[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 
[email protected].

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