![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Interim Final Determination to Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, Yolo- Solano Air Quality Management District
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: February 1, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 21)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5174-5176]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01fe06-8]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2005-0557c; FRL-8024-9]
Interim Final Determination to Stay and/or Defer Sanctions, Yolo-
Solano Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim final determination to stay sanctions
based on a proposed approval of revisions to the Yolo-Solano Air
Quality Management District (YSAQMD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) published elsewhere in today's Federal
Register. The revisions concern Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management
District Rule 2.21, Organic Liquid Storage and Transfer.
DATES: This interim final determination is effective on February 1,
2006. However, comments will be accepted until March 3, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number [DOCKET
NUMBER], by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, 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 http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov
is an ``anonymous access'' system, 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
[[Page 5175]]
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://www.regulations.gov 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., 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX, at
either (415) 947-4111, or wamsley.jerry@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
I. Background
On January 22, 2004 (69 FR 3012), we published a limited approval
and limited disapproval of Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District
Rule 2.21 as adopted locally on June 12, 2002 and submitted by the
State on August 6, 2002. We based our limited disapproval action on
certain deficiencies in the submittal. This disapproval action started
a sanctions clock for imposition of offset sanctions 18 months after
January 22, 2004 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 September 14, 2005, YSAQMD adopted revisions to Rule 2.21 that
were intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our limited
disapproval action. On October 20, 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 deficiencies identified in our January 22, 2004
disapproval action. Based on today's proposed approval, we are taking
this final rulemaking action, effective on publication, to stay
sanctions that were triggered by our January 22, 2004 limited disapproval.
EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this
stay of sanctions. If comments are submitted that change our assessment
described in this final determination and the proposed full approval of
revised YSAQMD Rule 2.21, 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 CAA section
179 sanctions associated with YSAQMD Rule 2.21 based on our concurrent
proposal to approve the State's SIP revision as correcting deficiencies
that initiated sanctions.
Because EPA has determined preliminarily 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 is
indicating through our proposed action that, more likely than not, the
State has corrected the deficiencies that started the sanctions clocks.
Therefore, it is not in the public interest to impose sanctions
initially or to keep sanctions applied and 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 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 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
(59 FR 22951, 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
[[Page 5176]]
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 therefore, and established an effective date of
February 1, 2006. 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 3, 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, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: January 6, 2006.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 06-893 Filed 1-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P