[Federal Register: February 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 29)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 7095-7097]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12fe04-9]
[[Page 7095]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 52
Interim Final Determination To Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District; Revisions to the
California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District; Interim Final Rule and Proposed Rule
[[Page 7096]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA269-0438b; FRL-7621-2]
Interim Final Determination To Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 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 revisions
to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP)
published elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The revisions concern
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Rules 4701,
4702, 4703, 4305, 4306, and 4351.
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on February 12,
2004. However, comments will be accepted until March 15, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105 or e-mail to steckel.andrew@epa.gov, or
submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov.
You can inspect copies of the submitted rule revisions, EPA's
technical support documents (TSDs), and public comments at our Region
IX office during normal business hours by appointment. You may also see
copies of the submitted rule revisions by appointment at the following
locations:
Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 1990 E. Gettysburg
Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726.
A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm.
Please be advised that this is not
an EPA website and may not contain the same version of the rule that
was submitted to EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas C. Canaday, EPA Region IX,
(415) 947-4121, canaday.tom@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On February 28, 2002 (67 FR 9209), we published a limited approval
and limited disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 4305, Rule 4351, Rule 4701,
and Rule 4703. Rules 4305 and 4351 establish emission limits for oxides
of nitrogen (NOX) and other pollutants on certain boilers,
steam generators, and process heaters. Rule 4305 was adopted locally on
December 19, 1996, and submitted by the State on March 3, 1997. Rule
4351 was adopted locally on October 19, 1995, and submitted by the
State on March 26, 1996. Rule 4701 establishes NOX and other
pollutant emissions limits on certain stationary internal combustion
engines. Rule 4701 was adopted locally on December 19, 1996, and
submitted by the State on March 10, 1998. Rule 4703 establishes
NOX emissions limits on certain stationary gas turbines.
Rule 4703 was adopted locally on October 16, 1997, and submitted by the
State on March 10, 1998. We based our limited disapproval action on
certain deficiencies in these rules. See the proposed rule at 63 FR
49053 (September 14, 1998) and the final rule at 67 FR 9209 (February
28, 2002) for a discussion of these deficiencies. This limited
disapproval action started a sanctions clock for imposition of offset
sanctions 18 months after April 1, 2002, 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 August 21, 2003, SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 4351 and
Rule 4305 that were intended to correct certain deficiencies identified
in our limited disapproval action for these rules. On September 18,
2003, SJVUAPCD adopted new Rule 4306, which also limits emissions of
NOX and other pollutants on boilers, steam generators, and
process heaters. New Rule 4306 was intended in part to correct those
deficiencies in the previously-approved version of Rule 4305 that had
not been addressed through the revisions to Rule 4305 as adopted by
SJVUAPCD on August 21, 2003. On September 29, 2003, the State submitted
these SIP revisions to EPA.
On August 21, 2003, SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 4701, and
adopted a new Rule 4702, which also limits NOX and other
pollutant emissions from stationary internal combustion engines. The
revised Rule 4701 and new Rule 4702 were intended in part to correct
the deficiencies identified in our limited disapproval action for Rule
4701. On October 9, 2003, the State submitted these SIP revisions to
EPA. Finally, on April 25, 2002, SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to Rule
4703 that were intended in part to correct the deficiencies identified
in our limited disapproval action for this rule. On June 18, 2002, the
State submitted these SIP revisions to EPA.
In the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, we have
published notice of an action proposing approval of these SIP
submittals because we believe they correct the deficiencies identified
in our February 28, 2002 limited disapproval action. Based on today's
proposed action, we are taking this final rulemaking action, effective
on publication, to stay and/or defer imposition of sanctions that were
triggered by our February 28, 2002 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
approval of new or amended SJVUAPCD Rules 4305, 4306, 4351, 4701, 4702,
and 4703, then we intend to take subsequent 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
approving SJVUAPCD Rules 4305, 4305, 4351, 4701, 4702, and 4703.
II. EPA Action
We are making an interim final determination to stay and/or defer
CAA section 179 sanctions associated with SJVUAPCD Rules 4351, 4305,
4701, and 4703 based on our concurrent action proposing approval of
revisions to the State's SIP as correcting deficiencies that initiated
sanctions.
Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has
corrected the deficiencies 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.
[[Page 7097]]
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 February 12, 2004. 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 April 12, 2004. 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 3, 2004.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 04-3077 Filed 2-11-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P