Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision; Interim Final Determination That State has Corrected the Deficiency

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 83-1-6565c; FRL-5061-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision; Interim Final Determination That

State has Corrected the Deficiency

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On August 29, 1994, in the Federal Register, EPA published a

direct final rulemaking fully approving revisions to the California

State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern San Diego County Air

Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD) Rule 61.9, ``Separation of Organic

Compounds from Water''. On that date, EPA 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 proposed

action within 30 days of publication of the proposed and direct final

actions, EPA will withdraw its direct final action and will consider

any comments received before taking final action on the State's

submittal. Based on the proposed full approval, EPA is making an

interim final determination by this action that the State has corrected

the deficiency for which a sanctions clock began on November 25, 1992.

This action will stay the application of the offset sanction and stay

the application of the highway sanction. Although this action is

effective upon publication, EPA will take comment. If no comments are

received on EPA's proposed approval of the State's submittal, the

direct final action published in the Federal Register on August 29,

1994, will also finalize EPA's determination that the State has

corrected the deficiency that started the sanctions clock. If comments

are received on EPA's proposed approval and this interim final action,

EPA will publish a final action taking into consideration any comments

received.

DATES: This interim final rule is effective on September 1, 1994.

Comments must be received by October 3, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: Daniel Meer, Rulemaking Section

(A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

The state submittal and EPA's analysis for that submittal, which

are the basis for this action, are available for public review at the

above address and at the following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket 6102, 401 ``M'' Street,

SW., Washington, DC 20460.

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 92123-1095.

San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake Drive,

San Diego, CA 92123-1096.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erik H. Beck, Rulemaking Section (A-5-

3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

Telephone: (415) 744-1190. Internet E-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On April 5, 1991, the State submitted SDCAPCD Rule 61.9

``Separation of Organic Compounds from Water'', for which EPA published

a limited disapproval in the Federal Register on October 26, 1992. 57

FR 48457. EPA's disapproval action started an 18-month clock for the

application of one sanction (followed by a second sanction 6 months

later) under section 179 of the Clean Air Act (Act) and a 24-month

clock for promulgation of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) under

section 110(c) of the Act. The State subsequently submitted a revised

rule on May 24, 1994. EPA has taken 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 the Federal Register

dated August 29, 1994, 59 FR 44322, EPA issued a direct final full

approval of the State of California's submittal of SDCAPCD Rule 61.9,

``Separation of Organic Compounds from Water''. In addition, in the

Proposed Rules section of the Federal Register dated August 29, 1994,

EPA proposed full approval of the State's submittal.

Based on the proposed and direct final approval, EPA believes that

it is more likely than not that the State has corrected the original

disapproval deficiency. Therefore, EPA is taking this final rulemaking

action, effective on publication, finding that the State has corrected

the deficiency. 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 deficiency. As appropriate, EPA will

also issue an interim final determination or a final determination that

the deficiency has not been corrected. Until EPA takes such an action,

the application of sanctions will continue to be deferred and or

stayed.

This action does not stop the sanctions clock that started for this

area on November 25, 1992. However, this action will stay the

application of the offsets sanction and will stay the application of

the highway sanction. See 59 FR 39832 (August 4, 1994). 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 applied, 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 deficiency, EPA will also determine that the State did not

correct the deficiency and the sanctions consequences described in the

sanctions rule will apply. See 59 FR 39832, to be codified at 40 CFR

52.31.

II. EPA Action

EPA is taking interim final action finding that the State has

corrected the disapproval deficiency that started the sanctions clock.

Based on this action, application of the offset sanction will be stayed

and application of the highway sanction 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 applied, stayed or

deferred 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 under the

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in not providing an opportunity for

comment before this action takes effect.\1\ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 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 and

direct final action is indicating that it is more likely than not that

the State has corrected the deficiency that started the sanctions

clock. 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 that it can to correct the deficiency that triggered

the sanctions clock. Moreover, it would be impracticable to go through

notice-and comment rulemaking on a finding that the State has corrected

the deficiency prior to the rulemaking approving the State's submittal.

Therefore, EPA believes that it is necessary to use the interim final

rulemaking process to temporarily stay 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. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).

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

\1\As previously noted, 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.

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

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action

from review under Executive Order 12866.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations

of less than 50,000.

This action temporarily relieves sources of an additional burden

potentially placed on them by the sanctions provisions of the Act.

Therefore, I certify that it does not have an impact on any small

entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Dated: August 22, 1994.

Harry Seraydarian,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 94-21412 Filed 8-31-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P