[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 236 (Friday, December 9, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-30329]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 9, 1994]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 125-1-6804b; FRL-5119-8]
 

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision; Interim Final Determination That 
State Has Corrected Deficiencies

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register EPA has published a 
proposed rulemaking fully approving revisions to the California State 
Implementation Plan. The revisions concern San Diego County Air 
Pollution Control District Rule 67.3, Metal Parts and Products Coating 
Operations. The proposed rulemaking provides the public with an 
opportunity to comment on EPA's action approving Rule 67.3. Based on 
the proposed approval, EPA is making an interim final determination by 
this action that the State has corrected the deficiencies for which a 
sanctions clock was activated on May 13, 1993. This action will defer 
the application of the offset sanction and defer the application of the 
highway sanction. Although this action is effective upon publication, 
EPA will take comment. If comments are received on EPA's proposed 
approval and this interim final action, EPA will publish a final 
document taking into consideration any comments received.

DATES: The effective date is December 9, 1994.
    Comments must be received by January 9, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: Rulemaking Section (A-5-3), Air 
and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    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:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket 6102, 401 ``M'' Street, 
SW., Washington 20460.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake 
Drive, CA 92313-1095.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Helen Liu, Rulemaking Section (A-5-3), 
Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 
IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Telephone: (415) 744-
1199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On April 5, 1991, the State submitted San Diego County Air 
Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD) Rule 67.3, Metal Parts and 
Products Coating Operations, for which EPA published a limited 
disapproval in the Federal Register on May 13, 1993. (58 FR 28357). 
EPA's limited disapproval action started an 18-month clock for the 
application 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 November 23, 1994. The revised rule was adopted by the SDCAPCD 
on November 1, 1994. In the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal 
Register, EPA has proposed full approval of the State's submittal of 
SDCAPCD Rule 67.3, Metal Parts and Products Coating 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 final rulemaking action, effective on publication, finding 
that the State has corrected the deficiency. However, EPA is also 
providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this final 
action. If, based on any comments on this action and any comments on 
EPA's proposed 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 deficiency. 
As appropriate, EPA will also issue an interim final determination or a 
final determination that the deficiency has not been corrected. Until 
EPA takes such an action, the application of sanctions will continue to 
be deferred and/or stayed.
    This action does not stop the sanctions clock that started for this 
area on May 13, 1993. However, this action will defer the application 
of the offsets sanction and will defer the application of the highway 
sanction. See 59 FR 39832 (Aug. 4, 1994). If EPA's proposal fully 
approving the State's submittal becomes final, such action will 
permanently stop the sanctions clock and will permanently lift any 
applied, stayed or deferred sanctions. If EPA receives adverse comments 
and subsequently determines that the State, in fact, did not correct 
the disapproval deficiency, the sanctions consequences described in the 
sanctions rule will apply. See 59 FR 39832, to be 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 
clock. Based on this action, application of the offset sanction will be 
deferred and application of the highway sanction will be deferred until 
EPA takes final rulemaking action fully approving the State's submittal 
or until EPA takes action proposing or 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 applied, 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.1 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 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 clock. 
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 that it can to correct the deficiencies that triggered 
the sanctions clock. 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. Regulatory Process

    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.
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action 
from review under Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: December 2, 1994.
Nora L. McGee,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-30329 Filed 12-8-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P