9766 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

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

economically significant. 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 authority to

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. As required by

Section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), 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. EPA has complied

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR

8859, March 15, 1988) 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 provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

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

B. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

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 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 rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 April 13, 2001.

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

regarding recodifications to Maryland’s

opacity regulations and approval of

procedures for granting an alternative

visible emission standard 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, Particulate matter.

Dated: November 30, 2001.

Bradley M. Campbell,

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. Section 52.1070 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(152) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(152) Revisions to the Maryland

Regulations governing visible emissions

submitted on March 21, 1991 and

November 5, 1997 by the Maryland

Department of the Environment:

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letters from the Maryland

Department of the Environment dated

March 21, 1991 and November 5, 1997

submitting revisions to the Maryland

State Implementation Plan.

(B) Document entitled ‘‘Procedures To

Be Used To Evaluate An Application

For An Alternative Visible Emissions

Standard Under COMAR 26.11.06.02B’’.

(C) Code of Maryland Administrative

Regulations (COMAR) 10.18.06.02

(General Emission Standards,

Prohibitions, and Restrictions—Visible

Emissions), Sections 10.18.06.02A(1),

.02(A)(1)(a), .02(A)(2), and .02C(1) and

(2), effective December 3, 1984.

(D) Recodified COMAR 26.11.06.02

(General Emission Standards,

Prohibitions, and Restrictions—Visible

Emissions), Sections 26.11.06.02A(1)

[General paragraph], .02A(1)(a) through

(d) and (f), .02A(2), and .02C(1) through

(3), effective August 1, 1988.

(E) COMAR 26.11.06.02B (Visible

Emissions—Case-by-Case Exception to

the Visible Emissions Standards).

(1) COMAR 10.18.06.02B(1)(a)

through (d), .02B(2)(a), .02B(4)(a) and

(b), and .02B(5)(a) and (b), effective

December 3, 1984. This rule replaces

COMAR 10.18.01.08. [Recodified as

COMAR 26.11.06.02B, effective August

1, 1988.]

(2) COMAR 26.11.06.02B(2)(b)

through (e) and .02 B(4)(c), effective July

3, 1995.

(F) Recodified COMAR 26.11.06.03D

(Particulate Matter from Materials

Handling and Construction), effective

August 1, 1988.

(ii) Additional Material.

(A) Remainder of the March 21, 1991

submittal (MD91–01) as it pertains to

the recodification of COMAR

26.11.06.02 and 26.11.06.03D.

(B) Remainder of the November 5,

1997 submittal (MD97–02).

[FR Doc. 01–3378 Filed 2–9–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MD107–3062; FRL–6922–8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Maryland; New Source Review

Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of Maryland.

This SIP revision amends the

requirements for major new sources and

major modifications to existing sources

of volatile organic compounds (VOCs),

and nitrogen oxides (NOX) to meet

certain new source review (NSR)

permitting requirements if they are

proposing to locate or are located within

the State of Maryland. These NSR

requirements apply not only in those

portions of Maryland designated as

ozone nonattainment areas, but

throughout the State of Maryland as the

entire state is located within the Ozone

Transport Region (OTR). EPA is fully

approving Maryland’s NSR program in

the Maryland portion of the

Metropolitan Washington, DC Ozone

Nonattainment Area and throughout the

State of Maryland with the exception of

the Baltimore Ozone Nonattainment

Area and the Maryland portion (Cecil

County) of the PhiladelphiaVerDate 11<MAY>2000 08:32 Feb 09, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12FER1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 12FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 9767

Wilmington-Trenton Ozone

Nonattainment Area. In the Baltimore

Ozone Nonattainment Area and in Cecil

County, EPA is granting limited

approval of Maryland’s NSR regulations

because they are more stringent than the

currently approved NSR program and

serve, therefore, to strengthen the SIP.

The intended effect of this action is to

grant approval of Maryland’s NSR

regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is

effective on March 14, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the Air Protection

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the

Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460; and the

Maryland Department of the

Environment, 2500 Broening Highway,

Baltimore, Maryland, 21224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Perry R. Pandya, Mailcode 3AP11, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103, (215)

814–2167 or by e-mail at

pandya.perry@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The State of Maryland submitted a

formal SIP revision to EPA on June 8,

1993. That revision consisted of its NSR

regulations. On September 25, 2000, the

State of Maryland submitted a revised

version of its NSR regulations as a SIP

revision. On October 19, 2000 (65 FR

62675), EPA proposed limited approval

of the State of Maryland’s NSR

regulations submitted on June 8, 1993,

as amended on September 25, 2000. In

its October 19, 2000 (65 FR 62675)

notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA

also withdrew its earlier May 25, 1994

(59 FR 26994) proposal to grant limited

approval/limited disapproval to

Maryland’s NSR regulations.

The comment period for EPA’s

October 19, 2000 proposal was

originally scheduled to close on

November 9, 2000. On November 9,

2000 (65 FR 67319), EPA published a

notice announcing that the comment

period had been extended to November

20, 2000. A detailed description of

Maryland’s NSR regulations and EPA’s

rationale for approving them were

provided in EPA’s October 19, 2000

proposed rulemaking notice (65 FR

62675) and shall not be restated here.

EPA received public comments from

EarthJustice, an environmental group. A

summary of the comments and EPA’s

responses are found in Section II, below.

II. Public Comments Received and

EPA’s Responses

Comment: The commenter asserts that

EPA does not have the authority under

the Clean Air Act to grant limited

approval to Maryland’s NSR program.

The commenter contends unless EPA

finds that Maryland’s NSR program

meets all applicable requirements of the

Clean Air Act, it must disapprove it,

either partially or fully.

Response: EPA disagrees with this

comment. Although section 110(k) of

the Clean Air Act may not expressly

provide authority for limited approvals,

section 301(a) of the Act does provide

‘‘gap-filling’’ authority in conjunction

with the section 110(k)(3) approval

authority to provide for limited

approvals where EPA has determined

that a revised State provision

strengthens the federal enforceability of

a given State SIP. EPA has determined

that Maryland’s revised nonattainment

NSR rules strengthen the federal

enforceability of the current Maryland

SIP because under the revised

regulations NSR is now applicable

statewide in Maryland, rather than just

in seven counties and Baltimore City.

Under the revised regulations, NSR

provisions now apply to major sources

of NOX emissions, rather that just major

sources of VOC emissions. Under the

Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the

Act), the definition of a major source is

determined by its size, location, the

classification of that area and whether it

is located in the ozone transport region

(OTR), which is established by the Act.

The entire State of Maryland is included

in the OTR. Therefore, NSR is

applicable statewide in Maryland. The

Act defines a major source of NOX as

one that emits or has the potential to

emit 25 or more tons of NOX per year

(TPY) in any ozone nonattainment area

classified as severe (such as Cecil

County, the Maryland portion of the

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton

Ozone Nonattainment Area and the

Baltimore Ozone Nonattainment Area),

as one that emits 50 or more TPY

located in any ozone nonattainment area

classified as serious (such as the

Maryland portion of the Metropolitan

Washington, D.C. Ozone Nonattainment

Area). For any area in the OTR classified

as attainment or marginal

nonattainment (that is, the rest of the

State), sections 182 and 184 of the Act

define a major stationary source of NOX

as one that emits or has the potential to

emit 100 or more TPY. Similarly, the

Act defines a major source of VOC as

one that emits or has the potential to

emit 25 or more tons of VOC per year

(TPY) in any ozone nonattainment area

classified as severe (such as Cecil

County, the Maryland portion of the

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton

Ozone Nonattainment Area and the

Metropolitan Baltimore Ozone

Nonattainment Area), as 50 or more TPY

located in any ozone nonattainment area

classified as serious (such as the

Maryland Portion of the Metropolitan

Washington, D.C. Ozone Nonattainment

Area). For any area in the OTR classified

as attainment or marginal

nonattainment (that is, the rest of the

State), sections182 and 184 of the Act

define a major stationary source of VOC

as one that emits or has the potential to

emit 50 or more TPY. Maryland’s

revised NSR regulation defines a major

source of VOC and a major source of

NOX to which NSR applies in

compliance with the Act. The currently

approved SIP’s NSR regulations not

only pertain solely to major VOC

sources located in designated ozone

nonattainment areas, but define a major

source of VOC as one with the potential

to emit 100 TPY. EPA has, therefore,

also determined that Maryland’s revised

nonattainment NSR rules strengthen the

federal enforceability of the current

Maryland SIP because under the revised

regulations, major sources are defined at

the Act’s lower definitions for

applicability of NSR. Prior to 1990,

offsets for NSR permitting in ozone

nonattainment area had to be secured at

a 1:1 ratio of actual emissions reduced

for allowable emissions increased. The

Act increases the ratio of required

offsets for purposes of satisfying NSR

requirements according to an ozone

nonattainment area’s classification. In

severe areas (such as the Baltimore

Ozone Nonattainment Area and Cecil

County) the offset ratio is 1.3:1, in

serious areas (such as the Metropolitan

Washington, D.C. Ozone Nonattainment

Area) the ratio is 1.2:1 and in areas of

the OTR classified as marginal or

attainment (such as the remainder of the

State of Maryland), the ratio is 1.15:1.

EPA has, therefore, also determined that

Maryland’s revised nonattainment NSR

rules strengthen the federal

enforceability of the current Maryland

SIP because under the revised

regulations, the ratio of required offsets

has been increased as mandated by the

Act whereas under the current SIP, the

required offset ratio is 1:1. For all the

reasons provided above, EPA concludes

that it has proper authority under the

Act to grant a limited approval action to

Maryland’s revised NSR regulations.

9768 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

Nonetheless, upon further

consideration of the comment received

and further evaluation of Maryland’s

NSR program, EPA has determined that

it is appropriate to grant full approval of

the State’s NSR program as it applies in

the Maryland portion of the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Ozone

Nonattainment Area and in all other

portions of Maryland with the exception

of the Baltimore and the Maryland

portion (Cecil County) of the

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton

Ozone Nonattainment Areas. EPA’s sole

reason for proposing limited approval

rather than full approval of Maryland’s

regulations was that they do not contain

certain restrictions on the use of

emission reductions from the shutdown

and curtailment of existing sources or

units as NSR offsets. These restrictions

apply in nonattainment areas without

an approved attainment demonstration

[see 40 CFR part 51.165(a)(ii)(C)]. On

December 15, 2000, EPA signed a final

rule approving the attainment

demonstration for the Metropolitan

Washington, D.C. Ozone Nonattainment

Area, and those restrictions do not

apply in that area. With the exception

of the Baltimore Ozone Nonattainment

Area, and the Maryland portion of the

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton

Ozone Nonattainment Area (where EPA

on December 16, 1999 proposed

approval of the attainment

demonstration, 64 FR 70397 and 70412,

respectively), the State of Maryland has

satisfied all applicable requirements for

attainment demonstrations.

Therefore, EPA is fully approving

Maryland’s NSR program in the

Maryland portion of the Metropolitan

Washington, D.C. Ozone Nonattainment

Area and throughout the State of

Maryland with the exception of the

Baltimore and the Maryland portion of

the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton

Ozone Nonattainment Areas (Cecil

County). In the Baltimore Ozone

Nonattainment Area, and the Maryland

portion of the Philadelphia-WilmingtonTrenton Ozone Nonattainment Area

(Cecil County), EPA is granting limited

approval of Maryland’s NSR regulations

because they are more stringent than the

current NSR program and serve,

therefore, to strengthen the SIP.

III. Final Action

EPA is approving Maryland’s NSR

regulations originally submitted as a SIP

revision on June 8, 1993 and

subsequently amended on September

25, 2000. EPA is granting full approval

of these regulations as they apply in the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Ozone

Nonattainment Area and throughout the

remainder of the State of Maryland with

the exception of the Baltimore and the

Maryland portion (Cecil County) of the

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton

Ozone Nonattainment Areas. EPA is

granting limited approval of Maryland’s

NSR regulations as they apply in Cecil

County and in the Baltimore Ozone

Nonattainment Area. As a result of

EPA’s approval action, EPA is

incorporating the following State

provisions into the Maryland SIP:

COMAR 26.11.17, as amended through

October 2, 2000; and revisions to

COMAR 26.11.01.01, 26.11.02, and

26.11.06.06, all as amended effective

April 26, 1993. Maryland’s submittals

strengthen the SIP and meet the NSR

requirements of the Clean Air Act.

Accordingly, this action revises 40 CFR

Section 52.1070 by adding paragraph

(c)(148) to reflect EPA’s approval action.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. General 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 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 small entities under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.). Because this rule approves preexisting requirements 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 (Public Law 104–4).

For the same reason, 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 government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it 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 (62 FR

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

economically significant.

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 authority

to 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. As required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), 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. EPA has complied

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR

8859, March 15, 1988) 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 provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

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

B. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

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 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 rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 April 13, 2001.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 29 / Monday, February 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 9769

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

approving Maryland’s NSR regulations

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, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: December 15, 2000.

Thomas C. Voltaggio,

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. Section 52.1070 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(148) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(148) Revisions to the Maryland State

Implementation Plan submitted on June

8, 1993 and September 25, 2000 by the

Maryland Department of the

Environment.

(i) Incorporation by Reference

(A) Letter dated June 8, 1993 from the

Maryland Department of the

Environment transmitting revisions to

COMAR 26.11.01, 26.11.02, and

26.11.06, as well as a new COMAR

26.11.17.

(B) The following provisions of

COMAR 26.11.01.01 (General

Administrative Provisions—

Definitions), 26.11.02 (Permits,

Approvals, and Registration), 26.11.06

(General Emission Standards,

Prohibitions, and Restrictions), and

26.11.17 (Requirements for Major New

Sources and Modifications), effective

April 26, 1993:

(1) Revised COMAR 26.11.01.01J

(definition of ‘‘Modification’’) [currently

cited as COMAR 26.11.01.01B(20)].

(2) New COMAR 26.11.01.01M–1

definition of ‘‘New Source Review

Source’’ (NSR Source) [currently cited

as COMAR 26.11.01.01B(24)], replacing

COMAR 26.11.01.01L (‘‘New Source

Impacting on a Non-Attainment Area—

NSINA’’).

(3) Revised COMAR 26.11.02.03A(1),

.03B, .09A (introductory paragraph),

09A(5), .10C (introductory paragraph),

.11A (introductory paragraph), .11A(3).

(4) Revised COMAR 26.11.06.06E(1).

(5) New COMAR 26.11.17.01A;

.01B(1)(a), (b); .01B(2) through .01B(14);

.01B(15)(a)[introductory paragraph

only], (c), (d), (e)[except iii], (f); .01B(16)

through (18); .02B through .02F; .03A;

.03B(1), .03B(2), .03B(3)(a) through

.03B(3)(d)[except introductory

paragraph]; .03B(4); .03B(5); .03C; .03D;

.05A; .05B(1); .05B(3). This rule replaces

COMAR 26.11.06.11.

(C) Letter dated September 25, 2000

from the Maryland Department of the

Environment transmitting revisions to

COMAR 26.11.17.

(D) The following provisions of

COMAR 26.11.17 (Requirements for

Major New Sources and Modifications),

effective October 2, 2000: .01B(1)(c);

.01B(15)(a)(i), .01B(15)(a)(ii),

.01B(15)(b), .01B(15)(e)(iii); .02A(1),

.02A(2); .03B(3), .03B(5),

.03B(6)[formerly .03B(5)], .04A(1),

.04A(2), .04B, .04C(1), .04C(2); .05B(2).

[FR Doc. 01–3381 Filed 2–9–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[DC–2025, MD–3064, VA–5052;

FRL–6943–9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans; District

of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia; Post

1996 Rate-of-Progress Plans, OneHour Ozone Attainment

Demonstrations and Attainment Date

Extension for the Metropolitan

Washington D.C. Ozone Nonattainment

Area; 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 pertaining to EPA’s approval

of the Maryland portion of the post 1996

rate-of-progress plans, one-hour ozone

attainment demonstrations and

attainment date extension for the

Metropolitan Washington D.C. Ozone

Nonattainment Area.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 2001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

published a document on January 3,

2001 (66 FR 586) inadvertently adding

paragraph (d) to § 52.1076 when that

paragraph already existed. The intent of

that rule was to amend that section by

adding a paragraph (e). This document

corrects the erroneous amendatory

language.

Correction

In the final rule (FR Docket 01–61)

published in the Federal Register on

January 3, 2001 (66 FR 586), on page

632 in the first column, the fifth

amendatory instruction is revised to

read—‘‘5. Section 52.1076 is amended

by adding paragraphs (e) and (g) to read

as follows:’’ and the added paragraph

text originally designated as (d) is now

correctly designated as paragraph (e).

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

Procedures 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) (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 effects on

the States, on the relationship between

the national government and the States,