Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81471 

River, extending the entire width of the 

river between mile markers 0.6 and 0.8 

on the Allegheny River. These markings 

are based on the USACE’s Allegheny 

River Navigation Charts (Chart 1, 

January 2004). 

(b) Periods of Enforcement. This rule 

will only be enforced from 5:30 p.m. 

through 6:45 p.m. on December 31, 

2010. The Captain of the Port Pittsburgh 

or a designated representative will 

inform the public through broadcast 

notices to mariners of the enforcement 

period for the safety zone as well as any 

changes in the planned schedule. 

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in § 165.23 of 

this part, entry into this zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port Pittsburgh. 

(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry 

into or passage through a safety zone 

must request permission from the 

Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or a 

designated representative. They may be 

contacted on VHF–FM Channel 13 or 

16, or through Coast Guard Sector Ohio 

Valley at 1–800–253–7465. 

(3) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Captain of the Port Pittsburgh and 

designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard 

patrol personnel. On-scene U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel includes 

Commissioned, Warrant, and Petty 

Officers of the U.S. Coast Guard. 

Dated: December 6, 2010. 

R.V. Timme, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of 

the Port Pittsburgh. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32511 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0808; FRL–9243–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Minnesota; Sulfur Dioxide SIP Revision 

for Marathon Petroleum St. Paul Park 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: On October 6, 2009, 

Minnesota submitted a request for a 

sulfur dioxide State Implementation 

Plan revision for Marathon Petroleum in 

St. Paul Park. This submittal updates 

the State Implementation Plan to reflect 

the installation of new boilers and a 

sulfur recovery unit and changes to 

three existing heaters. Overall, this 

update represents a decrease in sulfur 

dioxide emissions. EPA is approving 

these revisions under the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective February 28, 2011, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by January 

27, 2011. If adverse comments are 

received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2009–0808, by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312)408–2279. 

4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2009– 

0808. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received 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 information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. 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. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Mary 

Portanova, Environmental Engineer, at 

(312) 353–5954 before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Portanova, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–5954, 

portanova.mary@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Background 

II. What has changed in the SIP? 

III. Air Quality Analysis 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On October 6, 2009, Minnesota 

submitted a site-specific sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision request for Marathon Petroleum 

Co, LLC, (Marathon) in the Saint Paul 

Park area of Minneapolis-St.Paul, 

Minnesota. This area had been 

designated as nonattainment of the SO2

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) in 1979, but was redesignated 

to attainment for SO2 on May 13, 1997 

(62 FR 26230), after meeting the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81472 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

measuring eight quarters of monitored 

air quality data below the SO2 NAAQS. 

The October 6, 2009 submittal serves to 

update the SO2 maintenance plan for St. 

Paul Park. 

Minnesota places its SIP conditions in 

joint Title I/Title V documents, in the 

form of State Air Emission Permits. The 

SIP conditions are listed in the State’s 

documents as Title I conditions, which 

refers to Title I of the Clean Air Act. The 

documents also contain Title V permit 

conditions for the affected facilities. The 

most recently approved Title I SIP 

conditions for this Marathon facility 

(previously known as Marathon 

Ashland Petroleum LLC) were those 

which were placed in Minnesota’s Air 

Emission Permit No. 16300003–003. 

These SIP conditions were Federally 

approved into Minnesota’s SO2 SIP on 

May 20, 2002 (67 FR 35437). 

The October 6, 2009, SO2 SIP revision 

request accounts for several changes 

since 2002 at the Marathon Petroleum 

refinery, including the installation of a 

new sulfur recovery unit, physical 

changes to three existing heaters, and 

the installation of two new boilers. 

These changes were set forth in Air 

Emission Permits 16300003–006 and 

16300003–016. The State requested that 

EPA approve into the SIP only the 

permit conditions labeled ‘‘Title I 

Condition: State Implementation Plan 

for SO2 NAAQS,’’ and remove all nonSIP-related ‘‘Title I Conditions’’ from the 

SIP. 

II. What has changed in the SIP? 

Marathon has planned or 

implemented several changes to SO2- 

emitting units at the St. Paul Park 

facility since 2002. The company has 

installed a new sulfur recovery unit at 

the facility, made changes to three of its 

heaters, and installed two new boilers. 

SIP conditions have been altered to 

represent these new or modified units. 

Minnesota’s permit action 16300003– 

006, issued November 5, 2002, 

authorized Marathon to install a new 

sulfur recovery unit (SRU) and a Shell 

Claus off-gas treating (SCOT) tail gas 

unit. Allowable SO2 emissions from the 

new Number 3 SRU are restricted to 15 

lb/hr (on a 3-hour average) and 39 tons 

per year (tpy). A continuous emissions 

monitor (CEM) will be used to measure 

SO2 emissions from the units. 

Under the same permit action, 

Marathon made physical changes to two 

heaters. Changes to the Hot Oil Heater 

(EU016, 5–34–B–2) only affected its 

stack dispersion characteristics, but did 

not change its SO2 emission limit. 

Changes to the Number 2 Crude Charge 

Heater (EU006, 5–2–B–3) included the 

replacement of its burners with lownitrogen oxides burners and the 

replacement of its convection sections 

and stack. These changes removed the 

heater’s ability to burn refinery fuel oil. 

Permit action 16300003–006 primarily 

discussed reductions in the emissions of 

nitrogen oxides from this heater and did 

not address the effect on SO2 of 

removing refinery fuel oil. The revised 

permit allows only natural gas and 

refinery fuel gas for this heater, but the 

SO2 limits for the Number 2 Crude 

Charge Heater remain unchanged at 34 

lb/hr and 0.2834 lb/MMBTU. 

In 2007, Marathon replaced the 

burner in the Heavy Distillate 

Hydrotreater Charge Heater (EU017). 

With the new burner, this heater can no 

longer combust refinery fuel oil. In 

permit action 16300003–016, issued on 

September 11, 2009, EU017 was 

restricted to natural gas and refinery 

fuel gas only, and its SO2 SIP emission 

limit was reduced accordingly, from 

66.6 lb/hr to 2.97 lb/hr. This represents 

a 279 tpy reduction in allowable SO2

emissions. In addition, some former SIP 

testing and recordkeeping requirements 

relating to the use of refinery fuel oil 

have been removed for this heater. 

Permit action 16300003–016 also 

allows two new boilers to be installed 

at the Marathon facility. The new 

boilers, Boiler 92 (EU092) and Boiler 93 

(EU093), are limited to 0.025 lb/MMBtu 

of SO2, and are only permitted to use 

natural gas or refinery fuel gas. The new 

boilers’ 7.2 lb/hr (31.5 tpy) emissions 

increase will be offset by the shutdown 

of three other boilers at the facility: 

Boiler 5 (EU001), Boiler 4 (EU020) and 

Boiler 6 (EU021). The permit provides 

that Boilers 4, 5, and 6 must be shut 

down 180 days after the new boilers 

begin operating or 60 days after both 

new boilers achieve maximum operating 

rate, whichever comes first. Boilers 92 

and 93 are not allowed to begin 

operating until EPA has approved their 

SIP limits. Boilers 4 and 6 are allowed 

to use either natural gas, refinery fuel 

gas, or refinery fuel oil. Boiler 5 can 

only use natural gas or refinery fuel gas. 

Their shutdown will bring a 323 tpy 

reduction in allowable SO2 emissions. 

III. Air Quality Analysis 

The SO2 source configuration and 

emission limit changes in permits 

16300003–006 and 16300003–016 were 

evaluated using air dispersion 

modeling. Modeling analyses were 

performed when the Number 3 SRU and 

Boiler 92 and 93 installations were 

originally permitted (2002 and 2009). 

These analyses were submitted as part 

of the October 6, 2009 SIP revision 

request. Because EPA’s air quality 

modeling recommendations have 

changed since 2002, the analyses were 

not both performed using the same 

dispersion model. 

Modeling for the Number 3 SRU 

installation and the physical changes to 

heaters EU006 and EU016 was 

performed in 2002, using the ISCST3 

model, which was the EPArecommended model at the time. The 

predicted SO2 concentrations for the 

Marathon facility and neighboring SO2

sources, including a background 

concentration, were below the SO2

NAAQS. 

Modeling for the Boiler 92 and 93 

installation and the emission limit 

reductions for heater EU017 was 

performed in 2009, using the EPA 

recommended dispersion model, 

AERMOD, version 07026. This 

modeling included all sources at the 

Marathon facility, and served to replace 

the 2002 modeling analysis. Both the 

new boilers (EU092 and EU093) and the 

existing boilers (EU001, EU020, and 

EU021) were included in the modeling, 

although Marathon’s permit requires the 

three existing boilers to be shut down 

180 days after the two new boilers begin 

operating. SO2 emissions from 

neighboring facilities were also 

included in the modeling. The 2009 

AERMOD dispersion modeling used five 

years of meteorological data from 1986– 

1990. Surface meteorological data was 

measured at Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN, 

and upper air data was measured at St. 

Cloud, MN. The modeling used a 

receptor grid with 100 meter resolution. 

The resulting modeled SO2

concentrations, including a 

representative background SO2

concentration, were below the SO2

NAAQS. 

On June 22, 2010, EPA published 

final revisions to the SO2 NAAQS, 

which added a one-hour standard (75 

FR 35520). The SIP actions for the 

Marathon facility and the accompanying 

air quality analyses were finalized and 

the SIP revision request was submitted 

to EPA before EPA had proposed the 

new SO2 NAAQS (December 8, 2009; 74 

FR 64810). Given the timing of this SIP 

revision request, and the fact that it 

represents an overall decrease in SO2

emissions, EPA finds that the October 6, 

2009 submittal is complete and will not 

adversely affect Minnesota’s ability to 

attain and maintain the one-hour SO2

standard. 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving Minnesota’s 

October 6, 2009 site-specific SO2 SIP 

revision request for Marathon Petroleum 

Co, LLC, in the Saint Paul Park area of 

Minneapolis-St.Paul, Minnesota. We are 

publishing this action without prior 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81473 

proposal because we view this as a 

noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

State plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective February 28, 2011 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by January 

27, 2011. If we receive such comments, 

we will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. The EPA 

will not institute a second comment 

period. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. If we do not receive any 

comments, this action will be effective 

February 28, 2011. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act and 

applicable Federal regulations. 42 

U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, 

in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this 

action merely approves State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• 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); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action 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 Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by February 28, 

2011. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

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, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: December 15, 2010. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ 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 Y—Minnesota 

■ 2. In § 52.1220 the table in paragraph 

(d) is amended by updating the entry for 

‘‘Marathon Ashland Petroleum, LLC’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.1220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MINNESOTA SOURCE-SPECIFIC PERMITS

Name of source Permit No. State effective date EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Marathon Petroleum, LLC.

16300003–016 09/11/09 12/28/10, [Insert page number where 

the document begins].

Only conditions cited as ‘‘Title I condition: SIP for SO2 NAAQS.’’ 

* * * * * * * 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81474 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–32482 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[WV103–6041; FRL–9240–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Update to Materials 

Incorporated by Reference 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; administrative 

change. 

SUMMARY: EPA is updating the materials 

submitted by West Virginia that are 

incorporated by reference (IBR) into the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). The 

regulations affected by this update have 

been previously submitted by the West 

Virginia Department of Environmental 

Protection and approved by EPA. This 

update affects the SIP materials that are 

available for public inspection at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA), the Air and 

Radiation Docket and Information 

Center located at EPA Headquarters in 

Washington, DC and the Regional 

Office. 

DATES: Effective Date: This action is 

effective December 28, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: SIP materials which are 

incorporated by reference into 40 CFR 

part 52 are available for inspection at 

the following locations: Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the 

Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center, EPA Headquarters 

Library, Room Number 3334, EPA West 

Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, and 

NARA. If you wish to obtain materials 

from a docket in the EPA Headquarters 

Library, please call the Office of Air and 

Radiation (OAR) Docket/Telephone 

number: (202) 566–1742; or NARA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Harold A. Frankford, (215) 814–2108 or 

by e-mail at frankford.harold@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The SIP is a living document which 

the State revises as necessary to address 

its unique air pollution problems. 

Therefore, EPA from time to time must 

take action on SIP revisions containing 

new and/or revised regulations to make 

them part of the SIP. On May 22, 1997 

(62 FR 27968), EPA revised the 

procedures for incorporating by 

reference Federally-approved SIPs as a 

result of consultations between EPA and 

the Office of the Federal Register (OFR). 

The description of the revised SIP 

document, IBR procedures and 

‘‘Identification of plan’’ format are 

discussed in further detail in the May 

22, 1997 Federal Register document. On 

February 10, 2005 (70 FR 7024), EPA 

published a Federal Register beginning 

the new IBR procedure for West 

Virginia. On February 28, 2007 (72 FR 

8903) and February 10, 2009 (74 FR 

6542), EPA published updates to the 

IBR material in West Virginia. 

Since the publication of the last IBR 

update, EPA has approved the following 

regulatory changes to the IBR materials 

in paragraph 52.2520(c): 

1. Addition of Regulation 45 CSR 39. 

2. Revisions to the following 

regulations: 45 CSR 6, 45 CSR 8, 45 CSR 

40, and 45 CSR 41. 

3. Removal of the following 

regulations: 45 CSR 1, 45 CSR 9, 45 CSR 

12, and 45 CSR 26. 

II. EPA Action 

In this document, EPA is doing the 

following: 

1. Announcing the update to the IBR 

material as of November 1, 2010. 

2. Making corrections to the following 

entries listed in the paragraph 

52.2520(c) chart, as described below: 

a. 45 CSR 6—removing text from the 

‘‘Additional explanation/citation at 40 

CFR § 52.2565’’ column. 

b. 45 CSR 7—revising the dates in the 

State effective date column so that the 

date format is consistent with that found 

throughout the paragraph. 

c. 45 CSR 21—reinstating section 45 

CSR 45–21–36, which had been 

inadvertently removed from this 

paragraph. On February 1, 1995, (60 FR 

6022), EPA approved 45 CSR 21, 

Section 36 as part of the West Virginia 

SIP. 

d. 45 CSR 39—Correcting the 

regulation title of section 45–39–15 in 

the ‘‘Title/subject’’ column. 

e. 45 CSR 41—correcting the 

regulation title to read ‘‘Control of 

Annual Sulfur Dioxides Emissions.’’ 

3. In paragraph 52.2420(e), correcting 

the date format in the ‘‘EPA approval 

date column’’ for the entry entitled 

‘‘State of West Virginia Transportation 

Conformity Requirements.’’ 

EPA has determined that today’s rule 

falls under the ‘‘good cause’’ exemption 

in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

which, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’ 

authorizes agencies to dispense with 

public participation, and section 

553(d)(3) which allows an agency to 

make a rule effective immediately 

(thereby avoiding the 30-day delayed 

effective date otherwise provided for in 

the APA). Today’s rule simply codifies 

provisions which are already in effect as 

a matter of law in Federal and approved 

State programs. Under section 553 of the 

APA, an agency may find good cause 

where procedures are ‘‘impractical, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest.’’ Public comment is 

‘‘unnecessary’’ and ‘‘contrary to the 

public interest’’ since the codification 

only reflects existing law. Immediate 

notice in the CFR benefits the public by 

removing outdated citations and 

correcting non-substantive errors in the 

table entries. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• 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); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES