[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 218 (Friday, November 12, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61522-61523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-29302]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 filed in 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. 99-29302 Filed 11-10-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
