55634 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 1997 / Notices

ER96–222, 000, SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

ER96–1663, 001, PACIFIC GAS AND

ELECTRIC COMPANY, SAN DIEGO

GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY

ER96–1663, 002, PACIFIC GAS AND

ELECTRIC COMPANY, SAN DIEGO

GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY

ER96–1663, 003, PACIFIC GAS AND

ELECTRIC COMPANY, SAN DIEGO

GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY

ER96–1663, 004, PACIFIC GAS AND

ELECTRIC COMPANY, SAN DIEGO

GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY

ER96–1663, 005, PACIFIC GAS AND

ELECTRIC COMPANY, SAN DIEGO

GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY

ER96–1663, 006, PACIFIC GAS AND

ELECTRIC COMPANY, SAN DIEGO

GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY

OA96–28, 000, PACIFIC GAS &

ELECTRIC COMPANY

OA96–76, 000, SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

OA96–139, 000, SAN DIEGO GAS &

ELECTRIC COMPANY

OA97–602, 000, SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

OA97–604, 000, SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

ORDER ON APPLICATIONS FOR

AUTHORIZATIONS TO

ESTABLISH AN INDEPENDENT

SYSTEM OPERATOR AND POWER

EXCHANGE.

E–2.

DOCKET# EC97–5, 000, OHIO

EDISON COMPANY,

PENNSYLVANIA POWER

COMPANY, THE CLEVELAND

ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING

COMPANY AND THE TOLEDO

EDISON COMPANY ORDER ON

PROPOSED MERGER.

OIL AND GAS AGENDA

I.

PIPELINE RATE MATTERS

PR–1.

RESERVED

II.

PIPELINE CERTIFICATE MATTERS

PC–1.

OMITTED

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–28534 Filed 10–23–97; 2:12 pm]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5913–9]

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for OMB

Review; Comment Request;

Regulations Governing Constructed or

Reconstructed Major Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the following Information Collection

Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and approval:

Regulations Governing Constructed or

Reconstructed Major Sources (EPA ICR

No. 1658.02). The ICR describes the

nature of the information collection and

its expected burden and cost; where

appropriate, it includes the actual data

collection instrument.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before November 26, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sandy Farmer at EPA, (202) 260–2740,

and refer to EPA ICR No. 1658.02.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Regulations Governing

Constructed or Reconstructed Major

Sources; EPA ICR No. 1658.02. This is

a new collection.

Abstract: Owners or operators of

major sources of hazardous air

pollutants (HAPs) who construct or

reconstruct a source for which no

maximum achievable control

technology (MACT) standard has been

set, must submit a one-time-only

application to the permitting authority.

No periodic reporting is required for

this collection. Title V of the Clean Air

Act (CCA) as amended in 1990 requires

that MACT standards be met by

constructed and reconstructed major

sources of HAPs. This collection of

information is mandatory under

authority contained in section 112(g) of

the CAA as amended in 1990 [42 U.S.C.

7401 (et. seq.) as amended by Pub. L.

101–549]

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 are listed

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter

15. The Federal Register Notice

required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d),

soliciting comments on this collection

of information was published on April

1, 1994 in the proposed rule ‘‘Hazardous

Air Pollutants: Proposed Regulations

Governing Constructed, Reconstructed

or Modified Major Sources’ (59 FR

15504). A small number of comments

were received concerning the ICR for

the proposed rule. The comments fell

into two general categories; estimated

burden being too low and estimated

number of sources being too low.

Addressing these comments, EPA has

made two significant changes to the

rule. First, modified sources have been

removed from the effected entities.

Second the application process has been

simplified by deleting the requirement

that a detailed analytic determination of

individual HAPs be conducted.

Burden Statement: The annual public

reporting and recordkeeping burden for

this collection of information is

estimated to average 150 hours per

response. 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.

Respondents/Affected Entities: Major

sources of HAPs for which a MACT

standard has not been established.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

3,000.

Frequency of Response: Once per

construction, reconstruction or

modification.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:

106,535 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Cost

Burden: $0.

Send comments on the Agency’s need

for this information, the accuracy of the

provided burden estimates, and any

suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the following addresses.

Please refer to EPA ICR No. 1658.02 in

any correspondence.

Ms. Sandy Farmer, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, OPPE Regulatory

Information Division (2137), 401 M

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 207 / Monday, October 27, 1997 / Notices 55635

(Or E-Mail

Farmer.Sandy@epamail.epa.gov)

and

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for

EPA 725 17th Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20503.

Dated: October 17, 1997.

Richard Westlund,

Acting Director, Regulatory Information

Division.

[FR Doc. 97–28369 Filed 10–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5914–2]

Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle

Engines; Tampering Enforcement

Policy for Alternative Fuel Aftermarket

Conversions; Addendum to Mobile

Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A

September 4, 1997.

A. Purpose. The purpose of this

document is to clarify and revise the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s

(EPA’s) ‘‘tampering’’ enforcement policy

for motor vehicles and motor vehicle

engines originally designed to operate

on gasoline or diesel fuel and

subsequently modified to operate

exclusively or in conjunction with

compressed natural gas (CNG) or

liquified petroleum gas (LPG or

propane), hereinafter referred to as

‘‘alternative fuels’’. The provisions of

this Addendum shall apply to all

persons subject to the tampering

prohibition of Section 203(a) of the Act.

For the purpose of this policy

Addendum, the term manufacturer will

apply to any person who designs,

produces, and/or assembles components

for converting vehicles or engines to

operate on alternative fuels and is

responsible for complying with all

applicable requirements of this policy

Addendum.

B. Background. EPA’s policy is and

has been that any alteration from an

original configuration of a vehicle or

engine as certified under Title II of the

Act may constitute tampering under

Section 203(a)(3). Routine maintenance

and repair of vehicles and engines

requires the use of replacement parts

which may be non-original or

‘‘aftermarket’’ parts or systems. EPA’s

Office of Enforcement and General

Counsel issued Mobile Source

Enforcement Memorandum 1A (Memo

1A) on June 25, 1974 to provide

guidance to covered parties regarding

how the Agency intended to enforce the

‘‘tampering’’ prohibition under Section

203(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act (Act) with

respect to maintenance and the use of

aftermarket parts.

Memo 1A provides, in part, that the

use of an aftermarket part, alteration or

add-on part will not constitute

tampering if the dealer has a

‘‘reasonable basis’’ to believe that such

acts will not adversely affect emissions

performance. It also provides specific

procedures or options by which the

dealer would have a ‘‘reasonable basis’’.

One available procedure is emissions

testing performed in accordance with

‘‘40 CFR 85’’ (subsequently revised and

incorporated under 40 CFR Part 86)

demonstrating compliance with

emission standards for the useful life of

the vehicle or engine. An alternate

option is that ‘‘a Federal, state or local

environmental control agency

represents that a reasonable basis exists’

based on testing done in accordance

with procedures specified by that

agency. Many vehicles converted from

gasoline fueled to CNG or propane have

relied on the second option utilizing

procedures established by California or

Colorado for demonstrating emissions

compliance.

EPA has recently become aware of

federal emission test data generated

under a program conducted by the

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

(NREL) which indicate that a significant

number of these vehicles modified to

run on alternative fuels may be

exceeding one or more applicable

federal emission standards. The

installers involved in the NREL program

had attempted to comply with Memo 1A

by using conversion systems certified by

the state of California under the

‘‘California Exhaust Emission Standards

and Test Procedures for Systems

Designed to Convert Motor Vehicles

Certified for 1993 and Earlier Model

Years to Use Liquefied Petroleum Gas or

Natural Gas Fuels’’ (pre-1994 California

Procedures). EPA has subsequently

reviewed emission test data from other

sources which generally substantiate the

NREL results.

In response to concerns raised by

these data, the Agency conducted a

public stakeholders meeting on

February 21, 1997, with representatives

of the affected industries, regulatory

agencies and interested fleet operators.

The purpose of the meeting was to

discuss these data and the causes of the

emission failures as well as to explore

all available options to identify and

remedy the problems. Many reasons

were provided for the emission

problems, including inadequate initial

testing, insufficient durability

evaluations, overly broad vehicle

application based on limited testing,

inadequate systems/parts specifications,

improper installation and fuel

variability. The concerns of the affected

industries and fleets subject to several

alternative fuel statutory mandates were

also discussed.

The most significant conclusion

reached at that meeting, and from

extensive data review and discussions

subsequent to that meeting, was that the

pre-1994 California and Colorado

procedures as currently structured do

not provide an adequate demonstration

or assurance that a vehicle or engine

modified to operate on an alternative

fuel using an aftermarket conversion

system will comply with the applicable

emission standards for its useful life. As

a result of the above and in light of the

number of vehicles and engines that

may be converted to alternative fuels in

the near future, EPA believes it is

appropriate to issue this Addendum to

Memo 1A (this Addendum) to provide

additional guidance to the regulated

community, including manufacturers

and installers of alternative fuel

conversion systems.

C. Revised Policy. Effective

immediately, EPA will no longer accept

a representation based on the pre-1994

California Procedures for alternative

fuel conversion systems or on the test

procedures under Colorado Regulation

No. 14 in effect prior to the date of this

Addendum as a ‘‘reasonable basis’’

under paragraph 3(c) of Memo 1A.

Consequently, any future installation of

an alternative fuel conversion system, or

the modification of any motor vehicle or

motor vehicle engine in compliance

with Title II of the Clean Air Act to

operate exclusively or in part with an

alternative fuel, or the causing thereof,

may constitute tampering under Section

203(a) of the Act, where the installer or

manufacturer has relied exclusively on

a representation by Colorado or

California, as described above, that a

reasonable basis exists in accordance

with paragraph 3(c) of Memo 1A.

Effective immediately, the ‘‘reasonable

basis’’ under paragraph 3 of Memo 1A

that EPA agrees may be relied on by any

person, including a manufacturer,

installer or operator, when converting,

or causing the conversion of, a motor

vehicle or motor vehicle engine to

operate on an alternative fuel is limited

to one of the three options listed below.

1. A Federal Certificate under 40 CFR

Part 86 demonstrating compliance with

the applicable standards or under 40

CFR Part 88 demonstrating compliance

with Clean Fuel Fleet standards for each

engine family to be converted in

accordance with 40 CFR Part 85,

Subpart F; or