[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 224 (Monday, November 20, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69769-69771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29502]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[AMS-FRL-6903-4]
California State Nonroad Engine and Vehicle Pollution Control
Standards; Opportunity for Public Hearing and Request for Public
Comment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public hearing and request for public
comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 to CARB's original
SORE Regulations in July 1995. EPA has made the requested confirmation
for many of the amendments in the CARB request and published this
determination in an earlier FR notice. EPA also determined that other
amendments in this CARB request were not within the scope of the prior
authorization because these amendments are brand new standards. For
this reason, EPA is announcing the opportunity for a public hearing on
these specific amendments.
DATES: EPA has tentatively scheduled a public hearing for December 8,
2000, commencing at 9:30 am. Any person who wishes to testify on the
record at the hearing must notify EPA in writing by December 1, 2000
that he or she will attend the hearing to present oral testimony
regarding EPA's determination. If EPA receives one or more requests to
testify, this hearing will be held. If EPA does not receive any
requests to testify, this hearing will be canceled. Anyone who plans to
attend the hearing should contact Robert Doyle by telephone or E-Mail
(number and address below) to determine if this hearing will be held.
Regardless of whether or not a hearing is held, any party may submit
written comments regarding EPA's determination by or before December
22, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Parties wishing to present oral testimony at the public
hearing should provide written notice to John Guy, Acting Manager,
Engine Compliance Programs Group, (6403J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
If EPA receives a request for a public hearing, EPA will hold the
public hearing in the first floor conference room at 501 3rd Street,
NW., Washington, DC. Parties wishing to send written comments should
provide them to Mr. Guy at the above address. EPA will make available
for public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center written comments received from interested parties, in addition
to any testimony given at the public hearing. The Air Docket is open
during working hours from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at EPA, Air
[[Page 69770]]
Docket (6102), Room M-1500, Waterside Mall, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. The reference number for this docket is A-2000-
09.
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
(U.S. mail), 501 3rd Street NW, Washington, DC 20001 (courier mail).
Telephone: (202) 564-9258, Fax:(202) 565-2057, E-Mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Electronic Copies of Documents
EPA makes available an electronic copy of this Notice on the Office
of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) homepage (http://www.epa.gov/OTAQ). Users can find this document by accessing the OTAQ homepage and
looking at the path entitled ``Regulations.'' This service is free of
charge, except any cost you already incur for Internet connectivity.
Users can also get the official Federal Register version of the Notice
on the day of publication on the primary website: (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. Background
(A) Nonroad Authorizations
Section 209(e)(1) of the Act addresses the permanent preemption of
any State, or political subdivision thereof, from adopting or
attempting to enforce any standard or other requirement relating to the
control of emissions for certain new nonroad engines or vehicles.
Section 209(e)(2) of the Act allows the Administrator to grant
California authorization to enforce state standards for new nonroad
engines or vehicles which are not listed under section 209(e)(1),
subject to certain restrictions. On July 20, 1994, EPA promulgated a
regulation that sets forth, among other things, the criteria, as found
in section 209(e)(2), by which EPA must consider any California
authorization requests for new nonroad engines or vehicle emission
standards (section 209(e) rules).1, 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1, 2\ See 59 FR 36969 (July 20, 1994), and regulations set
forth therein, 40 CFR Part 85, Subpart Q, 85.1601-85.1606.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 209(e)(2) requires the Administrator, after notice and
opportunity for public hearing, to authorize California to enforce
standards and other requirements relating to emissions control of new
engines not listed under section 209(e)(1).\3\ The section 209(e) rule
and its codified regulations \4\ formally set forth the criteria,
located in section 209(e)(2) of the Act, by which EPA must grant
California authorization to enforce its new nonroad emission standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ As discussed above, states are permanently preempted from
adopting or enforcing standards relating to the control of emissions
from new engines listed in section 209(E)(1).
\4\ See 40 CFR Part 85, Subpart Q, 85.1605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in the preamble to the section 209(e) rule, EPA has
interpreted the requirement that EPA cannot find ``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.\5\ 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.\6\
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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See FR 36969, 36983 (July 20, 1994).
\6\ Setion 209(e)(1) of the Act has been implemented, See 40 CFR
Pt. 85, Subpart Q 85.1602, 85.1603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ To be consistent, the California certification procedures
need not be identical to the Federal certification procedures.
California procedures would be inconsistent, however, if
manufacturers would be unable to meet both the state and the Federal
requirement with the same test vehicle in the course of the same
test. See, e.g., 43 Fed. Reg. 32182 (July 25, 1978).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to enforcement procedures accompanying standards, EPA
must grant the requested authorization unless it finds that these
procedures may cause the California standards, in the aggregate, to be
less protective of public health and welfare than the applicable
Federal standards promulgated pursuant to section 213(a), or unless the
Federal and California certification test procedures are
inconsistent.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association,
Inc. v. EPA, 627 F.2d 1095, 1111-14 (D.C. Cir. 1979), cert. denied,
446 U.S. 952 (1980) (MEMA I); 43 Fed. Reg. 25729 (June 14, 1978).
While inconsistency with section 202(a) includes technological
feasibility, lead time, and cost, these aspects are typically
relevant only with regard to standards. The aspect of consistency
with 202(a) which is of primary applicability to enforcement
procedures (especially test procedures) is test procedure
consistency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once California has received an authorization for its standards and
enforcement procedures for a certain group or class of nonroad
equipment engines or vehicles, it may adopt other conditions precedent
to the initial retail sale, titling or registration of these engines or
vehicles without the necessity of receiving an additional
authorization.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 43 FR 36679, 36680 (August 18, 1978).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If California acts to amend a previously authorized standard or
accompanying enforcement procedure, the amendment 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, and raises no new issues affecting EPA's previous
authorization determination.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Decision Document for California Nonroad Engine Regulations
Amendments, Dockets A-2000-05 to 08, entry V-B, p.28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) The SORE Amendments Request
EPA granted California authorization for its SORE Rule by decision
of the Administrator dated July 5, 1995.\11\ The
[[Page 69771]]
SORE Rule, which applies to all gasoline, diesel, and other fueled
utility and lawn and garden equipment engines 25 horsepower and under,
with certain exceptions 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. By letter dated October 4, 1999, CARB notified EPA that
it had adopted numerous amendments to its SORE Regulations which were
first approved at a public hearing on March 26, 1998. These amendments
are the product of CARB's continuing reviews of industry efforts to
comply with the requirements of the CARB nonroad program. The Board
directed the CARB staff to review the industry progress in developing
the technology required to comply with the Tier 2 standards, and to
consider issues raised by the industry in this process. The staff
recommended to the Board that the SORE regulations ``be modified to
reflect the realities of the small engine market and the technological
capabilities of the industry.'' \12\ These recommended amendments which
CARB adopted consequently reduce compliance burdens on manufacturers
while also ``preserving most of the emission reductions--including most
reductions in excess of comparable federal program--that U.S.E.P.A.
previously authorized.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 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.
\12\ CARB Notice of Public Hearing with attached Staff Report,
Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-2, p. 2.
\13\ Letter from CARB to EPA requesting within the scope
confirmation for amendments to SORE Rule, dated October 4, 1999,
Docket A-2000-09, entry II-B-1, p.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its request letter, CARB asked EPA to confirm the CARB
determination that the amendments to the SORE regulations set forth in
its request package are within the scope of the 209(e) authorization of
the original authorization granted by EPA for the SORE Rule in July
1995. EPA has made such a determination for most of the regulation
amendments included in the CARB request.\14\ EPA also has determined,
on the other hand, that one set of regulation amendments in this
request cannot be considered within the scope of the previous
authorization because these particular amendments set brand new, more
stringent standards and therefore properly should be reviewed as a new
authorization request. These amendments set useful life standards for
covered engines (where before there were none). Accordingly, EPA
announces this opportunity for a public hearing on these new standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Decision Document for California Nonroad Engine Regulations
Amendments, Dockets A-2000-05 to 08, entry V-B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Procedures for Public Participation
Any party desiring to make an oral statement on the record should
file ten (10) copies of its proposed testimony and other relevant
material with John Guy Doyle at the address listed above no later than
December 20, 2000. In addition, the party should submit 25 copies, if
feasible, of the planned statement to the presiding officer at the time
of the hearing.
In recognition that a public hearing is designed to give interested
parties an opportunity to participate in this proceeding, there are no
adverse parties as such. Statements by participants will not be subject
to cross-examination by other participants without special approval by
the presiding officer. The presiding officer is authorized to strike
from the record statements that he or she deems irrelevant or
repetitious and to impose reasonable time limits on the duration of the
statement of any participant.
If a hearing is held, the Agency will make a verbatim record of the
proceedings. Interested parties may arrange with the reporter at the
hearing to obtain a copy of the transcript at their own expense.
Regardless of whether a public hearing is held, EPA will keep the
record open until December 22, 2000. Upon expiration of the comment
period, the Administrator will render a decision on CARB's request
based on the record of the public hearing, if any, relevant written
submissions, and other information that she deems pertinent. All
information will be available for inspection at EPA Air Docket, in
Docket No. A-2000-09.
Persons with comments containing proprietary information must
distinguish such information from other comments to the greatest
possible extent and label it as ``Confidential Business Information''
(CBI). If a person making comments wants EPA to base its decision in
part on a submission labeled CBI, then a nonconfidential version of the
document that summarizes the key data or information should be
submitted for the public docket. To ensure that proprietary information
is not inadvertently placed in the docket, submissions containing such
information should be sent directly to the contact person listed above
and not to the public docket. Information covered by a claim of
confidentiality will be disclosed by EPA only to the extent allowed and
by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. If no claim of
confidentiality accompanies the submission when EPA receives it, EPA
will make it available to the public without further notice to the
person making comments.
Dated: November 9, 2000.
Robert Perciasepe,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 00-29502 Filed 11-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P