Jump to main content.

Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Allegheny County, Pennsylvania; Control of Emissions from Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators; Correction

Related Material

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 




[Federal Register: May 26, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 103)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 34104-34105]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26my00-22]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[PA152-4099a; FRL-6705-7]


Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Allegheny County, Pennsylvania;
Control of Emissions from Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerators; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule; correcting amendment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document corrects minor errors in the text of rule
language in a published final rule pertaining to EPA's approval of the
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania hospital/medical/ /infectious waste
incinerator (HMIWI) 111(d)/129 plan submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James B. Topsale, (215) 814-2190 or by
e-mail at topsale.jim@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' or
``our'' are used, we mean EPA. On April 7, 2000 (65 FR 18249), we
published a final rulemaking action announcing our approval of the
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania hospital/medical/infectious waste
incinerator (HMIWI) 111(d)/129 plan submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. In the text of that document, we inadvertently made two
minors. Neither the rationale for nor the intent of the April 7, 2000
direct final rule was affected by these minor errors. This action
simply corrects the erroneous language in the published final
rulemaking.
    To the final rule (FR Docket 00-8660) published in the Federal
Register on April 7, 2000 (65 FR 18249), we are making the following
corrections:
    (1) On page 18251 in the first column, the revised rule language to
the second answer (A.) is corrected to read, ``* * * meeting the
maximum achievable control technology * * *''.
    The word ``available'' was inadvertently inserted in place of
``achievable''.
    (2) On page 18252 in the third column under Sec. 62.9662 Effective
Date, the text is revised to read, ``The effective date of the plan is
June 6, 2000.''
    The phrase ``* * * for municipal solid waste landfills * * *'' was
inadvertently included in the sentence and is hereby deleted.

[[Page 34105]]

    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 procedures 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
minor errors in the text of a previous action. Thus, notice and public
procedures 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) (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 6,
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. These corrections to the preamble and
40 CFR 62.9662 for Pennsylvania is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

    Dated: May 10, 2000.
Bradley M. Campbell,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 00-13205 Filed 5-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.