Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Low Emission Vehicle Program, 38787-38792 [2014-15886]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
stated in the Executive order.
This final regulatory action is not a
significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866.
We have also reviewed this final
regulatory action under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and
explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent
permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only
upon a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs
(recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing this final priority only
on a reasoned determination that its
benefits justify its costs. In choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Based on the analysis that follows, the
Department believes that this regulatory
action is consistent with the principles
in Executive Order 13563.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jul 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
We also have determined that this
regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive
orders, the Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities.
The benefits of the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and
Centers Program have been well
established over the years, as projects
similar to the one envisioned by the
final priority have been completed
successfully. The new RRTC will
generate, disseminate, and promote the
use of new information that will
improve outcomes for individuals with
disabilities in the areas of community
living and participation, employment,
and health and function.
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register
and the Code of Federal Regulations is
available via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you
can view this document, as well as all
other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF). To use PDF you must
have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at: www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Dated: July 3, 2014.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2014–16085 Filed 7–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38787
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0310; FRL–9913–30–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Low Emission Vehicle
Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Maryland.
This revision pertains to Maryland’s
incorporation by reference of the most
recent amendments to California’s Low
Emission Vehicle (LEV) program. The
Clean Air Act (CAA) contains authority
by which other states may adopt new
motor vehicle emissions standards that
are identical to California’s standards.
Maryland has adopted by reference
California’s light and medium-duty
vehicle emissions and fuel standards,
and consistent with California, submits
amendments to these standards as
revisions to the State’s SIP. In this SIP
revision, Maryland is updating its Low
Emissions Vehicle Program regulation to
adopt by reference California’s
Advanced Clean Car Program. This
action is being taken under the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on
September 8, 2014 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
written comment by August 8, 2014. If
EPA receives such comments, 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 Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2014–0310 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Email: Fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0310,
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Office of Air Program Planning,
Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
38788
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2014–
0310. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email 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.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Maryland Department of
the Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
´
Emlyn Velez-Rosa (215) 814–2038, or by
email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August
1, 2013, the Maryland Department of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jul 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
Environment (MDE) submitted a
revision to its SIP amending Maryland’s
Low Emissions Vehicle Program
regulation, COMAR 26.11.34, to adopt
California’s Advanced Clean Cars
Program, also referred to as the CA LEV
III program. The Maryland Low
Emissions Vehicle Program requires all
new 2011 and subsequent model year
passenger cars, light trucks, and
medium-duty vehicles having a gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 14,000
pounds or less that are sold in Maryland
to meet California’s vehicle standards.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Maryland’s Air Quality With Respect to
the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS)
B. Federal Vehicle Standards
C. California’s Vehicle Standards
D. Maryland’s Low Emissions Vehicle
Program
II. Summary of SIP Revision
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. Maryland’s Air Quality With Respect
to the Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS)
Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by
photochemical reactions between
volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
nitrogen oxides (NOX), and carbon
monoxide (CO) in the presence of
sunlight. In order to reduce ozone
concentrations in the ambient air, the
CAA requires all nonattainment areas to
apply controls on VOCs and NOX
emission sources to achieve emission
reductions.
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA
promulgated an 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) averaged
over an 8-hour time frame. On April 30,
2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA finalized
designations for areas across the country
with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, which became effective on
June 15, 2004. In this rulemaking action,
EPA designated for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS three separate
nonattainment areas containing eleven
counties and the City of Baltimore in
Maryland: (1) The Baltimore, Maryland
moderate nonattainment area (hereafter
the Baltimore Area), consisting of the
counties of Ann Arundel, Baltimore,
Carroll, Harford, and Howard, and the
City of Baltimore in Maryland; (2) the
Washington, DC-MD-VA moderate
nonattainment area (hereafter the
Washington Area), whose Maryland’s
portion consists of the counties of
Calvert, Charles, Frederick,
Montgomery, and Prince George’s; and
(3) the Philadelphia-Wilmington-
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE moderate
nonattainment area (hereafter the
Philadelphia Area), whose Maryland’s
portion consists of Cecil County. See 40
CFR 81.321. Upon designation, these
1997 8-hour ozone moderate
nonattainment areas had an attainment
date of no later than June 15, 2010.
Two of Maryland’s ozone
nonattainment areas have attained the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On
February 28, 2012 (77 FR 11739), EPA
determined that the Washington Area
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
by its June 15, 2010 attainment date. On
January 21, 2011 (76 FR 3840), EPA
issued a 1-year attainment date
extension (i.e., from June 15, 2010 to
June 15 2011) for the Philadelphia Area.
On March 26, 2012 (77 FR 17341), EPA
determined that the Philadelphia Area
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
by its June 15, 2011 attainment date.
On March 11, 2011 (76 FR 13289),
EPA issued a 1-year attainment date
extension (i.e., from June 15, 2010 to
June 15, 2011) for the Baltimore Area.
On February 1, 2012 (77 FR 4901), EPA
made a determination that the Baltimore
Area did not attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS by its June 15, 2011
attainment date, based on quality
assured, quality controlled, and certified
ambient air monitoring data for 2008–
2010. As a result, in this same
rulemaking action EPA reclassified the
Baltimore Area from moderate to serious
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436),
EPA revised the level of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS from 0.08 ppm to 0.075
ppm. EPA also strengthened the
secondary 8-hour ozone standard to the
level of 0.075 ppm making it identical
to the revised primary standard. On May
21, 2012 (77 FR 30088), EPA finalized
designations for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, that became effective on July
20, 2012. The 2008 8-hour ozone
designations included the same three
nonattainment areas previously
designated for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, but with different
classifications. The Washington Area
and the Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City Area were classified as
marginal nonattainment and the
Baltimore Area was classified as
moderate nonattainment.
B. Federal Vehicle Standards
Vehicles sold in the United States are
required by the CAA to be certified to
meet the Federal emission standards or
California’s emission standards. States
are forbidden from adopting their own
standards, but may adopt California’s
emission standards for which EPA has
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
granted a waiver of preemption.
Specifically, section 209 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, EPA may waive that
prohibition to any state that adopted its
own vehicle emission standards prior to
March 30, 1966. As California was the
only state to do so, California has
authority under the CAA to adopt its
own motor vehicle emissions standards.
California must demonstrate to EPA that
its newly adopted standards will be
‘‘. . . in the aggregate, at least as
protective of public health and welfare
as applicable Federal standards.’’ EPA
then must grant a waiver of preemption
for California’s standards, unless the
demonstration fails to meet specific
requirements set forth in section 209 of
the CAA applicable to such a waiver
demonstration.
Section 177 of the CAA authorizes
other states to adopt California’s
standards in lieu of Federal vehicle
standards, provided the state adopting
California’s standards does so at least
two years prior to the model year in
which they become effective and that
EPA has issued a waiver of preemption
to California for such standards.
California emission standards have been
traditionally more stringent than the
EPA requirements, but their structure is
similar to that of the Federal programs.
On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698),
EPA adopted the second tier of Federal
motor vehicle standards (Federal Tier 2
standards) enacted under the CAA. The
Federal Tier 2 standards included
tailpipe emissions standards for
passenger vehicles and light duty trucks
and gasoline sulfur standards. The
standards were phased-in between the
2004 and 2007 model years, except in
states that had formally adopted
California’s emission standards in lieu
of the Federal standards.
On May 7, 2010 (75 FR 25324), EPA
and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), an agency
under the Department of Transportation
(DOT), established a national program
consisting of new standards for lightduty motor vehicles to reduce
greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions and
to improve fuel economy. This program
affected new passenger cars, light-duty
trucks, and medium-duty passenger
vehicles sold in model years 2012
through 2016. EPA adopted the GHG
emissions standards under the CAA,
while NHTSA, as part of DOT, adopted
standards related to fuel economy, the
Corporate Average Fuel Economy
(CAFE) standards, under the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jul 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
Under this national program, adopted in
coordination with California,
automobile manufacturers face a single
set of national emissions standards to
meet both Federal and California
emissions requirements.
On October 15, 2012 (77 FR 62624),
EPA and NHTSA issued a joint final
rule to further reduce GHG emissions
and improve fuel economy for lightduty vehicles for model years 2017 and
beyond. This rule extended the previous
national program beyond 2016 by
tightening GHG for model years 2017 to
2025 and the CAFE standards between
model years 2017 and 2021. The rule
continued to apply to passenger cars,
light-duty trucks, and medium-duty
passenger vehicles sold in the
applicable model years.
EPA’s GHG standards are based on
carbon dioxide (CO2) emissionsfootprint curves, where each vehicle has
a different CO2 emissions compliance
target depending on its footprint value
(related to the size of the vehicle).
Generally, the larger the vehicle
footprint, the higher the corresponding
vehicle CO2 emissions target. As a
result, the burden of compliance was
distributed across all vehicles and all
manufacturers. The CAFE program
required vehicle manufacturers to
comply with the gas mileage, or fuel
economy, standards set by the DOT.
On March 3, 2014, EPA signed a final
rule adopting Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emission and Fuel Standards. The
Federal Tier 3 program establishes more
stringent Federal vehicle emissions
standards and lowers the sulfur content
of gasoline for new cars in states subject
to the Federal program, beginning in
model year 2017. The Federal Tier 3
vehicle program will reduce both
tailpipe and evaporative emissions from
passenger cars, light-duty trucks,
medium-duty passenger vehicles, and
some heavy-duty vehicles. The gasoline
sulfur standard will enable more
stringent vehicle emissions standards
and will make emissions control
systems more effective. The tailpipe
standards include different phase-in
schedules that vary by vehicle class but
generally phase in between model years
2017 and 2025. The Tier 3 standards are
closely harmonized with California LEV
Tier III standards as well as with
Federal and California GHG emission
standards for light-duty vehicles.
C. California’s Vehicle Standards
In 1990, California’s Air Resources
Board (CARB) adopted its first
generation of LEV standards applicable
to light and medium duty vehicles.
California’s vehicle emission standards
program is referred to as the California
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38789
Low Emissions Vehicle Program (CA
LEV program). These LEV standards
were phased-in beginning in model year
1994 through model year 2003. In 1999,
California adopted a second generation
of CA LEV standards, known as CA LEV
II. CA LEV II was phased-in beginning
with model year 2004 through model
year 2010. EPA granted a Federal
preemption waiver for CA LEV II
program on April 22, 2003 (68 FR
19811).
In December 2000, CARB modified
the CA 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. In 2006, CARB
adopted technical amendments to its CA
LEV II program that amended the
evaporative emission test procedures,
onboard refueling vapor recovery and
spitback test procedures, exhaust
emission test procedures, and vehicle
emission control label requirements.
These technical amendments aligned
each of California’s test procedures and
label requirements with its Federal
counterpart, in an effort to streamline
and harmonize the California and
Federal Tier 2 programs and to reduce
manufacturer testing burdens and
increase in-use compliance. On July 30,
2010 (75 FR 44948), EPA published a
Federal Register notice confirming that
CARB’s 2006 technical amendments
were within-the-scope of existing
waivers of preemption for the CA LEV
II program.
The CA LEV II program reduces
emissions in a similar manner to the
Federal Tier 2 program by use of
declining fleet average non-methane
organic gas (NMOG) emission standards,
applicable to each vehicle manufacturer
each year. Separate fleet average
standards are not established for NOX,
CO, particulate matter (PM), or
formaldehyde as these emissions are
controlled as a co-benefit of the NMOG
fleet average (fleet average values for
these pollutants are set by the
certification standards for each set of
California prescribed certification
standards.) These allowable sets of
standards range from LEV standards (the
least stringent standard set) to Zero
Emission Vehicle (ZEV) standards (the
most stringent standard set). In between,
the CA LEV II program establishes
various other standards: The Ultra-Low
Emission Vehicles (ULEV), Super-Ultra
Low Emission Vehicles (SULEV), Partial
Zero Emission Vehicles (PZEV), and
Advanced Technology-Partial Zero
Emission Vehicles (AT–PZEV). Each
manufacturer may comply by selling a
mix of vehicles meeting any of these
standards, as long as their sales-
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
38790
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
weighted, overall average of the various
standard sets meets the overall fleet
average and ZEV requirements.
In January 2012, California approved
a new emissions-control program for
model years 2017 through 2025, called
the Advanced Clean Cars Program, or
the CA LEV III program. The program
combines the control of smog, soot, and
GHG and requirements for greater
numbers of ZEV vehicles into a single
package of standards. The regulations
apply to light duty vehicles, light duty
trucks, and medium duty passenger
vehicles. Under the Advanced Clean
Cars Program, manufacturers can certify
vehicles to the standards before model
year 2015. Beginning with model year
2020, all vehicles must be certified to
CA LEV III standards. The ZEV
amendments add flexibility to
California’s existing ZEV program for
2017 and earlier model years, and
establish new sales and technology
requirements starting with the 2018
model year. The CA LEV III
amendments establish more stringent
criteria and GHG emission standards
starting with the 2015 and 2017 model
years, respectively. The California GHG
standards are almost identical in
stringency and structure to the Federal
GHG standards for model years from
2017 to 2025. Additionally, on
December 2012, California adopted a
‘‘deemed to comply’’ regulation that
enables manufacturers to show
compliance with California GHG
standards by demonstrating compliance
with Federal GHG standards. On June 9,
2013 (78 FR 2112), EPA granted a
Federal preemption waiver for
California’s Advanced Clean Cars
Program. California’s LEV Program is
contained in the California Code of
Regulations (CCR), Title 13 ‘‘Motor
Vehicles,’’ Division 3 ‘‘Air Resources
Board.’’
D. Maryland’s Low Emissions Vehicle
Program
In order to address ambient air quality
in the State, Maryland’s legislature
adopted and the Governor signed the
Maryland Clean Cars Act of 2007, the
purpose of which was to implement
California’s motor vehicle emission
standards. This statute compelled the
adoption by MDE on November 19, 2007
of a rule to implement CA LEV II
standards. This rule established
Maryland regulatory chapter COMAR
26.11.34, entitled ‘‘Low Emission
Vehicle Program’’ (also referred to as
Maryland Clean Car Program), which
became effective in Maryland on
December 17, 2007. Since originally
adopted, Maryland has revised its LEV
program in 2009 and 2011 to reflect
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jul 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
updates by California to the CA LEV II
program. Maryland submitted these
changes to EPA as SIP revisions, which
EPA approved into Maryland’s SIP. See
78 FR 34911 (June 11, 2013).
The Maryland Clean Car Program has
two objectives. The first is to reduce
emissions of NOX and VOCs, as
precursors of ground level ozone, from
new motor vehicles sold in Maryland.
The second objective of the program is
to reduce GHG emissions from motor
vehicles. The Maryland Clean Car
Program requires all 2011 and newer
model year passenger cars, light-duty
trucks, and medium-duty vehicles
having a GVWR of 14,000 pounds or
less that are sold as new cars or are
transferred in Maryland to meet the
applicable California emissions
standards. For purposes of the Maryland
Clean Car Program, transfer means to
sell, import, deliver, purchase, lease,
rent, acquire, or receive a motor vehicle
for titling or registration in Maryland.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Since Maryland last adopted
California’s vehicle standards in 2011,
California has updated its rules to adopt
its Advanced Clean Cars Program. As
mentioned previously, on June 9, 2013
(78 FR 2112), EPA granted a Federal
preemption waiver for California’s
Advanced Clean Cars Program.
Maryland adopted California’s updates
to portions of CCR Title 13, Division 3
by amending COMAR 26.11.34.02 on
February 6, 2013 (40:4 Md R. 347), as
proposed on November 30, 2012 (39:24
Md. R. 1587–1590). These amendments
became state-effective on March 4, 2013.
On August 1, 2013, Maryland
submitted as a SIP revision the stateadopted amendments to the Maryland
LEV Program rule, with exception of
CCR, Title 13, Division 3, Section 2030
‘‘Liquefied Petroleum Gas or Natural
Gas Retrofit Systems,’’ effective on
February 13, 2010. The purpose of this
SIP revision is for Maryland to update
its incorporation by reference
provisions, under COMAR 26.11.34.02,
to adopt the CA LEV III program. This
SIP revision will replace in its entirety
the existing regulation COMAR
26.11.34.02 as approved in the SIP on
June 11, 2013. See 78 FR 34911. A list
of California’s regulations being
incorporated by reference is included as
part of Maryland’s notice of proposed
action dated November 30, 2012 (39:24
Md. R. 1587–1590), which is included
in the State submittal and available
online at www.regulations.gov, Docket
ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0310.
The proposed SIP revision includes
Maryland’s revised Clean Car Program
rules that adopt by reference California’s
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Advanced Clean Car Program approved
by CARB in 2012. These amendments
are important for purposes of making
sure Maryland’s rules are consistent
with those of California, and thus in
compliance with Maryland’s
requirement under section 177 of the
CAA.
As explained earlier, the California
Advanced Clean Cars Program includes
changes to CA LEV II, GHG, and ZEV
standards, all of which have been
adopted by Maryland. The California
Advanced Clean Cars Program regulates
criteria pollutants, and requires that all
new 2017 and subsequent model year
vehicles transferred (including titled
and registered) in the State of Maryland
be certified to meet the new California
emission standards. The CA LEV III
emission standards will be phased-in
from 2017–2025. Maryland’s update to
its Clean Car Program will result in a
further reduction of ozone precursors
emissions of NOX and VOCs, as well as
air toxic and GHG emissions beyond the
State’s current, SIP-approved program.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving a SIP revision
submitted by Maryland on August 1,
2013. The SIP revision amends the
Maryland Low Emission Vehicle
Program, in regulation COMAR
26.11.34.02, to incorporate by reference
California’s Advanced Clean Car
Program. Maryland’s adoption of
California’s vehicle standards is
authorized by section 177 of the CAA,
and will ensure that Maryland’s Low
Emission Vehicle Program continues to
be the same as California’s Low
Emission Vehicle program. EPA is
publishing this rule without prior
proposal because EPA views this as a
noncontroversial amendment and
anticipates no adverse comment.
However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’
section of today’s Federal Register, EPA
is publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
SIP revision if adverse comments are
filed. This rule will be effective on
September 8, 2014, without further
notice unless EPA receives adverse
comment by August 8, 2014. If EPA
receives adverse comment, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that the rule will not take effect. EPA
will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time.
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this 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 CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 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 each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to 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).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by September 8, 2014. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. Parties with
38791
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking action. This
rulemaking action to revise the
Maryland Low Emissions Vehicle
Program may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements.
(See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 13, 2014.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart V—Maryland
2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by revising the entry for
COMAR 26.11.34.02. to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1070
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS, TECHNICAL MEMORANDA, AND STATUTES IN THE MARYLAND SIP
Code of Maryland
Administrative Regulations
(COMAR) citation
*
State
effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
26.11.34
*
26.11.34.02 with exception ............
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jul 08, 2014
*
Jkt 232001
*
03/04/13
*
PO 00000
Frm 00045
*
Additional explanation/citation at 40 CFR
52.1100
*
*
Low Emissions Vehicle Program
*
*
Incorporation by Reference ..........
*
EPA
approval
date
*
*
*
07/09/14 [Insert Federal Reg- Update to incorporate by reference Caliister citation].
fornia’s Advanced Clean Car Program
rules, with exception of Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 5, § 2030.
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
*
09JYR1
*
38792
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 595
[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0069]
RIN 2127–AL17
Make Inoperative Exemptions; Vehicle
Modifications To Accommodate People
With Disabilities; Ejection Mitigation;
Lamps, Reflective Devices, and
Associated Equipment
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule, technical correction.
AGENCY:
This final rule amends
NHTSA regulations to include a new
exemption relating to the Federal motor
vehicle safety standard for ejection
mitigation, and to correct a reference
regarding the standard for lamps,
reflective devices and associated
equipment. The exemptions facilitate
the mobility of physically disabled
drivers and passengers.
DATES: Effective date: The date on
which this final rule amends the CFR is
September 8, 2014.
Petitions for Reconsideration:
Petitions for reconsideration of this final
rule must be received at the address
below by August 25, 2014.
ADDRESSES: If you wish to petition for
reconsideration of this rule, submit your
petition to the following address so that
it is received by NHTSA by the date
above: Administrator, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., West Building,
Washington, DC 20590. You should
refer in your petition to the docket
number of this document. The petition
will be placed in the docket. Note that
all submissions received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please
see the Privacy Act heading below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher J. Wiacek, NHTSA Office of
Crash Avoidance Standards, NVS–123
(telephone 202–366–4801), or Deirdre
Fujita, NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel,
NCC–112 (telephone 202–366–2992).
The mailing address for these officials
is: National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jul 08, 2014
In
response to a petition for rulemaking
from Bruno Independent Living Aids
(Bruno), this final rule amends 49 CFR
Part 595, Subpart C, ‘‘Make Inoperative
Exemptions, Vehicle Modifications to
Accommodate People With
Disabilities,’’ to include a new
exemption relating to FMVSS No. 226,
‘‘Ejection mitigation.’’ This document
also corrects a reference in the part to
FMVSS No. 108, ‘‘Lamps, reflective
devices and associated equipment.’’ The
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
preceding this final rule was published
on October 26, 2012 (77 FR 65352).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2014–15886 Filed 7–8–14; 8:45 am]
Jkt 232001
Background
The National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act (49 U.S.C. Chapter
301) (‘‘Safety Act’’) and NHTSA’s
regulations require vehicle
manufacturers to certify that their
vehicles comply with all applicable
Federal motor vehicle safety standards
(FMVSSs) (see 49 U.S.C. 30112; 49 CFR
part 567) at the time of manufacture. A
vehicle manufacturer, distributor,
dealer, or repair business, except as
indicated below, may not knowingly
make inoperative any part of a device or
element of design installed in or on a
motor vehicle in compliance with an
applicable FMVSS (see 49 U.S.C.
30122). NHTSA has the authority to
issue regulations that exempt regulated
entities from the ‘‘make inoperative’’
provision (49 U.S.C. 30122(c)). The
agency has used that authority to
promulgate 49 CFR part 595, ‘‘Make
Inoperative Exemptions.’’
49 CFR part 595, subpart C, sets forth
exemptions from the make inoperative
provision to permit, under limited
circumstances, vehicle modifications
that take the vehicles out of compliance
with certain FMVSSs when the vehicles
are modified to be used by persons with
disabilities after the first retail sale of
the vehicle for purposes other than
resale. The regulation was promulgated
to facilitate the modification of motor
vehicles so that persons with disabilities
can drive or ride in them. The
regulation involves information and
disclosure requirements and limits the
extent of modifications that may be
made. Details of the regulation are
described in the October 26, 2012
NPRM.
FMVSS No. 226, ‘‘Ejection Mitigation’’
On January 19, 2011,1 the agency
published a final rule establishing
FMVSS No. 226, ‘‘Ejection Mitigation,’’
to reduce the partial and complete
1 76 FR 3212; response to petitions for
reconsideration, 78 FR 55138 (September 9, 2013).
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ejection of vehicle occupants through
side windows in crashes, particularly
rollover crashes. The standard applies to
passenger cars, and to multipurpose
passenger vehicles, trucks and buses
with a gross vehicle weight rating of
4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or less.2
To assess compliance with FMVSS
No. 226, an impactor is propelled from
inside a test vehicle toward the
windows. The ejection mitigation safety
system is required to prevent the
impactor from moving more than a
specified distance beyond the plane of
a window. In the test, the
countermeasure must retain the linear
travel of the impactor such that the
impactor must not travel 100
millimeters beyond the location of the
inside surface of the vehicle glazing.
This displacement limit serves to
control the size of any gaps forming
between the countermeasure (e.g., the
ejection mitigation side curtain air bag)
and the window opening, thus reducing
the potential for both partial and
complete ejection of an occupant.
The agency believes that vehicle
manufacturers will meet the standard by
means of side curtain air bag
technology, and possibly supplement
the technology with advanced glazing.
Existing side impact air bag curtains
(installed pursuant to FMVSS No. 214,
‘‘Side impact protection’’) will be made
larger so that they cover more of the
window opening, made more robust to
remain inflated longer, and made to
deploy in both side impacts and in
rollovers using sensor technology.3
FMVSS No. 226 is a new regulation
and currently, 49 CFR Part 595 does not
provide for an exemption for vehicles
that are modified to accommodate
people with disabilities.
NPRM
On October 26, 2012, NHTSA
published an NPRM 4 in the Federal
Register responding to a petition for
rulemaking from Bruno requesting
NHTSA to amend § 595.7 to include an
exemption from the requirements of
FMVSS No. 226. The NPRM granted the
petition and proposed to amend the
regulation.
Bruno manufactures a product line it
calls ‘‘Turning Automotive Seating
(TAS),’’ which replaces the seat
installed by the original equipment
manufacturer (OEM). In its petition,
Bruno states that the purpose of TAS is
2 Certain
vehicles are excluded from the standard.
estimates the new FMVSS No. 226
requirements will save 373 lives and prevent 476
serious injuries per year. The final rule adopted a
phase-in of the new requirements, which started
September 1, 2013.
4 77 FR 65352, October 26, 2012.
3 NHTSA
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 131 (Wednesday, July 9, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38787-38792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15886]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0310; FRL-9913-30-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Low Emission Vehicle Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland.
This revision pertains to Maryland's incorporation by reference of the
most recent amendments to California's Low Emission Vehicle (LEV)
program. The Clean Air Act (CAA) contains authority by which other
states may adopt new motor vehicle emissions standards that are
identical to California's standards. Maryland has adopted by reference
California's light and medium-duty vehicle emissions and fuel
standards, and consistent with California, submits amendments to these
standards as revisions to the State's SIP. In this SIP revision,
Maryland is updating its Low Emissions Vehicle Program regulation to
adopt by reference California's Advanced Clean Car Program. This action
is being taken under the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on September 8, 2014 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by August 8, 2014.
If EPA receives such comments, 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 Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2014-0310 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: Fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0310, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
[[Page 38788]]
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0310. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
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.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800
Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emlyn V[eacute]lez-Rosa (215) 814-
2038, or by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 1, 2013, the Maryland Department
of the Environment (MDE) submitted a revision to its SIP amending
Maryland's Low Emissions Vehicle Program regulation, COMAR 26.11.34, to
adopt California's Advanced Clean Cars Program, also referred to as the
CA LEV III program. The Maryland Low Emissions Vehicle Program requires
all new 2011 and subsequent model year passenger cars, light trucks,
and medium-duty vehicles having a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of
14,000 pounds or less that are sold in Maryland to meet California's
vehicle standards.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Maryland's Air Quality With Respect to the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
B. Federal Vehicle Standards
C. California's Vehicle Standards
D. Maryland's Low Emissions Vehicle Program
II. Summary of SIP Revision
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. Maryland's Air Quality With Respect to the Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by photochemical reactions
between volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and carbon monoxide (CO) in the presence of sunlight.
In order to reduce ozone concentrations in the ambient air, the CAA
requires all nonattainment areas to apply controls on VOCs and
NOX emission sources to achieve emission reductions.
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time
frame. On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA finalized designations for
areas across the country with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
which became effective on June 15, 2004. In this rulemaking action, EPA
designated for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS three separate nonattainment
areas containing eleven counties and the City of Baltimore in Maryland:
(1) The Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area (hereafter the
Baltimore Area), consisting of the counties of Ann Arundel, Baltimore,
Carroll, Harford, and Howard, and the City of Baltimore in Maryland;
(2) the Washington, DC-MD-VA moderate nonattainment area (hereafter the
Washington Area), whose Maryland's portion consists of the counties of
Calvert, Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince George's; and (3)
the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE moderate
nonattainment area (hereafter the Philadelphia Area), whose Maryland's
portion consists of Cecil County. See 40 CFR 81.321. Upon designation,
these 1997 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment areas had an attainment
date of no later than June 15, 2010.
Two of Maryland's ozone nonattainment areas have attained the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. On February 28, 2012 (77 FR 11739), EPA determined
that the Washington Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by its
June 15, 2010 attainment date. On January 21, 2011 (76 FR 3840), EPA
issued a 1-year attainment date extension (i.e., from June 15, 2010 to
June 15 2011) for the Philadelphia Area. On March 26, 2012 (77 FR
17341), EPA determined that the Philadelphia Area attained the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS by its June 15, 2011 attainment date.
On March 11, 2011 (76 FR 13289), EPA issued a 1-year attainment
date extension (i.e., from June 15, 2010 to June 15, 2011) for the
Baltimore Area. On February 1, 2012 (77 FR 4901), EPA made a
determination that the Baltimore Area did not attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS by its June 15, 2011 attainment date, based on quality
assured, quality controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data
for 2008-2010. As a result, in this same rulemaking action EPA
reclassified the Baltimore Area from moderate to serious nonattainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), EPA revised the level of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 ppm to 0.075 ppm. EPA also strengthened the
secondary 8-hour ozone standard to the level of 0.075 ppm making it
identical to the revised primary standard. On May 21, 2012 (77 FR
30088), EPA finalized designations for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
that became effective on July 20, 2012. The 2008 8-hour ozone
designations included the same three nonattainment areas previously
designated for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, but with different
classifications. The Washington Area and the Philadelphia-Wilmington-
Atlantic City Area were classified as marginal nonattainment and the
Baltimore Area was classified as moderate nonattainment.
B. Federal Vehicle Standards
Vehicles sold in the United States are required by the CAA to be
certified to meet the Federal emission standards or California's
emission standards. States are forbidden from adopting their own
standards, but may adopt California's emission standards for which EPA
has
[[Page 38789]]
granted a waiver of preemption. Specifically, section 209 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, EPA may waive that prohibition to any state that
adopted its own vehicle emission standards prior to March 30, 1966. As
California was the only state to do so, California has authority under
the CAA to adopt its own motor vehicle emissions standards. California
must demonstrate to EPA that its newly adopted standards will be ``. .
. in the aggregate, at least as protective of public health and welfare
as applicable Federal standards.'' EPA then must grant a waiver of
preemption for California's standards, unless the demonstration fails
to meet specific requirements set forth in section 209 of the CAA
applicable to such a waiver demonstration.
Section 177 of the CAA authorizes other states to adopt
California's standards in lieu of Federal vehicle standards, provided
the state adopting California's standards does so at least two years
prior to the model year in which they become effective and that EPA has
issued a waiver of preemption to California for such standards.
California emission standards have been traditionally more stringent
than the EPA requirements, but their structure is similar to that of
the Federal programs.
On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698), EPA adopted the second tier of
Federal motor vehicle standards (Federal Tier 2 standards) enacted
under the CAA. The Federal Tier 2 standards included tailpipe emissions
standards for passenger vehicles and light duty trucks and gasoline
sulfur standards. The standards were phased-in between the 2004 and
2007 model years, except in states that had formally adopted
California's emission standards in lieu of the Federal standards.
On May 7, 2010 (75 FR 25324), EPA and the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), an agency under the Department of
Transportation (DOT), established a national program consisting of new
standards for light-duty motor vehicles to reduce greenhouse gases
(GHG) emissions and to improve fuel economy. This program affected new
passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles
sold in model years 2012 through 2016. EPA adopted the GHG emissions
standards under the CAA, while NHTSA, as part of DOT, adopted standards
related to fuel economy, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE)
standards, under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA). Under
this national program, adopted in coordination with California,
automobile manufacturers face a single set of national emissions
standards to meet both Federal and California emissions requirements.
On October 15, 2012 (77 FR 62624), EPA and NHTSA issued a joint
final rule to further reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel economy for
light-duty vehicles for model years 2017 and beyond. This rule extended
the previous national program beyond 2016 by tightening GHG for model
years 2017 to 2025 and the CAFE standards between model years 2017 and
2021. The rule continued to apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks,
and medium-duty passenger vehicles sold in the applicable model years.
EPA's GHG standards are based on carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions-footprint curves, where each vehicle has a different
CO2 emissions compliance target depending on its footprint
value (related to the size of the vehicle). Generally, the larger the
vehicle footprint, the higher the corresponding vehicle CO2
emissions target. As a result, the burden of compliance was distributed
across all vehicles and all manufacturers. The CAFE program required
vehicle manufacturers to comply with the gas mileage, or fuel economy,
standards set by the DOT.
On March 3, 2014, EPA signed a final rule adopting Tier 3 Motor
Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards. The Federal Tier 3 program
establishes more stringent Federal vehicle emissions standards and
lowers the sulfur content of gasoline for new cars in states subject to
the Federal program, beginning in model year 2017. The Federal Tier 3
vehicle program will reduce both tailpipe and evaporative emissions
from passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty passenger vehicles,
and some heavy-duty vehicles. The gasoline sulfur standard will enable
more stringent vehicle emissions standards and will make emissions
control systems more effective. The tailpipe standards include
different phase-in schedules that vary by vehicle class but generally
phase in between model years 2017 and 2025. The Tier 3 standards are
closely harmonized with California LEV Tier III standards as well as
with Federal and California GHG emission standards for light-duty
vehicles.
C. California's Vehicle Standards
In 1990, California's Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted its first
generation of LEV standards applicable to light and medium duty
vehicles. California's vehicle emission standards program is referred
to as the California Low Emissions Vehicle Program (CA LEV program).
These LEV standards were phased-in beginning in model year 1994 through
model year 2003. In 1999, California adopted a second generation of CA
LEV standards, known as CA LEV II. CA LEV II was phased-in beginning
with model year 2004 through model year 2010. EPA granted a Federal
preemption waiver for CA LEV II program on April 22, 2003 (68 FR
19811).
In December 2000, CARB modified the CA 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. In 2006, CARB adopted technical amendments to its CA LEV II
program that amended the evaporative emission test procedures, onboard
refueling vapor recovery and spitback test procedures, exhaust emission
test procedures, and vehicle emission control label requirements. These
technical amendments aligned each of California's test procedures and
label requirements with its Federal counterpart, in an effort to
streamline and harmonize the California and Federal Tier 2 programs and
to reduce manufacturer testing burdens and increase in-use compliance.
On July 30, 2010 (75 FR 44948), EPA published a Federal Register notice
confirming that CARB's 2006 technical amendments were within-the-scope
of existing waivers of preemption for the CA LEV II program.
The CA LEV II program reduces emissions in a similar manner to the
Federal Tier 2 program by use of declining fleet average non-methane
organic gas (NMOG) emission standards, applicable to each vehicle
manufacturer each year. Separate fleet average standards are not
established for NOX, CO, particulate matter (PM), or
formaldehyde as these emissions are controlled as a co-benefit of the
NMOG fleet average (fleet average values for these pollutants are set
by the certification standards for each set of California prescribed
certification standards.) These allowable sets of standards range from
LEV standards (the least stringent standard set) to Zero Emission
Vehicle (ZEV) standards (the most stringent standard set). In between,
the CA LEV II program establishes various other standards: The Ultra-
Low Emission Vehicles (ULEV), Super-Ultra Low Emission Vehicles
(SULEV), Partial Zero Emission Vehicles (PZEV), and Advanced
Technology-Partial Zero Emission Vehicles (AT-PZEV). Each manufacturer
may comply by selling a mix of vehicles meeting any of these standards,
as long as their sales-
[[Page 38790]]
weighted, overall average of the various standard sets meets the
overall fleet average and ZEV requirements.
In January 2012, California approved a new emissions-control
program for model years 2017 through 2025, called the Advanced Clean
Cars Program, or the CA LEV III program. The program combines the
control of smog, soot, and GHG and requirements for greater numbers of
ZEV vehicles into a single package of standards. The regulations apply
to light duty vehicles, light duty trucks, and medium duty passenger
vehicles. Under the Advanced Clean Cars Program, manufacturers can
certify vehicles to the standards before model year 2015. Beginning
with model year 2020, all vehicles must be certified to CA LEV III
standards. The ZEV amendments add flexibility to California's existing
ZEV program for 2017 and earlier model years, and establish new sales
and technology requirements starting with the 2018 model year. The CA
LEV III amendments establish more stringent criteria and GHG emission
standards starting with the 2015 and 2017 model years, respectively.
The California GHG standards are almost identical in stringency and
structure to the Federal GHG standards for model years from 2017 to
2025. Additionally, on December 2012, California adopted a ``deemed to
comply'' regulation that enables manufacturers to show compliance with
California GHG standards by demonstrating compliance with Federal GHG
standards. On June 9, 2013 (78 FR 2112), EPA granted a Federal
preemption waiver for California's Advanced Clean Cars Program.
California's LEV Program is contained in the California Code of
Regulations (CCR), Title 13 ``Motor Vehicles,'' Division 3 ``Air
Resources Board.''
D. Maryland's Low Emissions Vehicle Program
In order to address ambient air quality in the State, Maryland's
legislature adopted and the Governor signed the Maryland Clean Cars Act
of 2007, the purpose of which was to implement California's motor
vehicle emission standards. This statute compelled the adoption by MDE
on November 19, 2007 of a rule to implement CA LEV II standards. This
rule established Maryland regulatory chapter COMAR 26.11.34, entitled
``Low Emission Vehicle Program'' (also referred to as Maryland Clean
Car Program), which became effective in Maryland on December 17, 2007.
Since originally adopted, Maryland has revised its LEV program in 2009
and 2011 to reflect updates by California to the CA LEV II program.
Maryland submitted these changes to EPA as SIP revisions, which EPA
approved into Maryland's SIP. See 78 FR 34911 (June 11, 2013).
The Maryland Clean Car Program has two objectives. The first is to
reduce emissions of NOX and VOCs, as precursors of ground
level ozone, from new motor vehicles sold in Maryland. The second
objective of the program is to reduce GHG emissions from motor
vehicles. The Maryland Clean Car Program requires all 2011 and newer
model year passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles
having a GVWR of 14,000 pounds or less that are sold as new cars or are
transferred in Maryland to meet the applicable California emissions
standards. For purposes of the Maryland Clean Car Program, transfer
means to sell, import, deliver, purchase, lease, rent, acquire, or
receive a motor vehicle for titling or registration in Maryland.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Since Maryland last adopted California's vehicle standards in 2011,
California has updated its rules to adopt its Advanced Clean Cars
Program. As mentioned previously, on June 9, 2013 (78 FR 2112), EPA
granted a Federal preemption waiver for California's Advanced Clean
Cars Program. Maryland adopted California's updates to portions of CCR
Title 13, Division 3 by amending COMAR 26.11.34.02 on February 6, 2013
(40:4 Md R. 347), as proposed on November 30, 2012 (39:24 Md. R. 1587-
1590). These amendments became state-effective on March 4, 2013.
On August 1, 2013, Maryland submitted as a SIP revision the state-
adopted amendments to the Maryland LEV Program rule, with exception of
CCR, Title 13, Division 3, Section 2030 ``Liquefied Petroleum Gas or
Natural Gas Retrofit Systems,'' effective on February 13, 2010. The
purpose of this SIP revision is for Maryland to update its
incorporation by reference provisions, under COMAR 26.11.34.02, to
adopt the CA LEV III program. This SIP revision will replace in its
entirety the existing regulation COMAR 26.11.34.02 as approved in the
SIP on June 11, 2013. See 78 FR 34911. A list of California's
regulations being incorporated by reference is included as part of
Maryland's notice of proposed action dated November 30, 2012 (39:24 Md.
R. 1587-1590), which is included in the State submittal and available
online at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0310.
The proposed SIP revision includes Maryland's revised Clean Car
Program rules that adopt by reference California's Advanced Clean Car
Program approved by CARB in 2012. These amendments are important for
purposes of making sure Maryland's rules are consistent with those of
California, and thus in compliance with Maryland's requirement under
section 177 of the CAA.
As explained earlier, the California Advanced Clean Cars Program
includes changes to CA LEV II, GHG, and ZEV standards, all of which
have been adopted by Maryland. The California Advanced Clean Cars
Program regulates criteria pollutants, and requires that all new 2017
and subsequent model year vehicles transferred (including titled and
registered) in the State of Maryland be certified to meet the new
California emission standards. The CA LEV III emission standards will
be phased-in from 2017-2025. Maryland's update to its Clean Car Program
will result in a further reduction of ozone precursors emissions of
NOX and VOCs, as well as air toxic and GHG emissions beyond
the State's current, SIP-approved program.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving a SIP revision submitted by Maryland on August 1,
2013. The SIP revision amends the Maryland Low Emission Vehicle
Program, in regulation COMAR 26.11.34.02, to incorporate by reference
California's Advanced Clean Car Program. Maryland's adoption of
California's vehicle standards is authorized by section 177 of the CAA,
and will ensure that Maryland's Low Emission Vehicle Program continues
to be the same as California's Low Emission Vehicle program. EPA is
publishing this rule without prior proposal because EPA views this as a
noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However,
in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register, EPA is
publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will
be effective on September 8, 2014, without further notice unless EPA
receives adverse comment by August 8, 2014. If EPA receives adverse
comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
[[Page 38791]]
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this
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 CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 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 each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to 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).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by September 8, 2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking action. This rulemaking action to revise the Maryland Low
Emissions Vehicle Program may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 13, 2014.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart V--Maryland
0
2. In Sec. 52.1070, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry for COMAR 26.11.34.02. to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Regulations, Technical Memoranda, and Statutes in the Maryland SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Additional
Code of Maryland Administrative Title/subject effective EPA approval date explanation/citation
Regulations (COMAR) citation date at 40 CFR 52.1100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26.11.34 Low Emissions Vehicle Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
26.11.34.02 with exception....... Incorporation by 03/04/13 07/09/14 [Insert Update to
Reference. Federal Register incorporate by
citation]. reference
California's
Advanced Clean Car
Program rules, with
exception of Title
13, California Code
of Regulations
(CCR), Division 3,
Chapter 2, Article
5, Sec. 2030.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 38792]]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-15886 Filed 7-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
