[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 107 (Monday, June 5, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32274-32276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-5052]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0012; FRL-8178-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Minnesota; Alternative Public Participation Process
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to the Minnesota State
Implementation Plan (SIP) that will establish, pursuant to regulations
on public hearings, an alternative public participation process for
certain SIP revisions. EPA is approving the Minnesota SIP revision
because we believe that the procedures set forth in Minnesota's request
afford the public adequate opportunity to comment on these
noncontroversial SIP revisions. In its SIP revision, Minnesota has
identified a limited number of types of SIP revisions that have been
found to be noncontroversial and in which the public has historically
shown little or no interest. For this limited number of SIP revisions,
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) will offer the
opportunity for a public hearing, but will not hold a hearing if one is
not requested. The EPA agrees that the SIP types that have been
identified by the MPCA have historically been noncontroversial and that
offering the public the opportunity to request a public hearing rather
than holding one automatically does not limit or curtail the public
participation process. Also, EPA is acknowledging that a public hearing
held at the time of the MPCA rulemaking, which meets the criteria for a
SIP public hearing, precludes the need for a separate public hearing
solely for SIP purposes.
EPA proposed to approve these revisions to the Minnesota SIP on
February 1, 2006 and no adverse comments were received on this
proposal. We are also taking this opportunity to correct a
typographical error made in that proposed approval.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 5, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0012. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through 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 Douglas
Aburano, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-6960 before visiting the
Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Aburano, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-6960, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Does This Action Apply to Me?
II. What Public Comments Were Received and What Is EPA's Response?
III. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
IV. Additional Information
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Does This Action Apply to Me?
This action applies to anyone who participates in the public
rulemaking process in Minnesota by submitting comments in writing or at
public hearings held by the MPCA.
II. What Public Comments Were Received and What is EPA's Response?
No adverse comments were received. A comment from the State of
Maryland was supportive of this approval. The comment stated that,
``the revised administrative procedures will utilize the technological
advances available today to save tax dollars while not compromising the
public's ability to access and comment on SIP revisions.'' Since this
comment was supportive of the action being taken there is no need to
respond to it.
[[Page 32275]]
III. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving alternative public hearing processes in the State
of Minnesota. The MPCA submitted a SIP revision listing a limited
number of various types of SIP revisions that are noncontroversial and
that the public has shown little or no interest in. The request to
approve these alternative public hearing processes was submitted by
MPCA on December 7, 2005. The MPCA held a public hearing on these
alternative public hearing processes on November 17, 2005. EPA proposed
to approve these alternative public hearing processes on February 1,
2006 (see 71 FR 5205). No adverse comments were received during the
EPA's public comment period on the proposed approval.
We are approving an alternative process for a limited number of
noncontroversial SIP revisions that will not require automatic public
hearings. For this limited number of noncontroversial SIP revisions
Minnesota will instead offer the public the opportunity to request a
public hearing. If any one person requests a public hearing, then the
MPCA will hold a public hearing at the end of the comment period for
that SIP submittal. The approval of this alternative process is
consistent with requirements found in 40 CFR 51.102(g). A description
of the types of SIP revisions that would use this alternative process
was provided in the proposed rule (see 71 FR 5209).
Minnesota also requested that we approve, pursuant to 40 CFR
51.102(g), public hearings held during the state rulemaking process as
an alternative to a SIP public hearing. Because we view these public
hearings as meeting the criteria under 40 CFR 51.102 we do not need to
approve these as alternatives. EPA acknowledges that a public hearing
held at the time of an MPCA rulemaking which meets the criteria for a
SIP rulemaking precludes the need for a public hearing solely for SIP
purposes.
IV. Additional Information
In the proposed approval of MPCA's SIP revision, we also solicited
comments on the state's use of the Internet, via the Minnesota State
Register and MPCA's own Web site, to inform the public of upcoming SIP
revisions and public hearings. The one comment made in support of the
February 1, 2006 proposed approval seemed to specifically support the
use of electronic public notification.
We are also correcting a typographical error. On page 5208 of the
proposed approval a reference was made to rule Minn. R. 7077.1400, it
should have referred to rule Minn. R. 7007.1400.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' 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).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
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.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves pre-existing 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 (Pub. L. 104-4).
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
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).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
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.
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
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 significant.
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
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.).
Congressional Review Act
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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register.
[[Page 32276]]
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 August 4, 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, Intergovernmental
relations.
Dated: May 24, 2006.
Cyndy Colantoni,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Subpart Y--Minnesota
0
2. In Sec. 52.1220, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry for ``Alternative Public Participation Process'' after the
existing entries to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Minnesota Nonregulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable State submittal
Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or date/effective EPA approved date Comments
provision nonattainment area date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Alternative Public Participation Statewide......... 12/07/05.......... 07/05/06 [Insert
Process. page number where
the document
begins].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-5052 Filed 6-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P