[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 197 (Friday, October 10, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52946-52947]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26855]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 198-0056; FRL-5907-2]


California State Implementation Plan Revision; Interim Final 
Determination That State Has Corrected Deficiencies

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final determination.

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

SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA has published a 
notice of proposed rulemaking fully approving revisions to the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions concern a 
rule from the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District 
(SDCAPCD): Rule 67.10, Kelp Processing and Bio-Polymer Manufacturing 
Operations. Based on the proposed full approval, EPA is making an 
interim final determination by this action that the State has corrected 
the deficiencies for which sanctions clocks began on April 15, 1996. 
This action will defer the imposition of the offsets sanction and defer 
the imposition of the highway sanction. Although the interim final 
action is effective upon publication, EPA will take comment. If no 
comments are received on EPA's proposed approval of the State's 
submittal, EPA will finalize its determination that the State has 
corrected the deficiencies that started the sanctions clocks by 
publishing a notice of final rulemaking in the Federal Register. If 
comments are received on EPA's proposed approval and this interim final 
action, EPA will publish a final rule taking into consideration any 
comments received.

DATES: Effective: October 10, 1997. Comments must be received by 
November 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office 
(AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 94105-3901.
    The state submittal and EPA's analysis for that submittal, which 
are the basis for this action, are available for public review at the 
above address and at the following locations:

San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake Drive, 
San Diego, CA 92123-1096
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia A. Bowlin, Rulemaking Office 
(AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, (415) 744-1188.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 13, 1994, the State submitted SDCAPCD Rule 67.10, Kelp 
Processing and Bio-Polymer Manufacturing Operations. EPA published a 
limited approval/limited disapproval for this rule in the Federal 
Register on February 14, 1996. 61 FR 5701. EPA's disapproval action 
started an 18-month clock for the imposition of one sanction (followed 
by a second sanction 6 months later) under section 179 of the Clean Air 
Act (Act) and a 24-month clock for promulgation of a Federal 
Implementation Plan (FIP) under section 110(c) of the Act. The State 
subsequently submitted a revised rule on August 1, 1997. The revised 
rule was adopted by SDCAPCD on June 25, 1997. In the Proposed Rules 
section of today's Federal Register, EPA has proposed full approval of 
the State of California's submittal of SDCAPCD's Rule 67.10, Kelp 
Processing and Bio-Polymer Manufacturing Operations.
    Based on the proposed approval set forth in today's Federal 
Register, EPA believes that it is more likely than not that the State 
has corrected the original disapproval deficiencies. Therefore, EPA is 
taking this interim final rulemaking action, effective on publication, 
finding that the State has corrected the deficiencies. However, EPA is 
also providing the public with an

[[Page 52947]]

opportunity to comment on this final action. If, based on any comments 
on this action and any comments on EPA's proposed full approval of the 
State's submittal, EPA determines that the State's submittal is not 
fully approvable and this final action was inappropriate, EPA will 
either propose or take final action finding that the State has not 
corrected the original disapproval deficiencies. As appropriate, EPA 
will also issue an interim final determination or a final determination 
that the deficiencies have not been corrected. Until EPA takes such 
action, the application of sanctions will continue to be deferred and/
or stayed.
    This action does not stop the sanctions clocks that started for 
this area on April 15, 1996. However, this action will defer the 
imposition of the offsets sanction and will defer the imposition of the 
highway sanction. See 59 FR 39832 (August 4, 1994). If EPA publishes a 
notice of final rulemaking fully approving the State's submittal, such 
action will permanently stop the sanctions clock and will permanently 
lift any imposed, stayed, or deferred sanctions. If EPA must withdraw 
the proposed full approval based on adverse comments and EPA 
susequently determines that the State, in fact, did not correct the 
disapproval deficiencies, the sanctions consequences described in the 
sanctions rule will apply. See 59 FR 39832, codified at 40 CFR 52.31.

II. EPA Action

    EPA is taking interim final action finding that the State has 
corrected the disapproval deficiencies that started the sanctions 
clocks. Based on this action, imposition of the offsets sanction will 
be deferred and imposition of the highway sanction will be deferred 
until EPA's final action fully approving the State's submittal becomes 
effective or until EPA proposes or takes final action disapproving in 
whole or part the State submittal. If EPA's proposed rulemaking action 
fully approving the State submittal becomes final, at that time any 
sanctions clocks will be permanently stopped and any imposed, stayed, 
or deferred sanctions will be permanently lifted.
    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.<SUP>1</SUP> 5 U.S.C. 
553(b)(3). 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 temporarily stay 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 document is to 
relieve a restriction. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As previously noted, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit 
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations 
of less than 50,000.
    This action temporarily relieves sources of an additional burden 
potentially placed on them by the sanctions provisions of the Act. 
Therefore, I certify that it does not have an impact on any small 
entities.

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed 
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in 
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector or to 
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
    Through submission of this State implementation plan or plan 
revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have 
elected to adopt the program provided for under Part D of the Clean Air 
Act. This rule may bind State, local, and tribal governments to perform 
certain actions and also require the private sector to perform certain 
duties. The rule being proposed for approval by this action will impose 
no new requirements because affected sources are already subject to 
these regulations under State law. Therefore, no additional costs to 
State, local, or tribal governments or to the private sector result 
from this action. EPA has also determined that this action does not 
include a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or 
more to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the 
private sector.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under section 801(a)(1)(A) of the Administrative Procedure Act 
(APA) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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 General Accounting 
Office prior to publication of the rule in today's Federal Register. 
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by section 804(2) of the 
APA as amended.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Intergovernmental regulations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: October 1, 1997.
Harry Seraydarian,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-26855 Filed 10-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P