Interim Final Determination To Defer Sanctions; California; South Coast Air Quality Management District, 37719-37720 [2013-14916]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 121 / Monday, June 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
37719
TABLE 2—2025 PM2.5 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR NEW JERSEY
[Tons per year]
Metropolitan planning organization
Direct PM2.5
North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority .....................................................................................................
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (Mercer County only) ................................................................
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties) .....................
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
Dated: June 10, 2013.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2013–14908 Filed 6–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0384; FRL–9826–3]
Interim Final Determination To Defer
Sanctions; California; South Coast Air
Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim
final determination to defer the
imposition of sanctions based on a
proposed approval of revisions to the
South Coast Air Quality Management
District’s (SCAQMD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP) published elsewhere in this
Federal Register. The revisions concern
the Clean Air Act (CAA) contingency
measure requirement for the 1997
annual and 24-hour national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) in the Los
Angeles-South Coast Air Basin (South
Coast).
This interim final determination
is effective on June 24, 2013. However,
comments will be accepted until July
24, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2013–0384, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: lo.doris@epa.gov.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
3. Mail or deliver: Doris Lo (Air–2),
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 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
www.regulations.gov or email.
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 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
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:
Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3959, lo.doris@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
I. Background
On November 9, 2012 (76 FR 69928),
we published a partial approval and
partial disapproval of the South Coast
2007 AQMP and the 2007 State Strategy
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1,509
119
363
NOX
25,437
2,551
8,003
(collectively the ‘‘South Coast PM2.5
SIP’’). As part of this action, EPA
disapproved the contingency measure
provisions in the South Coast PM2.5 SIP
as failing to meet the requirements of
CAA section 172(c)(9) and 40 CFR
51.1012, which require that the SIP for
each PM2.5 nonattainment area contain
contingency measures to be
implemented if the area fails to make
reasonable further progress or to attain
the NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. See 76 FR 41562, 41578
to 41580 (July 14, 2011) and 76 FR
69928, 69947 and 69952 (November 9,
2011). This disapproval action became
effective on January 9, 2012 and started
a sanctions clock for imposition of offset
sanctions 18 months after January 9,
2012 and highway sanctions 6 months
later, pursuant to section 179 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) and our regulations
at 40 CFR 52.31. As such, offset
sanctions will apply on July 9, 2013 and
highway sanctions will apply on
January 9, 2014, unless EPA determines
that the deficiency forming the basis of
the disapproval has been corrected.
On November 14, 2011, the State of
California submitted the ‘‘South Coast
Air Quality Management District
Proposed Contingency Measures for the
2007 PM2.5 SIP’’ (dated October 2011) as
a SIP revision to correct the deficiency
identified in our partial disapproval
action. On April 13, 2013, the SCAQMD
submitted a technical clarification to the
SIP revision, including updated
emissions data for the year 2012. In the
Proposed Rules section of today’s
Federal Register, we have proposed to
approve this submittal because we
believe it corrects the deficiency
identified in our November 9, 2011
partial disapproval action. Based on
today’s proposed approval, we are
taking this final rulemaking action,
effective on publication, to defer the
imposition of offset and highway
sanctions triggered by our November 9,
2011 partial disapproval.
EPA is providing the public with an
opportunity to comment on this deferral
of sanctions. If comments are submitted
that change our assessment described in
this final determination and the
proposed full approval of the SIP
revision, we intend to take subsequent
E:\FR\FM\24JNR1.SGM
24JNR1
37720
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 121 / Monday, June 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
final action to impose 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 defer CAA section 179
sanctions associated with our partial
disapproval of the South Coast PM2.5
SIP based on our concurrent proposal to
approve the State’s SIP revision as
correcting the deficiency that initiated
sanctions.
Because EPA has preliminarily
determined that the State has corrected
the deficiency identified in EPA’s
partial 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
deficiency that started the sanctions
clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public
interest to initially impose sanctions
when the State has most likely done all
it can to correct the deficiency 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 deficiency prior to the
rulemaking approving the State’s
submittal. Therefore, EPA believes that
it is necessary to use the interim final
rulemaking process to 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
purpose of this notice is to relieve a
restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)).
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action 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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
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 June
24, 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 August 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, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 12, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013–14916 Filed 6–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\24JNR1.SGM
24JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 121 (Monday, June 24, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37719-37720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14916]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0384; FRL-9826-3]
Interim Final Determination To Defer Sanctions; California; South
Coast Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim final determination to defer the
imposition of sanctions based on a proposed approval of revisions to
the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) portion of
the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) published elsewhere in
this Federal Register. The revisions concern the Clean Air Act (CAA)
contingency measure requirement for the 1997 annual and 24-hour
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) in the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin
(South Coast).
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on June 24, 2013.
However, comments will be accepted until July 24, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0384, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
2. Email: lo.doris@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Doris Lo (Air-2), 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 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 www.regulations.gov or email.
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 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 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: Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3959, lo.doris@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On November 9, 2012 (76 FR 69928), we published a partial approval
and partial disapproval of the South Coast 2007 AQMP and the 2007 State
Strategy (collectively the ``South Coast PM2.5 SIP''). As
part of this action, EPA disapproved the contingency measure provisions
in the South Coast PM2.5 SIP as failing to meet the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9) and 40 CFR 51.1012, which require
that the SIP for each PM2.5 nonattainment area contain
contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to make
reasonable further progress or to attain the NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. See 76 FR 41562, 41578 to 41580 (July 14, 2011) and 76
FR 69928, 69947 and 69952 (November 9, 2011). This disapproval action
became effective on January 9, 2012 and started a sanctions clock for
imposition of offset sanctions 18 months after January 9, 2012 and
highway sanctions 6 months later, pursuant to section 179 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) and our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31. As such, offset
sanctions will apply on July 9, 2013 and highway sanctions will apply
on January 9, 2014, unless EPA determines that the deficiency forming
the basis of the disapproval has been corrected.
On November 14, 2011, the State of California submitted the ``South
Coast Air Quality Management District Proposed Contingency Measures for
the 2007 PM2.5 SIP'' (dated October 2011) as a SIP revision
to correct the deficiency identified in our partial disapproval action.
On April 13, 2013, the SCAQMD submitted a technical clarification to
the SIP revision, including updated emissions data for the year 2012.
In the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, we have
proposed to approve this submittal because we believe it corrects the
deficiency identified in our November 9, 2011 partial disapproval
action. Based on today's proposed approval, we are taking this final
rulemaking action, effective on publication, to defer the imposition of
offset and highway sanctions triggered by our November 9, 2011 partial
disapproval.
EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this
deferral of sanctions. If comments are submitted that change our
assessment described in this final determination and the proposed full
approval of the SIP revision, we intend to take subsequent
[[Page 37720]]
final action to impose 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 defer CAA section
179 sanctions associated with our partial disapproval of the South
Coast PM2.5 SIP based on our concurrent proposal to approve
the State's SIP revision as correcting the deficiency that initiated
sanctions.
Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has
corrected the deficiency identified in EPA's partial 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 deficiency that started the sanctions
clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public interest to initially impose
sanctions when the State has most likely done all it can to correct the
deficiency 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 deficiency prior to the rulemaking
approving the State's submittal. Therefore, EPA believes that it is
necessary to use the interim final rulemaking process to 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 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 June 24, 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 August 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, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 12, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013-14916 Filed 6-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P