[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 121 (Tuesday, June 24, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37420-37421]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-15898]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA286-0404B; FRL-7517-9]


Interim Final Determination That the State of California Has 
Corrected Deficiencies and Stay and Deferral of Sanctions; San Joaquin 
Valley Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim final determination that the State of 
California has corrected deficiencies for which a sanctions clock began 
on December 10, 2001, based on a proposed approval of revisions to the 
San Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment area portion of the California 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) and an associated proposed finding 
published elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The revisions concern 
commitments for adoption of control measures for attaining the 1-hour 
ozone national ambient air quality standard. This action will stay the 
2:1 offset sanctions that was imposed in the area on June 10, 2003 and 
defer the imposition of the highway sanctions.

DATES: This interim final determination is effective on June 24, 2003. 
However, comments will be accepted until July 24, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Doris Lo at [email protected] or at U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (Air-2), 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105.
    You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revision at the 
following locations by appointment:

Planning Office (AIR-2), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 East 
Gettysburg, Fresno, CA

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3959.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

I. Background

    On January 8, 1997 (62 FR 1149), EPA published a final approval of 
the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 
(SJVUAPCD) portion of the 1994 California ozone SIP. This SIP included, 
among other things, a commitment to adopt and implement 19 local 
control measures. On November 8, 2001 (66 FR 56476), EPA found that the 
SJVUAPCD had failed to implement six of the 19 control measure 
commitments. This finding began a sanctions clock for imposition of 2:1 
offset sanctions 18 months after December 11, 2001, and highway 
sanctions 6 months later, pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA). The offset sanction was imposed on June 11, 2003.
    On December 6, 2001, SJVUAPCD adopted a revised set of control 
measure commitments that was intended in part to address EPA's previous 
finding regarding non-implementation of the SIP. On June 11, 2002, the 
State submitted these revised commitments to EPA. In the Proposed Rules 
section of today's Federal Register, we have proposed approval of this 
submittal and have proposed to find that adoption and implementation of 
specified rules in the submittal and 14 CCR 1774 and 13 CCR 2450-2466 
correct the deficiencies that resulted in the previous finding 
regarding non-implementation.

II. EPA Action

    Based on today's proposed approval and finding, we believe that it 
is more likely than not that the State has corrected the deficiencies 
that resulted in the non-implementation finding that started the offset 
and highway sanctions clocks. We are therefore taking final rulemaking 
action, effective on publication, to stay the offset sanctions and 
defer imposition of the highway sanctions that were triggered by our 
November 8, 2001 finding.
    EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this 
final action. If comments are submitted that change our assessment 
described in this final determination and the proposed approval of the 
revised commitments and associated finding, 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 and finding.
    Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has 
corrected the deficiencies that resulted in EPA's finding of non-
implementation, 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.

[[Page 37421]]

    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 and associated finding, 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 keep applied sanctions in place or to impose additional 
sanctions 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 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 stay and defer 
sanctions while EPA completes its rulemaking process on the 
approvability of the State's submittal and associated finding. 
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 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 therefor, and established an effective 
date of June 24, 2003. 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 August 25, 2003. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 13, 2003.
Jack P. Broadbent,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 03-15898 Filed 6-23-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P