[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 50 (Thursday, March 13, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13518-13523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 08-1017]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 86

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0072; FRL-8539-4
RIN 2060-069


In-Use Testing for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles; 
Emission Measurement Accuracy Margins for Portable Emission Measurement 
Systems and Program Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In a rule published on June 14, 2005, EPA established a 
manufacturer-run, in-use testing program for heavy-duty diesel 
vehicles. The program requires engine manufacturers to measure exhaust 
emissions from their diesel engines using portable emissions 
measurement systems during real-world operation. At the time the rule 
was promulgated, EPA established interim emission measurement 
``accuracy'' margins for the requisite portable emission measurement 
devices pending the development of final accuracy margins through a 
comprehensive research program. This notice proposes to adopt the 
resulting final accuracy margins for gaseous pollutants. Also, this 
rule proposes to make several changes to the program in the early years 
of in-use testing. First, we are proposing to eliminate the first 
calendar year, i.e., 2006, of the two-year pilot program for 
particulate emissions (PM) in response to engine manufacturers' 
concerns, which primarily relate to the availability and efficacy of 
the requisite portable measurement systems (PEMS) for that pollutant. 
Second, due to a delay in developing the final accuracy margin for PM 
under the aforementioned comprehensive research program, we are 
proposing to delay the first year of the fully enforceable PM test 
program from the 2008 calendar year to the 2009 calendar year. During 
the 2008 calendar year, there will be another year of pilot program 
testing for that pollutant. Third, and finally, we are proposing to 
extend the normal period for reporting in-use test results and allowing 
certain short-term changes in how vehicles are recruited and tested. 
These proposed revisions are primarily intended to address delays in 
initiating the gaseous emission and PM pilot programs, manufacturers' 
concerns regarding the schedule for initial purchases of PM measurement 
systems, and manufacturers' concerns regarding potential difficulties 
of initially instrumenting vehicles with these units.

DATES: Written comments must be received by April 14, 2008. Request for 
a public hearing must be received by March 28, 2008. If we receive a 
request for a public hearing, we will publish information related to 
the timing and location of the hearing and the timing of a new deadline 
for public comments.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2004-0072, by one of the following methods:
    <bullet> www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    <bullet> E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8deca0ece3e9a0ffa0e9e2eee6e8f9cde8fdeca3eae2fb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c1a0eca0afa5ecb3eca5aea2aaa4b581a4b1a0efa6aeb7">[email protected]</span></a>.
    <bullet> Fax: (202) 566-9744.
    <bullet> Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 2822T, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include two 
copies.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 
Headquarters Library, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., 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-
2004-0072. 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 information 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 e-mail 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 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/oar/dockets.html.
    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 
West Building, EPA Headquarters Library, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, N.W., 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: Richard Wilcox, Assessment and 
Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, 2000 
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-
4390; fax number: (734) 214-4939; e-mail address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#52253b3e313d2a7c203b313a123722337c353d24"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c3b4aaafa0acbbedb1aaa0ab83a6b3a2eda4acb5">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register, 
we are making these revisions as a direct final rule without prior 
proposal because we view these revisions as noncontroversial and 
anticipate no adverse comment.
    We have explained our reasons for these revisions in the preamble 
to the direct final rule. If we receive no adverse comment, we will not 
take further action on this proposed rule. If we receive adverse 
comment on the rule, we will withdraw the direct final rule. We will 
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on this 
proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on

[[Page 13519]]

this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this 
time.

 II. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    This action will affect companies that manufacture and certify 
heavy-duty diesel engines and vehicles for use on the highway.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Category                     NAICS Code \a\      Examples of potentially affected entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.....................................            336112  Engine and Truck Manufacturers.
                                                         336120
Industry.....................................            811112  Independent commercial importers of vehicles
                                                                  and parts.
                                                          81198
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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:
    <bullet> Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
    <bullet> Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
    <bullet> If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    <bullet> Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    <bullet> Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
    <bullet> Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

IV. Summary of Rule

    The manufacturer-run, in-use testing program for heavy-duty diesel 
vehicles that are used on the highway was promulgated in 2005 to 
monitor the emissions performance of the engines used in those vehicles 
when operated under a wide range of real world driving conditions\1\ 
The program is specifically intended to monitor compliance with the 
applicable Not-to-Exceed (NTE) exhaust emission standards for non-
methane hydrocarbons (NMHC), oxides of nitrogen (NO<INF>X</INF>), 
carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM). It requires each 
manufacturer of heavy-duty highway diesel engines to assess the in-use 
exhaust emissions from their engines using onboard, portable emission 
measurement systems during typical operation while on the road.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From New Motor 
Vehicles: In-Use Testing for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines and Vehicles, 
70 FR 34594 (June 14, 2005).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Gaseous Emission Measurement Margins for Manufacturer-Run, In-Use 
Testing

    For the purposes of the in-use testing program, it was necessary to 
establish emission measurement ``accuracy'' margins for the portable 
emission measurement system.\2\ They are primarily designed to account 
for any differences between the accuracy of the onboard, portable 
emission measurement instruments and the accuracy of the instruments 
used during laboratory testing in the emissions certification process. 
When the in-use testing program was first established in 2005, there 
was uncertainty regarding what specific accuracy margins should be used 
in the in-use testing program, since the portable measurement systems 
had not been rigorously tested at that time. As a result, we 
promulgated interim accuracy allowances for use in the pilot programs 
for gaseous pollutants and PM.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The emission measurement accuracy margin added to the value 
of the applicable NTE standard and any in-use compliance testing 
margin that is already allowed by the regulations to determine the 
numerical compliance limit, i.e., NTE threshold, which is used in 
the in-use testing program.
    \3\ The in-use testing requirements consist of a two-year pilot 
program for gaseous emissions (i.e., NMHC, No<INF>X</INF>, and CO) 
in calendar years 2005 and 2006, and calendar years 2006 and 2007 
for PM emissions. This NPRM proposes to change the years of the PM 
pilot program to calendar years 2007 and 2008. The programs are 
fully enforceable after their respective pilot program ends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Shortly before the in-use test program was promulgated, EPA entered 
into an memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the California Air Resources 
Board (CARB) and the manufacturers of heavy-duty highway diesel engines 
(through the Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA)) to develop ``data 
driven'' emission measurement allowances through a comprehensive 
research, development, and demonstration program for the enforceable 
programs, i.e., beginning in the 2007 calendar year for gaseous 
emissions and the 2008 calendar year for PM. The overall test program 
was designed to be completed in two phases. The first phase addressed 
gaseous emission accuracy margins and the second phase addressed PM 
emission accuracy margins. All parties agreed to support the final 
accuracy margins assuming that the agreed upon test program was 
followed and the results incorporated into a direct final rulemaking, 
or a subsequent final rulemaking (preceded by proposed rulemaking) if 
adverse comment was received on the direct final rule.
    The cooperative test program and additional follow-on development 
work for gaseous emissions have now been completed, and a resultant set 
of final emission measurement accuracy margins has been identified for 
use in the fully enforceable program that begins in 2007. The gaseous 
emission measurements accuracy margins vary based on the model year of 
the engine and the emission calculation methodology that is used to 
determine the final grams/brake horsepower-hour

[[Page 13520]]

emission. The proposed values are shown in Table 1.

    Table 1.--Final Measurement Accuracy Margins for the Enforceable Gaseous Emissions In-Use Testing Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Accuracy margins (g/bhp-hr)
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                           2007-2009 model year engines         2010 and later
                      Pollutant                      ---------------------------------------- model year engines
                                                                                             -------------------
                                                         Method 1 only      Methods 2 and 3       All methods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 NMHC...............................................               0.02                0.01                0.01
CO..................................................                0.5                0.25                0.25
NOX.................................................               0.45                0.15                0.15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. NMHC NOx In-Use Testing Accuracy Margins

    The June 2005 final rule that implemented the in-use testing 
program addressed accuracy margins for each of the gaseous pollutants 
and their associated individual standards, i.e., NMHC, NA<INF>X</INF>, 
and CO. The MOA and subsequent gaseous emissions test program also 
focused on identifying the final accuracy margins for these individual 
pollutants. In developing the original rule and subsequent test 
program, however, we failed to recognize that 2004 through 2006 model 
year engine families are actually certified to a combined 
NO<INF>X</INF> plus NMHC standard under Sec.  86.004-11(a)(l) of the 
applicable regulations. Furthermore, under the ``phase-in options'' of 
Sec.  86.007-11(g)(l) an engine manufacturer may optionally certify 
some of its production in model years 2007 through 2009 to the combined 
NO<INF>X</INF> plus NMHC standard for 2006 model year engines under 
Sec.  86.2004-11, rather than the otherwise applicable individual 
NO<INF>X</INF> and NMHC standards. Therefore, we are correcting this 
oversight by proposing in-use testing accuracy margins for the combined 
NO<INF>X</INF> plus NMHC standard.
     The methodology for determining an accuracy margin for the 
combined NO<INF>X</INF> plus NMHC emission standard is the same as that 
used to determine the numerical value of the combined standard itself. 
Specifically, the individual NO<INF>X</INF> and NMHC accuracy margins 
are simply added together to provide a single value. Therefore, for 
2004-2007 model year engines that may be tested under the gaseous 
emission pilot program for the 2006 and 2007 calendar years, we propose 
that the combined accuracy margin is the sum of the individual 
NO<INF>X</INF> and NMHC values already contained in Sec.  86.1912, or 
0.67 g/bhp-hr. For engines tested in the enforceable program that 
begins in the 2007 calendar year and applies to 2007 and later model 
year diesel engines, the combined NO<INF>X</INF> plus NMHC accuracy 
margins, using the individual values from Table 1, are shown in Table 
2.

 Table 2.--Final Combined NOX Plus NMHC Measurement Accuracy Margins for
        the Enforceable Gaseous Emissions In-Use Testing Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Accuracy margins 2007-2009 model year
                                            engines (g/bhp-hr)
            Pollutant            ---------------------------------------
                                     Method 1 only      Methods 2 and 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX + NMHC......................               0.47                0.16
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Delaying the Enforceable PM Program From 2008 to 2009

     The MOA described in section IV.A. acknowledged that in order to 
promulgate new measurement accuracy margins with adequate lead time to 
begin the 2008 enforceable PM I program, certain key milestone dates in 
the test program had to be achieved. Contingencies for missing the 
final delivery date were specified in the MOA and in the June 2005 
final rulemaking.\4\ Most relevant to today's proposal was that if the 
final values and documentation were delayed more than three months from 
November 1, 2007 then the PM pilot program would continue for calendar 
year 2008 in place of the fully enforceable program for that year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 40 CFR 86.1935.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Completing the PM test program on schedule required that the 
initial work be conducted in parallel with the ongoing gaseous emission 
test program Using the same contractors and personnel from EPA, CARB, 
and the engine manufacturers. Due to unexpected issues in the gaseous 
emission test program and the lack of other resources, all work on the 
PM test plan and subsequent test program had to be postponed until 
recently. The end result of this postponement is that the final 
accuracy margin for PM will be delayed by approximately one year. 
Accordingly, the MOA and in-use test program regulations require that 
the first year of the previously adopted enforceable program (calendar 
year 2008) be placed into abeyance and the PM pilot program continued 
for that year. Hence, we are proposing to modify the in-use testing 
regulations so that the PM pilot program extends into 2008 and the 
fully enforceable PM program begins in 2009.

D. Suspending the 2006 PM Pilot Program

     The in-use testing program, as originally adopted in June 2005, 
included a two-year pilot (i.e., demonstration) program for PM 
emissions in calendar years 2006 and 2007. In establishing this 
requirement,

[[Page 13521]]

EPA noted that the onboard measurement of PM emissions was 
significantly more challenging than for gaseous emissions, and that 
further development of the requisite portable measurement systems would 
be needed. We also noted our expectation that engine manufacturers 
would use ``best available'' prototype systems that were capable of 
measuring PM emissions as required. Nonetheless, in recognition of the 
then remaining technical uncertainties, we added a provision to the 
regulations that would suspend the in-use test program as it applied to 
PM measurement if we discovered fundamental technical problems with 
portable in-use PM measurement systems that could not be resolvable in 
a reasonable time.
     In a letter dated January 4, 2007, EMA requested that the first 
year of the two-year PM pilot program be held in abeyance. The 
principle reasons cited were associated with certain technical concerns 
primarily relating to the availability and efficacy of the requisite 
portable measurement systems for that pollutant. In a subsequent letter 
dated April 11, 2007, EMA more specifically detailed its concerns with 
currently available portable PM measurement systems. The trade group 
also argued that it would be better to take the time now to develop 
better portable PM measurement devices in order to ensure a successful 
launch of the fully enforceable program in 2009. Finally, EMA noted 
that even with the suspension of the 2006 PM pilot program, there would 
still be a full two years of the PM pilot as originally called for in 
the regulations.
     After carefully considering EMA's concerns, we agree that it is 
better to eliminate the 2006 calendar year PM pilot program in order to 
focus our collective efforts on improving the current portable PM 
measurement systems and conducting the cooperative research and 
deve1opment program for this pollutant. Therefore, we are proposing 
such a delay.

 E. Revised Schedules and Testing Flexibilities the for the 2005 
Through 2009 In-Use Test Programs

    The June 2005 final rule that established the heavy-duty in-use 
test program stated that EPA would typically select engine families for 
testing in June of each calendar year. Further, the regulations allowed 
18 months from the time engine families were designated for engine 
manufacturers to complete all testing and report the results to EPA. 
Subsequent to the final rule, we concluded that certain adjustments to 
the test schedules were necessary in the early years of the program to 
address: (1) Delays in initiating certain aspects of the program, (2) 
manufacturers' concerns regarding the schedule for initial purchases of 
PM measurement systems, and (3) manufacturers' concerns instrumenting 
test vehicles for PM emission testing in the early years of the 
program. Our proposed adjustments for engine family designation and 
reporting dates are summarized in Table 3, which also reflect the other 
proposed programmatic revisions discussed previously.

                       Table 3.--Revised Engine Family Designation and Reporting Schedules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Designate families                         Report due
              Program              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Original            Revised            Original            Revised
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 Gaseous Pilot................         06/2005  Unchanged............         11/2006  11/2007.
2006 Gaseous Pilot................         06/2006  12/2006..............         11/2007  11/2008.
2007 Gaseous Enforceable..........         06/2007  12/2007..............         11/2008  11/2009.
2007 PM Pilot.....................         06/2007  12/2007..............         11/2008  05/2010.
2008 Gaseous Enforceable..........         06/2008  09/2008..............         11/2009  03/2010.
2008 PM Pilot.....................         06/2008  09/2008..............         11/2009  09/2010.
2009 Gaseous Enforceable..........         06/2009  Unchanged............         11/2010  04/2011.
2009 PM Enforceable...............         06/2009  Unchanged............         11/2010  04/2011.
2010 Gaseous Enforceable..........         06/2010  Unchanged............         11/2011  Unchanged.
2010 PM Enforceable...............         06/2010  Unchanged............         11/2011  Unchanged.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For illustration only. The 2010 program dates are as originally promulgated.

 EF. Removing the Gaseous Accuracy Test Program from the Regulations

    We are proposing to delete the references in Sec.  86.1935 that 
pertain to the final report for gaseous emission accuracy margins and 
the consequences that would ensue if the report was delayed beyond 
certain dates. These provisions are no longer needed because final 
accuracy margins for gaseous pollutants are being proposed in this 
rulemaking. The proposed revised section, therefore, would 
appropriately focus on the ongoing development of accuracy margins for 
PM emissions.
    For additional discussion of the proposed rule changes, see the 
direct final rule EPA has published in the ``Rules and Regulations'' 
section of today's Federal Register. This proposal incorporates by 
reference all the reasoning, explanation, and regulatory text from the 
direct final rule.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
the terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) 
and is therefore not subject to review under the EO. This proposed rule 
merely replaces the interim gaseous emission measurement accuracy 
allowances for portable emission measurement systems with final values 
and delays the in-use testing implementation dates for the fully 
enforceable PM test program as either envisioned or allowed for in the 
original final rule. This proposal also grants a request from the 
affected engine manufacturers for a one year delay in the start of the 
pilot testing program for PM. Further, here are no costs associated 
with this rule beyond those envisioned in the original rule.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule does not include any new collection 
requirements, as it acts to replace interim gaseous emission 
measurement accuracy allowances for portable emission measurement 
systems with final values and delays the implementation schedule for 
the in-use PM testing program. There are no new paperwork requirements 
associated with this rule.

[[Page 13522]]

    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

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that, 
the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed 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-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
     After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, I certify 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 rule on small entities.'' 5 USC 603 and 604. 
Thus, an agency may certify 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 proposed rule acts to replace interim gaseous emission 
measurement accuracy allowances for portable emission measurement 
systems with final values and delays the implementation schedule for 
the in-use PM testing program. We have, therefore, concluded that 
today's proposal 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

    This proposed rule contains no federal mandates for state, local, 
or tribal governments as defined by the provisions of Title II of the 
UMRA. The proposed rule imposes no enforceable duties on any of these 
governmental entities. Nothing in the proposed rule would significantly 
or uniquely affect small governments. EPA has determined that this 
proposed rule contains no federal mandates that may result in 
expenditures of more than $100 million to the private sector in any 
single year. This proposed rule acts to replace interim gaseous 
emission measurement accuracy allowances for portable emission 
measurement systems with final values and delays the implementation 
schedule for the in-use PM testing program. See the direct final rule 
EPA has published in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of today 
Federal Register for a more extensive discussion of UMRA policy,

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This proposed 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 proposed rule merely 
replaces interim measurement accuracy allowances for portable emission 
measurement systems with final values as envisioned in the original 
rule. See the direct final rule EP A has published in the ``Rules and 
Regulations'' section of today's Federal Register for a more extensive 
discussion of Executive Order 13132.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This proposed 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 proposed 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 
proposed rule merely replaces interim gaseous emission measurement 
accuracy allowances for portable emission measurement systems with 
final values and delays the implementation schedule for the in-use PM 
testing program. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this 
rule. See the direct final rule EPA has published in the ``Rules and 
Regulations'' section of today's Federal Register for a more extensive 
discussion of Executive Order 13132.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    This proposed rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it 
is not economically significant, and does not involve decisions on 
environmental health or safety risks that may disproportionately affect 
children. See the direct final rule EPA has published in the ``Rules 
and Regulations'' section of today's Federal Register for a more 
extensive discussion of Executive Order 13045.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This proposed 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 
proposed rule merely replaces interim gaseous emission measurement 
accuracy allowances for portable emission measurement systems with 
final values and delays the implementation schedule for the in-use PM 
testing program.

[[Page 13523]]

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This proposed rule does not involve technical standards. This 
proposed rule merely replaces interim gaseous emission measurement 
accuracy allowances for portable emission measurement systems with 
final values and delays the implementation schedule for the in-use PM 
testing program. Thus, we have determined that the requirements of the 
NTTAA do not apply. See the direct final rule EPA has published in the 
``Rules and Regulations'' section of today's Federal Register for a 
more extensive discussion of NTTAA policy.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    EPA has determined that this proposed 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. See the direct final rule EPA has published in the ``Rules 
and Regulations'' section of today's Federal Register for a more 
extensive discussion of Executive Order 13045.

 K. Statutory Authority,

    The statutory authority for this action comes from 42 U.S.C. 7401-
7671q. C. 7607(d).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Confidential business information, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 28, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 08-1017 Filed 3-12-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>