[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 217 (Thursday, November 10, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68337-68339]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22378]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R09-OAR-2005-AZ-0007, FRL-7994-6]
Interim Final Determination to Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, Pinal
County Air Quality Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim final determination to stay and/or
defer imposition of sanctions based on a proposed approval of a
revision to the Pinal County Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD)
portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) published
elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The revisions concern PCAQCD
Rule 2-8-300.
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on November 10,
2005. However, comments will be accepted until December 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number R09-OAR-2005-
AZ-0007, by one of the following methods:
Agency Website: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. EPA prefers
receiving comments through this electronic public docket and comment
system. Follow the on-line instructions to submit comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions.
E-mail: [email protected].
Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through the
agency website, eRulemaking portal, or e-mail. The agency website and
eRulemaking portal are Aanonymous access'' systems, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
[[Page 68338]]
copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either
location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On April 28, 2004 (69 FR 23103), we published a limited approval
and limited disapproval of PCAQCD Rule 2-8-300 as adopted locally on
June 29, 1993 and submitted by the State on November 27, 1995. We based
our limited disapproval action a deficiency in the submittal. This
disapproval action started a sanctions clock for imposition of offset
sanctions 18 months after May 28, 2005 and highway sanctions 6 months
later, pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and our
regulations at 40 CFR 52.31.
On May 18, 2005, PCAQCD adopted revisions to Rule 2-8-300 that were
intended to correct the deficiency identified in our limited
disapproval action. On September 12, 2005, the State submitted these
revisions to EPA. In the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal
Register, we have proposed approval of this submittal because we
believe it corrects the deficiency identified in our April 28, 2004
disapproval action. Based on today's proposed approval, we are taking
this final rulemaking action, effective on publication, to stay and/or
defer imposition of sanctions that were triggered by our April 28, 2004
limited disapproval.
EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this
stay/deferral of sanctions. If comments are submitted that change our
assessment described in this final determination and the proposed full
approval of revised PCAQCD Rule 2-8-300, 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.
II. EPA Action
We are making an interim final determination to stay and/or defer
CAA section 179 sanctions associated with PCAQCD Rule 2-8-300 based on
our concurrent proposal to approve the State's SIP revision as
correcting a deficiency that initiated sanctions.
Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has
corrected the deficiency 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 (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.
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
clocks. 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 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/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 notice is to relieve
a restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)).
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action stays and/or 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 (Pub. L. 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 November 10, 2005. 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
[[Page 68339]]
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
January 9, 2006. 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: October 19, 2005.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 05-22378 Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P