[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 79 (Thursday, April 24, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20077-20082]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-10172]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[LA-58-1-7522; FRL-7487-4]


Notice of Withdrawal of October 2, 2002, Attainment Date 
Extension, Determination of Nonattainment as of November 15, 1999, and 
Reclassification of the Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule finalizes EPA's finding that the Baton Rouge 1-hour 
ozone nonattainment area (hereinafter referred to as the Baton Rouge 
area) did not attain the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality 
standard (NAAQS or standard) by November 15, 1999, the attainment date 
for serious nonattainment areas set forth in the Federal Clean Air Act 
(CAA or Act). As a result of this finding, the Baton Rouge area will be 
reclassified from a serious to a severe one-hour ozone nonattainment 
area by operation of law on the effective date of this rule. In 
addition, EPA is establishing a schedule for Louisiana to submit State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions addressing the CAA's pollution 
control requirements for severe ozone nonattainment areas within 12 
months of the effective date of this rule and establishing November 15, 
2005, as the date by which the Baton Rouge area must attain the ozone 
NAAQS. Finally, EPA is adjusting the dates by which the area must 
achieve a 9% reduction in ozone precursor emissions to meet the 2002 
rate-of-progress requirement and is adjusting the contingency measure 
requirements as they relate to the 2002 ROP milestone. On December 11, 
2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its 
decision on EPA's extension policy used to extend the 1-hour ozone 
attainment deadline for the Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas, area, without 
reclassifying the area. The Court rejected EPA's extension of Beaumont-
Port Arthur's attainment date because it determined that the CAA 
precludes such an extension as a matter of law. We are issuing this 
rule in response to the rejection by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals 
of EPA's use of the extension policy.

DATES: This final rule is effective on June 23, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Copies of documents relevant to this action are available 
for public inspection during normal business hours at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733; and the Louisiana Department of 
Environmental Quality (LDEQ), 7920 Bluebonnet Boulevard, Baton Rouge, 
Louisiana 70884. Please contact the appropriate office at least 24 
hours in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Maria L. Martinez, Air Planning 
Section (6PD-L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733, telephone (214) 665-2230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we, us, 
or our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides additional 
information by addressing the following questions:

Table of Contents

I. What Is the Background for This Rule?
II. What Are the National Ambient Air Quality Standards?
III. What Is the NAAQS for Ozone?
IV. What Is a SIP?
V. What Is the Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area?
VI. What Does This Action Do?
VII. What Is the New Attainment Date for the Baton Rouge Area?
VIII. When Must Louisiana Submit SIP Revisions Fulfilling the 
Requirements for Severe Ozone Nonattainment Areas?
IX. What Is the Impact of a Reclassification on the Title V 
Operating Permit Program?
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is the Background for This Rule?

    On May 9, 2001, EPA proposed its finding that the Baton Rouge 
serious ozone nonattainment area did not attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 
by November 15, 1999, the applicable attainment date (66 FR 23646). The 
proposed finding was based upon ambient air quality data from the years 
1997, 1998, 1999. These data showed that the 1-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.12 
parts per million (ppm) had been exceeded on an average of more than 
one day per year over this three-year period and that the area did not 
qualify for an attainment date extension under section 181(a)(5). EPA

[[Page 20078]]

also proposed that the appropriate reclassification of the area was to 
severe.
    In that proposed action, we also stated that Louisiana was seeking 
an extension of its attainment date pursuant to the extension policy, 
which was published in a March 25, 1999, Federal Register notice (64 FR 
14441). This policy addressed areas affected by downwind transport of 
ozone and/or ozone precursors. EPA proposed to take final action on the 
determination of nonattainment and reclassification of the Baton Rouge 
area only after the area had received an opportunity to qualify for an 
attainment date extension under the extension policy. EPA received 
comments on the May 9, 2001, proposed rule (66 FR 23646). We also 
received comments from the public on the supplemental proposed 
rulemaking published on July 25, 2001 (66 FR 38608) for the ``Clean Air 
Reclassification and Notice of Potential Eligibility for Extension of 
Attainment Date, Louisiana; Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area.'' 
This notice supplemented the proposed actions of the May 9, 2001, 
notice, by proposing to extend the deadline for submission of an 
attainment plan from August 31, 2001, to December 31, 2001. Louisiana 
submitted an Attainment Plan/Transport SIP on December 31, 2001 for the 
Baton Rouge area.
    On March 7, 2002, the United States District Court for the Middle 
District of Louisiana entered a judgment ordering EPA to issue a 
determination by June 5, 2002, as to whether the Baton Rouge area had 
attained the applicable ozone standard under the CAA. LEAN v. Whitman, 
No. 00-879-A.
    EPA made the determination required by the Court, and as the Court 
further ordered, EPA then published a notice of this determination in 
the Federal Register. 67 FR 42687 (June 24, 2002). That notice stated 
EPA's finding that the Baton Rouge area did not attain the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS by November 15, 1999, and that the area would be reclassified to 
``severe'' by operation of law as of the effective date of the rule. In 
addition, the June 24, 2002, rulemaking established the dates by which 
Louisiana was to submit SIP revisions addressing the CAA's pollution 
control requirements for severe ozone nonattainment areas and to attain 
the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone. The June 24, 2002, rulemaking was to be 
effective August 23, 2002. EPA's responses to the comments related to 
the reclassification are incorporated by reference in this rule and 
appear in the June 24, 2002, rule.
    On August 20, 2002, EPA published a rule extending the effective 
date of the June 24, 2002, rulemaking to October 4, 2002 (67 FR 53882).
    On October 2, 2002, EPA issued a final rule in which EPA extended 
the attainment date for the Baton Rouge area, consistent with the 
extension policy, and withdrew the June 24, 2002, rulemaking before its 
effective date (67 FR 61786). The October 2, 2002, rulemaking also 
approved the attainment demonstration for the Baton Rouge area and took 
several other related actions.
    Petitions for review of the October 2, 2002, rulemaking have been 
filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Louisiana 
Environmental Action Network (LEAN) v. EPA, No. 02-60991; Pointe Coupee 
Parish Police Jury v. EPA, No. 02-61021.
    Additionally on December 11, 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for 
the Fifth Circuit issued its decision in Sierra Club v. United States 
EPA, 314 F.3d 735. Among the issues in that case was EPA's decision 
under the extension policy to extend the 1-hour ozone attainment 
deadline for the Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas, area without 
reclassifying the area. The Court rejected this decision because it 
determined that the CAA precludes such an extension as a matter of law. 
Because the Court's decision was based on its legal interpretation of 
the CAA and not on the particular facts at issue in the Beaumont-Port 
Arthur case, and because the decision is precedential within the 
Circuit, we must withdraw our determination to extend the attainment 
deadline for Baton Rouge. Accordingly, we requested that the Fifth 
Circuit grant a partial voluntary remand of our October 2, 2002, final 
rule, to allow us to withdraw our decision to extend the attainment 
date for Baton Rouge. The Court granted that request on February 25, 
2003. We are issuing this rule in response to the Fifth Circuit Court 
of Appeals rejection of EPA's use of the extension policy.

II. What Are the National Ambient Air Quality Standards?

    EPA has set NAAQS for six common air pollutants: carbon monoxide, 
lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. 
The CAA requires that these standards be set at levels that protect 
public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. These 
standards, established under section 109 of the CAA, present state and 
local governments with the air quality levels they must meet to achieve 
clean air. Also, these standards allow the American people to assess 
whether or not the air quality in their communities is healthful.

III. What Is the NAAQS for Ozone?

    The NAAQS for ozone is expressed in two forms which are referred to 
as the 1-hour and 8-hour \1\ standards. Table 1 summarizes the 1-hour 
ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The 8-hour ozone standard value is 0.08 ppm and is the 
primary and secondary standard. The method of compliance is the 
average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ozone concentration measured at each monitor over any three-year 
period is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm.

                                       Table 1.--Summary of Ozone Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Standard            Value                      Type \a\                        Method of compliance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-hour             0.12 ppm           Primary and Secondary                 Must not be exceeded, on average,
                                                                             more than one day per year over any
                                                                             three-year period at any monitor
                                                                             within an area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Primary standards are designed to protect public health and secondary standards are designed to protect
  public welfare and the environment.

    The 1-hour ozone standard of 0.12 parts per million (ppm) was 
promulgated in 1979. The 1-hour ozone standard continues to apply to 
Baton Rouge and it is the classification of the Baton Rouge area with 
respect to the 1-hour ozone standard that is addressed in this 
document.

IV. What Is a SIP?

    Section 110 of the CAA requires states to develop air pollution 
regulations and control strategies to ensure that state air quality 
meets the NAAQS established by EPA. After engaging in required public 
participation, each state must submit the required regulations and 
control strategies to us for approval and

[[Page 20079]]

incorporation into the Federally enforceable SIP.
    Each Federally approved SIP protects air quality primarily by 
addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be 
extensive. They may contain state regulations or other enforceable 
measures, as well as supporting information such as emission 
inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations.

V. What Is the Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area?

    The Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment area, located in southern 
Louisiana, consists of East Baton Rouge, West Baton Rouge, Ascension, 
Iberville, and Livingston Parishes.
    Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the CAA, each ozone area designated 
nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard before enactment of the 
1990 CAA Amendments, such as the Baton Rouge area, was designated 
nonattainment by operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 
Amendments. In addition, under section 181(a) of the Act, each area 
designated nonattainment under section 107(d) was classified as 
``marginal,'' ``moderate,'' ``serious,'' ``severe,'' or ``extreme,'' 
depending on the severity of the area's air quality problem. The design 
value for an area characterizes the severity of the air quality 
problem. The design value for an area is the highest site design value. 
The site design value in turn is the fourth highest 1-hour daily 
maximum in a given three-year period. Table 2 provides the design value 
ranges for each nonattainment classification. Ozone nonattainment areas 
with design values between 0.160 and 0.180 ppm, such as the Baton Rouge 
area (which had a design value of 0.164 ppm in 1989), were classified 
as serious. These nonattainment designations and classifications were 
initially codified in 40 CFR part 81 (see 56 FR 56694, November 6, 
1991).

          Table 2.--1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Classifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Area class            Design value (ppm)      Attainment date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marginal....................  0.121 up to 0.138...  November 15, 1993.
Moderate....................  0.138 up to 0.160...  November 15, 1996.
Serious.....................  0.160 up to 0.180...  November 15, 1999.
Severe......................  0.180 up to 0.280...  November 15, 2005.
Extreme.....................  0.280 and above.....  November 15, 2010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. What Does This Action Do?

    In this action, in accordance with the decisions of the Fifth 
Circuit Court of Appeals rejecting EPA's use of the extension policy 
and in fulfilling our nondiscretionary duty under the CAA, EPA is 
withdrawing the portion of the October 2, 2002, rulemaking that granted 
Baton Rouge an extension of its attainment date. Specifically we are 
withdrawing the approvals of the attainment date extension for the 
Baton Rouge area and the transport demonstration in Louisiana's 
December 31, 2001, SIP. Additionally, EPA is reinstating its previous 
final determination that the Baton Rouge area did not attain the 1-hour 
ozone NAAQS by November 15, 1999, as prescribed in section 181 of the 
CAA. As a result of this action, the Baton Rouge area is reclassified 
by operation of law to severe ozone nonattainment pursuant to section 
181(b)(2) of the CAA on the effective date of this action.\2\ In 
addition, this action sets the dates by which Louisiana must submit SIP 
revisions addressing the CAA's pollution control requirements for 
severe ozone nonattainment areas (the ``severe area SIP'') and to 
attain the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone. The post-1999 ROP nine percent 
reduction originally was required under the CAA to occur by November 
15, 2002. Because that statutory deadline passed before the area became 
classified as severe and thus first became subject to the requirement 
to demonstrate post-1999 ROP, we conclude that the State must have some 
time to actually develop and implement the measures needed to achieve 
such progress. Accordingly, in this action we are allowing Louisiana to 
demonstrate that the first required post-1999 nine percent ROP is 
achieved as expeditiously as practicable after November 15, 2002, but 
in any case no later than November 15, 2005. EPA is allowing Louisiana 
to relate contingency measures for the 2002 ROP milestone to this new 
date.\3\ Further discussion of a severe ozone nonattainment area's SIP 
requirements appears below in section VIII.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This rulemaking is a final action because the Fifth 
Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. United States EPA, 314 F.3d 
735, leaves no remaining questions on which we might solicit public 
comment regarding the reclassification of the Baton Rouge area. In 
light of the Court's decision and considering that we have already 
taken public comments and issued a final rule on reclassification 
(67 FR 42687, June 24, 2002), we have concluded that no good cause 
exists to require additional public comment regarding the 
reclassification of the Baton Rouge area.
    \3\ The severe area ROP plan will also have to provide for the 
second increment of post-1999 ROP for the period 2002 to 2005 and 
thus must achieve a minimum of 18 percent emission reductions from 
base line emissions by November 15, 2005. Therefore, the average ROP 
emission reductions will not decrease.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. What Is the New Attainment Date for the Baton Rouge Area?

    In the June 24, 2002, rulemaking, EPA set forth its conclusion 
under section 181(a)(1) of the Act that the attainment deadline for the 
Baton Rouge area, as a serious ozone nonattainment area reclassified to 
severe under section 181(b)(2), is as expeditiously as practicable but 
no later than the date provided in the Act for the new classification: 
November 15, 2005. EPA incorporates this conclusion, supporting 
reasoning, and responses to comments by reference into this rulemaking.

VIII. When Must Louisiana Submit SIP Revisions Fulfilling the 
Requirements for Severe Ozone Nonattainment Areas?

    Under section 182(i) of the Act, serious ozone nonattainment areas 
reclassified to severe are required to submit SIP revisions addressing 
the severe area requirements for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Under section 
182(d), severe area plans are required to meet all the requirements for 
serious area plans plus the requirements for severe area plans, which 
include: (1) A 25 ton per year major stationary source threshold; (2) 
additional reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules for 
sources subject to the new lower major stationary source threshold; (3) 
a new source review (NSR) offset requirement of at least 1.3 to 1; (4) 
a rate of progress in emission reductions of ozone precursors of at 
least 3 percent of base line emissions per year from November 15, 1999, 
until the attainment year; (5) additional transportation control 
measures (TCMs) needed to offset growth in emissions due to growth in 
vehicle miles traveled (VMT); and (6) a fee requirement for major 
stationary sources of volatile organic

[[Page 20080]]

compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) \4\ should the 
area fail to attain by 2005.\5\ In addition, under Section 211(k) of 
the Act the use of reformulated gasoline (RFG) will be required in the 
Baton Rouge area beginning one year from the effective date of this 
rule. The application of the RFG requirement occurs by operation of law 
in any area reclassified to severe ozone nonattainment status. We have 
issued a ``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' that sets forth our preliminary 
views on these section 182 requirements and how we will act on SIPs 
submitted under Title I. See generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 
57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Ozone is not emitted directly into the air, but is formed 
through the photochemical reaction of NOX and VOCs.
    \5\ Section 182(d)(3) sets a deadline of December 31, 2000, to 
submit the plan revision requiring fees for major sources should the 
area fail to attain. This date can be adjusted pursuant to CAA 
section 182(i). We adjusted this date to coincide with the submittal 
deadline for the rest of the severe area plan requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, since the Baton Rouge area did not attain by the 
serious area attainment date, and in order to fulfill the contingency 
measures requirements of sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the CAA, 
the implementation of the failure-to-attain contingency measures in the 
current SIP is triggered automatically upon the effective date of this 
rule. Further, Louisiana is required to submit a revision to the SIP 
containing additional contingency measures for its severe area SIP to 
meet ROP requirements and backfill for failure to attain. See 57 FR 
13498, 13511 (1992).
    The Baton Rouge severe area plan must also contain enforceable 
regulations, control measures, means or techniques as necessary or 
appropriate to make the required rate of progress and to attain the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but no later than 
November 15, 2005. The severe area SIP and its budgets must use the 
MOBILE6 emissions model. Using MOBILE6 may require a revision to the 
1990 base year inventory and ROP targets. Section 182(i) further 
provides that EPA may adjust the CAA deadlines for submitting these 
severe area SIP requirements. In addition to establishing a new 
attainment date, EPA must also address the schedule by which Louisiana 
is required to submit SIP revisions meeting the CAA's pollution control 
requirements for severe areas. In our June 24, 2002, redesignation 
rulemaking, after taking comments, we required that Louisiana submit 
SIP revisions fulfilling all of the severe area requirements, no later 
than one year after the effective date of the reclassification. We also 
concluded that if the submission showed that the area could attain the 
one-hour ozone NAAQS sooner than the attainment date established in the 
June 24, 2002, reclassification notice, we would adjust the attainment 
date to reflect the earlier date, consistent with the requirement in 
section 181(a)(1) that the NAAQS be attained as expeditiously as 
practicable. EPA did not receive any comments on the proposed schedule. 
We conclude that the severe SIP revision schedule is reasonable and 
appropriate. Therefore, EPA is requiring Louisiana to submit SIP 
revisions within 12 months of the effective date of this rule. These 
revisions must address the Act's pollution control requirements for 
severe ozone nonattainment areas and must demonstrate attainment by 
November 15, 2005.

IX. What Is the Impact of a Reclassification on the Title V Operating 
Permit Program?

    In the June 24, 2002, final rule, EPA listed most of the SIP 
revisions that would be required to be submitted by Louisiana 
addressing the severe area requirements. One of these requirements is 
the lowering of the major stationary source threshold for VOC and 
NOX emissions from 50 tons per year to 25 tons per year.
    As a consequence of the reclassification of the Baton Rouge area to 
severe, additional sources become subject to the Title V major 
stationary source operating permit program. The affected sources are 
those with a potential to emit at least 25 tons per year of either VOC 
or NOX, or both VOC and NOX. Any new major 
stationary source must submit a timely Title V permit application. ``A 
timely application for a source applying for a part 70 permit for the 
first time is one that is submitted within 12 months after the source 
becomes subject to the permit program or on or before such earlier date 
as the permitting authority may establish.'' See 40 CFR 70.5(a)(1) and 
see 40 CFR 71.5(a)(1). On the effective date of this action that can be 
found in the DATES section of this final rule, the 12 month (or earlier 
date set by Louisiana) time period to submit a timely application will 
commence in accordance with the State's Title V program regulations 
applicable to that source.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA is 
required to determine whether regulatory actions are significant and 
therefore should be subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
review, economic analysis, and the requirements of the Executive Order. 
The Executive Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as one 
that is likely to result in a rule that may meet at least one of the 
four criteria identified in section 3(f), including, under paragraph 
(1), that the rule may ``have an annual effect on the economy of $100 
million or more or adversely affect, in a material way, the economy, a 
sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the 
environment, public health or safety, or state, local or tribal 
governments or communities.''
    The Agency has determined that the finding of nonattainment would 
result in none of the effects identified in section 3(f) of the 
Executive Order. Under section 181(b)(2) of the CAA, determinations of 
nonattainment are based upon air quality considerations and the 
resulting reclassifications must occur by operation of law. They do 
not, in and of themselves, impose any new requirements on any sectors 
of the economy. In addition, because the statutory requirements are 
clearly defined with respect to the differently classified areas, and 
because those requirements are automatically triggered by 
classifications that, in turn, are triggered by air quality values, 
determinations of nonattainment and reclassification cannot be said to 
impose a materially adverse impact on state, local, or tribal 
governments or communities.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final action to reclassify the Baton Rouge area as a severe 
ozone nonattainment area and to adjust applicable deadlines does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

C. 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,

[[Page 20081]]

small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    Determinations of nonattainment and the resulting reclassification 
of nonattainment areas by operation of law under section 181(b)(2) of 
the CAA do not in and of themselves create any new requirements. 
Instead, this rulemaking only makes a factual determination, and does 
not directly regulate any entities. See 62 FR 60001, 60007-8, and 60010 
(November 6, 1997) for additional analysis of the RFA implications of 
attainment determinations. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I 
certify that this final action does not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of those terms 
for RFA purposes.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(UMRA), 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 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 believes, as discussed previously in this document, that a 
determination of nonattainment is a factual determination based upon 
air quality considerations and the resulting reclassification of the 
area occurs by operation of law. Thus, the finding does not constitute 
a Federal mandate, as defined in section 101 of the UMRA, because it 
does not impose an enforceable duty on any entity.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 
1999) requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by state and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have Federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.'' Under 
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has 
Federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance 
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal 
Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by state and local governments, or EPA consults with 
state and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has 
Federalism implications and that preempts state law unless the Agency 
consults with state and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. This determination of nonattainment 
and the resulting reclassification of a nonattainment area by operation 
of law 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 (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), because this action does not, in and of itself, impose any 
new requirements on any sectors of the economy, and does not alter the 
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
established in the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the 
Executive Order do not apply to these actions.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This final rule also does not have tribal implications because it 
will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, 
on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 
13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). Thus, Executive Order 13175 does 
not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    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 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. This final 
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because this is not an 
economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive 
Order 12866.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    Under Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001), EPA must prepare for those matters identified as 
significant energy actions. A ``significant energy action'' is any 
action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that 
promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule 
or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance notices of 
proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking, that is a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, and is 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. Under Executive Order 12866, this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action.'' For this reason, the 
finding of nonattainment and reclassification is also not subject to 
Executive Order 13211.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    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 final action to reclassify the Baton Rouge area as a severe 
ozone nonattainment area and to adjust applicable deadlines does not 
involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of 
any voluntary consensus standards.

[[Page 20082]]

J. Congressional Review Act

    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).

K. 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 June 23, 2003. 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 to reclassify the Baton Rouge area as a 
severe ozone nonattainment area and to adjust applicable deadlines may 
not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. 
(See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Intergovernmental relations, Motor vehicle pollution, Nitrogen oxides, 
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 14, 2003.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

0
Part 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. In Sec.  81.319 the table for Louisiana--Ozone (1-hour Standard) is 
amended by revising the entry for the Baton Rouge area to read as 
follows:


Sec.  81.319  Louisiana.

* * * * *

                                        Louisiana-Ozone (1-Hour Standard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Designation                         Classification
           Designated area           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Date \1\             Type             Date \1\             Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baton Rouge Area:
    Ascension Parish................     11/15/90  Nonattainment..........      6/23/03  Severe
    East Baton Rouge Parish.........     11/15/90  Nonattainment..........      6/23/03  Severe
    Iberville Parish................     11/15/90  Nonattainment..........      6/23/03  Severe
    Livingston Parish...............     11/15/90  Nonattainment..........      6/23/03  Severe
    West Baton Rouge Parish.........     11/15/90  Nonattainment..........      6/23/03  Severe
 
                                                 * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is October 18, 2000, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-10172 Filed 4-23-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P