

[Federal Register: March 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 54)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 13227-13229]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21mr07-18]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Docket No. EPA-R02-OAR-2006-0920, FRL-8290-1]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey; 
Low Emission Vehicle Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to approve a 
New Jersey state implementation plan revision that adopts California's 
second generation low emission vehicle program for light-duty vehicles, 
LEV II. Clean Air Act section 177 sets forth requirements by which 
other states may adopt new motor vehicle emissions standards that are 
identical to California's standards. Specifically, the State's 
implementation plan revision adopts changes to its existing light duty 
vehicle rule by incorporating California's LEV II program. The intended 
effect of this action is to approve, as consistent with section 
110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act, a control strategy that will help New 
Jersey achieve attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
for ozone.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 20, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R02-
OAR-2006-0920, by one of the following methods: http://www.regulations.gov:
 Follow the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments.
    E-mail: Werner.Raymond@epa.gov.
    Fax: 212-637-3901.
    Mail: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 
New York 10007-1866.
    Hand Delivery: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional 
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 
4:30 excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-
2006-0920. 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 information 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 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
.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Laurita, 
laurita.matthew@epa.gov at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 

2 Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, NY 
10007-1866, telephone number (212) 637-3895, fax number (212) 637-3901.
    Copies of the State submittals are available at the following 
addresses for inspection during normal business hours:
    Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, Air Programs 
Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
    New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Public Access 
Center, 401 East State Street 1st Floor, Trenton, New Jersey 08625.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Description of the SIP Revision
    A. Background
    B. What are the relevant EPA and CAA requirements?
    C. What is the California LEV Program?
    D. What is the history and current content of the New Jersey LEV 
Program?
II. Proposed EPA Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Description of the SIP Revision

A. Background

    Under the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990, all 21 counties 
in New Jersey were designated as nonattainment with respect to the 
former 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The 
counties were divided into four separate nonattainment areas with ozone 
attainment deadlines varying by area; however, no counties in New 
Jersey were redesignated to attainment prior to the revocation of the 
1-hour ozone standard on June 15, 2005. On June 15, 2004 all 21 
counties in New Jersey were designated as nonattainment with respect to 
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS as part of either the New York-Northern New 
Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT or the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic 
City, PA-NJ-MD-DE moderate nonattainment areas. Both of these areas 
have attainment dates of no later than June 2010.
    To bring the state into attainment New Jersey adopted, among other 
measures, the National Low Emission

[[Page 13228]]

Vehicle (NLEV) program on February 3, 1999. The NLEV program was a 
voluntary agreement between EPA, vehicle manufacturers, and the states 
to introduce vehicles that met emission standards that were more 
stringent than the Federal Tier 1 standards in effect at the time. The 
NLEV program would only take effect after all auto manufacturers and a 
sufficient number of states ``opted-in'' to the program. EPA made an 
NLEV in-effect finding on March 2, 1998 (63 FR 11374), after which 
participating states submitted state implementation plan (SIP) 
revisions to ensure continuation of the program. New Jersey submitted 
an NLEV SIP revision on February 22, 1999, and EPA issued a direct 
final rule to approve New Jersey's NLEV program on November 3, 1999 (64 
FR 59638).
    In January 2004 the New Jersey Legislature passed legislation 
requiring the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to 
adopt the California low emission vehicle (LEV) program, known as the 
LEV II program. Pursuant to this legislation, New Jersey promulgated 
regulations to adopt a LEV program identical to California's LEV II 
program. New Jersey's regulations became effective on January 27, 2006. 
On June 2, 2006, New Jersey submitted a SIP revision to EPA, seeking 
federal approval of the regulations. New Jersey's LEV program will 
affect light-duty motor vehicles manufactured in model year 2009 and 
later.

B. What are the relevant EPA and CAA requirements?

    Section 209(a) of the CAA prohibits states from adopting or 
enforcing standards relating to the control of emissions from new motor 
vehicles or new motor vehicle engines. However, under section 209(b) of 
the CAA, EPA may grant a waiver of the section 209(a) prohibition to 
the State of California, thereby allowing California to adopt its own 
motor vehicle emissions standards. Section 209(b) of the CAA requires 
California to show that its standards will be ``* * * in the aggregate, 
at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable 
Federal standards * * *.'' Section 209(b) further provides that EPA 
will grant a waiver unless it finds that: (1) The State's determination 
is ``arbitrary and capricious,'' (2) the State ``does not need such 
State standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions,'' or 
(3) the State's standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are 
``not consistent'' with CAA section 202(a).
    Section 177 of the CAA allows other states to adopt and enforce 
California's standards relating to the control of emissions from new 
motor vehicles, provided that, among other things, such state standards 
are identical to the California standards for which a waiver has been 
granted under CAA section 209(b). In addition to the identicality 
requirement, the state must adopt such standards at least two years 
prior to the commencement of the model year to which the standards will 
apply. New Jersey has met the requirements of section 177.

C. What is the California LEV II program?

    The California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted the first 
generation LEV regulations in 1990, which were effective through the 
2003 model year. CARB adopted California's second generation LEV 
regulations (LEV II) following a November 1998 hearing. Subsequent to 
the adoption of the LEV II program in February 2000, the U.S. EPA 
adopted separate Federal standards known as the Tier 2 regulations (65 
FR 6698). In December 2000, CARB modified the LEV II program to take 
advantage of some elements of the Federal Tier 2 regulations to ensure 
that only the cleanest vehicle models would continue to be sold in 
California. EPA granted California a waiver for its LEV II program on 
April 22, 2003 (68 FR 19811).
    The LEV II regulations expand the scope of the LEV I regulations by 
setting strict fleet-average emission standards for light-duty, medium-
duty (including sport utility vehicles) and heavy-duty vehicles. The 
standards began with the 2004 model year and increase in stringency 
through the 2010 model year and beyond. The LEV II regulations provide 
flexibility to auto manufacturers by allowing them to certify their 
vehicle models to one of several different emissions standards. The 
different tiers of increasingly stringent LEV II emission standards to 
which a manufacturer may certify a vehicle are: Low-emission vehicle 
(LEV), ultra-low-emission vehicle (ULEV), super-ultra low-emission 
vehicle (SULEV), partial zero-emission vehicle (PZEV), advanced 
technology partial zero-emission vehicle (ATPZEV) and zero-emission 
vehicle (ZEV).
    The manufacturer must show that the overall fleet for a given model 
year meets the specified phase-in requirements according to the fleet 
average non-methane hydrocarbon requirement for that year. The fleet 
average non-methane hydrocarbon emission limits are progressively lower 
with each model year. The program also requires auto manufacturers to 
include a ``smog index'' label on each vehicle sold, which is intended 
to inform consumers about the amount of pollution coming from that 
vehicle relative to other vehicles.
    In addition to the LEV II requirements, minimum percentages of 
passenger cars and the lightest light-duty trucks marketed in 
California by a large or intermediate volume manufacturer must be ZEVs. 
This is referred to as the ZEV mandate. California has modified the ZEV 
mandate several times since it took effect. Most recently, CARB has put 
in place an alternative compliance program (ACP) to provide auto 
manufacturers with several options to meet the ZEV mandate. The ACP 
established ZEV credit multipliers to allow auto manufacturers to take 
credit for meeting the ZEV mandate by selling more PZEVs and ATPZEVs 
than they are otherwise required to sell. On December 28, 2006, EPA 
granted California's request for a waiver of federal preemption to 
enforce provisions of the ZEV regulations through model year 2011.
    On October 15, 2005, California amended the LEV II program to 
include greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards for passenger cars, 
light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles. On December 21, 
2005, California requested that EPA grant a waiver of preemption under 
CAA section 209(b) for its greenhouse gas emission regulations. As of 
the date of this Notice, EPA has not taken action on California's 
request.

D. What is the history and current content of the New Jersey LEV 
Program?

    On February 3, 1999, New Jersey adopted the NLEV program. The NLEV 
program was a voluntary agreement between EPA, vehicle manufacturers, 
and the states to introduce vehicles that met emission standards that 
were more stringent than the Federal Tier 1 standards in effect at the 
time. The NLEV program would only take effect after all auto 
manufacturers and a sufficient number of states ``opted-in'' to the 
program. EPA made an NLEV in-effect finding on March 2, 1998 (63 FR 
11374), after which participating states submitted state implementation 
plan (SIP) revisions to ensure continuation of the program. New Jersey 
submitted an NLEV SIP revision on February 22, 1999, and EPA issued a 
direct final rule to approve New Jersey's NLEV program on November 3, 
1999 (64 FR 59638).
    On January 27, 2006, New Jersey amended its low emission vehicle 
program to be identical to California's LEV II program. New Jersey has 
adopted California's LEV II program, which

[[Page 13229]]

includes provisions for light-duty, medium-duty and heavy-duty 
vehicles, by incorporating the California LEV II regulations into the 
New Jersey Administrative Code by reference.
    New Jersey is requesting that EPA approve its LEV program 
regulations as submitted in its SIP submission. EPA's approval would 
make the program federally enforceable, further ensuring that planned 
emissions reductions will continue to take place.

II. Proposed EPA Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the portion of New Jersey's low 
emission vehicle program that is identical to the California standards 
for which a waiver has been granted. However, because the waiver 
granted for the ZEV portion of the program is limited to model year 
2011 and earlier vehicles, EPA is proposing to take no action on the 
ZEV component. In addition, EPA is proposing to take no action on the 
greenhouse gas component of the program.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, 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 by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not 
have federalism implications because it does 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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This proposed rule 
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children 
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose 
an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 8, 2007.
Alan J. Steinberg,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. E7-5157 Filed 3-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
