[Federal Register: September 24, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 185)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 57241-57244]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24se04-23]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Region II Docket No. R02--OAR-2004--NY-0002, FRL-7818-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New York; Low
Emission Vehicle Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a New York State State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision which
adopts California's second generation low emission vehicle program for
light-duty vehicles, (LEV II). Clean Air Act Section 177 allows states
to adopt motor vehicle emissions standards that are identical to
California's and New York meets this requirement. Specifically, the
State's SIP revision adopts changes to its existing LEV rule by
incorporating a non-methane hydrocarbon standard and various
administrative and grammatical changes to make its existing LEV rule
identical to California's LEV II program.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 25, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID Number R02-OAR-2004-NY-0002 by one of the following
methods:
I. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
II. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional
[[Page 57242]]
Material in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment
system, is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the
system, select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
III. E-mail: Werner.Raymond@epa.gov.
IV. Fax: (212) 637-3901.
V. Mail: ``RME ID Number R02-OAR-2004-NY-0002,'' Raymond Werner,
Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2
Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
VI. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Raymond
Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's
normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket
ID Number R02-OAR-2004-NY-0002. EPA's policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including
any personal information provided, unless the comment includes
information claimed to be Confidential Business Information or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be Confidential Business Information
or otherwise protected through Regional Material in EDocket,
regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA Regional Material in EDocket Web
site and the federal regulations.gov Web site are ``anonymous access''
systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through Regional
Material in EDocket or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
Regional Material in EDocket index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in Regional Material in
EDocket or in hard copy at the Air Programs Branch, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact
the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew A. Bascue, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4249 or bascue.andrew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Description of the SIP Revision
A. Background
B. What are the relevant EPA and CAA requirements?
C. What is the California LEV Program?
D. What is the History and Current Content of the New York LEV
Program?
II. Proposed EPA Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Description of the SIP Revision
A. Background
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990, the New York-
Northern New Jersey-Long Island Nonattainment Area was designated as
severe nonattainment of the 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). The New York counties that are part of the
Nonattainment Area include Bronx, Kings, Nassau, New York, Putnam,
Queens, Richmond, Rockland and Westchester and the lower Orange County
towns of Chester, Minisink, Monroe, Tuxedo, Warwick and Woodbury, which
for the purposes of this proposed rulemaking will be referred to as the
New York Metropolitan NAA. The ozone attainment deadline for this area
is November 15, 2007.
To bring the New York Metropolitan NAA into attainment New York
adopted, among other measures, a Clean Fuel Fleet program, which was
later replaced by a low emission vehicle (LEV) program identical to
California's LEV I program. New York first adopted its LEV program in
1994 and EPA issued a direct final rule to approve the New York LEV
program effective as of February 6, 1995 (60 FR 2025). Since that time
New York has modified its LEV program to be consistent with and to
maintain identicality to California's LEV program, which has undergone
several changes over the years. The current version of the New York LEV
program is intended to be identical to California's current LEV
program.
B. What Are the Relevant EPA and CAA Requirements?
Section 209(a) of the CAA preempts states from adopting or
enforcing standards relating to the control of emissions from new motor
vehicles or new motor vehicle engines. However, under section 209(b) of
the CAA, EPA may grant a waiver to the State of California to adopt its
own motor vehicle emissions standards. Section 209(b) of the CAA states
that California must show that its standards will be: ``* * * in the
aggregate, at least as protective of public health and welfare as
applicable Federal standards * * *''. Section 209(b) goes on to state
that EPA will grant a waiver unless it finds that: (1) The State's
determination is arbitrary and capricious, (2) the State ``does not
need such State standards to meet compelling and extraordinary
conditions,'' or (3) the State's standards and accompanying enforcement
procedures are not consistent with section 202(a) of the CAA.
Section 177 of the CAA allows other states to adopt and enforce
California motor vehicle emission standards. The state must show that
the standards are identical to California's and must adopt such
standards at least two years prior to the commencement of the model
year to which the standards will apply. New York has met both of these
requirements.
C. What Is the California LEV II Program?
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted the first
generation low emissions vehicle (LEV I) regulations in 1990, which
were effective through the 2003 model year. CARB adopted
[[Page 57243]]
California's second generation LEV regulations (LEV II ) following a
November 1998 hearing. Subsequent to the adoption of the LEV II program
in February 2000, the U.S. EPA adopted its own standards known as the
Tier 2 regulations (65 FR 6698). In December 2000, CARB modified the
LEV II program to take advantage of some elements of the Federal Tier 2
regulations to ensure that only the cleanest vehicle models would
continue to be sold in California. EPA granted California a waiver for
its LEV II program on April 22, 2003 (68 FR 19811).
The LEV II regulations expand the scope of the LEV I regulations by
setting strict fleet-average emission standards for light-duty, medium-
duty (including sport utility vehicles) and heavy-duty vehicles. The
standards would begin with the 2004 model year and increase in
stringency through 2010 and beyond. The LEV II regulations provide
flexibility to auto manufacturers by allowing them to certify their
vehicle models to one of several different emissions standards. The
different tiers of increasingly stringent LEV II emission standards to
which a manufacturer may certify a vehicle are: low-emission vehicle
(LEV), ultra-low-emission vehicle (ULEV), super-ultra low-emission
vehicle (SULEV), partial zero-emission vehicle (PZEV), advanced
technology partial zero-emission vehicle (ATPZEV) and zero-emission
vehicle (ZEV).
The manufacturer must show that the overall fleet for a given model
year meets the specified phase-in requirements according to the fleet
average non-methane hydrocarbon requirement for that year. The fleet
average non-methane hydrocarbon requirements are progressively lower
with each model year. The program also requires auto manufacturers to
include a ``smog index'' label on each vehicle sold, which is intended
to inform consumers about the amount of pollution coming from that
vehicle relative to other vehicles.
In addition to the LEV II requirements, minimum percentages of
passenger cars and the lightest light-duty trucks marketed in
California by a large or intermediate volume manufacturer must be ZEVs;
this is referred to as the ZEV mandate. The ZEV mandate has undergone
several modifications through the years in California. Most recently,
CARB has put in place an alternative compliance program (ACP) to
provide auto manufacturers with several options to meet the ZEV
mandate. The ACP established ZEV credit multipliers to allow auto
manufacturers to take credit for meeting the ZEV mandate by selling
more PZEVs and ATPZEVs than they are otherwise required.
D. What Is the History and Current Content of the New York Low Emission
Vehicle Program?
Section 182(c)(4)(A) of the CAA requires certain states, including
New York, to submit for EPA approval a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision that includes measures to implement the Clean Fuel Fleet
program (CFFP). Section 182(c)(4)(B) of the CAA allows states to ``opt
out'' of the CFFP by submitting for EPA approval a SIP revision
consisting of a program or programs that will result in at least
equivalent long term reductions in ozone precursors and toxic air
emissions as achieved by the CFFP. In 1994, New York opted out of the
CFFP, promulgating its LEV program in New York State Code of Rules and
Regulations Part 218, ``Emission Standards for Motor Vehicles and Motor
Vehicle Engines''. EPA approved the light-duty portion of New York's
LEV program on January 6, 1995 (60 FR 2022), which was identical to
California's LEV program.
Most recently, New York has amended its LEV program to be identical
to California's LEV II program. New York has adopted California's LEV
II program by reference, which includes provisions for light-duty,
medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles and an ACP identical to those in
California's program. New York has also adopted its own ACP, which is
specific to New York State and gives auto manufacturers an additional
level of flexibility in meeting the ZEV mandate beyond the flexibility
provided by the ACP in California's program.
In the current action, New York is requesting that EPA take action
on the light-duty portion of its LEV program without the ZEV mandate or
the associated ACP segments. The State has already taken emissions
reduction credit for the light-duty portion of its LEV program; EPA
approved that credit as part of our approval of New York's attainment
demonstration SIP revision on February 4, 2002 (67 FR 5170). The State
showed that its LEV program will meet necessary emissions reductions
without relying on its ZEV sales mandate (i.e., since the emission
reductions are already assured by the fleet average emissions
standard). In the current SIP revision, New York is requesting Federal
approval of the program regulation. EPA's approval would make the
program Federally-enforcable--further ensuring that planned emissions
reductions will continue to take place.
II. Proposed EPA Action
EPA is proposing to approve the light-duty vehicle portion of New
York's LEV program without the ZEV mandate or associated ACP segments,
since the State has sought approval only for the light-duty portion of
the program. Approval of this program will further ensure that planned
reductions attributable to this program, as detailed in New York's 1-
hour ozone attainment demonstration, will be achieved. The State
adopted the program on December 13, 2000, as noticed in the New York
State Register.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not
have Federalism implications because it does 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
[[Page 57244]]
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This proposed rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose
an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 14, 2004.
Jane M. Kenny,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 04-21497 Filed 9-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P