Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Interim final determination.
Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA has published a direct final rulemaking fully approving revisions to the California State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) Rule 2.32. EPA has also published a proposed rulemaking to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on EPA's action. If a person submits adverse comments on EPA's direct final action, EPA will withdraw its direct final rule and will consider any comments received before taking final action on the State's submittal. Based on the proposal, EPA is making an interim final determination by this action that the State has corrected the deficiency for which a sanctions clock began on January 13, 2000. This action will stay the imposition of the offset and highway sanctions. Although this action is effective upon publication, EPA will take comment. If no comments are received on EPA's approval of the State's submittal, the direct final action published in today's Federal Register will also finalize EPA's determination that the State has corrected the deficiencies that started the sanctions clock. If comments are received on EPA's approval and this interim final action, EPA will publish a final notice taking into consideration any comments received.
This document is effective January 28, 2002. Comments must be received by February 27, 2002.
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 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:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section, 1001 “I” Street, Sacramento, CA 95812
Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 1947 Galileo Court, Suite 103, Davis, CA 95616Start Further Info
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.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
On September 28, 1994, the State submitted YSAQMD Rule 2.32, for which EPA published a limited disapproval in the Federal Register on January 13, 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 YSAQMD rule 2.32 on November 28, 2001. EPA is taking direct final action on this submittal pursuant to its modified direct final policy set forth at 59 FR 24054 (May 10, 1994). In the Rules section of today's Federal Register, EPA has issued a direct final full approval of the State of California's submittal of Rule 2.32. In addition, in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, EPA has proposed full approval of the State's submittal.
Based on the proposal 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 interim final rulemaking action, effective on publication, finding that the State has corrected the deficiencies. 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 full 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 deficiencies. As appropriate, EPA will also issue an interim final determination or a final determination that the deficiencies have been corrected.
This action does not stop the sanctions clock that started for this area on January 13, 2000. However, this action will stay the imposition of the offset and highway sanctions. If EPA's direct final action fully approving the State's submittal becomes effective, such action will permanently stop the sanctions clock and will permanently lift any imposed, stayed or deferred sanctions. If EPA must withdraw the direct final action based on adverse comments and EPA subsequently determines that the State, in fact, did not correct the disapproval deficiencies, EPA will also determine that the State did not correct the deficiency and the sanctions consequences described in the sanctions rule will apply.
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 and highway sanctions will be stayed until EPA's direct final action fully approving the State's submittal becomes effective or until EPA takes action proposing or finally disapproving in whole or part the State submittal. If EPA's direct final action fully approving the State submittal becomes effective, at that time any sanctions clocks will be permanently stopped and any imposed sanctions will be permanently lifted.
Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has an 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 document 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 approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 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 Start Printed Page 3820Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, 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).
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 approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, 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.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. 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. 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. 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 March 29, 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).)Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
- Environmental protection
- Air pollution control
- Incorporation by reference
- Intergovernmental regulations
- Nitrogen dioxide
- Reporting and recordkeeping
Dated: December 28, 2001.
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 02-2006 Filed 1-25-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P