[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 198 (Thursday, October 14, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55662-55667]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26855]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Region II Docket No. NJ36-1-196, FRL-6457-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey;
Nitrogen Oxides Budget and Allowance Trading Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency proposes to conditionally
approve New Jersey's State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for
ozone. This SIP revision relates to New Jersey's portion of the Ozone
Transport Commission's September 27, 1994 Memorandum of Understanding,
which includes a regional nitrogen oxides budget and allowance
(NOX Budget)
[[Page 55663]]
trading program that will significantly reduce NOX emissions
generated within the Ozone Transport Region. Today's action proposes a
conditional approval of New Jersey's regulations which implement Phase
II and Phase III of the NOX Budget Trading Program to reduce
NOX, and intends to help meet the national ambient air
quality standard for ozone. However, if New Jersey corrects the
deficiency discussed in today's proposed action between the time of
today's proposed action and a final rulemaking action, and the
correction is consistent with EPA's findings as discussed below, EPA
proposes full approval of New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading
Program.
DATES: EPA must receive written comments on or before November 15,
1999.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments to: Raymond Werner, Acting Chief, Air
Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, 290
Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
Copies of the state submittal and supporting documents are
available for inspection during normal business hours, at the following
addresses:
Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch,
290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Air
Quality Management, Bureau of Air Quality Planning, 401 East State
Street, CN418, Trenton, New Jersey 08625.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Ruvo, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency Region II, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor,
New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4014.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Overview
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to conditionally
approve the New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection's
(New Jersey's) Nitrogen Oxides Budget and Allowance (NOX
Budget) Trading Program.
The following table of contents describes the format for this
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section:
EPA's Action
What Action is EPA Proposing Today?
Why is EPA Proposing this Action?
What is a Budget and Allowance Trading Program?
What is EPA's Proposed Condition for Approval?
How can New Jersey Get Full Approval for Their Program?
What Guidance did EPA Use to Evaluate New Jersey's Program?
What is EPA's Evaluation of New Jersey's Program?
New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program
What is the Ozone Transport Commission's Memorandum of
Understanding (OTC MOU)?
Which States Signed the OTC MOU?
What Does the OTC MOU Require?
How Did States Meet the OTC MOU?
How Did New Jersey Meet the OTC MOU?
How Does New Jersey's Program Protect the Environment?
How Will New Jersey and EPA Enforce the Program?
When Did New Jersey Propose and Adopt the Program?
When Did New Jersey Submit the Program to EPA and What Did it
Include?
What Other Significant Items Relate to New Jersey's Program?
Conclusion
Administrative Requirements
EPA's Action
What Action Is EPA Proposing Today?
EPA proposes to conditionally approve a revision to New Jersey's
ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) which New Jersey submitted to EPA
on April 26, 1999. This SIP revision relates to New Jersey's new
Subchapter 31 ``NOX Budget Program'' regulation for New
Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program.
Why Is EPA Proposing this Action?
EPA is proposing this action to:
Give you the opportunity to submit written comments on
EPA's proposed action, as discussed in the DATES and ADDRESSES
sections.
Fulfill New Jersey's and EPA's requirements under the
Clean Air Act (the Act).
Make New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program
federally-enforceable and available for credit toward the attainment
SIP.
What Is a Budget and Allowance Trading Program?
Air emissions trading uses market forces to reduce the overall cost
of compliance for sources, such as a power plant, while maintaining
emission reductions and environmental benefits. One type of market-
based program is an emissions budget and allowance trading program,
also commonly referred to as a cap and trade program.
In a budget and allowance trading program, the state or EPA set a
regulatory limit, or budget, on mass emissions from a specific group of
sources. The state or EPA assigns or allocates allowances to the
sources, authorizing emissions up to the level of the budget. Sources
may sell or trade allowances with other sources, cost-effectively
complying with the budget. The budget limits the total number of
allocated allowances. The total effect is to reduce emissions. An
example of a budget and allowance trading program is EPA's Acid Rain
Program for reducing sulfur dioxide emissions.
What Is EPA's Proposed Condition for Approval?
EPA proposes to condition its approval of New Jersey's
NOX Budget Trading Program on New Jersey including a
definition of a violation and of the days of a violation which more
fully comports with the other state rules and EPA's guidance.
Originally, New Jersey proposed amendments to Subchapter 3 for the
NOX Budget Trading Program which included defining a
violation and for determining the number of days of a violation in
order to determine civil and criminal penalties. These provisions
stated:
Each ton of excess emissions is a separate violation
For purposes of determining the number of days of a
violation, each day in the control period (153 days), where there are
any excess emissions, constitutes a day in violation, unless the source
can demonstrate a lesser number of days, to the State's satisfaction.
However, in response to comments on the proposal, New Jersey
reserved these provisions when it adopted Subchapter 31 on June 17,
1998. In the adoption documents, New Jersey said it would propose
another amendment to clarify these provisions for defining violations.
The absence of these provisions in New Jersey's adopted
NOX Budget rule creates uncertainty about how the State will
define a violation and determine the number of days of a violation
should a source not hold enough allowances as of the allowance transfer
deadline. The other states in the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)
included similar provisions in their adopted rules. Since the
NOX Budget Program is a regional program, each state rule
must be substantively consistent with the other state rules, in order
to ensure an allowance in one state has the same value as an allowance
in another state.
This area of New Jersey's NOX Budget Program does not
fully satisfy EPA's guidance for providing enforcement mechanisms. New
Jersey must revise Subchapter 3 and/or 31 to incorporate the provisions
for defining a violation and determining the number of days of a
violation should a source not hold enough allowances as of the
allowance transfer deadline. Correcting this deficiency will clarify
any confusion in how the State defines a violation and
[[Page 55664]]
will help to ensure consistency within the regional NOX
Budget Trading Program.
How Can New Jersey Get Full Approval for Their Program?
EPA proposes a conditional approval of New Jersey's NOX
Budget Trading Program due to the deficiency discussed in the ``What is
EPA's Proposed Condition for Approval?'' section. EPA informed New
Jersey of the deficiency in a July 8, 1999 letter. In a July 29, 1999
letter, New Jersey committed to correcting the deficiency within one
year of EPA's final action.
To achieve full approval, New Jersey must correct the deficiency
and submit it to EPA within one year of EPA's final action on New
Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program SIP revision. However,
if New Jersey corrects the deficiency between the time of today's
proposed action and a final rulemaking action, and the correction is
consistent with EPA's findings as discussed earlier, EPA proposes full
approval of New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program. EPA
will consider all information submitted prior to any final rulemaking
action as a supplement or amendment to the April 26, 1999 submittal.
What Guidance Did EPA Use To Evaluate New Jersey's Program?
In 1994, EPA issued Economic Incentive Program (EIP) rules and
guidance (40 CFR part 51, subpart U), that outlines requirements for
establishing EIPs in cases where the Act requires States adopt EIPs to
meet the ozone and carbon monoxide standards in designated
nonattainment areas. There is no requirement for New Jersey to submit
an EIP. However, since subpart U also contains guidance on the
development of voluntary EIPs, New Jersey followed the EIP guidance in
the development and submittal of its NOX Budget Trading
Program.
EPA evaluated New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program to
determine whether the Program meets the SIP requirements described in
section 110 of the Act. EPA also evaluated the Program using the EIP of
1994 as guidance for voluntary EIPs, in coordination with other
guidance documents.
What Is EPA's Evaluation of New Jersey's Program?
EPA determined New Jersey's new Subchapter 31 regulation for New
Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program is consistent with EPA's
guidance, except for the deficiency discussed in the ``What is EPA's
Proposed Condition for Approval?'' section. Specifically, New Jersey's
NOX Budget Trading Program is consistent with EPA's EIP
guidance of 1994.
New Jersey's Subchapter 31 contains provisions for definitions,
program applicability, opt-ins, interface with the emission offset
program and the open market emissions trading program, annual allowance
allocation, claims for incentive allowances, permitting, allowance
transfer, allowance banking, early reduction credits, the
NOX Allowance Tracking System, monitoring, recordkeeping,
reporting, end-of-season reconciliation, compliance certification,
excess emissions deduction, the program audit, and guidance documents
incorporated by reference and penalties.
Given the documentation in the SIP submittal and the provisions of
New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program, and New Jersey's
commitment for a periodic program audit, EPA determined that New Jersey
will continue to meet the reasonable further progress and SIP
attainment requirements.
A Technical Support Document (TSD), prepared in support of this
proposed action, contains the full description of New Jersey's
submittal and EPA's evaluation. A copy of the TSD is available upon
request from the EPA Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section.
New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program
What Is the Ozone Transport Commission's Memorandum of Understanding?
The Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) adopted a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) on September 27, 1994, which committed the
signatory states to the development and proposal of a region-wide
reduction in NOX emissions, with one phase of reductions by
1999 and another phase of reductions by 2003. Since the Act required
reasonably available control technology (RACT) to reduce NOX
emissions by May of 1995, the OTC MOU refers to the reduction in
NOX emissions by 1999 as Phase II and the reduction in
NOX emissions by 2003 as Phase III.
Which States Signed the OTC MOU?
The OTC states include Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, the northern counties of Virginia and
the District of Columbia. All of the OTC jurisdictions, with the
exception of the Commonwealth of Virginia, signed the September 27,
1994 MOU.
What Does the OTC MOU Require?
The OTC MOU requires a reduction in ozone season (May 1 to
September 30) NOX emissions from utility and large
industrial combustion facilities within the Ozone Transport Region.
This reduction furthers the effort to achieve the health-based national
ambient air quality standard for ozone. In the MOU, the OTC states
agreed to propose regulations for the control of NOX
emissions according to the following guidelines:
The level of required NOX reductions is from a
1990 baseline emissions level.
The reduction would vary by location, or zone, and use a
two-phase region-wide trading program.
The reduction required by May 1, 1999 is the less
stringent of the following:
a. The affected facilities in the inner zone will reduce their
NOX emission rate by 65% from the 1990 baseline, or emit
NOX at a rate no greater than 0.20 pounds per million Btu.
b. The affected facilities in the outer zone will reduce their
NOX emission rate by 55% from the 1990 baseline, or emit
NOX at a rate no greater than 0.20 pounds per million Btu.
The reduction required by May 1, 2003 is the less
stringent of the following:
c. The affected facilities in the inner and outer zones will reduce
their NOX emission rate by 75% from the 1990 baseline, or
emit NOX at a rate no greater than 0.15 pounds per million
Btu.
d. The affected facilities in the northern zone will reduce their
NOX emission rate by 55% from the 1990 baseline, or emit
NOX at a rate no greater than 0.20 pounds per million Btu.
The inner zone consists of all contiguous moderate and above
nonattainment areas in the OTC, except those located in Maine. The
outer zone consists of the remainder of the OTC, except the northern
zone. The northern zone consists of Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire
(except for its moderate and above nonattainment areas) and the
northeastern attainment portion of New York.
New Jersey must meet the requirements for the inner zone.
How Did States Meet the OTC MOU?
First, after consideration of the reductions required in the OTC
MOU, the OTC States developed a 1990 baseline emission level and the
emission budgets for 1999 and 2003. The NOX Budget Trading
Program caps
[[Page 55665]]
NOX emissions in the Ozone Transport Region at 219,000 tons
in 1999 and 143,000 tons in 2003, less than half of the 1990 baseline
emission level of 490,000 tons.
Then, the OTC charged a Task Force of representatives from the OTC
States, organized through the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use
Management (NESCAUM) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management
Association (MARAMA), with the task of developing a model rule to
implement the program defined by the OTC MOU. During 1995 and 1996, the
NESCAUM/MARAMA NOX Budget Task Force worked with EPA, as
well as representatives from industry, utilities, and environmental
groups, and developed a model rule as a template for OTC states to
adopt their own rules to implement the OTC MOU. EPA's EIP rules formed
the general regulatory framework for the model rule. The OTC issued the
model rule on May 1, 1996. The model rule was intended to be used by
the OTC states to implement the Phase II reductions called for in the
MOU. The model rule does not specifically include the implementation of
Phase III.
How Did New Jersey Meet the OTC MOU?
In accordance and consistent with the NESCAUM/MARAMA NOX
Budget model rule issued in May 1996, New Jersey developed their
regulation, new Subchapter 31 ``NOX Budget Program.''
Subchapter 31 includes reduction requirements to implement Phase II
and Phase III of the OTC's MOU. The regulation includes provisions for
a regional NOX Budget Trading Program, and establishes
procedures for defining NOX emission allowances for each
NOX control period beginning May 1, 1999 through the
NOX control period ending September 30, 2002 (Phase II), and
for each NOX control period beginning May 1, 2003 and
thereafter (Phase III). New Jersey's SIP submittal identifies the
budget sources and their initial NOX allowance allocations.
How Does New Jersey's Program Protect the Environment?
Specific to New Jersey, the NOX Budget Program will
result in NOX emissions reductions during the ozone season
of close to 80% between 1990 and 2003 from applicable sources. In 1990,
NOX emissions from NOX Budget sources totaled
more than 46,500 tons during the ozone season. In 1995, following New
Jersey's NOX RACT rules, emissions of NOX were
reduced to about 21,200 tons during the ozone season. The adopted
NOX Budget Program rules will further reduce NOX
emissions to 17,300 and 8,200 tons during the ozone season in 1999 and
2003, respectively.
In addition to contributing to attainment of the ozone standard,
decreases of NOX emissions will also likely help improve the
environment in several important ways. On a national scale, decreases
in NOX emissions will also decrease acid deposition,
nitrates in drinking water, excessive nitrogen loadings to aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems, and ambient concentrations of nitrogen dioxide,
particulate matter and toxics. On a global scale, decreases in
NOX emissions will, to some degree, reduce greenhouse gases
and stratospheric ozone depletion.
How Will New Jersey and EPA Enforce the Program?
Under New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program, New
Jersey allocates allowances to budget sources. Each allowance permits a
source to emit one ton of NOX during the seasonal control
period. For each ton of NOX discharged in a given control
period, EPA will remove one allowance from the source's allowance
account. The source, or any other source will never use this allowance
again for compliance. This is known as a retirement of the allowance.
Allowances may be bought, sold, or banked. Unused allowances may be
banked for future use, with limitation. Each budget source must comply
with the program by demonstrating at the end of each control period
that actual emissions do not exceed the amount of allowances held for
that period. However, regardless of the number of allowances a source
holds, it cannot emit at levels that would violate other federal or
state limits, for example, RACT, new source performance standards, or
Title IV.
The State and EPA will determine compliance by ensuring that
allowances held by a source at the end of each control period meet or
exceed the emissions for that source for the given control period.
Source owners shall monitor emissions by certified monitoring systems
and must report resulting data to EPA. Violations are also possible for
not adhering to monitoring, reporting and record keeping requirements.
However, as discussed in the ``What is EPA's Proposed Condition for
Approval?'' section, the missing provisions in New Jersey's Program
limit the ability of New Jersey and EPA to enforce the Program.
Lastly, the federally-enforceable operating permits for budget
sources contain the applicable requirements of the NOX
Budget Program.
When Did New Jersey Propose and Adopt the Program?
New Jersey proposed their NOX Budget Trading Program on
September 15, 1997 and held a public hearing on October 17, 1997. New
Jersey requested public comments by November 24, 1997. New Jersey
adopted the NOX Budget Trading Program on June 17, 1998 with
an operative date of August 16, 1998.
When Did New Jersey Submit the Program to EPA and What Did it Include?
New Jersey submitted its NOX Budget Trading Program SIP
revision to EPA on April 26, 1999. EPA determined the submittal
administratively and technically complete on June 18, 1999.
New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program SIP revision
included the following elements:
New Subchapter 31
Amended Subchapter 3
Copies of monitoring guidance and energy efficiency
protocol to incorporate by reference
Allowance allocation file for 1999 and explanation of
allocation methodology, as supporting information.
What Other Significant Items Relate to New Jersey's Program?
New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program SIP
revision also fulfills the State's commitments to adopt the
NOX Budget Program with respect to the Alternative Ozone
Attainment Demonstration submittals sent to EPA on December 31, 1996
and August 31, 1998.
New Jersey's Subchapter 31 contains NOX
emissions budget and allocation schemes for 1999 through the ozone
season of 2002 (Phase II), and for the ozone season of 2003 and beyond
(Phase III) of the OTC NOX Budget Program. Therefore,
Subchapter 31 satisfies New Jersey's obligations under the OTC MOU to
make specific additional NOX reductions by May 1, 2003 and
continue to make reductions thereafter. Additionally, New Jersey's
attainment demonstrations will rely on the NOX reductions
associated with the OTC program in 2003 and beyond to achieve
attainment with the one hour ozone standard. In its current form,
except for the deficiency discussed in the ``What is EPA's Proposed
Condition for Approval?'' section, Subchapter 31 is approvable for
1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 and thereafter.
In September 1998, EPA issued the final Regional Transport of Ozone
Rule (``NOX SIP Call'') requiring 22 eastern
[[Page 55666]]
States and the District of Columbia to submit SIP's to address the
regional transport of ground-level ozone through reductions in
NOX. New Jersey did not submit the April 26, 1999 SIP
revision for Subchapter 31 to satisfy the requirements of the
NOX SIP Call. Therefore, in order to meet EPA's
NOX SIP Call, New Jersey will need to submit an additional
SIP revision that establishes the NOX caps for the State
during 2003 and beyond, but New Jersey's Phase III limits may be
equivalent to the SIP Call limits.
Conclusion
EPA proposes a conditional approval of New Jersey's NOX
Budget Trading Program due to the deficiency discussed in the ``What is
EPA's Proposed Condition for Approval?'' section. In a July 29, 1999
letter, New Jersey committed to correcting the deficiency within one
year of EPA's final action.
To achieve full approval, New Jersey must correct the deficiency
and submit it to EPA within one year of EPA's final action on New
Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program SIP revision. However,
if New Jersey corrects the deficiency between the time of today's
proposed action and a final rulemaking action, and the correction is
consistent with EPA's findings as discussed earlier, EPA proposes full
approval of New Jersey's NOX Budget Trading Program.
EPA requests public comment on the issues discussed in today's
action. EPA will consider all public comments before taking final
action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking
procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional office
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
Administrative Requirements
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from review under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866,
entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
Executive Order on Federalism
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. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must 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 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. 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.
On August 4, 1999, President Clinton issued a new executive order
on federalism, Executive Order 13132, [64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999),]
which will take effect on November 2, 1999. In the interim, the current
Executive Order 12612, [52 FR 41685 (October 30, 1987),] on federalism
still applies. This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on
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 12612.
The rule affects only one State, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act.
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 an
economically significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866,
and it does not address environmental health or safety risk that would
have a disproportionate effect on children.
Executive Order 13084
Under E.O. 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. If the mandate is unfunded,
EPA must 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, E.O. 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.
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 proposed rule will not have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities because conditional approvals of
SIP submittals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean
Air Act does not create any new requirements but simply approve
requirements that the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the
Federal SIP approval does not impose 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).
[[Page 55667]]
If the conditional approval is converted to a disapproval under
section 110(k), based on the state's failure to meet the commitment, it
will not affect any existing state requirements applicable to small
entities. Federal disapproval of the state submittal does not affect
its state-enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal
does not impose a new Federal requirement. Therefore, I certify that
this disapproval action will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities because it does not remove
existing requirements nor does it substitute a new federal requirement.
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 proposed conditional approval action
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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 30, 1999.
William J. Muszynski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 99-26855 Filed 10-13-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
