Professional Documents
Culture Documents
* * * * * * *
VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:43 Dec 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07DER1.SGM 07DER1
70884 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
These revisions clarify Delaware’s rule approves pre-existing requirements Business Regulatory Enforcement
intention that all permits issued under state law and does not impose Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
pursuant to Regulation 1102 be federally any additional enforceable duty beyond that before a rule may take effect, the
enforceable regardless of whether they that required by state law, it does not agency promulgating the rule must
are intended to limit potential to emit. contain any unfunded mandate or submit a rule report, which includes a
significantly or uniquely affect small copy of the rule, to each House of the
IV. Final Action governments, as described in the Congress and to the Comptroller General
EPA is approving Delaware’s revision Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 of the United States. EPA will submit a
to Regulation 1102—Permits as a (Pub. L. 104–4). This rule also does not report containing this rule and other
revision to Delaware’s SIP. have tribal implications because it will required information to the U.S. Senate,
EPA is publishing this rule without not have a substantial direct effect on the U.S. House of Representatives, and
prior proposal because the Agency one or more Indian tribes, on the the Comptroller General of the United
views this as a noncontroversial relationship between the Federal States prior to publication of the rule in
amendment and anticipates no adverse Government and Indian tribes, or on the the Federal Register. This rule is not a
comment because these revisions are to distribution of power and ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
clarify that all Regulation 1102 permits responsibilities between the Federal 804(2).
are federally enforceable. However, in Government and Indian tribes, as
the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Federal Register, EPA is publishing a FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
separate document that will serve as the action also does not have Federalism
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
proposal to approve the SIP revision if implications because it does not have
this action must be filed in the United
adverse comments are filed. This rule substantial direct effects on the States,
States Court of Appeals for the
will be effective on February 5, 2007 on the relationship between the national
appropriate circuit by February 5, 2007.
without further notice unless EPA government and the States, or on the
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
receives adverse comment by January 8, distribution of power and
the Administrator of this final rule does
2007. If EPA receives adverse comment, responsibilities among the various
not affect the finality of this rule for the
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in levels of government, as specified in
purposes of judicial review nor does it
the Federal Register informing the Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely extend the time within which a petition
public that the rule will not take effect.
approves a state rule implementing a for judicial review may be filed, and
EPA will address all public comments
Federal requirement, and does not alter shall not postpone the effectiveness of
in a subsequent final rule based on the
the relationship or the distribution of such rule or action. This action to
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
power and responsibilities established approve Delaware’s Regulation 1102—
second comment period on this action.
in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is Permits may not be challenged later in
Any parties interested in commenting
not subject to Executive Order 13045 proceedings to enforce its requirements.
must do so at this time. Please note that
‘‘Protection of Children from (See section 307(b)(2).)
if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of Environmental Health Risks and Safety List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
this rule and if that provision may be Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
severed from the remainder of the rule, because it is not economically Environmental protection, Air
EPA may adopt as final those provisions significant. pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
of the rule that are not the subject of an In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
adverse comment. role is to approve state choices, matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
provided that they meet the criteria of requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
V. Statutory and Executive Order the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the organic compounds.
Reviews absence of a prior existing requirement Dated: November 21, 2006.
A. General Requirements for the State to use voluntary consensus
William T. Wisniewski,
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR to disapprove a SIP submission for Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is failure to use VCS. It would thus be
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and ■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
inconsistent with applicable law for
therefore is not subject to review by the EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, PART 52—[AMENDED]
Office of Management and Budget. For to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
this reason, this action is also not that otherwise satisfies the provisions of ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
subject to Executive Order 13211, the Clean Air Act. Thus, the continues to read as follows:
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That requirements of section 12(d) of the
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
National Technology Transfer and
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
22, 2001). This action merely approves Subpart I—Delaware
272 note) do not apply. This rule does
state law as meeting Federal not impose an information collection
requirements and imposes no additional burden under the provisions of the ■ 2. In § 52.420, the table in paragraph
requirements beyond those imposed by Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 (c) is amended by revising the entries
state law. Accordingly, the U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). for Regulation 2—Permits, Sections 1, 6,
Administrator certifies that this rule 11, and 12 to read as follows:
will not have a significant economic B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General § 52.420 Identification of plan.
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility The Congressional Review Act, 5 * * * * *
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small (c) * * *
VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:43 Dec 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07DER1.SGM 07DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 70885
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
Section 6 ............................. Denial, Suspension or Revocation of Operating Per- 06/15/06 12/07/06, [Insert page
mits. number where the docu-
ment begins].
* * * * * * *
Section 11 ........................... Permit Application .......................................................... 06/15/06 12/07/06, [Insert page
number where the docu-
ment begins].
Section 12 ........................... Public Participation ......................................................... 06/15/06 12/07/06, [Insert page
number where the docu-
ment begins].
* * * * * * *
VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:43 Dec 06, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07DER1.SGM 07DER1