[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 189 (Thursday, September 30, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58262-58264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-21824]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 134-082; FRL-7820-1]


Interim Final Determination To Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, 
Maricopa County Environmental Services Department

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 Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) 
portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) published 
elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The revisions concern MCESD Rule 
331.

DATES: This interim final determination is effective on September 30, 
2004. However, comments will be accepted until November 1, 2004.

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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#433037262028262f6d222d27312634032633226d242c35"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="deadaabbbdb5bbb2f0bfb0baacbba99ebbaebff0b9b1a8">[email protected]</span></a>, or 
submit comments at http://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.
    Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., (Mail Code 6102T), Washington, DC 20460.
    Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 1110 W. Washington 
Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007.

[[Page 58263]]

    Maricopa County Environmental Services Department, 1001 N. 
Central Avenue, Suite 695, Phoenix, AZ 85004.

    A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at http://www.maricopa.gov/envsvc/AIR/ruledesc.asp. 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: Francisco D[oacute][ntilde]ez, EPA 
Region IX, (415) 972-3956, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b5f1dadbd0cf9bf3c7d4dbd6dcc6d6daf5d0c5d49bd2dac3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0c4863626976224a7e6d626f657f6f634c697c6d226b637a">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

I. Background

    On April 16, 2003 (68 FR 18546), we published a limited approval 
and limited disapproval of MCESD Rule 331 as adopted locally on April 
7, 1999 and submitted by the State on August 4, 1999. We based our 
limited disapproval action on certain deficiencies in the submittal. 
This disapproval action started a sanctions clock for imposition of 
offset sanctions 18 months after April 16, 2003 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 April 21, 2004, MCESD adopted revisions to Rule 331 that were 
intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our limited 
disapproval action. On July 28, 2004, 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 April 16, 2003 
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 April 16, 2003 
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 the proposed full 
approval of revised MCESD Rule 331, we intend to take subsequent final 
action to reimpose sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 51.31(d). If no 
comments are submitted that change our assessment, then all sanctions 
and sanction clocks will be permanently terminated on the effective 
date of a final rule approval.

II. EPA Action

    We are making an interim final determination to stay and/or defer 
CAA section 179 sanctions associated with MCESD Rule 331 based on our 
concurrent proposal to approve the State's SIP revision as correcting 
deficiencies that initiated sanctions.
    Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has 
corrected the deficiencies identified in EPA's limited disapproval 
action, relief from sanctions should be provided as quickly as 
possible. Therefore, EPA is invoking the good cause exception under the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in not providing an opportunity for 
comment before this action takes effect (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However, 
by this action EPA is providing the public with a chance to comment on 
EPA's determination after the effective date, and EPA will consider any 
comments received in determining whether to reverse such action.
    EPA believes that notice-and-comment rulemaking before the 
effective date of this action is impracticable and contrary to the 
public interest. EPA has reviewed the State's submittal and, through 
its proposed action, is indicating that it is more likely than not that 
the State has corrected the deficiencies that started the sanctions 
clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public interest to initially impose 
sanctions or to keep applied sanctions in place when the State has most 
likely done all it can to correct the deficiencies that triggered the 
sanctions clocks. Moreover, it would be impracticable to go through 
notice-and-comment rulemaking on a finding that the State has corrected 
the deficiencies prior to the rulemaking approving the State's 
submittal. Therefore, EPA believes that it is necessary to use the 
interim final rulemaking process to stay and/or defer sanctions while 
EPA completes its rulemaking process on the approvability of the 
State's submittal. Moreover, with respect to the effective date of this 
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 September 30, 2004. EPA will submit a report containing this 
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,

[[Page 58264]]

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 29, 2004. 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, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: September 10, 2004.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 04-21824 Filed 9-29-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>