[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 15, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68896-68898]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29066]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MA-25-7197a; A-1-FRL-6882-7]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Massachusetts; Rate-of-Progress Emission Reduction Plans

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 
submitted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The revision 
establishes 15 percent and post-1996 rate-of-progress (ROP) plans for 
the Springfield Massachusetts serious ozone nonattainment area. The 
intended effect of this action is to approve this SIP revision as 
meeting the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become effective on December 15, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are 
available for public inspection during normal business hours, by 
appointment at the Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA-New England, One Congress Street, 11th floor, 
Boston, MA; and the Division of Air Quality Control, Department of 
Environmental Protection, One Winter Street, 8th Floor, Boston, MA 
02108.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert F. McConnell, (617) 918-1046.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is organized as follows:

    A. What action is EPA taking today?
    B. Are the 1990 emission estimates used in the ROP calculations 
consistent with those approved in the base year inventory?
    C. What are the Springfield area's 1999 emission target levels?
    D. What is the status of the Commonwealth's I/M program?
    E. When is the Commonwealth expected to meet its 1999 emission 
target levels?
    F. Has Massachusetts revised its Stage II regulation?
    G. Has the Commonwealth submitted a contingency plan?
    H. What are the current conformity budgets for the Springfield 
area?

A. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving 15 percent and post-96 ROP plans submitted by the 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the Springfield serious ozone 
nonattainment area. On September 27, 1999 (64 FR 51944), EPA published 
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of 
Massachusetts. The NPR proposed approval of these ROP plans. A 
supplementary proposed rule was published on November 30, 1999 (64 FR 
66829) that provided additional information on the automobile 
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program to be used in Massachusetts 
and the timing of 15% and 9% ROP plan reductions. The formal SIP 
revision was submitted by Massachusetts on April 1, 1999, and amended 
on June 25, 1999, and September 9, 1999.

B. Are the 1990 Emission Estimates Used in the ROP Calculations 
Consistent With Those Approved in the Base Year Inventory?

    The 1990 base year inventory found in the ROP plans for the Western 
Massachusetts area matches the base year inventory for this area EPA 
approved in the July 14, 1997 Federal Register (62 FR 37510), with one 
exception. The NO<INF>X</INF> emission estimate for non-road engines 
approved in the July 14, 1997 Federal Register document was 19.9 tons 
per summer day (tpsd); this value was lowered to 17 tpsd in the 
inventory used in the Springfield area's ROP target emission level 
calculations. EPA's discussions with Massachusetts indicate that the 17 
tpsd estimate used in the ROP plans is incorrect. On September 15, 2000 
Massachusetts submitted a letter to EPA confirming that 19.9 tpsd is 
the correct NO<INF>X</INF> non-road base year emission estimate for the 
Springfield area, and submitted a revised target level calculation 
utilizing the correct value, 19.9 tpsd.

C. What Are the Springfield Area's 1999 Emission Target Levels?

    The 1999 emission target levels for the Springfield area are 115 
tpsd for VOC, and 100 tpsd for NO<INF>X</INF>. The States' projected, 
controlled emissions for 1999 are both expected to equal the 1999 
emission target levels for VOC and NO<INF>X</INF>.

D. What Is the Status of the Commonwealth's I/M Program?

    The Commonwealth began its automobile I/M program on October 1, 
1999, but experienced routine start-up difficulties which required that 
full enforcement of the program be delayed for two and one half months. 
The Commonwealth began fully enforcing the I/M program on December 15, 
1999.
    In a separate action in the rules section of today's Federal 
Register, EPA is publishing a limited approval for the Commonwealth's 
I/M program. EPA has considered whether the ROP plans should also 
receive limited approval and determined that full approval of the ROP 
plans is more appropriate. Essentially, the issues that cause EPA to 
limit its approval of the I/M program have no impact on achieving the 
reductions necessary to support these ROP plans. The Commonwealth began 
fully enforcing its motor vehicle emissions testing program on December 
15, 1999, and has continued to operate the program since that time 
without encountering major difficulties. It is the testing of motor 
vehicles and subsequent requirement that high polluting vehicles be 
repaired to emit less pollution that achieves the emission reductions 
attributable to automobile 
I/M programs. The reason EPA is not granting full approval of the 
Commonwealth's I/M program pertain to requirements that Massachusetts 
fully document that the I/M program complies with the provisions of 
section 182(c)(3) of the CAA. Achievement of these conditions, although 
necessary for full approval of the I/M program, are not prerequisite to 
achieving the relatively low level of emission reductions from the 
program on which these ROP plans rely. The I/M program as currently 
implemented, and which is fully enforceable in the SIP pursuant to our 
limited approval, is accomplishing the minimal emission reductions 
needed to support the ROP plans, and therefore full approval of the ROP 
plans is appropriate.

[[Page 68897]]

E. When Is the Commonwealth Expected To Meet Its 1999 Emission 
Target Levels?

    EPA believes that it is unlikely the Commonwealth met its emission 
target levels by November 15, 1999, but that it now meets these 
emission levels.
    The EPA's September 27, 1999 proposed approval of the 
Commonwealth's ROP plans noted that these plans relied, to a small 
degree, on the emission reductions from the I/M program scheduled to 
begin on October 1, 1999. However, the delayed enforcement of this 
program described above, and more conservative assumptions of the 
amount of credit derived from the program that Massachusetts is 
implementing as noted in the November 30, 1999 supplementary proposed 
rule, delayed the achievement of the emission reductions expected from 
this program. Based on the amount of vehicles subject to emission 
testing each month once the Commonwealth began enforcing this program 
on December 15, 1999, EPA believes the estimated reductions from I/M 
needed for the 15 percent and post-96 ROP plans were achieved and 
surpassed by the end of April, 2000, prior to the beginning of the 
ozone season. EPA believes that these reductions were achieved as 
expeditiously as practicable and that no other reasonable emissions 
control strategy would have allowed the Commonwealth or EPA to achieve 
these reductions sooner.

F. Has Massachusetts Revised Its Stage II Regulation?

    EPA's September 27 , 1999 proposed approval of the Commonwealth's 
ROP plans noted compliance issues associated with this rule. 
Massachusetts committed, in its one hour ozone attainment demonstration 
submittal, to address these issues by modifying its Stage II regulation 
to enhance the compliance assurance mechanisms designed into the rule. 
Massachusetts held a public hearing on its proposed revisions to its 
Stage II, gasoline vapor recovery regulation on January 20, 2000. The 
Commonwealth submitted the revised Stage II rule to EPA for parallel 
processing on August 9, 2000, and EPA proposed approval of this rule on 
August 21, 2000 (65 FR 50669). When EPA acts on the attainment 
demonstration, we will evaluate whether Massachusetts has adequately 
addressed the compliance issues associated with this rule. Enforcement 
of the Stage II rule currently approved in the SIP supports these ROP 
plans.

G. Has the Commonwealth Submitted a Contingency Plan?

    Massachusetts has not submitted a contingency plan. Sections 
172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) require that 
contingency measures be implemented if an area misses an ozone SIP 
milestone, or does not attain the NAAQS by the applicable date. 
Massachusetts has not met its obligation to submit a contingency plan 
for the Springfield serious nonattainment area.

H. What Are the Current Conformity Budgets for the Springfield 
Area?

    The Commonwealth's revised ROP plans contain motor vehicle emission 
budgets for the year 1999. However, the Massachusetts DEP submitted an 
ozone attainment demonstration plan to EPA in 1998 that contains mobile 
source emission budgets for Western Massachusetts for 2003. Since the 
year 2003 budgets are more restrictive, cover a time frame later than 
the ROP plans (which include the current transportation analyses 
milestone years), and are based on the attainment plan, these 2003 VOC 
and NO<INF>X</INF> budgets take precedence over motor vehicle emission 
budgets for earlier years. The specific 2003 budgets for the 
Springfield area are 23.770 tpsd for VOC, and 49.110 tpsd for 
NO<INF>X</INF>.
    Other specific requirements of the ROP plans and the rationale for 
EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated 
here. No public comments were received on the NPR.

Final Action

    EPA is approving rate-of-progress emission reduction plans for the 
Springfield, Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area as a revision to 
the Massachusetts SIP. These plans meet the requirements of sections 
182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2) of the CAA.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing 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.

Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action 
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). For the same reason, 
this rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 
13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule 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 it 
merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is 
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 
because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for

[[Page 68898]]

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued 
under the executive order. This rule does not impose an information 
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    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. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    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 January 16, 2001. 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).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: September 20, 2000.
Mindy S. Lubber,
Regional Administrator, EPA--New England.

    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 W--Massachusetts

    2. Section 52.1129 is added to subpart W to read as follows:


Sec. 52.1129  Control strategy: Ozone.

    Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the 
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection on April 1, 1999, 
and supplemented on June 25, 1999 and September 9, 1999. The revisions 
are for the purpose of satisfying the rate of progress requirements of 
sections 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Air Act for the 
Springfield, Massachusetts serious ozone nonattainment area.

[FR Doc. 00-29066 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P