[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