00-849. Final Rule To Extend the Stay of Action on Section 126 Petitions for Purposes of Reducing Interstate Ozone Transport  

  • [Federal Register Volume 65, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2000)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 2039-2042]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 00-849]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [FRL-6522-9]
    RIN: 2060-AH88
    
    
    Final Rule To Extend the Stay of Action on Section 126 Petitions 
    for Purposes of Reducing Interstate Ozone Transport
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: Today, EPA is taking final action to extend the temporary stay 
    of the effective date of the May 25, 1999 final rule (64 FR 28250) 
    regarding petitions filed under section 126 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 
    until February 17, 2000. This action to extend the temporary stay will 
    prevent the section 126 findings from being triggered automatically 
    under the mechanism EPA established in the May 25, 1999 rule. The EPA 
    revised the May 25, 1999 rule in a final rule signed on December 17, 
    1999. Today's action extends the stay of the May 25, 1999 rule until 
    the revised rule becomes effective on February 17, 2000.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective January 10, 2000.
    
    ADDRESSES: Documents relevant to this action are available for 
    inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center 
    (6102), Attention: Docket No. A-97-43, U.S. Environmental Protection 
    Agency, 401 M Street SW, room M-1500, Washington, DC 20460, telephone 
    (202) 260-7548 between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday though Friday, 
    excluding legal holidays. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning today's action 
    should be addressed to Carla Oldham, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
    Standards, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, MD-15, 
    Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, telephone (919) 541-3347, e-mail at 
    oldham.carla@epa.gov.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Availability of Related Information
    
        The official record for the section 126 rulemaking, as well as the 
    public version of the record, has been established under docket number 
    A-97-43 (including comments and data submitted electronically as 
    described below). The public version of this record, including printed, 
    paper versions of electronic comments, which does not include any 
    information claimed as confidential business information, is available 
    for inspection from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
    excluding legal holidays. The official rulemaking record is located at 
    the address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document. In 
    addition, the Federal Register rulemakings and associated documents are 
    located on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/rto/126.
    
    I. Background
    
    A. Temporary Stay of May 25, 1999 Final Rule on the Section 126 
    Petitions
    
        On May 25, 1999 (64 FR 28250), EPA made final determinations that 
    portions of the petitions filed by eight Northeastern States under 
    section 126 of the CAA are technically meritorious. The petitions 
    sought to mitigate what they described as significant transport of one 
    of the main precursors of ground-level ozone, nitrogen oxides 
    (NOX), across State boundaries. Each petition specifically 
    requested that EPA make a finding that certain stationary sources emit 
    NOX in violation of the CAA's prohibition on emissions that 
    significantly contribute to nonattainment problems in the petitioning 
    State.
        On June 24, 1999 (64 FR 33956), EPA issued an interim final rule to 
    temporarily stay the effectiveness of the May 25, 1999 final rule until 
    November 30, 1999. The purpose of the interim final rule was to provide 
    EPA time to conduct notice-and-comment rulemaking to address issues 
    raised by two rulings of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
    Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit). In one ruling in American Trucking 
    Assn., Inc., v. EPA, 175 F.3d 1027 (D.C. Cir. 1999), the court remanded 
    the 8-hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone, 
    which formed part of the underlying technical basis for certain of 
    EPA's determinations under section 126. On October 29, 1999, the D.C. 
    Circuit granted in part EPA's Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En 
    Banc (filed on June 28, 1999) in American Trucking, and modified 
    portions of its opinion addressing EPA's ability to implement the 8-
    hour standard. See American Trucking, 1999 WL 979463 (Oct. 29, 1999). 
    The court denied the remainder of EPA's rehearing petition. Id. The EPA 
    continues to evaluate the effect of American Trucking, as modified by 
    the D.C. Circuit's October 29, 1999 opinion and order. The EPA expects, 
    however, that the status of the 8-hour standard will be uncertain for 
    some time to come. In a separate action, on May 25, 1999, the D.C. 
    Circuit granted a motion to stay the State implementation plan (SIP) 
    submission deadlines established in a related EPA action, the 
    NOX SIP call (October 27, 1998, 63 FR 57356).
        In the interim final rule staying the May 25, 1999 rule, EPA 
    explained why it would be contrary to the public interest for the May 
    25, 1999 rule to remain in effect while EPA conducted rulemaking to 
    respond to issues raised by the court rulings. The reader should refer 
    to the June 24, 1999 interim final rule (64 FR 33956) and May 25, 1999 
    final rule (64 FR 28250) for further details and background 
    information. On November 30, 1999, EPA extended the temporary stay 
    until January 10, 2000 because EPA had not yet finalized the revisions 
    to the May 25, 1999 final rule (64 FR 67781; December 3, 1999). In that 
    action to extend the stay, EPA indicated that the stay should remain in 
    place until the effective date of the revised rule, which would be 30 
    days after the date the revised rule was published in
    
    [[Page 2040]]
    
    the Federal Register. Thus, EPA noted that it would further extend the 
    stay for a few additional weeks, if necessary.
    
    B. Revisions to the May 25, 1999 Final Rule
    
        On June 24, 1999 (64 FR 33962), EPA proposed to revise two aspects 
    of the May 25, 1999 final rule. The EPA proposed to stay indefinitely 
    the affirmative technical determinations based on the 8-hour standard 
    pending further developments in the NAAQS litigation. The EPA also 
    proposed to remove the trigger mechanism for making section 126 
    findings that was based on the NOX SIP call deadlines and to 
    instead make the findings under the 1-hour standard in a final rule to 
    be issued in November 1999. In the proposal, EPA indicated that it 
    expected to promulgate the final rule based on the proposal by November 
    30, 1999, when the interim final rule would expire. To address the 
    possibility that there could be a delay in amending the May 25, 1999 
    final rule, EPA requested comments in the June 24, 1999 proposal on 
    extending the temporary stay beyond November 30 until EPA completed the 
    final rule. The EPA noted that if additional time were needed, it would 
    likely not be more than 2 or 3 months. Two commenters agreed that it 
    would be appropriate for EPA to further extend the stay under such 
    circumstances, while one commenter expressed concern that an extension 
    of time would increase the likelihood of delay.
        In a rule signed on December 17, 1999, EPA finalized the revisions 
    to the May 25, 1999 final rule. The revised rule removes the trigger 
    mechanism and instead directly makes the section 126 findings based on 
    the 1-hour standard. The revised rule also indefinitely stays the 
    portion of the May 25, 1999 rule that is based on the 8-hour standard. 
    In addition, the revised rule includes a Federal NOX Budget 
    Trading Program as the control remedy for sources subject to section 
    126 findings under the 1-hour standard. The revised rule will be 
    published in the Federal Register on January 18, 2000, and hence will 
    become effective 30 days later on February 17, 2000.
    
    II. Today's Final Rule To Extend the Temporary Stay
    
        Today's final rule, which is effective January 10, 2000, 
    temporarily extends the stay of the May 25, 1999 rule until February 
    17, 2000. This action will prevent the section 126 findings from being 
    automatically triggered under the mechanism in the May 25, 1999 rule. 
    The EPA signed the final rule to modify the May 25, 1999 rule on 
    December 17, 1999. However, the stay needs to apply until the effective 
    date of the final section 126 rule. As the revised final section 126 
    rule will not become effective until February 17, 2000, EPA is 
    extending the stay until that date.
        This extension of the stay does not affect the compliance date of 
    May 1, 2003 for emissions reductions under the section 126 rule. Also, 
    the affected entities have had notice of the requirements under section 
    126 as of the date that EPA signed and released the final section 126 
    rule to the public. The rule was signed on December 17, 1999 and 
    immediately placed on EPA's website listed above.
    
    III. Rulemaking Procedures
    
        As noted above, this rule will be effective on January 10, 2000. 
    Providing for a delay of the effective date of this final rule (either 
    30 or 60 days after publication) would be unnecessary and contrary to 
    the public interest. Because the final rule relieves a regulatory 
    burden that would otherwise be imposed, there is no need to provide 
    time for education and compliance with a new regulatory requirement. 
    Moreover, the current stay expires January 10, 2000. Allowing the stay 
    to lapse before the final rule becomes effective would allow the 
    section 126 findings to be automatically triggered for sources 
    potentially subject to the section 126 findings in all States that had 
    not submitted SIPs in compliance with the NOX SIP call and 
    for which EPA had not proposed approval of such SIPs. As explained in 
    the June 24, 1999 proposal (64 FR 33962), EPA believes it is no longer 
    appropriate to link the section 126 findings with compliance with the 
    NOX SIP call, in light of the judicial stay of the 
    compliance dates under the NOX SIP call. Thus, allowing the 
    findings to be triggered automatically would be contrary to the 
    purposes of the ongoing section 126 rulemaking and contrary to the 
    public interest. In addition, under the automatic trigger mechanism, 
    findings would be made based on both the 1-hour and 8-hour standards. 
    The EPA believes it is appropriate in light of the court's decision in 
    American Trucking Ass'n v. EPA to stay the findings based on the 8-hour 
    standard at this time. Given the lack of burden upon affected parties 
    and the need to make this final rule effective on January 10, 2000, EPA 
    finds good cause for expediting the effective date of this portion of 
    today's rule. The EPA believes that this is consistent with 5 U.S.C. 
    553(d)(1) and (3).
    
    IV. Administrative Requirements
    
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    
        Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
    Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' 
    and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
    and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines 
    ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
    rule that may:
        (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
    adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
    economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
    health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
    communities;
        (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
    action taken or planned by another agency;
        (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
    user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
    thereof; or
        (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
    mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
    the Executive Order.
        The EPA believes that this final rule is not a ``significant 
    regulatory action'' because it relieves, rather than imposes, 
    regulatory requirements, and raises no novel legal or policy issues.
    
    B. Regulatory Flexibility
    
        The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a 
    regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule. The 
    EPA has also determined that this rule will not have a significant 
    economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
    entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small 
    governmental jurisdictions. Today's action does not create any new 
    requirements. Thus, this rule will not have a significant economic 
    impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    
    C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    
        Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
    Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
    effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
    governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 2 
    U.S.C. 1532, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including 
    a cost-benefit analysis, for any proposed or final rule that ``includes 
    any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, 
    and tribal
    
    [[Page 2041]]
    
    governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 
    $100,000,000 or more * * * in any one year.'' A ``Federal mandate'' is 
    defined to include a ``Federal intergovernmental mandate'' and a 
    ``Federal private sector mandate'' (2 U.S.C. 658(6)). A ``Federal 
    intergovernmental mandate,'' in turn, is defined to include a 
    regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, 
    or tribal governments (2 U.S.C. 658(5)(A)(i)), except for, among other 
    things, a duty that is ``a condition of Federal assistance (2 U.S.C. 
    658(5)(A)(i)(I)). A ``Federal private sector mandate'' includes a 
    regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty upon the private 
    sector,'' with certain exceptions (2 U.S.C. 658(7)(A)).
        The EPA has determined that this 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 imposes no new requirements. 
    Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal 
    governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
    
    D. Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        This final rule does not impose any new information collection 
    requirements. Therefore, an Information Collection Request document is 
    not required.
    
    E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
    Health Risks and Safety Risks
    
        Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that (1) is determined to 
    be ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 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 rule on children, and 
    explain why the regulation is preferable to other potentially effective 
    and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
        This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not 
    ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866 and 
    because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental 
    health risks or safety risks addressed by this action present a 
    disproportionate risk to children.
    
    F. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice
    
        Executive Order 12898 requires that each Federal agency make 
    achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and 
    addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human 
    health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and 
    activities on minorities and low-income populations. This Federal 
    action imposes no new requirements and will not delay achievement of 
    emissions reductions under existing requirements. Accordingly, no 
    disproportionately high or adverse effects on minorities or low-income 
    populations will result from this action.
    
    G. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    
        Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
    10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
    ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
    development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
    ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
    Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
    effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
    government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
    responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
        Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
    regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
    direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
    the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
    compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
    consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
    developing the proposed regulation. The EPA also may not issue a 
    regulation that has federalism implications and that preempts State 
    law, unless the Agency consults with State and local officials early in 
    the process of developing the proposed regulation.
        This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not 
    have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
    between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
    of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
    as specified in Executive Order 13132. 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. Thus, the requirements of 
    section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
    
    H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
    Tribal Governments
    
        Under Executive Order 13084, 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. This action does not impose 
    any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 
    requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
    
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    
        Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
    Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, directs EPA to use voluntary 
    consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would 
    be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
    consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials 
    specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business 
    practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
    standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through 
    OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and 
    applicable voluntary consensus standards.
        This final rule does not involve the promulgation of any new 
    technical standards. Therefore, NTTAA
    
    [[Page 2042]]
    
    requirements are not applicable to today's rule.
    
    J. Judicial Review
    
        Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of 
    Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This 
    section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in 
    the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (i) when the 
    agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations 
    promulgated, or final actions taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii) 
    when such action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action 
    is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in 
    taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such 
    action is based on such a determination.''
        For the reasons discussed in the May 25, 1999 final rule, the 
    Administrator determined that final action regarding the section 126 
    petitions is of nationwide scope and effect for purposes of section 
    307(b)(1). Thus, any petitions for review of final actions regarding 
    the section 126 rulemaking must be filed in the Court of Appeals for 
    the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date final 
    action is published in the Federal Register.
    
    K. Congressional Review Act
    
        The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 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. The 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 this rule going into effect. This action is not a 
    ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Emissions trading, 
    Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Ozone transport, Reporting and recordkeeping 
    requirements.
    
        Dated: January 7, 2000.
    Carol M. Browner,
    Administrator.
    
        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 52 of chapter 1 of 
    title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
    
    PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
    
        1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
    
    Subpart A--General Provisions
    
        2. Section 52.34 is amended by revising paragraph (l) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 52.34  Action on petitions submitted under section 126 relating to 
    emissions of nitrogen oxides.
    
    * * * * *
        (1) Temporary stay of rules. Notwithstanding any other provisions 
    of this subpart, the effectiveness of this section is stayed from July 
    26, 1999 until February 17, 2000.
    
    [FR Doc. 00-849 Filed 1-10-00; 4:02 pm]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
1/10/2000
Published:
01/13/2000
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
00-849
Dates:
This final rule is effective January 10, 2000.
Pages:
2039-2042 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
FRL-6522-9
PDF File:
00-849.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52.34