Results of Section 610 Review of Emission Standards

for Tier 2 Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur

	On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698), EPA published emission standards for
light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks requiring vehicle
manufacturers to reduce tailpipe emissions.  Specifically, EPA sought to
reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and non-methane hydrocarbons,
pollutants which contribute to ozone pollution.  The rulemaking also
required oil refiners to limit the sulfur content of the gasoline they
produce.  Sulfur in gasoline has a detrimental impact on catalyst
performance and the sulfur requirements have enabled the introduction of
advanced technology emission control systems on motor vehicles.

Pursuant to Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, EPA has
completed a review of this rule to determine if the provisions related
to small entities should be continued without change, or should be
rescinded or amended to minimize adverse economic impacts on small
entities. 

The Agency published the Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and
Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements rule (Tier 2 Program) on February
10, 2000 (65 FR 6698).  The program significantly reduced emissions
related to ozone and particulate matter from new passenger cars and
light trucks, including pickup trucks, vans, minivans, and sport-utility
vehicles.  The program also required refiners to significantly reduce
the level of sulfur in their gasoline.

The Tier 2 program required vehicle manufacturers to reduce new vehicle
emissions, primarily nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds, and
particulate matter.  Included as 'manufacturers' were several companies
that convert gasoline vehicles to operate on alternative fuel, and
several that import vehicles into the U.S. and upgrade their emission
control systems to comply with EPA specifications.  Most of these
companies are small entities, and a SBREFA panel recommended that EPA
provide special flexibility to these types of vehicle manufacturers.  In
the final rule, EPA adopted these recommendations, including providing
more time before the companies' vehicles were required to meet the
emission standards otherwise applicable to larger manufacturers.

The Tier 2 program also required oil refiners to produce gasoline with
much-reduced content of sulfur, primarily to protect the improved
catalyst systems anticipated on new Tier 2 vehicles.  An informal
coalition of small refining companies formed to participate in the
rulemaking and the SBREFA panel.  As with the vehicle provisions of the
rule, EPA adopted the recommendations of the small refiners, providing
more lead time for meeting the gasoline sulfur requirements.

Discussion of the Five Statutory Factors

1. Continued need for the rule

One of the factors that must be considered in a section 610 review is
the continued need for the rule under review. The Agency finds that the
provisions relating to small entities functioned well to bring small
vehicle manufacturers into compliance with the overall standards.  This
limited set of manufacturers was able to successfully take advantage of
the less aggressive phase-in and yet ultimately comply with the primary
emission standards. Similarly, small refiners took advantage of the less
aggressive phase-in provisions for gasoline sulfur control in order to
ultimately comply with the overall gasoline sulfur requirements.  EPA is
not aware of any small entities that wished to use these provisions (or
separate refiner hardship relief provisions) and yet were unable to use
them to facilitate compliance with the overall Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur
program.

2. Nature of complaints or comments received concerning the rule.

EPA received no substantive public comments during the review period for
the 2000 final rule.  (We received one comment related to diesel sulfur
control, which was not relevant to the gasoline sulfur control program
in the 2000 rule.)

3. Complexity of the Rule

The Agency must also consider the complexity of the rule under review. 
The 2000 rule included a number of provisions aimed at easing the burden
of compliance for both small manufacturers of vehicles and small
refiners.  In both cases, the provisions provided additional lead time
before the overall requirements became effective for these companies. 
These provisions did not add complexity to the rule, and, in some cases,
reduced or postponed actions that these companies would have otherwise
been required to undertake.  EPA believes that the transitional
flexibilities afforded by these provisions mitigate the implementation
complexity of the rule while meeting statutory objectives.

4. Extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with
other Federal, State, or local government rules

The Agency must also consider the extent to which the 2000 rule
overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal, State, or local
government rules.  Throughout the development, proposal, and
implementation of the rule, EPA worked closely with other federal
agencies, and organizations representing California, other states, and
local governments.  The final rule does not duplicate, conflict with, or
unnecessarily overlap with similar programs administered by these
entities, and in some cases (e.g., the California light duty vehicle
program) has been fully complementary.  

5. The degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors
have changed in the area affected by the rule

Finally, the Agency must consider the degree to which technology,
economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected
by the rule under review.  Vehicle emission control technology and
refinery gasoline sulfur reduction technology have continued to evolve
over the past decade.  Also, EPA has issued additional regulatory
requirements that apply to both the vehicle manufacturing and oil
refining industries.  However, EPA does not believe that any of these
factors, or the general economic fluctuations that these industries have
faced, affect the value of the small entity related provisions of the
final rule. 

Conclusion

Based on EPA’s Section 610 review of the small-entity related
provisions of the 2000 Tier 2 Vehicle and Gasoline Sulfur final rule,
including the fact that no relevant comments were received as a result
of the review, we plan no amendments in response to this review at this
time.  As part of any future rulemakings in this area, EPA will continue
to work with small-entity representatives to reduce unfavorable impacts
to the extent appropriate while meeting the need for emission
reductions.

