5542 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2004 / Notices 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[AMS–FRL–7619–1] 

California State Motor Vehicle 

Pollution Control Standards; Within 

the Scope Requests; Opportunity for 

Public Hearing and Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public 

hearing and public comment. 

SUMMARY: The California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) has notified EPA that it 

has approved two separate sets of 

amendments to its ‘‘Malfunction and 

Diagnostic System Requirements for 

1994 and Subsequent Model Year 

Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and 

Medium-Duty Vehicles and Engines 

(OBD II).’’ The first set of amendments 

addresses implementation and 

certification concerns that had been 

identified since implementation of OBD 

II in 1994. These amendments also add 

several monitoring requirements and 

diagnostic and repair information 

requirements. The second set of 

amendments applies to 2004 and 

subsequent model year vehicles. These 

amendments, among other things, also 

address implementation and 

certification issues that have been 

identified since implementation of OBD 

II in 1994, and address monitoring 

requirements for new emission 

technologies that will be used in 2004 

and subsequent model year vehicles. 

The amendments also include several 

new compliance provisions relating to 

OBD II monitoring requirements, 

including post-assembly line evaluation 

testing and an OBD II specific in-use 

testing protocol. CARB requests that 

EPA confirm CARB’s findings that its 

amendments are within-the-scope of a 

previous waiver issued by EPA under 

section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act 

(Act), 42 U.S.C. 7543(b), which covered 

CARB’s OBD II regulations through 

April 26, 1995.

DATES: EPA has tentatively scheduled a 

public hearing for March 22, 2004, 

beginning at 10 a.m. EPA will hold a 

hearing only if a party notifies EPA by 

February 20, 2004, expressing its 

interest in presenting oral testimony 

regarding CARB’s requests or other 

issues noted in this notice. By March 1, 

2004, any person who plans to attend 

the hearing should call David Dickinson 

of EPA’s Certification and Compliance 

Division at (202) 343–9256 to learn if a 

hearing will be held. Any party may 

submit written comments by April 21, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: EPA will make available for 

public inspection at the Air and 

Radiation Docket written comments 

received from interested parties, in 

addition to any testimony given at the 

public hearing. The official public 

docket is the collection of materials that 

is available for public viewing at the Air 

and Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket 

Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 

B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. The EPA Docket 

Center Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the Air and 

Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1743. The 

reference number for this docket is A–

99–45. Parties wishing to present oral 

testimony at the public hearing(s) 

should provide written notice to David 

Dickinson at the address noted below; 

parties should also submit any written 

comments to David Dickinson. If EPA 

receives a request for a public hearing, 

EPA will hold the public hearing at 

1310 L St, NW., Washington, DC 20005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Dickinson, Certification and 

Compliance Division (6405J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. Telephone: (202) 343–9256, 

Fax: (202) 343–2804, e-mail address: 

Dickinson.David@EPA.GOV. EPA will 

make available an electronic copy of 

this Notice on the Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality’s 

(OTAQ’s) homepage (http://

www.epa.gov/otaq/). Users can find this 

document by accessing the OTAQ 

homepage and looking at the path 

entitled ‘‘Regulations.’’ This service is 

free of charge, except any cost you 

already incur for Internet connectivity. 

Users can also get the official Federal 

Register version of the Notice on the 

day of publication on the primary Web 

site: (http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/

EPA–AIR/).

Please note that due to differences 

between the software used to develop 

the documents and the software into 

which the documents may be 

downloaded, changes in format, page 

length, etc., may occur. Parties wishing 

to present oral testimony at the public 

hearing should provide written notice to 

David Dickinson at: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., (6405J), Washington, DC 

20460. Telephone: (202) 343–9256.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Section 209(a) of the Clean Air Act, as 

amended (‘‘Act’’), 42 U.S.C. 7543(a), 

provides:

No State or any political subdivision 

thereof shall adopt or attempt to enforce any 

standard relating to the control of emissions 

from new motor vehicles or new motor 

vehicle engines subject to this part. No state 

shall require certification, inspection or any 

other approval relating to the control of 

emissions from any new motor vehicle or 

new motor vehicle engine as condition 

precedent to the initial retail sale, titling (if 

any), or registration of such motor vehicle, 

motor vehicle engine, or equipment. 

Section 209(b)(1) of the Act requires the 

Administrator, after notice and opportunity 

for public hearing, to waive application of 

the prohibitions of section 209(a) for any 

state that has adopted standards (other than 

crankcase emission standards) for the control 

of emissions from new motor vehicles or new 

motor vehicle engines prior to March 30, 

1966, if the state determines that the state 

standards will be, in the aggregate, at least as 

protective of public health and welfare as 

applicable federal standards. The 

Administrator must grant a waiver unless he 

finds that (A) the determination of the state 

is arbitrary and capricious, (B) the state does 

not need the state standards to meet 

compelling and extraordinary conditions, or 

(C) the state standards and accompanying 

enforcement procedures are not consistent 

with section 202(a) of the Act.

CARB submitted an October 30, 2003, 

letter to the Administrator notifying 

EPA that it had adopted additional 

amendments to its OBD II program and 

requesting that EPA confirm that its 

amendments are within the scope of the 

previously granted OBD II waiver. These 

amendments provide, among other 

requirements: (1) The continuation of 

existing emission malfunction 

thresholds for vehicles manufacturers in 

2004 and subsequent model years with 

an increase in the malfunction threshold 

for vehicles complying with LEV II 

SULEV from 1.75 times the applicable 

standard to 2.5 times the applicable 

standard; (2) an update or expansion of 

current monitoring requirements 

including catalyst system monitoring for 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) conversion 

efficiency, secondary air system 

monitoring for proper air flow during 

vehicle warm-up for 2006 and 

subsequent model years, more frequent 

monitoring of many components to 

better detect for intermittent faults and 

a standardized methodology to 

determine operating frequency for 

several major monitors during in-use 

driving (i.e., In-Use Performance Ratios); 

(3) new monitoring requirements to 

account for new emission-control 

technologies, which will, in general, be 

phased in starting with the 2005 or 2006 

model year, including monitoring for 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2004 / Notices 5543

variable valve timing and/or control 

systems, cold start emission reduction 

strategies, and direct ozone reduction 

systems, and for diesel emission control 

systems (catalyst and particulate trap); 

(4) additional diagnostic information on 

the OBD data stream, including, but not 

limited to, vehicle identification 

numbers (VIN), catalyst temperature, 

distance traveled since MIL activated 

and other information contained in Title 

13 CCR 1968.2 (f)(4.2); (5) an allowance 

for the new Controller Area Network 

(CAN) communication protocols in 

addition to the current communication 

protocols for 2004–2007 and solely for 

all 2008 and subsequent model years; 

and (6) new enforcement provisions 

which include (i) requirements for a 

sampling of assembly line production 

vehicles, validation testing on one to 

three production vehicles per model 

year, and a collection of in-use data 

from new motor vehicles during the first 

six months after production begins and 

(ii) a new ‘‘section 1968.5’’ which 

establishes an OBD II-specific in-use 

testing protocol and associated remedial 

provisions, including detailed in-use 

testing procedures for OBD II systems 

installed on 2004 and subsequent model 

year vehicles, criteria that CARB will 

consider in determining compliance and 

appropriate remedies, and procedures 

for manufacturers to follow in the 

course of remedial action.

CARB also submitted a December 24, 

1997, letter to the Administrator 

notifying EPA that it had adopted 

amendments to its OBD II program. 

These amendments provide for, among 

other requirements: (1) Catalyst 

monitoring requirements for low 

emission vehicles (LEV I program) to 

specify a tailpipe emission level 

malfunction criterion in place of a front 

catalyst efficiency criterion with a 

phase-in commencing in 1998; (2) a new 

phase-in of the ‘‘full-range’’ misfire 

requirement of 50 percent in the 1997–

1999 model years, 75 percent in 2000, 

90 percent in 2001 and 100 percent in 

2002, including a clarification of the 

criteria for meeting the full range 

detection requirements; (3) an 

allowance of manufacturers to 

demonstrate compliance with the 

requirement to monitor the evaporative 

system for leaks equal or greater in 

magnitude than a 0.020 inch diameter 

hole, with a phase-in beginning with the 

2000 model year, if it can demonstrate 

that smaller diameter leaks will not 

cause evaporative emissions to exceed 

1.5 times the applicable standard; (4) a 

positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) 

monitoring requirement with a phase-in 

from the 2002 through 2004 model 

years; (5) a thermostat monitoring 

requirement with a phase-in from the 

2000 through 2002 model years; (6) an 

extension of the alternate fuel vehicle 

full compliance requirement with OBD 

II to the 2005 model year; (7) beginning 

with the 1997 model year through the 

2003 model year, manufacturers could 

continue to have two deficiencies 

without being subject to penalties, 

unless a monitoring strategy was 

completely absent, in which case 

penalties would accrue with the first 

deficiency, and any additional 

deficiency provisions; (8) a deletion of 

the tampering protection provisions 

except those that apply to nonreprogrammable vehicles; and (9) 

various service information 

requirements. 

CARB asserts, and requests that the 

Administrator determine, that its OBD II 

amendments fall within the scope of 

EPA’s previously granted waiver, and 

thereby may be deemed to meet the 

requirements of section 209(b) of the 

Act set forth above. 

EPA has decided in the past that 

when California’s amendments: (1) Do 

not undermine the previous 

determination that California’s 

standards, in the aggregate, are at least 

as protective of public health and 

welfare as comparable Federal 

standards; (2) do not affect the 

consistency of California’s requirements 

with section 202(a) of the Act; and (3) 

raise no new issues affecting EPA’s 

previous waiver determinations, then 

EPA’s concurrence that the amendments 

are within the scope of a previous 

waiver determination is merited. 

When EPA receives new waiver 

requests from CARB, EPA publishes a 

notice of opportunity for public hearing 

and comment and then publishes a 

decision in the Federal Register

following the public comment period. In 

contrast, when EPA receives within the 

scope waiver requests from CARB, EPA 

traditionally publishes a decision in the 

Federal Register and concurrently 

invites public comment if an interested 

party is opposed to EPA’s decision. 

Because of the many elements of 

CARB’s OBD II amendments, EPA 

invites comment on the following issues 

before making a determination for 

CARB’s within the scope requests: (1) 

Should EPA consider CARB’s requests 

as within the scope of a previous waiver 

request or should they be considered 

and examined as new waiver requests? 

(2) If EPA were to consider CARB’s 

requests as within the scope requests 

then do California’s respective 

amendments (a) undermine California’s 

previous determinations that its 

standards, in the aggregate, are at least 

as protective of public health and 

welfare as comparable Federal 

standards, (b) affect the consistency of 

California’s requirements with section 

202(a) of the Act, and (c) raise new 

issues affecting EPA’s previous waiver 

determinations? (3) If EPA were to 

consider CARB’s requests as new waiver 

requests, then provide comment on (a) 

whether California’s determinations that 

its standards are at least as protective of 

public health and welfare as applicable 

federal standards are arbitrary and 

capricious, (b) whether California needs 

separate standards to meet compelling 

and extraordinary conditions, and (c) 

whether California’s standards and 

accompanying enforcement procedures 

are consistent with section 202(a) of the 

Act. 

II. Procedures for Public Participation 

If a public hearing is held, any party 

desiring to make an oral statement on 

the record should file ten (10) copies of 

its proposed testimony and other 

relevant material with David Dickinson 

at the address listed above no later than 

March 19, 2004. In addition, the party 

should submit 25 copies, if feasible, of 

the planned statement to the presiding 

officer at the time of the hearing. 

In recognition that a public hearing is 

designed to give interested parties an 

opportunity to participate in this 

proceeding, there are no adverse parties 

as such. Statements by participants will 

not be subject to cross-examination by 

other participants without special 

approval by the presiding officer. The 

presiding officer is authorized to strike 

from the record statements that he or 

she deems irrelevant or repetitious and 

to impose reasonable time limits on the 

duration of the statement of any 

participant.

If a hearing is held, the Agency will 

make a verbatim record of the 

proceedings. Interested parties may 

arrange with the reporter at the hearing 

to obtain a copy of the transcript at their 

own expense. Regardless of whether a 

public hearing is held, EPA will keep 

the record open until April 21, 2004. 

Upon expiration of the comment period, 

the Administrator will render a decision 

on CARB’s request based on the record 

of the public hearing, if any, relevant 

written submissions, and other 

information that he deems pertinent. 

Persons with comments containing 

proprietary information must 

distinguish such information from other 

comments to the greatest possible extent 

and label it as ‘‘Confidential Business 

Information’’ (CBI). If a person making 

comments wants EPA to base its 

decision in part on a submission labeled 

CBI, then a nonconfidential version of 

5544 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2004 / Notices 

the document that summarizes the key 

data or information should be submitted 

for the public docket. To ensure that 

proprietary information is not 

inadvertently placed in the docket, 

submissions containing such 

information should be sent directly to 

the contact person listed above and not 

to the public docket. Information 

covered by a claim of confidentiality 

will be disclosed by EPA only to the 

extent allowed and by the procedures 

set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

If no claim of confidentiality 

accompanies the submission when EPA 

receives it, EPA will make it available 

to the public without further notice to 

the person making comments.

Dated: January 27, 2004. 

Robert Brenner, 

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 04–2422 Filed 2–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–7618–6] 

Great Lakes National Program Office 

FY2004–2005 Funding Guidance—

Request for Initial Proposals

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of funding availability.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency’s Great Lakes 

National Program Office (GLNPO) is 

requesting Initial Proposals for projects, 

collectively totaling up to $4,180,000, 

furthering protection and clean up of 

the Great Lakes ecosystem. Initial 

Proposals are requested through the 

USEPA Great Lakes National Program 

Office FY2004–2005 Funding Guidance 

(‘‘Funding Guidance’’).

DATES: The deadline for all Initial 

Proposals is 8 a.m. Central time, 

Monday morning, March 29, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The Funding Guidance is 

available on the Internet at http://

www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/2004guid/. It 

is also available from Lawrence Brail 

(312–886–7474/ 

brail.lawrence@epa.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mike Russ, EPA–GLNPO, G–17J, 77 

West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604 

(312–886–4013/russ.michael@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Projects 

should address Contaminated 

Sediments, Pollution Prevention and 

Toxics Reduction, Habitat (Ecological) 

Protection and Restoration, Invasive 

Species, Strategic or Emerging Issues, 

and Other Lakewide Management Plan 

or Remedial Action Plan (LaMP/RAP) 

Priorities. 

Assistance is available pursuant to 

Clean Water Act section 104(b)(3) for 

activities in the Great Lakes Basin and 

in support of the Great Lakes Water 

Quality Agreement. State pollution 

control agencies, interstate agencies, 

other public or nonprofit private 

agencies, institutions, and organizations 

are eligible to apply.

Dated: January 28, 2004. 

Gary V. Gulezian, 

Director, Great Lakes National Program 

Office.

[FR Doc. 04–2420 Filed 2–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–7618–9] 

Proposed Amendment to CERCLA 

Section 122(h) Administrative 

Agreement for Recovery of Response 

Costs for the Amenia Town Landfill 

Superfund Site, Town of Amenia, 

Dutchess County, NY

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency.

ACTION: Notice; request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 

122(i) of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 

1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 

U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given by 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (‘‘EPA’’), Region II, of a 

proposed amendment to an 

administrative agreement pursuant to 

section 122(h) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 

9622(h), for recovery of response costs 

concerning the Amenia Town Landfill 

Superfund Site (‘‘Site’’) located in the 

Town of Amenia, Dutchess County, 

New York. The proposed amendment 

would add two parties, Great Eastern 

Color Lithographic Corporation and 

H.O. Penn Machinery Company, Inc. to 

the prior cost recovery settlement 

concerning this Site. The prior 

settlement required the original settling 

parties, Town of Amenia, New York; 

Ashland, Inc.; BP America Inc.; CurtissWright Corporation; International 

Business Machines Corporation; 

Alastair B. Martin; Estate of Edith 

Martin; Metal Improvement Company, 

Inc.; Town of Sharon, Connecticut; 

Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc.; TBG 

Services, Inc.; Unisys Corporation; and 

Weyerhaeuser Company to pay 

$361,873.17 in reimbursement of EPA’s 

response costs at the Site. That 

settlement included a covenant not to 

sue the settling parties pursuant to 

section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 

9607(a), in exchange for their payments. 

The prior settlement was the subject of 

a public notice published in 68 FR 

48383 (August 13, 2003). No comments 

were received concerning the prior 

settlement which became effective on 

September 18, 2003. The proposed 

amendment to the prior settlement 

agreement would add the two additional 

parties who would be subject to the 

same obligations and benefits under the 

prior settlement as the original parties to 

that settlement and a further obligation 

to pay an additional $11,000 each 

($22,000 total) in reimbursement of 

EPA’s past costs. For thirty (30) days 

following the date of publication of this 

notice, EPA will receive written 

comments relating to the proposed 

amendment to the prior settlement. EPA 

will consider all comments received and 

may modify or withdraw its consent to 

the amendment to the settlement if 

comments received disclose facts or 

considerations that indicate that the 

proposed amendment is inappropriate, 

improper or inadequate. EPA’s response 

to any comments received will be 

available for public inspection at EPA 

Region II, 290 Broadway, New York, 

New York 10007–1866.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before March 8, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The proposed amendment 

to the prior settlement is available for 

public inspection at EPA Region II 

offices at 290 Broadway, New York, 

New York 10007–1866. Comments 

should reference the Amenia Town 

Landfill Superfund Site located in the 

Town of Amenia, Dutchess County, 

New York, Index No. CERCLA–02–

2003–2029. To request a copy of the 

proposed amendment to the prior 

settlement agreement, please contact the 

individual identified below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George A. Shanahan, Assistant Regional 

Counsel, New York/Caribbean 

Superfund Branch, Office of Regional 

Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 17th Floor, 290 Broadway, New 

York, New York 10007–1866. 

Telephone: 212–637–3171.

Dated: January 23, 2004. 

William McCabe, 

Acting Director, Emergency and Remedial 

Response Division, Region 2.

[FR Doc. 04–2418 Filed 2–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P