Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 1997 / Proposed Rules 66841

Aviation Administration proposes to

amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,

CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND

CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS;

AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING

POINTS

1. The authority citation for part 71

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389.

§ 71.1 [Amended]

2. The incorporation by reference in

14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation

Administration Order 7400.9E, Airspace

Designations and Reporting Points,

dated September 10, 1997, and effective

September 16, 1997, is amended as

follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas

Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More

Above the Surface of the Earth

* * * * *

AGL ND E5 Cooperstown, ND [New]

Cooperstown Municipal Airport, ND

(Lat. 47°25′22′′N, long. 98°06′21′′W)

Devils Lake VORTAC

(Lat. 48°06′48′′N, long. 98°54′29′′W)

Grand Forks Air Force Base, ND

(Lat. 47°57′40′′N, long. 97°24′04′′W)

Valley City Barnes County Municipal

Airport, ND

(Lat. 46°56′28′′N, long. 98°01′03′′W)

Jamestown VOR/DME

(Lat. 46°55′58′′N, long. 98°40′44′′W)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile

radius of the Cooperstown Municipal Airport

and that airspace extending upward from

1,200 feet above the surface within an area

bounded on the east by longitude

97°49′30′′W, on the south by the 7.9-mile

radius of the Valley City Barnes County

Municipal Airport and by V2–520, on the

southwest by the 16.5-mile radius of the

Jamestown VOR/DME and on the west by

V561; that airspace bounded on the

northwest by the 34-mile arc of the Grand

Forks Air Force Base, on the east by V561,

on the southwest by the 16.5-mile radius of

the Jamestown VOR/DME and V170, and on

the west by V55; and that airspace bounded

on the north by V430, on the east by the 34-

mile arc of the Grand Forks Air Force Base,

on the south by V55, on the west by V170,

and on the northwest by the 22-mile radius

of the Devils Lake VORTAC.

* * * * *

Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois on November

24, 1997.

David B. Johnson,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division.

[FR Doc. 97–33283 Filed 12–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 85

[AMS–FRL–5938–7]

RIN 2060–AH62

IM Program Requirement—On-Board

Diagnostic Checks; Amendment to the

Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

change a provision of the federal vehicle

inspection and maintenance (I/M) rules

relating to the implementation deadline

by which states are required to begin

On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) checks as a

routine part of basic and enhanced I/M

programs. The current rule requires

Ozone Transport Region (OTR) areas

with low enhanced programs to

implement OBD checks by January 1,

1999, and all other areas to implement

OBD checks by January 1, 1998. This

notice proposes to delay for a period of

up to three years the required

implementation deadline for OBD in

those areas. This proposed amendment

will set a new implementation date for

OBD checks as January 1, 2001 for all

areas with basic and enhanced I/M

programs. During this time extension

the Agency will generate, collect and

analyze the data necessary to accord

OBD checks the appropriate level of

emission reduction credits.

Additionally, certain clarifying

amendments are being proposed to

allow for updates to the Code of Federal

Regulations which are cross-referenced

in the OBD rule.

DATES: Written comments on this

proposal must be received no later than

January 6, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this

proposed rulemaking are contained in

the Public Docket No. A–94–21. The

docket is located at the Air Docket,

Room M–1500 (6102), Waterside Mall

SW., Washington, DC 20460. The docket

may be inspected between 8:30 a.m. and

12 noon and between 1:30 p.m. until

5:30 p.m. on weekdays. A reasonable fee

may be charged for copying docket

material. The preamble, regulatory

language and regulatory support

document are also available

electronically from the EPA internet

Web site. This service is free of charge,

except for any cost one may already

incur for internet connectivity. The

official Federal Register version is made

available on the day of publication on

the primary Web site listed below. The

EPA Office of Mobile Sources also

publishes these notices on the

secondary Web site listed below.

http://www.epa.gov/EPA-AIR/ (either

select desired date or use Search

feature)

http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/ (look

in What’s New or under the specific

rulemaking topic)

Please note that due to differences

between the software used to develop

the document and the software into

which the document may be

downloaded, minor changes in format,

pagination, etc. may occur.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leila Cook, Office of Mobile Sources,

National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions

Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann

Arbor, Michigan, 48105. Telephone

(313) 741–7820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities. Entities potentially

regulated by the minor amendment to

the I/M rule are those which adopt,

approve, or fund I/M programs.

Regulated categories and entities

include:

Category Examples of regulated entities

Local government ...... Local air quality

agencies.

State government ...... State air quality agencies responsible for

I/M programs.

Federal government .. DOT.

This table is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

regulated by this action. This table lists

the types of entities of which EPA is

now aware that could potentially be

regulated by this proposed I/M

amendment. Other types of entities not

listed in the table could also be

regulated. To determine whether your

organization is regulated by this action,

you should carefully examine the

applicability criteria of 40 CFR 51.350 of

the I/M rule. If you have any questions

regarding the applicability of this action

to a particular entity, consult the person

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Summary of Rule

Under the Clean Air Act as amended

in 1990 (the Act), 42 U.S.C. 7401 et.

seq., the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) published in the Federal

Register on November 5, 1992 (40 CFR

part 51, subpart S) rules relating to

motor vehicle inspection and

maintenance (I/M) programs (hereafter

referred to as the I/M rule; see 57 FR
66842 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 1997 / Proposed Rules

52950). Subsequent to that rule, the EPA

published in the Federal Register on

August 6, 1996, (40 CFR parts 51 and

85) rules relating to the implementation

of On-board Diagnostic (OBD) checks as

a routine part of I/M programs (hereafter

referred to as the I/M OBD rule; see 61

FR 40940).

The statutory requirement for OBD

checks as an I/M program requirement

is found in sections 182(c)(3)(C)(vii) and

202(m)(3) of the Act. Section

182(c)(3)(C)(vii) requires the inspection

of emission control diagnostic systems.

In the I/M OBD rule, EPA interpreted

the statutory requirement to include

OBD checks in addition to otherwise

required emission testing, and thus

promulgated a rule which required both

tests as part of the regular I/M test

procedure. Per the I/M OBD rule, until

January 1, 2000, both OBD and

evaporative system tests, where

applicable, were to be required on each

subject vehicle of model year 1996 and

newer. During this period vehicles

which fail the OBD check would not

automatically fail the I/M test. Only

after January 1, 2000, would failure of

the OBD test require mandatory repair

and retest. The two-year period from

when OBD checks were to be started,

until they could generate I/M failures,

was to be a period during which the

Agency would evaluate the relative

effectiveness of OBD.

The Agency believes that sufficient

data must be generated on which to base

an appropriate level of emission

reduction credits for OBD. It would be

premature at this time, therefore, to

require the states to perform OBD

checks in addition to the regular

exhaust and evaporative testing and

attendant costs. EPA now believes that

the data needed must be generated by a

separate study that compares OBD’s

emission reduction potential to the

Federal Test Procedure, the same

procedure used to certify all new

automobiles today. The Agency is

currently conducting such a study

which began October 1, 1997. Two years

are needed to ensure ample time for

fleet penetration of OBD-equipped

vehicles, so that enough vehicles can be

recruited for the study. The third year

will be needed to allow sufficient time

to analyze the data generated by the

study and to develop and assign

appropriate credits.

Today, EPA is proposing to amend 40

CFR section 51.373 to delay to January

1, 2001 the implementation deadline for

OBD checks in OTR low enhanced areas

and in all other areas. While these dates

were different in the I/M OBD rule, i.e.,

January 1, 1999 and January 1, 1998,

respectively, today’s rule delays both to

the same deadline of January 1, 2001.

This amounts to a two-year delay for

those OTR low enhanced areas and a

three year delay for all other areas.

Additionally, EPA is proposing to

reserve 40 CFR 85.2207 (a) and (e)

which address failure of the OBD test as

a basis for failure of the I/M test. EPA

proposes to reserve these subsections

pending resolution of the appropriate

level of emission reduction credits for

OBD.

Additionally, certain clarifying

amendments are being proposed to

allow for updates to the Code of Federal

Regulations which are cross-referenced

in the OBD rule. Part 86 of the CFR,

which includes the technical

specifications for OBD systems, is

periodically updated to include new

requirements for these systems. The

current rule requires compliance with

certain I/M program requirements

pursuant to section 86.094–17. As this

section has now been amended to

include new subsections which also

apply to OBD systems, this action

proposes to amend the sections of the

OBD rule where that subsection is

referenced to obviate the need for future

amendments in this regard. Where

section 86.094–17 was referenced

before, this action proposes to amend

such language to refer simply to certain

vehicles with ‘‘certified OBD systems’’.

The requirement shall remain that

states revise their I/M SIPs by August 6,

1998, to implement OBD. This is due to

the Act’s requirement in section

202(m)(3) that states revise their SIPs

within two years after promulgation of

the regulations to provide for OBD

inspections. As the I/M OBD rule was

promulgated on August 6, 1996, states

must adopt rules, by two years from that

date, which require OBD checks. Only

the date for the start of testing is

proposed for delay here.

Also unchanged, are the sections that

allow for states to implement OBD

inspections before December 31, 1999,

and to allow failure of OBD to result in

failure of the I/M test, thereby requiring

repair. Both efforts shall remain

optional to the states. States which

choose to add OBD checks to their

regular tailpipe and evaporative tests

should be able to do so without

regulatory hindrance. Those states

should benefit from increased consumer

acceptance of the technology and the

resolution of implementation problems

commonly associated with the startup of

a new testing technology. However,

states which choose to conduct OBD

checks, on vehicles so equipped, before

the proposed new deadline, cannot earn

emission reduction credits for doing so

unless they also perform the exhaust

and (where applicable) evaporative

tests. Only after the Agency has

accorded OBD a defined level of

emissions reduction credit can states

potentially drop the exhaust and

evaporative tests and still earn emission

reduction credits for performing OBD

checks on those vehicles. Should EPA

and states complete testing and review

of OBD systems sooner than expected,

the Agency may be able to make credits

available to states who choose to

implement OBD I/M checks prior to the

proposed deadline.

These proposed amendments are

consistent with the relevant

requirements of the Clean Air Act.

These changes will not result in any

change in health and environmental

benefits. The only Act-required deadline

with regards to OBD testing is that

described above, such that states must

revise their SIPs by the date certain and

that requirement has been retained in

this amendment. The Act does not

include a specific deadline for

implementation of OBD testing. EPA

believes it is reasonable to extend that

deadline for the reasons stated above.

EPA here solicits comments on this

proposal. Anyone wishing to comment

on the proposal should do so at this

time. Because the current deadline for

implementation of OBD is January 1,

1998, and because time is needed to

accept and respond to comment, time is

of the essence in the promulgation of

this rule. For the reasons stated above it

will be necessary to limit the comment

period for this proposal to fifteen days.

A thirty day comment period would not

allow the Agency to promulgate a final

rulemaking action until after the January

1, 1998 deadline. The agency will make

every effort to ensure that this proposed

rule is distributed by every available

mechanism so that concerned

stakeholders will have ample time to

comment.

Administrative Requirements

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.

605(b), I certify that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities

and, therefore, is not subject to the

requirement of a Regulatory Impact

Analysis. A small entity may include a

small government entity or jurisdiction.

A small government jurisdiction is

defined as governments of cities,

counties, towns, townships, villages,

school districts, or special districts, with

a population of less than 50,000. This

certification is based on the fact that the

I/M areas impacted by this rulemaking
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 1997 / Proposed Rules 66843

do not meet the definition of a small

government jurisdiction, that is,

governments of cities, counties, towns,

townships, villages, school districts, or

special districts, with a population of

less than 50,000. The I/M rule applies

only to urbanized areas with

populations in excess of 100,000 or

200,000 depending upon location.

Unfunded Mandates Act

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

where the estimated costs to State, local,

or tribal governments, or to the private

sector, will be $100 million or more.

Under Section 205, EPA must select the

most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves

the objective of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements.

Section 203 requires EPA to establish a

plan for informing and advising any

small governments that may be

significantly impacted by the rule. To

the extent that the requirements in this

action would impose any mandate at all

as defined in Section 101 of the

Unfunded Mandates Act upon the state,

local, or tribal governments, or the

private sector, as explained above, this

rule is not estimated to impose costs in

excess of $100 million. Therefore, EPA

has not prepared a statement with

respect to budgetary impacts.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This regulatory action does not

contain any information collection

requirements requiring approval by the

office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

Executive Order 12866

It has been determined that this

proposed amendment to the I/M OBD

rule is not a significant regulatory action

under the terms of Executive Order

12866 and has been waived from Office

of Management and Budget (OMB)

review.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Lead,

Motor vehicle pollution, Nitrogen oxide,

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfer

oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 85

Confidential business information,

Imports, Incorporation by reference,

Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Research, Warranties.

Dated: December 16, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, parts 51 and 85 of chapter I

of title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations is proposed to be amended

as follows:

PART 51—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 51

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. Section 51.351 is amended by

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 51.351 Enhanced I/M performance

standard.

* * * * *

(c) On-Board Diagnostics (OBD). The

performance standard shall include

inspection of all 1996 and later lightduty vehicles and light-duty trucks

equipped with certified on-board

diagnostic systems, and repair of

malfunctions or system deterioration

identified by or affecting OBD systems

as specified in § 51.357.

* * * * *

3. Section 51.352 is amended by

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 51.352 Basic I/M performance standard.

* * * * *

(c) On-Board Diagnostics (OBD). The

performance standard shall include

inspection of all 1996 and later lightduty vehicles and light-duty trucks

equipped with certified on-board

diagnostic systems, and repair of

malfunctions or system deterioration

identified by or affecting OBD systems

as specified in § 51.357.

* * * * *

4. Section 51.373 is amended by

revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:

§ 51.373 Implementation deadlines.

* * * * *

(g) On-Board Diagnostic checks shall

be implemented in all basic, low

enhanced and high enhanced areas as

part of the I/M program by January 1,

2001.

PART 85—[AMENDED]

5. The authority citation for Part 85

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

6. Section 85.2207 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraphs (a)

and (e).

7. Section 85.2231 is amended by

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 85.2231 On-board diagnostic test

equipment requirements.

* * * * *

(b) The test system shall be capable of

communicating with the standard data

link connector of vehicles with certified

OBD systems.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–33315 Filed 12–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region 2 Docket No. NY 26–2–176b, FRL–

5936–7]

Determination of Attainment of the

One-Hour Ozone Standard for the

Poughkeepsie, New York

Nonattainment Area and Determination

Regarding Applicability of Certain

Reasonable Further Progress and

Attainment Demonstration

Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to find that

the Poughkeepsie ozone nonattainment

area in New York has attained the onehour National Ambient Air Quality

Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and that

certain reasonable further progress and

attainment demonstration requirements,

along with certain related requirements

of Part D of Title I of the Clean Air Act

are not applicable for as long as the area

continues to attain the one-hour ozone

standard. In the Final Rules section of

this Federal Register, EPA is making

these determinations without prior

proposal because the Agency views this

as a noncontroversial activity and

anticipates no adverse comments. A

detailed rationale for this activity is set

forth in the direct final rule. If no

adverse comments are received in

response to that direct final rule no

further activity is contemplated in

relation to this proposed rule. If EPA

receives adverse comments, the direct

final rule will be withdrawn and all

public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this proposed rule. The EPA

will not institute a second comment

period on this document. Any parties