59254 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: August 29, 2011. 

W. C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart V Maryland 

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entries 

for COMAR 26.11.26.01 and 

26.11.26.03, and adding new entries for 

COMAR 26.11.26.02, 26.11.26.04, 

26.11.26.05, 26.11.26.06, 26.11.26.07, 

26.11.26.08, and 26.11.26.09 in 

numercal order. The amendments read 

as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c)* * * 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP 

Code of Maryland 

administrative regulations (COMAR) 

citation 

Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date 

Additional 

explanation/citation at 

40 CFR 52.1100 

*******

26.11.26 ............... Conformity 

26.11.26.01 .......... Purpose ............................................... 6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

New Regulation. 

26.11.26.02 .......... Definitions ........................................... 6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins.

Definitions added for transportation conformity; definitions for general conformity were approved at 

(c)(136). 

26.11.26.03 .......... Transportation Conformity .................. 6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

New Regulation. 

26.11.26.04 .......... Transportation Conformity—Consultation in General.6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

New Regulation. 

26.11.26.05 .......... Transportation Conformity—Interagency Consultation Requirements.6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

New Regulation. 

26.11.26.06 .......... Transportation Conformity—Dispute 

Resolution.

6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

New Regulation. 

26.11.26.07 .......... Transportation Conformity—Public 

Consultation Procedures.

6/30/08 9/26/11] [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

New Regulation. 

26.11.26.08 .......... Transportation Conformity—Interagency Consultation.6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

New Regulation. 

26.11.26.09 .......... General Conformity ............................. 6/30/08 9/26/11 [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

Formerly SIP regulation 

26.11.26.03. 

*******

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–24526 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0789; FRL–9471–2] 

Interim Final Determination To Stay 

and Defer Sanctions, San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim 

final determination to stay the 

imposition of offset sanctions and to 

defer the imposition of highway 

sanctions based on a proposed approval 

of revisions to the San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

published on September 14, 2011. 76 FR 

56706. The revisions concern 

SJVUAPCD Rule 4570. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on September 26, 2011. 

However, comments will be accepted 

until October 26, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0789, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 


bjneal on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59255 

body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

http://www.regulations.gov, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material, large maps), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sona Chilingaryan, EPA Region IX, 

(415) 972–3368, 

chilingaryan.sona@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. Background 

On January 14, 2010 (75 FR 2079), we 

finalized a limited approval and limited 

disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 4570 as 

adopted locally on June 18, 2009 and 

submitted by the State on June 26, 2009. 

We based our limited disapproval action 

on certain deficiencies in the submittal. 

Our disapproval action started a 

sanctions clock for imposition of 

sanctions pursuant to section 179 of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) and our regulations 

at 40 CFR 52.31. Under 40 CFR 

52.31(d)(1), offset sanctions apply 

eighteen months after the effective date 

of a disapproval and highway sanctions 

apply six months after the offset 

sanctions, unless we determine that the 

deficiencies forming the basis of the 

disapproval have been corrected. 

On October 21, 2010, SJVUAPCD 

adopted revisions to Rule 4570 that 

were intended to correct the 

deficiencies identified in our limited 

disapproval action. On April 5, 2011, 

the State submitted these revisions to 

EPA. On September 14, 2011 (76 FR 

56706) we proposed approval of the 

State’s submittal because we believe it 

corrects the deficiencies identified in 

our January 14, 2010 limited 

disapproval action. Based on our 

September 14, 2011 proposed approval, 

we are taking this final rulemaking 

action, effective on publication, to stay 

the imposition of offset sanctions and to 

defer the imposition of highway 

sanctions that were triggered by our 

January 14, 2010 limited disapproval. 

EPA is providing the public with an 

opportunity to comment on this stay/ 

deferral of sanctions. If comments are 

submitted that change our assessment 

described in this final determination 

and the proposed full approval of 

revised SJVUAPCD Rule 4570, we 

intend to take subsequent final action to 

reimpose sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 

52.31(d). If no comments are submitted 

that change our assessment, then all 

sanctions and sanction clocks will be 

permanently terminated on the effective 

date of a final rule approval. 

II. EPA Action 

We are making an interim final 

determination to stay the imposition of 

offset sanctions and to defer the 

imposition of highway sanctions 

associated with SJVUAPCD Rule 4570 

based on our September 14, 2011 

proposed approval of the State’s SIP 

revision as correcting deficiencies that 

initiated sanctions. 

Because EPA has preliminarily 

determined that the State has corrected 

the deficiencies identified in EPA’s 

limited disapproval action, relief from 

sanctions should be provided as quickly 

as possible. Therefore, EPA is invoking 

the good cause exception under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in 

not providing an opportunity for 

comment before this action takes effect 

(5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However, by this 

action EPA is providing the public with 

a chance to comment on EPA’s 

determination after the effective date, 

and EPA will consider any comments 

received in determining whether to 

reverse such action. 

EPA believes that notice-andcomment rulemaking before the 

effective date of this action is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. EPA has reviewed the State’s 

submittal and, through its proposed 

action, is indicating that it is more likely 

than not that the State has corrected the 

deficiencies that started the sanctions 

clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public 

interest to initially impose sanctions or 

to keep applied sanctions in place when 

the State has most likely done all it can 

to correct the deficiencies that triggered 

the sanctions clocks. Moreover, it would 

be impracticable to go through noticeand-comment rulemaking on a finding 

that the State has corrected the 

deficiencies prior to the rulemaking 

approving the State’s submittal. 

Therefore, EPA believes that it is 

necessary to use the interim final 

rulemaking process to stay and defer 

sanctions while EPA completes its 

rulemaking process on the approvability 

of the State’s submittal. Moreover, with 

respect to the effective date of this 

action, EPA is invoking the good cause 

exception to the 30-day notice 

requirement of the APA because the 

purpose of this notice is to relieve a 

restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action stays and defers Federal 

sanctions and imposes no additional 

requirements. 

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. 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is 

not a significant regulatory action. 

The administrator certifies that this 

action 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.). 

This rule does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). 

This rule 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 action 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 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. 

The requirements of section 12(d) of 

the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272) do not apply to this rule because 

it imposes no standards. 


bjneal on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
59256 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

This rule 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. 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 to Congress and the 

Comptroller General. However, section 

808 provides that any rule for which the 

issuing agency for good cause finds that 

notice and public procedure thereon are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest, shall take effect at 

such time as the agency promulgating 

the rule determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). 

EPA has made such a good cause 

finding, including the reasons therefor, 

and established an effective date of 

September 26, 2011. 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 rule 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 November 25, 2011. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule for the 

purpose of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental 

regulations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 16, 2011. 

Thomas J. McCullough, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24516 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Part 412 

[CMS–1349–CN] 

RIN 0938–AQ28 

Medicare Program; Inpatient 

Rehabilitation Facility Prospective 

Payment System for Federal Fiscal 

Year 2012; Changes in Size and Square 

Footage of Inpatient Rehabilitation 

Units and Inpatient Psychiatric Units; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects 

technical errors that appeared in the 

final rule published in the Federal 

Register on August 5, 2011 entitled 

‘‘Medicare Program; Inpatient 

Rehabilitation Facility Prospective 

Payment System for Federal Fiscal Year 

2012; Changes in Size and Square 

Footage of Inpatient Rehabilitation 

Units and Inpatient Psychiatric Units,’’ 

(hereinafter FY 2012 IRF PPS final rule 

(76 FR 47836)). 

DATES: Effective Date. The corrections 

are effective October 1, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susanne Seagrave, (410) 786–0044. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

There were technical errors in the 

August 5, 2011 FY 2012 IRF PPS final 

rule (76 FR 47836). These technical 

errors are identified and corrected in the 

‘‘Summary of Errors’’ and ‘‘Correction of 

Errors’’ sections below. The provisions 

in this correction document are effective 

as if they were included in the final rule 

published on August 5, 2011. 

Accordingly, the corrections are 

effective October 1, 2011. 

II. Summary of Errors 

In the August 5, 2011 final rule (76 FR 

47836), we applied our established 

formula for calculating the relative 

weight values for case-mix groups 

(CMG). The CMG relative weight values 

for CMGs 1201, 1202, 1203, 1301, 1302, 

and 1303 in Table 1 on pages 47842 

through 47844 of the final rule did not 

reflect our policy that the relative 

weight values for higher-paying tiers 

must always be greater than or equal to 

the relative weight values for lowerpaying tiers. That is, a tier 1 payment for 

a given CMG must always be at least as 

high as a tier 2 payment for that same 

CMG, the tier 2 payment must always be 

at least as high as the tier 3 payment, 

and the tier 3 payment must always be 

at least as high as the ‘‘no-comorbidity’’ 

tier payment. We have used this policy 

in calculating the CMG relative weights 

since the inception of the IRF PPS. 

However, we inadvertently did not 

apply this policy correctly for CMGs 

1201, 1202, 1203, 1301, 1302, and 1303 

in Table 1 on pages 47842 through 

47844 of the FY 2012 IRF PPS final rule. 

Further, as discussed in ‘‘Step 4’’ in 

the CMG relative weights discussion, 

column 1, on page 47841 of the FY 2012 

IRF PPS final rule, we normalized the 

FY 2012 CMG relative weights to the 

same average CMG relative weight 

values from the FY 2011 IRF PPS notice 

(75 FR 42836). As this process utilized 

the incorrect values that had been listed 

for the relative weight values for CMGs 

1201, 1202, 1203, 1301, 1302, and 1303, 

upon correction we also needed to 

reapply the normalization process to the 

other CMGs using the corrected relative 

weight values. This process corrects the 

relative weight values for all CMGs so 

that we are appropriately applying the 

policy of normalizing the FY 2012 CMG 

relative weights to the same average 

CMG relative weight values from the FY 

2011 IRF PPS notice. 

Since the FY 2012 payment rates 

listed in Table 11 on pages 47865 

through 47866 of the final rule are based 

on the CMG relative weights in Table 1 

(the payment rates are equal to the CMG 

relative weights multiplied by the FY 

2012 Standard Payment Conversion 

Factor), we are also providing 

corrections to Table 11 in the final rule 

to reflect the corrections to the CMG 

relative weights in Table 1. In addition, 

we are correcting the example of 

computing the IRF FY 2012 Federal 

prospective payment in Table 12 on 

page 47867 of the final rule to reflect the 

correction to the unadjusted Federal 

prospective payment rate for CMG 0110 

(without comorbidities) from Table 11. 

Finally, we utilized the CMG payment 

rates reflected in Table 11 of the IRF 

PPS final rule to determine the FY 2012 

outlier threshold. As described in the 

final rule, the outlier threshold is to be 

set so that the estimated total outlier 

payments in FY 2012 will equal 3 

percent of total estimated payments. 

Since corrections to the FY 2012 

payment rates result in slight 

differences in the amount of outlier 

payments we estimate for FY 2012, the 

use of the corrected data results in an 

outlier threshold for FY 2012 IRF PPS 

of $10,713. Therefore, we are correcting 

the outlier threshold amount for FY 

2012 from $10,660 to $10,713 to ensure 


bjneal on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES