State and Federal Standards for Mobile-Source Emissions (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Regulation of Emissions from New Mobile Sources
3 Regulation of Emissions from New Mobile Sources
Pages 65-113
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 65... ...
This chapter describes how the federal government and California set emissions standards for new mobile sources and how the emissions reductions from those standards are incorporated into air quality management. 1The term "new mobile sources" is used throughout the report to refer to newly manufactured sources not yet in use by the consumer.
|
From page 66... ...
In congressional hearings, evidence was presented that California had adopted its own state vehicle emissions standards and that several other states were in the process of following California's lead and preparing to adopt their own state standards (Air Pollution -- 1967 [Automotive Air Pollution] : Hearings before the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Senate Comm.
|
From page 67... ...
Although the initial congressional discussions in 1967 favored preempting new motor vehicle emissions standards in all 50 states, the California congressional delegation successfully persuaded their House and Senate colleagues to make a special exception for California because of
|
From page 68... ...
. Thus, as described by the nation's second highest court, Congress intended California to "act as a kind of laboratory for innovation" for mobilesource emissions control (Motor & Eqpt.
|
From page 69... ...
First, Congress revised the criteria for a federal waiver of vehicle emissions standards for California, which were now administered by EPA, to require that the California standards be at least as protective as the applicable federal standards in the aggregate. In the original version of the waiver provisions adopted in 1967, Congress had required every California standard to be at least as protective as the equivalent federal standard.
|
From page 70... ...
. Adoption of California Standards by Other States An even more fundamental change adopted by Congress in 1977 was a decision to allow other states to adopt the California standards.
|
From page 71... ...
were unduly restricting the capability of non-California states to obtain emissions reductions from new motor vehicles, which contributed to their inability to meet the NAAQS. As the House committee stated in 1977, The Committee is concerned that this preemption (section 209(a)
|
From page 72... ...
. To avoid imposing undue burdens on vehicle manufacturers, Congress imposed "strict limits" on the authority of states to adopt the California new motor vehicle emissions standards under section 177 (H.R.
|
From page 73... ...
Although the basic preemption framework of section 177 was retained, some conditions for adoption of California emission standards were added. Section 177 was amended by adding the following provision to its existing language: Nothing in this section or in title II of this Act shall be con strued as authorizing any such State to prohibit or limit, di rectly or indirectly, the manufacture or sale of a new motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine that is certified in California as meeting California standards, or to take any action of any kind to create, or have the effect of creating, a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine different than a motor vehicle or en gine certified in California under California standards (a `third vehicle')
|
From page 74... ...
(2) implicitly preempts state emissions standards by requiring EPA to provide a preemption waiver for California standards and other emissions requirements similar to the waiver provided for motor vehicle emissions standards under section 209(b)
|
From page 75... ...
. Second, unlike section 177, a state choosing to adopt California's standards for nonroad sources must notify the EPA administrator of its decision, although EPA still has no approval role in the adoption of the state standards (42 USC § 7543(e)
|
From page 76... ...
. One year later, EPA changed its position on the basis of its findings that the ZEV mandate directly resulted in some reductions of evaporative emissions and nitrogen oxides (NOx)
|
From page 77... ...
. The case involved regulations adopted by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, a local government agency responsible for air pollution control in the Los Angeles metropolitan area.
|
From page 78... ...
. This waiver covered the LEV program's 1996 to 1998 model-year passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles and engines.
|
From page 79... ...
Waiver Criteria for On-Road Standards Pursuant to section 209(b) , California must first find that its proposed standards for motor vehicles are, in the aggregate, at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards.
|
From page 80... ...
. Waiver Criteria for Nonroad Standards A similar waiver procedure is provided for California standards for nonroad engines and vehicles in section 209(e)
|
From page 81... ...
EPA often does not approve a California waiver until shortly before or, in some cases, even after the applicable regulations take effect. For example, the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
|
From page 82... ...
. EPA issued a waiver decision for California motor vehicle evaporative emissions standards for 1996 to 1998 model-year vehicles on August 5, 1999, well after the applicable model years were over (64 Fed.
|
From page 83... ...
However, as noted above, many past waivers received no important comments, and the agency is under no obligation to respond to frivolous or otherwise minor comments. State Adoption of California Standards under Section 177 of the CAA Amendments In contrast to section 209(b)
|
From page 84... ...
. EPA and the courts have rejected all claims by manufacturers that different conditions in a section 177 state (that is, different fuels than California that allegedly adversely affect emission-control equipment or cold temperatures that allegedly affect performance of battery-powered electric vehicles)
|
From page 85... ...
EPA has taken the position that a state need not adopt all of the California standards. For example, EPA determined that a state adopting California's LEV standards in the 1990s was not required to adopt California's ZEV mandate, which had been enacted as part of the LEV standards by California (59 Fed.
|
From page 86... ...
. EPA subsequently noted "the NMOG fleet average is the central provision of the LEV program to require manufacture of the low emission vehicles in the program and to obtain enforceable emission reductions from such vehicles" (59 Fed.
|
From page 87... ...
In some cases, Congress directs the agency to adopt numerical standards, such as the Tier 1 standards for motor vehicle emissions, or to study an issue such as the issue of nonroad engines and develop the standards (EPA 1991)
|
From page 88... ...
OMB's role includes a review of both the proposed and the final rules under EO 12866. OMB also issues directives and guidance, in the form of memoranda and circulars, on the types of regulatory analysis required.
|
From page 89... ...
This RIA includes a discussion of health and welfare concerns about motor vehicle emissions; the impacts of the proposal on emissions, air quality, and vehicle and gasoline costs; the cost effectiveness and the cost and benefits of the proposal; and the impacts of the proposal on small businesses. CALIFORNIA'S HISTORY AND PROCESS FOR DEVELOPING MOBILE-SOURCE EMISSIONS STANDARDS California has played a central role in the control of emissions from mobile sources, especially the automobile.
|
From page 90... ...
Source: Los Angeles Times 1947. Control District, the first such air pollution control district in the country and the forerunner to the current South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
|
From page 91... ...
The federal government followed suit in the Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act of 1965 when it adopted both the California crankcase and tailpipe emissions standards for 1968 model-year vehicles. In 1970, Congress moved ahead of California and the federal government process by amending the CAA to require the establishment of regulations to reduce motor vehicle emissions by 90% for model-years 1975 and 1976 vehicles.
|
From page 92... ...
92 a x e) ilm/smrag(s NO 43.
|
From page 93... ...
93 cesn c 40.
|
From page 94... ...
94 d ry ot ot ai (5snte byde ducere ducre rd edcu da rem rd -Duty Californ anst nterrucnoc reds th rda yr3(stnemeriu yr1(tnemeriu yr1(tnemeriu ust act dium win Me (E ten and arisopm quierralimsitpo yr2(stnemeriu yr1(stnemeriu yr3(tnemeriu oni req req req andats req req req lari lari lari ust xhae PA standt ) t lari lari lari simt simt simt haxe OC bu ex simt simt simt Co Ad later)
|
From page 95... ...
95 s t ure fact ediw yr ni nuame (5t tionan en estastd yr6(1 notub ts en 200 esclhievy witht later) yr en (1 (Continued)
|
From page 96... ...
96 tub skc ai ts some Included tru cedna en ty with rds. adv irem Californ lyw nda duth No ents.
|
From page 97... ...
Additionally, California has 35 air pollution control districts or air quality management districts with authority to regulate stationary, indirect, and area sources of air pollution within a given county or region. The California Clean Air Act The California CAA provides a framework for air quality planning and regulation in the state.
|
From page 98... ...
· Air quality management plans to achieve and maintain California ambient air quality standards must be developed in 1990 and revised at 3-year intervals thereafter (requirements for the South Coast Air Quality Management District)
|
From page 99... ...
· San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District · South Coast Air Quality Management District (Los Angeles region) · Any additional air quality management district in the state One member having expertise in each of the following fields: · Automotive engineering or a closely related field · Agriculture, science, or law · Medicine or health effects · Air pollution control or an area similar to that indicated above Two members having no special expertise may be selected from the public at large.
|
From page 100... ...
Tons per Day per Year South Coast Basin 16.9 840 36 San Joaquin Valley 4.1 630 69 Houston 5.5 1360 181 Source: Witherspoon 2004. Air Quality Management Planning and Subsequent Regulatory Processes The basis for the development of air quality regulations in California is the need to meet state ambient air quality standards.
|
From page 101... ...
From the beginning, CARB and the SCAQMD have had to commit to achieving the highest emissions reductions possible from all source categories of under their jurisdiction to meet federal clean air goals. Keeping in mind the emission-reduction commitments, each agency begins the process of identifying cost, safety, and other factors that are part of the control options at its disposal for its area of responsibility.
|
From page 102... ...
As discussed later in Chapter 6 in reference to the ZEV mandate, CARB seems to be able to adjust its rules more often to meet changing technological developments than the federal process has demonstrated to date. MOBILE-SOURCE REGULATION IN THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN State Implementation Planning Process SIPs2 are the formally adopted air quality attainment plans required by the CAA.
|
From page 103... ...
For example, in the early 1980s, during the development of the 1987 SIPs, EPA produced a new mobile-source emissions model. Some states preferred the older emissions model that predicted greater emissions reductions and argued that the timing of the process did not allow use of the newer model.
|
From page 104... ...
104 . ent pmuiqe cilbup nt or provisions.t n.
|
From page 105... ...
105 and ann no e.atstehtfo onita ent ngi sum eratioids . entdn empl as conred imeht ndepei byd l.edom sirededethe evi anspld erationd un n.
|
From page 106... ...
106 ti . of Areae Extrem =eluavnigsed( 9771e and Th athteatr earsy5l rm fo hr mpp0 ts.
|
From page 107... ...
. Such an evaluation would include estimating emissions reductions from specific control measures, costs for implementation of control measures, cost-effectiveness, and implementation issues.
|
From page 108... ...
108 0072 0072 insn insn ctio ctio Redu Redu x)
|
From page 109... ...
109 0072 insn ctio Redu x) NO day tedam 1 Esti persno(t 5 5-2 5 seitnu co nenini)
|
From page 110... ...
Given the significant fraction of emissions that comes from such vehicles, it is prudent to question whether strategies designed to reduce the emissions from high emitters would be more effective than tightening new emissions standards. The committee concludes that new vehicle emissions standards contribute to reducing motor vehicle emissions in ways not matched by in-use emissions controls.
|
From page 111... ...
. Thus, improvements in emission-control tech nologies spurred by emissions standards have affected in-use emis sions, including emissions from high emitters.
|
From page 112... ...
I/M of light-duty vehicles contributes 15% to NOX reductions. Local initiatives also include transportation control measures, which are designed to achieve on-road mobilesource emissions reductions and are included as control measures in the SIP.
|
From page 113... ...
· States first began using their authority under section 177 of the CAA in the early 1990s when New York and Massachusetts adopted California emissions standards for new light-duty vehicles. The primary reason that these states adopted California emissions standards was to obtain additional emissions reductions to help attain and maintain the NAAQS.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.