[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 224 (Monday, November 20, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69767-69769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29501]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[AMS-FRL-6903-3]
California State Nonroad Engine and Vehicle Pollution Control
Standards; Notice of Within the Scope Determinations for Amendments to
California's Small Off-Road Engine Regulations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice Regarding Within the Scope Determinations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The California Air Resources Board (CARB), by letter dated
October 4, 1999, requested that EPA confirm CARB's finding that
amendments to its Small Off-Road Engine (SORE) Regulations are within-
the-scope of a prior authorization under section 209(e) of the Clean
Air Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 7543(b), granted by EPA for CARB's original
SORE Regulations in July 1995. EPA in this notice has made the
requested confirmation for many of the amendments in the CARB request.
EPA has also determined that other amendments in this CARB request were
not within the scope of the prior authorization because these
amendments are new standards, and will announce the opportunity for a
public hearing on these specific amendments.
DATES: Any objections to the findings in this notice regarding EPA's
determination that California's amendments to its regulations for test
procedures for nonroad engines and vehicles are within the scope of
previous authorizations must be filed by December 20, 2000. Otherwise,
at the end of this 30-day period, these findings will become final.
Upon receipt of any timely objection, EPA will consider scheduling a
public hearing to reconsider these findings in a subsequent Federal
Register notice.
ADDRESSES: Any objections to the within the scope findings in this
notice should be filed with Robert Doyle at the address noted below.
The Agency's decisions as well as all documents relied upon in reaching
these decisions, including those submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB), are available for public inspection in the Air
and Radiation Docket and Information Center during the working hours of
8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Docket (6102), Room M-1500, Waterside Mall, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. The Docket for this matter is Docket A-2000-09.
Copies of the Decision Document for these determinations can be
obtained by contacting Robert Doyle as noted below, or can be accessed
on the EPA Office of Mobile Sources Internet Home Page, also noted
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert M. Doyle, Attorney-Advisor,
Certification and Compliance Division, (6403J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Telephone: (202) 564-9258, FAX: (202) 565-2057, E-Mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Electronic Copies of Documents
Electronic copies of this Notice and the accompanying Decision
Document are available via the Internet on the Office of Transportation
and Air Quality (OTAQ) Home Page (http://www.epa.gov/OTAQ). Users can
find these documents by accessing the OTAQ Home Page and looking at the
path entitled ``Chronological List of All OTAQ Regulations.'' This
service is free of charge, except for any cost you already incur for
Internet connectivity. The official Federal Register version of the
Notice is made available on the day of publication on the primary Web
site (http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/).
Please note that due to differences between the software used to
develop the documents and the software into which the documents may be
downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc. may occur.
II. Amendments to the SORE Regulations
We have determined that certain amendments to the CARB SORE \1\
Regulations are within the scope of a prior authorization under section
209(e) of the Clean Air Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 7543(b), granted by EPA to
CARB's original SORE Regulations by decision of the Administrator dated
July 5, 1995.\2\ The SORE regulations apply to all gasoline, diesel,
and other fueled utility and lawn and garden equipment engines 25
horsepower and under, with certain exceptions. Under the original
authorization, the SORE regulations established two ``tiers'' of
exhaust emission standards for these engines (Tier 1 from 1995 through
1998 model years, and Tier 2 for model year 1999 and beyond), as well
as numerous other requirements. The amendments to the regulations,
outlined in CARB's request letter,\3\ and fully described CARB's
submissions, accomplish the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These amendments, among other things, renamed the
regulations from the Utility, Lawn and Garden Engine Regulations
(ULGE Rule) to the Small Off-Road Engine Regulations (SORE Rule).
\2\ 60 FR 37440 (July 20, 1995). The CARB small engine emission
regulations were then called the Utility, Lawn and Garden Engine
(ULGE) regulations. The new amendments, among other things, renamed
the ULGE regulations as the SORE regulations
\3\ Letter from Micahel P. Kenney, Executive Officer, CARB, to
Carol M. Browner, Administrator, EPA, dated October 4, 1999, Docket
A-2000-09, entry II-B-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The descriptive terms ``handheld'' and nonhandheld'' have
been dropped in favor of describing covered engines by engine
displacement categories. The former handheld engines are now called
``less than or equal to 65 cubic centimeters (cc),'' or ``0-65cc,'' and
the former nonhandheld engines are now called ``greater than 65 cc.''
CARB stated that the former categories were picked to ensure that
multi-positional equipment supported solely by the operator could use
the lighter (but dirtier) handheld engines, which are usually two-
stroke engines. Because of manufacturer difficulty with the engine
definitions, CARB chose engine displacement to define category choices.
CARB has changed both the previously authorized Tier 2
standards and the authorized implementation dates for those standards.
For the 0-65cc engines, CARB extended the Tier 1 standards for one more
year, through model year 1999, so Tier 2 standards do not begin for
these engines until the model year 2000. CARB also changed the Tier 2
standards, by relaxing the CO and PM standards, and changing the format
of the HC and NOX standards to allow manufacturers more
flexibility. For the Over 65 cc engines, CARB extended the Tier i
standards two additional years, through calendar year 2001 for most
engines in this category. The extension is longer in some special
cases: through 2002 for engines equal to or greater than 225cc and
horizontal
[[Page 69768]]
shaft engines below 225 cc, and through 2006 for vertical shaft engines
below 225 cc. Additionally, manufacturers who produce more than 40,000
spark-ignited engines per year between 65 and 225cc for sale in
California's extreme nonattainment areas are responsible for additional
emission standards to obtain the emission reductions that would have
occurred under the original CARB staff proposal for these amendments.
For small compression ignition engines, CARB extended the
coverage of the Tier 1 standards one additional year, through model
year 1999. For model year 2000 and later, CARB amended the SORE
regulations to implement the emission standards for small nonroad
compression ignition engines in the Statement of Principles agreed upon
by CARB, EPA and various industry members in 1996. The effect of these
standards is a relaxation of the Tier 1 standards; the CARB staff
acknowledged that it did not believe the 3.2 g/bhp-hr HC +
NOX standard was attainable in the prescribed time period of
the CARB Tier 2 standards. CARB notes, however, that the amended small
compression engine standards will provide good SIP benefits while also
providing California/Federal harmonization of the regulations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Staff Report, Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-2, p. 32-33,
Final Regulation Order--Exhaust Standards and Test Procedures,
Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-8, part VI, p. 98. CARB adopted by
reference, with some modifications, 40 CFR Part 89 as that Part
relates to the small compression engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB has expanded the applicability of the SORE Rule to
include speciality vehicles and golf carts; these vehicles previously
were regulated under the CARB Nonroad Recreational Vehicle Rule. This
change results in all engines less than 25 hp used in mobile
applications now being covered by the same Rule. CARB also modified the
applicability of the Rule to remove the provision that includes engines
that produce a rated power greater than 25hp but are governed to
produce actual power of under 25hp. CARB had found that a small number
of engines of that type were built on an automotive base. The
manufacturer expected the engine would not be subject to the SORE
standards, but because the manufacturer's customer installed a governor
downrating the engine, it became subject to these standards. CARB
states that engines in this grouping will be regulated in an upcoming
rulemaking to levels appropriate to their automotive origins.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ CARB Staff Report, Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-2, pp. 10-
11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturers will have the option of demonstrating
compliance with the PM standard through an engineering evaluation
rather than through direct testing measurement, the only method allowed
in the original rule. CARB staff recommended this change after learning
that a simple formula could produce a valid PM measurement value, and
thus save manufacturers the cost of the expensive sampling equipment
required to measure PM. CARB devised this formula based on information
from an industry group showing that PM emissions from two-stroke
engines will be no greater than the tested HC emissions divided by the
fuel to oil ratio used in the engine.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ CARB Staff Report, Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-2, p. 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB has established a program of averaging, banking and
trading (ABT) of emission credits for manufacturers of these engines.
Manufacturers will be able to use a corporate average to show
compliance with the HC + NOX standard. For any one engine
family, the manufacturer can establish a ``Family Emission Limit
(FEL)'' which will be the emission standard for that family, and the
FEL can be above the standard (subject only to a set upper limit), so
long as the average of all the manufacturer's families met the
standard. This corporate average would weight individual engine
families by power, load factor, sales and durability period. CARB notes
that this credit program is designed to provide industry the
flexibility to address problems such as low sales volume engines for
which emission reductions are relatively costly by allowing
manufacturers to focus efforts first on the higher sales volume
engines. The manufacturer averaging program also includes an emission
reduction credits mechanism. CARB will allow manufacturers to generate
Production Emission Reduction Credits when the final HC +
NOX sample mean (from the production line testing) of an
engine family is below the FEL. These credits earned can be used for
certification and as a remedy for noncompliance of another engine
family.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ CARB Staff Report, Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-2, p. 8-9,
and p. 35, Final Regulation Order, Exhaust Standards and Test
Procedures, Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-8, pp. 53-63 (emission
reduction credits) and p. 110 (upper limit).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB amended its ``quality audit'' requirements. In the
original program, manufacturers were required to test 1% of total
production for compliance in end of production line tests (``green''
engines). In the new requirements, manufacturers now have an option to
follow a procedure similar to the Federal ``Cumulative Sum (``Cum
Sum'') procedure. Under Cum Sum, manufacturers can complete the
production line testing with a small number of engines when the family
is clean, and thus not have to meet the 1% of production requirement.
CARB's amendments alter the Cum Sum requirements by requiring a minimum
testing rate of 2 engines from each family per quarter to ensure
continued sampling. Manufacturers of small volume families can minimize
their tests by retaining the 1% testing number. With the exception of
the quarterly minimum, CARB's program is similar to that adopted for
the Federal nonhandheld program and proposed for the Federal handheld
program.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ CARB Staff Report, Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-2, p. 8-9,
and Final Statement of Reasons, Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-7,
p.44-45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB amended its emission warranty regulations by
expanding the list of covered emission-related parts to include air
filters and pressure regulators.
In an October 4, 1999 letter to EPA, CARB notified EPA of the
above-described amendments to its SORE regulations and asked EPA to
confirm that these amendments are within the scope of previous
authorizations.\9\ EPA can make such a confirmation if certain
conditions are present. Specifically, if California acts to amend a
previously authorized standard or accompanying enforcement procedure,
the amendments may be considered within the scope of a previously
granted authorization provided that it does not undermine California's
determination that its standards in the aggregate are as protective of
public health and welfare as applicable Federal standards, does not
affect the consistency with section 209 of the Act, \10\ and raises no
new
[[Page 69769]]
issues affecting EPA's previous authorization determination.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The CARB request also included amendments which established
brand new durability standards for covered engines (where before
there were none). EPA has determined that these two sets of
regulation amendments in this request cannot be considered within
the scope of the previous authorization because these particular
amendments set new and/or more stringent standards and therefore
properly should be reviewed as a new authorization request.
Accordingly, EPA will offer the opportunity for a public hearing on
these new standards.
\10\ EPA has interpreted the requirement regarding whether
``California standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are
not consistent with section 209'' to mean that California standards
and accompanying enforcement procedures must be consistent with
section 209(a), section 209(e)(1), and section 209(b)(1)(C), as EPA
has interpreted that subsection in the context of motor vehicle
waivers. In order to be consistent with section 209(a), California's
nonroad standards and enforcement procedures must not apply to new
motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines. Secondly, California's
nonroad standards and enforcement procedures must be consistent with
section 209(e)(1), which identifies the categories permanently
preempted from state regulation. California's nonroad standards and
enforcement procedures would be considered inconsistent with section
209 if they applied to the categories of engines or vehicles
identified and preempted from State regulation in section 209(e)(1).
Finally, and most importantly in terms of application to nonroad
within the scope requests such as these, because California's
nonroad standards and enforcement procedures must be consistent with
section 209(b)(1)(C), EPA will review nonroad authorization requests
under the same ``consistency'' criteria that are applied to motor
vehicle waiver requests. Under section 209(b)(1)(C), the
Administrator shall not grant California a motor vehicle waiver if
she finds that California ``standards and accompanying enforcement
procedures are not consistent with section 202(a)'' of the Act. As
previous decisions granting waivers of Federal preemption for motor
vehicles have explained, State standards are inconsistent with
section 202(a) if there is inadequate lead time to permit the
development of the necessary technology giving appropriate
consideration to the cost of compliance within that time period or
if the Federal and State test procedures impose inconsistent
certification requirements.
\11\ Decision Document for California Nonroad Engine Regulations
Amendments, Dockets A-2000-05 to 08, entry V-B, .p. 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its request letter, CARB stated that the various amendments will
not cause the California nonroad standards, in the aggregate, to be
less protective of public health and welfare than the applicable
Federal standards. Regarding consistency with section 209, CARB stated
that the amendments (1) apply only to nonroad engines and vehicles and
not to motor vehicles or engines, (2) apply only to those nonroad
engines and vehicles which are not included in the preempted
categories, and (3) do not raise any concerns of inadequate leadtime or
technological feasibility or impose any inconsistent certification
requirements (compared to the Federal requirements). Finally, CARB
stated that the amendments raise no new issues affecting the prior EPA
authorization determinations.
EPA agrees with all CARB findings with regard to the provisions
listed. Thus, EPA finds that these amendments are within the scope of
previous authorizations. A full explanation of EPA's decision is
contained in a Decision Document which may be obtained from EPA as
noted above.
Because these amendments are within the scope of previous
authorizations, a public hearing to consider them is not necessary.
However, if any party asserts an objection to these findings by
December 20, 2000, EPA will consider holding a public hearing to
provide interested parties an opportunity to present testimony and
evidence to show that there are issues to be addressed through a
section 209(e) authorization determination and that EPA should
reconsider its findings. Otherwise, these findings shall become final
on December 20, 2000.
Our decision will affect not only persons in California but also
the manufacturers outside the State who must comply with California's
requirements in order to produce nonroad engines and vehicles for sale
in California. For this reason, we hereby determine and find that this
is a final action of national applicability.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, judicial review of this final
action may be sought only in the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit. Petitions for review must be filed by
January 19, 2001. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Act, judicial review
of this final action may not be obtained in subsequent enforcement
proceedings.
EPA's determination that these California regulations are within
the scope of prior authorizations by EPA does not constitute a
significant regulatory action under the terms of Executive Order 12866
and this action is therefore not subject to Office of Management and
Budget review.
In addition, this action is not a rule as defined in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(2). Therefore, EPA has not prepared a
supporting regulatory flexibility analysis addressing the impact of
this action on small business entities.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, does not
apply because this action is not a rule, for purposes of 5 U.S.C.
804(3).
Finally, the Administrator has delegated the authority to make
determinations regarding authorizations under section 209(e) of the Act
to the Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
Dated: November 9, 2000.
Robert Perciasepe,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 00-29501 Filed 11-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P