+(,121/,1(

Citation: 71 Fed. Reg. 28270 2006 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Thu Jul 31 18:28:39 2014

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance

 of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license

 agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from 

 uncorrected OCR text.
Federal Register / VoL 71, No. 94/Tuesday, May 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

(c) In general, final proposals will be

considered on the following selection

criteria:

(1) Importance of the problem. Each

proposal will be evaluated according to

the merit of how it addresses issue(s) of

national capacity. The proposal must

articulate the importance of the problem

it addresses, how the proposal addresses

issues of national capacity in

international education, and how it is

consistent with the objectives of the

NSEP.

(2) Importance of proposed foreign

language(s), foreign area(s), field(s) or

discipline(s). The proposal will be

evaluated according to how well it

articulates the need for programs in the

proposed areas, languages, fields, or

disciplines.

(3) Identification of need and gaps!

shortfalls. The proposal will be

evaluated according to its

persuasiveness in identifying where the

needs exist and where serious shortfalls

exist in the capacity to fill the need. The

proposal should clearly identify why

these gaps exist and provide a strong

indication of familiarity with the state of

the field in the proposal area. (4) Cost effectiveness. Proposals will

be evaluated on the basis of

"educational value for the dollar."

NSEP is interested in funding proposals

in areas where other funding is limited

or in areas where NSEP funding can

significantly augment or complement

other sources. NSEP is not interested inreplacing funds available from other

sources or in duplicating other efforts.

Also, NSEP is interested in projects

whose dollar levels and long-range

budget plans provide for realistic

continuation by the grantee institution

and adaptation by other institutions.

NSEP is interested in proposed

approaches to leveraging other funds

against the proposed project.

(5) Evaluation plans. Proposals will

be evaluated on their approach to

measuring impact. What impact will the

proposed program have on national

capacity? How will the proposed

program deal with assessing language

and foreign cultural competency? In the

case of study abroad programs, how will

the success and impact of study abroad

experiences be assessed. Proposals

should not defer the consideration of

these issues to a latter stage of the effort.

Evaluation and assessment should be an

integral part of the entire proposal

effort.

(6) Prospects for wider impact.

Proposals must address national needs

and will be evaluated according to how

well they are likely to address these

needs. What component of the higher

education community does the proposal

address? How diverse a student

population will the proposed program

address? What applications to other

institutions will be made available,

either directly or indirectly, because of

the proposed program?

(7) Capacity and commitment of the

applicant. The proposal will be

evaluated according to the evidence

provided on the commitment of the

institution, and other institutions, to the

proposed project. What other

institutions are involved and what is

their commitment? If there are

commitments from foreign institutions,

what is the evidence of this

commitment? Are their plans for the

institution to integrate the efforts of the

proposed program into the educational

process? What plans are there for

eventual self-support? As with many

other similar programs, NSEP is

particularly interested in the degree to

which the institution is willing to bear

a reasonable share of the direct and

indirect costs of the proposed project.

(d) Applicants should also indicate if

they currently receive or are seeking

support from other sources. Applicants

should indicate why support from NSEP

is appropriate, if other sources are also

being sought.

Dated: May 10, 2006.

L.M. Bynum,

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD.

[FR Doc. 06-4532 Filed 5-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0272; FRL-8159-7]

Revisions to the Arizona State

Implementation Plan, Arizona

Department of Environmental Quality,

Pima County Department of

Environmental Quality, and Pinal

County Air Quality Control District.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action to approve revisions to the

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality. (ADEQ), Pima County

Department of Environmental Quality

(PCDEQ), and Pinal County Air Quality

Control District (PCAQCD) portions of

the Arizona State Implementation Plan

(SIP). These revisions concern

particulate matter (PM-10) emissions

from open burning. We are approving

local rules that regulate this emission

source under the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on July 17,

2006 without further notice, unless EPA

receives adverse comments by June 15,

2006. If we receive such comments, we

will publish a timely withdrawal in the

Federal Register to notify the public

that this direct final rule will not take

effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments,

identified by docket number EPA-RO9-

OAR-2006-0272, by one of the

following methods:

* Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

* www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line

instructions.

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

" Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel

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

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, CA 94105.

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://

nw w.regulations.gov is an "anonymous

access" system, and EPA will not know

your identity or contact information

unless you provide it in the body of

your comment. If you send e-mail

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: The index to the docket for

this action is 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 in

the index, some information may be

publicly available only at the hard copy

location (e.g., copyrighted material), 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: Al

Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-

4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, "we," "us"

and "our" refer to EPA.

28270
Federal R.pister /Vol. 71, No. 94/Tuesday May 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

Table of Contents. B. Do the rule revisions meet the I. The State's Submittal

I. The State's Submittal evaluation criteria?

A. What rules did the State submit? C. EPA Recommendations To Further A, What rules did the State submit?

B. Are there other versions of these rules? Imprbve a Rule Table 1 lists the rules we are

C. What is the purpose of the submitted D. Public Comment and Final Action, approving with the dates that the

rule revisions? .III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews amended rules were adopted by the

11. EPA's Evaluation and Action local air agencies and submitted by the

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? ADEQ.

TABLE 1.-SUBMITTED RULES FOR DIRECT FINAL APPROVAL

Local agency Rule No. I Rule title = Amended Submitted

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

ADEQ ................

PCDEQ ............

PCAQCD ...........

PCAQCD ...........

R18-,-2-602 .......

R18-2-1501 .....

R18-2-1502 ..... R18-2-1503 .....

R18-2-1504 .....

R 18-2-1505 ..... R18-2-1506 .....

R18-2-1507 .....

R18-2-1508 4

R18-2-1509 .....

R18-2-1510 .....

R18-2-1511 .....

R18-2-1512 .....

R18-2-1513 .....

17.12.480 .........

3-8-700 ........... 3-8-710 ...........

Unlawful O pen Burning .................................................................

Definitions ..........................................................................

Applicability .........................................................................

Annual Registration, Program Evaluation and Planning ................................... Prescribed Burn Plan ............................... ............

Prescribed Burn Requests'and Authorization ................................................... Sm oke Dispersion and Evaluation ..........................................................

Prescribed Burn Accom plishm ent; W ildfire Reporting .................. * .................. Wildland Fire Use: Plan, Authorization, Monitoring; Inter-Agency Consultation; Status Reporting.

Emission Reduction Techniques ..................................... ......

Sm oke M anagem ent Techniques ..................................................................

M onitoring ..........................................................................

Burner Q ualifications ...................................................................

Public Notification Program;- Regional Coordination ....................... O pen Burning Perm its ..... ...............................................................

General Provisions .: ...................................................................

Perm it Provisions and Adm inistration ........................................................

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

03/16/04

10/19/04

10/27/04

10/27/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

12/30/04

On June 30, 2005, the submittal of

ADEQ Rule R18-2-602, ADEQ Rules

R18-2-1501 through R18-2-1513,

PCDEQ Rule 17.12.480, and PCAQCD

Rules 3-8-700 and 3-8-710 were

determined by operatiop of law to meet

the completeness criteria in 40 CFR pal

51 appendix V, which must be met

before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these

rules?

We approved versions of ADEQ Rule

R18-2-602 into the SIP on October 19,

1984 (49 FR 41026) and April 23, 1982

(47 FR 17485) as Rule R9-3-402. We

approved a version of combined ADEQ

Rules R18-2-1501 through R18-2-151:

into the SIP on April 23, 1982 (47 FR

17485) as Rule R9-3-403.

We approved versions of PCAQCD

Rules 3-8-700 and 3-8-710 into the SI

on April 28, 2004 (69 FR 23103).

We approved a version of PCDEQ

Rule 17.12.480 into the SIP as combine

Rules 204, section A; 204, section B; an

Table 204 on-April 16, 1982 (47 FR

16328).

C. What is the purpose of the submittec

rule revisions?

Section 110(a) of the Clean Air Act

(CAA) requires states to submit

regulations that control volatile organic

compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulal

matter, and other air p6llutants which

harm human.health and the

environment. These rules were

developed as part of the local air

district's programs to control these

pollutants.

The purposes of the revisions of

ADEQ Rule R18-2-602 relative to the

t SIP rule are as follows:

t * 602.B: The rule adds 11 definitions

for improved clarity.

* 602.D.1: The rule adds a list of

types of burning that may be permitted,

to include construction burning,

agricultural burning, residential

burning, prescribed burning, weed

abatement, prevention of fire hazard,

and air curtain destructor operation.

* 602.D.3.e: The rule adds a

requirement for an applicant to state the

3" emission reduction techniques that will

be used to minimize fire emissions.

o 602.D.3.f: The rule adds a

requirement for daily reporting on

p burns.

o 602.D.3.g: The' rule adds a

requirement for notification before

d ignition of the burn.

.d e 602.D.3.h-o: The rule adds

requirements to start burning without

black smoke, to attend the fire at all

time, to have fire extinguishing

equipment on-site, to locate a waste

burner over 50 feet from any structure,

to have a copy of the burn permit on

site, to not bum during a stagnation

advisory or a time when Class I areas

:e might be affected, to not burn during an

air pollution episode, and to allow the

Director or a public officer to extinguish

the fire during unfavorable conditions.

* 602.D.3.p: The rule adds a

provision that failure to obtain or

comply with a permit is subject to civil

or criminal penalties.

* 602.G: The rule adds the option for

the Director to delegate burn permitting

authority to a county, town, air

pollution control district, or fire district.

* 602.H: The rule adds a requirement

for the Director to hold an annual public.

meeting to discuss the open burning

program and emission reduction

techniques.

The purposes of the revisions of Rules

R18-2-1501 through R18-2-1513

relative to the SIP rule are as follows:

* 1501: The rule adds 23 definitions

for improved clarity. e 1502: The rule extends the

authority of ADEQ to regulate

prescribed burning to all areas of the

state, all federal and state land

managers, and all private or municipal

burners, except Indian Trust lands.

9 1503: The rule adds to the

information required for the annual

burn permits for planned burning. The

rule adds a requirement for annual.

evaluation meetings on past burn

projects.

e 1504: The rule adds extensive

requirements for a burn plan to be

submitted to ADEQ at least 14 days

prior to ignition of the burn.

9 1505: The rule adds extensive

requirements for a daily burn plan to be

submitted to ADEQ by at least 2 p.m. of

the previous business day. ADEQ may

28271
Federal Register/Vol. 71jNo. 94/Tuesday, "May 16, 2006/Rules' and Regulations

approve or modify the burn plan basedon a change in weather conditions and

potential impact on the public.

e 1506: The rule adds 12 additional

factors for ADEQ to evaluate daily burn

plans for smoke dispersion on which

ADEQ may approve, approve with

conditions, or disapprove the daily bum

plan.

* 1507: The rule adds a requirement

for the burner to submit a burn

accomplishment form to ADEQ by 2

p.m. the next day. Wildfires burning

more than 100 acres per day in timber

or slash or more than 300 acres per day

of brush or grass must be reported by

the entity with jurisdiction for the area

of the fire.

9 1508: The rule adds extensive

requirements for reporting to ADEQ the

beneficial use of a wildland fire incident

exceeding 40 acres.of timer or 250 acres

of brush or grass.

e 1509: The rule adds the

requirement that as many emission

reduction techniques (ERTs) as possible

be used. A list of 16 potential ERTs is

provided.

9 1510: The rule adds the

requirement that as many smoke

management techniques (SMTs) as

possible be used. A list of 11 potential

SMTs is provided. * 1511: The rule adds extensive

-requirements for monitoring air quality

before or during a prescribed burn or a

wildland fire beneficial use incident, if

necessary to assess smoke impacts.

o 1512: The rule adds a requirement

for a prescribed-fire boss to have formal

training in fire and smoke management

techniques. * 1513: The rule adds a requirement

for the ADEQ Director to conduct a

public education and awareness

program in smoke management.

The purposes of the revisions of

PCDEQ Rule 17.12.480 relative to the

SIP versions are as follows:

* 480.A: The rule adds one definition,

deletes three definitions, and changes

the rule number.

o 480.C.l.f: The rule adds an

exemption from permitting for

ceremonial destruction of flags.

* 480.C.2.a: The rule adds an

exemption from permitting for control

of an active wildfire by a ublic official.

o 480-C.4: The rule adds an

exemption from permitting for

prescribed burning by federal and state

agencies.

* 480.D.1: The rule adds the

allowance to burn with a permit for

agricultural burning and prescribed

burning in the absence of a federal or

state land manager.

o 480.F: The rule adds the allowance

to burn with a permit and an approved

waste burner household waste where no

household waste collection or disposal

service is available on either farms of at

least 40 acres or on a site where the

nearest dwelling unit is at least 500 feet

away.

* 480: The revised rule deletes an

exemption from permitting for the

training of government officials in

criminal-enforcement or nationaldefense activities and deletes an

exemption from permitting for safety

flares.

The purposes of the PCAQCD Rule 3-

8-700 revisions relative to the SIP rule

are as follows:

* 700.A.4: The rule receives

exemption provisions from section

710.E for subterranean detonation of

explosives, fireworks and pyrotechnics,

and adds an exemption provision for

ceremonial destruction of flags.

* 700.A.5: The rule adds the

provision that fires set for the disposal

of materials shall be presumed to be

larger than "de minimis."

* 700.B: The rule adds 12 definitions

for improved clarity.

* 700.C.l.c,d: The rule adds

limitations on the amount to be burned

in one month for small-scale residential

permits to less than 10 cubic yards of

uncompacted material and for largescale residential permits to less than 20

cubic yards.

a 700.C.2.b,c: The rule adds

limitations on the amount to be burned

in one month for small-scale

commercial permits to less than 10

cubic yards of uncompacted matevial

and for large-scale commercial permits

to less than 20 cubic yards.

* 700.C.2.d: The rule adds various

requirements and restrictions for

commercial land-clearing permits of

greater than 20 cubic yards. The rule

also adds requirements for the use of air

curtain destructors for land clearing.

* 700.C.7: The rule adds a restriction

of 20 cubic yards for Ia bonfire permit at

civic events.

* 700.D.2: The rule receivesprovisions for permit terms from section

710.D and adds provisions for permit

terms for training exercises, commercial

land clearing, and bonfires.

* 700.D.3: The rule adds the

requirement that permits may be

suspended due to air stagnation

advisory, air pollution emergency

episode, excessive visibility

impairment, or extreme fire danger.

* 700.D.4: The rule adds the

requirement for an applicant to state the

emission reduction techniques that will

be used to minimize fire emissions.

o 700.D.5: The rule adds permit

conditions to limit burn times, limit

wind speed, constantly attend the fire,

completely extinguish the fire, start

burning without black smoke, have fire

extinguishing equipment on-site, have a

waste burner over 50 feet from any

structure, notify the fire agency of

commencement of burning, prevent

smoke dispersion into a populated area,

prevent visibility impairment, not create

a public nuisance, not burn when Class

I areas might be affected, not cause

uncontrollable spreading of the fire, not

burn during a stagnation advisory, and.

not burn during an air pollution

episode.

* 700.E: The rule adds requirements

for daily reporting on burns.

* 700.G.1: The rule adds a "no-burn"

restriction whenever monitoring and

forecasting indicates that the carbon

monoxide ambient standard is likely to

be exceeded.

e 700.G.2: The rule adds a "no0burn"

restriction by operation of law whenever

Maricopa.Environmental Services

Department or Arizona Department of

Environmental Quality declares a "noburn" restriction in neighboring

Maricopa County.

* 700.H: The rule adds a provision

that failure to obtain or comply with a'

permit is subject to civil or criminal

penalties.

The purposes of the PCAQCD Rule 3-

8-710 relative to the SIP rule are as

follows:

* 710.C: The rule adds a prohibition

against storing materials subject to

spontaneous.combusti6n, except coal,

without adequate fire-fighting facilities.

* 710.D. The rule transfers provisions

for the term of a permit to section

700.D.2.

o 710.E. The rule transfers provisions

for exemptions to section 700.A.4.

EPA's techiical support document

(TSD) has more information about these

rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

Generally, SIP rules must be

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the

CAA) and must not relax existing

requirements (see sections 110(1) and

.193).

SIP rules in PM-10 nonattainment

areas must require for major sources

reasonably available control measures

(RACM), including reasonably available

control technology (RACT), in moderate

PM-10 nonattainment areas (see section

189(a)) or must require for major sources

best available control measures (BACM),

including best available control

technology (BACT), in serious PM-10

nonattainment areas (see section

189(b)). ADEQ regulates a moderate

PM-10 nonattainment area (see 40 CFR

m I I IIII IF I

28272
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

part.81), so ADEQ Rules R18-2-602 and

combined Rules R18-2-1501 through

R18-2-1513 must fulfill the,

requirements of RACM/RACT. PCDEQ

regulates a moderate PM-10

nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81),

so PCDEQ Rule 17.12.480 must fulfill

the requirements of RACM/RACT.

PCAQCD regulates a serious PM-10

nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81),

so combined PCAQCD Rules 3-8-700

and 3-8-710 must fulfill the

requirements of BACM/BACT.

Guidance and policy documents that

we use to help evaluate specific

enforceability and RACT requirements

consistently include the following:

* Requirements for Preparation,

Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40

CFR part 51.

e PM-i 0 Guideline Document (EPA452/R-93-008).

B. Do the Rule Revisions Meet the

Evaluation Criteria?

We believe these rules are consistent

with the relevant policy and guidance

regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations,

BACM/BACT, and RACM/RACT. The

TSD has more information on our

evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further

Improve a Rule

The TSD describes additional

revisions to PCAQCD Rule 3-8-700 that

do not affect EPA's current action but

are recommended for the next time the

local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of

the CAA, EPA is fully approving ADEQ

Rule RI 8-2-602, ADEQ Rules R18-2-

1501 through R18-2-1513, PCDEQ Rule

17.12.480, and PCAQCD Rules 3-8-700

and 3-8-710 because we believe they

fulfill all relevant requirements. We do

not think anyone will object to this

approval, so we are finalizing it without

proposing it in advance. However, in

the Proposed Rules section of this

Federal Register, we are simultaneously

proposing approval of the same

submitted rules. If we receive adverse

comments by June 15, 2006, we will

publish a timely withdrawal in. the

Federal Register to notify the public

that the direct final approval will not

take effect and we will address the

comments'in a subsequent final action

based on the proposal. If we do not

receive timely adverse comments, the

direct final approval will be effective

without further notice on July 17, 2006.

This will incorporate these rules into

the federally enforceable SIP.

Please note that if EPA receives

adverse comment on an amendment,

paragraph, or section of this rule and if

that provision may be severed from the

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt

as final those provisions of the rule that

are not the subject of an adverse

comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 199), 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 approves

state law as meeting Federal

requirements 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 sinall

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this

rule approves pre-existing requiremen{s

under state law 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

action 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 action merely

approves a state rule implementing a

Federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. 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

sinificant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's

role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the Clean Air Act- In this context, in the

absence of a prior existing requirement

for the State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authorityto disapprove a SIP submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies 'the provisions of

the Clean Air Act. 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 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. section 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 July 17, 2006.

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 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 relations,

Particulate matter, Reporting and

recordke.ping requirements.

28273
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 94 / Tuesday; May 16, 2006 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: March 22, 2006.

Wayne Nastri,

Regional Administrator, Region DC.

m Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

'of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

m 1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart D-Arizona

m 2. Section 52.120 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(131) to read as

follows:'

§52.120 Identification of plan. * * * * *

(c) * * .

(131) The following amended rules

were submitted on December 30, 2004,

by the Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference. (A)

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality.

(1) Rule R18-2-602, adopted effective

on May 14, 1979 and amended effective

on March 16, 2004.

(2) Rules R18-2-1501, R18-2-1502,

R18-2-1503, R18-2-1504, R18-2-1505,

R18-2-1506, R18-2-1507, R18-2-1508,

R18-2-1509, R18-2-1510, R18-2-1511,

R18-2-1512, and R18-2-1513, adopted

effective on October 8, 1996 and

amended effective on March 16, 2004.

(B) Pima County Department of

Environmental Quality.,

(1) Rule 17.12.480, amended on

October 19, 2004.

(C) Pinal County Air Quality Control

District.

(1) Rules 3-8-700 and 3-8-710,

adopted effective on June 29, 1993 and

amended on October 27, 2004. * * * * *

[FR Dac. 06-4516 Filed 5-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2005-0563; FRL-8171-1]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Wisconsin;

Wisconsin Construction Permit

Permanency SIP Revision; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correcting

amendment.

SUMMARY: This document corrects'an

error in the amendatory instruction in a

final rule which published on February

28, 2006, pertaining to revisions to the

Wisconsin State Implementation Plan

which make permanent all terms of

Wisconsin's permits to construct,

reconstruct, replace or modify sources

unless the terms are revised through a revision of the construction permit or

issuance of a new construction permit.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This correcting

amendment is effective on May 16,

2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christos Panos, Environmental

Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)

353-8328, or by e-mail at

panos.christos@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

.published a document on February 28,

2006, (71 FR 9934) adding § 52.2587,

when § 52.2587 was already reserved by

a previous rulemaking action. This

document corrects this error by

redesignating § 52.2587 as § 52.2589.

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 this 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).

Statutory .and Executive Order Reviews

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, 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)). Because the agency has made

a "good cause" finding that this action

is not subject to notice-and-comment

requirements under the Administrative

Procedures Act or any other statute as

indicated in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section above, it is nat

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) (Pub. L.

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 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), nor

will it have substantial direct effpcts qn

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

28274