Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0571-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Deferment of Sanctions: California; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
Posted Date: 2011-07-28T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 145 (Thursday, July 28, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45199-45200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18992]

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

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 e-mail 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-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 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

[[Page 45200]]

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. Sec.  
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