[Federal Register: January 31, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 21)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 4932-4933]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31ja03-19]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 273-0370c; FRL-7441-7]
Interim Final Determination to Stay and/or Defer Sanctions,
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim final determination to stay and/or
defer imposition of sanctions based on a proposed approval of revisions
to the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) portion
of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) published elsewhere
in today's Federal Register. The revisions concern ICAPCD Rule 701.
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on January 31,
2003. However, comments will be accepted until March 3, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
You can inspect copies of the submitted rule revisions and EPA's
technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal
business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted rule revisions
and TSD at the following locations:
Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 150 South 9th Street,
El Centro, CA 92243.
A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm.
Please be advised that this is not
an EPA Web site and may not contain the same version of the rule that
was submitted to EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX; (415) 947-4118.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On July 11, 2001 (66 FR 36170), we published a limited approval and
limited disapproval of ICAPCD Rule 701 as adopted locally on September
14, 1999 and submitted by the State on May 26, 2000. We based our
limited disapproval action on certain deficiencies in the submittal.
This disapproval action started a sanctions clock for imposition of
offset sanctions 18 months after August 10, 2001 and highway sanctions
6 months later, pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and
our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31.
On August 13, 2002, ICAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 701 that were
intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our disapproval
action. On October 16, 2002, the State submitted these revisions to
EPA. In the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, we have
proposed approval of this submittal because we believe it corrects the
deficiencies identified in our July 11, 2001 disapproval action. Based
on today's proposed approval, we are taking this final rulemaking
action, effective on publication, to stay and/or defer imposition of
sanctions that were triggered by our July 11, 2001 disapproval.
EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this
stay/deferral of sanctions. If comments are submitted that change our
assessment described in this final determination and the proposed
approval of revised ICAPCD Rule 701, we intend to take subsequent final
action to reimpose sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 51.31(d). If no
comments are submitted that change our assessment, then all sanctions
and sanction clocks will be permanently terminated on the effective
date of a final rule approval.
II. EPA Action
We are making an interim final determination to stay and/or defer
CAA section 179 sanctions associated with ICAPCD Rule 701 based on our
concurrent proposal to approve the State's SIP revision as correcting
deficiencies that initiated sanctions.
Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has
corrected the deficiencies identified in EPA's limited disapproval
action, relief from sanctions should be provided as quickly as
possible. Therefore, EPA is invoking the good cause exception under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in not providing an opportunity for
comment before this action takes effect (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However,
by this action EPA is providing the public with a chance to comment on
EPA's determination after the effective date, and EPA will consider any
comments received in determining whether to reverse such action.
EPA believes that notice-and-comment rulemaking before the
effective date of this action is impracticable and contrary to the
public interest. EPA has reviewed the State's submittal and, through
its proposed action, is indicating that it is more likely than not that
the State has corrected the deficiencies that started the sanctions
clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public interest to initially impose
sanctions or to keep applied sanctions in place when the State has most
likely done all it can to correct the deficiencies that triggered the
sanctions clocks. Moreover, it would be impracticable to go through
notice-and-comment rulemaking on a finding that the State has corrected
the deficiencies prior to the rulemaking approving the State's
submittal. Therefore, EPA believes that it is necessary to use the
interim final rulemaking process to stay and/or defer sanctions while
EPA completes its rulemaking process on the approvability of the
State's submittal. Moreover, with respect to the effective date of this
[[Page 4933]]
action, EPA is invoking the good cause exception to the 30-day notice
requirement of the APA because the purpose of this notice is to relieve
a restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)).
III. Administrative Requirements
This action stays and/or defers federal sanctions and imposes no
additional 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 is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action.
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.).
This rule 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).
This rule 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).
This action 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 rule 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.
The requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272) do not apply to
this rule because it imposes no standards.
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.).
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 to Congress and the Comptroller
General. However, section 808 provides that any rule for which the
issuing agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure
thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, shall take effect at such time as the agency promulgating the
rule determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). EPA has made such a good cause
finding, including the reasons therefor, and established an effective
date of January 31, 2003. 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. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 1, 2003. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purpose of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which 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
regulations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 12, 2002.
Keith Takata,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 03-2175 Filed 1-30-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P