Optional Certification Streamlining Procedures for Light-Duty
Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Engines for Original
Equipment Manufacturers and for Aftermarket Conversion Manufacturers;
Final Rule
Related Material
[Federal Register: March 7, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 45)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11898-11904]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07mr00-11]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 86
[AMS-FRL-6545-7]
Optional Certification Streamlining Procedures for Light-Duty
Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Engines for Original
Equipment Manufacturers and for Aftermarket Conversion Manufacturers;
Final Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is adopting a fee
waiver provision for vehicles certified with ``closed'' fuel systems
and for vehicles certified to the Clean-Fuel vehicle (CFV) standards.
EPA is also adopting a provision for calculating eligibility for a
partial fee waiver for vehicles converted to operate on a gaseous fuel.
EPA proposed this provision in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
published on July 20, 1998, at 63 FR 38767, to provide incentives for
the manufacturer of CFVs by easing the burden of certification for
manufacturers of these vehicles. EPA is not adopting certain other
provisions proposed in that document.
The fee waivers adopted today will be effective for the 2000 Model
Year (MY) and will continue through MY 2003. This action will reduce
the cost of certification for manufacturers certifying a small-volume
engine family to CFV standards. In addition, it is anticipated this
action will provide a financial incentive for automobile and engine
manufacturers to increase the number of offerings of alternatively
fueled vehicles to private owners and fleet owners. Manufacturers who
qualify for the fee waivers and who have already paid their fees for
2000 MY vehicles will be eligible for a complete refund. EPA estimates
that overall manufacturers will save about $100,000 during each of the
next four model years due to this provision.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective April 6, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this final rule are contained in
Docket No. A-97-27, located at the Air Docket, 401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC 20460, and may be reviewed in Room M-1500 from 8 a.m.
until 5:30 p.m. on business days. The telephone number is (202) 260-
7548 and the facsimile number is (202) 260-4400. As provided in 40 CFR
Part 2, EPA may charge a reasonable fee for photocopying docket
materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Clifford Tyree, Senior Project
Manager, U.S. EPA, National Vehicle and Fuel Emission Laboratory,
Vehicle Programs and Compliance Division, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann
Arbor, MI 48105-2425. Telephone: (734) 214-4310; FAX 734-214-4053. E-
Mail, tyree.clifford@epamail.epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by this action are Original
Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) of Light-Duty Vehicles, Light-Duty
Trucks (LDTs), and Heavy-Duty Engine (HDEs) manufacturers. In addition,
aftermarket converters of LDVs, LDTs, and HDEs will also be regulated.
Entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Auto industry of light-duty vehicles, Original Equipment
light-duty trucks, and heavy-duty Manufacturers (OEMs) and
engines. Aftermarket Converters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether
your
[[Page 11899]]
product is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in Sec. 86.094-1 of title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular product, consult the person listed in
the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Obtaining Electronic Copies of the Regulatory Documents
The preamble, regulatory and other related documents are also
available electronically from the EPA Internet Web site. This service
is free of charge, except for any cost you already incur for Internet
connectivity. The electronic Federal Register version is made available
on the day of publication on the primary Web site listed below. The EPA
Office of Mobile Sources also publishes Federal Register notices and
related documents on a secondary Web site listed below.
1. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/(either select desired
date or use Search feature.)
2. http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/cff.htm
Please note that due to differences between the software used to
develop the document and the software into which the document may be
downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc. may occur.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Content of the Final Rule
A. Definition of Dedicated Vehicle (or Engine)
B. Engine Family Criteria and Assigned Deterioration Factors
C. Fees
III. Projected Impacts
A. Environmental Impact
B. Economic Impact
IV. Public Participation
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Congressional Review Act
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
G. Protection of Children
H. Enhancing Intergovernmental Partnerships
I. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
J. Executive Order 13132, Federalism Policies
VI. Statutory Authority
I. Introduction
The goal of the proposed amendments was to ease the burden of
certification for manufacturers of vehicles and engines certified with
closed fuel systems and for manufacturers of Clean-Fuel vehicles (CFV),
to increase the supply of such vehicles. This overall increase in the
supply of such vehicles will also result in a broader selection of
vehicles certified to CFV standards for fleet operators subject to the
purchasing requirements of state Clean-Fuel Fleet Programs (CFFP) under
section 246 of the Clean Air Act. EPA proposed to (1) Revise the
definition for dedicated vehicle (or engine) in 40 CFR 86.092-90 to
include CFVs with limited ability to operate on a conventional fuel,
(2) amend the current regulations to allow manufacturers of CFVs to
group certain engine families together for certification purposes, and
(3) exempt certain manufacturers for MY 1999, 2000, and 2001, from
certification fees for vehicles with closed fuel systems and for CFVs.
II. Content of the Final Rule
A. Definition of Dedicated Vehicle (or Engine)
EPA is not adopting the proposed changes to the definition of a
dedicated vehicle (or engine) for the reasons described below. EPA
received four comments expressing support for this provision, but also
expressing concern that the proposed definition would add complexity
and confusion for the consumer.
EPA proposed to revise the current definition of dedicated vehicle
(or engine) to encompass vehicles with limited ability to operate on a
second fuel. The emergency fuel supply of the second fuel would be
limited to a fuel capacity that would only allow a 50-mile range or,
operation for one hour in three hours of driving. Some commenters felt
strongly that the operators would find a way to circumvent the
limitations on the use of the second fuel. For example, the electronic
limit of one hour of operation in three could easily be tampered with.
They also felt that some operators would choose to operate on the
gasoline in non-emergency situations, even if the total capacity would
only allow a 50-mile range.
EPA received several comments arguing that any vehicle called
``dedicated'' should only be capable of operating on one fuel. They
stated that the option of an emergency fuel supply within the
definition of ``dedicated'' would erode consumer knowledge and
understanding of the work they have accomplished in producing vehicles
which would not have the emergency fuel supply.
EPA has considered the comments received and concludes that it is
best to keep the current definition of dedicated vehicle (or engine)
intact and, therefore, the proposed change is not being adopted today.
EPA believes that at this time it cannot ensure that amending the
definition of dedicated vehicle as proposed will not result in consumer
confusion about alternative fueled vehicles. Therefore, vehicles with a
limited ability to operate on a second fuel will continue to be
considered dual-fueled vehicles.
B. Engine Family Criteria and Assigned Deterioration Factors
In light of recently adopted amendments to EPA's certification
regulations EPA has decided not to adopt the proposed engine family
criteria and assigned deterioration factors (DFs) proposed in the NPRM.
\1\ The flexibility that would have been provided by the proposed
definition of ``Engine Family Class'' is for the most part encompassed
in the ``Durability group determination'' and the ``Test group
determination'' provisions of the CAP 2000 amendments.\2\\,\\3\ Because
the CAP 2000 amendments provide the majority of relief proposed for
light-duty vehicles, it is unnecessary to adopt the proposed
provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 40 CFR Part 9 et al.; Control of Air Pollution From New
Motor Vehicles; Compliance programs for New Light-Duty Vehicles and
Light-Duty Trucks; Final Rule, 85 FR 23905, May 4, 1999 (the ``CAP
2000'' regulations).
\2\ 40 CFR 86.1820-01 ``Durability group Determination''
\3\ 40 CFR 86.1827-01 ``Test group Determination''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CAP 2000 rules do not apply to heavy-duty engines and the
proposed durability requirements would have required specific
durability data submissions for heavy-duty engines. Some commenters
stated that the proposed changes were more restrictive than current
regulations, therefore the heavy-duty manufacturers would not likely
exercise the options that would be provided by the proposed provisions.
Since the changes would have been optional and because it appears
unlikely the heavy-duty engine manufacturers would use the options that
would have been provided by the proposed provisions, EPA has decided
not to adopt the proposed changes for heavy-duty engines.
Several commenters noted that a 1995 EPA guidance document (CD-95-
14), would expire with the 2000 MY. This Agency guidance document
provided assigned deterioration factors for gaseous-fueled vehicles and
engines for small-volume manufacturers as provided in 40 CFR 86.094-
14(a)(2) and 86.094-14(c)(7)(i)(C). The commenters noted that the
Agency has previously indicated its intent to extend the
[[Page 11900]]
applicability of the assigned deterioration factors to reflect both the
new sales-volume limit for small-volume manufacturers as provided in
the CAP 2000 provisions and to include assigned deterioration factors
for heavy-duty engines qualified to use additive deterioration factors.
EPA did not indicate in the NPRM any intent to revise this guidance.
This issue is outside the scope of today's action, and EPA intends to
address this issue in a separate context.
C. Fees
EPA is finalizing the proposed fee waiver provisions, for the
reasons described below and in the NPRM. Every commenter addressing the
fees issue supported this proposed amendment.
Several commenters who supported EPA's proposal recommended
expanding the scope of the fee waiver. One fleet operator recommended
the fee waiver be extended indefinitely. One commenter wanted the fee
waiver to be retroactive to the date of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, July 20, 1998. One commenter wanted all of the 1999 model
year fees to be refunded for all alternative fueled vehicles. For the
reasons described below, EPA is finalizing the proposed fee waiver for
MY 2000 vehicles and engines meeting LEV or better emissions standards,
and for MY 2000 dedicated gaseous fuel vehicles and engines. In
addition, EPA is adopting a provision through which manufacturers who
have certified such vehicles for MY 2000 can seek a refund of
certification fees. Finally, EPA is extending the fee waiver through MY
2003, two years beyond the proposed waiver.
EPA disagrees with the commenter who recommends the fee waiver be
extended indefinitely. The purpose of the fee waiver is to encourage
manufacturers to produce and certify clean fuel vehicles, and gaseous
fueled vehicles, as described in the NPRM. EPA does not believe that it
is necessary or appropriate to provide a fee waiver beyond a specific,
short-term time period as an incentive to manufacturers. Once clean
fuel vehicles and gaseous fueled vehicles are certified and in use, it
is reasonable to expect that consumers, including fleets, will continue
to provide a market for such vehicles. Therefore, an indefinite or
significantly longer term fee waiver is not needed.
EPA also does not believe it is appropriate to make the fee waiver
and refunds retroactive to MY vehicles before MY2000. While EPA
believes it is appropriate to provide a short-term fee waiver for
certain vehicles for the reasons described in the NPRM, to the extent
manufacturers certified clean fuel vehicles and gaseous fueled vehicles
in prior model years, they clearly believed it was a wise business
decision to do so even without the incentive provided by a fee waiver
or refund. Since the purpose of the waiver is to encourage
certification of such vehicles, that purpose is not served by refunding
or waiving fees from prior model years.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As described below, EPA is providing an opportunity for
certain manufacturers to request a refund of fees for MY 2000. This
is to provide equity for all manufacturers of similar vehicles for a
particular model year, and therefore the reasoning for this limited
refund provision does not support extending the refund to prior
model years. In addition, EPA's calculation of fees that could be
refunded for MY 2000 under the provision adopted today shows that
the total possible amount that could be refunded is relatively small
(less than $75,000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA received comments requesting the fee waiver extend at least
through MY 2004. One commenter indicated that original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs) plan for model year introduction 3 and 4 years in
advance, and therefore it is appropriate for EPA to waive certification
fees for those vehicles and engines which manufacturers are currently
beginning to develop. Commenters also noted that EPA's emission
standards are expected to be revised beginning with MY 2004, making a
fee waiver through this period a convenient bridge to the new
standards.
EPA is adopting a fee waiver provision for clean fuel vehicles and
dedicated alternative fuel vehicles that applies through MY 2003. EPA
is aware that certain fleets continue to experience difficulty in
obtaining appropriate clean fuel vehicles to meet fleet program
purchase requirements. Moreover, further development of the alternative
fuel refueling infrastructure would help enable such fleets to have a
broader choice of qualifying vehicles from which to choose. For these
reasons, EPA proposed a fee waiver to extend for three model years (MY
1999-2001). Based on the effective date of today's action, a three-
model-year fee waiver provision adopted today would apply through MY
2002. EPA believes that it is appropriate to extend the waiver
provision for an additional model year, to encourage manufacturers to
begin development of clean fuel vehicles and dedicated alternative fuel
vehicles for introduction into commerce in the future. Those
manufacturers who do need four years to plan for vehicle introduction
are thus assured of a fee waiver for MY 2003.
EPA disagrees with commenters who recommended the fee waiver extend
at least through MY 2004, to provide a bridge to implementation of
EPA's Tier 2 standards. As described in this notice and in the NPRM,
the fee waiver is primarily intended to encourage manufacturers to
certify and produce vehicles and engines to meet the purchase
requirements of fleet operators subject to clean fuel fleet program
purchase requirements. It was not proposed as a means to facilitate
implementation of new emissions standards. For this reason, and because
EPA believes a four-model-year period is sufficient to provide an
initial encouragement for the production of clean fuel vehicles and
dedicated alternative fuel vehicles, EPA is not extending the fee
waiver beyond MY 2003.
Several commenters wanted the fee waiver to apply to flexible- and
dual-fuel vehicles. EPA is finalizing the proposal to waive fees for
dedicated Tier 1 gaseous fueled vehicles, for the reasons described in
the NPRM. EPA is not including Tier 1 flexible- and dual-fuel vehicles
in the full fee waiver because EPA cannot ensure the vehicles will be
operated using the alternative fuel. However, as described below, EPA
believes it is appropriate to provide a more limited incentive for
manufacturers to certify such vehicles.
One commenter claimed the need to include flexible- and dual-fuel
vehicles is consistent with the Congressional intent under Energy
Policy Act (EPAct) to reduce dependency on foreign oil. This fee waiver
is not intended to further the purposes of EPAct, which is a statute
administered by the Department of Energy (DOE). Also, for the reason
already stated in the NPRM and above, the fee waiver will apply only to
dedicated fuel systems.
EPA's fee waiver proposal was issued in July 1998, and, at that
time, EPA expected the fee waiver would begin to apply no later than MY
2000, based on the expected date of promulgation of the final rule.
However, due to the delay in taking final action on the proposed
provisions, some manufacturers have already certified vehicles to the
Low-Emissions Vehicles (LEV), Inherently-LEV (ILEV), Ultra LEV (ULEV),
or Zero-Emissions Vehicles (ZEV) emissions standards for MY 2000. EPA
is adopting a provision to refund the certification fees paid for such
vehicles, as well as any dedicated gaseous fueled Tier 1 vehicles, to
provide equity in charging of fees in MY 2000. EPA does not want to
penalize those manufacturers who certified these cleaner vehicles early
in the model year, prior to promulgation of
[[Page 11901]]
these regulations. Therefore, manufacturers of such vehicles can
request a refund of certification fees from EPA. This refund provision,
in combination with the fee waiver provision, results in an
appropriate, equitable, and nondiscriminatory fee schedule, for the
reasons described in the NPRM, and because it avoids penalizing
manufacturers who have already certified such vehicles for MY 2000.
Several commenters noted a discrepancy between the preamble and the
proposed rule. In the preamble, EPA clearly identified vehicles and
engines with ``closed'' fuel systems certified to Tier 1 standards as
eligible for a fee waiver.\5\ The proposed amendments to the regulatory
language did not reflect this provision. This oversight is corrected in
today's action and any vehicle or engine with a dedicated ``closed''
fuel system is eligible. A vehicle or engine with a dual-fuel system or
flexible-fuel system would not be eligible for a fee waiver. Vehicles
certified only to California emissions standards would also not be
eligible for a fee waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 63 FR 38771.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the existing fee waiver provisions, found at 40 CFR 86.908-
93(a), provides a waiver from the full fee if the projected sales are
anticipated to be such that a full fee would exceed 1% of the retail
value. For example, if the retail sales price--based on the National
Automobile Dealer's Association appraisal--is $25,000.00, then the
manufacturer would pay 1% of this value or $250.00 for each vehicle
until the maximum applicable fee is reached. Several commenters
recommended EPA change the way the 1% value was determined. These
commenters argued that the value added during the conversion process is
the value that should be the basis of the 1% fee waiver calculations.
EPA agrees that the calculation method for the one percent waiver in
the current regulations often results in manufacturers paying the full
certification fee for conversions where production volume exceeds
approximately one hundred vehicles or engines. Under the regulations
adopted today, conversions to clean fuel vehicles or to dedicated
gaseous fueled Tier 1 vehicles would be eligible for a full fee waiver.
However, conversions to dual-and flexible-fueled Tier 1 vehicles would
not. EPA believes it is appropriate to provide an incentive for
certification of such vehicles, since they are likely to operate on a
cleaner fuel (e.g., gaseous fuel, with lower evaporative and refueling
emissions) at least some of the time. While EPA cannot ensure that such
vehicles operate on the cleaner fuel all of the time, the Agency
believes that consumers who purchase dual-and flexible-fueled vehicles
do so because they intend to operate on the cleaner fuel to the extent
practicable, but wish to have the ability to operate on gasoline or
diesel in the event refueling facilities for the cleaner fuel are not
readily available at a particular time. Encouraging the certification,
production, and market penetration of these vehicles will also support
a broader refueling infrastructure for gaseous fuels, which benefits
the clean fuel fleet program (since a number of clean fuel fleet
vehicles are expected to be gaseous fueled vehicles). In addition, to
the extent such vehicles are operated on gaseous fuels, environmental
benefits are achieved through lower evaporative and refueling
emissions. For these reasons, EPA is revising its current regulations
for converted vehicles that can operate on gaseous fuels to provide for
calculation of the one percent fee waiver based on the value added to
the retail value of the vehicle, or engine, by the conversion. This
calculation method will apply through MY 2003 (the same time period as
the full fee waiver for clean fuel vehicles and Tier 1 dedicated
gaseous fuel systems). While EPA believes this incentive in the form of
a different calculation method for the one percent waiver is an
appropriate incentive for encouraging the production of such vehicles,
the Agency does not believe a full fee waiver is appropriate, since we
cannot ensure that the vehicles will be operated on the cleaner fuel.
III. Projected Impacts
A. Environmental Impact
Today's action will have no adverse effects on air quality, since
all current emissions standards and requirements continue to apply to
vehicles and engines affected by today's action. EPA believes that this
action encourages manufacturers to develop and market vehicles and
engines with innovative, new emissions control technology, ultimately
resulting in broader market penetration of CFVs and clean alternative
fuels.
B. Economic Impact
By waiving certification fees for qualifying vehicles, this action
reduces the regulatory burden on industry without adversely affecting
air quality. EPA anticipates that the new provisions should result in
environmental benefits through encouraging increased production and use
of low emission vehicles and engines.
IV. Public Participation
The Agency provided the opportunity for a Public Hearing for the
proposed rule, if requested. No public hearing was requested. An
extension of the comment period was requested and, in a Federal
Register notice on September 11, 1998, the comment period was extended
from August 19, 1998 to October 13, 1998. This Notice also informed
interested parties that no public hearing had been requested.
A total of twenty-eight comments were received. A summary of these
comments and EPA's analysis and responses to those comments are
contained in a separate Response To Comments document located in the
Docket A-97-27.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to 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.
It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of the Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612 generally requires
an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule
subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a significant
[[Page 11902]]
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and small governmental jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because
EPA is not imposing any new requirements, and any impact will be to
reduce costs.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., requires
agencies to submit for OMB review and approval, federal requirements
and activities that result in the collection of information from ten or
more persons. Information collection requirements may include
reporting, labeling, and Recordkeeping requirements. Federal agencies
may not impose penalties on persons who fail to comply with collections
of information that does not display a currently valid OMB control
number.
Today's action does not impose any new information collection
burden. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously
approved the information collection requirements under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned
OMB control number 2060-0104 (EPA ICR No. 0783).
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 instruction; 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 requirement;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search for data sources; complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
Copies of the ICR document(s) may be obtained from Sandy Farmer,
OPPE Regulatory Information Division; EPA; 401 M St., SW (mail code
2137); Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740. Include the
ICR and/or OMB number in any correspondence.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (signed
into law on March 22, 1995) requires that EPA prepare a budgetary
impact statement before promulgating a rule that includes a federal
mandate that may result in expenditure by state, local and tribal
governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or
more in any one year. Section 203 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
requires EPA to establish a plan for obtaining input from and
informing, educating and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, EPA must identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives before
promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must be
prepared. EPA must select from those alternatives the least costly,
most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objectives of the rule, unless EPA explains why this alternative is not
selected or the selection of this alternative is inconsistent with law.
Because this rule is expected to result in the expenditure by
state, local and tribal governments or private sectors of less than
$100 million in any one year, EPA has not prepared a budgetary impact
statement or specifically addressed selection of the least costly, most
cost-effective or least burdensome alternative. Because small
governments will not be significantly or uniquely affected by this
rule, EPA is not required to develop a plan with regard to small
governments.
E. Congressional Review Act
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. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (such as 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 final rule does not involve consideration of any new technical
standards.
G. Protection of Children
Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks 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.
This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it
is not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and because
the Agency does not have reason to believe environmental health or
safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk
to children. To the extent this action encourages the certification and
use of CFVs, as expected, any resulting effect on children's health
will be positive through reduced emissions of certain pollutants, such
as VOC's, NOX, and PM.
H. Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
[[Page 11903]]
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. This rule will be implemented at the federal level and
imposes compliance obligations only on private industry. Accordingly,
the requirements of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply
to this rule.
I. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. This rule will be implemented
at the federal level and imposes compliance obligations only on private
industry. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive
Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.
J. Executive Order 13132, Federalism Policies
On August 4, 1999, President Clinton issued a new executive order
on federalism, Executive Order 13132, [64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)]
which will take effect on November 2, 1999. In the interim, the current
Executive Order 12612 [52 FR 41685 (October 30, 1987)] on federalism
still applies. This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on
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 12612.
Today's rule does not create a mandate on State or local. The rule
does not impose any enforceable duties on these entities. This rule
will be implemented at the federal level and imposes compliance
obligations only on private industry. Accordingly, the requirements of
Executive Order 13132 do not apply to this rule.
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 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 the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law, unless
the Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process
of developing the proposed regulation.
Section 4 of the Executive Order contains additional requirements
for rules that preempt State or local law, even if those rules do not
have federalism implications (i.e., the rules 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). Those
requirements include providing all affected State and local officials
notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation in the
development of the regulation. If the preemption is not based on
express or implied statutory authority, EPA also must consult, to the
extent practicable, with appropriate State and local officials
regarding the conflict between State law and Federally protected
interests within the agency's area of regulatory responsibility.
This final rule does not have federalism implications. It 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. This rule contains provisions
for waivers of certification fees for certain manufacturers of new
motor vehicles and engines. The requirements of the rule will be
enforced by the federal government at the national level. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule. In addition, EPA provided state and local officials an
opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations. A summary of
concerns raised by commenters, including state and local commenters,
and EPA's response to those concerns, is found in the Response to
Comments document for this rulemaking.
Although this rule was proposed before the November 2, 1999
effective date of Executive Order 13132, EPA provided State and local
officials notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation when
it published the proposed rule, as described above. Thus, EPA has
complied with the requirements of section 4 of the Executive Order.
VI. Statutory Authority
Authority for the actions set forth in this notice of proposed
rulemaking is granted to the EPA by sections 217, and 301(a) of the
Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7552 and 7601(a))
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 24, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, chapter I, title 40 of the
Code
[[Page 11904]]
of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 86--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
2. Section 86.908-93 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)
and (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 86.908-93 Waivers, and refunds.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) For converted vehicles that are dual- or flexible-fuel
vehicles and can operate on a gaseous fuel, the full fee for a
certification request for a MY exceeds 1% of the value added to the
vehicle by the conversion, for MY 2000 through 2003.
* * * * *
(d)(1) For model years 2000 through 2003, the required fees under
this subpart shall be waived for any light-duty vehicle, light-duty
truck, or heavy-duty engine family that meets the small volume sales
requirements of Sec. 86.1838-01 and:
(i) Is a dedicated gaseous-fueled vehicle or engine OR;
(ii) Receives a certificate of conformity with the LEV, ILEV, ULEV,
or ZEV emissions standards in 40 CFR part 88.
(2) If the manufacturer does not receive a certificate of
conformity with the LEV, ILEV, ULEV, or ZEV emissions standards in 40
CFR part 88 as required in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section, the
fee requirements of this section will apply. Before any certificate can
be issued, the applicable fee must be paid.
(3) Manufacturers that have paid certification fees for model year
2000 vehicle and engine families that meet the criteria in paragraph
(d)(1) of this section may request a refund of such fees. EPA shall
refund such fees if it determines that the vehicle or engine family
meets the criteria of paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
[FR Doc. 00-5388 Filed 3-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20090510201354im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}