Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36067

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[AL52–200014; FRL–6708–6]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans for Designated Facilities and

Pollutants: Alabama; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: The United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

published in the Federal Register on

April 10, 2000, a document approving

the section 111(d) Plan submitted by the

Alabama Department of Environmental

Management for the State of Alabama on

April 20, 1999. This plan enables the

State of Alabama to implement and

enforce the Emissions Guidelines (EG)

for existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious

Waste Incinerator (HMIWI) units. In the

April 10, 2000, rule, EPA inadvertently

referenced an incorrect citation to

Alabama’s state implementation plan in

the Code of Federal Regulations. EPA is

correcting the citation with this

document.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This correction is

effective on June 9, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kimberly Bingham at (404) 562–9038,

Bingham.Kimberly@epa.gov or Scott

Davis at (404) 562–9127,

Davis.ScottR@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document wherever

‘‘we,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used we mean EPA.

Our April 10, 2000, (65 FR 18909–

18911) rulemaking indicated that we

approved the section 111d plan for the

State of Alabama. This plan enables the

State of Alabama to implement and

enforce the Emissions Guidelines (EG)

for existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious

Waste Incinerator (HMIWI) units. In that

document we inadvertently codified the

revisions into 40 CFR 62.100. Our April

10, 2000, document indicated that we

were removing 40 CFR 62.104 and

renaming the section. In that document

we should not have removed 40 CFR

62.104, but instead added a new section

40 CFR 62.105.

Section 553 of the Administrative

Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B),

provides that, when an agency for good

cause finds that notice and public

procedure are impracticable,

unnecessary or contrary to the public

interest, the agency may issue a rule

without providing notice and an

opportunity for public comment. We

have determined that there is good

cause for making today’s rule final

without prior proposal and opportunity

for comment because we are merely

correcting an incorrect citation in a

previous action. Thus, notice and public

procedure are unnecessary. We find that

this constitutes good cause under 5

U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and

is therefore not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget.

Because the agency has made a ‘‘good

cause’’ finding that this action is not

subject to notice-and-comment

requirements under the Administrative

Procedure Act or any other statute as

indicated in the Supplementary

Information section above, it is not

subject to the regulatory flexibility

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or to sections

202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public

Law 104–4). In addition, this action

does not significantly or uniquely affect

small governments or impose a

significant intergovernmental mandate,

as described in sections 203 and 204 of

UMRA. This rule also does not

significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule 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 governments, as specified by

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999). This rule also is not

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR

19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant.

This technical correction action does

not involve technical standards; thus

the requirements of section 12(d) of the

National Technology Transfer and

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

272 note) do not apply. The rule also

does not involve special consideration

of environmental justice related issues

as required by Executive Order 12898

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In

issuing this rule, EPA has taken the

necessary steps to eliminate drafting

errors and ambiguity, minimize

potential litigation, and provide a clear

legal standard for affected conduct, as

required by section 3 of Executive Order

12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996).

EPA has complied with Executive Order

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1998) by

examining the takings implications of

the rule in accordance with the

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk

and Avoidance of Unanticipated

Takings’’ issued under the executive

order. This rule does not impose an

information collection burden under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional

Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as

added by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,

generally provides that before a rule

may take effect, the agency

promulgating the rule must submit a

rule report, which includes a copy of

the rule, to each House of the Congress

and to the Comptroller General of the

United States. Section 808 allows the

issuing agency to make a rule effective

sooner than otherwise provided by the

CRA if the agency makes a good cause

finding that notice and public procedure

is impracticable, unnecessary or

contrary to the public interest. This

determination must be supported by a

brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As

stated previously, EPA had made such

a good cause finding, including the

reasons therefore, and established an

effective date of June 9, 2000. EPA will

submit a report containing this rule and

other required information to the U.S.

Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Comptroller

General of the United States prior to

publication of the rule in the Federal

Register. This correction to the

identification of plan for Missouri is not

a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

Dated: May 19, 2000.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

For the reasons stated in the

preamble, in FR Doc. 00–8142

published at 65 FR 18909 make the

following corrections:

PART 62—[CORRECTED]

1. On page 18911, in the third

column, in amendatory instruction 3,

correct ‘‘62.104’’ to read ‘‘62.105.’’

2. On page 18911, in the third

column, under the title Air Emissions

From Hospital/Medical/Infectious

Waste Incinerators, correctly designate

§ 62.104 as § 62.105.

[FR Doc. 00–13846 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P