p.1 

OAR Box 1190 

Prepped by Candice Davis 

Document Number: 

74) 11 l-A-1 

Docket Number: 

A-90-28 

Printed 5/5/2008 9:13:51 AM Sheet 74 of 106 
P.2 

41066 

k-%-^' H-A-\ 

Federal Regiater / Vol. 60, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 1995 I Notices 

3A5.214) a motion lo 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 the 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protest is filed and not withdrawn 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 appUcation for 

authorization pursuant to Section 7 of 

the Natural Gas Act. 

Linwood A. Watson, Jr., % 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 95-19M7 Filed 8-10-95; 8:45 am) 

MLUNfl COM «m-oi-p 

iNVIROrOIENTAL PROTECTION ' 

AGENCY 

[FRL-MTWT 

California Stote Motor Vehfcfe* 

- P-lrUtfon C^trol S*_rwfcr_a; '" 

Opportunity far PuMtc Haorfnf 

AOWCT: Environmental Protection 

Agency (IPA) 

ACTW»e Notice of opportunity for public 

he___af and public comment period. 

wmum: Tha California Air Beaourcae 

Board (CARB) has notified EPA that it 

haa adopted regulationa regarding oaboard diagnoeric system requir—enta 

for 1994 and latar model yaar paieanyr 

cars, light-duty trucks, and meditup- , 

duty vehidea (OBD II). On-board 

diagnoatica consist of a computer-baaed 

system iacorporated into the vehicle 

electronics tor tha purpoee of detecting 

operational malfunctions within the 

emission control system. When, 

malfunctione are detected, a 

malfunction light is illuminated on tha 

instrument panel and a trouble code is 

stored in tha computer memory 

identifying tha system in which the 

fault has occurred. CARB initially 

requested that EPA find its OBD II 

regulations within the scope of existing 

waivers of Fedaral preemption pursuant 

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

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

Subsequently, CARB twice amended tha 

subject regulationa. On June 14,1995. -

California requested that, pursuant to 

section 209(b) of tha 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. 

DATM: 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 sot a 

hearing is held, written comments 

regarding CARB's request will be 

. accepted through November J7,1995. 

AOOmm : If a request is received, a 

public hearing will be held at: Sheraton 

Inn, 3200 Boardwalk, Ann Arbor, 

Michigan 4«10g. Pardee wishing to 

toatify at tha hearing ahould provide : 

writtan notice to: Charles N. Freed, 

Director, Manufacturers Operations 

Division (6405J), U.S. Environmental 

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

Washington. D.C 20460. In addition, 

written comments, in duplicate, should 

be sent to Mr. Freed at the same address. 

Copiaa of material relevant to the waiver. 

requew (Docket No. A-90-2S) 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 M15O0. First Floor Waterside 

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

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

FO* FWrTHIH MFOftMATICM CONTACT: 

Leila Holmes Cook, Attorney/Advisor, 

Manufacturers Operations Division 

(6405J), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Waahington, DC 20460, 

Telephone: (202) 233-9252. 

•umjEMBrrAitY INFORMATION: 

I. Backgrauad and Diacuaaiea 

Section 209(a) ofthe 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 * * * fpr) require certification, 

inspection, or any other approval 

relating to the control of omissions 

* * • 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 reouires tha 

Administrator, after notice ana an 

opportunity for public heering, to waive 

application ofthe prohibitions of 

section 209(a) for Califomia '•'• * * 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 ofthe State is arbitrary 

and capricious, (B) [California] does not 

need such * * * standards to meet 

compelling and extraordinary 

conditions, or (C) [its] standards and 

accompanying enforcemcmt procedureare not consistent with section 202(a) of 

[the Act]." 

As previous-decisioas granting -

waivers of federal preemption have 

explained. State standards are 

inconstttent wtth sectfdfi 202(anf there 

ia inadequate lead time to permit the 

development of the necessary 

technology given the cost.of compliance 

within that time period or if the Federal 

v and atata teat proeeduree impoee 

inconsistent certification requirements. 

With regard to enforcement 

proeeduree accompanying etaadarda, I 

.muat grant the requested waiver tm leea 

I find that theea procedures may cause 

tha California atandarda, in the 

aggregate, to be leaa protective of public 

haalth and welfare than the applicable .. T 

Federal standards promulgated pursuant 

to section 202(a). or unless the 

California aad Federal certification taat . 

procedures are inconsistent 

Once Califomia 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 ofthe subject class of 

vehiclea without having to receive a 

further waiver of Federal preemption. 

CARB initially requested that BPA 

find its OBD _f regulationa 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 

Dt agnostics Rule on January 29.1993 

[58 FR 9466 (February 19,1993)]. By 

letter dated June 14,1995, California 

requested that/pursuant to section 

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

FederaJ preemption for its onboard 

diagnostics amendments including the 

December 1994 revisions. These 
P.3 

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 155 / Friday, August 11. 1995 / Notices 41087' 

^1 

m' 

'fP 

i 

v 

amendments, which npply to 1994 and 

later modal year passenger cars, lightduty trucks, and medium-duty vehiclerequire the monitoring of essentially all 

emission control systems, end emission 

related components. In addition, it 

address., deficiencies in the OBD I 

requirements that hava 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 oparation, 

supplementary air system function, the 

exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system 

flow rate, chloroflourocarbon loss (air 

conditioning refrigerant), and 

monitoring of other components and 

cystems controlled by the on-board 

engine control computer. In general the 

Califomia OBD II regulations require 

that a deteriorated component orsystem 

bs detected 'as malfunctioning bythe 

time its lack of performance causes 

, vehicle emissions to axcesd l.S.tjmes 

any of ths standards to which ths 

vohiel® is certified or whoa a 

component is completely nonfunctioning. Therefore, permissible 

emission increases ars a function of tho 

standards to which the vehicle is 

. C-rtified. 

. A numb a? of changss to requirementinitially established undsr OBD I wars 

made to increase ths effectiveness ofthe 

monitoring systems in detecting 

, omission-related malfunctions. Thes® 

requirements include tampering 

deterrence features, as well as, 

improvements to ths malfunction 

detection effectiveness of ths 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 en emission 

standard is exceeded by 1.5 times thQ , 

applicable standard. ' 

In order to facilitate vehicle repairs 

and assist Inspection and Maintenance 

Programs in utilizing the OBD system, 

CARB has rsquired standardized vehicle 

communication systems that interface 

with a relatively low-cost, hond-held. 

universal diagnostic tool. Tho tool will 

bo abb to rood specific diagnostic 

information such as fault codes which 

load service personnel to tho likely area 

of any malfunctions, and will provide 

continuously updated engino parameter 

data that will further help to isolate 

fault codes and ensure proper repairs. 

In response to a Petition from Ford 

Motor Compon-, dated March 29,19.3. 

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 modols or 

engine families introduced prior to 

April 1,19®4. In making this 

determination the Executive Officer 

would consider, among other things, tho 

overall extent to which the OBD 0 

requirements will be met, and whothor 

the manufacturer mad® good-faith 

efforts-to comply with the regulation. 

For 1995 model year vehicles for which 

production begins after March.31,1834, 

per vehicle penalties in increments of 

$25 or $50 jjer vehicle for the third and 

subsequently identified deficiency not 

to exceed $500 per vehicle are possible. 

'On Dsoamber..19-.; CARS 

approved amendments which addressed 

manufacturer concerns with developing 

fully compliant monitoring systems by 

the 19SS model year. Specifically, theco 

amendments give additional co_ap____03 

flejribility for !__nt__3cturors having . -

difficulty creating enhanced diogacolic 

{systems which monitor catalycto u___. im 

low-emission vehicles (LSV) and " 

adejjuoto misfire detection. In addMsai, 

the a__end__o_tto also addfooo 

monitoring rsspirements for ovop_i?__.TO 

system leaks and for the moaitorims of 

diesel and alternate fuel vehiclea. 

In its request letter dated. Juno _ _, 

1S95, Califomia has stated that 

regardless of whether tho EPA views tho 

subject regulation as accoEapanyiEg 

enforcement procedures or nara 

gtagJBardsTfiie requisite Tindinga to' 

support a grant of a waiver of federal 

preemption have been made. That is, ap 

accompanying enforcement procedures, 

the regulations do not endanger the 

protectiveness finding that the AKE has 

mad.'fdr previously granted^_fvQr 

determinations and the regulations are , 

consistent with the intent of section 

202(a) ofthe federal CAA. In ths 

alternative, if the OBD II regulations e__ 

viewed as new emission standards, a 

waiver should be granted bec_u_o tho 

regulations (as amended) are, in the 

aggregate, at least as stringent ao the 

comparable federal OBD regulations, 

California needs its own motor vehicle 

program to meet compelling and 

extraordinary conditions in the state, 

and tho regulations are conoijtomt with 

section 202(a) of the CAA. Section' 

202(a) FcguflF-O that the proc-dupca 

provide sufficient lead time to pennit 

the development and application of 

requisite technology, giving appropriate 

consideration, to the cost of compliance 

within such period. In addition, the 

Agency hao held that to ovoid 

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 

ofthe 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 proOsdusv. 

may cause the California standards, in 

the a^rsgote, to be less protective of 

public health and wolfora than __o . 

applicable Federal stend_K_c 

promulgated pursuant to csctiom 202(a), 

and (B) whether the California and 

Federal certification test procsdu_e_ are 

inconsistent. 

(3) If CARB's regulations aro 

standards, address (A) wheah-? 

Califoraia's detarainafea tlsat tho 

amended standards oro aft la__t as • 

protective of. public health ond wotfc_o 

as applicable Federal standards is 

arbitrary and capricious: (B) whether 

Califomia 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. 

KI. Prcra__._-G_ ffi__ I 

Any person desiring to make en oral 

statement on the record should file ten 

(10) copies of their propecsd testimony 

and other relevant material with the 

Director of EPA's Manufacturer. 

Operations Division at tho Director*. 

address listed above, not later that. . 

October 13,1895. In addition!, that .'' 

peraon should submit 25 oapioo. if 

feasible, of tho planned ctatom.m. to tho 

presiding officer at tho time of the 

Etecauso a public hearing is designed 

lo give interested partieo an opportunity 

to participate in this proceeding, there 

are no adverse parties as such. 
_P_4. 

X- - Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 1995 / Notices 

Statements by participants will not be 

subject to cross-exam ino tion by other 

participants without special approval by 

the presiding officer. Tho presiding 

officer is authorized to strike from the 

record statements which ho or she 

deems irrelevant or repetitious and to 

impose reasonable limits on tho 

duration of the statement of any 

witness. 

If a hearing io held, the Agency will 

make a verbatim record of tho 

proceedings. Interested persons may 

arrange with the reporter at the hearing 

to obtain a copy of the transcript at their 

own expense. 

Regardless of whether a public 

hearing is held, EPA will keep the 

record open until November 17,1995. 

The Administrator will then render her 

decision on CARB's request based on 

the record of the public hearing, if one 

is held, relevant written submissions, 

and other information which is deemed 

ps_t__QBt All information will b_. 

available for public inapsciiom at the 

EPA Air Docket. 

Dated: August 3,1805. 

Ansa E. Gcc__, 

Acting Aaais^ntAdmii-ki-Tatcfffos-Air and 

EadiatioiL 

(FH Das. 95-10.02 Filed 8-10-83; 8:43 am] 

caicco essa c__xr>p 

A<s!k_ .Jcta IPftsgrcss: A_J<_ (Mini 

©QmpMc_j@o Ptoiro fl lasjcjpfcio 

AOCTCSV: Environmental Protection 

AgoEcy(EPA) 

ACTION: Notice of draft nitrogen oxides 

compliance plans and written 

exemptions. 

§_CX3AflY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency is issuing draft 

nitrogen oxides (NOx) compliance plans 

and written exemptions from the Acid 

Rain Program permitting and 

monitoring requirements to a total of 74 

utility units at 30 plants in accordance 

with the Acid Rain Program regulations 

(00 CFR parts 72 and 76). Because the 

Agency does not anticipate receiving 

adverse comments, tfc_5_ NOx 

compliance plans and exemptions are 

also being issued as a direct final action 

in the notice of nitrogen oxides 

compliance plans and written 

exemptions published elsewhere in 

today's Fedora! Kcsicaoir. 

©ATGO: Comments on the NOx 

compliance plans and written 

exemptions proposed by this action 

must be received on or before 

September 11,1995", or within 30 days 

after notice is given in a publication of 

general circulation in tho area where the 

source is located, whichever io later. 

AC_«_0__3: Send comments to tho 

following addresses: 

For plants in Maryland, Pennsylvania, 

and West Virginia: Thomas Maolany, 

Director, Air, Radiation and Toxics 

Division, EPA Region 3, 841 Chestnut 

Building, Philadelphia, PA 19107. 

For plants in Ohio and Wisconsin: 

David Kee, Director, Air and Radiation 

Division, EPA Region 5, Ralph H. 

Metcalfe Federal Bldg., 77 West Jackstm 

Blvd., Chicago, IL 60804. 

Fo. piantain Arkansas, New Mexico, 

and Texas: Samuel Coleman, Director, 

Compliance Assurance and Enforcomcat 

Division, EPA Region 6, First Interstate 

Bank Tower, 1.45 Ross Ave.^eiSN-AA), 

Dallas. TX 75202-2733. 

For plants in Iowa: William A. 

Sjjmtlin, Director, Air and Toxics 

Division, EPA Region 7, 726 Minnesota 

Ave.. Kansas Qty, KS 66101. 

For pleats in Arizona and California: 

Colin Bloomfield, EPA Region 9, Air and 

Toxics Division (A-5-2), 75 Hawthorao 

' "St-SeSr,'&__ Francisco, CA, M103?r'~ 

Submit comments in duplicate and 

identify tho NOx compliance plast c? 

writtsn exemption to which the 

commesto apply, the commentsr'o 

name, address, and telephone number, 

and the commenter's interest in the 

- mattor aad affiliation, if any, to the 

owners and operators of the imit 

covered by the NOx compliance plan <rr 

written exemption. 

F03 PUrnKSQ !MFORC!ATICa _e$3TA_T: For 

plants in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and 

WestVifginw Linda Miller, (215) 597-

7547, EPA Region 3; for plants in 

Wisconsin: Beth Valenziano, (312) 883-

2703, EPA Region 5; for plants in Ohio: 

Franklin Echevarria, (312) 888-9853, 

EPA Region 5; for plants in Arkansas, 

NewM-KJco, an&Texas: Daniel.Meyer, 

(214) 665-7233, EPA Region 6; for 

plants in Iowa: Jon Knodel, (913) 551-

7622, EPA Region 7; for plants in 

Arizona and Califomia: Celia 

Bloomfield, (415) 744-1249, EPA 

Region 9. 

_ype__ra!MTAnv iMFORmTtoa: If no 

significant, adverse comments are 

timely received, no further activity is 

contemplated in relation to these draft 

NOx compliance plans and written 

exemptions, and the NOx compliance 

plans ond written exemptions issued as 

a direct final action in the notice of NOx 

compliance plans and written 

exemptions published elsewhere in 

today's Federal Register will 

automatically become final on the date 

spneified in that notice. If significant, 

adverse comments are timely received 

on any NOx compliance pion or written 

exemption, that NOx compliance plan 

or written exemption in the notice of 

NO« compliance piano and written 

exemptions will be withdrawn and all 

public comment received on that NOx 

compliance plan or written exemption 

will ba addmscod in a subsequent final 

action based on the relevant NOx 

compliance plan or written exemption 

in this notice of draft NOx compliance 

plans and written exemptions. Becauco 

the Agency will not institute a second 

comment period on this notice of draft 

NOx compliance plans and written 

exemptions, any parties interested in 

commenting should do so during this 

comment period. 

For further information,and a detailed 

description ofthe NOx compliance 

plans and written exemptions, see the 

information provided in the notice of 

NO* Compliance plans and written 

exemptions elsewhere in today's 

IFc-oral RGgBotc.. 

Dated: August 7,1993. 

]fe_ejp_.A.K-_g_r, . 

Acting Director, Aeid Rain Division, Office 

• of Atmospheric Programs, Offica of Air aad 

Radiation. 

(PR Dae. es-iecm) Filed 0-10--5; 8:45 am] 

cauxa essa exe-ce-p . 

KPK_=_2PiK. •'. ' . 

A<_!!_ .fcto Pm®?cm: Aefc_ Kcta 

.©®_^_Cnl©3 tPlaOO 0 .__K_SS[p>1-©ln!0 

M_K§V: Environmaatal Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

A_Yt_a° Notice of nitrogen oxides 

compliance plans and written 

exemptions. 

S__r_flfiV: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency is issuing, as a direct 

final action, nitrogen oxides (NOx) 

compliance plans and written 

exemptions from the Acid Rain Program 

permitting and monitoring requirements 

to a total of 74 utility units at 30 plants 

- in accordance with the Acid Rain 

Program regulations (40 CFR parts 72 

and 76). Because the Agency does not 

anticipate receiving adverse comments, 

these compliance plans and exemptions 

are being issued as a direct»final action. 

DATES: Each NOx compUance plan and 

written exemption issued in this direct 

final action, will be final on September 

21,1995. or 40 days after notice is also 

given in a publication of general 

circulation in the area where the sourco 

is located, whichever is later, unleoa 

significant, adverse comments aiQ 

received by September 11,1995, or 30 

days after the aforementioned local 

notice is published, whichever is later. 

If significant, adverse comments are 

timely received on any NO« compliance 

plan or on any exemption in this direct