Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 2006 / Notices 29621 

determine progress each NEP is making 

in implementing its CCMP and 

achieving environmental results. In 

addition to evaluating progress, the 

results are used to identify areas of 

weakness each NEP should address for 

long-term success in protecting and 

restoring their estuaries. EPA will also 

compile successful tools and 

approaches as well as lessons learned 

from all implementation reviews to 

transfer to the NEPs and other 

watershed programs. For this ICR cycle, 

implementation reviews will be 

required for seven programs in FY2006, 

12 programs in FY2007, and nine 

programs in 2008. 

Government Performance Results Act 

EPA requests that each of the 28 NEPs 

receiving section 320 funds report 

information that can be used in the 

GPRA reporting process. This reporting 

is done on an annual basis and is used 

to show environmental results that are 

being achieved within the overall NEP 

Program. This information is ultimately 

submitted to Congress along with GPRA 

information from other EPA programs. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection of information is 

estimated to average 218 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 which have subsequently 

changed; 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. 

The ICR provides a detailed 

explanation of the Agency’s estimate, 

which is only briefly summarized here: 

Estimated total number of potential 

respondents: 28. 

Frequency of response: Annual. 

Estimated total average number of 

responses for each respondent: 2. 

Estimated total annual burden hours: 

6,113. 

Estimated total annual costs: 

$409,349. 

Are There Changes in the Estimates 

From the Last Approval? 

There are no changes in burden from 

the last approval. 

What is the Next Step in the Process for 

This ICR? 

EPA will consider the comments 

received and amend the ICR as 

appropriate. The final ICR package will 

then be submitted to OMB for review 

and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 

1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue 

another Federal Register Notice 

pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to 

announce the submission of the ICR to 

OMB and the opportunity to submit 

additional comments to OMB. If you 

have any questions about this ICR or the 

approval process, please contact the 

technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Dated: May 17, 2006. 

Diane C. Regas, 

Director, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and 

Watersheds. 

[FR Doc. E6–7829 Filed 5–22–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[AMS–FRL–8173–3] 

California State Nonroad Engine and 

Vehicle Pollution Control Standards; 

Authorization of Large Off-Road SparkIgnition Engine Standards, Notice of 

Decision 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of decision for 

authorization of Large Off-Road SparkIgnition Engine Standards. 

SUMMARY: EPA today, pursuant to 

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

42 U.S.C. 7543(b), is authorizing 

California to enforce its regulations 

setting emission standards and other 

requirements for large off-road sparkignition engines. 

ADDRESSES: The Agency’s Decision 

Document, containing an explanation of 

the Assistant Administrator’s decision, 

as well as all documents relied upon in 

making that decision, including those 

submitted to EPA by CARB, are 

available for public inspection in EPA 

Air Docket OATR–2004–0404 at the 

following address: EPA Docket Center 

(EPA/DC), Public Reading Room, Room 

B102, EPA West Building, 1301 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC. The EPA Docket Center Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, 

except on government holidays. The Air 

Docket telephone number is (202) 566–

1744, and the facsimile number is (202) 

566–1741. You may be charged a 

reasonable fee for photocopying docket 

materials, as provided in 40 CFR part 2. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert M. Doyle, Attorney-Advisor, 

Office of Transportation and Air 

Quality, (6403J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Washington, D.C. 20460 

(U.S. mail), 501 3rd Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20005 (courier mail). 

Telephone: (202) 343–9258, Fax: (202) 

343–2804, E-Mail: doyle.robert@epe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Electronic Copies of 

Documents 

EPA makes available an electronic 

copy of this Notice on the Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) 

homepage (http://www.epa.gov/OTAQ). 

Users can find this document by 

accessing the OTAQ homepage and 

looking at the path entitled ‘‘Federal 

Register Notices.’’ (This service is free of 

charge, except any cost you already 

incur for Internet connectivity. Users 

can also get the official Federal Register 

version of the Notice on the day of 

publication on the primary Web site: 

(http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPAAIR/) Please note that due to differences 

between the software used to develop 

the documents and the software into 

which the documents may be 

downloaded, changes in format, page 

length, etc., may occur. 

Additionally, an electronic version of 

the public docket is available through 

the Federal government’s electronic 

public docket and comment system. 

You may access EPA dockets at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. After opening the 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site, 

select ‘‘Environmental Protection 

Agency’’ from the pull-down Agency 

list, then scroll to Docket ID EPA–HQ–

OAR–2004–0404 to view documents in 

the record of the large offroad spark 

ignition engine authorization request. 

Although a part of the official docket, 

the public docket does not include 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

II. Background 

(A) Nonroad Authorizations 

Section 209(e)(1) of the Act addresses 

the permanent preemption of any State, 

or political subdivision thereof, from 

adopting or attempting to enforce any 

standard or other requirement relating 

to the control of emissions for certain 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
29622 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 2006 / Notices 

1Section 209(e)(1) of the Act provides: 

No State or any political subdivision thereof shall 

adopt or attempt to enforce any standard or other 

requirement relating to the control of emissions 

from either of the following new nonroad engines 

or nonroad vehicles subject to regulation under this 

Act—

(A) New engines which are used in construction 

equipment or vehicles or used in farm equipment 

or vehicles and which are smaller than 175 

horsepower. 

(B) New locomotives or new engines used in 

locomotives. Subsection (b) shall not apply for 

purposes of this paragraph. 

2See 59 FR 36969 (July 20, 1994), and regulations 

set forth therein, 40 CFR part 85, subpart Q, 

§§ 85.1601–85.1606. 

3As discussed above, states are permanently 

preempted from adopting or enforcing standards 

relating to the control of emissions from new 

engines listed in section 209(e)(1). 

4See 40 CFR part 85, subpart Q, § 85.1605. 

5See 59 FR 36969, 36983 (July 20, 1994). 

6Section 209(e)(1) of the Act has been 

implemented, See 40 CFR part 85, subpart Q, 

§§ 85.1602, 85.1603. 

§ 85.1603 provides in applicable part: 

(a) For equipment that is used in applications in 

addition to farming or construction activities, if the 

equipment is primarily used as farm and/or 

construction equipment or vehicles, as defined in 

this subpart, it is considered farm or construction 

equipment or vehicles. (b) States are preempted 

from adopting or enforcing standards or other 

requirements relating to the control of emissions 

from new engines smaller than 175 horsepower, 

that are primarily used in farm or construction 

equipment or vehicles, as defined in this subpart. 

§ 85.1602 provides definitions of terms used in 

§ 85.1603 and states in applicable part: 

Construction equipment or vehicle means any 

internal combustion engine-powered machine 

primarily used in construction and located on 

commercial construction sites. 

Farm Equipment or Vehicle means any internal 

combustion engine-powered machine primarily 

used in the commercial production and/or 

commercial harvesting of food, fiber, wood, or 

commercial organic products or for the processing 

of such products for further use on the farm 

primarily used means used 51 percent or more. 

7To be consistent, the California certification 

procedures need not be identical to the Federal 

certification procedures. California procedures 

would be inconsistent, however, if manufacturers 

would be unable to meet both the state and the 

Federal requirement with the same test vehicle in 

the course of the same test. See, e.g., 43 FR 32182 

(July 25, 1978). 

8See, e.g., Motor and Equipment Manufacturers 

Association, Inc. v. EPA, 627 F.2d 1095, 1111–14 

(DC Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 952 (1980) 

(MEMA I); 43 FR 25729 (June 14, 1978). 

While inconsistency with section 202(a) includes 

technological feasibility, lead time, and cost, these 

aspects are typically relevant only with regard to 

standards. The aspect of consistency with 202(a) 

which is of primary applicability to enforcement 

procedures (especially test procedures) is test 

procedure consistency. 

9See 43 FR 36679, 36680 (August 18, 1978). 

10 Decision Document for California Nonroad 

Engine Regulations Amendments, Dockets A–2000–

05 to 08, entry V–B, p. 28. 

new nonroad engines or vehicles.1

Section 209(e)(2) of the Act allows the 

Administrator to grant California 

authorization to enforce state standards 

for new nonroad engines or vehicles 

which are not listed under section 

209(e)(1), subject to certain restrictions. 

On July 20, 1994, EPA promulgated a 

regulation that sets forth, among other 

things, the criteria, as found in section 

209(e)(2), by which EPA must consider 

any California authorization requests for 

new nonroad engines or vehicle 

emission standards (section 209(e) 

rules).2

Section 209(e)(2) requires the 

Administrator, after notice and 

opportunity for public hearing, to 

authorize California to enforce 

standards and other requirements 

relating to emissions control of new 

engines not listed under section 

209(e)(1).3 The section 209(e) rule and 

its codified regulations4 formally set 

forth the criteria, located in section 

209(e)(2) of the Act, by which EPA must 

grant California authorization to enforce 

its new nonroad emission standards: 

40 CFR part 85, subpart Q, § 85.1605 

provides: 

(a) The Administrator shall grant the 

authorization if California determines that its 

standards will be, in the aggregate, at least as 

protective of public health and welfare as 

applicable Federal standards. 

(b) The authorization shall not be granted 

if the Administrator finds that: 

(1) The determination of California is 

arbitrary and capricious; 

(2) California does not need such California 

standards to meet compelling and 

extraordinary conditions; or 

(3) California standards and accompanying 

enforcement procedures are not consistent 

with section 209. 

As stated in the preamble to the 

section 209(e) rule, EPA has interpreted 

the requirement that EPA cannot find 

‘‘California standards and 

accompanying enforcement procedures 

are not consistent with section 209’’ to 

mean that California standards and 

accompanying enforcement procedures 

must be consistent with section 209(a), 

section 209(e)(1), and section 

209(b)(1)(C), as EPA has interpreted that 

subsection in the context of motor 

vehicle waivers.5 In order to be 

consistent with section 209(a), 

California’s nonroad standards and 

enforcement procedures must not apply 

to new motor vehicles or new motor 

vehicle engines. Secondly, California’s 

nonroad standards and enforcement 

procedures must be consistent with 

section 209(e)(1), which identifies the 

categories permanently preempted from 

state regulation.6 California’s nonroad 

standards and enforcement procedures 

would be considered inconsistent with 

section 209 if they applied to the 

categories of engines or vehicles 

identified and preempted from State 

regulation in section 209(e)(1). 

Finally, because California’s nonroad 

standards and enforcement procedures 

must be consistent with section 

209(b)(1)(C), EPA will review nonroad 

authorization requests under the same 

‘‘consistency’’ criteria that are applied 

to motor vehicle waiver requests. Under 

section 209(b)(1)(C), the Administrator 

shall not grant California a motor 

vehicle waiver if she finds that 

California ‘‘standards and 

accompanying enforcement procedures 

are not consistent with section 202(a)’’

of the Act. Previous decisions granting 

waivers of Federal preemption for motor 

vehicles have stated that State standards 

are inconsistent with section 202(a) if 

there is inadequate lead time to permit 

the development of the necessary 

technology giving appropriate 

consideration to the cost of compliance 

within that time period or if the Federal 

and State test procedures impose 

inconsistent certification requirements.7

With regard to enforcement 

procedures accompanying standards, 

EPA must grant the requested 

authorization unless it finds that these 

procedures may cause the California 

standards, in the aggregate, to be less 

protective of public health and welfare 

than the applicable Federal standards 

promulgated pursuant to section 213(a), 

or unless the Federal and California 

certification test procedures are 

inconsistent.8

Once California has received an 

authorization for its standards and 

enforcement procedures for a certain 

group or class of nonroad equipment 

engines or vehicles, it may adopt other 

conditions precedent to the initial retail 

sale, titling or registration of these 

engines or vehicles without the 

necessity of receiving an additional 

authorization.9

If California acts to amend a 

previously authorized standard or 

accompanying enforcement procedure, 

the amendment may be considered 

within the scope of a previously granted 

authorization provided that it does not 

undermine California’s determination 

that its standards in the aggregate are as 

protective of public health and welfare 

as applicable Federal standards, does 

not affect the consistency with section 

209 of the Act, and raises no new issues 

affecting EPA’s previous authorization 

determination.10

(B) The Off-Road Large Spark Ignition 

Engines Regulations Request 

By letter dated February 15, 2000, 

CARB requested EPA authorization to 

enforce California’s Off-Road Large 

Spark Ignition Engine (LSI) 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 2006 / Notices 29623 

11These engines are often derived from 

automobile engines, although they have less 

sophisticated fuel and emission control systems, 

and are fueled usually by either gasoline or 

liquified petroleum gas (LPG). Typical applications 

for these LSI engines are forklifts, portable 

generators, large turf care equipment, irrigation 

pumps, welders, air compressors, scrubber/ 

sweepers, and airport service vehicles. CARB Initial 

Staff Report, Docket Entry OAR–2004–0404–0008, 

p1. 

12 70 FR 2151 (January 12, 2005). 

regulations.11 The CARB regulations set 

emission standards for these engines 

commencing with model year 2001 for 

certification and with model year 2004 

for in-use compliance. There are two 

sets of standards depending on the size 

of the engine; one set for LSI engines 

less than or equal to 1.0 liters 

displacement, and the other for LSI 

engines greater than 1.0 liters 

displacement. For the smaller LSI 

engines, CARB set standards for HC plus 

Nox and for CO at static levels for model 

year 2002 and beyond, and 100% of a 

manufacturer’s sales must meet the 

standards each year. For the larger LSI 

engines, CARB approved two tiers of 

emission levels. For Tier 1, 

manufacturers are able to phase-in 

compliance at certification with 25% of 

the sales for 2001, 50% for 2003, and 

75% for 2003, and manufacturers have 

no in-use compliance requirement. For 

Tier 2, beginning with the 2004 model 

year, manufacturers have to meet the 

standards at certification with 100% of 

sales, and are subject to in-use 

compliance with a less stringent 

standards for model years 2004 through 

2006 (with an engine durability period 

of 3500 hours or 5 years) and full in-use 

standards for model years 2007 and 

beyond (with a durability period of 5000 

hours or 7 years). 

To accompany the new standards, 

CARB also adopted regulations 

requiring manufacturer production line 

testing (along with CARB authority to 

conduct Selective Enforcement Audits), 

manufacturer required in-use testing, an 

in-use emission credit program, 

permanent emission labels, and 

emission warranties. CARB also adopted 

provisions to provide relief to small 

volume manufacturers (annual 

production under 2000 engines) 

basically by delaying the time when 

they must comply with in-use standards 

until 2004. 

EPA offered the opportunity for a 

public hearing, and requested public 

comments, on the CARB authorization 

request, as the Act requires us to do, by 

publication of a Federal Register notice 

to such effect on January 12, 2005.12

There was no request for a public 

hearing, nor were any comments 

received on the CARB authorization 

request. Therefore, EPA has made this 

determination based on the information 

submitted by CARB in its request. 

(C) Authorization Decision 

EPA has decided to grant California 

authorization to enforce its regulations 

setting emission standards and other 

requirements for large off-road sparkignition engines. In its request letter, 

CARB stated that these LSI regulations 

will not cause the California nonroad 

standards, in the aggregate, to be less 

protective of public health and welfare 

than the applicable Federal standards. 

CARB also stated that California’s need 

for the emission reductions expected 

from the LSI regulations remains 

compelling. Finally, regarding 

consistency with section 209, CARB 

stated that the LSI regulations (1) apply 

only to nonroad engines and vehicles 

and not to motor vehicles or engines, (2) 

apply only to those nonroad engines 

and vehicles which are not included in 

the preempted categories, and (3) do not 

raise any concerns of inadequate 

leadtime or technological feasibility or 

impose any certification requirements 

inconsistent with Federal requirements. 

EPA agrees with all CARB findings 

with regard to the provisions listed. 

Additionally, no information was 

presented to EPA by any party which 

would demonstrate that California did 

not meet the burden of satisfying the 

statutory criteria of section 209(e). For 

these reasons, EPA authorizes California 

to enforce these LSI regulations. 

My decision will affect not only 

persons in California but also the 

manufacturers outside the State who 

must comply with California’s 

requirements in order to produce 

nonroad engines and vehicles for sale in 

California. For this reason, I hereby 

determine and find that this is a final 

action of national applicability. 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, 

judicial review of this final action may 

be sought only in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit. Petitions for review 

must be filed by July 24, 2006. Under 

section 307(b)(2) of the Act, judicial 

review of this final action may not be 

obtained in subsequent enforcement 

proceedings. 

As with past authorization decisions, 

this action is not a rule as defined by 

Executive Order 12866. Therefore, it is 

exempt from review by the Office of 

Management and Budget as required for 

rules and regulations by Executive 

Order 12866. 

In addition, this action is not a rule 

as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(2). Therefore, EPA has 

not prepared a supporting regulatory 

flexibility analysis addressing the 

impact of this action on small business 

entities. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, does not apply 

because this action is not a rule, for 

purposes of 5 U.S.C. 804(3). 

Finally, the Administrator has 

delegated the authority to make 

determinations regarding authorizations 

under section 209(e) of the Act to the 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation. 

Dated: May 15, 2006. 

William L. Wehrum, 

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation. 

[FR Doc. E6–7834 Filed 5–22–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–8173–5; Docket I.D. No. EPA–HQ–

ORD–0116] 

Harmonization in Interspecies 

Extrapolation: Use of BW3/4 as Default 

Method in Derivation of the Oral RfD 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of Peer-Review 

Teleconference with opportunity for 

public comment. 

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing that 

Versar, Inc., an EPA contractor for 

external scientific peer review, plans to 

convene an independent panel of 

experts and organize and conduct an 

external peer review meeting to review 

the draft document titled, 

‘‘Harmonization in Interspecies 

Extrapolation: Use of BW3/4 as Default 

Method in Derivation of the Oral RfD’’

(EPA/630/R–06/001). The peer review 

meeting is planned to take place by 

teleconference. On Februrary 15, 2006, 

EPA announced a 60-day public 

comment period for the draft document 

(71 FR 7958). The draft document was 

prepared by the Agency’s Risk 

Assessment Forum. 

The public comment period and the 

external peer review are separate 

processes that provide opportunities for 

all interested parties to comment on the 

document. In addition to considering 

public comments submitted in 

accordance with the February 15, 2006, 

announcement of a public comment 

period, EPA intends to forward those 

comments to Versar, Inc. for the external 

peer review panel prior to the 

teleconference. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES