Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: June 12, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 113)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31544-31545]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12jn01-5]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Region II Docket No. NJ43-219; FRL-6990-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey;
Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found that the
State of New Jersey has implemented the enhanced Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M) program. EPA, therefore, is terminating all sanctions
clocks related to the implementation of the New Jersey enhanced I/M
program upon the effective date of this document. This action also
reinstates the interim approval granted under Section 348 of the
National Highway Systems Designation Act of the enhanced I/M program.
The interim approval became effective on December 13, 1999.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will be effective July 12, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available at the following addresses for inspection during normal
business hours: Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air
Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866; New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Air
Quality Management, Bureau of Air Pollution Control, 401 East State
Street, CN027, Trenton, New Jersey 08625; and Environmental Protection
Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Air Docket
(6102), 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy-Ann Mitchell, Air Programs
Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New
York, New York 10278, (212) 637-4249.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What Is EPA Taking Action On?
On November 19, 1999, New Jersey notified EPA by letter that the
mandatory enhanced I/M program would be implemented on December 13,
1999. EPA had been working closely with the State during the phase-in
period of the enhanced I/M program and agreed that the State would have
the program implemented on December 13, 1999. Therefore, on December
17, 1999 (64 FR 70659), EPA proposed to find that the State of New
Jersey had implemented its enhanced I/M program by December 13, 1999.
EPA also proposed to reinstate the interim approval under Section 348
of the NHSDA of the enhanced I/M program effective on December 13,
1999.
Also in the December 17, 1999 Federal Register, EPA published an
interim final rule (64 FR 70593), which stayed the application of the
offset sanction and deferred the highway sanction as of December 13,
1999. Although the State of New Jersey had numerous start-up problems,
the program was implemented and is currently operational. A description
of EPA's rationale for our proposed action was presented in the
proposal and will not be restated here. No public comments were
received on the proposal.
II. Final Action
Upon the effective date of today's action, all sanctions clocks
related to the implementation of New Jersey's enhanced I/M program are
terminated. In addition, the interim approval of New Jersey's enhanced
I/M program is reinstated. Since approximately six months of the
interim period had passed by December 12, 1997, the State had the
remaining 12 months of the interim approval period to demonstrate their
I/M program's test and repair network effectiveness. On December 13,
2000, New Jersey submitted their I/M program's test and repair network
effectiveness demonstration.
Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
final action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore
is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This
final action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements
and imposes no additional requirements
[[Page 31545]]
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this final 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). This final rule also does 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 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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 final 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 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). This rule will be effective July 12, 2001.
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 August 13, 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, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: May 9, 2001.
William J. Muszynski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 01-13779 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif)