99-28882. Interim Final Determination That State Has Corrected Deficiencies; State of Arizona; Maricopa County  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 215 (Monday, November 8, 1999)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 60681-60683]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-28882]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [AZ 086-0018c; FRL-6468-8]
    
    
    Interim Final Determination That State Has Corrected 
    Deficiencies; State of Arizona; Maricopa County
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Interim final determination.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA has published a 
    direct final rulemaking fully approving revisions to the Arizona State 
    Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA has also published a proposed rulemaking 
    on the same subject. If a person submits adverse comments on EPA's 
    direct final action, EPA will withdraw its direct final rule and will 
    consider any comments received before taking final action on the 
    State's SIP revisions. Based on the full approval, EPA is making an 
    interim final determination by this action that the State has corrected 
    the deficiencies for which a sanctions clock began on April 30, 1998. 
    This action will stay both the imposition of the offset sanction and 
    the imposition of the highway sanction. Although this action is 
    effective upon publication, EPA will take comment. If no comments are 
    received on EPA's approval of the State's SIP revisions, the direct 
    final action published in today's Federal Register 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 approval 
    EPA with publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule. If 
    comments are received on this interim final action, EPA will publish a 
    final determination taking into consideration any comments received.
    
    DATES: Effective Date: November 8, 1999.
    Comments: Comments must be received by December 8, 1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted to Andrew Steckel at the 
    Region IX office listed below. Copies of the SIP revisions and EPA's 
    evaluation report are available for public inspection at EPA's Region 
    IX office during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted 
    revisions are also available for inspection at the following locations:
    
    Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street, 
    SW., Washington, DC 20460
    Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division, 3033 
    North Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85012
    Maricopa County Environmental Services Division, Air Quality Division, 
    1001 North Central Avenue #201, Phoenix, AZ 85004
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Bowlin, Rulemaking Office, 
    AIR-4, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
    75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-
    1188.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background
    
        On August 31, 1995, the State of Arizona submitted Maricopa County 
    Rule 318, Approval of Residential Woodburning Devices, and the Maricopa 
    County Residential Woodburning Restriction Ordinance which EPA 
    disapproved in part on March 31, 1998. 63 FR 15303. EPA's disapproval 
    action started an 18-month clock for the imposition of one sanction 
    (followed by a second sanction 6 months later) and a 24-month clock for 
    promulgation of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). The State 
    subsequently submitted revised rules on August 4, 1999. 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 today's Federal Register, EPA has issued a direct final full 
    approval of the State of Arizona's SIP revision. In addition, in the 
    Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, EPA has proposed 
    full approval of the State's revision.
        Based on the direct final full 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 deficiencies. 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 direct final 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 withdraw the direct final rule 
    and either propose or take final action finding that the State has not 
    corrected the original disapproval deficiencies. As appropriate, EPA 
    will also issue an interim final determination or a final determination 
    that the deficiencies have been corrected.
        This action does not stop the sanctions clock that started for this 
    area on April 30, 1998. However, this action will stay the imposition 
    of the offset sanction and will stay the imposition of the highway 
    sanction. See 59 FR 39832 (Aug. 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 
    imposed, 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 deficiencies, 
    EPA will also determine that the State did not correct the deficiencies 
    and the sanctions consequences described in the sanctions rule will 
    apply. See 59 FR 39832, 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, imposition of the offset sanction will be 
    stayed and imposition 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
    
    [[Page 60682]]
    
    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 imposed, 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 to the 
    30-day notice requirement of the Administrative Procedure Act because 
    the purpose of this document is to relieve a restriction. See 5 U.S.C. 
    553(d)(1).
    
    III. Administrative Requirements
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
    regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Regulatory 
    Planning and Review.
    
    B. Executive Order 12875
    
        Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
    Partnership, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by 
    statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local or tribal 
    government, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary 
    to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments, or 
    EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, 
    Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office of 
    Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
    consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal 
    governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written 
    communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
    need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 
    requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected 
    officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal 
    governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
    of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.'' 
    Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal 
    governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these 
    entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 
    do not apply to this rule.
    
    C. Executive Order 13045
    
        Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
    Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is 
    determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 
    12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA 
    has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 
    If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate 
    the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on 
    children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
    potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
    by the Agency. This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is 
    does not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
    safety risks.
    
    D. Executive Order 13084
    
        Under Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with 
    Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
    required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
    communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
    direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
    government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
    costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
    governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
    requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
    separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
    description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
    representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
    of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
    regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
    an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
    representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
    and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
    that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule 
    does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian 
    tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of 
    E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
    
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
    to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
    notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
    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 small governmental 
    jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under 
    section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create 
    any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is 
    already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not 
    create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
    significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the 
    Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
    Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
    Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
    grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
    42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    
        Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
    (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
    must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
    final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
    annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; 
    or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
    must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
    that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
    statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan 
    for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
    significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
        EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not 
    include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of 
    $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in 
    the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves 
    pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
    requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
    tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
    
    G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
    
        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
    
    [[Page 60683]]
    
    agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes 
    a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the 
    Comptroller General of the United States. 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. 
    This rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    
    H. Petitions for Judicial Review
    
        Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
    judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
    of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 7, 2000. Filing a 
    petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
    does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
    review nor does it extend the time within which a 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, Incorporation by 
    reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Particulate matter, Reporting 
    and recordkeeping, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
    
        Dated: October 27, 1999.
    Debbie Jordan,
    Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 99-28882 Filed 11-5-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
11/08/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Interim final determination.
Document Number:
99-28882
Pages:
60681-60683 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
AZ 086-0018c, FRL-6468-8
PDF File:
99-28882.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52