Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: Connecticut,

[Federal Register: August 16, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 157)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 44411-44415]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr16au99-9]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[R1-052-7211a; A-1-FRL-6417-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plan; Connecticut; Approval of National Low Emission Vehicle Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Connecticut on February 7, 1996 and February 18, 1999, committing that the State will accept compliance with the National Low Emission Vehicle (National LEV) program requirements as a compliance option for new motor vehicles sold in the State, which had also adopted the California Low Emission Vehicle (CAL LEV) program. Auto manufacturers have agreed to sell cleaner vehicles meeting the National LEV standards throughout these States for the duration of the manufacturers' commitments to the National LEV program. This SIP revision is required as part of the agreement between States and automobile manufacturers to ensure the continuation of the National LEV program to supply clean cars throughout most of the country, beginning with 1999 model year vehicles in

[[Page 44412]]

Northeastern States and extending to other States beginning with 2001 model year vehicles.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 15, 1999 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by September 15, 1999. If we receive such comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Susan Studlien, Deputy Director, Office of Ecosystem Protection (mail code CAA), US Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114. Copies of the State submittal and EPA's technical support document are available for public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment, at the Office of Ecosystem Protection, US Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston, MA, and Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, US Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, (LE-131), Washington, DC 20460. In addition, the information is available at the Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-1630.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Judge, (617) 918-1045.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background

   On January 7, 1998, (63 FR 926) the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule outlining a voluntary nationwide clean car program, designed to reduce smog and other pollution from new motor vehicles. The National LEV regulations allow auto manufacturers to commit to meet tailpipe standards for cars and light-duty trucks that are more stringent than EPA can mandate. The regulations provided that the program would come into effect only if northeastern States and the auto manufacturers voluntarily signed up for it. On March 9, 1998 (63 FR 11374), EPA found that nine northeastern States and 23 manufacturers had opted into the National LEV program and that the program is in effect. Now that it is in effect, National LEV is enforceable in the same manner as any other federal new motor vehicle program. National LEV will achieve significant air pollution reductions nationwide. In addition, the program provides substantial harmonization of federal and California new motor vehicle standards and test procedures, which enables manufacturers to design and test vehicles to one set of standards nationwide. The National LEV program demonstrates how cooperative, partnership efforts can produce a smarter, cheaper program that reduces regulatory burden while increasing protection of the environment and public health.

   The National LEV program will result in substantial reductions in non-methane organic gases (NMOG) and nitrous oxides (NOx), which contribute to unhealthy levels of smog in many areas across the country. National LEV vehicles are 70% cleaner than today's model requirements under the Clean Air Act. This voluntary program provides auto manufacturers flexibility in meeting the associated standards as well as the opportunity to harmonize their production lines and make vehicles more efficiently. National LEV vehicles are estimated to cost an additional $76 above the price of vehicles otherwise required today, but it is expected that due to factors such as economies of scale and historical trends related to emission control costs, the per vehicle cost will be even lower. This incremental cost is less than 0.5% of the price of an average new car. In addition, the National LEV program will help ozone nonattainment areas across the country improve their air quality as well as reduce pressure to make further, more costly emission reductions from stationary industrial sources.

   Because it is a voluntary program, National LEV was set up to come into effect, and will remain in effect, only if the Northeastern State and auto manufacturer participants commit to the program and abide by their commitments. The States and manufacturers initially committed to the program through opt-in notifications to EPA, which were sufficient for EPA to find that National LEV had come into effect. The National LEV regulations provide that the second stage of the State commitments is to be made through SIP revisions that incorporate the State commitments to National LEV in State regulations, which EPA will approve into the federally-enforceable SIPs. The National LEV regulations laid out the elements to be incorporated in the SIP revisions, the timing for such revisions, and the language (or substantively similar language) that needs to be included in a SIP revision to allow EPA to approve the revision as adequately committing the State to the National LEV program. In today's action, EPA is approving the National LEV SIP revision for Connecticut as adequately committing the State to the program. EPA expects to take similar actions for the other States that have elected to join the National LEV program in the future.

   Connecticut has adopted a State clean vehicle program identical to the CAL LEV program (without the zero emission vehicle requirements) pursuant to section 177 of the Clean Air Act. The State has also modified that regulation accepting compliance with National LEV as an alternative for auto manufacturers to comply with the CAL LEV requirements. The State's regulation provides that for the duration of the State's participation in National LEV, manufacturers may comply with National LEV or equally stringent mandatory federal standards in lieu of compliance with a State program adopted pursuant to section 177. The regulation accepts National LEV as a compliance alternative for requirements applicable to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty trucks designed to operate on gasoline. The regulation further provides that the State's participation in National LEV extends until model year 2006, if by December 15, 2000, EPA adopts mandatory standards at least as stringent as the National LEV standards and such standards would apply to new motor vehicles beginning in model year 2004, 2005 or 2006. If EPA does not adopt such standards by that date, the State's participation in National LEV would extend only until model year 2004. Through these regulations, Connecticut has adequately committed to the National LEV program, as provided in the final National LEV rule.

   The final National LEV rule also stated that if States submitted SIP revisions containing language substantively identical to the language in the regulations without additional conditions, and if the submissions met the Clean Air Act requirements for approvable SIP submissions, EPA would not need to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking to approve the SIP revisions. In the National LEV rulemaking, EPA already provided full opportunity for public comment on the language for the SIP revisions. Thus, as discussed in more detail in the final rule, the requirements for EPA approval are easily verified objective criteria. See 63 FR 936 (January 7, 1998). While EPA believes that it could have appropriately approved the Connecticut submission without providing for additional notice and comment, EPA nonetheless decided to take this action as a direct final rulemaking, which allows an opportunity for further public comment. Here, EPA is not under a timing constraint that would support a shorter rulemaking process, and thus EPA

   [[Page 44413]]

   decided there was no need to deviate from the Agency's usual procedures for SIP approvals.

   Final Action

   EPA has evaluated the submitted SIP revision submitted by Connecticut and has determined that it is consistent with the EPA National LEV regulations and meets the section 110 requirements for SIP approvals. Therefore, EPA is approving the Connecticut low emission vehicle rule as submitted on February 7, 1996 and February 18, 1999, into the Connecticut SIP.

   EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective October 15, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comment by September 15, 1999.

   If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments received in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

   Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any State Implementation Plan. Each request for revision to the State implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

2. Administrative Requirements

   1. Executive Order 12866

      The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

   2. Executive Order 12875

      Under E.O. 12875, 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, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to provide to the OMB 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 written communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 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 that does not already exist as a matter of State law. EPA is simply approving a State regulation under the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 do not apply to this rule.

   3. 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 not ``economically significant'' as defined under E. O. 12866, and does not involve an action that addresses environmental or safety risks.

   4. Executive Order 13084

      Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly 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, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to provide to the OMB, 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. This action does not involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

   5. 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).

   6. Unfunded Mandates

      Under sections 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 costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the

      [[Page 44414]]

      aggregate, or to the 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 this final approval action does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 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.

   7. 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 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).

   8. Petitions for Judicial Review

      Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filedin the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 15, 1999. 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).) EPA encourages interested parties to comment in response to the proposed rule rather than petition for judicial review, unless the objection arises after the comment period allowed for in the proposal.

      List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

      Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

      Dated: July 28, 1999. John P. DeVillars, Regional Administrator, Region I.

      Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

      PART 52--[AMENDED]

      1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

         Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

         Subpart H--Connecticut

      2. Section 52.370 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(79) to read as follows:

         Sec. 52.370 Identification of plan

         * * * * * *

         (c) * * *

         (79) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection on February 7, 1996 and February 18, 1999.

         (i) Incorporation by reference.

         (A) Connecticut regulation section 22a-174-36, entitled ``Low Emission Vehicles'' as dated and effective by determination of the Secretary of State on December 23, 1994.

         (B) Connecticut regulation section 22a-174-36(g), entitled ``Alternative Means of Compliance via the National Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program'' as dated and effective by determination of the Secretary of State on January 29, 1999.

         (ii) Additional material

         (A) Letter from the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection dated February 7, 1996 submitting a revision to the Connecticut State Implementation Plan for the Low Emission Vehicle program.

         (B) Letter from the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection dated February 18, 1999 submitting a revision to the Connecticut State Implementation Plan for the National Low Emission Vehicle program to be a compliance option under the State's Low Emission Vehicle Program.

      3. In Sec. 52.385, Table 52.385 is amended by adding new entries in State citations for Section 22a-174-36, entitled ``Low Emission Vehicles'' and Section 22a-174-36(g), entitled ``Alternative Means of Compliance via the National Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program'' to read as follows:

         Sec. 52.385 EPA--approved Connecticut Regulations

         * * * * *

         Table 52.385--EPA-Approved Rules and Regulations

         Dates

         Connecticut state

         -------------------------------------- Federal Register citation

         Title/ subject

         Date adopted by Date approved by citation

         52.370

         Comments/ description State

         EPA

         *

         *

         *

         *

         *

         *

         * 22a-174-36............... Low Emission Vehicles.... 12/23/94......... August 16, 1999.. [Insert FR

         (c)(79)......... Approval of Low Emission citation from

         Vehicle Program. published date]. 22a-174-36(g)............ Alternative Means of 1/29/99.......... August 16, 1999.. [Insert FR

         (c)(79)......... Approval of Alternative Compliance via the

         citation from

         Means of Compliance via National Low Emission

         published date].

         the National Low Vehicle (LEV) Program.

         Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program for the ``California'' low emission vehicle program adopted above.

         [[Page 44415]]

         * * * * * * *

         [FR Doc. 99-21004Filed8-13-99; 8:45 am]

         BILLING CODE 6560-50-P