[Federal Register: December 6, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 235)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 72817-72820]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06de02-24]
[[Page 72817]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 86
Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles: Amendment to the Tier
2 Motor Vehicle Emission Regulations; Proposed Rule and Final Rule
[[Page 72818]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 86
[AMS-FRL-7416-6]
RIN 2060-AI23
Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Amendment to
the Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission Regulations; Proposed Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to clarify and revise certain provisions of
the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur regulations (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000,
hereinafter referred to as the Tier 2 rule). Today's action proposes
minor revisions to clarify the regulations governing compliance with
the Tier 2 rule, and it proposes to modify the Tier 2 program to
provide for cleaner diesel engines than were anticipated during the
interim Tier 2 program (through the 2006 model year).
In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register,
we are making these technical amendments as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because we view these technical amendments as
noncontroversial revisions and anticipate no adverse comment.
We have explained our reasons for these technical amendments in the
preamble to the direct final rule. If we receive no adverse comment, we
will not take further action on this proposed rule. If we receive
adverse comment, we will withdraw the portions of the direct final rule
receiving such comment and those portions will not take effect. We will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
DATES: If we do not receive a request for a public hearing, written
comments are due January 6, 2003. Requests for a public hearing must be
received by December 23, 2002. If we do receive a request for a public
hearing, it will be held on January 9, 2003, starting at 10 a.m. In
that case, the public comment period will close on February 10, 2003.
ADDRESSES:
Comments: All comments and materials relevant to today's action
should be submitted to Public Docket No. A-97-10 at the following
address: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Hearing: If we do receive a request for a public hearing, it will
be held at the EPA National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Docket: Materials relevant to this rulemaking are contained in
Public Docket Number A-97-10 at the following address: EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Public Reading Room, Room B102, EPA West Building,
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington DC. The EPA Docket Center
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except on government holidays. You can reach the Reading Room
by telephone at (202) 566-1742, and by facsimile at (202) 566-1741. The
telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. You may be
charged a reasonable fee for photocopying docket materials, as provided
in 40 CFR part 2.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberts French, U.S. EPA, National
Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, Assessment and Standards
Division, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone (734)
214-4380, fax (734) 214-4050, e-mail french.roberts@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is proposing to clarify and revise
certain provisions of the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur regulations (65 FR
6698, February 10, 2000, hereinafter referred to as the Tier 2 rule).
Today's action proposes minor revisions to clarify the regulations
governing compliance with the Tier 2 rule, and it proposes to modify
the Tier 2 program to provide for the certification of cleaner diesel
engines than were anticipated during the interim Tier 2 program
(through the 2006 model year).
However, in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of today's
Federal Register, we are promulgating these revisions as a direct final
rule without a prior proposal because we view this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse comment. We have
explained our reasons for this action in the preamble to the direct
final rule. This proposal incorporates by reference all of the
reasoning, explanation, and regulatory text from the direct final rule.
For further information, including the regulatory text for this
proposal, please refer to the direct final rule that is located in the
``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register publication.
The direct final rule will be effective on March 6, 2003, unless we
receive adverse comment by January 6, 2003, or if we receive a request
for a public hearing by December 23, 2002. If we receive no adverse
comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule. If we
receive adverse comment on one or more distinct amendments, paragraphs,
or sections of this rulemaking, we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register indicating which provisions are being withdrawn
due to adverse comment. We may address all adverse comments in a
subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. We will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Any distinct
amendment, paragraph, or section of today's rulemaking for which we do
not receive adverse comment will become effective on the date set out
above, notwithstanding any adverse comment on any other distinct
amendment, paragraph, or section of the direct final rule.
I. Regulated Entities
Entities potentially affected by this action are those that
manufacture and sell motor vehicles in the United States. The table
below gives some examples of entities that may have to comply with the
regulations. However, since these are only examples, you should
carefully examine these and other existing regulations in 40 CFR part
80. If you have any questions, please call the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category NAICS codes \a\ SIC codes \b\ Examples of potentially regulated entities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...................................... 336111 3711 Automobile and light truck manufacturers.
336112
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
\b\ Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
[[Page 72819]]
II. Access to Rulemaking Documents Through the Internet
Today's action is available electronically on the date of
publication from EPA's Federal Register Internet Web site listed below.
Electronic copies of this preamble, regulatory language, and other
documents associated with today's final rule are available from the EPA
Office of Transportation and Air Quality Web site listed below shortly
after the rule is signed by the Administrator. This service is free of
charge, except any cost that you already incur for connecting to the
Internet.
EPA Federal Register Web site: http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/epa-air/
(either select a desired date or use the Search feature).
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.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency is required to determine whether this regulatory action would be
``significant'' and therefore subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as any
regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:
[sbull] 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;
[sbull] Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with
an action taken or planned by another agency;
[sbull] Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or,
[sbull] Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, we have determined
that this proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action.''
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, do not apply to this action
as it does not involve the collection of information as defined
therein.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any proposed rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's direct final rule
on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A motor vehicle
manufacturer with fewer than 1000 employees; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school
district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this proposed action would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This proposed rule would not have any adverse economic impact on small
entities. Today's proposed rule proposes to amend certain provisions of
the Tier 2 rule (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000), such that regulated
entities will find it easier to comply with the requirements of the
Tier 2 rule. More specifically, today's action proposes to make minor
revisions to clarify the regulations governing compliance with the Tier
2 rule.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal
governments, and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, we
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to state, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more for
any single year. Before promulgating a rule for which a written
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative that is
not the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if we provide an explanation in the final rule of why such
an alternative was adopted.
Before we establish any regulatory requirement that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, we must develop a small government plan pursuant to
section 203 of the UMRA. Such a plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, and enabling officials of
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of our regulatory proposals with significant federal
intergovernmental mandates. The plan must also provide for informing,
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
This rule contains no federal mandates for state, local, or tribal
governments as defined by the provisions of Title II of the UMRA. The
rule imposes no enforceable duties on any of these governmental
entities. Nothing in the rule will significantly or uniquely affect
small governments.
We have determined that this rule does not contain a federal
mandate that may result in estimated expenditures of more than $100
million to the private sector in any single year. This action has the
net effect of revising certain provisions of the Tier 2 rule.
Therefore, the requirements of the UMRA do not apply to this action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires us 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, we may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute,
[[Page 72820]]
unless the federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the
direct compliance costs incurred by state and local governments, or we
consults with state and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. We 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, we 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 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 revises certain
provisions of earlier rules that adopted national standards to control
vehicle emissions and gasoline fuel sulfur levels. 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Today's proposed rule does not uniquely affect the communities of
American Indian tribal governments since the motor vehicle requirements
for private businesses in today's rule will have national
applicability. Furthermore, today's rule does not impose any direct
compliance costs on these communities and no circumstances specific to
such communities exist that will cause an impact on these communities
beyond those discussed in the other sections of today's document. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ``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 we have reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, section 5-501 of the Executive Order directs us to
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 us.
This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not
an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866. Furthermore, this rule does not concern an environmental
health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), section 12(d) of Public Law 104-113, directs us to
use voluntary consensus standards in our regulatory activities unless
it would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
This rule references technical standards adopted by us through
previous rulemakings. No new technical standards are established in
today's rule. The standards referenced in today's rule involve the
measurement of gasoline fuel parameters and motor vehicle emissions.
III. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
Statutory authority for today's final rule is found in the Clean
Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., in particular, section 202 of the Act,
42 U.S.C. 7521. This rule is being promulgated under the administrative
and procedural provisions of Clean Air Act section 307(d), 42 U.S.C.
7607(d).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Motor vehicle pollution.
Dated: November 26, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 02-30842 Filed 12-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P