[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 153 (Thursday, August 8, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51525-51527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-20097]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[FRL-7256-9]


Amendment to State Implementation Plan (SIP) Procedural 
Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to amend its procedural regulations regarding 
State Implementation Plans under the Clean Air Act (CAA) to clarify 
that such plans, when approved by EPA, are fully enforceable and 
binding upon all entities affected by the plans, and that any 
interpretations of relevant law or application of law to specific facts 
contained in EPA's rulemaking action on such plans shall have full 
force and effect of law as precedent for any future EPA rulemaking 
action on similar plans. Further, EPA proposes to clarify that the 
agency will apply the CAA and implementing regulations in like manner 
to like situations, and will explain any deviations from past practice 
based upon factual differences in different areas or developing 
interpretations of applicable law in future plan approval or 
disapproval actions, through notice-and-comment rulemaking.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 9, 2002.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be submitted to Docket #A-2002-10, 
Office of Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Mail Code 6102, Washington, DC 20460, phone 
number (202) 260-7548. The normal business hours are 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 
p.m. Comments can either be submitted to the address above, by fax 
(202) 260-4400, or by e-mail to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Denise M. Gerth, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Mail Code C-539-02, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, phone number 
(919) 541-5550 or by e-mail at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: States adopt SIPs under section 110 of the 
CAA providing for implementation of national ambient air quality 
standards (NAAQS) within their boundaries. Such SIPs are subsequently 
approved or disapproved by EPA pursuant to notice-and-comment 
rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act. Buckeye Power, Inc. 
v. EPA, 481 F.2d 162 (6th Cir. 1973). Under clearly established case 
law, once approved by EPA, these SIPs have full force and effect of law 
and are fully enforceable and binding upon all entities affected by the 
plans. Union Electric Co. v. EPA, 515 F.2d, 206 (8th Cir. 1975).
    For a number of years, EPA had included certain language in the 
preambles to its rulemaking actions approving or disapproving submitted 
SIPs indicating that ``[n]othing in this action should be construed as 
permitting, allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request 
for revision to any SIP. U.S. EPA shall consider each request for 
revision to the SIP in light of specific technical, economic, and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.'' (58 FR 48312, September 15, 1993). By this 
language, EPA had intended to convey to States contemplating 
prospective SIP revisions that EPA's approval or disapproval of any SIP 
would depend on the specific facts and law applicable to the SIP 
revision at issue, and that States could not be guaranteed an identical 
result to that reached in any prior SIP action. The purpose of this 
language was not to leave the approved SIPs without the force and 
effect of law as to regulated parties, nor to deprive the rulemaking 
actions regarding SIP submissions of the precedential effect they 
necessarily have regarding subsequent EPA rulemaking actions. In fact, 
although EPA certainly has the ability to adjust its policies and 
rulings in light of experience and to announce new principles through 
rulemaking procedures, EPA may not depart from its prior rules of 
decision to reach a different result in future cases without fully 
explaining such discrepancies and taking comment on the appropriateness 
of the resulting action. Western States Petroleum Association, et al., 
v. EPA, et al., 87 F.3d 280 (9th Cir. 1996).
    In a recent decision concerning a SIP revision in Nevada, the Court 
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, while acknowledging that SIPs are 
enforceable against regulated parties, interpreted the language EPA had 
included in the SIP warning States that they could not be guaranteed a 
given result in future SIP revision requests as limiting the binding 
precedential effect of EPA's action approving the SIP. Hall v. EPA, 273 
F.3d 1146 (9th Circuit 2001). As noted above, EPA did not intend this 
result, and further the agency believes that in light of existing law 
concerning Agency rulemaking, EPA could not impose such a restriction 
on its actions in any event.

[[Page 51526]]

Thus, EPA is proposing to amend its regulations to clarify that all EPA 
actions on SIPs do have full force and effect of law and binding 
precedential effect.
    Under the proposed rule, all approved SIPs are fully enforceable, 
and all EPA actions approving or disapproving SIPs have binding 
precedential effect. Where EPA proposes in any future SIP action to 
make any deviations from past practice based upon factual differences 
in different areas or developing interpretations of applicable law, EPA 
will do so through full notice-and-comment rulemaking in future plan 
approval or disapproval actions.

Administrative Requirements

A. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the 
Executive Order. It has been determined that this is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 
12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB review.

B. Federalism

    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This proposed rule is procedural 
in nature. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local 
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule 
from State and local officials.

C. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 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. The EPA 
interprets Executive Order 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 Executive Order 
13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended 
to mitigate health or safety risks.

D. Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires EPA 
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not have 
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175; thus the 
Order does not apply to this rule.

E. Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 
22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the provisions of 
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act) for State, local, or 
tribal governments or the private sector because this rule imposes no 
enforceable duty on any State, local or tribal governments or the 
private sector.

G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This proposed rule is not subject to the RFA, which generally 
requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for any 
rule that will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. The RFA applies only to rules subject to 
notice-and-comment under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) or any 
other statute. While this action is subject to notice-and-comment under 
the APA, a RFA is not necessary because this action does not impose any 
significant impacts on a substantial number of small entities. This 
rule doesn't impose any obligations on such entities; it just 
recognizes the precedential impact of SIP approvals.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This 
proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, 
EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

I. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Today's action does not establish any new information collection 
requirements beyond those which are currently required under the 
Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Regulations in 40 CFR part 58 (OMB 
#2060-0084, EPA ICR No. 0940.15). Therefore, the requirements of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act do not apply to today's action.

    Dated: August 1, 2002.
Elizabeth Craig,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
    Part 51, subpart F, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF 
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

    1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows: 
42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.


Sec. 51.105  [Amended]

    2. Section 51.105 is amended by redesignating the existing 
paragraph as paragraph (a) and adding a new paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:
    (b) All plans, or any portions thereof or revisions thereto, that 
have been approved by EPA shall be fully enforceable and binding upon 
all entities affected by the plans or revisions, and any 
interpretations of relevant law or application of law to

[[Page 51527]]

specific facts contained in EPA's rulemaking action approving or 
disapproving such plans and revisions shall have full force and effect 
of law as precedent for any future EPA rulemaking action on similar 
plans and revisions under applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act 
and EPA's implementing regulations. The EPA shall apply the Act and 
implementing regulations in like manner to like situations, and will 
explain any deviations from past practice based upon factual 
differences in different areas or developing interpretations of 
applicable law in future SIP approval or disapproval actions through 
notice-and-comment rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 02-20097 Filed 8-7-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P