Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0858-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Extension of Temporary Exhaust Emission Test Procedure Option for All Terrain Vehicles
Posted Date: 2007-04-26T04:00Z

[Federal Register: April 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 80)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 20730-20735]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26ap07-11]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 1051

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0858; FRL-8305-8]
RIN 2060-A035

 
Extension of Temporary Exhaust Emission Test Procedure Option for 
All Terrain Vehicles

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In a rule published November 8, 2002, EPA promulgated new 
emission standards for recreational vehicles beginning in model year 
2006. This included a newly regulated class of nonroad vehicles/engines 
commonly referred to as all-terrain vehicles. In that rulemaking, a 
temporary provision was included allowing manufacturers to test all-
terrain vehicles over a steady-state, engine-based, duty cycle for 
exhaust emissions prior to the 2009 model year in lieu of the 
transient, chassis-based, Federal Test Procedure which was effective 
for 2006 and later model years. In this rulemaking we are taking direct 
final action to extend the availability of this temporary provision for 
in some cases up to an additional six model years. More specifically, 
manufacturers would have to certify exhaust emission engine families 
representing not less than 50 percent of their US-directed production 
on the Federal Test Procedure in model year 2014 and 100 percent in 
2015. Manufacturers with only one all terrain vehicle exhaust emission 
engine family would not be required to use the Federal Test Procedure 
until the 2015 model year. For those manufacturers who have not yet 
done so, this will allow additional time to certify to the previously 
promulgated Federal Test Procedure-based emission standards using 
either contract facilities or by obtaining in-house capability.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on June 25, 2007, without 
further notice, unless we receive adverse comments by May 29, 2007 or a 
request for a public hearing by May 11, 2007. If EPA receives such 
comments or such a request, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that 
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2005-0858, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments.
     E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov
     Fax: (202) 566-1741
     Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 6102T, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460. Please include two 
copies.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., Room: 3334 Mail Code: 6102T, 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-
2006-0858. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov. including any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other infonnation whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

The http://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 http://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

[[Page 20731]]

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/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA/

DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., 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: Michael Samulski, Assessment and 
Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, 2000 
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-
4532; fax number: (734) 214-4050; email address: 
samulski.michael@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Why is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?

    EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposal because we 
view this action as noncontroversial and anticipate no adverse comment. 
However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register 
publication, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as 
the proposal to adopt the provisions in this Direct Final Rule if 
adverse comments are received on this direct final rule. We will not 
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time. For further 
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of 
this document.
    If EPA receives adverse comment or a request for public hearing, we 
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 
public that this direct final rule will not take effect. We would 
address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on the 
proposed rule.

II. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    This action will affect companies that manufacture and certify all-
terrain vehicles for sale in the United States.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Examples of
             Category               NAICS code \a\  potentially affected
                                                          entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..........................          336999  Snowmobiles and all-
                                                     terrain vehicle
                                                     manufacturers.
Industry..........................          421110  Independent
                                                     commercial
                                                     importers of
                                                     vehicles and parts.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 
http://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:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
     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.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

IV. Summary of Rule

    The current exhaust emission standards for all-terrain vehicles 
(ATVs) are based on the use of the chassis-based transient emission 
test cycle used for Class I highway motorcycles. These emission 
standards first took effect in the 2006 model year. As an option, 
section 1051.145(b) of the regulations includes a temporary provision 
which allows ATV manufacturers to certify their products for exhaust 
emissions over a steady-state, engine-based, duty cycle. This option is 
now in place for model years 2006-2008, inclusive. This option has 
existed in California since 1997 and it is permanently available under 
the California regulations. Until recently, for their California 
certification most manufacturers have elected to use the optional 
engine cycle. EPA included the optional test cycle in its rule because 
it enabled the implementation of emission controls for ATVs several 
years earlier than otherwise would have been possible if ATV 
manufacturers had been required to certify their products on the 
chassis-based FTP. For many manufacturers, additional lead time would 
have been required to procure and install the necessary chassis 
dynamometers and related emissions measurement equipment, train 
technicians, and then to certify their products on this chassis cycle. 
In this rulemaking, we are extending the availability of this option 
for reasons described below.
    The steady-state duty cycle, often referred to as J1088, has six 
modes and was originally developed to represent the operation of small 
utility engines. It only includes engine operation at idle and one 
other speed. During the course of the original rulemaking, EPA 
expressed its concern that the J1088 test cycle misses substantial 
portions of typical ATV operation. EPA stated that it preferred using 
the transient motorcycle FTP as the basis for the test procedures and 
emission standards in a long-term ATV program. However, many 
manufacturers expressed support for the long-term use of the optional 
test procedure to certify their engines, as was allowed in California, 
primarily due to costs associated with installing

[[Page 20732]]

chassis dynamometer facilities capable of meeting FTP requirements.
    EPA recognized the manufacturers' interests regarding facility 
costs associated with FTP testing for ATVs. During the rulemaking, EPA 
discussed the possibility of developing a new test cycle specifically 
for ATVs. EPA discussed its intent to work with all interested parties 
to determine whether a new test cycle and accompanying standards would 
be appropriate. By finalizing the temporary J1088 option, EPA provided 
time to develop, and if appropriate, adopt and implement an alternative 
to the FTP that meets the needs of the Agency, manufacturers, and other 
parties. EPA indicated that it would consider extending the 
availability of the J1088 option beyond the 2008 model year, if 
necessary, to give more time to adopt changes to the ATV test cycle.
    Soon after the final rule was published for the ATV emission 
standards, EPA entered a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the 
California Air Resources Board, the Motorcycle Industry Council, and 
the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America, regarding ATV test cycle 
development and implementation with the goal of developing and 
implementing a test cycle for ATVs that would be agreed to by all 
participants. In response to the MOU, the manufacturers collected data 
on ATV operating characteristics in the field (speed, load, etc.) in an 
attempt to better inform the signatories to the MOU on the operating 
characteristics of these vehicles. This data was provided to EPA in 
November 2005 together with a manufacturer concept on a possible steady 
state test cycle derived from this field data and some data comparing 
emissions on this cycle to those on the FTP. This information is 
available in the public docket for this rulemaking.
    EPA very carefully considered the data and analyses provided by the 
manufacturers with the core question being whether ATV operation is 
fundamentally steady-state or transient in nature. Beyond this, EPA 
fully considered the steady-state test cycle put forth by the 
manufacturers. However, EPA is concerned that much of the possible 
operating range of ATV engines was not covered in the test cycle 
proposed by the manufacturers and that transient operation is not 
represented at all. In an effort to at least partially resolve this 
matter, EPA put forth the idea of adding Not-To-Exceed requirements to 
the industry cycle such as required in other EPA rules where steady-
state testing is prescribed. However, EPA and the industry could not 
agree on a concept or appropriate multipliers.
    Thus, EPA believes it is time to close deliberations on a new 
emissions test cycle, leaving in place the current provision that the 
FTP and the emission standards promulgated in 2002 would take effect if 
an alternative test cycle was not implemented. While many manufacturers 
have already certified on the FTP, the manufacturers involved in the 
MOU postponed investing in the chassis dynamometer testing facilities 
needed for the FTP in the good faith hope that an engine dynamometer 
based alternative cycle could be developed. Since this will not be the 
case, it is appropriate to determine how much lead time is needed to 
complete full transition to the FTP in an orderly manner. Time is not 
now available to procure and implement the chassis dynamometer and meet 
the emission standards called for by EPA's 2009 requirement.
    EPA believes that a period of five additional model years is 
appropriate before FTP-based testing should be mandated and that one 
additional model year is needed to accommodate a phase-in and small 
business interests. As mentioned in the summary above, exhaust emission 
engine families representing at least 50 percent of US-directed 
production would have to be certified on the FTP in the 2014 model year 
with the remainder in 2015 model year. Manufacturers with only one 
exhaust emission engine family in the 2014 model year would not be 
required to comply until the 2015 model year.
    To allow for the use of current emission sampling practices used 
with the J1088 cycle, this action also extends the availability of raw 
gas sampling. It will be available for use with the J1088 cycle as long 
as the J1088 cycle can be used for ATV exhaust emission certification.
    In determining how much lead time is needed EPA considered the 
following factors. Time is needed to build chassis test facilities, 
procure and install chassis dynamometers and related emission test 
equipment, train personnel on use of this equipment, conduct the 
development work needed to meet the emission standards, and ultimately 
to certify. Generally speaking, the first two items would take 
approximately 36 months to complete, the next two would take about 24 
months, and the last step, certification, about 12 months. Thus, 
products would be ready for the 2014 model year. The original rule 
provided six years of lead time for the FTP requirement. It was 
promulgated in late 2002 and absent a change in the test cycle would be 
required for the 2009 model year (mid-late 2008). Thus five of the six 
years have passed. During this timeframe large manufacturers would also 
have to acquire the facilities and equipment to run the required 
production line testing programs beginning in the 2014 model year.
    It is worth noting that in the 2007 model year many small volume 
manufacturers, almost exclusively from Asia, have certified using the 
FTP. However, information available to EPA suggests that most of these 
manufacturers avoided installing new equipment either by using time 
available on co-located or nearby chassis dynamometers used for 
motorcycle development or by contracting with one of a few contract 
labs in the Asia. Generally, such options are not readily available to 
the larger volume manufacturers who have not yet pursued chassis 
dynamometer facilities for certification of their ATVs and who must 
have production line testing capability as well.
    EPA does not expect that this revision to the regulation will have 
an adverse cost impact to the manufacturers beyond that envisioned in 
the original rule. It will give manufacturers additional time to use 
current practices while moving toward mandatory use of the FTP for ATV 
emissions certification. We expect this extension will help to ensure 
compliance costs are minimized and that the emission reductions 
identified in the 2002 rule are achieved. Even the J1088 test cycle has 
reduced emissions significantly by eliminating ATVs powered by high 
emitting two-stroke engines as a new product offering. Adopting the FTP 
will help to ensure robust emission control in ATVs using 4-stroke 
engines by including consideration of transient operation and vehicle/
engine operation over a wider variety of conditions than that seen in 
the J1088 cycle.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is 
therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order. This direct 
final rule merely gives an extension of time in which a temporary 
optional test duty cycle may be used. There are no costs associated 
with this rule beyond those envisioned in the original rule.

[[Page 20733]]

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This direct final rule does not include any new collection 
requirements, as it acts to extend the availability of an existing 
temporary test procedure option. There are no new paperwork 
requirements associated with this rule.
    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

    EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis in connection with this direct final rule.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this final 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-far-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, EPA has concluded 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 proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 
and 604. Thus, an agency may conclude 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 direct final rule merely gives an extension of time in which a 
temporary optional test duty cycle may be used. We have therefore 
concluded that today's final rule 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

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to state, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why such 
an alternative was adopted.
    Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal 
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a 
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying 
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected 
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the 
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant federal 
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising 
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    This rule contains no federal mandates for state, local, or tribal 
governments as defined by the provisions of Title II of the UMRA. The 
rule imposes no enforceable duties on any of these governmental 
entities. Nothing in the rule would significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. EPA has determined that this rule contains no 
federal mandates that may result in expenditures of more than $100 
million to the private sector in any single year. This direct final 
rule merely gives an extension of time in which a temporary optional 
test duty cycle may be used. The requirements of UMRA therefore do not 
apply to this action.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' are defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    Under Section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has 
federalism implications and that preempts State law, unless the Agency 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the regulation.
    Section 4 of the Executive Order contains additional requirements 
for rules that preempt State or local law, even if those rules do not 
have federalism implications (i.e., the rules 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). Those 
requirements include providing all affected State and local officials 
notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation in the 
development of the regulation. If the preemption is not based on 
express or implied statutory

[[Page 20734]]

authority, EPA also must consult, to the extent practicable, with 
appropriate State and local officials regarding the conflict between 
State law and Federally protected interests within the agency's area of 
regulatory responsibility.
    This 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 direct final rule merely gives 
an extension of time in which a temporary optional test duty cycle may 
be used.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This 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 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 direct final merely 
gives an extension of time in which a temporary optional test duty 
cycle may be used. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this 
rule.

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

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies 
to any rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' 
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may 
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action 
meets both criteria, Section 5-501 of the Order directs the Agency to 
evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule 
on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to 
other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives 
considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not 
economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental 
health or safety risks addressed by this action present a 
disproportionate risk to children. This direct final gives an extension 
of time in which a temporary optional test duty cycle may be used 
beyond that time period prescribed in the original rule.

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

    This 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 
direct final rule merely gives an extension of time in which a 
temporary optional test duty cycle may be used.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (such as materials specifications, test 
methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA 
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the 
Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus 
standards.
    This direct final rule does not involve technical standards. This 
direct final rule merely gives an extension of time in which a 
temporary optional test duty cycle may be used. Thus, we have 
determined that the requirements of the NTTAA do not apply.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this 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. This direct 
final rule merely gives an extension of time in which a temporary 
optional test duty cycle may be used before it expires.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to Congress and the Comptroller General of the United 
States. We will submit a report containing this rule and other required 
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and 
the Comptroller General of the United States before publication of the 
rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 
days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not 
a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This direct final rule 
is effective on June 25, 2007.

L. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this action comes from section 213 of 
the Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7547). This action is a 
rulemaking subject to the provisions of Clean Air Act section 307(d). 
See 42 U.S.C. 7607(d):

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 1051

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Exhaust emission

[[Page 20735]]

testing, Recreational vehicle, All-terrain vehicle.

    Dated: April 19, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 1051--CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM RECREATIONAL ENGINES AND 
VEHICLES

0
1. The authority citation for part 1051 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

0
2. Section 1051.145 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) introductory 
text and (e)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  1051.145  What provisions apply only for a limited time?

* * * * *
    (b) Optional emission standards for ATVs. To meet ATV standards for 
model years before 2014, you may apply the exhaust emission standards 
by model year in paragraph (b)(1) of this section while measuring 
emissions using the engine-based test procedures in 40 CFR part 1065 
instead of the chassis-based test procedures in 40 CFR part 86. In 
model year 2014 you may apply this provision for exhaust emission 
engine families representing up to 50 percent of your U.S.-directed 
production. This provision is not available in the 2015 or later-model 
years. If you certify only one ATV exhaust emission engine family in 
the 2014 model year this provision is available for that family in the 
2014 model year.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
* * * * *
    (2) ATV. You may use the raw sampling procedures described in 40 
CFR part 90 or 91 for ATVs certified using engine-based test procedures 
as specified in Sec.  1051.615 before the 2015 model year. You may use 
these raw sampling procedures for any ATVs certified using engine-based 
test procedures as specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 07-2069 Filed 4-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M