Jump to main content.

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Bay Area Air Quality Management District

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

  [Federal Register: June 5, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 108)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33633-33635]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05jn03-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA275-0393c; FRL-7495-3]
 
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Bay Area 
Air Quality Management 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 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) portion of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP) published elsewhere in 
today's Federal Register. The revisions concern BAAQMD Rule 8-5--
Storage of Organic Liquids and 8-18--Equipment Leaks.

DATES: This interim final determination is effective on June 5, 2003. 
However, comments will be accepted until July 7, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    You can inspect copies of the submitted rule revisions and EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal 
business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted rule revisions 
and TSD at the following locations:

Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental

[[Page 33634]]

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; and,
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94109.

A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at 
http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm. Exit Disclaimer
    Please be advised that this is not an EPA Web site and may not 
contain the same version of the rule that was submitted to EPA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX, 
(415) 947-4111.

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

I. Background

    On October 10, 2001, (66 FR 51568), we published a limited approval 
and limited disapproval of BAAQMD Rules 8-5 and 8-18 as adopted locally 
on December 15, 1999 and January 7, 1998, respectively, and submitted 
by the State on March 28, 2000. We based our limited disapproval action 
on certain deficiencies in each submittal. This disapproval action 
started a sanctions clock for imposition of offset sanctions 18 months 
after November 9, 2001 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 November 27, 2002, BAAQMD adopted revisions to Rules 8-5 and 8-
18 that were intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our 
limited disapproval action. On January 21, 2003, the State submitted 
these revisions to EPA. In the Proposed Rules section of today's 
Federal Register, we have proposed approval of these submittals because 
we believe they correct the deficiencies identified in our October 10, 
2001 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 October 
10, 2001 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 BAAQMD Rules 8-5 and 8-18, 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 BAAQMD Rules 8-5 and 8-18 
based on our concurrent proposal to approve the State's SIP revision 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.
    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 (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. Sec.  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

[[Page 33635]]

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 5, 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 4, 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, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: April 28, 2003.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 03-13882 Filed 6-4-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.