[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 128 (Thursday, July 3, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39888-39892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-16923]
[[Page 39888]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[FRL-7522-6]
Revisions to the Regional Haze Rule To Correct Mobile Source
Provisions in Optional Program for Nine Western States and Eligible
Indian Tribes Within That Geographic Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve a correction to the mobile
source provisions in the EPA's regional haze rule. This correction is
consistent with recommendations of the Western Regional Air Partnership
(WRAP). The amendments to the rule are intended to address an emissions
projection scenario for mobile sources which was not addressed when EPA
published the regional haze rule in 1999.
DATES: Comments on this proposal must be received by August 4, 2003.
In the ``Final Rules'' section of today's Federal Register, we are
publishing a direct final rule that matches the substance of this
proposed rule. If the Agency receives adverse comment or a request for
public hearing by August 4, 2003, we will withdraw the direct final
rule by publishing a timely withdrawal notice in the Federal Register.
If the Agency receives no adverse comments to this proposed rule, the
direct final rule is effective September 2, 2003.
ADDRESSES: All comments should be submitted to Docket No. OAR-2002-
0076. When mailing documents, comments, or requests to the EPA Docket
Center through the U.S. Postal Service, please use the following
address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West (Air Docket),
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room B108; Mail Code: 6102T, Washington,
DC 20460. To mail comments or documents through a courier service, the
mailing address is: EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B108; Mail Code:
6102T, Washington, DC 20004. The normal business hours are 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays. Comments can be submitted to the
address above, by fax (202) 566-1741, or by e-mail to [email protected]. The voice telephone number is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you would like further information
about this proposed rule or to request a public hearing, contact Kathy
Kaufman, Integrated Policies and Strategies Group, (919) 541-0102 or by
e-mail [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by this action are nine States in
the Western United States (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho,
Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming) and Indian Tribes within
that same geographic area. This proposed action, and an earlier action
taken by EPA in 1999, provides these States and Tribes with an optional
program to protect visibility in federally protected scenic areas. The
portion of the program addressed by this proposed rule is a program for
tracking of mobile source emissions under the 1999 rule.
Docket. The EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket No. OAR-2002-0076. The official public docket
consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any
public comments received, and other information related to this action.
Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not
include confidential business information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the
collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Air
Docket in the EPA Docket Center, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744,
and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the
public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and
comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically.
Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you
may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through
the docket facility identified above. Once in the system, select
``search,'' then key in the docket identification number OAR-2002-0076.
Outline. The contents of today's preamble are listed in the
following outline.
I. Background
A. What is the regional haze rule?
B. What are the special provisions for Western States and
eligible Indian Tribes in 40 CFR 51.309 of the regional haze rule?
II. Changes to the Mobile Source Provisions of Section 309
A. Why are we changing the mobile source provisions of 40 CFR
51.309?
B. What are the specific changes to the mobile source provisions
of 40 CFR 51.309?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
IV. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
I. Background
A. What Is the Regional Haze Rule?
Section 169(A) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes a national
goal for protecting visibility in federally-protected scenic areas.
These ``Class I'' areas include national parks and wilderness areas.
The national visibility goal is to remedy existing impairment and
prevent future impairment in these Class I areas, consistent with the
requirements of sections 169A and 169B of the CAA.
Regional haze is a type of visibility impairment caused by air
pollutants emitted by numerous sources across a broad region. The EPA
uses the term regional haze to distinguish this type of visibility
problem from those which are more local in nature. In 1999, EPA issued
a regional haze rule requiring States to develop implementation plans
that will make ``reasonable progress'' toward the national visibility
goal (64 FR 35714, July 1, 1999). The first State plans for regional
haze are due between 2003 and 2008. The regional haze rule provisions
appear at 40 CFR 51.308 and 40 CFR 51.309.
[[Page 39889]]
B. What Are the Special Provisions for Western States and Eligible
Indian Tribes in 40 CFR 51.309 of the Regional Haze Rule?
The regional haze rule at 40 CFR 51.308 sets forth the requirements
for State implementation plans (SIPs) under the regional haze program.
The rule requires State plans to include visibility progress goals for
each Class I area, as well as emissions reductions strategies and other
measures needed to meet these goals. The rule also provides an optional
approach, described in 40 CFR 51.309, that may be followed by the nine
Western States (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New
Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming) that comprise the transport region
analyzed by the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission (GCVTC)
during the 1990's. This optional approach is also available to eligible
Indian Tribes within this geographic region. The regulatory provisions
at 40 CFR 51.309 are based on the final report issued by the GCVTC in
1996,\1\ which included a number of recommended emissions reductions
strategies designed to improve visibility in the 16 Class I areas on
the Colorado Plateau.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Recommendations for Improving Western Vistas. GCVTC, June
10, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In developing the regional haze rule, EPA received a number of
comments on the proposed rule encouraging the Agency to recognize
explicitly the work of the GCVTC. In addition, in June 1998, Governor
Leavitt of Utah provided comments to EPA on behalf of the Western
Governors Association (WGA), further emphasizing the commitment of
Western States to implementing the GCVTC recommendations. The WGA's
comments also suggested the translation of the GCVTC's recommendations
into specific regulatory language. The EPA issued a Notice of
Availability during the fall of 1998 requesting further comment on the
WGA's proposal and a draft set of regulatory language based upon the
WGA's recommendations. Based on the comments received on this Federal
Register action, EPA developed the provisions set forth in 40 CFR
51.309 that allow the nine Transport Region States and eligible Tribes
within that geographic area to implement many of the GCVTC
recommendations within the framework of the national regional haze
rule.
The provisions in 40 CFR 51.309 comprise a comprehensive long-term
strategy for addressing sources that contribute to visibility
impairment within this geographic region. The strategy addresses the
time period between the year 2003, when the implementation plans are
due,\2\ and the year 2018. The provisions address emissions from
stationary sources, mobile sources, and area sources such as emissions
from fires and windblown dust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Indian Tribes are given the flexibility under EPA
regulations to submit implementation plans and opt into the program
after the 2003 deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Changes to the Mobile Source Provisions of Section 309
A. Why Are We Changing the Mobile Source Provisions of 40 CFR 51.309?
1. What Is the Basis for the Old Provisions?
The GCVTC determined that mobile source emissions need to be an
essential part of a strategy to reduce haze on the Colorado Plateau.
Therefore, one element of the GCVTC's strategy, as reflected in 40 CFR
51.309(d)(5), was to address mobile source emissions. Section 309 also
requires States to establish a mobile source emissions budget for each
area that significantly contributes to visibility impairment in any of
the 16 Class I areas covered by this section of the regulations. At the
time the GCVTC made its recommendations (in 1996), mobile source
emissions were projected to be lowest in 2005, and to subsequently rise
over the course of the first regional haze planning period (i.e., until
2018). Accordingly, section 309 required mobile source emissions
budgets to be set using the lowest projected level as a planning
objective and performance indicator for each area.
2. What Is the Basis for the New Provisions?
Since the GCVTC made its recommendations, new developments have
caused mobile source emissions projections to change significantly.
Over the past few years, we have promulgated a series of new emissions
standards for several different engine types, as well as new standards
for diesel fuel content.\3\ As a result of these new standards, the
WRAP, using EPA's latest models,\4\ now projects a significant decline
in mobile source emissions throughout the region during the 2003-2018
time period covered by the section 309 plans, particularly from onroad
mobile sources. Rather than emissions being lowest in 2005, and
subsequently rising, mobile source emissions for all pollutants except
sulfur dioxide (SO2) are expected to decline continuously over the
course of the first regional haze planning period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 62 FR 25355, (May 8, 1997); 63 FR 18978, (April 16,
1998); 63 FR 56968, (October 23, 1998); 64 FR 73300, (December 29,
1999); 65 FR 59895, (October 6, 2000); 66 FR 5001, (January 18,
2001); 67 FR 68241, (November 8, 2002); and 68 FR 9745, (February
28, 2003).
\4\ MOBILE6 and MOBILE6.2 for on-highway vehicles and the
NONROAD model for nonroad vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The projected trends for mobile source emissions of SO2
differ from those of other pollutants. Emission reductions from
pollutants such as nitrogen oxides (NOX) and particulate
matter (PM) are dependent on technological changes to the onroad fleet
and to nonroad engines which are implemented gradually. In contrast,
SO2 emissions reductions are immediately realized when the
sulfur content of the fuel changes, because emissions from both new and
existing engines immediately drop sharply. We have already published
stringent fuel sulfur limits for onroad engines and have proposed
stringent fuel sulfur limits for nonroad engines.\5\ These Federal fuel
sulfur regulations, fully implemented, would together result in a
substantial reduction in SO2 emissions over the 2003--2018
planning period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See http://www.epa.gov/nonroad/ [placeholder for nonroad
diesel proposal, signed 4/15/03].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What Are the Specific Changes to the Mobile Source Provisions of 40
CFR 51.309?
These revisions would change Sec. 51.309(d)(5)(i) to eliminate the
requirement for setting mobile source emissions budgets using the
lowest projected level as a planning objective and performance
indicator for each area. Instead, the new Sec. 51.309(d)(5)(i) would
substitute, as the new planning objective and performance indicator, a
requirement for statewide inventories to show a continuous decline in
emissions of each pollutant of concern over the planning period. Should
mobile source emissions not decline as expected, States would have to
revise their SIPs to include any feasible additional strategies. This
new requirement conforms to trends that are currently projected.
In addition, in light of the continuous decline in mobile source
emissions expected over the entire region, these revisions also
eliminate the unneeded requirement in Sec. 51.309(5)(ii) and (iii) to
determine whether mobile sources emissions constitute a significant
contributor to haze in a given State. The revisions retain the
requirements for statewide inventories and performance demonstrations.
Finally, the revisions contain a backstop provision, requested by
the WRAP, to address any potential concerns regarding SO2
from nonroad
[[Page 39890]]
sources in the event that recently proposed Federal standards,
referenced above, are not finalized. The backstop provision, contained
in the new Sec. 51.309(d)(5)(i)(B), requires States to assess the need
for any long-term strategies to address SO2 from nonroad
mobile sources by no later than December 31, 2008. In determining
whether to revise their SIPs to address SO2 from mobile
sources, States may consider the emissions reductions achieved--or
anticipated--by any Federal standards that are in place addressing fuel
sulfur content for nonroad engines.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and 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 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
``(1) 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;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.''
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, we have determined
that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not add any new requirements involving the
collection of information as defined by the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The OMB has approved the information collection
requirements contained in the final Regional Haze regulations (64 FR
35714, July 1, 1999) and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0421 (EPA
ICR No. 1813.04).
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are
listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C.
601 et. seq., generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute 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 organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed
rulemaking on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business that is a small industrial entity as defined in the U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) size standards (as discussed on the SBA
Web site at http://www.sba.gov/size/indextableofsize.html); (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's direct final rule
on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
This proposed rule would eliminate certain comprehensive
requirements to address mobile source emissions that EPA now considers
to be unnecessary. Specifically, as discussed above, this proposed rule
would eliminate the requirements in Sec. 51.309(5)(ii) and (iii) to
determine whether mobile sources emissions constitute a significant
contributor to haze in a given State, and for those States with areas
that meet this significance criterion, to establish mobile source
emissions budgets. This proposed rule would require emissions
reductions consistent with the downward trend in mobile source emission
inventories that is currently projected, based on regulations that have
already been promulgated. We have therefore concluded that this
proposed rule would relieve regulatory burden for all small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law
104-4) (UMRA), establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess
the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 2
U.S.C. 1532, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including
a cost-benefit analysis, for any proposed or final rule that ``includes
any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more * * * in any one year.'' A ``Federal mandate'' is
defined under section 421(6), 2 U.S.C. 658(6), to include a ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' and a ``Federal private sector mandate.'' A
``Federal intergovernmental mandate,'' in turn, is defined to include a
regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local,
or tribal governments,'' section 421(5)(A)(i), 2 U.S.C. 658(5)(A)(i),
except for, among other things, a duty that is ``a condition of Federal
assistance,'' section 421(5)(A)(i)(I). A ``Federal private sector
mandate''
[[Page 39891]]
includes a regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty upon the
private sector,'' with certain exceptions, section 421(7)(A), 2 U.S.C.
658(7)(A).
Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is
needed under section 202 of the UMRA, section 205, 2 U.S.C. 1535, of
the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most
cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objectives of the rule.
Because the entire program under 40 CFR 51.309, including today's
amendments, is an option that each of the States may choose to
exercise, these revisions to section 309 do not establish any
regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal governments. The program is not required
and, thus is clearly not a ``mandate.'' Moreover, as explained above,
today's rule eliminates certain requirements and will overall reduce
any regulatory burdens. Accordingly, this rule will not result in
expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or the private sector, of $100 million or more in any given year. Thus
EPA is not obligated, under section 203 of UMRA, to develop a small
government agency plan.
We believe that this rulemaking is not subject to the requirements
of UMRA. For regional haze SIPs overall, it is questionable whether a
requirement to submit a SIP revision constitutes a Federal mandate, as
discussed in the preamble to the regional haze rule (64 FR 35761, July
1, 1999). However, today's direct final rule contains no Federal
mandates (under the regulatory provisions of title II of the UMRA) for
State, local or Tribal governments or the private sector. In addition,
the program contained in 40 CFR 51.309, including today's revisions, is
an optional program.
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 section 6(b) of 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 a regulation. Under section 6(c) of Executive Order 13132,
EPA may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications and
that preempts State law, unless EPA consults with State and local
officials early in the process of developing the regulation.
This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It would
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. As described above, this
proposed rule contains minor revisions to section 309 of the regional
haze rule which would reduce any regulatory burden on the States. In
addition, section 309 is an optional program for States. The minor
revisions to section 309, accordingly, would not directly impose
significant new requirements on State and local governments. Moreover,
even if today's proposed revisions did have federalism implications,
these proposed revisions would not impose substantial direct compliance
costs on State or local governments, nor would they preempt State law.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this proposed rule.
Consistent with EPA policy, we nonetheless did consult with
representatives of State and local governments in developing this
proposed rule. This rule directly implements specific recommendations
from the WRAP, which includes representatives from all the affected
States.
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 today's rule from
State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 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.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This proposed rule would eliminate certain requirements and will
overall reduce any regulatory burden on the Tribes. Moreover, the
section 309 program is an optional program for Tribes within the same
geographic region as the WRAP states. Accordingly, this proposed rule
would not have tribal implications. In addition, this proposed rule
would directly implement specific recommendations from the WRAP, which
includes representatives of Tribal governments. Thus, although this
proposed rule would not have tribal implications, representatives of
Tribal governments have had the opportunity to provide input into
development of the recommendations forming its basis.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health 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.
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 proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions that
[[Page 39892]]
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer 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 proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards. We welcome comments on this aspect of the proposed
rulemaking and, specifically, invite the public to identify
potentially-applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why
such standards should be used in this regulation.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 requires that each Federal agency make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and
activities on minorities and low-income populations. The requirements
of Executive Order 12898 have been previously addressed to the extent
practicable in the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the regional
haze rule (cited above), particularly in chapters 2 and 9 of the RIA.
This proposed rule makes no changes that would have a
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effect on minorities and low-income populations.
IV. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
Statutory authority for today's proposed rule comes from sections
169(a) and 169(b) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7545(c) and (k)). These
sections require EPA to issue regulations that will require States to
revise their SIPs to ensure that reasonable progress is made toward the
national visibility goals specified in section 169(A).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 27, 2003.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 51 of title 40,
Chapter 1 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:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7410, 7414, 7421, 7470-7479, 7492, 7601,
and 7602.
Subpart P--Protection of Visibility
2. Section 51.309 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(6) and
(d)(5)(i), deleting paragraphs (d)(ii) and (d)(iii), and renumbering
(d)(iv) to (d)(ii), to read as follows:
Sec. 51.309 Requirements related to the Grand Canyon Visibility
Transport Commission.
* * * * *
(b)(6) Continuous decline in total mobile source emissions means
that the projected level of emissions from mobile sources of each
listed pollutant in 2008, 2013, and 2018, are less than the projected
level of emissions from mobile sources of each listed pollutant for the
previous period (i.e., 2008 less than 2003; 2013 less than 2008; and
2018 less than 2013).
* * * * *
(d)(5)(i) Statewide inventories of onroad and nonroad mobile source
emissions of VOC, NOX, SO2, PM2.5,
elemental carbon, and organic carbon for the years 2003, 2008, 2013,
and 2018.
(A) The inventories must demonstrate a continuous decline in total
mobile source emissions (onroad plus nonroad; tailpipe and evaporative)
of VOC, NOX, PM2.5, elemental carbon, and organic
carbon, evaluated separately. If the inventories show a continuous
decline in total mobile source emissions of each of these pollutants
over the period 2003-2018, no further action is required as part of
this plan to address mobile source emissions of these pollutants. If
the inventories do not show a continuous decline in mobile source
emissions of one or more of these pollutants over the period 2003-2018,
the plan submission must provide for an implementation plan revision by
no later than December 31, 2008 containing any necessary long-term
strategies to achieve a continuous decline in total mobile source
emissions of the pollutant(s), to the extent practicable, considering
economic and technological reasonableness and federal preemption of
vehicle standards and fuel standards under title II of the CAA.
(B) The plan submission must also provide for an implementation
plan revision by no later than December 31, 2008 containing any long-
term strategies necessary to reduce emissions of SO2 from
nonroad mobile sources, consistent with the goal of reasonable
progress. In assessing the need for such long-term strategies, the
State may consider emissions reductions achieved or anticipated from
any new Federal standards for sulfur in nonroad diesel fuel.
(ii) [text of (iv) retained same as before]
[FR Doc. 03-16923 Filed 7-2-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P