Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 45199 

Dated: June 27, 2011. 

Donald E. Laverdure, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary. 

Dated: July 12, 2011. 

Rhea S. Suh, 

Assistant Secretary—Policy, Management 

and Budget. 

[FR Doc. 2011–19060 Filed 7–27–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–6W–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0571; FRL–9444–7] 

Interim Final Determination To Defer 

Sanctions, San Joaquin Valley Unified 

Air Pollution Control District, CA 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim 

final determination to defer imposition 

of sanctions based on a proposed 

determination, published elsewhere in 

this Federal Register, that the State of 

California has submitted a rule that 

satisfies the requirements of Clean Air 

Act (CAA) Section 185 fee program. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on July 28, 2011. However, 

comments will be accepted until August 

29, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0571, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), 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 e-mail. 

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 e-mail 

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: Lily 

Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4114, 

wong.lily@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. Background 

On January 13, 2010 (75 FR 1716), 

EPA published a final limited approval 

and limited disapproval of revisions to 

the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA’s final 

action concerned SJVUAPCD Rule 3170, 

‘‘Federally Mandated Ozone 

Nonattainment Fee,’’ a fee rule which 

applied to major sources of volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides 

of nitrogen (NOX) emissions. SJVUAPCD 

submitted Rule 3170 pursuant to section 

185 of the CAA. EPA determined that 

while Rule 3170 strengthened the SIP, it 

did not fully meet the requirements of 

section 185 of the CAA. EPA’s final 

action started a sanctions clock for 

imposition of offset sanctions 18 months 

after February 12, 2010 and highway 

sanctions 6 months after offset 

sanctions, pursuant to section 179 of the 

CAA and our regulations at 40 CFR 

52.31. 

On May 19, 2011, SJVUAPCD 

amended Rule 3170 and on June 14, 

2011, the California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) submitted amended Rule 

3170. In the Proposed Rules section of 

today’s Federal Register, we have 

proposed approval of this submittal. 

Based on today’s proposed approval, we 

are taking this final rulemaking action, 

effective on publication, to defer 

imposition of sanctions that were 

triggered by our January 13, 2010 

limited approval and limited 

disapproval of Rule 3170, based on a 

finding that it is more likely than not 

that the SJVUAPCD has submitted a rule 

that meets the requirements of sections 

172(e) and 185 of the CAA. 

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 approval of Rule 3170, we 

would take final action proposing to 

partially or fully disapprove Rule 3170 

and lifting this deferral of the sanctions. 

If no comments are submitted that 

change our assessment, then with regard 

to the failure to meet the requirements 

of section 185 of the CAA, any imposed 

sanctions would no longer apply and 

any sanction clocks would be 

permanently terminated on the effective 

date of a final approval of Rule 3170. 

II. EPA Action 

We are making an interim final 

determination to defer CAA section 179 

sanctions associated with SJVUAPCD’s 

1-hour Ozone CAA section 185 

obligation based on our concurrent 

proposal to fully approve Rule 3170 as 

meeting sections 172(e) and 185 of the 

CAA. 

Because EPA has preliminarily 

determined that Rule 3170 meets the 

requirements of sections 172(e) and 185 

of the CAA and is fully approvable, 

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 submitted a 

revision to the SIP that meets sections 

172(e) and 185 of the CAA that was the 

basis for the action that started the 

sanctions clocks. Therefore, it is not in 

the public interest to impose sanctions. 

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 


rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
45200 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 (Public Law 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 July 

28, 2011. 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 September 26, 2011. 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, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: July 19, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–18992 Filed 7–27–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 64 

[Docket ID FEMA–2011–0002; Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–8189] 

Suspension of Community Eligibility 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule identifies 

communities, where the sale of flood 

insurance has been authorized under 

the National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP), that are scheduled for 

suspension on the effective dates listed 

within this rule because of 

noncompliance with the floodplain 

management requirements of the 

program. If the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) receives 

documentation that the community has 

adopted the required floodplain 

management measures prior to the 

effective suspension date given in this 

rule, the suspension will not occur and 

a notice of this will be provided by 

publication in the Federal Register on a 

subsequent date. 

DATES: Effective Dates: The effective 

date of each community’s scheduled 

suspension is the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) 

listed in the third column of the 

following tables. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you want to determine whether a 

particular community was suspended 

on the suspension date or for further 

information, contact David Stearrett, 

Mitigation Directorate, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 500 C 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, 

(202) 646–2953. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP 

enables property owners to purchase 

flood insurance which is generally not 

otherwise available. In return, 

communities agree to adopt and 

administer local floodplain management 

aimed at protecting lives and new 

construction from future flooding. 

Section 1315 of the National Flood 

Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 

U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance 

coverage as authorized under the NFIP, 

42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; unless an 

appropriate public body adopts 

adequate floodplain management 

measures with effective enforcement 

measures. The communities listed in 

this document no longer meet that 

statutory requirement for compliance 


rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES