[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 157 (Monday, August 16, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44411-44415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-21004]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
I. 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.
II. Administrative Requirements
A. 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.''
B. 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.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. 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).
F. 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.
G. 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).
H. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 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. 99-21004 Filed 8-13-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
