Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plan; Connecticut; Approval of National Low Emission Vehicle Program

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