[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 35 (Thursday, February 21, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7960-7961]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-3915]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 253-0321c; FRL-7139-4]


Interim Final Determination That State Has Corrected the Rule 
Deficiencies and Stay of Sanctions, El Dorado County Air Pollution 
Control District, State of California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final determination.

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

SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA has proposed 
conditional approval of revisions to the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions concern El Dorado County Air 
Pollution Control District (EDCAPCD) Rule 233. Based on the proposed 
conditional approval, EPA is making an interim final determination that 
the State has corrected deficiencies in the rule for which a sanction 
clock began on February 14, 2000. This action will stay the imposition 
of the offset sanctions and defer the imposition of the highway 
sanctions. Although this action is effective upon publication, EPA will 
take comment and will publish a final rule taking into consideration 
any comments received on this interim final determination.

DATES: This document is effective February 21, 2002. Comments must be 
received by March 25, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted to Andrew Steckel, 
Rulemaking Section (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report for the 
rule are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office 
during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule revisions 
are available for inspection at the following locations:

Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105.
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' 
Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District, 2850 Fairlane 
Court, Building C, Placerville, CA 95667.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charnjit Bhullar, Rulemaking Office, 
AIR-4, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 972-
3960.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On October 20, 1994, the State submitted EDCAPCD Rule 233, for 
which EPA published a limited disapproval in the Federal Register on 
January 13, 2000 (65 FR 2052). The effective date of our limited 
disapproval was February 14, 2000. EPA's disapproval action started an 
18-month clock for the imposition of one sanction (followed by a second 
sanction 6 months later) and a 24-month clock for promulgation of a 
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). The State subsequently submitted a 
revised version of Rule 233 on November 09, 2001. In the Proposed Rules 
section of today's Federal Register, EPA has proposed conditional 
approval of the November 2001 submittal.
    Based on the proposed conditional approval, EPA believes that it is 
more likely than not that the State has corrected the original 
disapproval deficiencies. Therefore, EPA is taking this interim final 
rulemaking action finding that the State has corrected the 
deficiencies. However, EPA is 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 EPA's proposed conditional 
approval, EPA determines that the State's submittal is not approvable 
and this interim final action was inappropriate, EPA will propose to 
disapprove the State's submittal and will take interim final action 
finding that the State has not corrected the original disapproval 
deficiencies. Upon a final disapproval of the State's submittal, EPA 
would finalize the interim final finding, finding that the State has 
not corrected the deficiencies.
    This action does not stop the sanctions clock that started for this 
area on February 14, 2000, the effective date of our disapproval. 
However, this action will stay the imposition of the offset sanction 
and will defer imposition of the highway sanction. See 40 CFR 
52.31(d)(2)(ii). If EPA takes final action conditionally approving the 
State's submittal, such action will continue any deferral or stay of 
the offset and highway sanctions. When the State meets its commitment 
and EPA takes final action fully approving the State's submittal 
meeting those commitments, such action will permanently stop the 
sanctions clock and will permanently lift any imposed, stayed or 
deferred sanctions. However, if at any time EPA determines that the 
State, in fact, did not correct the disapproval deficiencies, as 
appropriate, EPA 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 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, imposition of the offset sanction will be 
stayed and imposition of the highway sanction will be deferred until 
EPA takes final action fully approving the State's submittal or EPA 
takes action proposing or finally disapproving in whole or part the 
State submittal. If EPA takes final action conditionally approving the 
State's submittal, any deferral or stay of the sanctions clock will 
remain in place. If EPA subsequently takes final action fully approving 
the State submittal meeting its commitment, any sanctions clocks will 
be permanently stopped and any imposed, stayed or deferred sanctions 
will be permanently lifted.
    Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has an

[[Page 7961]]

approvable plan, relief from sanctions should be provided as quickly as 
possible. Therefore, EPA is 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. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 32111, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). 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 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also 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 also 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 action 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, 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (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 effected conduct. EPA has compiled 
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 impractible, 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 February 21, 
2002. 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 action is 
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    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 April 22, 2002. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rules. 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 relations, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: January 23, 2002.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 02-3915 Filed 2-20-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P