[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 15, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12591-12592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-5133]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[R01-OAR-2004-ME-0002; A-1-FRL-7884-7]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maine; Control of Total Reduced Sulfur From Kraft Pulp Mills: 
Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule; and Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule, correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This document withdraws the direct final rule published in the 
Federal Register on March 1, 2005. 70 FR 9872. In that rule, we 
approved a revision to the State of Maine's plan for controlling total 
reduced sulfur (``TRS'') from kraft pulp mills under section 111(d) of 
the Clean Air Act (``CAA'') (the ``111(d) plan''). That revision 
extended the compliance date for brown stock washers to April 17, 2007. 
EPA stated in the direct final rule that if it received adverse comment 
by March 31, 2005, the rule would be withdrawn and not take effect. We 
are withdrawing the direct final rule today because we received an 
adverse comment concerning our approval to extend the

[[Page 12592]]

compliance date for brown stock washers. EPA will address this comment 
and any others received concerning Maine's revision to its 111(d) plan 
in a subsequent final action based upon the proposed rule that was 
issued simultaneously with the direct final rule. 70 FR 9901. As 
explained in the direct final rule and the proposed rule, EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this action. 70 FR 9874; 70 FR 
9901. In addition, this document corrects a statement in the preamble 
of the direct final rule. In that preamble, the Agency inaccurately 
summarized the provisions of CAA section 111(d). This mistake has no 
bearing on the substance of EPA's proposed approval of Maine's revision 
to its 111(d) plan.

DATES: The direct final rule is withdrawn as of March 15, 2005. EPA 
will continue to take comments on the proposed rule until March 31, 
2005. Please see EPA's direct final rule published on March 1, 2005 (70 
FR 9872) for instructions for submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian D. Cohen, Air Permits, Toxics, and 
Indoor Air Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New 
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP), Boston, 
MA 02114-2023, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The statement in the preamble to the direct 
final rule that we are correcting today concerns the summary of section 
111(d) that we provided in the statutory background section of the 
notice. Specifically, we stated:

    Section 111(d) of the CAA allows EPA to approve state plans to 
regulate emissions from existing sources of ``designated 
pollutants,'' i.e., pollutants not listed as criteria pollutants 
under CAA section 108(a) nor as hazardous air pollutants (``HAPs'') 
under section 112(b)(1), but to which a standard of performance for 
new sources applies under section 111.''

70 FR 9872, 9873 (column 3). This summary of CAA section 111(d)(1) is 
inaccurate and incomplete. As an initial matter, we intended for the 
above statement to summarize one of our regulations. The above 
statement incorrectly summarizes that regulation because the regulation 
refers to section 112(b)(1)(A) of the Act, not section 112(b)(1). Upon 
further examination of the regulation, we recognize that we erred in 
relying on the regulation because that regulation interprets section 
111(d) of the 1970 CAA, not the 1990 Act, which represents existing 
law. See 40 C.F.R. 60.21(a) (promulgated in November 1975). This is 
evidenced, in part, by the fact that the CAA, as amended in 1990, does 
not include a ``section 112(b)(1)(A)'' to which the regulation refers. 
The above-quoted statement therefore does not take into account or, in 
any way, address the 1990 CAA, in which Congress amended section 
111(d).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A commenter on the direct final rule noted that the above-
quoted statement does not take into account section 111(d), as 
amended in 1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in our January 30, 2004, proposed rule concerning 
emissions of hazardous air pollutants from Electric Utility Units, we 
believe that we can regulate hazardous air pollutants from certain 
source categories under CAA section 111(d). 69 FR 4652, 4684-86 (Jan. 
30, 2004). Nevertheless, the question of whether we can regulate 
hazardous air pollutants from particular source categories under CAA 
section 111(d), as amended in 1990, is not material to our approval of 
the State of Maine's section 111(d) plan revision, since that revision 
concerns TRS, which is not a hazardous air pollutant. Thus, we revise 
the statutory background in the preamble of the direct final rule 
approving the TRS section 111(d) plan, to read as follows:

    Section 111(d) of the CAA provides that where EPA has issued 
section 111(b) standards for new sources of a listed source category 
for a particular pollutant, EPA shall establish regulations for 
existing sources in that category that emit the pollutant at issue. 
The regulations that EPA establishes are to set forth a procedure 
similar to that provided for under CAA section 110, where each State 
submits a plan to the Administrator for review and approval. Section 
111(d) does contain certain exceptions for regulation under that 
provision. Those exceptions are not relevant here.

Specifically, the above corrected statement replaces the first sentence 
that appears under the heading ``Background and Purpose'' in the direct 
final rule, see 70 FR 9873, column 3. We are correcting this statement 
in the direct final rule because the rationale underlying EPA's 
approval of Maine's revision to its 111(d) plan is set forth only in 
the direct final rule, not in the proposed rule that was issue on March 
1, 2005. See 70 FR 9901 (``For additional information, see the direct 
final rule''). Because interested parties must prepare any comments on 
the proposed rule by reference to the content of the direct final rule 
that was published on March 1, 2005, we take action today to correct 
the statutory background statement included in that notice.
    Furthermore, EPA approved Maine's TRS section 111(d) plan in 1990, 
and approved revisions to that plan in 1994 and 2003. The issue 
addressed in the direct final rule published on March 1, 2005, does not 
concern whether EPA has authority to regulate TRS from kraft pulp mill 
plants under section 111(d), but rather, whether EPA reasonably 
approved Maine's proposed extension of the compliance date for certain 
facilities. Accordingly, the above revised statement accurately 
summarizes the statutory background that is relevant to the proposed 
extension of the compliance date for brown stock washers. See 70 FR 
9872, 9874 (March 1, 2005) for a summary and explanation of the 
proposed compliance date extension.

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action merely corrects a statement in the preamble of the 
direct final rule published on March 1, 2005, and nothing in this 
action changes the analysis found in section V, ``Statutory and 
Executive Order Reviews,'' of the direct final rule. Please, refer to 
that direct final rule (70 FR 9874, 9875) for information regarding 
applicable Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
    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 correction to 
rule document 05-3908 is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Total reduced sulfur.

    Dated: March 9, 2005.
Ira W. Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 05-5133 Filed 3-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P