’s and other
states’ Class I areas except for the BART
requirements for Eastman. The May 14,
2012, SIP revision (as clarified in a May
25, 2012, SIP revision) changed the
compliance date for the Eastman BART
determination included in Tennessee’s
April 4, 2008, SIP revision and provided
a BART alternative determination
option for Eastman. EPA is finalizing
approval of the BART requirements for
Eastman, as provided in Tennessee’s
April 4, 2008, May 14, 2012, and May
25, 2012, SIP revisions because these
SIP revisions are consistent with the
regional haze provisions of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s regulations.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be
effective December 27, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2009–0786. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., 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 form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Regulatory Development Section,
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Explanation
*
To satisfy the requirements
sections 128 and
110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
To satisfy the requirements
sections 128 and
110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
To satisfy the requirements
section 110(a)(2)(G).
To satisfy the requirements
section 110(a)(2)(G).
of
of
of
of
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
for further information. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 a.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michele Notarianni, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Michele
Notarianni can be reached at telephone
number (404) 562–9031 and by
electronic mail at
notarianni.michele@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is the background for this final
action?
II. What is the update to the response to
comments received on EPA’s June 9,
2011, proposal related to Eastman?
III. What is the response to comments
received on EPA’s August 27, 2012,
proposal related to Eastman?
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
E:\FR\FM\27NOR1.SGM
27NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 27, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70687-70689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28589]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0809; FRL-9754-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida;
Section 128 and 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and (G) Infrastructure Requirements
for the 1997 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards;
Correction
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule, correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA published in the Federal Register of July 30, 2012, a
final rule approving portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Florida, through the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) on May 24, 2012, as
demonstrating that the State met the SIP requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act) for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). In that final rule, EPA approved Florida's
infrastructure submission, provided to EPA on May 24, 2012, which
included state statues to be incorporated into the SIP to address
infrastructure requirements regarding state boards and emergency
powers. While EPA discussed in the final rulemaking that it was taking
action to approve certain state statues into the Florida SIP to address
the state board requirements and emergency powers, EPA inadvertently
did not list these state statues in the regulatory text of the July 30,
2012, final rule. Accordingly, this rulemaking corrects that
inadvertent regulatory text omission.
[[Page 70688]]
DATES: Effective November 27, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nacosta C. Ward, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number
is (404) 562-9140. Ms. Ward can be reached via electronic mail at
ward.nacosta@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This action corrects an inadvertent omission
in the regulatory language in a July 30, 2012, final rulemaking where
EPA approved certain state statues into the Florida SIP to address
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) regarding state boards and 110(a)(2)(G)
regarding emergency powers for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR
29581. In the July 30, 2012, final rule, EPA inadvertently did not list
these state statues in the regulatory text. Accordingly, this
rulemaking corrects that inadvertent regulatory text omission.
EPA has determined that today's action falls under the ``good
cause'' exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) which, upon finding ``good cause,'' authorizes
agencies to dispense with public participation where public notice and
comment procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest. Public notice and comment for this action is
unnecessary because today's action to correct an inadvertent regulatory
text omission included with EPA's July 30, 2012, final rule is
consistent with the substantive revisions to the Florida SIP described
in the May 18, 2012, proposed rule for the July 30, 2012, final rule.
See 77 FR 29581. As such, public notice and comment has been provided
for these revisions and additional notice and comment procedures are
unnecessary. In addition, EPA can identify no particular reason why the
public would be interested in being notified of the correction, or in
having the opportunity to comment on the correction prior to this
action being finalized, since this correction action does not change
the meaning of EPA's analysis or action to approve certain state
statues as addressing the state board and emergency episode
requirements for 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS into the Florida SIP. EPA also
finds that there is good cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for this
correction to become effective on the date of publication of this
action. Section 553(d)(3) of the APA allows an effective date less than
30 days after publication ``as otherwise provided by the agency for
good cause found and published with the rule.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). The
purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in APA section
553(d)(3) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their
behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Today's rule,
however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that
affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes
effect. Rather, today's action merely corrects an inadvertent omission
for the regulatory text of a prior rulemaking by listing these state
statues in the regulatory text for the Florida SIP. For these reasons,
EPA finds good cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for this correction to
become effective on the date of publication of this action.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is 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). This action
merely corrects an inadvertent omission for the regulatory text of
EPA's July 30, 2012, final rule to approve certain state statues as
addressing the state board and emergency episode requirements for 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS into the Florida SIP, and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
merely corrects an inadvertent omission for the regulatory text of
EPA's July 30, 2012, final rule to approve certain state statues as
addressing the state board and emergency episode requirements for 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS into the Florida SIP, and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
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). This rule also does not have Federalism
implications because it does 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 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This rule merely corrects an inadvertent
omission for the regulatory text of EPA's July 30, 2012, final rule to
approve certain state statues as addressing the state board and
emergency episode requirements for 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS into the
Florida SIP, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it is not economically significant. In addition, this
rule 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. This rule also does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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. 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. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by January 28, 2013.
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
[[Page 70689]]
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. See CAA section 307(b)(2).
Dated: November 14, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart K--Florida
0
2. Section 52.520(c), is amended by adding in numerical order a new
entry for ``State Statutes,'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Florida Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
State citation (Section) Title/subject effective date EPA approval date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
State Statutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
112.3143(4)...................... Voting Conflict.... 4/19/2012 7/30/2012 77 FR To satisfy the
44485. requirements of
sections 128 and
110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
112.3144......................... Full and Public 4/19/2012 7/30/2012 77 FR To satisfy the
Disclosure of 44485. requirements of
Financial sections 128 and
Interests. 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
403.131.......................... Injunctive relief, 4/19/2012 7/30/2012 77 FR To satisfy the
remedies. 44485. requirements of
section
110(a)(2)(G).
120.569.......................... Decisions which 4/19/2012 7/30/2012 77 FR To satisfy the
affect substantial 44485. requirements of
interests. section
110(a)(2)(G).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-28589 Filed 11-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
