20730 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

■ i. By revising the entry for Part 60 

(20.11.60). 

■ ii. By revising the entry for Part 61 

(20.11.61). 

The amendments read as follows: 

§ 52.1620 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED ALBUQUERQUE/BERNALILLO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject 

State 

submittal/ 

effective date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

* * * * * * * 

New Mexico Administrative Code Title 20—Environmental Protection, Chapter 11—Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Air Quality Control 

Board 

* * * * * * * 

Part 60 (20.11.60) ......................... Permitting in Nonattainment 

Areas.

12/14/05 4/26/07 [Insert FR page 

number where document 

begins].

Part 61 (20.11.61) ......................... Prevention of Significant Deterioration.12/14/05 4/26/07 [Insert FR page 

number where document 

begins].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–7896 Filed 4–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 1051 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0858; FRL–8305–8] 

RIN 2060–A035 

Extension of Temporary Exhaust 

Emission Test Procedure Option for All 

Terrain Vehicles 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: In a rule published November 

8, 2002, EPA promulgated new emission 

standards for recreational vehicles 

beginning in model year 2006. This 

included a newly regulated class of 

nonroad vehicles/engines commonly 

referred to as all-terrain vehicles. In that 

rulemaking, a temporary provision was 

included allowing manufacturers to test 

all-terrain vehicles over a steady-state, 

engine-based, duty cycle for exhaust 

emissions prior to the 2009 model year 

in lieu of the transient, chassis-based, 

Federal Test Procedure which was 

effective for 2006 and later model years. 

In this rulemaking we are taking direct 

final action to extend the availability of 

this temporary provision for in some 

cases up to an additional six model 

years. More specifically, manufacturers 

would have to certify exhaust emission 

engine families representing not less 

than 50 percent of their US-directed 

production on the Federal Test 

Procedure in model year 2014 and 100 

percent in 2015. Manufacturers with 

only one all terrain vehicle exhaust 

emission engine family would not be 

required to use the Federal Test 

Procedure until the 2015 model year. 

For those manufacturers who have not 

yet done so, this will allow additional 

time to certify to the previously 

promulgated Federal Test Procedurebased emission standards using either 

contract facilities or by obtaining inhouse capability. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

on June 25, 2007, without further notice, 

unless we receive adverse comments by 

May 29, 2007 or a request for a public 

hearing by May 11, 2007. If EPA 

receives such comments or such a 

request, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

OAR–2005–0858, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov 

• Fax: (202) 566–1741 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, Mail Code: 6102T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC, 20460. Please include two copies. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center 

(Air Docket), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA West Building, 

1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room: 

3334 Mail Code: 6102T, Washington, 

DC. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Docket’s normal hours of 

operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–

0858. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov. including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other infonnation 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

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 www.regulations.gov your email 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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 20731 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA 

West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The 

Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 

a.m. 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 Docket 

is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Samulski, Assessment and 

Standards Division, Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality, 2000 

Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 

48105; telephone number: (734) 214–

4532; fax number: (734) 214–4050; 

email address: 

samulski.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why is EPA Using a Direct Final 

Rule? 

EPA is publishing this rule without a 

prior proposal because we view this 

action as noncontroversial and 

anticipate no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’

section of today’s Federal Register 

publication, we are publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to adopt the provisions in this 

Direct Final Rule if adverse comments 

are received on this direct final rule. We 

will not institute a second comment 

period on this action. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. For further information about 

commenting on this rule, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this document. 

If EPA receives adverse comment or a 

request for public hearing, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that this direct final rule will not take 

effect. We would address all public 

comments in any subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. 

II. Does This Action Apply to Me? 

This action will affect companies that 

manufacture and certify all-terrain 

vehicles for sale in the United States. 

Category NAICS code a

Examples of potentially affected 

entities 

Industry 336999 Snowmobiles and 

all-terrain vehicle manufacturers. 

Industry 421110 Independent 

commercial importers of vehicles and parts. 

a North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS). 

To determine whether particular 

activities may be affected by this action, 

you should carefully examine the 

regulations. You may direct questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

as noted in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

III. What Should I Consider as I 

Prepare My Comments for EPA? 

A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI). In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

IV. Summary of Rule 

The current exhaust emission 

standards for all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) 

are based on the use of the chassis-based 

transient emission test cycle used for 

Class I highway motorcycles. These 

emission standards first took effect in 

the 2006 model year. As an option, 

section 1051.145(b) of the regulations 

includes a temporary provision which 

allows ATV manufacturers to certify 

their products for exhaust emissions 

over a steady-state, engine-based, duty 

cycle. This option is now in place for 

model years 2006–2008, inclusive. This 

option has existed in California since 

1997 and it is permanently available 

under the California regulations. Until 

recently, for their California certification 

most manufacturers have elected to use 

the optional engine cycle. EPA included 

the optional test cycle in its rule 

because it enabled the implementation 

of emission controls for ATVs several 

years earlier than otherwise would have 

been possible if ATV manufacturers had 

been required to certify their products 

on the chassis-based FTP. For many 

manufacturers, additional lead time 

would have been required to procure 

and install the necessary chassis 

dynamometers and related emissions 

measurement equipment, train 

technicians, and then to certify their 

products on this chassis cycle. In this 

rulemaking, we are extending the 

availability of this option for reasons 

described below. 

The steady-state duty cycle, often 

referred to as J1088, has six modes and 

was originally developed to represent 

the operation of small utility engines. It 

only includes engine operation at idle 

and one other speed. During the course 

of the original rulemaking, EPA 

expressed its concern that the J1088 test 

cycle misses substantial portions of 

typical ATV operation. EPA stated that 

it preferred using the transient 

motorcycle FTP as the basis for the test 

procedures and emission standards in a 

long-term ATV program. However, 

many manufacturers expressed support 

for the long-term use of the optional test 

procedure to certify their engines, as 

was allowed in California, primarily due 

to costs associated with installing 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
20732 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

chassis dynamometer facilities capable 

of meeting FTP requirements. 

EPA recognized the manufacturers’

interests regarding facility costs 

associated with FTP testing for ATVs. 

During the rulemaking, EPA discussed 

the possibility of developing a new test 

cycle specifically for ATVs. EPA 

discussed its intent to work with all 

interested parties to determine whether 

a new test cycle and accompanying 

standards would be appropriate. By 

finalizing the temporary J1088 option, 

EPA provided time to develop, and if 

appropriate, adopt and implement an 

alternative to the FTP that meets the 

needs of the Agency, manufacturers, 

and other parties. EPA indicated that it 

would consider extending the 

availability of the J1088 option beyond 

the 2008 model year, if necessary, to 

give more time to adopt changes to the 

ATV test cycle. 

Soon after the final rule was 

published for the ATV emission 

standards, EPA entered a memorandum 

of understanding (MOU) with the 

California Air Resources Board, the 

Motorcycle Industry Council, and the 

Specialty Vehicle Institute of America, 

regarding ATV test cycle development 

and implementation with the goal of 

developing and implementing a test 

cycle for ATVs that would be agreed to 

by all participants. In response to the 

MOU, the manufacturers collected data 

on ATV operating characteristics in the 

field (speed, load, etc.) in an attempt to 

better inform the signatories to the MOU 

on the operating characteristics of these 

vehicles. This data was provided to EPA 

in November 2005 together with a 

manufacturer concept on a possible 

steady state test cycle derived from this 

field data and some data comparing 

emissions on this cycle to those on the 

FTP. This information is available in the 

public docket for this rulemaking. 

EPA very carefully considered the 

data and analyses provided by the 

manufacturers with the core question 

being whether ATV operation is 

fundamentally steady-state or transient 

in nature. Beyond this, EPA fully 

considered the steady-state test cycle 

put forth by the manufacturers. 

However, EPA is concerned that much 

of the possible operating range of ATV 

engines was not covered in the test 

cycle proposed by the manufacturers 

and that transient operation is not 

represented at all. In an effort to at least 

partially resolve this matter, EPA put 

forth the idea of adding Not-To-Exceed 

requirements to the industry cycle such 

as required in other EPA rules where 

steady-state testing is prescribed. 

However, EPA and the industry could 

not agree on a concept or appropriate 

multipliers. 

Thus, EPA believes it is time to close 

deliberations on a new emissions test 

cycle, leaving in place the current 

provision that the FTP and the emission 

standards promulgated in 2002 would 

take effect if an alternative test cycle 

was not implemented. While many 

manufacturers have already certified on 

the FTP, the manufacturers involved in 

the MOU postponed investing in the 

chassis dynamometer testing facilities 

needed for the FTP in the good faith 

hope that an engine dynamometer based 

alternative cycle could be developed. 

Since this will not be the case, it is 

appropriate to determine how much 

lead time is needed to complete full 

transition to the FTP in an orderly 

manner. Time is not now available to 

procure and implement the chassis 

dynamometer and meet the emission 

standards called for by EPA’s 2009 

requirement. 

EPA believes that a period of five 

additional model years is appropriate 

before FTP-based testing should be 

mandated and that one additional 

model year is needed to accommodate a 

phase-in and small business interests. 

As mentioned in the summary above, 

exhaust emission engine families 

representing at least 50 percent of USdirected production would have to be 

certified on the FTP in the 2014 model 

year with the remainder in 2015 model 

year. Manufacturers with only one 

exhaust emission engine family in the 

2014 model year would not be required 

to comply until the 2015 model year. 

To allow for the use of current 

emission sampling practices used with 

the J1088 cycle, this action also extends 

the availability of raw gas sampling. It 

will be available for use with the J1088 

cycle as long as the J1088 cycle can be 

used for ATV exhaust emission 

certification. 

In determining how much lead time is 

needed EPA considered the following 

factors. Time is needed to build chassis 

test facilities, procure and install chassis 

dynamometers and related emission test 

equipment, train personnel on use of 

this equipment, conduct the 

development work needed to meet the 

emission standards, and ultimately to 

certify. Generally speaking, the first two 

items would take approximately 36 

months to complete, the next two would 

take about 24 months, and the last step, 

certification, about 12 months. Thus, 

products would be ready for the 2014 

model year. The original rule provided 

six years of lead time for the FTP 

requirement. It was promulgated in late 

2002 and absent a change in the test 

cycle would be required for the 2009 

model year (mid-late 2008). Thus five of 

the six years have passed. During this 

timeframe large manufacturers would 

also have to acquire the facilities and 

equipment to run the required 

production line testing programs 

beginning in the 2014 model year. 

It is worth noting that in the 2007 

model year many small volume 

manufacturers, almost exclusively from 

Asia, have certified using the FTP. 

However, information available to EPA 

suggests that most of these 

manufacturers avoided installing new 

equipment either by using time 

available on co-located or nearby 

chassis dynamometers used for 

motorcycle development or by 

contracting with one of a few contract 

labs in the Asia. Generally, such options 

are not readily available to the larger 

volume manufacturers who have not yet 

pursued chassis dynamometer facilities 

for certification of their ATVs and who 

must have production line testing 

capability as well. 

EPA does not expect that this revision 

to the regulation will have an adverse 

cost impact to the manufacturers 

beyond that envisioned in the original 

rule. It will give manufacturers 

additional time to use current practices 

while moving toward mandatory use of 

the FTP for ATV emissions certification. 

We expect this extension will help to 

ensure compliance costs are minimized 

and that the emission reductions 

identified in the 2002 rule are achieved. 

Even the J1088 test cycle has reduced 

emissions significantly by eliminating 

ATVs powered by high emitting twostroke engines as a new product 

offering. Adopting the FTP will help to 

ensure robust emission control in ATVs 

using 4-stroke engines by including 

consideration of transient operation and 

vehicle/engine operation over a wider 

variety of conditions than that seen in 

the J1088 cycle. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under the Executive 

Order. This direct final rule merely 

gives an extension of time in which a 

temporary optional test duty cycle may 

be used. There are no costs associated 

with this rule beyond those envisioned 

in the original rule. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 20733 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This direct final rule does not include 

any new collection requirements, as it 

acts to extend the availability of an 

existing temporary test procedure 

option. There are no new paperwork 

requirements associated with this rule. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or 

financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose 

or provide information to or for a 

Federal agency. This includes the time 

needed to review instructions; develop, 

acquire, install, and utilize technology 

and systems for the purposes of 

collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing 

and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able 

to respond to a collection of 

information; search data sources; 

complete and review the collection of 

information; and transmit or otherwise 

disclose the information. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

EPA has determined that it is not 

necessary to prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis in connection with 

this direct final rule. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this final rule on small entities, a 

small entity is defined as: (1) A small 

business that meet the definition for 

business based on SBA size standards at 

13 CFR 121.201; (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-farprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s final rule on small 

entities, EPA has concluded that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. In determining 

whether a rule has a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities, the impact of 

concern is any significant adverse 

economic impact on small entities, 

since the primary purpose of the 

regulatory flexibility analyses is to 

identify and address regulatory 

alternatives ‘‘which minimize any 

significant economic impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities.’’ 5 

U.S.C. 603 and 604. Thus, an agency 

may conclude that a rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities if 

the rule relieves regulatory burden, or 

otherwise has a positive economic effect 

on all of the small entities subject to the 

rule. 

This direct final rule merely gives an 

extension of time in which a temporary 

optional test duty cycle may be used. 

We have therefore concluded that 

today’s final rule will relieve regulatory 

burden for all small entities and will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

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, 

EPA 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 

in any one year. Before promulgating an 

EPA rule for which a written statement 

is needed, section 205 of the UMRA 

generally requires EPA 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 EPA to adopt an alternative other 

than the least costly, most cost-effective, 

or least burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation of why such an 

alternative was adopted. 

Before EPA establishes any regulatory 

requirements that may significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, 

including tribal governments, it must 

have developed under section 203 of the 

UMRA a small government agency plan. 

The plan must provide for notifying 

potentially affected small governments, 

enabling officials of affected small 

governments to have meaningful and 

timely input in the development of EPA 

regulatory proposals with significant 

federal intergovernmental mandates, 

and 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 would significantly 

or uniquely affect small governments. 

EPA has determined that this rule 

contains no federal mandates that may 

result in expenditures of more than 

$100 million to the private sector in any 

single year. This direct final rule merely 

gives an extension of time in which a 

temporary optional test duty cycle may 

be used. The requirements of UMRA 

therefore do not apply to this action. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), requires EPA 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’’ are 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, EPA may not issue a regulation 

that has federalism implications, that 

imposes substantial direct compliance 

costs, and that is not required by statute, 

unless the Federal government provides 

the funds necessary to pay the direct 

compliance costs incurred by State and 

local governments, or EPA consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the regulation. 

EPA 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 

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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
20734 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

authority, EPA 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 direct final 

rule merely gives an extension of time 

in which a temporary optional test duty 

cycle may be used. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR 

22951, 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.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal 

implications’’ is defined in the 

Executive Order to include regulations 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on 

one or more Indian tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

government and the Indian tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes.’’

This rule does not have tribal 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175. 

This rule does not uniquely affect the 

communities of Indian Tribal 

Governments. Further, no circumstances 

specific to such communities exist that 

would cause an impact on these 

communities beyond those discussed in 

the other sections of this rule. This 

direct final merely gives an extension of 

time in which a temporary optional test 

duty cycle may be used. 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 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

Section 5–501 of the Order directs the 

Agency 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 the 

Agency. 

This rule is not subject to the 

Executive Order because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, and because the 

Agency does not have reason to believe 

the environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. This 

direct final gives an extension of time in 

which a temporary optional test duty 

cycle may be used beyond that time 

period prescribed in the original rule. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001) because it is not likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution or use of energy. 

This direct final rule merely gives an 

extension of time in which a temporary 

optional test duty cycle may be used. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 

note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless doing so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (such as materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies. NTTAA 

directs EPA to provide Congress, 

through OMB, explanations when the 

Agency decides not to use available and 

applicable voluntary consensus 

standards. 

This direct final rule does not involve 

technical standards. This direct final 

rule merely gives an extension of time 

in which a temporary optional test duty 

cycle may be used. Thus, we have 

determined that the requirements of the 

NTTAA do not apply. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(February 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this rule will 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations because it does not affect 

the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment. This 

direct final rule merely gives an 

extension of time in which a temporary 

optional test duty cycle may be used 

before it expires. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to Congress and the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States. We will submit a report 

containing this rule and other required 

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States before publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This direct 

final rule is effective on June 25, 2007. 

L. Statutory Authority 

The statutory authority for this action 

comes from section 213 of the Clean Air 

Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7547). This 

action is a rulemaking subject to the 

provisions of Clean Air Act section 

307(d). See 42 U.S.C. 7607(d): 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 1051 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Exhaust emission 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 20735 

testing, Recreational vehicle, All-terrain 

vehicle. 

Dated: April 19, 2007. 

Stephen L. Johnson, 

Administrator. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 1051—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM RECREATIONAL ENGINES AND 

VEHICLES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1051 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

■ 2. Section 1051.145 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b) introductory text 

and (e)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 1051.145 What provisions apply only for 

a limited time? 

* * * * * 

(b) Optional emission standards for 

ATVs. To meet ATV standards for 

model years before 2014, you may apply 

the exhaust emission standards by 

model year in paragraph (b)(1) of this 

section while measuring emissions 

using the engine-based test procedures 

in 40 CFR part 1065 instead of the 

chassis-based test procedures in 40 CFR 

part 86. In model year 2014 you may 

apply this provision for exhaust 

emission engine families representing 

up to 50 percent of your U.S.-directed 

production. This provision is not 

available in the 2015 or later-model 

years. If you certify only one ATV 

exhaust emission engine family in the 

2014 model year this provision is 

available for that family in the 2014 

model year. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

* * * * * 

(2) ATV. You may use the raw 

sampling procedures described in 40 

CFR part 90 or 91 for ATVs certified 

using engine-based test procedures as 

specified in § 1051.615 before the 2015 

model year. You may use these raw 

sampling procedures for any ATVs 

certified using engine-based test 

procedures as specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 07–2069 Filed 4–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 67 

Final Flood Elevation Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Base (1% annual chance) 

Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified 

BFEs are made final for the 

communities listed below. The BFEs 

and modified BFEs are the basis for the 

floodplain management measures that 

each community is required either to 

adopt or to show evidence of being 

already in effect in order to qualify or 

remain qualified for participation in the 

National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP). 

DATES: The date of issuance of the Flood 

Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing 

BFEs and modified BFEs for each 

community. This date may be obtained 

by contacting the office where the maps 

are available for inspection as indicated 

on the table below. 

ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each 

community are available for inspection 

at the office of the Chief Executive 

Officer of each community. The 

respective addresses are listed in the 

table below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering 

Management Section, Mitigation 

Division, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3151. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) makes the final determinations 

listed below for the modified BFEs for 

each community listed. These modified 

elevations have been published in 

newspapers of local circulation and 

ninety (90) days have elapsed since that 

publication. The Mitigation Division 

Director of FEMA has resolved any 

appeals resulting from this notification. 

This final rule is issued in accordance 

with section 110 of the Flood Disaster 

Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, 

and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has 

developed criteria for floodplain 

management in floodprone areas in 

accordance with 44 CFR part 60. 

Interested lessees and owners of real 

property are encouraged to review the 

proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM 

available at the address cited below for 

each community. The BFEs and 

modified BFEs are made final in the 

communities listed below. Elevations at 

selected locations in each community 

are shown. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This final rule is categorically excluded 

from the requirements of 44 CFR part 

10, Environmental Consideration. An 

environmental impact assessment has 

not been prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood 

elevation determinations are not within 

the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

Regulatory Classification. This final 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

under the criteria of section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 

1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 

58 FR 51735. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. 

This final rule involves no policies that 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This final rule meets the 

applicable standards of Executive Order 

12988. 

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

■ Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 67—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 67 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 

3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. 

§ 67.11 [Amended] 

■ 2. The tables published under the 

authority of § 67.11 are amended as 

follows: 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES