Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 6809 

1 87 FR 45730 (July 29, 2022). 

TABLE 1 TO § 36.2—CIVIL MONETARY PENALTY INFLATION ADJUSTMENTS—Continued 

Statute Description 

New maximum 

(and minimum, 

if applicable) 

penalty amount 

20 U.S.C. 1082(g) (section 432(g) of the HEA) ... Provides for a civil penalty, as set by Congress in 1986, of up to 

$25,000 for violations by lenders and guaranty agencies of title 

IV of the HEA, which authorizes the Federal Family Education 

Loan Program.

$71,545. 

20 U.S.C. 1094(c)(3)(B) (section 487(c)(3)(B) of 

the HEA).

Provides for a civil penalty, as set by Congress in 1986, of up to 

$25,000 for an IHE’s violation of title IV of the HEA, which authorizes various programs of student financial assistance.

$71,545. 

20 U.S.C. 1228c(c)(2)(E) (section 429 of the 

General Education Provisions Act).

Provides for a civil penalty, as set by Congress in 1994, of up to 

$1,000 for an educational organization’s failure to disclose certain information to minor students and their parents.

$2,111. 

31 U.S.C. 1352(c)(1) and (c)(2)(A) ....................... Provides for a civil penalty, as set by Congress in 1989, of 

$10,000 to $100,000 for recipients of Government grants, contracts, etc. that improperly lobby Congress or the executive 

branch with respect to the award of Government grants and 

contracts.

$25,132 to $251,322. 

31 U.S.C. 3802(a)(1) and (a)(2) ........................... Provides for a civil penalty, as set by Congress in 1986, of up to 

$5,000 for false claims and statements made to the Government.

$14,308. 

PART 668—STUDENT ASSISTANCE 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 668 

continues to read in part as follows: 

Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1001–1003, 1070g, 

1085, 1088, 1091, 1092, 1094, 1099c, 1099c– 

1, 1221e–3, and 1231a, unless otherwise 

noted. 

* * * * * 

§ 668.84 [Amended] 

■ 4. Section 668.84 is amended by: 

■ a. In paragraph (a)(1) introductory 

text, removing the number ‘‘$69,733’’ 

and adding, in its place, the number 

‘‘$71,545’’. 

■ b. Removing the parenthetical 

authority citation at the end of the 

section. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01419 Filed 1–16–25; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0627; FRL–12536– 

02–R9] 

Interim Final Determination To Defer 

Sanctions, San Joaquin Valley Unified 

Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final determination. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is making an interim final 

determination that the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB) has submitted 

a Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision on 

behalf of the San Joaquin Valley Unified 

Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVUAPCD or ‘‘District’’) that corrects 

deficiencies concerning the District’s 

new source review (NSR) stationary 

source permitting program. This 

determination is based on a proposed 

approval, published elsewhere in this 

issue of the Federal Register, of 

SJVUAPCD Rules 1020, 2020, and 2201. 

The effect of this interim final 

determination is to defer sanctions that 

were triggered by the EPA’s limited 

disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 2201 in 

2023. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective January 21, 2025. However, 

comments will be accepted on or before 

February 20, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0620 at https://

www.regulations.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. If you need 

assistance in a language other than 

English or if you are a person with a 

disability who needs a reasonable 

accommodation at no cost to you, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

St., San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: 

(415) 972–3959; email: lo.doris@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. EPA Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On July 10, 2023, we published a 

limited approval and limited 

disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 2201 as 

adopted locally on August 15, 2019.1

We based our limited disapproval action 

on deficiencies identified in the 

submitted rule. This limited approval 

and limited disapproval action started a 

sanctions clock for imposition of offset 

sanctions 18 months after August 9, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
6810 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 

2 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 

3 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). 

2023, and highway sanctions six 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 18 

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 April 20, 2023, SJVUAPCD 

amended Rules 1020 and 2201 to 

address the deficiencies that were the 

basis for our limited disapproval of Rule 

2201, as identified in our July 29, 2022, 

proposal. The State submitted these 

amended rules to the EPA on October 

13, 2023, along with other revisions to 

Rule 2020 adopted on December 18, 

2014. In the Proposed Rules section of 

this Federal Register, we are proposing 

a limited approval of these rules 

because we believe they correct the 

deficiencies identified in our July 10, 

2023 disapproval action and meet other 

applicable CAA requirements. This 

approval is limited because the EPA is 

simultaneously proposing a limited 

disapproval of the rules based on other 

revisions that do not meet applicable 

CAA requirements. Based on this 

proposed action, we are taking this final 

rulemaking action, effective on 

publication, to defer the imposition of 

the offset and highway sanctions that 

were triggered by our July 10, 2023 

limited disapproval. 

The 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 our proposed limited approval of 

SJVUAPCD Rules 1020, 2020, and 2201, 

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 

associated with our July 10, 2023 final 

action will be permanently terminated 

on the effective date of a final rule 

approval. 

II. EPA Action 

We are making an interim final 

determination to defer the imposition of 

the offset and highway sanctions 

associated with our limited disapproval 

of SJVUAPCD Rule 2201 (as adopted in 

2023) based on our concurrent proposal 

finding that the State’s SIP revision 

corrects the deficiencies that initiated 

the sanctions. 

Because the EPA has preliminarily 

determined that the State has corrected 

the deficiencies identified in the EPA’s 

July 10, 2023 limited disapproval 

action, relief from sanctions should be 

provided as quickly as possible. 

Therefore, the 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.2

However, by this action, the EPA is 

providing the public with an 

opportunity to comment on the EPA’s 

determination after the effective date, 

and the EPA will consider any 

comments received in determining 

whether to reverse such action. 

The EPA believes that notice-andcomment rulemaking before the 

effective date of this action is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. The 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 were the 

basis for the limited disapproval that 

started the sanctions clocks. Therefore, 

it is not in the public interest to apply 

sanctions. The EPA believes that it is 

necessary to use the interim final 

rulemaking process to defer sanctions 

while the EPA completes its rulemaking 

process on the approvability of the 

State’s submittal. Moreover, with 

respect to the effective date of this 

action, the 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.3

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action defers Federal sanctions 

and imposes no additional 

requirements. For that reason, this 

action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 

21879, April 11, 2023); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• 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); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

because it proposes to approve a state 

program; 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); and 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian Tribe has demonstrated that a 

Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on communities with 

environmental justice (EJ) concerns to 

the greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. Executive Order 

14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) 

builds on and supplements Executive 

Order 12898 and defines EJ as, among 

other things, ‘‘the just treatment and 

meaningful involvement of all people, 

regardless of income, race, color, 

national origin, Tribal affiliation, or 

disability, in agency decision-making 

and other Federal activities that affect 

human health and the environment.’’ 

The State did not evaluate EJ 

considerations as part of its SIP 

submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis 

and did not consider EJ in this action. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of Executive Orders 

12898 and 14096 of achieving EJ for 

communities with EJ concerns. 

This action is subject to the 

Congressional Review Act, and the EPA 

will submit a rule report to each House 

of the Congress and to the Comptroller 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 6811 

1EPA received comments opposing the removal 

of the ANR from the Sierra Club, the Ohio 

Environmental Council, Ohio Citizen Action, 

Altman Newman Co. LPA, the National Resources 

Defense Council, and more than 1800 individual 

commenters who submitted their comments as part 

of a letter-writing campaign. See Docket ID No. 

EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0055. All documents in the 

docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

website. 

2See ‘‘Sierra Club, Ohio Environmental Council, 

Ohio Citizen Action, Altman Newman Co. LPA, and 

Natural Resources Defense Council Comments 

Regarding EPA Proposed Removal of the Air 

Pollution Nuisance Rule from the Ohio State 

Implementation Plan (SIP),’’ Docket ID No. EPA– 

R05–OAR–2020–0055. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. 

General of the United States. This action 

is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). The CRA allows the 

issuing agency to make a rule effective 

sooner than otherwise provided by the 

CRA if the agency makes a good cause 

finding that notice and comment 

rulemaking procedures are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). 

The EPA has made a good cause finding 

for this action as discussed in Section II 

of this preamble, including the basis for 

that finding. 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by March 24, 2025. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action for 

the purposes of judicial review nor does 

it extend the time within which a 

petition for judicial review may be filed, 

and it shall not postpone the 

effectiveness of such rule or action. This 

action may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce its requirements 

(see CAA section 307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ammonia, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: January 13, 2025. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01215 Filed 1–17–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0055; FRL–11687– 

02–R5] 

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Withdrawal of 

Technical Amendment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

correct a November 19, 2020, 

rulemaking removing the Air Nuisance 

Rule (ANR) from the Ohio State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). This action 

is in response to a February 10, 2023, 

decision by the United States Court of 

Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Sixth 

Circuit or Court) to remand without 

vacatur EPA’s removal of the ANR from 

the Ohio SIP. Because the Court did not 

vacate EPA’s removal of the ANR, the 

ANR is currently not in Ohio’s SIP. 

After reevaluating EPA’s November 19, 

2020, rulemaking, upon remand, EPA 

proposed to determine that its 

November 2020 final action was in 

error, and to correct that action by 

reinstating the ANR as part of the Ohio 

SIP. EPA proposed to take this action on 

February 22, 2024 and received both 

supportive and adverse comments. EPA 

is finalizing this action as proposed, and 

upon the effective date of this action, 

the ANR will be reinstated into the Ohio 

SIP. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

February 20, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0055. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information (CBI), Proprietary Business 

Information (PBI), or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either through https://

www.regulations.gov or at the 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Christos 

Panos, at (312) 353–8328 before visiting 

the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christos Panos, Air and Radiation 

Division (AR–18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 353–8328, panos.christos@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

I. Background 

A detailed history of this matter is 

provided in EPA’s February 22, 2024, 89 

FR 13304, notice of proposed 

rulemaking (February 2024 Proposed 

Rule). It includes a discussion of EPA’s 

previous rulemaking action to remove 

the ANR, OAC 3745–15–07, from the 

Ohio SIP, which EPA proposed on 

March 23, 2020, 85 FR 16309 (March 

2020 Proposed Rule) and finalized on 

November 19, 2020, 85 FR 73636 

(November 2020 Final Rule). That 

action relied on EPA’s error-correction 

authority under Clean Air Act (CAA or 

Act) section 110(k)(6). In that action, 

EPA concluded that we had erred by 

approving the ANR into Ohio’s SIP 

because we determined that the ANR 

was not relied upon by Ohio to 

demonstrate the implementation, 

maintenance, attainment, or 

enforcement of any National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). 

During the public comment period for 

the March 2020 Proposed Rule to 

remove the ANR from the Ohio SIP, 

EPA received comments from the Sierra 

Club and other environmental groups,1

referred to in this action collectively as 

‘‘Environmental Commenters,’’ asserting 

that EPA’s approval of the ANR as part 

of the SIP was not an error and that 

EPA’s use of its error correction 

authority to remove the ANR from 

Ohio’s SIP was unlawful. These 

comments stated that the ANR was an 

‘‘important regulatory tool in achieving 

and maintaining the NAAQS,’’ and that 

its removal from the SIP ‘‘ignored the 

role of citizen suits in CAA 

enforcement.’’ Further, these comments 

identified procedural concerns with 

EPA’s error correction, and stated that 

EPA was required to adhere to the SIP 

revision process to remove the ANR 

from Ohio’s SIP, which would include 

addressing the requirements of section 

193 of the CAA to demonstrate that no 

backsliding would result from this 

change. Additionally, these comments 

addressed the use of the ANR in 

enforcement actions.2 These comments 

asserted that EPA had failed to consider 

the impact of eliminating the only 

available pathway for Ohio residents to 

enforce the ANR. Therefore, the 

commenters maintained, removing the 

ANR from the SIP prevents local 

governments and non-governmental 

organizations, as well as affected Ohio 

communities, from directly enforcing 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1