Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision; Interim Final Determination That State Has Corrected Deficiencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 125-1-6804b; FRL-5119-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision; Interim Final Determination That

State Has Corrected Deficiencies

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register EPA has published a

proposed rulemaking fully approving revisions to the California State

Implementation Plan. The revisions concern San Diego County Air

Pollution Control District Rule 67.3, Metal Parts and Products Coating

Operations. The proposed rulemaking provides the public with an

opportunity to comment on EPA's action approving Rule 67.3. Based on

the proposed approval, EPA is making an interim final determination by

this action that the State has corrected the deficiencies for which a

sanctions clock was activated on May 13, 1993. This action will defer

the application of the offset sanction and defer the application of the

highway sanction. Although this action is effective upon publication,

EPA will take comment. If comments are received on EPA's proposed

approval and this interim final action, EPA will publish a final

document taking into consideration any comments received.

DATES: The effective date is December 9, 1994.

Comments must be received by January 9, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: Rulemaking Section (A-5-3), Air

and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

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 20460.

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.

San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake

Drive, CA 92313-1095.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Helen Liu, Rulemaking Section (A-5-3),

Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region

IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Telephone: (415) 744-

1199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On April 5, 1991, the State submitted San Diego County Air

Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD) Rule 67.3, Metal Parts and

Products Coating Operations, for which EPA published a limited

disapproval in the Federal Register on May 13, 1993. (58 FR 28357).

EPA's limited 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 November 23, 1994. The revised rule was adopted by the SDCAPCD

on November 1, 1994. In the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal

Register, EPA has proposed full approval of the State's submittal of

SDCAPCD Rule 67.3, Metal Parts and Products Coating Operations.

Based on the proposed approval set forth in today's Federal

Register, EPA believes that it is more likely than not that the State

has corrected the original disapproval deficiencies. 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 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 May 13, 1993. However, this action will defer the application

of the offsets sanction and will defer the application of the highway

sanction. See 59 FR 39832 (Aug. 4, 1994). If EPA's proposal fully

approving the State's submittal becomes final, such action will

permanently stop the sanctions clock and will permanently lift any

applied, stayed or deferred sanctions. If EPA receives adverse comments

and subsequently determines that the State, in fact, did not correct

the disapproval deficiency, 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 deficiencies that started the sanctions

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

deferred and application of the highway sanction will be deferred until

EPA takes final rulemaking action fully approving the State's submittal

or until EPA takes action proposing or disapproving in whole or part

the State submittal. If EPA's proposed rulemaking action fully

approving the State submittal becomes final, 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

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.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

action, is indicating that it is more likely than not that the State

has corrected the deficiencies 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 deficiencies 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 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 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 document 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.

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

III. Regulatory Process

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.

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

from review under Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental regulations, Reporting and recordkeeping, Ozone,

Volatile organic compounds.

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

Dated: December 2, 1994.

Nora L. McGee,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 94-30329 Filed 12-8-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P