[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 150 (Thursday, August 5, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42600-42602]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-19903]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[DC25-2018a; FRL-6412-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
District of Columbia; 15 Percent Plan for the Metropolitan Washington,
D.C. Ozone Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are converting our conditional approval of the District of
Columbia's State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to achieve a 15
percent reduction in volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions (15%
plan) in the Metropolitan Washington, D.C. ozone nonattainment area to
a full approval. In a rule published on July 7, 1998, we conditionally
approved the District's 15% plan as a revision to the District's SIP.
The sole condition we imposed for full approval was that the District
begin mandatory testing of motor vehicles under its enhanced inspection
and maintenance program (I/M program) on or before April 30, 1999. The
District began the required testing on April 26, 1999, and thus
fulfilled the condition for full approval. The District's 15% plan SIP
revision meets all the requirements of the Clean Air Act relating to
the plan to achieve a 15% reduction in VOC emissions.
DATES: This rule is effective on October 4, 1999 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by September 7,
1999. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief,
Ozone and Mobile Sources Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, US Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; and the District of
Columbia Department of Public Health, Air Quality Division, 2100 Martin
Luther King Avenue, S.E., Washington, DC 20020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Cripps, (215) 814-2179, at
the EPA Region III address above, or by e-mail at
cripps.christopher@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this action, we are converting our
conditional approval of the District's 15% plan as a revision to the
District's SIP to a full approval.
In a rule published on July 7, 1998 (63 FR 36578), we granted a
conditional approval to the District's 15% plan because the District's
enhanced inspection maintenance (I/M) program, which is one of the many
control measures adopted by the District to achieve the 15% reduction
in VOC emissions, had only been conditionally approved at that time.
The sole condition we imposed for full approval of the District's
enhanced I/M program and thus the 15% plan was that the District begin
mandatory testing of motor vehicles under its enhanced I/M program on
or before April 30, 1999. The District began the required testing on
April 26, 1999, and thus fulfilled the condition for full approval.
In a rule published June 11, 1999 (64 FR 31498) , we converted our
conditional approval of the District's enhanced I/M program as a
revision to the District's SIP to a full approval. Therefore, we are
now converting our conditional approval of the District's 15% plan as a
revision to the District's SIP to full approval.
EPA Action
EPA is converting its conditional approval of the District's 15%
plan to a full approval. An extensive discussion of the District's 15%
plan and our rationale for our approval action was provided in the
previous final rule that conditionally approved the 15% plan (see 63 FR
36578 and 63 FR 36652) and in our Technical Support Document, dated
June 22, 1998. This action to convert our conditional approval to a
full approval is being published without prior proposal because we view
this as a noncontroversial amendment and because we anticipate no
adverse comments. In a separate document in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of this Federal Register publication, we are proposing to
convert our conditional approval of the District's 15% plan SIP
revision to a full approval if adverse comments are filed. This action
will be effective without further notice unless we receive relevant
adverse comment by September 7, 1999. If we receive such comment, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect. We will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. Any
parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. If no such
comments are received by September 7, 1999, you
[[Page 42601]]
are advised that this action will be effective on October 4, 1999.
Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from review under 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. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. requires EPA to
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.
C. Executive Order 13045
E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies
to any rule that the EPA determines (1) Is ``economically
significant,'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) the environmental
health or safety risk addressed by the rule has 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 final 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 an environmental health or safety risk that
would have a disproportionate effect on children.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly affects 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 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 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 a 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 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 approval action promulgated 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.
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 to convert our conditional approval of
the District of Columbia's
[[Page 42602]]
15% plan to a full approval must be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 4, 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).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.
Dated: July 23, 1999.
W. Michael McCabe,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
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. 7401-7671q.
Subpart J--District of Columbia
2. Section 52.476 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 52.476 Control strategy: ozone.
EPA approves as a revision to the District of Columbia State
Implementation Plan the 15 Percent Rate of Progress Plan for the
District of Columbia's portion of the Metropolitan Washington, D.C.
ozone nonattainment area, submitted by the Director of the District of
Columbia Department of Health on April 16, 1998.
Sec. 52.473 [Removed]
3. Section 52.473 is removed and reserved.
[FR Doc. 99-19903 Filed 8-4-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
