```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 31 (Thursday, February 14, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10554-10556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03250]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0064; FRL-9777-8]

Interim Final Determination To Stay and Defer Sanctions, 
Sacramento Metropolitan 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 Sacramento 
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD or District) 
portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) published 
elsewhere in this Federal Register. The SIP revision concerns two 
permitting rules submitted by the SMAQMD: Rule 214, Federal New Source 
Review, and Rule 217, Public Notice Requirements for Permits.

DATES: This interim final determination is effective on February 14, 
2013. However, comments will be accepted until March 18, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0064, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://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 http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or email. http://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 http://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 http://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 20, 2011 (76 FR 43183), we published a limited approval and 
limited disapproval of SMAQMD Rule 214 as adopted locally on October 
28,

[[Page 10555]]

2010 and submitted by the State on December 7, 2010. 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 19, 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 August 23, 2012, SMAQMD adopted an amended version of Rule 214, 
which was intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our July 
20, 2011 limited approval and limited disapproval action. On September 
26, 2012, the State submitted this amended rule to EPA. In the Proposed 
Rules section of today's Federal Register, we are proposing to fully 
approve this rule because we believe it corrects the deficiencies 
identified in our July 20, 2011 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 that 
were triggered by our July 20, 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 full 
approval of amended SMAQMD Rule 214, 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 SMAQMD Rule 214 (as adopted 2010) 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. Sec.  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 14, 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

[[Page 10556]]

Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 15, 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: January 29, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013-03250 Filed 2-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```