[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6452]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: March 18, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-4852-6]
Ozone Transport Commission; Recommendation That EPA Adopt Low
Emission Vehicle Program for the Northeast Ozone Transport Region
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is announcing that on February 10, 1994, the Northeast
Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) submitted a recommendation to EPA for
additional control measures to be applied throughout the Northeast
Ozone Transport Region (OTR). Specifically, the OTC has recommended
that EPA require all State members of the OTC to adopt an Ozone
Transport Commission Low Emission Vehicle program for the entire OTR.
The EPA is commencing a review of the recommendation to determine
whether to approve, disapprove, or partially approve and partially
disapprove it. The Agency believes that its decision must be made in
the context of the Northeast States' overall ozone emission reduction
needs to meet the ozone standard. The Agency expects to consider the
recommended measure as part of the overall attainment goal for the
region, and anticipates gathering information regarding the recommended
measure as it relates to the overall attainment effort through
consultations and public hearings.
The Agency will hold a public hearing before May 11, 1994, and will
receive written comments until 30 days following the public hearing.
The Agency will consider all relevant data, views, and comments in
responding to the recommendation. The Agency will issue a second notice
in the Federal Register in late March or early April 1994 that will
provide specific information about the time and place of the public
hearing and more detail about the process EPA intends to follow in
reaching a decision. EPA also expects, in the forthcoming Federal
Register notice, to describe a framework for reaching a decision and to
identify and discuss significant issues.
ADDRESSES: The recommendation and supporting materials that the OTC
submitted to EPA on February 10, 1994 are contained in Air Docket No.
A-94-11 at: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. The public docket room is located in room M-1500,
Waterside Mall (Ground Floor). Materials may be inspected from 8 a.m.
until 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. EPA may charge a reasonable fee for
copying docket materials. EPA will place all information relevant to
the OTC's recommendations and to EPA's action on the recommendations in
the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Shields, Office of Mobile
Sources, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC, 20460, telephone:
(202) 260-3450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Northeast Ozone Transport Region (OTR)
was established by operation of law under section 184 of the Clean Air
Act (the Act) and is comprised of the States of Connecticut, Delaware,
Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, the District of Columbia, and the
portion of Virginia that is within the Consolidated Metropolitan
Statistical Areas that includes the District of Columbia.
These States include a large number of ozone nonattainment areas,
which are classified under section 181 of the Act into 4 categories
with associated attainment dates: Marginal (1994); moderate (1996);
serious (1999); and severe (2005 or 2007). For moderate, serious, and
severe ozone nonattainment areas, under section 182 of the Act the
States are obligated to submit demonstrations by November 15, 1994 that
their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) will provide for attainment of
the ozone standard by the applicable dates. Congress established the
OTR in the 1990 Amendments to the Act based on the recognition that the
transport of ozone and ozone precursors throughout the region may
render the Northeast States' attainment strategies interdependent.
Under section 184 of the Act, the Administrator established a
Northeast Ozone Transport Commission for the OTR consisting of the
Governor of each State or their designees, the Administrator or her
designee, the Regional Administrators for the EPA regional offices
affected (or the Administrator's designees), and an air pollution
control official representing each State in the region, appointed by
the Governor.
Section 184(c) specifies a procedure for the OTC to develop
recommendations for additional control measures to be applied within
all or a part of the OTR if the OTC determines that such measures are
necessary to bring any area in the OTR into attainment for ozone by the
applicable dates in the Act. Section 184(c)(1) provides that:
Upon petition of any States within a transport region for ozone,
and based on a majority vote of the Governors on the Commission (or
their designees), the Commission may, after notice and opportunity
for public comment, develop recommendations for additional control
measures to be applied within all or a part of such transport region
if the commission determines such measures are necessary to bring
any area in such region into attainment by the dates provided by
[subpart II of part D of title I of the Clean Air Act].
Section 184(c) also lays out procedures the Administrator is to
follow in responding to recommendations from the OTC. Upon receipt of
the recommendations, the Administrator is to publish a Federal Register
notice stating that the recommendations are available and providing an
opportunity for a public hearing within 90 days. The Administrator is
also to ``commence a review of the recommendations to determine whether
the control measures in the recommendations are necessary to bring any
area in such region into attainment by the dates provided by [subpart
II] and are otherwise consistent with [the] Act.'' Finally, in
undertaking her review, the Administrator is to consult with members of
the OTC and is to take into account the data, views, and comments
received pursuant to the public hearing.
Last, sections 184(c)(4) and (5) govern EPA's response to the OTC
recommendations. The Administrator is to determine whether to approve,
disapprove, or partially approve and partially disapprove the
recommendations within nine months of receipt. For any disapproval, the
Administrator is to specify:
(i) Why any disapproved additional control measures are not
necessary to bring any area in such region into attainment by the
dates provided by [subpart II] or are otherwise not consistent with
the Act; and
(ii) Recommendations concerning equal or more effective actions
that could be taken by the commission to conform the disapproved
portion of the recommendations to the requirements of [section 184].
Section 184(c)(5) provides that, upon approval or partial approval
of any recommendations, the Administrator is to issue to each State in
the OTR to which an approved requirement applies a finding under
section 110(k)(5) that the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for that
State is inadequate to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D).
Section 110(a)(2)(D) provides, in pertinent part, that each State's SIP
shall contain adequate provisions:
(i) Prohibiting, consistent with the provisions of this title,
any source or other type of emissions activity within the State from
emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will--
(I) Contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere
with maintenance by, any other State with respect to any such
national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard.
Under section 184(c)(5), the Administrator's finding of inadequacy
under section 110(a)(2)(D) is to require that each affected State
revise its SIP to include the approved additional control measures
within one year after the finding is issued.
The Administrator convened the OTC on May 7, 1991. Thereafter, the
OTC moved to work toward a regional ozone strategy with emphasis on
consensus agreements to adopt regional measures to address the ozone
problem in the Northeast. To address the contribution of motor vehicles
to the Northeast ozone problem, the OTC focused early on emissions
standards for new motor vehicles and on adoption of federal
reformulated gasoline throughout the OTR as potential additional
control measures. The Clean Air Act, however, imposes certain
limitations on the States' ability to adopt new motor vehicle emissions
standards.
Section 209 of the Act generally preempts States from establishing
new motor vehicle emissions standards, leaving such regulation to EPA
under title II of the Act. Section 209 does, however, provide an
exception for California to adopt new motor vehicle emissions standards
where the Administrator grants a preemption waiver based on a finding
that California's standards will be, ``in the aggregate, at least as
protective of public health and welfare as applicable Federal
standards.'' Further, under section 177 of the Act, any State which has
SIP provisions approved under part D of title I may adopt and enforce
new motor vehicle emission standards for any model year if:
(1) Such standards are identical to the California standards for
which a waiver has been granted for such model year, and
(2) California and such State adopt such standards at least two
years before commencement of such model year (as determined by
regulations of the Administrator).
EPA has granted a waiver for California's ``Low Emission Vehicle''
program. This program generally calls for five categories of vehicles
meeting progressively more stringent emissions standards: California
Tier I vehicles; Transitional Low Emission Vehicles (TLEV); Low
Emission Vehicles (LEV); Ultra-Low Emission Vehicles (ULEV); and Zero
Emission Vehicles (ZEV). California has also established an overall
non-methane organic gas (NMOG) standard that each manufacturer must
meet for its fleet of new vehicles in a particular model year by
selling any combination of vehicles certified by California as meeting
standards for one of the five categories. In addition, under
California's program, at least 2% of each manufacturers' new vehicle
fleet sold in California must be ZEV's by 1998, and 10% by 2003.
At its second meeting on July 16, 1991, the OTC adopted a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in which the State and District of
Columbia Representatives agreed that, in view of the significant
contribution of motor vehicles to the Northeast ozone problem, they all
support California's Motor Vehicle Control Program, and call on their
jurisdictions to cooperatively evaluate the feasibility, air quality
benefits, and associated costs of this Program in the OTR. At its third
meeting on October 29, 1991, the OTC States agreed to a further MOU
providing that each OTC would take steps to implement California's Low
Emission Vehicle program as soon as possible. New York and
Massachusetts are the only States that have fully adopted the
California LEV program in legislation and regulations without
contingencies, and both States are set to implement their programs. The
automobile manufacturers' have challenged the legality of both programs
and both lawsuits are ongoing. Other States have adopted or are
adopting the program contingent on regional program adoption, and the
remaining States are at various stages of the legislative or regulatory
process to adopt the program.
In August 1993, Maine, Maryland, and Massachusetts petitioned the
OTC to adopt a recommendation calling for the application of the
California LEV program throughout the OTR. During the fall of 1993, the
OTC held a number of public forums in various locations in the
Northeast, and held a public hearing in Hartford, Connecticut on
December 16-17, 1993. Finally, at its winter meeting on February 1,
1994 in Washington, DC, the OTC voted by a 9 to 4 majority to recommend
that EPA mandate the California LEV program throughout the OTR. (The
OTC refers to the program they recommend as ``OTC LEV.'') New
Hampshire, Virginia, Delaware, and New Jersey voted against the
recommendation. The OTC's recommendation contains the following
elements:
(1) The OTC LEV program would be applicable to all 1999 and
subsequent model year passenger cars and light duty trucks in the OTR;
(2) Subject to certain very limited exceptions, all vehicles sold,
imported, delivered, purchased, leased, rented, acquired, received, or
registered in the OTR that are subject to the OTC LEV program must be
certified pursuant to a California Air Resources Board (CARB) Executive
Order;
(3) The OTC LEV program would allow the sale of the five categories
of California vehicles: California Tier I, TLEV, LEV, ULEV, and ZEV;
(4) Manufacturers could choose any combination of California
certified vehicles to meet average NMOG fleet emission standards in the
OTR as follows:
1999--0.113 g/mi
2000--0.073 g/mi
2001--0.070 g/mi
2002--0.068 g/mi
2003 and later--0.062 g/mi
Regarding California's ZEV sales mandate, the OTC recommends that,
to the extent it must apply to satisfy section 177, it shall apply. But
if it is not required under section 177, the OTC recommends that the
``individual States within the OTC may at their option include such a
requirement and/or economic incentives designed to increase the sales
of ZEVs in the programs they adopt.''
(5) The effective date for the OTC LEV program would be January 1,
1996, allowing two vehicle model years prior to applicability of the
standards in 1999, but does not preclude earlier State implementation.
EPA believes that its decision whether to approve the OTC's
recommendation raises substantial and difficult questions that must be
made in the context of the Northeast States' overall emission reduction
needs to attain the ozone standard. The Agency thus believes that the
scope of its review should be broad enough to encompass the context of
the particular LEV measure that the OTC recommends. The States are
currently developing their overall strategy (including emissions
inventory work, modeling work, and analysis of the full range of
potential control measures), in preparation for the November 15, 1994
attainment demonstration deadline. The Agency believes that this
November 15 deadline is critical to the States' progress toward timely
attainment. The Agency expects to undertake thorough consultations with
the members of the commission and the affected States, and to provide
an opportunity for all interested members of the public to provide
data, views, and other information that may assist EPA in reaching a
decision. The Agency believes that, in determining whether the
recommended LEV measure is ``necessary'' under section 184, it should
consider the measure as part of the overall emission reduction needs
for the region, and anticipates gathering information regarding the
recommended measure as it relates to the overall emission reductions
needs through consultations and public hearings. The EPA urges those
who intend to prepare testimony and written comments to begin
considering this issue in the context of the total attainment
requirements for the region, and to provide comments on the overall
emission reduction needs of the region.
As noted above, the Agency will provide a further Federal Register
notice in late March or early April that will provide specific
information about the time and place of the public hearing and more
detail about the process EPA intends to follow in reaching a decision.
EPA also expects to describe a framework for reaching its decision and
to discuss significant issues for public comment in this forthcoming
notice.
Dated: March 10, 1994.
Mary D. Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 94-6452 Filed 3-17-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
