```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 28, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53038-53039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21011]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0534; FRL-9900-36-Region 9]

Interim Final Determination to Stay and Defer Sanctions; 
California; San Joaquin Valley

AGENCY: U.S. 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 portion of the California State Implementation Plan published 
elsewhere in this Federal Register. The revisions concern the Clean Air 
Act nonattainment area contingency measure requirement for the 1997 
annual and 24-hour national ambient air quality standards for fine 
particulate matter (PM2.5) in the San Joaquin Valley.

DATES: This interim final determination is effective on August 28, 
2013. However, comments will be accepted until September 27, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0534, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.
     Email: wicher.frances@epa.gov.
     Mail or deliver: Frances Wicher (AIR-2), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105.
    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 9, 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: Frances Wicher, EPA Region 9, (415) 
972-3957, wicher.frances@epa.gov.

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

I. Background

    On November 9, 2011 (76 FR 69896), we published a partial approval 
and partial disapproval of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 
Control District's (SJVUAPCD or District) 2008 PM2.5 Plan 
and the California Air Resources Board's (CARB) 2007 State Strategy 
(collectively the ``SJV PM2.5 SIP''). As part of this 
action, EPA disapproved the contingency measure provisions in the SJV 
PM2.5 SIP as failing to meet the requirements of Clean Air 
Act (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 41338, 41357 to 41559 (July 13, 2011) and 76 FR 69896, 69924 
(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 CAA section 179 and our regulations at 40 CFR 
52.31. As such, offset sanctions applied on July 9, 2013 and will 
continue to apply, 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 July 3, 2013, the State of California submitted as a SIP 
revision the SJVUAPCD's ``Quantifying Contingencies for the 2008 PM2.5 
Plan'' (dated June 20, 2013) (``Contingency Measure SIP''). In the 
Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, we are proposing to 
approve this SIP revision because we believe that 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 stay the imposition of 
the offset sanctions and to defer the imposition of the highway 
sanctions triggered by our November 9, 2011 partial disapproval.
    EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this 
stay and deferral of sanctions. If comments are submitted that change 
our assessment described in this final determination and the proposed 
full approval of the Contingency Measure SIP, we intend to take 
subsequent final action to re-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 stay the imposition 
of the offset sanctions and to defer the imposition of the highway 
sanctions associated with our partial disapproval of the SJV 
PM2.5 SIP, based on our concurrent proposal to approve the 
State's SIP revision as correcting the deficiency that initiated these 
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

[[Page 53039]]

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 or to keep applied sanctions in place 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 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 August 28, 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 October 28, 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: August 15, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2013-21011 Filed 8-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```