Interim Final Determination to Stay and Defer Sanctions, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 56114-56115 [2011-23134]
Download as PDF
56114
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Regulation Promulgation
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Federal Subsistence
Board amends title 36, part 242, and
title 50, part 100, of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as set forth below.
PART SUBSISTENCE MANAGEMENT
REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC LANDS IN
ALASKA
1. The authority citation for both 36
CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100
continues to read as follows:
■
Subpart B—Program Structure
2. Amend § __.10 by revising
paragraphs (b)(1) and (d)(2) to read as
follows:
■
Federal Subsistence Board.
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) The voting members of the Board
are: A Chair to be appointed by the
Secretary of the Interior with the
concurrence of the Secretary of
Agriculture; two public members who
possess personal knowledge of and
direct experience with subsistence uses
in rural Alaska to be appointed by the
Secretary of the Interior with the
concurrence of the Secretary of
Agriculture; the Alaska Regional
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
Alaska Regional Director, National Park
Service; Alaska Regional Forester, U.S.
Forest Service; the Alaska State
Director, Bureau of Land Management;
and the Alaska Regional Director,
Bureau of Indian Affairs. Each Federal
agency member of the Board may
appoint a designee.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(2) A quorum consists of five
members.
*
*
*
*
*
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
Dated: August 31, 2011.
Ken Salazar,
Secretary of the Interior, Department of the
Interior.
Dated: August 16, 2011.
Beth G. Pendleton,
Regional Forester, USDA—Forest Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–23243 Filed 9–9–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P; 3410–11–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Sep 09, 2011
Jkt 223001
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0733; FRL–9462–1]
Interim Final Determination to Stay and
Defer Sanctions, San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is making an interim
final determination to stay the
imposition of offset sanctions and to
defer the imposition of highway
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 this Federal
Register. The revisions concern
SJVUAPCD Rule 4684, Polyester Resin
Operations.
DATES: This interim final determination
is effective on September 12, 2011.
However, comments will be accepted
until October 12, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2011–0733, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
https://www.regulations.gov is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA
will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
SUMMARY:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3, 472, 551, 668dd,
3101–3126; 18 U.S.C. 3551–3586; 43 U.S.C.
1733.
§ __.10
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
https://www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available
only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
copyrighted material, large maps), and
some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Grounds, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3019, grounds.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
I. Background
On January 26, 2010 (75 FR 3996), we
published a limited approval and
limited disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule
4684, as adopted locally on September
20, 2007 and submitted by the State on
March 7, 2008. We based our limited
disapproval action on certain
deficiencies in the submittal. This
disapproval action started a sanctions
clock for imposition of sanctions
pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air
Act (CAA) and our regulations at 40
CFR 52.31. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(1),
offset sanctions apply eighteen months
after the effective date of a disapproval
and highway sanctions apply six
months after the offset sanctions, unless
we determine that the deficiencies
forming the basis of the disapproval
have been corrected.
On August 18, 2011, SJVUAPCD
adopted revisions to Rule 4684 that
were intended to correct the
deficiencies identified in our limited
disapproval action. On July 22, 2011,
the State submitted a proposed rule
with request for parallel processing to
EPA. In the Proposed Rules section of
today’s Federal Register, we have
proposed full approval of the rule once
we receive the final adopted version as
a revision to the California SIP because
we believe it corrects the deficiencies
for SJVUAPCD Rule 4684 identified in
our January 26, 2010 disapproval action.
Based on today’s proposed approval, we
are taking this final rulemaking action,
effective on publication, to stay the
imposition of the offset sanctions and to
defer the imposition of the highway
sanctions triggered by our January 26,
2010 limited disapproval. This action
only addresses SJVUAPCD Rule 4684.
E:\FR\FM\12SER1.SGM
12SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SJVUAPCD Rules 4401 and 4605,
Steam-Enhanced Crude Oil Production
Wells and Aerospace Assembly and
Component Coating Operations, which
were also determined to be deficient in
our January 26, 2010 limited
disapproval action, and the associated
sanctions clocks, are being addressed in
a separate action.
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 Rules 4684, 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 the imposition of
the offset sanctions and to defer the
imposition of the highway sanctions
associated with SJVUAPCD Rule 4684
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-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 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 noticeand-comment rulemaking on a finding
that the State has corrected the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Sep 09, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 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 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 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
56115
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
September 12, 2011. 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 November 14, 2011. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental
regulations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: August 31, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011–23134 Filed 9–9–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\12SER1.SGM
12SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 176 (Monday, September 12, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56114-56115]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23134]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0733; FRL-9462-1]
Interim Final Determination to Stay and 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 the
imposition of offset sanctions and to defer the imposition of highway
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 this
Federal Register. The revisions concern SJVUAPCD Rule 4684, Polyester
Resin Operations.
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on September 12,
2011. However, comments will be accepted until October 12, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0733, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. https://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents in the docket are listed at https://www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Grounds, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3019, grounds.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On January 26, 2010 (75 FR 3996), we published a limited approval
and limited disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 4684, as adopted locally on
September 20, 2007 and submitted by the State on March 7, 2008. We
based our limited disapproval action on certain deficiencies in the
submittal. This disapproval action started a sanctions clock for
imposition of sanctions pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(1),
offset sanctions apply eighteen months after the effective date of a
disapproval and highway sanctions apply six months after the offset
sanctions, unless we determine that the deficiencies forming the basis
of the disapproval have been corrected.
On August 18, 2011, SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 4684 that
were intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our limited
disapproval action. On July 22, 2011, the State submitted a proposed
rule with request for parallel processing to EPA. In the Proposed Rules
section of today's Federal Register, we have proposed full approval of
the rule once we receive the final adopted version as a revision to the
California SIP because we believe it corrects the deficiencies for
SJVUAPCD Rule 4684 identified in our January 26, 2010 disapproval
action. Based on today's proposed approval, we are taking this final
rulemaking action, effective on publication, to stay the imposition of
the offset sanctions and to defer the imposition of the highway
sanctions triggered by our January 26, 2010 limited disapproval. This
action only addresses SJVUAPCD Rule 4684.
[[Page 56115]]
SJVUAPCD Rules 4401 and 4605, Steam-Enhanced Crude Oil Production Wells
and Aerospace Assembly and Component Coating Operations, which were
also determined to be deficient in our January 26, 2010 limited
disapproval action, and the associated sanctions clocks, are being
addressed in a separate action.
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 Rules 4684, 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 the imposition
of the offset sanctions and to defer the imposition of the highway
sanctions associated with SJVUAPCD Rule 4684 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 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 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
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. Sec. 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 September 12, 2011. 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 November 14, 2011. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: August 31, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-23134 Filed 9-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P