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

[Federal Register: November 12, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 218)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 61522-61523]

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

[DOCID:fr12no99-23]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CT-054-7213; A-1-FRL-6471-7]

Removal of the Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut; National Low Emission Vehicle Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule; removal of amendments.

SUMMARY: On August 16, 1999 (64 FR 44411), EPA published a direct final rule that approved the National low emission vehicle (LEV) program for Connecticut. EPA stated in that direct final rule that if we received adverse comment by September 15, 1999, the rule would not take effect and EPA would publish a timely withdrawal. EPA subsequently received adverse comment on that direct final rule, but did not publish the withdrawal prior to the effective date of the direct final rule. In this action, EPA is removing the amendments that were published in the August 16, 1999, direct final rule.

DATES: This action is effective November 12, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Judge, Air Quality Planning Unit of the Office of Ecosystem Protection (mail code CAQ), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114-2023, or at (617) 918-1045 or judge.robert@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is removing the amendments to the Connecticut State Implementation Plan that was published as a direct final rule on August 16, 1999. This amendment had approved the National LEV program for the State of Connecticut as a compliance alternative to the State's California LEV program adopted under section 177. Since EPA received a letter dated September 14, 1999 with adverse comments from the American Canoe Association, Incorporated, by its terms, the direct final rule should not have become effective. EPA, therefore, is hereby removing those amendments in today's action.

This removal action is simply a ministerial correction of the prior direct final rulemaking, which by its terms should not have become effective because the American Canoe Association commented adversely on the approval action. Therefore, EPA is

[[Page 61523]]

invoking the good cause exception under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) because EPA believes that notice-and- comment rulemaking of this removal action is contrary to the public interest and unnecessary. This removal action merely restores the regulatory text that existed prior to the direct final rule. EPA stated in the August 16, 1999 direct final action that should adverse comment be received, the rule would not take effect. The rule took effect because EPA did not publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register prior to the rule's effective date. It would be contrary to the public interest to keep that final rule in effect when it should not have taken effect since adverse comment was received. Additionally, further notice-and-comment on this action is unnecessary because EPA is merely restoring the regulatory text that existed prior to the final rule, consistent with the original rulemaking. In a subsequent final rule, we will summarize and respond to any comments received and take final rulemaking action on this requested Connecticut SIP revision.

Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or impose any significant or unique impact on small governments as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not require prior consultation with State, local, and tribal government officials as specified by Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993) or Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655 (May 10, 1998), or involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Because this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

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. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This determination must be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated previously, EPA has made such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefore, and established an effective date of November 12, 1999. 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 action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

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 January 11, 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, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen Dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 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

   Sec. 52.370 [Amended]

2. Section 52.370 is amended by removing paragraph (c)(79).

   Sec. 52.385 [Amended]

3. In Sec. 52.385, Table 52.385 is amended by removing the entries in Connecticut 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.' ''

   [FR Doc. 99-29302Filed11-10-99; 8:45 am]

   BILLING CODE 6560-50-P