Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12243 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart II—North Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry for entry for ‘‘8-Hour 

Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance 

Plan for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Maintenance Areas.’’ at 

the end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.1770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State effective date EPA approval 

date Federal Register citation Explanation 

*******

8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan 

for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem 

Maintenance Area.

August 2, 2012 ................. 2/22/13 [Insert citation of publication].

[FR Doc. 2013–04011 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0094; FRL–9783–3] 

Interim Final Determination To Stay 

and Defer Sanctions, Placer County Air 

Pollution Control District and Feather 

River 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 Placer County Air 

Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and 

Feather River Air Quality Management 

District (FRAQMD) portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) published elsewhere in this 

Federal Register. The SIP revision 

concerns two permitting rules submitted 

by the PCAPCD and FRAQMD, 

respectively: Rule 502, New Source 

Review, and Rule 10.1, New Source 

Review. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on February 22, 2013. 

However, comments will be accepted 

until March 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0094, 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 (Air3), 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 27, 2011 (76 FR 44809), we 

published a limited approval and 

limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 

502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1 as adopted 

locally on October 28, 2010 and October 

5, 2009, respectively. 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 27, 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 October 31, 2011 and February 7, 

2012, PCAPCD and FRAQMD adopted 

amended versions of Rules 502 and 

10.1, respectively, which were intended 

to correct the deficiencies identified in 

our July 27, 2011 limited disapproval 

action. On November 18, 2011 and 

September 21, 2012, the State submitted 

these amended rules to EPA. In the 

Proposed Rules section of today’s 

Federal Register, we are proposing a 

limited approval/limited disapproval of 

these rules because we believe it 

corrects the deficiencies identified in 

our July 27, 2011 disapproval action, 

but other revisions have created new 

deficiencies. Based on today’s proposed 

action, 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 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
12244 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

that were triggered by our July 27, 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 limited approval and 

limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 

502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1, 

respectively, 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 PCAPCD Rule 502 and 

FRAQMD Rule 10.1 (as adopted 2010 

and 2009 respectively) 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-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 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 noticeand-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. 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 22, 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 April 23, 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: February 12, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2013–04001 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES