[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38624-38625]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15862]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0085; FRL 9518-9]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Radionuclides
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document

announces that an Information Collection Request (ICR) has been
forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval. This is a request to renew an existing approved collection.
The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the nature of the
information collection and its estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 30, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0085, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, and
(2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA,
725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Egidi, Radiation Protection
Division, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, Mail Code 6608J,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 343-2304; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On January 24, 2012 (77 FR 3472), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0085, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation
Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-
566-1742.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at www.regulations.gov as EPA receives
them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted
material, confidential business information (CBI), or other information
whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further
information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NESHAP for Radionuclides (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1100.14, OMB Control No. 2060-0191.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2012. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: In the context of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857),
Section 114 authorizes the Administrator of EPA to require any person
who owns or operates any emission source or who is subject to any
requirements of the Act to: (1) Establish and maintain records, (2)
make reports, install, use, and maintain monitoring equipment or
method, (3) sample emissions in accordance with EPA prescribed
locations, intervals and methods, and (4) provide information as may be
requested. EPA's regional offices use the information collected to
ensure that public health continues to be protected from the hazards of
radionuclides by compliance with health based standards. This
information is required for those facilities meeting the definition of
each Subpart. EPA's compliance monitoring activities vary widely. EPA
could issue a letter requesting information about compliance or could
conduct a full scale investigation, including on-site inspections. The
information required to be submitted is not confidential in nature.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 144
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: The NAICS Codes of facilities
associated with the activity of the respondents are: (1) Elemental
Phosphorous--325188, (2) Phosphogypsum Stacks--212392, (3) Underground
Uranium Mines--212291, and (4) Uranium Mill Tailings--212291.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 20.
    Frequency of Response: Initially (Once), Annually, Random
(Occasionally).
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 2,872.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $500,572, which includes $283,460 in
annualized capital and O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 6,324 hours in the
total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. This decrease reflects a reduction in the number
of facilities affected due to dwindling interest in underground uranium
mining, fewer conventional uranium impoundments, reduced activities at
phosphogypsum facilities, and alternate usage of phosphogypsum, (e.g.,
as road base).

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-15862 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: February 1, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 20)]
[Notices]
[Page 5077-5079]
[DOCID:fr01fe10-55]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0020; FRL-8808-3]

Pesticide Product; Registration Application

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has received an application to register a pesticide
product containing an active ingredient not included in any previously
registered pesticide products. Pursuant to the provisions of section
3(c)(4) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), EPA is hereby providing notice of receipt and opportunity to
comment on this application.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 3, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0020, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2010-0020. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line 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 regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website 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 regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the 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 docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Driss Benmhend, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying

information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
     ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
     iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
     viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Registration Applications

    EPA received an application as follows to register a pesticide
product containing an active ingredient not included in any previously
registered products. Pursuant to the provision of section 3(c)(4) of
FIFRA, EPA is hereby providing notice of receipt of the application and
opportunity to comment.
    File Symbol: 53575-GA. Applicant: Pacific Biocontrol Corporation,
575 Viewridge Dr., Angwin, CA 94508. Product name: Isomate-EGVM mating
disruptor pheromone  (E,Z)-7,9-Dodecadien-1-yl acetate at 75.68%.
Proposed classification/Use: None.

III. Background Information

    The European Grape Vine moth (EGVM), Lobesia botrana, is a
Lepidopteran pest that poses a risk of serious harm to vineyards. The
EGVM is established in many parts of the world, but, has not previously
been observed in the United States. Recently, the EGVM has been
observed in the Napa Valley of northern California. The EGVM can feed
on both the flower and the fruit of the grapevine. If the moth attacks
mature grape clusters, the berries can become further damaged through
infection by the fungus botrytis - a condition known as bunch rot. In
2009, Napa Valley winegrape growers suffered serious crop loss and
damage from EGVM. Approximately 30 properties have been officially
identified as having the pest present, and it is believed that the pest
will be found on many more properties once delimitation trapping is
conducted this spring. As a sustainable agriculture community,
registration of a pheromone-based product is of importance to the Napa
Valley winegrape growers and other affected communities in order to
provide effective, sustainable, and low risk alternatives to
traditional pesticides.
    The subject active ingredient is a synthetic biochemical that is
structurally similar to and mimics the naturally occurring pheromone
produced by the female EGVM to attract males for mating. This pheromone
is one of a group of straight-chain lepidopteran pheromones (SCLPs) for
which EPA has previously conducted an aggregate risk assessments. The
active ingredient will mitigate the effects of the EGVM by disrupting
the normal mating cycle of the EGVM. The pheromone will be contained in
a twist-tie dispenser that consists of a polyethylene plastic tube
parallel to an associated aluminum wire within the field. It will be
applied by hand directly on the plant or trellis wires. Each twist-tie
dispenser slowly releases infinitesimal amounts of pheromone into the
atmosphere. The pheromone slowly diffuses from the inside of the tube
to the surface where it volatilizes in microgram amounts. This
formulation is not randomly distributed by a mechanical device, nor is
it sprayed into the air.

A. What are pheromones?

    Pheromones are natural chemicals emitted by insects that mediate
communications between individuals of the same species. Pheromones
serve a number of functions including identifying the location of food
sources, alarming other individuals about potential dangers, and
locating potential mates. Pheromones are ubiquitous in the environment,
and are not considered to be air pollutants.
    EPA has registered many products containing SCLPs. The Agency has
compiled a substantial database on SCLPs and has assessed the risks of
this class of compounds to human health and the environment. SCLPs
exhibit negligible toxicity in animal testing; have no effects on non-
target species; and are used at extremely low rates (application rates
of SCLPs do not exceed 150 grams active ingredient/acre/year). Because
the effects of SCLPs are highly species specific, and given their low
application rates, risks to human health are negligible. In addition,
EPA concludes that there is no likelihood of adverse effects to non-
target organisms. SCLPs are exempt from the requirement of a tolerance
in or on all raw agricultural commodities when applied to growing crops
at a rate not to exceed 150 grams of active ingredient/acre (40 CFR
180.1153). EPA has determined that there is a certainty of no harm from
consumption of food containing residues of SCLPs.

B. What is Isomate-EGVM?

    The application before the Agency is for ``Isomate-EGVM,'' an end-
use product (EP) containing 94% of active ingredient, which is the SCLP
that is chemically similar to the pheromone produced naturally by the
European Grapevine Moth - and which has a similar physiologic effect.
In general, pheromones are easily broken down by UV light and
oxidation, and do not remain long in the environment. But, to be
effective, the Isomate-EGVM must last long enough to effectively act on
the target pest's population within the orchards where they are used.
Inert ingredients are therefore added as stabilizers to protect the
longevity of the pheromone. Isomate-EGVM contains two inert
ingredients, BHT and bumetrizole. BHT is an antioxidant and bumetrizole
functions as a UV stabilizer. BHT is approved by the FDA as a food
additive permitted for direct addition to food for human consumption,
and is present in a wide array of food items. Bumetrizole is also
approved by the FDA as a stabilizer in polymers used in producing,
manufacturing, packaging, processing, and transporting food. In
addition, the NOP (National Organic Program) has approved both of these
ingredients for organic uses involving twist-tie dispensers.

C. EPA's Proposed Action

    Pursuant to FIFRA Section 3(c)(4), EPA is providing notice of, and
the opportunity to comment on, the receipt of an application for
registration for the pesticide product Isomate-EGVM. In addition, EPA
is providing advanced notice of OPP's preliminary risk assessment on
Isomate-EGVM. EPA has been informed by USDA's Animal Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) that vineyards located in Sonoma and Napa
counties in California have become infested with EGVM. The moth is
currently in diapause. APHIS is concerned that an active and severe
infestation may begin when the moths begins to emerge from diapause in
late February. APHIS has requested expedited consideration of the
Isomate-EGVM registration application so that growers will be able to
immediately begin to use this product for mating disruption efforts
when the insects emerge. Based upon EPA's risk assessment for SCLPs,
including the EGVM pheromone, EPA believes that registration of
Isomate-EGVM will not cause harm to humans and will not

cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment particularly
given the fact that the product, when applied, volatizes when released.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pest.

    Dated: January 21, 2010.
Keith Matthews,
Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 2010-2146 Filed 1-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: March 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 54)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13227-13229]
[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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    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,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region

2 Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, NY
10007-1866, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    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

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

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