Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 53935 

PART 51—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 51 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401–

7671q. 

■ 2. Section 51.100 is amended by 

adding paragraph (s)(6) to read as 

follows: 

§ 51.100 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(s) * * * 

(6) For the purposes of determining 

compliance with California’s aerosol 

coatings reactivity-based regulation, (as 

described in the California Code of 

Regulations, Title 17, Division 3, 

Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5, Article 3), 

any organic compound in the volatile 

portion of an aerosol coating is counted 

towards that product’s reactivity-based 

limit. Therefore, the compounds 

identified in paragraph (s) of this 

section as negligibly reactive and 

excluded from EPA’s definition of VOCs 

are to be counted towards a product’s 

reactivity limit for the purposes of 

determining compliance with 

California’s aerosol coatings reactivitybased regulation. 

* * * * * 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(338) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(338) New and amended regulations 

for the following agency were submitted 

on March 13, 2002, by the Governor’s 

designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) California Air Resources Board. 

(1) California Code of Regulations, 

Title 17, Division 3, Chapter 1, 

Subchapter 8.5, Consumer Products, 

Article 3, Aerosol Coating Products, 

Sections 94520 to 94528, and 

Subchapter 8.6, Maximum Incremental 

Reactivity, Article 1, Tables of 

Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR) 

Values, Sections 94700 to 94701, both 

adopted on May 1, 2001. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–18016 Filed 9–12–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[CA–319–0488c; FRL–7966–5] 

Interim Final Determination To Stay 

and/or Defer Sanctions, San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim 

final determination to stay and/or defer 

imposition of sanctions based on a 

proposed approval of revisions to the 

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) published 

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. 

The revisions concern San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District Rule 4623—Storage of Organic 

Liquids. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on September 13, 2005. 

However, comments will be accepted 

until October 13, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Andy 

Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR–

4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105 or email to steckel.andrew@epa.gov, or 

submit comments at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

You can inspect copies of the 

submitted rule revisions, EPA’s 

technical support document (TSD), and 

public comments at our Region IX office 

during normal business hours by 

appointment. You may also see copies 

of the submitted rule revisions by 

appointment at the following locations: 

Rulemaking Office (AIR–4), Air 

Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105; 

California Air Resources Board, 

Stationary Source Division, Rule 

Evaluation Section, 1001 ‘‘I’’ Street, 

Sacramento, CA 95814; and 

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District, 1990 East 

Gettysburg Street, Fresno, CA 93726. 

A copy of the rule may also be 

available via the Internet at http:// 

www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm. 

Please be advised that this is not an EPA 

Web site and may not contain the same 

version of the rule that was submitted 

to EPA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX, at 

either (415) 947–4111, or 

wamsley.jerry@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. Background 

On January 22, 2004 (69 Federal 

Register (FR) 3012), we published a 

limited approval and limited 

disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 4623 as 

adopted locally on December 20, 2001 

and submitted by the State on March 15, 

2002. We based our limited disapproval 

action on certain deficiencies in the 

submittal. This disapproval action 

started a sanctions clock for imposition 

of offset sanctions 18 months after 

February 23, 2004 and highway 

sanctions 6 months later, pursuant to 

section 179 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

and our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31. 

On May 19, 2005, SJVUAPCD adopted 

revisions to Rule 4623 that were 

intended to correct the deficiencies 

identified in our limited disapproval 

action. On July 15, 2005, the State 

submitted these revisions to EPA. In the 

Proposed Rules section of today’s 

Federal Register, we have proposed 

approval of this submittal because we 

believe it corrects the deficiencies 

identified in our January 22, 2004 

disapproval action. Based on today’s 

proposed approval, we are taking this 

final rulemaking action, effective on 

publication, to stay and/or defer 

imposition of sanctions that were 

triggered by our January 22, 2004 

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 the proposed full approval of 

revised SJVUAPCD Rule 4623, we 

intend to take subsequent final action to 

reimpose sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.31(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 and/or defer CAA 

section 179 sanctions associated with 

SJVUAPCD Rule 4623 based on our 

concurrent proposal to approve the 

State’s SIP revision as correcting 

deficiencies that initiated sanctions. 

Because EPA has preliminarily 

determined that the State has corrected 

the deficiencies identified in EPA’s 

53936 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

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/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 notice is to relieve a 

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

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action stays and/or 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 therefor, 

and established an effective date of 

September 13, 2005. 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 November 14, 2005. 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, Intergovernmental 

regulations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: August 19, 2005. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 05–18020 Filed 9–12–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[CA–319–0488a; FRL–7966–4] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the San 

Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 

Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of 

the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

emissions from facilities storing and 

processing organic liquids such as crude 

oil and petroleum by-products. We are 

approving SJVUAPCD Rule 4623, a rule 

regulating these emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 

(CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 14, 2005 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by October 13, 2005. If we 

receive such comments, we will publish 

a timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register to notify the public that this 

direct final rule will not take effect.