[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 72 (Thursday, April 13, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19992-19993]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-8832]



  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 72 / Thursday, April 13, 2000 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 19992]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ092-002; FRL-6575-2]


Interim Final Determination that State has Corrected the Plan 
Deficiency and Stay of Sanctions; Phoenix PM-10 Nonattainment Area, 
Arizona

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final determination.

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

SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA is proposing to 
approve under the Clean Air Act (CAA) provisions of the Revised MAG 
1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM-10 for the Maricopa County 
(Phoenix, Arizona) Nonattainment Area (MAG plan), February 2000, and 
control measures on which it relies, that address the annual 
particulate matter (PM-10) national ambient air quality standard. Based 
on this proposed approval, we are making an interim final determination 
that the State of Arizona has corrected the deficiencies in the PM-10 
state implementation plan for the Phoenix area for which a sanctions 
clock began on September 2, 1998. This action will stay the imposition 
of the offset sanction and defer the imposition of the highway 
sanction. Although this action is effective upon publication, we will 
take comment and will publish a final rule taking into consideration 
any comments received on this interim final determination.

DATES: This interim final determination is effective April 13, 2000.
    Comments must be received by June 12, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted to Frances Wicher at the 
Region 9 office listed below.
    A copy of docket No. AZ-MA-00-001, containing material relevant to 
this action and our proposed approval of the MAG plan, is available for 
public inspection at EPA's Region 9 office during normal business 
hours.
    A copy of the docket is also available for inspection at:

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Library, 3033 N. Central 
Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85012, (602) 207-2217.
Maricopa Association of Governments, 302 North 1st Street, Phoenix, 
Arizona 85003, (602) 254-6300.

Electronic Availability

    This document, our proposed approval of the MAG plan and the 
Technical Support Document (TSD) for the approval, are also available 
as an electronic file on EPA's Region 9 Web Page at http://www.epa.gov/region09/air.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frances Wicher, Office of Air 
Planning, AIR-2, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: 
(415) 744-1248, Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 3, 1998, we disapproved the provisions for implementing 
reasonably available control measure (RACM) for the annual standard in 
the 1991 MAG Moderate Area PM-10 Plan because the plan failed to 
implement RACM for a number of significant sources of PM-10. We also 
disapproved the attainment demonstration because the failure to 
implement RACM meant the plan no longer conclusively demonstrated that 
attainment of the PM-10 standard by the end of 1994, the moderate area 
attainment date, was impracticable. 63 FR 41326.
    Our 1998 disapprovals started sanction clocks under CAA section 
179(a). Under section 179(a), once we disapprove a state plan provision 
because it fails to meet a CAA requirement, a State has 18 months to 
correct the deficiency that resulted in the disapproval before the 
first of two sanctions goes into place.\1\ If the state still has not 
corrected the deficiency with 24 months, the second sanction goes into 
place. The offset sanction was imposed in the Phoenix nonattainment 
area on March 2, 2000. It will be followed by the imposition of a 
second sanction, highway funding and approval limitations, on September 
2, 2000 if we do not defer or stop the sanction clock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The two CAA sanctions are a limitation on certain highway 
approvals and funding and an increase in the offset ratio to 2 to 1 
for any major new stationary source or major modification. See CAA 
section 179(b). Our sanction regulations provide that the first 
sanction to be imposed is the offset ratio unless we have 
established at the time of the disapproval that the highway sanction 
will be first. 40 CFR 52.31(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 16, 2000, Arizona submitted the revised MAG serious 
area PM-10 plan, Revised MAG 1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM-
10 for the Maricopa County (Phoenix, Arizona) Nonattainment Area, 
February 2000. In the Proposed Rule section of today's Federal 
Register, we are proposing to approve the plan's provisions for the 
implementation of RACM and the attainment demonstration as they pertain 
to the annual standard.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As a serious PM-10 nonattainment area, the plan must now 
provide for both the implementation of RACM and best available 
control measures (BACM) under CAA section 189(a)(1)(C) and 
(b)(1)(B). While we also proposed to approve the BACM provisions of 
the MAG serious area plan, that determination is not relevant to the 
sanction issue addressed here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our proposed approval of the annual standard provisions in 
the MAG plan elsewhere in today's Federal Register, we believe that it 
is more likely than not that Arizona has corrected the original 
deficiencies that prompted our disapprovals. Therefore, we are taking 
this interim final rulemaking action finding that the State has 
corrected the deficiencies. However, we are also providing the public 
with a opportunity to comment on this interim final action. If, based 
on the comments on this action and the comments on our proposed 
approval of the State's submittal, we determine that the State's 
submittal does not comply with the CAA's requirements for RACM and 
attainment and this interim final action was inappropriate, we will 
propose to disapprove the State's submittal and will take interim final 
action finding that the State has not corrected the original 
disapproval deficiency. Upon a final disapproval of the State's 
submittal, we would finalize the interim final finding, finding that 
the State has not corrected the deficiency.
    This action does not stop the sanctions clock that started for this 
area on September 2, 1998, the effective date of our disapproval. 
However, this action will stay the imposition of the offset sanction 
and will defer the imposition of the highway sanction. See 40 CFR 
51.31(d)(2)(i). If we take final action approving the MAG plan's 
implementation of RACM and attainment demonstration provisions for the 
annual standard, such action will stop the sanctions clock and will 
lift any imposed, stayed or deferred sanctions. However, if at any time 
we determine that the State, in fact, did not correct the deficiencies, 
as appropriate, we either will withdraw this interim final 
determination or take final action finding that the State has not 
corrected the deficiencies. Such action will retrigger the sanctions 
consequences as described in the sanctions rule. 40 CFR 52.31.

II. EPA Action

    We are taking interim final action finding that the State has 
corrected the deficiencies that started the sanctions clock. Based on 
this action, imposition of the offset sanction will be stayed and

[[Page 19993]]

imposition of the highway sanction will be deferred until we take final 
action fully approving the MAG plan's implementation of RACM and 
attainment demonstration provisions for the annual standard or finally 
disapproving these provisions.
    Because we have preliminarily determined that Arizona has an 
approvable plan, relief from sanctions should be provided as quickly as 
possible. Therefore, we are invoking the good cause exception to the 
30-day notice requirement of the Administrative Procedure Act because 
the purpose of this notice is to relieve a restriction. See 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(1).

III. Administrative 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 
merely stays and defers federal sanctions. Accordingly, the 
Administrator certifies that this rule 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.). Because this rule 
only stays an imposed sanction and defers the imposition of another, it 
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). For the same reason, this rule also 
does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal 
governments, as specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 
10, 1998). This rule will 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), because it merely stays a sanction and 
defers another one, and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    This rule does not contain technical standards, thus, the 
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required 
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), 
in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate 
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and 
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied 
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining 
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
    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, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. However, section 808 provides that any rule for which 
the issuing agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding 
and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rule) 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). As stated 
previously, EPA has made such a good cause finding, including the 
reasons therefor, and established an effective date of April 13, 2000. 
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. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as 
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: April 3, 2000.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 00-8832 Filed 4-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P