Interim Final Determination To Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 46772-46773 [05-15833]
Download as PDF
46772
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 154 / Thursday, August 11, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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.
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 October 11, 2005.
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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 25, 2005.
Laura K. Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(328)(i)(C) and
(c)(336) to read as follows:
I
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(328) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) Monterey Bay Unified Air
Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 400, adopted on July 1, 1969,
and amended on October 15, 2003.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate jul<14>2003
13:55 Aug 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
(336) New and amended regulations
for the following APCDs were submitted
on April 26, 2005, by the Governor’s
designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 4101, adopted on May 21,
1992, and amended on February 17,
2005.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–15831 Filed 8–10–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA–316–0484c; FRL–7949–2]
Interim Final Determination To Stay
and/or Defer Sanctions, San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
AGENCY:
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
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD)
portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) published
elsewhere in today’s Federal Register.
The revisions concern SJVUAPCD Rule
4101—Visible Emissions.
DATES: This interim final determination
is effective on August 11, 2005.
However, comments will be accepted
until September 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Andy
Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR–
4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105 or
e-mail to steckel.andrew@epa.gov, or
submit comments at https://
www.regulations.gov.
You can inspect copies of the
submitted rule revisions, EPA’s
technical support document (TSD), and
public comments at our Region IX office
during normal business hours by
appointment. You may also see copies
of the submitted rule revisions by
appointment 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; and,
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District, 1990 East
Gettysburg Street, Fresno, CA 93726.
A copy of the rule may also be
available via the Internet at https://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:
Jerald S. Wamsley, Rulemaking Office
(AIR–4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, at either (415) 947–
4111, or wamsley.jerry@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
I. Background
On January 8, 2004 (see 69 FR 1271),
we published a disapproval of
SJVUAPCD Rule 4101 as adopted
locally on November 15, 2001 and
submitted by the State on December 6,
2001. We based our disapproval action
on certain deficiencies in the submittal.
This disapproval action started a
sanctions clock for imposition of offset
sanctions 18 months after February 9,
2004 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 February 17, 2005, SJVUAPCD
adopted revisions to Rule 4101 that
were intended to correct the
deficiencies identified in our
disapproval action. On April 26, 2005,
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 January 8,
2004 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 January 8, 2004
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 full approval of
revised SJVUAPCD Rule 4101, 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
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 154 / Thursday, August 11, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
section 179 sanctions associated with
SJVUAPCD Rule 4101 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
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-andcomment 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 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 noticeand-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
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. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
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
VerDate jul<14>2003
13:55 Aug 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
not a significant regulatory action.
The administrator certifies that this
action 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 (Pub. L. 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
August 11, 2005. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
46773
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 October 11, 2005. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 25, 2005.
Laura K. Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 05–15833 Filed 8–10–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[RO3–OAR–2005–MD–0007; FRL–7951–3]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Air Quality Plans for Designated
Facilities and Pollutants, Maryland;
Control of Emissions From Small
Municipal Waste Combustor (SMWC)
Units; Delegation of Authority
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve the Maryland
Department of the Environment’s (MDE)
request for delegation of authority to
implement and enforce the Federal plan
(68 FR 5144, January 31, 2003) for small
municipal waste combustor (SMWC)
units under sections 111(d) and 129 of
the Clean Air Act (the ‘‘Act’’). The plan
establishes emissions limits, compliance
schedules, monitoring, operating, and
recordkeeping requirements for existing
SMWC units for which construction
commenced on or before August 30,
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 154 (Thursday, August 11, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46772-46773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-15833]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA-316-0484c; FRL-7949-2]
Interim Final Determination To Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, San
Joaquin Valley Unified 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 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP)
published elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The revisions concern
SJVUAPCD Rule 4101--Visible Emissions.
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on August 11,
2005. However, comments will be accepted until September 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105 or e-mail to steckel.andrew@epa.gov, or
submit comments at https://www.regulations.gov.
You can inspect copies of the submitted rule revisions, EPA's
technical support document (TSD), and public comments at our Region IX
office during normal business hours by appointment. You may also see
copies of the submitted rule revisions by appointment 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; and,
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990
East Gettysburg Street, Fresno, CA 93726.
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: Jerald S. Wamsley, Rulemaking Office
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, at either
(415) 947-4111, or wamsley.jerry@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On January 8, 2004 (see 69 FR 1271), we published a disapproval of
SJVUAPCD Rule 4101 as adopted locally on November 15, 2001 and
submitted by the State on December 6, 2001. We based our disapproval
action on certain deficiencies in the submittal. This disapproval
action started a sanctions clock for imposition of offset sanctions 18
months after February 9, 2004 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 February 17, 2005, SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 4101 that
were intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our disapproval
action. On April 26, 2005, 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 January 8, 2004 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 January 8, 2004 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 full
approval of revised SJVUAPCD Rule 4101, 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
[[Page 46773]]
section 179 sanctions associated with SJVUAPCD Rule 4101 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 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 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
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. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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 action 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 (Pub. L. 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 August 11, 2005. 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 October 11, 2005. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 25, 2005.
Laura K. Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 05-15833 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P