Interim Final Determination To Stay and Defer Sanctions, Placer County Air Pollution Control District and Feather River Air Quality Management District, 12243-12244 [2013-04001]
Download as PDF
12243
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Plan for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Maintenance Areas.’’ at
the end of the table to read as follows:
Subpart II—North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by
adding a new entry for entry for ‘‘8-Hour
Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance
■
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1770
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Provision
State effective date
*
*
*
8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan
for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem
Maintenance Area.
*
August 2, 2012 .................
[FR Doc. 2013–04011 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0094; FRL–9783–3]
Interim Final Determination To Stay
and Defer Sanctions, Placer County Air
Pollution Control District and Feather
River Air Quality Management 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 a revision to the Placer County Air
Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and
Feather River Air Quality Management
District (FRAQMD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP) published elsewhere in this
Federal Register. The SIP revision
concerns two permitting rules submitted
by the PCAPCD and FRAQMD,
respectively: Rule 502, New Source
Review, and Rule 10.1, New Source
Review.
DATES: This interim final determination
is effective on February 22, 2013.
However, comments will be accepted
until March 25, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2013–0094, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection
SUMMARY:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
EPA approval
date
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
*
2/22/13
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 email. 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 email 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:
Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Federal Register citation
*
[Insert citation of publication].
Explanation
*
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
I. Background
On July 27, 2011 (76 FR 44809), we
published a limited approval and
limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule
502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1 as adopted
locally on October 28, 2010 and October
5, 2009, respectively. We based our
limited disapproval action on certain
deficiencies in the submitted rule. This
disapproval action started a sanctions
clock for imposition of offset sanctions
18 months after August 27, 2011 and
highway sanctions 6 months later,
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 October 31, 2011 and February 7,
2012, PCAPCD and FRAQMD adopted
amended versions of Rules 502 and
10.1, respectively, which were intended
to correct the deficiencies identified in
our July 27, 2011 limited disapproval
action. On November 18, 2011 and
September 21, 2012, the State submitted
these amended rules to EPA. In the
Proposed Rules section of today’s
Federal Register, we are proposing a
limited approval/limited disapproval of
these rules because we believe it
corrects the deficiencies identified in
our July 27, 2011 disapproval action,
but other revisions have created new
deficiencies. Based on today’s proposed
action, 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
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
12244
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
that were triggered by our July 27, 2011
limited 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 our proposed limited approval and
limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule
502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1,
respectively, we intend to take
subsequent final action to reimpose
sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 52.31(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.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 PCAPCD Rule 502 and
FRAQMD Rule 10.1 (as adopted 2010
and 2009 respectively) based on our
concurrent proposal to approve the
State’s SIP revision as correcting the
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
deficiencies prior to the rulemaking
approving the State’s submittal.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
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 therefore,
and established an effective date of
February 22, 2013. 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 23, 2013. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 12, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013–04001 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12243-12244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04001]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0094; FRL-9783-3]
Interim Final Determination To Stay and Defer Sanctions, Placer
County Air Pollution Control District and Feather River Air Quality
Management 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 a revision to the Placer
County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and Feather River Air
Quality Management District (FRAQMD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) published elsewhere in this Federal Register.
The SIP revision concerns two permitting rules submitted by the PCAPCD
and FRAQMD, respectively: Rule 502, New Source Review, and Rule 10.1,
New Source Review.
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on February 22,
2013. However, comments will be accepted until March 25, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0094, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), 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 email. 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 email 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: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On July 27, 2011 (76 FR 44809), we published a limited approval and
limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1 as adopted
locally on October 28, 2010 and October 5, 2009, respectively. We based
our limited disapproval action on certain deficiencies in the submitted
rule. This disapproval action started a sanctions clock for imposition
of offset sanctions 18 months after August 27, 2011 and highway
sanctions 6 months later, 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 October 31, 2011 and February 7, 2012, PCAPCD and FRAQMD adopted
amended versions of Rules 502 and 10.1, respectively, which were
intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our July 27, 2011
limited disapproval action. On November 18, 2011 and September 21,
2012, the State submitted these amended rules to EPA. In the Proposed
Rules section of today's Federal Register, we are proposing a limited
approval/limited disapproval of these rules because we believe it
corrects the deficiencies identified in our July 27, 2011 disapproval
action, but other revisions have created new deficiencies. Based on
today's proposed action, 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
[[Page 12244]]
that were triggered by our July 27, 2011 limited 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 our proposed
limited approval and limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 502 and FRAQMD
Rule 10.1, respectively, we intend to take subsequent final action to
reimpose sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 52.31(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 PCAPCD Rule 502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1 (as
adopted 2010 and 2009 respectively) based on our concurrent proposal to
approve the State's SIP revision as correcting the 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 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 therefore, and established an effective
date of February 22, 2013. 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 23, 2013. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 12, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013-04001 Filed 2-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P