P.1 

OAR Box 1191 

Prepped by Candice Davis 

Document Number: 

53) FED REG VOL. 66, NO. 155 8/11/95 

Docket Number: 

A-90-28 

Printed 5/13/2008 9:41:37 AM Sheet 53 of 54 
P.2 

4il!D)(_>S or / Vol. 60, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 1995 / Notices 

385.214) a motion to intervene or notice 

of intervention and pursuant to 

§ 157.205 of the Regulations under the 

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a 

protest to the request. If no protest is 

filed within die time allowed therefor, 

the proposed activity shall be deemed to 

be authorized effective the day after the 

time allowed for filing a protest. If a 

protest is filed and not withdrawn 

within 30 days after the time allowed 

for filing a protest, the instant request 

shall be treated as an application for 

authorization pursuant to Section 7 of 

the Natural Gas Act. 

Linwood A. Watson, Jr., 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 95-19887 Filed 8-10-95; 8:45 ami 

BILLING CODS 8717-01-P 

EMWOKOMMENTAIL PROTECTDOKI 

[FRL-527&-3] ft Ab-ffi 

<DsO.tfoirB.ISa State [ffioto. W©Metes 

IPoOliyifltoir- ConH-oH SteB.t_a.ds; 

OpiportMnt^ to. IPubHic C.®a.ing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) 

ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public 

hearing and public comment period. 

SUMMARY: The California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) has notified EPA that it 

has adopted regulations regarding onboard diagnostic system requirements 

for 1994 and later model year passenger 

cars, light-duty trucks, and mediumduty vehicles (OBD II). On-board 

diagnostics consist of a computer-based 

system incorporated into the vehicle 

electronics for the purpose of detecting 

operational malfunctions within the 

emission control system. When 

malfunctions are detected, a 

malhinction light is illuminated on the 

instrument panel and a trouble code is 

stored in the computer memory 

identifying the system in which the 

fault has occurred. CARB initially 

requested that EPA find its OBD II 

regulations within the scope of existing 

waivers of Federal preemption pursuant 

to section 209 of the Clean Air Act (Act), 

42 U.S.C. 7543(b), as amended. 

Subsequently, CARB twice amended the 

subject regulations. On June 14,1995, 

California requested that, pursuant to 

section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act, EPA 

waive Federal preemption for its 

onboard diagnostics amendments 

including the December 1994 revisions. 

This notice announces that EPA has 

tentatively scheduled a public hearing 

for October 17,1995, to hear comments 

from the general public concerning 

CARB's request. 

DATES: EPA has tentatively scheduled a 

public hearing for October 17,1995, 

beginning at 9:30 a.m. Any person who 

wishes to testify on the record at the 

hearing must notify EPA by September 

29,1995, that it wishes to present oral 

testimony regarding CARB's request. 

Any party may submit written 

comments regarding CARB's request by 

November 17,1995. If EPA receives one 

or more requests to testify on the 

pending request, a hearing will be held. 

Please note that if no one notifies EPA 

that they wish to testify, no hearing will 

be held. Therefore, any person who 

plans to attend the hearing should call 

Leila Holmes Cook of EPA's 

Manufacturers Operation Division at 

(202) 233-9252, on or after October 2, 

1995, to determine if a request for a 

hearing has been received by the 

Agency and thus whether a hearing will 

be held. Regardless of whether or not a 

hearing is held, written comments 

regarding CARB's request will be 

accepted through November 17,1995. 

ADDRESSES: If a request is received, a 

public hearing will be held at: Sheraton 

Inn, 3200 Boardwalk, Ann Arbor, 

Michigan 48108. Parties wishing to 

testify at the hearing should provide 

written notice to: Charles N. Freed, 

Director, Manufacturers Operations 

Division (6405J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., 

Washington, D.C. 20460. In addition, 

written comments, in duplicate, should 

be sent to Mr. Freed at the same address. 

Copies of material relevant to the waiver 

request (Docket No. A-90-28) will be 

available for public inspection during 

the working hours of 8:30 AM to 12:00 

PM and 1:30 PM to 3:30 PM, Monday 

through Friday, at: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Docket (LE-131), 

Room M1500, First Floor Waterside 

Mall, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, 

D.C. 20460 [Telephone (202) 260-7548]. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Leila Holmes Cook, Attorney/Advisor, 

Manufacturers Operations Division 

(6405J), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington, DC. 20460, 

Telephone: (202) 233-9252. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background audi Bisciissiom 

Section 209(a) of the Act as amended, 

42 U.S.C. 7543(a), provides in part: "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 * * * [or] require certification, 

inspection, or any other approval 

relating to the control of emissions 

* * * 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) of the Act requires the 

Administrator, after notice and an 

opportunity for public hearing, to waive 

application of the prohibitions of 

section 209(a) for California "* * * 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. 

No such waiver shall be granted if the 

Administrator finds that—(A) the 

determination of the State is arbitrary 

and capricious, (B) [California] does not 

need such * * * standards to meet 

compelling and extraordinary 

conditions, or (C) [its] standards and 

accompanying enforcement procedures 

are not consistent with section 202(a) of 

[the Act]." 

As previous decisions granting 

waivers of federal preemption have 

explained, State standards are 

inconsistent with section 202(a) if there 

is inadequate lead time to permit the 

development of the necessary 

technology given the cost of compliance 

within that time period or if the Federal 

and state test procedures impose 

inconsistent certification requirements. 

With regard to enforcement 

procedures accompanying standards, I 

must grant the requested waiver unless 

I find that these procedures may cause 

the California standards, in the 

aggregate, to be less protective of public 

health and welfare than the applicable 

Federal standards promulgated pursuant 

to section 202(a), or unless the 

California and Federal certification test 

procedures are inconsistent. 

Once California has been granted 

waiver for a set of standards and 

enforcement procedures for a class of 

vehicles, it may adopt other conditions 

precedent to initial retail sale, titling or 

registration of the subject class of 

vehicles without having to receive a 

further waiver of Federal preemption. 

CARB initially requested that EPA 

find its OBD II regulations within the 

scope of existing waivers of federal 

preemption pursuant to section 209 of 

the Clean Air Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 

7543(b), as amended. Subsequently, 

CARB twice amended the subject 

regulations. EPA finalized its On-Board 

Diagnostics Rule on January 29,1993 

[58 FR 9468 (February 19,1993)]. By 

letter dated June 14,1995, California 

requested that, pursuant to section 

209(b) of the Clean Air Act, EPA waive 

Federal preemption for its onboard 

diagnostics amendments including the 

December 1994 revisions. These 
P.4 

®r / Vol. 60, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 1995 / Notices 

amendments, which apply to 1994 and 

later model year passenger cars, lightduty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles 

require the monitoring of essentially all 

emission control systems, and emission 

related components. In addition, it 

addresses deficiencies in the OBD I 

requirements that have become apparent 

since their adoption, and establishes 

new testing protocol and 

standardization procedures. 

OBD II provides for new monitoring 

requirements covering: catalyst system 

condition, engine misfire detection, 

evaporative control system operation, 

supplementary air system function, the 

exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system 

flow rate, chloroflourocarbon loss (air 

conditioning refrigerant), and 

monitoring of other components and 

systems controlled by the on-board 

engine control computer. In general the 

California OBD II regulations require 

that a deteriorated component or system 

be detected as malfunctioning by the 

time its lack of performance causes 

vehicle emissions to exceed 1.5 times 

any of the standards to which the 

vehicle is certified or when a 

component is completely nonfunctioning. Therefore, permissible 

emission increases are a function of the 

standards to which the vehicle is 

certified. 

A number of changes to requirements 

initially established under OBD I were 

made to increase the effectiveness of the 

monitoring systems in detecting 

emission-related malfunctions. These 

requirements include tampering 

deterrence features, as well as, 

improvements to the malfunction 

detection effectiveness of the fuel 

system, oxygen sensor, EGR system, 

other emission-related electronic 

components. 

Manufacturers are required to perform 

emission tests on a durability 

demonstration vehicle equipped with 

deteriorated emission-critical parts and 

show that the on-board diagnostic 

system will identify when an emission 

standard is exceeded by 1.5 times the 

applicable standard. 

In order to facilitate vehicle repairs 

and assist Inspection and Maintenance 

Programs in utilizing the OBD system, 

CARB has required standardized vehicle 

communication systems that interface 

with a relatively low-cost, hand-held, 

universal diagnostic tool. The tool will 

be able to read specific diagnostic 

information such as fault codes which 

'ead service personnel to the likely area 

of any malfunctions, and will provide 

continuously updated engine parameter 

data that will further help to isolate 

fault codes and ensure proper repairs. 

In response to a Petition from Ford 

Motor Company, dated March 29,1993, 

CARB modified its OBD II regulations to 

give the Executive Officer, upon request 

from a manufacturer; the authority to 

waive one or more of the OBD II 

requirements for vehicle models or 

engine families introduced prior to 

April 1,1994. In making this 

determination the Executive Officer 

would consider, among other things, the 

overall extent to which the OBD II 

requirements will be met, and whether 

the manufacturer made good-faith 

efforts to comply with the regulation. 

For 1995 model year vehicles for which 

production begins after March 31,1994, 

per vehicle penalties in increments of 

$25 or $50 per vehicle for the third and 

subsequently identified deficiency not 

to exceed $500 per vehicle are possible. 

On December 8,1994, CARB 

approved amendments which addressed 

manufacturer concerns with developing 

fully compliant monitoring systems by 

the 1996 model year. Specifically, these 

amendments give additional compliance 

flexibility for manufacturers having 

difficulty creating enhanced diagnostic 

systems which monitor catalysts used in 

low-emission vehicles (LEV) and 

adequate misfire detection. In addition, 

the amendments also address 

monitoring requirements for evaporative 

system leaks and for the monitoring of 

diesel and alternate fuel vehicles. 

In its request letter dated, June 14, 

1995, California has stated that 

regardless of whether the EPA views the 

subject regulation as accompanying 

enforcement procedures or new 

standards, the requisite findings to 

support a grant of a waiver of federal 

preemption have been made. That is, as 

accompanying enforcement procedures, 

the regulations do not endanger the 

protectiveness finding that the ARE has 

made for previously granted waiver 

determinations and the regulations are 

consistent with the intent of section 

202(a) of the federal CAA. In the 

alternative, if the OBD II regulations are 

viewed as new emission standards, a 

waiver should be granted because the 

regulations (as amended) are, in the 

aggregate, at least as stringent as the 

comparable federal OBD regulations, 

California needs its own motor vehicle 

program to meet compelling and 

extraordinary conditions in the state, 

and the regulations are consistent with 

section 202(a) of the CAA. Section 

202(a) requires that the procedures 

provide sufficient lead time to permit 

the development and application of 

requisite technology, giving appropriate 

consideration to the cost of compliance 

within such period. In addition, the 

Agency has held that to avoid 

inconsistency with section 202(a), 

California's procedures may not impose 

inconsistent certification requirements 

such that manufacturers would be 

unable to meet both the California and 

Federal requirements with the same test 

vehicle. 

Once California has been granted 

waiver of Federal preemption for a set 

of standards and enforcement 

procedures for a class of vehicles, it may 

adopt other conditions precedent to the 

initial retail sale, titling or registration 

of the subject class of vehicles without 

having to receive a further waiver of 

Federal preemption. 

California's request will be considered 

according to the procedures for a waiver 

decision, which includes providing the 

opportunity for a public hearing. Any 

party wishing to present testimony at 

the hearing should address the 

following issues: 

(1) Whether California's OBD II 

regulations are appropriately considered 

accompanying enforcement procedures 

or new emission standards; 

(2) If CARB's regulations are 

accompanying enforcement procedures, 

address (A) whether these procedures 

may cause the California standards, in 

the aggregate, to be less protective of 

public health and welfare than the 

applicable Federal standards 

promulgated pursuant to section 202(a), 

and (B) whether the California and 

Federal certification test procedures are 

inconsistent. 

(3) If CARB's regulations are 

standards, address (A) whether 

California's determination that the 

amended standards are at least as 

protective of public health and welfare 

as applicable Federal standards is 

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. Procedmires for Public Participation 

Any person desiring to make an oral 

statement on the record should file ten 

(10) copies of their proposed testimony 

and other relevant material with the 

Director of EPA's Manufacturers 

Operations Division at the Director's 

address listed above not later than 

October 13,1995. In addition, that 

person should submit 25 copies, if 

feasible, of the planned statement to die 

presiding officer at the time of the 

hearing. 

Because a public hearing is designed 

to give interested parties an opportunity 

to participate in this proceeding, there 

are no adverse parties as such. 
P.5 

4106 8 Federal Regis! / Friday, August 11, 1995 / Notices 

Statements by participants will not 

subject to cross-examina! 

participants without special appro 

the presiding officer. The presiding 

officer is authorized to strike fron 

record statements which 

deems irrelevant or repetitious ai 

impose reasonable limits on 

duration of the statement of any 

witness. 

If a hearing is held, the Agency will 

make a verbatim i 

proceedings. Interested persons n 

arrange with the reporter at the he 

to obtain a copy of the transcript at their 

own expense. 

Regardless of whether 

hearing is held. EPA will keei 

record open until November 17.1995. 

The Administrator will then render her 

decision on CARB's request base 

the record of the pur 

is held, relevant written 

and other i --med 

pertinent. All information will be 

able for public inspecti' i 

EPA Air Dock 

Dated: August 3, 1995. 

Ann E. Goods, 

Acting Assistant Admi 

Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 95-19902 Filed 8-

BILLING COO€ M*0-60~P 

IFHL-6275-8] 

Acid Rain Program: Acid Rain 

Compliance Plans & Exemptions 

AGENCY: Environii 

Agency (EPA) 

ACTION: Notice of draft nil 

•lansand vi 

exemptions. 

SUMMARY: Th 

• tion Age. 

nitrogen oxides (NO 

and written exempt 

Rain Program permitting and 

monitoring require.i 

utility units at 30 plants i 

he Acid Rain ' 

(40 CFR parts 

Agency does n 

compliance pi 

also being issued as a di -

in th 

complia: and writt 

exemptio 

today's Federal Register 

DATES:( 

compliance plans and 

exeu oposed b 

must be receiafter notice isgi 

l he area where the 

vhichever is later. 

ADOREs? :omments to the 

g addresses: 

Maryland, Pennsylvania, 

and West Virginia: Thomas Maslany, 

Radiation and Toxics 

Region 3, 841 Chestnut 

iadelphia, PA 19107. 

o and Wisconsin: 

Air and Radiation 

Ralph H. 

Bldg.. 77 West Jackson 

60604. 

>r plants in Arkansas, New Mexico, 

Coleman. Director. 

ance and Enforcement 

6, First Interstate 

1445 Ross Ave. (6EN-AA), 

102-2733. 

i iowa: William A. 

\ir and Toxics 

7. 726 Minnesota 

S66101. 

ma and California: 

EPA Region 9, Air and 

\-5-2). 75 Hawthorne 

o. CA, 94105. 

lplicate and 

iiance plan or 

to which the 

ommenter's 

telephone number, 

ii; the 

if any. to the 

the unit 

inpliance plan or 

• 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

mnsylvania, and 

tiller, (215) 597-

plants in 

112)886-

for plants in Ohio: 

12)886-9653, 

I • in Arkansas, 

is: Daniel Meyer, 

for 

913)551-

plants in 

oia: Celia 

14-1249. EPA 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If no 

"nents are 

ctivity is 

i to these draft 

• and written 

)x compliance 

options issue-.1 

tiie notice of NOx 

.here in 

Register will 

: on the date 

lfsignifU 

nely received 

an or written 

exemption, that NOx compliance plan 

or written exemption in the 

NOx compliance plans and writ! 

exemptions will be withdrawn am 

public comment received on that N( K 

compliance plan or wrin< ption 

will be addressed in a subsequent final 

action based on the relevant •• 

compliance plan or written exemption 

in this notice of drat: 

plans and written exei i • • ise 

t h e Agenc y wil l not institut e 

comment period on this notice <»f draft 

NOx compliance plans and writ! 

exemptions, any parties interested in 

commenting should do so during this 

comment period. 

For further informatior 

description of the NO\ 

plans and written exemption! 

information provide 

NOx compliance plans 

exemptions elsewhere in 

Federal Register. 

Dated: August 7,19 

Joseph A. Kragl 

Acting Director, Acid Rain i 

of Atmospheric Progrt; 

Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 95-19900 Filed 8-10-95; 8:45 nm| 

BILLING COOE WW-60-P 

[FRL-6275-3] 

Acid Rain Program: Acid Rain 

Compliance Plans & Exemptions 

AGENCY: Environn 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of m 

compliance plans 

exemptions. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. En ial 

Protection Agenc\ 

final action, nftrogi 

compliance plans and writt 

exemptions from I 

permitting and mi 

to a total of 74 utility 

in accordance with 

Program regulation 

and 76). Because the Ag' 

anticipate receiving a-' 

these compliance plans and exemptl 

are being issued a 

DATES: Each NOx ' 

written exern, 

final action, will b 

21. 1995. or 40 d. 

given in a pub; 

circulation in the area where th 

is located, wis 

significant, ad\v 

red by Sep 

days after the 

notice is publish" 

If sig; 

timely receive 

plan or on any exemption in tin