Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0544-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Approvals and Promulgations of Implementations Plans: California Air Resources Board - In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Truck and Bus Regulation, etc.
Posted Date: 2011-07-11T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 132 (Monday, July 11, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40652-40660]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17232]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0544; FRL-9434-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California Air 
Resources Board--In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Truck and Bus 
Regulation, Drayage Truck Regulation and Ocean-Going Vessels Clean 
Fuels Regulation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) that EPA expects to be submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB or Board). These revisions concern 
three regulations that reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter 
(PM), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), sulfur dioxide 
(SO2) and other pollutants from in-use, heavy-duty diesel-
fueled trucks and buses and from ocean-going vessels (OGV) operating 
within California jurisdiction. This proposed approval is based on 
proposed regulations submitted by CARB and an accompanying request to 
proceed with SIP review while the State completes its public review and 
agency adoption process. EPA will not take final action on the 
regulations until California submits the final adopted versions to EPA 
as a revision to the California SIP. Final EPA approval of the 
regulations and incorporation of them into the California SIP would 
make them federally enforceable. We are providing a 30-day comment 
period for today's proposal.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by August 10, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0544, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. E-mail: R9truck--dray--OGVcomments
    3. Mail or deliver: Roxanne Johnson (Air U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments 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 Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you 
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as 
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not 
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the 
body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 
public comment. 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.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 
IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents 
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly 
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), 
and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). 
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment 
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roxanne Johnson, EPA Region IX, (415) 
947-4150, johnson.roxanne@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What regulations did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these regulations?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted regulations?
    D. What requirements do the regulations establish?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the regulations?
    B. CARB Regulations Meeting CAA SIP Evaluation Criteria
    1. Did the State provide adequate public notification and 
comment periods?
    2. Does the State have adequate legal authority to implement the 
regulations?
    3. Are the regulations enforceable as required under CAA section 
110(a)(2)?

[[Page 40653]]

    4. Do the regulations interfere with reasonable further progress 
and attainment or any other applicable requirement of the Act?
    5. Will the State have adequate personnel and funding for the 
regulations?
    6. EPA's Regulation Evaluation Conclusion
    C. Proposed Action, Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What regulations did the State submit?

    By letters dated May 11 and May 19, 2011, CARB submitted to EPA 
three proposed regulations, with requests for parallel 
processing.1, 2 See May 11, and May 19, 2011 letters to 
Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, from James N. 
Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under EPA's ``parallel processing'' procedure, EPA proposes 
rulemaking action concurrently with the State's proposed rulemaking. 
If the State's proposed rule is changed, EPA will evaluate that 
subsequent change and may publish another notice of proposed 
rulemaking. If no significant change is made, EPA will publish a 
final rulemaking on the rule after responding to any submitted 
comments. Final rulemaking action by EPA will occur only after the 
rule has been fully adopted by California and submitted formally to 
EPA for incorporation into the SIP. See 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
    \2\ Technically, the versions of the regulations submitted to 
EPA by CARB for parallel processing, and evaluated herein, represent 
proposed modifications and amendments to regulations previously 
adopted by CARB, but because the previously-adopted regulations were 
not submitted for incorporation into the SIP, i.e., the regulations 
would be new to the SIP, we refer to them as ``proposed 
regulations'' rather than ``proposed amendments'' or ``proposed 
modifications'' in this document. To be clear, the versions of the 
truck, bus, and drayage truck regulations that we have evaluated 
herein are the versions released for public comment on May 19, 2011, 
and the version of the ocean-going vessel regulation that we have 
evaluated herein is the version released for public comment on April 
26, 2011.
    \3\ In addition to the proposed version of 13 CCR section 
2299.2, CARB also submitted the proposed version of 17 CCR section 
93118.2. The two regulations are fundamentally identical and reflect 
the authorities granted to CARB in the California Health and Safety 
Code to regulate marine vessel emissions (section 2299.2, title 13, 
CCR) and to regulate sources of toxic air contaminants (section 
93118.2, title 17, CCR). We see no need for both regulations to be 
approved into the SIP and propose to approve only the title 13 
regulation into the California SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 1 below, lists the regulations addressed by this proposal. 
These regulations include: (1) Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel 
Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants, 
from In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles (``Truck and Bus 
Regulation''); (2) In-Use On-road Diesel-Fueled Heavy-Duty Drayage 
Trucks (``Drayage Truck Regulation''); and (3) Fuel Sulfur and Other 
Operational Requirements for Ocean-Going Vessels within California 
Waters and 24 Nautical Miles of the California Baseline (``OGV Clean 
Fuels Regulation'').

  Table 1--Regulations Submitted by California for Parallel Processing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  California Code of Regulations
   (CCR), title 13, section No.               Regulation title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 2025......................  Regulation to Reduce Emissions of
                                     Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides
                                     of Nitrogen and Other Criteria
                                     Pollutants, from In-Use Heavy-Duty
                                     Diesel-Fueled Vehicles.
Section 2027......................  In-Use On-road Diesel-Fueled Heavy-
                                     Duty Drayage Trucks.
Section 2299.2 \3\................  Fuel Sulfur and Other Operational
                                     Requirements for Ocean-Going
                                     Vessels within California Waters
                                     and 24 Nautical Miles of the
                                     California Baseline.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB's May 11, 2011 parallel processing request includes the CARB 
notice of public hearing, held on June 23, 2011 and the CARB Staff 
Report, ``Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Rulemaking: 
Proposed Amendments to the Regulations `Fuel Sulfur and Other 
Operational Requirements for Ocean-Going Vessels within California 
Waters and 24 Nautical Miles of the California Baseline,' '' May 2011. 
The proposed OGV Clean Fuels Regulation was submitted as appendix A to 
the CARB Staff Report, but since the version in appendix A only 
includes the subsections of the regulation that are proposed for 
amendment, and not the unchanged subsections, we have also reviewed the 
original regulation approved in 2008 together with the proposed 
amendments.
    CARB's May 19, 2011 parallel processing request includes CARB's 
notice of public availability of the proposed Truck and Bus Regulation 
and proposed Drayage Truck Regulation and the initiation of a 15-day 
comment period. CARB's 15-day notice refers to two attachments, one of 
which shows the most recent modifications to the Truck and Bus 
Regulation and the second of which shows the most recent modifications 
to the Drayage Truck Regulation. Herein, we refer to these versions of 
the regulations as ``proposed regulations.'' The versions of the 
regulations referred to in the 15-day notice as ``attachment 1'' and 
``attachment 2'' are the versions of the regulations that we have 
evaluated herein. CARB's May 19, 2011 request also includes: Two 
resolutions dated December 17, 2010 through which CARB approved 
amendments [to the Truck and Bus Regulation and Drayage Truck 
Regulation] for adoption by the CARB Executive Officer (EO) once he 
makes further modifications to the regulations consistent with the 
resolutions, and the CARB staff report, ``Initial Statement of Reasons 
for Proposed Rulemaking: Proposed Amendments to the Truck and Bus 
Regulations, the Drayage Truck Regulation, the Tractor-Trailer 
Greenhouse Gas Regulation,'' October 2010.
    EPA is granting CARB's request that EPA ``parallel process'' our 
review and propose action on the three regulations. All of the relevant 
documents are available for review in the docket for today's proposed 
rulemaking.

B. Are there other versions of these regulations?

    The Truck and Bus Regulation was initially approved by CARB in 
December 2008 and became effective (for State law purposes) in January 
2010. In December 2010, CARB adopted Resolution 10-44 after considering 
amendments to the Truck and Bus Regulation as initially proposed by 
CARB staff and covered by the Notice of Public Hearing (``45-day Public 
Notice'') and Staff Report, which were initially published on October 
19, 2010, and staff's suggested modifications to the proposed 
amendments, which were made in response to comments received before the 
CARB public hearing regarding staff's initial proposal. CARB directed 
staff to modify the initially proposed amendments consistent with the 
suggested modifications and CARB's findings as set forth in the 
resolution. Resolution 10-44 further directed the CARB EO to make the 
modifications to

[[Page 40654]]

the initially proposed amendments to the Truck and Bus Regulation 
available for public comment for a period of 15 days, and to take final 
action to adopt the proposed amendments, as modified in the publicly 
noticed 15-day changes, or return to the CARB Board for further 
consideration. The version of the regulation that is subject to CARB's 
15-day notice is the one we evaluate herein for eventual approval into 
the California SIP. CARB's 15-day public comment period ended June 3, 
2011.
    The Drayage Truck Regulation was initially approved by CARB in 
December 2007 and became effective (for State law purposes) in December 
2008. In December 2010, CARB adopted Resolution 10-45 after considering 
amendments to the Drayage Truck Regulation initially proposed by CARB 
staff and covered by the 45-Day Public Notice and Staff Report, and 
directed that the proposed amendments be modified consistent with the 
CARB Board's findings therein and following the process outlined above 
for final adoption of amendments to the Truck and Bus Regulation. The 
version of the regulation that is subject to CARB's 15-day notice, 
which covers both the Truck and Bus Regulation and the Drayage Truck 
Regulation, is the one we evaluate herein for eventual approval into 
the California SIP.
    The OGV Clean Fuels Regulation was initially approved by CARB in 
July 2008 and became effective (for State law purposes) in July 2009. 
On May 4, 2011, CARB published a 45-day notice opening a public comment 
period and making available proposed amendments to the regulation. A 
public hearing for the CARB Board to consider adoption of the 
amendments was held on June 23, 2011. Following the public hearing on 
June 23, 2011, the CARB Board adopted a resolution that directs the 
CARB Executive Officer to take final action to adopt the amendments 
that were the subject of the 45-day notice in a manner consistent with 
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, and to 
further modify the OGV Clean Fuels Regulation to reduce the ``Phase 1'' 
sulfur content limit for marine gas oil from 1.5% to 1.0% beginning on 
August 1, 2012, subject to an additional 15-day notice to allow for 
public comment on the further modifications. The original regulation, 
along with the proposed amendments that was the subject of CARB's 45-
day notice, is the version we evaluate herein for eventual approval 
into the California SIP. For evaluative purposes herein, we also 
recognize the CARB Board's action on June 23, 2011 to direct the CARB 
Executive Officer to modify the regulation to reduce the ``Phase 1'' 
sulfur content limit for marine gas oil from 1.5% to 1.0% beginning on 
August 1, 2012, as set forth in attachment B to CARB's proposed 
Resolution 11-25 dated June 23, 2011.
    As described above, there are previous versions of the three 
regulations, but none of the previous versions were submitted to EPA 
for incorporation into the SIP. For a more detailed discussion of 
CARB's adoption process for these regulations and a discussion of the 
previous versions of these regulations adopted by the State but not 
submitted to EPA, please see the documentation submitted by CARB, 
included in the docket for today's rulemaking.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted regulations?

    The purpose of the three regulations is to reduce NOX, 
SO2 and PM emissions from in-use heavy-duty diesel-fueled 
trucks and buses, drayage trucks, ocean-going vessels (OGV), and to 
meet CAA requirements. NOX is a precursor responsible for 
the formation of ozone, and NOX and SO2 are 
precursors for fine particulate matter (PM2.5).\4\ At 
elevated levels, ozone and PM2.5 harm human health and the 
environment by contributing to premature mortality, aggravation of 
respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, 
visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ SO2 belongs to a family of compounds referred to 
as sulfur oxide (SOX). PM2.5 precursors 
include SO2, NOX, volatile organic compounds, 
and ammonia. See 40 CFR 51.1000. CARB generally uses the term, 
sulfur oxides (SOX); herein, we use SO2 to 
refer to the same pollutant type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    California has a number of nonattainment areas for the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and PM2.5, 
and the CAA requires states to submit SIP revisions that ensure 
reasonable further progress and that demonstrate attainment of the 
NAAQS within such areas. See, generally, part D of title I of the CAA. 
Reductions from these regulations play a critical role in assuring that 
areas such as the South Coast Air Basin and the San Joaquin Valley Air 
Basin meet the NAAQS for ozone and PM2.5.

D. What requirements do the regulations establish?

Truck and Bus Regulation
    CARB's Truck and Bus Regulation (i.e., 13 CCR section 2025) 
requires fleet (defined as one or more vehicles) owners to upgrade 
their vehicles to meet specific performance standards for 
NOX and PM. The regulation applies to diesel-fueled trucks 
and buses that are privately owned, federally owned, and to publicly 
and privately owned school buses, that have a manufacturer's gross 
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 14,000 pounds (lbs). (Local 
and state government owned diesel-fueled trucks are already subject to 
other CARB regulations.) Nearly all of the vehicles affected by the 
regulation are on-road vehicles, but the regulation also applies to 
yard trucks with off-road engines used for agricultural operations and 
two-engine street sweepers with such engines. The regulation exempts 
certain categories of trucks and buses, many of which, such as drayage 
trucks, are subject to different CARB regulations.
    Key concepts used in the Truck and Bus Regulation include ``2010 
Model Year Emissions Equivalent Engine,'' ``PM BACT,'' and ``Verified 
Diesel Emission Control Strategy'' (VDECS). As set forth in 13 CCR 
section 2025(d)(3), ``2010 Model Year Emissions Equivalent Engine'' 
means emissions from: (A) An engine certified to the 2004 through 2006 
model year (MY) heavy-duty diesel engine emissions standard that is 
equipped with the highest level VDECS and that reduces NOX 
emissions by at least 85%; (B) An engine that was built to the 2004 
engine emission standard and was not used in any manufacturer's 
averaging, banking, or trading program that is equipped with the 
highest level VDECS and that reduces NOX exhaust emissions 
by at least 85%; (C) An engine certified to the 2007 MY heavy-duty 
diesel engine emissions standard that meets PM BACT and that reduces 
NOx exhaust emissions by more than 70%; (D) An engine certified to the 
2010 MY or newer heavy-duty certified to the 2010 MY or newer heavy-
duty diesel engine emissions standard that meets PM BACT; (E) A heavy-
duty engine certified to 0.2 grams per brake-horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr) 
or less NOX emissions level and 0.01 g/bhp-hr or less PM 
emissions level; or (F) An off-road engine certified Tier 4 engine 
emissions standard.
    ``PM BACT'' means the technology employed on the highest level 
VDECS for PM or an engine that is equipped with an original equipment 
manufacturer (OEM) diesel particulate filter and certified to meet the 
0.01 g/bhp-hr certification standard. See 13 CCR section 2025(d)(48). 
``Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategy'' (VDECS) means an emission 
control strategy, designed primarily for the reduction of diesel PM 
emissions, which has been verified pursuant to the Verification 
Procedures. VDECS can be

[[Page 40655]]

verified to achieve Level 1 diesel PM reductions (25%), Level 2 diesel 
PM reduction (50%), or Level 3 diesel PM reductions (85%). VDECS may 
also be verified to achieve NOX reductions. See 13 CCR 
section 2025(d) (60).
    The basic requirements of the regulation are set forth in 
subsections (e), (f), and (g). Under these subsections, different sets 
of requirements are established for subject vehicles with a GVWR 26,000 
lbs or less [subsection (f)] and subject vehicles with a GVWR greater 
than 26,000 lbs [subsection (g)]. Under subsection (f), with certain 
exceptions, subject vehicles with a GVWR 26,000 lbs or less must, 
starting January 1, 2015, be equipped with a ``2010 model year 
emissions equivalent engine'' pursuant to the schedule shown in table 
2. School buses, that otherwise would be subject to subsection (f), are 
subject to a different set of requirements in subsection (k). Under 
subsection (k), with certain exceptions, all school buses must comply 
with PM BACT by 2014.

 Table 2--Compliance Schedule Under Section 2025(f) by Engine Model Year
                      for Lighter Heavy-Duty Trucks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Compliance date
   Existing engine model year      as of January 1       Requirement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1995 and older..................               2015  2010 model year
                                                      emission
                                                      equivalent.
1996............................               2016
1997............................               2017
1998............................               2018
1999............................               2019
2003 and older..................               2020
2004-2006.......................               2021
All engines.....................               2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under subsection (g), with certain exceptions, subject vehicles 
with a GVWR more than 26,000 lbs must, starting January 1, 2012, meet 
the PM Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirement and must 
upgrade to a 2010 MY emissions equivalent engine pursuant to the 
schedule shown in table 3. Fleets with vehicles otherwise subject to 
subsection (g) may opt for a different phase-in compliance schedule for 
PM BACT but must comply with section 2025(g) by 2023. See 13 CCR 
section 2025, subsections (h) (``Small Fleet Compliance Option'') and 
(i)(``Phase-in Option'').

 Table 3--Compliance Schedule Under Section 2025(g) by Engine Model Year
                      for Heavier Heavy-Duty Trucks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Compliance date     Compliance date
        Engine model year          install PM filter     2010 engine by
                                      by January 1         January 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993 and older..................  No Requirement.....               2015
1994-1995.......................  No Requirement.....               2016
1996-1999.......................  2012...............               2020
2000-2004.......................  2013...............               2021
2005-2006.......................  2014...............               2022
2007 or newer...................  2014 if not OEM                   2023
                                   equipped.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 2025(j) allows credits for early PM retrofits, fleets that 
have downsized, early addition of newer vehicles, hybrid vehicles, 
alternative fueled vehicles and vehicles with heavy-duty pilot ignition 
engines that can allow delayed requirements for other heavier trucks in 
the fleet. Fleet owners are required to meet the reporting and record 
keeping requirements of subsections (r) and (s). Credits are not 
transferrable except with appropriate documentation of a change of 
business form approved by the EO.
    Subsection (l) provides requirements for drayage trucks and utility 
vehicles. Drayage trucks subject to the Drayage Truck Regulation may be 
included in the fleet to comply with the requirements of the Truck and 
Bus Regulation only if all drayage trucks are included. Starting 
January 1, 2023, all drayage truck owners must comply with the 
requirements summarized above in tables 2 and 3. Drayage trucks may not 
utilize any of the credits in subsection (j) or exemptions and 
extensions in subsection (p). Starting January 1, 2021, all private 
utility vehicle owners must comply with the requirements summarized 
above in tables 2 and 3.
    Subsection (m) provides exemptions for agricultural fleets that 
meet the conditions of this subsection and remain below annual mileage 
limits specified therein. Starting January 1, 2017, all agricultural 
vehicles that have exceeded 10,000 miles in any calendar year since 
January 1, 2011, must comply with the requirements summarized above in 
tables 2 and 3. This subsection includes a provision, which allows the 
CARB EO to exempt vehicles as specialty agricultural vehicles as long 
as the vehicles meet the requirements of the subsection and the EO does 
not exceed the caps for the number of such vehicles in the San Joaquin 
Valley and Statewide. This section also provides an optional phase-in 
for log trucks. Starting January 1, 2014, 10 percent of the total log 
truck fleet must comply with 2010 MY emissions or equivalent, and by 
January 1, 2023, 100 percent of the fleet must be 2010 MY emissions 
equivalent.
    Subsection (p) provides for exemptions, delays, and extensions. The 
categories of vehicles that may qualify for relief under subsection (p) 
include vehicles used exclusively in NOX exempt areas (which 
include no counties within the South Coast Air Basin or San Joaquin 
Valley), low-mileage construction trucks, unique vehicles, low-use 
vehicles, vehicles operating with a three-day pass, vehicles awaiting 
sale, and vehicles used solely on San Nicholas or San Clemente Islands. 
Extensions in compliance deadlines are also provided

[[Page 40656]]

for in subsection (p) for emission control device manufacturer delays 
or unavailability of highest level VDECS.
    Subsection (r) includes detailed reporting requirements. Generally, 
the reporting requirements apply to owners who have elected to use the 
compliance options or credits provided for in the regulation or who 
rely on the special provisions in the regulation, such as those for 
agricultural provisions, street sweeper provisions, NOX 
exempt areas, and low-mileage construction trucks. Subsection (s) sets 
forth the record keeping requirements of the regulation, subsection (t) 
requires vehicle owners to make records available to CARB, and 
subsection (u) establishes record retention requirements.
    Subsections (v) through (z) include provisions that support 
compliance and enforcement of the regulation by, for example, 
establishing a right of entry for CARB agents [subsection (v)] and by 
requiring sellers to provide a specific disclosure concerning the 
regulation to buyers [subsection (w)]. Subsection (z) establishes the 
penalties for non-compliance. Under this subsection, any person who 
fails to comply with the Truck and Bus Regulation may be subject to 
civil or criminal penalties under the California Health and Safety Code 
sections 39674, 39675, 42400, 42400.1, 42400.2, 42402.2, and 43016.
Drayage Truck Regulation
    CARB's Drayage Truck Regulation (13 CCR section 2027) applies to 
owners and operators of certain in-use, on-road, diesel-fueled, heavy-
duty drayage vehicles with a GVWR greater than 26,000 pounds defined as 
``drayage trucks.'' Drayage trucks are those that are used for 
transporting cargo, such as containerized, bulk, or break-bulk goods 
and that operate on or transgress through port or intermodal rail yard 
property for the purpose of loading, unloading or transporting cargo, 
including transporting empty containers and chassis; or that operate 
off port or intermodal railyard property transporting cargo or empty 
containers or chassis that originated from or is destined to a port or 
intermodal rail yard property. The regulation also applies to owner and 
operators of motor carriers that dispatch drayage trucks that operate 
in California, marine or port terminals, intermodal rail yards, and 
rail yard and port authorities. Owners and operators are subject to the 
Drayage Truck Regulation through December 31, 2022. Starting January 1, 
2023, drayage trucks will be subject to the Truck and Bus Regulation.
    Section 2027(d) of the Drayage Truck Regulation includes the 
requirements and compliance deadlines, grouped into two phases. Phase 1 
of the regulation [section 2027(d)(1)] required that, by December 31, 
2009, all drayage trucks with a GVWR greater than 33,000 pounds to be 
equipped with a 1994-2003 MY engine certified standards to California 
or federal emission standards and a level 3 VDECS for PM emissions; or, 
2004 or newer MY engine certified to California or federal emission 
standards. Drayage trucks with GVWR greater than 33,000 pounds but with 
2004 or 2005 engines are allowed extra time to be equipped with a level 
3 VDECS (by January 1, 2012 for subject vehicles with MY 2004 engines 
and by January 1, 2013 for vehicles with MY 2005 engines). Under Phase 
1, by January 1, 2012, all drayage trucks with a GVWR of 26,001 lbs to 
33,000 pounds must be equipped with a level 3 VDECS for PM emissions. 
Phase 2 [section 2027(d)(2)] requires all drayage trucks to be equipped 
with a 1994 or newer MY engine that meets or exceeds 2007 MY California 
or federal emissions standards.
    Drayage truck owners must register with the CARB Drayage Truck 
Registry, a database that contains information on all trucks that 
conduct business at California ports and intermodal rail yards. See 
section 2027(e). Sections 2027(d)(3), (4), (5) and (6) include 
additional requirements for drayage truck owners, drayage truck 
operators, motor carriers and marine or port terminals and intermodal 
rail yards, to ensure that the various parties coordinate their 
activities to ensure compliance with the emissions standards and 
compliance deadlines in Phases 1 and 2.
    The Drayage Truck Regulation provides for the same types of 
penalties for non-compliance as described above for the Truck and Bus 
Regulation. Sections 2027(h) (``Right of Entry'') and 2027(i) 
(``Enforcement'') authorize and support efforts by CARB and other 
officials to ensure compliance with the regulation. Section 2023(j) is 
a sunset clause that provides that, starting January 2, 2023, drayage 
truck would no longer be subject to the provisions of the Drayage Truck 
Regulation but rather would be subject to the provisions of the Truck 
and Bus Regulation in 13 CCR section 2025.
OGV Clean Fuels Regulation
    CARB's OGV Clean Fuels Regulation (13 CCR section 2299.2) requires 
the use of low sulfur marine distillate fuels (instead of heavy fuel 
oil) to reduce PM, NOX, and SO2 emissions from 
the use of auxiliary diesel and diesel-electric engines, main 
propulsion engines, and auxiliary boilers on ocean-going vessels 
(OGVs). The regulation applies to owners and operators of OGVs that 
operate in any of the Regulated California Waters, which are defined in 
the regulation to include, among other areas, all waters within 24 
miles of the California baseline (except a specific area off Point 
Conception. Unless specifically exempted, the regulation applies to 
both U.S.-flagged and foreign-flagged OGVs. Exemptions in the 
regulation include, among other vessels, OGVs that pass through 
Regulated California Waters but do not enter California internal or 
estuarine waters or call at a port, roadstead \5\ or terminal facility; 
OGVs owned or operated by any governmental entity (unless used for 
commercial purposes); and OGVs when compliance with the regulation is 
reasonably determined by the master of the vessel to endanger the 
safety of the vessel, its crew, its cargo or its passengers because of 
severe weather conditions, equipment failure, fuel contamination or 
other extraordinary reasons beyond the master's reasonable control. See 
13 CCR 2299.2(c)(1), (3) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Roadstead'' means any facility that is used for the 
loading, unloading, and anchoring of ships. See 13 CCR section 
2299.2(d)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 2299.2(e)(1) specifies allowable fuels and fuel sulfur 
content limits for auxiliary diesel engines, main engines and auxiliary 
boilers that must be met while the OGV is operating in Regulated 
California Waters. In the first phase, beginning July 1, 2009, 
auxiliary diesel engines, main engines and auxiliary boilers on subject 
OGVs must use either marine gas oil (MGO), with a maximum of 1.5 
percent sulfur by weight, or marine diesel oil (MDO), with a maximum of 
0.5 percent sulfur by weight. The ``Phase 1'' sulfur content limit for 
MGO would be reduced from 1.5% to 1.0% beginning on August 1, 2012. 
Phase 2, beginning January 1, 2014, requires use of either MGO with a 
maximum of 0.1% sulfur by weight or MDO with a maximum of 0.1% sulfur 
by weight. As such, the OGV Clean Fuels Regulation establishes more 
stringent requirements than otherwise required under Federal law, at 
least until January 1, 2015.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In 2008, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) 
adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI (International Convention for 
the Prevention of Air Pollution From Ships) to further reduce air 
emissions from ships. Among other provisions, the 2008 amendments to 
MARPOL Annex VI allowed for the creation of Emission Control Areas 
(ECA) by member states allowing them to implement more stringent 
requirements than otherwise provided for in Annex VI upon approval 
by the IMO. In 2010, the IMO approved a joint application by the 
U.S. and Canada for the creation of an ECA, referred to as the North 
American ECA. Under the North American ECA, OGVs traveling within a 
200 nautical mile zone of the North American coastline are required 
to use fuels with no more than 1% sulfur beginning in August 2012 
and no more than 0.1% sulfur beginning in January 2015. EPA is 
implementing the provisions of MARPOL Annex VI through its ocean-
going vessel rule (75 FR 22895). Under these regulations, both U.S.- 
and foreign-flagged ships subject to the engine and fuel standards 
of MARPOL Annex VI must comply with the applicable Annex VI 
provisions when they enter U.S. ports or operate in most internal 
U.S. waters including the Great Lakes, excluding steamships.

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

[[Page 40657]]

    Section 2299.2(e)(2) establishes recordkeeping, reporting, and 
monitoring requirements including the requirement to retain and 
maintain records that document vessel entry to and departure from 
Regulated California Waters, completion of any fuel switching 
procedures used to comply with the regulations, and types and sulfur 
content of fuel used in each auxiliary engine, main engine, and 
auxiliary boiler operated in Regulated California Waters. Under 
subsection (e) (2), any person subject to the regulation must provide 
CARB with access to the OGV for the purpose of determining compliance 
with the regulation.
    Under section 2299.2(f), the OGV Clean Fuels Regulation provides 
for the same types of penalties for non-compliance as described above 
for the Truck and Bus Regulation.
    Section 2299.2(g) allows the EO to exempt, in whole or in part, 
vessels from compliance with the fuel and fuel sulfur content 
requirements in subsection (e) based on the need for essential 
modifications. Essential modifications refer to the addition of new 
equipment, or the replacement of existing components with modified 
components, that can be demonstrated to be necessary to comply with the 
regulation. See 13 CCR 2299.2(d)(10). Eligibility for relief under 
subsection (g) is generally cleared in advance by CARB through approval 
of an Essential Modification Report that demonstrates the need for 
essential modification and that is submitted by the vessel owner or 
operator to CARB 45 days prior to entry into Regulated California 
Waters.
    Section 2299.2(h) allows CARB, under certain circumstances, to 
permit an owner or operator of an OGV to pay noncompliance fees in lieu 
of meeting the fuel and fuel sulfur content requirements in subsection 
(e) if specific notification requirements are met under subsection 
(h)(1). CARB may consider noncompliance fees in lieu of compliance for 
any owner or operator of an OGV that demonstrates that noncompliance is 
beyond the person's reasonable control under circumstances where the 
OGV was, while en route from its last port of call, redirected to a 
California port, where the supply of complying fuel is inadequate, or 
where the person made an inadvertent purchase of defective fuel. In-
lieu fees may also be assessed for noncompliance by OGVs to be taken 
out of service for modifications or based on infrequent visits and need 
for vessel modifications. Applicable noncompliance (in-lieu) fees are 
shown below in Table 4.

      Table 4--Noncompliance Fee Schedule Under the OGC Clean Fuels
                         Regulation, Per Vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Per-port
                         Port visit                           visit fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st Port Visited...........................................      $45,500
2nd Port Visited...........................................       45,500
3rd Port Visited...........................................       91,000
4th Port Visited...........................................      136,500
5th or more Port Visited...................................      182,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under subsection (h), CARB assesses the fees at the time of the 
port visit, and the fees must be paid prior to leaving the California 
port or by a later date approved by CARB. Section 2299.2(h)(5)(D) 
allows CARB to enter into enforceable agreements with each port that 
will receive the fees. Fees must be used by the ports only to fund 
projects reducing PM, NOX, and SO2 within two 
miles of port boundaries, or OGVs operated in Regulated California 
Waters.
    Section 2299.2(i) establishes the test methods that must be used to 
determine compliance with 13 CCR section 2299.2. Subsection (i) allows 
the CARB EO to approve alternative test methods if they are 
demonstrated to be equally or more accurate than the listed methods.
    Lastly, under section 2299.2(j), the requirements of OGV Clean 
Fuels Regulation will cease to apply if and when the CARB EO issues 
written findings that Federal requirements are in place that will 
achieve equivalent emissions reductions within the Regulated California 
Waters and are being enforced within the Regulated California Waters.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the regulations?

    EPA has evaluated the three regulations described in the previous 
section of this document against the applicable procedural and 
substantive requirements of the Clean Air Act for SIPs and SIP 
revisions and has concluded that they meet all of the applicable 
requirements. Generally, SIPs must include enforceable emission 
limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques, as well 
as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary to meet 
the requirements of the Act [see CAA section 110(a)(2)(A)]; must 
provide necessary assurances that the State will have adequate 
personnel, funding, and authority under State law to carry out such SIP 
(and is not prohibited by any provision of Federal to State law from 
carrying out such SIP) [see CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)]; must be adopted 
by a State after reasonable notice and public hearing [see CAA section 
110(l)], and must not interfere with any applicable requirement 
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other 
applicable requirement of the Act [see CAA section 110(l)].\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ CAA section 193, which prohibits any pre-1990 SIP control 
requirement relating to nonattainment pollutants in nonattainment 
areas from being modified unless the SIP is revised to insure 
equivalent or greater emission reductions of such air pollutants, 
does not apply to these regulations because they do not represent 
pre-1990 SIP control requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. CARB Regulations Meeting CAA SIP Evaluation Criteria

1. Did the State provide aadequate public notice and comment periods?
    Under CAA section 110(l), SIP revisions must be adopted by the 
State, and the State must provide for reasonable public notice and 
hearing prior to adoption. In 40 CFR 51.102(d), we specify that 
reasonable public notice in this context refers to at least 30 days. As 
described previously, the three subject regulations were submitted to 
EPA by California with requests to ``parallel process'' them pending 
final adoption (of the most recent amendments) by CARB. We recognize 
the extensive public process that CARB conducted prior to the adoption 
of the original versions of the three regulations and the extensive 
public process that CARB conducted for the recent amendments and 
modifications and expect to determine that CARB will have met the 
applicable procedural requirements for SIP revisions upon submittal by 
CARB of the final adopted regulations as a SIP revision with the 
necessary public process documentation.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For example, all three regulations were originally developed 
through a series of public workshops and adopted following 45-day 
public comment periods. The significant amendments to the Truck and 
Bus Regulation and the Drayage Truck Regulation proposed in October 
2010 followed a similar process as have the 2011 amendments to the 
OGV Clean Fuels Regulation. The modifications to the 2010 amendments 
proposed in 2011 for the Truck and Bus Regulation and Drayage Truck 
Regulation were subject to a supplemental 15-day public comment 
period.

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

[[Page 40658]]

2. Does the State have adequate legal authority to implement the 
regulations?
    CARB has been granted both general and specific authority under the 
California Health and Safety Code (H&SC) to adopt and implement these 
regulations. California H&SC sections 39600 (``Acts required'') and 
39601 (``Adoption of regulation; Conformance to federal law'') confer 
on CARB the general authority and obligation to adopt regulations and 
measures necessary to execute CARB's powers and duties imposed by State 
law. California H&SC sections 43013(a) and 43018 provide broad 
authority to achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective emission 
reductions from all mobile source categories, including both on-road 
and off-road diesel engines. Regarding in-use motor vehicles, 
California H&SC sections 43600 and 43701(b), respectively, grant CARB 
authority to adopt emission standards and emission control equipment 
requirements. Further, California H&SC section 39666 gives CARB 
authority to adopt airborne toxic control measures to reduce emissions 
of toxic air contaminants from new and in-use nonvehicular sources, 
including marine vessels.
    Moreover, we know of no obstacle under Federal or State law in 
CARB's ability to implement the regulations. As a general matter, the 
CAA assigns mobile source regulation to EPA through title II of the Act 
and assigns stationary source regulation and SIP development 
responsibilities to the States through title I of the Act. In so doing, 
the CAA preempts various types of State regulation of mobile sources as 
set forth in section 209(a) (preemption of State emissions standards 
for new motor vehicles and engines), section 209(e) (preemption of 
State emissions standards for nonroad vehicles and engines) and section 
211(c)(4)(A) [preemption of State fuel requirements for motor vehicles, 
i.e., other than California's motor vehicle fuel requirements--see 
section 211(c)(4)(B)]. For certain types of mobile source standards, 
the State of California may request a waiver or authorization for state 
emissions standards. See CAA sections 209(b) (new motor vehicles) and 
209(e)(2) (most categories of new and non-new nonroad vehicles).
    Notwithstanding the preemption provisions of the CAA, however, we 
do not believe that preemption represents an obstacle to implementation 
by California with respect to these three particular regulations. 
First, the Truck and Bus Regulation and Drayage Truck Regulation 
establish emissions standards for in-use trucks and buses. Because the 
requirements do not apply to new motor vehicles or engines and because 
the burden for retrofits or replacements does not fall on original 
equipment manufacturers, we believe that the preemption under CAA 
section 209(a) does not apply and California need not secure a waiver 
to enforce the Truck and Bus Regulation or the Drayage Truck 
Regulation. See Allway Taxi Inc. v. City of New York, 340 F. Supp. 1120 
(S.D.N.Y) (interpreting CAA section 209(a) motor vehicle preemption), 
aff'd, 468 F.2d 624 (2d Cir. 1972).
    To the extent that the Truck and Bus Regulation affects nonroad 
vehicles or engines, we take note of CARB's authorization request under 
CAA section 209(e)(2) for CARB's emissions standards for in-use off-
road diesel-fueled equipment with engines 25 horsepower and greater and 
EPA's related notice of opportunity for public hearing and comment 
concerning CARB's request. See 75 FR 11880 (March 12, 2010) for the 
most recent related EPA announcement concerning CARB's authorization 
request for the relevant in-use nonroad emissions standards. Assuming 
that EPA issues the relevant authorization requested by CARB, there 
will be no obstacle to CARB's enforcement of the provisions of the 
Truck and Bus Regulation that apply to nonroad vehicles and engines.
    With respect to the OGV Clean Fuels Regulation, we first note that 
State-adopted fuel requirements for nonroad vehicles are generally not 
preempted under the CAA. However, there are provisions of Federal law, 
other than the CAA, that might be relied upon to challenge State fuel 
requirements as preempted. In this instance, we recognize that the 
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in which the 
court upheld CARB's OGV Clean Fuels Regulation against a challenge 
grounded in preemption principles. See Pacific Merchant Shipping Ass'n. 
v. Goldstene, No. 09-17765 (9th Cir. March 28, 2011). The petitioners 
in the Pacific Merchant case may yet appeal the decision to the U.S. 
Supreme Court, but at this time, we have no reason to believe that the 
case will ultimately be resolved in a manner that takes away CARB's 
ability to implement and enforce the OGV Clean Fuels Regulation.
3. Are the regulations enforceable as required under CAA section 
110(a)(2)?
    We have evaluated the enforceability of the three subject proposed 
regulations with respect to applicability and exemptions; standard of 
conduct and compliance dates; sunset provisions; discretionary 
provisions; and test methods, recordkeeping and reporting,\9\ and have 
concluded for the reasons given below that the proposed regulations 
would be enforceable for the purposes of CAA section 110(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ These concepts are discussed in detail in an EPA memorandum 
from J. Craig Potter, EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation, et al., titled ``Review of State Implementation Plans and 
Revisions for Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency,'' dated 
September 23, 1987.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, with respect to applicability, we find the proposed 
regulations would be sufficiently clear as to which persons and which 
vehicles or engines are affected by the regulations. For instance, with 
respect to the Truck and Bus Regulation, subsections (b) define the 
scope and applicability of the regulation in terms of, among other 
parameters, type of fuel used and manufacturer's GVWR. Subsection (c) 
of the Truck and Bus Regulation clearly identifies categories of 
vehicles that are exempt from the regulation, and subsection (d) 
provides additional detail on the types of owners and operators and 
vehicles covered by the regulation by defining key terms including 
``person'' and ``agricultural operations,'' among others. Similar types 
of provisions are also found in the Drayage Truck Regulation [see 13 
CCR section 2027(b) and (c)] and the OGV Clean Fuels Regulation [see 13 
CCR sections 2299.2(b), (c), and (d)].
    Second, we find that the proposed regulations would be sufficiently 
specific so that the persons affected by the regulations would be 
fairly on notice as to what the requirements and related compliance 
dates are. To a large extent, we have already described the substantive 
requirements and compliance dates set forth in the proposed regulations 
in section I.D of this document. We recognize that CARB intends to 
extend certain compliance dates in the latest amendments to the 
original regulations but, as discussed in section II.B.4 of this 
document, we find that extending the compliance dates would not 
interfere reasonable further progress and attainment requirements for 
California nonattainment areas with respect to the 1997 
PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS. See section II.B.4 of this document. 
No compliance date in any of the regulations extends past January 1, 
2023, which is consistent with the attainment needs for California with 
respect to the attainment deadline for the South Coast and San Joaquin 
Valley ``extreme'' nonattainment areas for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

[[Page 40659]]

    Third, both the Drayage Truck Regulation and OGV Clean Fuels 
Regulation contain sunset provisions. In the case of the Drayage Truck 
Regulation, the regulation would sunset on December 31, 2022, but after 
that date, the requirements of the Truck and Bus Regulation would 
apply. See 13 CCR section 2027(j). Thus, regulation of drayage trucks 
would continue indefinitely under the terms of the Truck and Bus 
Regulation. Under subsection (j) of the OGV Clean Fuels Regulation, 
once the CARB EO makes a finding that federal requirements are in place 
that will achieve equivalent emissions reduction within California 
Regulated Waters and that are being enforced within California 
Regulated Waters, the regulation would no longer be in effect. The CARB 
EO is expected to make the necessary finding under subsection (j) 
sometime after January 1, 2015 when the 0.1% marine fuel sulfur content 
limit (applicable within the North American ECA) will become 
enforceable by EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard. Given that the 0.1% marine 
fuel sulfur content limit will continue to be federally enforceable 
after the CARB EO invokes the sunset clause, we find the sunset clause 
in the OGC Clean Fuels Regulation to be acceptable.
    Fourth, all three regulations would contain provisions that allow 
for discretion on the part of CARB's EO. Such ``director's discretion'' 
provisions can undermine enforceability of a SIP regulation, and thus 
prevent full approval by EPA, but in the instances of ``director's 
discretion'' in the three subject regulations, the discretion that can 
be exercised by the CARB EO is limited both in scope and application. 
As such, we do not find that the ``director's discretion'' provisions 
in the proposed regulations would preclude our approval of them for the 
purposes of the SIP.
    Lastly, each of the proposed regulations identifies appropriate 
test methods and includes adequate recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements sufficient to ensure compliance with the applicable 
requirements.
4. Do the regulations interfere with reasonable further progress and 
attainment or any other applicable requirement of the Act?
    The State's 2007 State Strategy to attain the 1997 PM2.5 
and ozone NAAQS relies on these three regulations to help achieve 
needed emissions reductions in various nonattainment areas in 
California, particularly the South Coast Air Basin and San Joaquin 
Valley. A summary of the latest emissions reductions estimates from 
these rules in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley 1997 
PM2.5 and ozone attainment plans can be found in the State's 
2007 State Strategy, the 2009 Status Report on the State Strategy and 
the ``Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State 
Implementation Plans (SIP) for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley 
Air Basins and Proposed SIP revisions,'' dated March 29, 2011. In 
separate rulemakings, EPA is evaluating the approvability of the 
reasonable further progress (RFP) and attainment demonstrations (and 
other provisions) for areas that rely on these three regulations. In 
general, these rules provide much needed NOX, direct PM and 
SO2 reductions, however, the attainment plans do not require 
specific reductions from any particular rule. Thus, EPA believes that 
the approval of these three regulations, which have never been approved 
into the SIP, does not interfere with RFP, attainment or any other 
applicable requirement of the Act.
5. Will the State have adequate personnel and funding for the 
regulations?
    Chapter XIII of CARB's ``Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed 
Rulemaking, Proposed Amendments to the Truck and Bus Regulation, the 
Drayage Truck Regulation and the Tractor-Trailer Greenhouse Gas 
Regulation,'' dated October 2010, addresses implementation and 
enforcement of the regulations. As described therein, CARB intends to 
conduct enforcement of the Truck and Bus Regulation and Drayage Truck 
Regulation similarly to enforcement of CARB's commercial vehicle and 
school bus idling regulations. CARB's enforcement staff intends to use 
the inspection and audit methods that they have developed during the 
many years of experience enforcing the Heavy-Duty Vehicle Inspection 
Program (adopted into law in 1988) and the Periodic Smoke Inspection 
Program (adopted into law in 1990).
    CARB indicates that enforcement activities will include inspections 
at border crossings, California Highway Patrol (CHP) weigh stations, 
fleet facilities, and randomly selected roadside locations and audits 
of records. See appendix H to CARB's initial statement of reasons for 
proposed rulemaking, dated October 2010, cited above. These activities 
could result in corrective actions and substantial civil penalties for 
non-compliance with the regulations. CARB's enforcement activities are 
summarized in annual reports. See, e.g., CARB's 2009 Annual Enforcement 
Report (August 2010).
    We recognize the general effectiveness of CARB's motor vehicle 
enforcement program and expect CARB's approach to enforcement of the 
Truck and Bus and Drayage Truck regulations, as described above, to be 
equally effective; however, none of the information we have received or 
were able to download from CARB's Web site has identified the specific 
additional resources and personnel that CARB has allocated to the Truck 
and Bus Regulation. We expect such information to be submitted to EPA 
as part of the SIP submittal package contained the final adopted 
versions of the regulations.
    Since the original OGV Clean Fuels Regulation became effective, 
CARB enforcement staff has conducted over 450 vessel inspections and 
the compliance rate, as determined by CARB enforcement staff, is 
approximately 95%. See page ES-2 of CARB's Initial Statement of Reasons 
for Proposed Rulemaking, Proposed Amendments to the Regulations ``Fuel 
Sulfur and Other Operational Requirements for Ocean-Going Vessels 
within California Waters and 24 Nautical Miles of the California 
Baseline,'' dated May 2011. Based on CARB's enforcement activities 
since the effective date of the original OGV Clean Fuels Regulation, we 
believe that CARB has allocated adequate funding and personnel for the 
regulation.
6. EPA's Regulation Evaluation Conclusion
    Based on the above discussion, we believe these regulations are 
consistent with the relevant CAA requirements, policies and guidance.

C. Proposed Action, Public Comment and Final Action

    For the reasons given above, we believe CARB's Truck and Bus 
Regulation, Drayage Truck Regulation, and OGV Clean Fuels Regulation 
fulfill all relevant requirements, and thus, EPA is proposing to 
approve these regulations under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA once we 
receive the final adopted versions as a revision to the California SIP. 
If the State substantially revises these submitted regulations from the 
versions proposed by the State and submitted for ``parallel 
processing,'' this will result in the need for additional proposed 
rulemaking on these regulations.
    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal for the 
next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new information during the 
comment period, we intend to publish a final approval

[[Page 40660]]

action that will incorporate these regulations into the federally 
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves State law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with 
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive 
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified 
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the 
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, 
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on 
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: June 29, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-17232 Filed 7-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P