Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program |
|---|
|
Stanley L. Laskowski
Environmental Protection Agency
30 June 1994
[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 125 (Thursday, June 30, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-15982]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: June 30, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[PA38-1-6207; FRL-5005-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed conditional approval.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to conditionally approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. This revision establishes and requires the implementation
of an enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program
in the counties of Allegheny, Beaver, Berks, Blair, Bucks, Cambria,
Centre, Chester, Cumberland, Dauphin, Delaware, Erie, Lackawanna,
Lancaster, Lebanon, Lehigh, Luzerne, Lycoming, Mercer, Montgomery,
Northampton, Philadelphia, Washington, Westmoreland and York. The
intended effect of this action is to propose conditional approval of
the Pennsylvania enhanced motor vehicle I/M program. This action is
being taken under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 1, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Thomas J. Maslany, Director, Air,
Radiation, and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the Air, Radiation,
and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107 and the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of Air
Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania 17105.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Kelly L. Bunker, (215) 597-4554.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
Motor vehicles are significant contributors of volatile organic
compounds (VOC), carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxide (NOx)
emissions. An important control measure to reduce these emissions is
the implementation of a motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M)
program. Despite being subject to the most rigorous vehicle pollution
control program in the world, cars and trucks still create about half
of the ozone air pollution and nearly all of the carbon monoxide air
pollution in United States cities, as well as toxic contaminants. Of
all highway vehicles, passenger cars and light-duty trucks emit most of
the vehicle-related carbon monoxide and ozone-forming hydrocarbons.
They also emit substantial amounts of nitrogen oxides and air toxics.
Although the U.S. has made progress in reducing emissions of these
pollutants, total fleet emissions remain high. This is because the
number of vehicle miles travelled on U.S. roads has doubled in the last
20 years to 2 trillion miles per year, offsetting much of the
technological progress in vehicle emission control over the same two
decades. Projections indicate that the steady growth in vehicle travel
will continue. Ongoing efforts to reduce emissions from individual
vehicles will be necessary to achieve our air quality goals.
Today's cars are absolutely dependent on properly functioning
emission controls to keep pollution levels low. Minor malfunctions in
the emission control system can increase emissions significantly, and
the average car on the road emits three to four times the new car
standard. Major malfunctions in the emission control system can cause
emissions to skyrocket. As a result, 10 to 30 percent of cars are
causing the majority of the vehicle-related pollution problem.
Unfortunately, it is rarely obvious which cars fall into this category,
as the emissions themselves may not be noticeable and emission control
malfunctions do not necessarily affect vehicle driveability.
Effective I/M programs, however, can identify these problem cars
and assure their repair. I/M programs ensure that cars are properly
maintained in customer use. I/M produces emission reduction results
soon after the program is put in place.
EPA projects that ``enhanced'' I/M programs in the most polluted
cities around the country would cut vehicle emissions by 28 percent, at
a cost of about $12.50 per vehicle per year. This represents a major
step toward the Clean Air Acts's requirement that the most seriously
polluted cities achieve a 24 percent overall emissions reduction by
2000.
The Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the Act) requires that most
polluted cities adopt either ``basic'' or ``enhanced'' I/M programs,
depending on the severity of the problem and the population of the
area. The moderate ozone nonattainment areas, plus marginal ozone areas
with existing or previously required I/M programs, fall under the
``basic'' I/M requirements. Enhanced programs are required in serious,
severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas with urbanized
populations of 200,000 or more; CO areas that exceed a 12.7 parts per
million (ppm) design value1 with urbanized populations of 200,000
or more; and all metropolitan statistical areas with a population of
100,000 or more in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The air quality design value is estimated using EPA
guidance. Generally, the fourth highest monitored value with 3
complete years of data is selected as the ozone design value because
the standard allows one exceedance for each year. The highest of the
second high monitored values with 2 complete years of data is
selected as the carbon monoxide design value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Basic'' and ``enhanced'' I/M programs both achieve their
objective by identifying vehicles that have high emissions as a result
of one or more malfunctions, and requiring them to be repaired. An
``enhanced'' program covers more of the vehicles in operation, employs
inspection methods which are better at finding high emitting vehicles,
and has additional features to better assure that all vehicles are
tested properly and effectively repaired.
The Act requires states to make changes to improve existing I/M
programs or to implement new ones for certain nonattainment areas.
Section 182(a)(2)(B) of the Act directed EPA to publish updated
guidance for state I/M programs, taking into consideration findings of
the Administrator's audits and investigations of these programs. The
Act further requires each area required to have an I/M program to
incorporate this guidance into the SIP. Based on these requirements,
EPA promulgated I/M regulations on November 5, 1992 (57 FR 52950,
codified at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.350-51.373).
Under sections 182(c)(3), 187(a)(6) and 187(b)(1) of the Act, any
area having a 1980 Bureau of Census-defined urbanized area population
of 200,000 or more and either: (1) designated as serious or worse ozone
nonattainment or (2) moderate or serious CO nonattainment areas with a
design value greater than 12.7 ppm shall implement enhanced I/M in the
1990 Census-defined urbanized area. The Act also established the ozone
transport region (OTR) in the northeastern United States which includes
the States of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Maryland and Northern Virginia and the District of Columbia. Sections
182(c)(3) and 184(b)(1)(A) of the Act require the implementation of
enhanced I/M programs in all metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs)
located in the OTR which have a population of 100,000 or more people.
The Act requires basic I/M programs to be implemented in the 1990
Census-defined urbanized area of the following nonattainment areas: (1)
any area which is classified as moderate or worse ozone nonattainment
and is not required to implement enhanced I/M or (2) any area outside
the OTR that is classified as serious or worse ozone nonattainment or
moderate or serious CO nonattainment with a design value greater than
12.7 ppm and having a 1990 Census-defined urbanized area population of
less than 200,000. Any areas classified as marginal ozone nonattainment
or moderate CO nonattainment with a design value of 12.7 ppm or less
shall continue operating existing programs that are part of an approved
SIP as of November 15, 1990 or implement any previously required
program, and shall update the program to meet the basic I/M
requirements set forth in Secs. 51.350-51.373.
The I/M regulation establishes minimum performance standards for
basic and enhanced I/M programs as well as requirements for the
following: network type and program evaluation; adequate tools and
resources; test frequency and convenience; vehicle coverage; test
procedures and standards; test equipment; quality control; waivers and
compliance via diagnostic inspection; motorist compliance enforcement;
motorist compliance enforcement program oversight; quality assurance;
enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors; data
collection; data analysis and reporting; inspector training and
licensing or certification; public information and consumer protection;
improving repair effectiveness; compliance with recall notices; on-road
testing; SIP revisions; and implementation deadlines. The performance
standard for basic I/M programs remains the same as it has been since
initial I/M policy was established in 1978, pursuant to the 1977
amendments to the Clean Air Act. The performance standard for enhanced
I/M programs is based on a high-technology transient test, known as
IM240, for new technology vehicles (i.e, those with closed-loop control
and, especially, fuel injected engines), including a transient loaded
exhaust short test incorporating hydrocarbons (HC), CO and NOx
cutpoints, an evaporative system integrity (pressure) test and an
evaporative system performance (purge) test. For enhanced I/M programs,
all requirements must initially be implemented by January 1, 1995
except that areas switching from an existing test-and-repair network to
a test-only network may phase in that change between January 1995 and
January 1996.
II. Background
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is part of the OTR and contains
the following MSAs or parts thereof with a population of 100,000 or
more: Allentown-Bethlehem, Altoona, Beaver, Erie, Harrisburg Lebanon-
Carlisle, Johnstown, Lancaster, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley,
Reading, Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, Sharon, State College, Williamsport,
and York. Sections 182(c)(3) and 184(b)(1)(A) of the Act require all
states in the OTR region which contain MSAs or parts thereof with a
population of 100,000 or more, to submit a SIP revision for an enhanced
I/M program. Section 51.372(b)(2) of the federal I/M regulation
required affected states to submit full I/M SIP revisions that met the
requirements of the Act by November 15, 1993.
On November 5, 1993, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources (PADER) submitted to EPA a SIP revision for an enhanced I/M
program. The revision included a copy of the final enhanced I/M
regulation, 67 Pennsylvania (PA) Code Chapter 178; the Pennsylvania I/M
Request for Proposals (RFP); the Pennsylvania I/M legislation, Act 166;
and supporting documents. On March 30, 1994, PADER submitted an
addendum to the SIP which included portions of the selected I/M
contractor's proposal. The I/M regulations were adopted by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on June 3, 1993 and become effective on
January 1, 1995. EPA's I/M regulations require state I/M rules to be
effective by November 15, 1993. However, EPA believes that the
effective date of the Pennsylvania enhanced I/M program is approvable
for two reasons. First, it would be a futile act to require the
Commonwealth to amend its regulations to require an earlier effective
date at this time. It would normally take Pennsylvania more than the
six months remaining before the effective date of January 1, 1995 to
complete the administrative process to amend the regulations. Secondly,
an earlier effective date would not change any of the requirements of
the regulations. Pennsylvania has already initiated all of the steps
required under the federal I/M regulations to be conducted prior to
January 1, 1995 under independent authority. The January 1, 1995
effective date will allow the Commonwealth to fully implement the
enhanced I/M program consistent with the requirements of the federal I/
M rule. Therefore, EPA concludes that the delay in the effective date
of the Pennsylvania I/M rule is deminimis, and EPA proposes to approve
the January 1, 1995 effective date.
EPA summarizes the requirements of the federal I/M regulations as
found in 40 CFR part 51.350-51.373 and its analysis of the
Commonwealth's submittal below. A more detailed analysis of the
Commonwealth's submittal is contained in a Technical Support Document
(TSD) dated May 18, 1994, which is available from the Region III
office, listed in the ADDRESSES section. Parties desiring additional
details on the federal I/M regulation are referred to the November 5,
1992 Federal Register notice (57 FR 52950) or 40 CFR part 51.350-
51.373.
III. EPA's Analysis of Pennsylvania Enhanced I/M Program
As discussed above, sections 182(c)(3), 184(b)(1)(A), 187(a)(6) and
187(b)(1) of the Act require that states adopt and implement
regulations for an enhanced I/M program in certain areas. The following
sections of this notice address some specific elements of the
Commonwealth's submittal. Parties desiring more specific information
should consult the TSD.
Applicability--40 CFR Part 51.350
Sections 182(c)(3) and 184(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 40 CFR part
51.350(a) require all states in the OTR which contain MSAs or parts
thereof with a population of 100,000 or more to implement an enhanced
I/M program. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is part of the OTR and
contains the following MSAs or parts thereof with a population of
100,000 or more: Allentown-Bethlehem, Altoona, Beaver, Erie,
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, Johnstown, Lancaster, Philadelphia,
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Reading, Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, Sharon, State
College, Williamsport, and York. The Philadelphia area is classified as
a severe ozone nonattainment area and also required to implement an
enhanced I/M program as per section 182(c)(3) of the Act and 40 CFR
part 51.350(2). In addition, the Philadelphia area of Pennsylvania is
designated as moderate nonattainment for CO with a design value of less
than 12.7 ppm. As per 40 CFR part 51.350(3), any area classified as
moderate CO nonattainment with a design value of 12.7 ppm or less shall
continue operating I/M programs that were part of an approved SIP as of
November 15, 1990 and shall update those programs as necessary to meet
the basic I/M program requirements.
Under the requirements of the Clean Air Act, the following 33
counties in Pennsylvania (which are located in the above listed MSAs)
would be subject to the enhanced I/M program requirements: Adams,
Allegheny, Beaver, Berks, Blair, Bucks, Cambria, Carbon, Centre,
Chester, Columbia, Cumberland, Dauphin, Delaware, Erie, Fayette,
Lackawanna, Lancaster, Lebanon, Lehigh, Luzerne, Lycoming, Mercer,
Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Perry, Philadelphia, Somerset,
Washington, Westmoreland, Wyoming and York. However, under the federal
I/M regulations, specifically 40 CFR part 51.350(b), some rural
counties having a population density of less than 200 persons per
square mile based on the 1990 census can be excluded from program
coverage provided that at least 50% of the MSA population is included
in the program. The following eight counties in the Commonwealth
qualify for the exemption discussed in 40 CFR part 51.350(b) and are
exempt from participation in the program: Adams, Carbon, Columbia,
Fayette, Monroe, Perry, Somerset and Wyoming. Consequently, the
Pennsylvania I/M regulation requires that the enhanced I/M program be
implemented in 25 counties in the Commonwealth. The 25 counties are as
follows: Allegheny, Beaver, Berks, Blair, Bucks, Cambria, Centre,
Chester, Cumberland, Dauphin, Delaware, Erie, Lackawanna, Lancaster,
Lebanon, Lehigh, Luzerne, Lycoming, Mercer, Montgomery, Northampton,
Philadelphia, Washington, Westmoreland and York.
The Pennsylvania I/M legislative authority (referred to as Act 166
throughout the remainder of this notice) provides the legal authority
to establish the geographic boundaries. The program boundaries listed
in an appendix to the SIP include the 25 counties listed above and meet
the federal I/M requirements under section 51.350. However, part of
this provision states ``this program shall be established in all areas
of this Commonwealth where the secretary certifies by publication in
the Pennsylvania Bulletin that a system is required in order to comply
with Federal law. Any area, counties, county or portion thereof
certified to be in the program by the secretary must be mandated to be
in the program by Federal law.'' Act 166 requires ``at least 60 days
prior to the implementation of any enhanced emission inspection program
developed under this subsection, the Secretary of Transportation shall
certify by notice in the Pennsylvania Bulletin that an enhanced
emission inspection program will commence''. The Pennsylvania I/M
regulation states that the program begins 60 days after publication of
the notice. It is stated in the Pennsylvania I/M SIP that ``it is not
possible at this time to furnish a copy of that notice since it will be
published in calendar year 1994.'' The SIP goes on to state that ``when
that notice has appeared in the Bulletin, the Department shall furnish
a copy to the EPA as an amendment to this SIP''. EPA interprets this
language as a commitment on the part of the Commonwealth to publish the
bulletin notice and submit it as an amendment to the SIP by December
31, 1994. EPA is proposing to find that the geographic applicability
requirements are satisfied based on the condition that the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania will submit to EPA by December 31, 1994 the
Pennsylvania Bulletin notice certifying the geographic coverage. EPA,
therefore, proposes to conditionally approve the Pennsylvania SIP based
on the Commonwealth's commitment to publish the notice certifying the
need for the I/M program and the geographic scope of the program by
December 31, 1994. The geographic coverage certified in the notice must
include the 25 counties listed above or EPA will consider the
commitment not met and will promptly issue a letter to the Commonwealth
indicating that the conditional approval has been converted to a
disapproval.
The federal I/M regulation requires that the state program shall
not sunset until it is no longer necesary. EPA interprets the federal
regulation as stating that a SIP which does not sunset prior to the
attainment deadline for each applicable area satisfies this
requirement. The Pennsylvania I/M regulation provides for the program
to continue past the attainment dates for all applicable nonattainment
areas in the Commonwealth and is therefore approvable.
Enhanced I/M Performance Standard--40 CFR Part 51.351
The enhanced I/M program must be designed and implemented to meet
or exceed a minimum performance standard, which is expressed as
emission levels in area-wide average grams per mile (gpm) for certain
pollutants. The performance standard shall be established using local
characteristics, such as vehicle mix and local fuel controls, and the
following model I/M program parameters: network type, start date, test
frequency, model year coverage, vehicle type coverage, exhaust emission
test type, emission standards, emission control device, evaporative
system function checks, stringency, waiver rate, compliance rate and
evaluation date. The emission levels achieved by the state's program
design shall be calculated using the most current version, at the time
of submittal, of the EPA mobile source emission factor model. At the
time of the Pennsylvania submittal the most current version was
MOBILE5a. Areas shall meet the performance standard for the pollutants
which cause them to be subject to enhanced I/M requirements. In the
case of ozone nonattainment areas, the performance standard must be met
for both NOx and HC. The Pennsylvania submittal must meet the
enhanced I/M performance standard for HC and NOx in all subject I/
M areas in the Commonwealth.
The Pennsylvania submittal includes the following program design
parameters:
Network type--centralized, test-only
Start date--January 1995
Test frequency--biennial
Model year/vehicle type coverage--all 1968 and newer light duty
gasoline vehicles (LDGV), light duty gasoline trucks 1 & 2 (LDGT1,
LDGT2) up to 9,000 lbs gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR)
Exhaust emission test type--transient test for 1977 and newer model
year vehicles, idle testing for 1968 to 1976 model year vehicles
Emission standards--permanent transient test standards (1983 and newer
vehicles): 0.8 gpm HC, 15 gpm CO, 2.0 gpm NOx from 1/1/97 through
12/31/01, 0.6 gpm HC, 15 gpm CO and 1.5 gpm NOx from 1/1/02 and
after. Please refer to the Pennsylvania I/M regulations found in the
June 19, 1993 edition of the Pennsylvania Bulletin for idle standards
and for transient test standards for other applicable model years
Emission control device--visual inspection of fuel inlet restrictor and
catalytic converter on all 1984 and newer vehicles
Evaporative system function checks--pressure and purge check on all
1977 and newer vehicles
Stringency (pre-1981 failure rate)--20%
Waiver rate--3% on pre and post 1981 vehicles
Compliance rate--96%
Evaluation dates--For HC and NOx: 7/1/99, 7/1/02 and 7/1/05 for
Philadelphia area and 7/1/99 for other other areas
The Pennsylvania program design parameters meet the federal I/M
regulations and are approvable.
The emission levels achieved by the Commonwealth were modeled using
MOBILE5a. The modeling demonstration was performed correctly, used
local characteristics and demonstrated that the program design will
meet the minimum enhanced I/M performance standard, expressed in gpm,
for HC, and NOx, for each milestone and for the attainment
deadline. The Philadelphia area was required to meet the basic I/M
program requirements because of the areas' CO nonattainment
classification. The modeling demonstration shows that the program meets
the enhanced I/M performance standard and in so doing is exceeding the
basic I/M program requirements. The modeling demonstration is
approvable.
Network Type and Program Evaluation--40 CFR Part 51.353
Enhanced I/M programs shall be operated in a centralized test-only
format, unless the state can demonstrate that a decentralized program
is equally effective in achieving the enhanced I/M performance
standard. The enhanced program shall include an ongoing evaluation to
quantify the emission reduction benefits of the program, and to
determine if the program is meeting the requirements of the Act and the
federal I/M regulation. The SIP shall include details on the program
evaluation and shall include a schedule for submittal of biennial
evaluation reports, data from a state monitored or administered mass
emission test of at least 0.1% of the vehicles subject to inspection
each year, description of the sampling methodology, the data collection
and analysis system and the legal authority enabling the evaluation
program.
Both Act 166 and the Commonwealth's I/M regulation provide for a
centralized, test-only network. Pennsylvania's centralized, test-only
network type is approvable. The submittal includes an ongoing program
evaluation which meets the federal I/M regulations. However, Act 166
and the Commonwealth regulation prohibit the contractor from having any
business interest in a vehicle repair facility in the Commonwealth but
does not prohibit such interest in the entire continental United
States. EPA interprets section 51.353 of the federal regulation as
prohibiting this business interest without geographic limitation. EPA
is aware that as a matter of fact the present contractor for
Pennsylvania's enhanced I/M program does not have any vehicle repair
facility business interests in any other state, and is in fact
prohibited from such interests as per contracts with several other
state enhanced I/M programs. Based on this knowledge, EPA is proposing
to find that this requirement is met with the contingency that the
present contractor or any future contractors for the Pennsylvania I/M
program will not at any time in the future have any business interest
in a vehicle repair facility anywhere in the continental United States.
EPA proposes to approve the Pennsylvania SIP on this basis. EPA's
proposed approval is contingent on implementation of the program
consistent with this finding. Should the contractor for the
Pennsylvania I/M program at any time acquire any prohibited repair
business interest EPA will rescind its approval and disapprove the SIP.
Adequate Tools and Resources--40 CFR Part 51.354
The federal regulation requires the state to demonstrate that
adequate funding of the program is available. A portion of the test fee
or separately assessed per vehicle fee shall be collected, placed in a
dedicated fund and used to finance the program. Alternative funding
approaches are acceptable if demonstrated that the funding can be
maintained. Reliance on funding from the state or local General Fund is
not acceptable unless doing otherwise would be a violation of the
state's constitution. The SIP shall include a detailed budget plan
which describes the source of funds for personnel, program
administration, program enforcement, and purchase of equipment. The SIP
shall also detail the number of personnel dedicated to the quality
assurance program, data analysis, program administration, enforcement,
public education and assistance and other necessary functions.
The Pennsylvania State Constitution prohibits monies received from
test fees or any other fees received to be deposited in a proprietary
account. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PADOT), which
implements the I/M program, has no means to fund the I/M program and
must rely on future uncommitted annual appropriations from the General
Assembly. The federal I/M regulations allow for this funding method if,
as in Pennsylvania, doing otherwise would be a violation of the State
Constitution. The submittal demonstrates that sufficient funds,
equipment and personnel have been appropriated to meet program
operation requirements.
The SIP indicates that the average per vehicle cost for oversight
of the program will be 59 cents per vehicle. Other states are planning
to spend roughly $4 per vehicle for oversight of an enhanced I/M
program. EPA is concerned that Pennsylvania's level of oversight
committed may be too low. However, the federal regulation does not set
a prescribed amount to be spent for oversight. Therefore, EPA is
proposing to approve the current level of funding for program
oversight. But, EPA will monitor program implementation closely to
ensure that the current level of funding devoted to oversight is
sufficient.
The Commonwealth's submittal meets the adequate tools and resources
requirements set forth in the federal I/M regulations and is
approvable.
Test Frequency and Convenience--40 CFR Part 51.355
The enhanced I/M performance standard assumes an annual test
frequency; however, other schedules may be approved if the performance
standard is achieved. The SIP shall describe the test year selection
scheme, how the test frequency is integrated into the enforcement
process and shall include the legal authority, regulations or contract
provisions to implement and enforce the test frequency. The program
shall be designed to provide convenient service to the motorist by
ensuring short wait times, short driving distances and regular testing
hours.
The Pennsylvania enhanced I/M regulation provides for a biennial
test frequency. The Commonwealth has submitted modeling that
demonstrates that the performance standard is met using the biennial
test frequency. Act 166 and the Commonwealth's I/M regulation provide
the legal authority to implement and enforce the biennial test
frequency. The Pennsylvania I/M Request for Proposals (RFP), and the
Pennsylvania I/M contractors' proposal (hereafter the contractors'
proposal) provide sufficient evidence that convenient services will be
provided to the motorist. The Pennsylvania submittal meets the test
frequency and convenience requirements of the federal I/M regulations
and is approvable.
Vehicle Coverage--40 CFR Part 51.356
The performance standard for enhanced I/M programs assumes coverage
of all 1968 and later model year light duty vehicles and light duty
trucks up to 8,500 pounds GVWR, and includes vehicles operating on all
fuel types. Other levels of coverage may be approved if the necessary
emission reductions are achieved. Vehicles registered or required to be
registered within the I/M program area boundaries and fleets primarily
operated within the I/M program area boundaries and belonging to the
covered model years and vehicle classes comprise the subject vehicles.
Fleets may be officially inspected outside of the normal I/M program
test facilities, if such alternatives are approved by the program
administration, but shall be subject to the same test requirements
using the same quality control standards as non-fleet vehicles and
shall be inspected in independent, test-only facilities, according to
the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.353(a). Vehicles which are operated
on Federal installations located within an I/M program area shall be
tested, regardless of whether the vehicles are registered in the state
or local I/M area.
The federal I/M regulation requires that the SIP shall include the
legal authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle
coverage requirement, a detailed description of the number and types of
vehicles to be covered by the program and a plan for how those vehicles
are to be identified including vehicles that are routinely operated in
the area but may not be registered in the area, and a description of
any special exemptions including the percentage and number of vehicles
to be impacted by the exemption.
The Pennsylvania enhanced I/M program requires coverage of all 1968
and newer LDGV, LDGT1 and LDGT2 up to 9,000 pounds GVWR which are
registered or required to be registered in the I/M program area. As of
the date of the SIP submittal, 5,815,580 vehicles will be subject to
enhanced I/M testing. The Commonwealth's regulation does not currently
include vehicles operating on all fuel types but Pennsylvania commits
to adding the required testing of these vehicles once EPA promulgates
regulations on alternative fueled vehicle I/M testing. Act 166 and the
Pennsylvania I/M regulation provide the legal authority to implement
and enforce the vehicle coverage. This level of coverage is currently
approvable because it provides the necessary emission reductions to
meet the performance standard.
Pennsylvania's program provides that large fleets will make special
testing arrangements with the Pennsylvania I/M contractor. This will
include appointments scheduled during non-peak hours using a dedicated
lane, testing scheduled after hours and the establishment of a test
lane at a large fleet location if such a fleet determines that this
would be a more cost effective approach for their particular needs.
Small fleets will be tested on a first-come, first-served basis at the
regular test stations in the same manner as a privately-owned vehicle.
The Commonwealth's plan for testing fleet vehicles is acceptable and
meets the requirements of the federal I/M regulation. The
Commonwealth's regulation requires vehicles which are operated on
Federal installations located within an I/M program area to be tested,
regardless of whether the vehicles are registered in the state or local
I/M area, and is approvable.
The Commonwealth's regulation provides for no special exemptions.
Test Procedures and Standards--40 CFR Part 51.357
Written test procedures and pass/fail standards shall be
established and followed for each model year and vehicle type included
in the program. Test procedures and standards are detailed in 40 CFR
part 51.357 and in the EPA document entitled ``High-Tech I/M Test
Procedures, Emission Standards, Quality Control Requirements, and
Equipment Specifications'', EPA-AA-EPSD-IM-93-1, dated April 1994. The
federal I/M regulation also requires vehicles that have been altered
from their original certified configuration (i.e. engine or fuel
switching) to be tested in the same manner as other subject vehicles.
The Commonwealth's regulation includes a description of the test
procedure for idle emission and evaporative system pressure testing and
for a visual emission control device inspection which conform to EPA
approved test procedures and are approvable.
The Commonwealth regulations provide a general description of the
test procedure for transient emission and evaporative system purge
testing. However, the Commonwealth regulations do not provide specific
transient and purge test procedures as described in the EPA document
entitled ``High Tech I/M Test Procedures, Emission Standards, Quality
Control Requirements, and Equipment Specifications'', EPA-AA-EPSD-IM-
93-1, April 1994. The Pennsylvania SIP states that the regulation will
be amended by January 1995 to include the test procedures found in the
July 1993 version of the EPA document referenced above. EPA interprets
this language as a commitment on the part of the Commonwealth to amend
the Commonwealth regulations by December 31, 1994 to incorporate the
test procedures from the EPA document. Since the release of the July
1993 version of the EPA document, a final version, dated April 1994,
has been released which contains minor changes from the July 1993
version. EPA believes that the Commonwealth can incorporate the minor
changes from the final version into their regulation amendments.
Section 178.205(2) of the Commonwealth's regulation allows the
Commonwealth to approve alternate purge procedures if they are shown to
be equivalent or better than Commonwealths' existing purge test
procedure. EPA's concern is that this provision does not require EPA
approval before implementation of the alternate test procedure in the
Commonwealth's program. EPA is proposing to find that the test
procedure requirements of the federal regulation are satisfied based on
the condition that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will submit to EPA
by December 31, 1994 the amended Commonwealth's regulation
incorporating the transient and evaporative purge test procedures from
the final version of the EPA I/M document referenced above and
requiring EPA approval prior to the use of any alternate purge test
procedure. EPA proposes to conditionally approve the Pennsylvania SIP
based on the Commonwealth's commitment to amend its regulations
consistent with this finding. The effective date of these regulation
amendments must coincide with the start date of the enhanced I/M
program. If the Commonwealth fails to fulfill this condition by
December 31, 1994, EPA will consider the commitment not met and will
promptly issue a letter to the Commonwealth indicating that the
conditional approval has been converted to a disapproval.
The Commonwealth regulation establishes HC, CO, and CO2 pass/
fail exhaust standards for the idle test procedure for each applicable
model year and vehicle type. The idle exhaust standards adopted by the
Commonwealth conform to EPA established standards and are approvable.
The Pennsylvania regulation applies one set of start-up transient
emission standards and two sets of permanent transient emission
standards for all vehicle types, i.e. LDGT, LDGT1, LDGT2 and Tier 1
vehicles. The Commonwealth regulation fails to provide Phase 2
standards for all vehicle types and model years. The net result of this
is that the Commonwealth emission standards that apply to LDGT1 and
LDGT2 vehicles are more stringent than federal requirement, which is
approvable; however, the Commonwealth emission standards applied to
Tier 1 vehicles in the Commonwealth's regulation do not meet the
minimum federal requirements. The SIP states that the Commonwealth will
be amending their regulation to replace the existing standards with the
standards found in the July 1993 version of the EPA I/M document
referenced above and further states that the changes can be
accomplished by the end of calendar year 1994. EPA interprets this
language as a commitment on the part of the Commonwealth to amend the
Commonwealth's regulation by December 31, 1994 to incorporate the
emission standards from the EPA document. Since the release of the July
version of the EPA document, a final version, dated April 1994, has
been released which contains minor changes from the July 1993 version.
EPA believes that the Commonwealth can incorporate the minor changes
from the final version into their regulation amendments. EPA is
proposing to find that the test standard requirements of the federal
regulation are satisfied based on the condition that the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania will submit to EPA by December 31, 1994 the amended
Commonwealth's regulation incorporating the Tier 1 and Phase 2 emission
standards from the final version of EPA I/M document referenced above.
EPA is proposing to conditionally approve the Pennsylvania SIP based on
the Commonwealth's commitment to revise its regulations consistent with
this finding. The effective date of these regulation amendments must
coincide with the start date of the enhanced I/M program. If the
Commonwealth fails to fulfill this condition by December 31, 1994, EPA
will consider the commitment not met and will promptly issue a letter
to the Commonwealth indicating that the conditional approval has been
converted to a disapproval.
EPA intends to promulgate the test procedures and related
requirements found in the final version of the EPA I/M document
referenced above as official I/M tests in part 85 of the CFR. Any
changes made during the rulemaking process, which EPA believes would be
minimal, should also be made in the Pennsylvania regulation.
The Commonwealth regulation establishes evaporative purge and
pressure test standards which conform to EPA established standards and
are approvable.
The Pennsylvania regulation provides start-up emission standards
for the transient test that apply during calendar year 1995 and 1996.
The schedule for implementation of these start-up emission standards is
approvable. The Pennsylvania regulation provides for two sets of
permanent emission standards for the transient test, one set which
applies from 1997 through 2001 and the second set which applies in
calendar year 2002 and on. The schedule for implementation of the
permanent standards is approvable and was used in the performance
standard modeling demonstration.
The Commonwealth's regulation also requires vehicles that have been
altered from their original certified configuration (i.e. engine or
fuel switching) to be tested in the same manner as other subject
vehicles.
Test Equipment--40 CFR Part 51.358
Computerized test systems are required for performing any
measurement on subject vehicles. The federal I/M regulation requires
that the state SIP submittal include written technical specifications
for all test equipment used in the program. The specifications shall
describe the emission analysis process, the necessary test equipment,
the required features, and written acceptance testing criteria and
procedures.
The Commonwealth submittal contains the written technical
specifications for all test equipment to be used in the program. The
specifications require the use of computerized test systems. The
specifications also include performance features and functional
characteristics of the computerized test systems which meet the federal
I/M regulations and are approvable.
Quality Control--40 CFR Part 51.359
Quality control measures shall insure that emission measurement
equipment is calibrated and maintained properly, and that inspection,
calibration records, and control charts are accurately created,
recorded and maintained.
The Commonwealth's submittal contains the RFP and the contractors'
proposal which describe and establish quality control measures for the
emission measurement equipment, record keeping requirements and
measures to maintain the security of all documents used to establish
compliance with the inspection requirements. This portion of the
Commonwealth's submittal complies with the quality control requirements
set forth in 40 CFR part 51.359 and is approvable.
Waivers and Compliance Via Diagnostic Inspection--40 CFR Part 51.360
The federal I/M regulation allows for the issuance of a waiver,
which is a form of compliance with the program requirements that allows
a motorist to comply without meeting the applicable test standards. For
enhanced I/M programs, an expenditure of at least $450 in repairs,
adjusted annually to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index
(CPI) as compared to the CPI for 1989, is required in order to qualify
for a waiver. Waivers can only be issued after a vehicle has failed a
retest performed after all qualifying repairs have been made. Any
available warranty coverage must be used to obtain repairs before
expenditures can be counted toward the cost limit. Tampering related
repairs shall not be applied toward the cost limit. Repairs must be
appropriate to the cause of the test failure. Repairs for 1980 and
newer model year vehicles must be performed by a recognized repair
technician. The federal regulation allows for compliance via a
diagnostic inspection after failing a retest on emissions and requires
quality control of waiver issuance. The SIP must set a maximum waiver
rate and must describe corrective action that would be taken if the
waiver rate exceeds that committed to in the SIP.
Act 166 and the Pennsylvania I/M regulation provide the necessary
authority to issue waivers, set and adjust cost limits, administer and
enforce the waiver system, and set a $450 cost limit and allow for an
annual adjustment of the cost limit to reflect the change in the CPI as
compared to the CPI in 1989. The Pennsylvania regulation, RFP, and the
contractors' proposal include provisions which address waiver criteria
and procedures, including cost limits, tampering and warranty related
repairs, quality control and administration. These provisions meet the
federal I/M regulations requirements and are approvable. The
Pennsylvania I/M regulation requires repairs for 1980 and later model
year vehicles to be performed by a recognized repair technician. The
Commonwealth's regulation allows for compliance via diagnostic
inspection and the policies and procedures outlined in the submittal
meet federal I/M regulations and are approvable. The Commonwealth's
regulation does not allow for time extensions. The Commonwealth has set
a maximum waiver rate of 3% for both pre-1981 and 1981 and later
vehicles and has described corrective actions to be taken if the waiver
rate exceeds 3%. This waiver rate has been used in the performance
standard modeling demonstration and is approvable. The waiver
provisions of the SIP meet federal requirements and are approvable.
Motorist Compliance Enforcement--40 CFR Part 51.361
The federal regulation requires that compliance shall be ensured
through the denial of motor vehicle registration in enhanced I/M
programs unless an exception for use of an existing alternative is
approved. An enhanced I/M area may use either sticker-based enforcement
programs or computer-matching programs if either of these programs were
used in the existing program and it can be demonstrated that the
alternative has been more effective than registration denial. For newly
implementing enhanced areas, including newly subject areas in a state
with an I/M program in another part of the state, there is no provision
for enforcement alternatives in the Act. The SIP shall provide
information concerning the enforcement process, legal authority to
implement and enforce the program, and a commitment to a compliance
rate to be used for modeling purposes and to be maintained in practice.
Both Act 166 and the Pennsylvania I/M regulation provide the legal
authority to implement a registration denial system. The Pennsylvania
SIP commits to a compliance rate of 96% which was used in the
performance standard modeling demonstration and is approvable. The
submittal includes detailed information concerning the registration
denial enforcement process which meets the federal I/M regulation
requirements and is approvable.
Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight--40 CFR Part 51.362
The federal I/M regulation requires that the enforcement program
shall be audited regularly and shall follow effective program
management practices, including adjustments to improve operation when
necessary. The SIP shall include quality control and quality assurance
procedures to be used to insure the effective overall performance of
the enforcement system. An information management system shall be
established which will characterize, evaluate and enforce the program.
The Pennsylvania SIP describes in general how the enforcement
program oversight is quality controlled and quality assured and
includes the establishment of an information management system.
The SIP includes a commitment to develop the procedures document
which will detail the specifics of the implementation of the oversight
program by the fall of 1994. The SIP includes a commitment to submit
this procedures document as an amendment to the SIP. EPA proposes
conditional approval of the Pennsylvania SIP with the condition that
the Commonwealth meet its commitment that the motorist compliance
enforcement program oversight procedures manual be submitted as a SIP
amendment within one year from the date of publication of the Federal
Register notice which conditionally approves the SIP.
Quality Assurance--40 CFR Part 51.363
An ongoing quality assurance program shall be implemented to
discover, correct and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in the program.
The program shall include covert and overt performance audits of the
inspectors, audits of station and inspector records, equipment audits,
and formal training of all state I/M enforcement officials and
auditors. A description of the quality assurance program which includes
written procedure manuals on the above discussed items must be
submitted as part of the SIP.
The Pennsylvania submittal describes the quality assurance program
and includes regulations and supporting documents which describe
procedures for implementing inspector, records and equipment audits as
well as providing formal training to all Commonwealth enforcement
officials. Performance audits of inspectors will consist of both covert
and overt audits. The SIP states that a quality assurance procedure
manual is under development which will be consistent with federal
regulation and will include written procedures for performing covert
and overt audits. EPA interprets this as a commitment to develop the
procedures manual and submit it to EPA as a SIP revision. EPA proposes
to conditionally approve the SIP based on its finding that the SIP
meets the quality assurance requirements of the federal regulation with
the condition that the Commonwealth meet its commitment that the
quality assurance program procedures manual will be submitted as a SIP
amendment within one year from the date of publication of the Federal
Register notice which conditionally approves the SIP.
Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors--40 CFR Part
51.364
Enforcement against licensed stations, contractors and inspectors
shall include swift, sure, effective, and consistent penalties for
violation of program requirements. The federal I/M regulation requires
the establishment of minimum penalties for violations of program rules
and procedures which can be imposed against stations, contractors and
inspectors. The legal authority for establishing and imposing
penalties, civil fines, license suspensions and revocations must be
included in the SIP. State quality assurance officials shall have the
authority to temporarily suspend station and/or inspector licenses
immediately upon finding a violation that directly affects emission
reduction benefits, unless constitutionally prohibited. An official
opinion explaining any state constitutional impediments to immediate
suspension authority must be included in the submittal. The SIP shall
describe the administrative and judicial procedures and
responsibilities relevant to the enforcement process, including which
agencies, courts and jurisdictions are involved, who will prosecute and
adjudicate cases and the resources and sources of those resources which
will support this function.
The Pennsylvania submittal includes the legal authority to
establish and impose penalties against stations, contractors and
inspectors. The penalty schedules for inspectors and stations which are
found in the Commonwealth's regulation meet the federal I/M regulation
requirements and are approvable. The penalty schedule for contractors
is approvable with one contingency. 67 PA Code Sec. 178.602(b),
entitled Schedule of Penalties for Emission Inspection Contractors,
states that ``the contractor shall be subject to the terms and
conditions of the Contractor Responsibility Program and may be subject
to penalties and sanctions thereunder in addition to or in lieu of
those imposed under this section or the contract''. The Contractor
Responsibility Program (CRP) is not a statute but rather a Governors'
Office Management Directive and is found in the SIP in Addendum I of
the RFP. The Management Directive does not list specific monetary
penalties to be assessed to the contractor but rather provides for
suspension or debarment of the contractor. EPA is concerned that the
penalties imposed under the CRP could be less stringent than those in
the Commonwealth's I/M regulation. The Commonwealth has indicated that
it intends to use this authority only to impose penalties that are more
stringent than those in the Commonwealth's regulation. Therefore, EPA
is proposing to approve the penalty schedule against contractors which
is found in section 178.602(b) of the Commonwealth's regulation with
the contingency that penalties assessed against the contractor under
the CRP in lieu of the penalties in the Commonwealth's I/M regulation
must be equal to or more stringent than those in the Commonwealth's I/M
regulation. However, should Pennsylvania at any time assess penalties
less stringent than those in the regulation EPA will rescind its
approval and disapprove the SIP.
The Commonwealth's I/M regulation gives the state auditor the
authority to temporarily suspend station and inspector licenses or
certificates immediately upon finding a violation. The submittal
include descriptions of administrative and judicial procedures relevant
to the enforcement process which meet federal I/M regulations and are
approvable.
Data Collection--40 CFR Part 51.365
Accurate data collection is essential to the management, evaluation
and enforcement of an I/M program. The federal I/M regulation requires
data to be gathered on each individual test conducted and on the
results of the quality control checks of test equipment required under
40 CFR part 51.359.
The Commonwealth's regulation and RFP require the collection of
data on each individual test conducted and describe the type of data to
be collected. The type of test data collected meets the federal I/M
regulation requirements and is approvable. The submittal also commits
to gather and report the results of the quality control checks required
under 40 CFR part 51.359 and is approvable.
Data Analysis and Reporting--40 CFR Part 51.366
Data analysis and reporting are required to allow for monitoring
and evaluation of the program by the state and EPA. The federal I/M
regulation requires annual reports to be submitted which provide
information and statistics and summarize activities performed for each
of the following programs: testing, quality assurance, quality control
and enforcement. These reports are to be submitted by July and shall
provide statistics for the period of January to December of the
previous year. A biennial report shall be submitted to EPA which
addresses changes in program design, regulations, legal authority,
program procedures and any weaknesses in the program found during the
two year period and how these problems will be or were corrected.
The Pennsylvania I/M SIP provides for the analysis and reporting of
data for the testing program, quality assurance program, quality
control program and the enforcement program. The type of data to be
analyzed and reported on meets the federal I/M regulation requirements
and is approvable. The Commonwealth commits to submit annual reports on
these programs to EPA by July of the subsequent year. A commitment to
submit a biennial report to EPA which addresses reporting requirements
set forth in 40 CFR part 51.366(e) is also included in the SIP.
Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification--40 CFR Part 51.376
The federal I/M regulation requires all inspectors to be formally
trained and licensed or certified to perform inspections.
The Pennsylvania I/M regulation requires all inspectors to receive
formal training, be certified by the PADOT and renew the certification
every two years. The Commonwealth's I/M regulation, the RFP and the
contractors' proposal include a description of and the information
covered in the training program, a description of the required written
and hands-on tests and a description of the certification process. The
SIP meets the federal I/M regulation requirements for inspector
training and certification and is approvable.
Public Information and Consumer Protection--40 CFR Part 51.368
The federal I/M regulation requires the SIP to include public
information and consumer protection programs. The RFP and the
contractors' proposal include a public information program which
educates the public on I/M, state and federal regulations, air quality
and the role of motor vehicles in the air pollution problem, and other
items as described in the federal rule. The consumer protection program
includes provisions for a challenge mechanism, protection of whistle
blowers and providing assistance to motorists in obtaining warranty
covered repairs. The public information and consumer protection
programs contained in the SIP submittal meet the federal regulations
and are approvable.
Improving Repair Effectiveness--40 CFR Part 51.369
Effective repairs are the key to achieving program goals. The
federal regulation requires states to take steps to ensure that the
capability exists in the repair industry to repair vehicles. The SIP
must include a description of the technical assistance program to be
implemented, a description of the procedures and criteria to be used in
meeting the performance monitoring requirements required in the federal
regulation and a description of the repair technician training
resources available in the community.
The Pennsylvania I/M regulation, the RFP, and the contractors'
proposal require the implementation of a technical assistance program
which includes a hot line service to assist repair technicians and a
method of regularly informing the repair facilities of changes in the
program, training courses, and common repair problems. A repair
facility performance monitoring program is also included in the
Commonwealth's I/M regulation, the RFP, and the I/M contractors'
proposal which includes providing the motorist whose vehicle fails the
test a summary of local repair facilities performances, provides
regular feedback to each facility on their repair performance and
requires the submittal of a completed repair form at the time of
retest. The performance monitoring program design meets the criteria
described in the federal regulation and is approvable. The
Commonwealth's regulation provides for the establishment and
implementation of a repair technician training program which, at a
minimum, covers the four types of training described in 40 CFR part
51.369(c) of the federal regulation. The repair effectiveness program
described in the SIP meets the federal regulation and is approvable.
Compliance With Recall Notices--40 CFR Part 51.370
The federal regulation requires the states to establish methods to
ensure that vehicles that are subject to enhanced I/M and are included
in an emission related recall receive the required repairs prior to
completing the emission test and/or renewing the vehicle registration.
Act 166 and the Commonwealth's I/M regulation provide the legal
authority to require owners to comply with emission related recalls
before completing the emission test and renewing the vehicle
registration. The SIP includes procedures to be used to incorporate
national database recall information into the Commonwealth's inspection
database and quality control methods to insure recall repairs are
properly documented and tracked. The submittal includes a commitment to
submit an annual report to EPA which includes the recall related
information as required in 40 CFR part 51.370(c). The recall compliance
program contained in the SIP submittal meets the federal requirements
and is approvable.
On-Road Testing--40 CFR Part 51.371
On-road testing is required in enhanced I/M areas. The use of
either remote sensing devices (RSD) or roadside pullovers including
tailpipe emission testing can be used to meet the federal regulations.
The program must include on-road testing of 0.5% of the subject fleet
or 20,000 vehicles, whichever is less, in the nonattainment area or the
I/M program area. Motorists that have passed an emission test and are
found to be high emitters as a result of an on-road test shall be
required to pass an out-of-cycle test.
Legal authority to implement the on-road testing program and
enforce off-cycle inspection and repair requirements is contained in
Act 166 and the Commonwealth's I/M regulation. The SIP submittal
requires the use of RSD to test 20,000 vehicles per year in the I/M
program area and will be implemented by the contractor. A description
of the program which includes test limits and criteria, resource
allocations, and methods of collecting, analyzing and reporting the
results of the testing are detailed in the submittal. The on-road
testing program described in the SIP meets federal requirements and is
approvable.
State Implementation Plan Submissions/Implementation Deadlines--40 CFR
Part 51.372-373
The Pennsylvania submittal included the Commonwealth's final I/M
regulations, legislative authority to implement the program, a final
RFP, portions of the contractor's proposal, the signed contract between
the Commonwealth and the contractor, a modeling demonstration showing
that the program design meets the performance standard, evidence of
adequate funding and resources to implement the program, and a detailed
discussion on each of the required program design elements. The
submittal states that all inspectors and stations will be certified by
December 22, 1994 and the start date for implementation of full-
stringency cutpoints will be January 1, 1997. The submittal also
includes a commitment to include onboard diagnostic checks in the I/M
program within 2 years after promulgation of onboard diagnostic check
regulations for I/M programs.
Act 166 provides the legal authority to implement the program.
However, part of this provision states ``this program shall be
established in all areas of this Commonwealth where the secretary
certifies by publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin that a system is
required in order to comply with Federal law.'' Act 166 requires ``at
least 60 days prior to the implementation of any enhanced emission
inspection program developed under this subsection, the Secretary of
Transportation shall certify by notice in the Pennsylvania Bulletin
that an enhanced emission inspection program will commence''. The
Pennsylvania I/M regulation states that the program begins 60 days
after publication of the notice. It is stated in the Pennsylvania I/M
SIP that ``it is not possible at this time to furnish a copy of that
notice since it will be published in calendar year 1994.'' The SIP goes
on to state that ``when that notice has appeared in the Bulletin, the
Department shall furnish a copy to the EPA as an amendment to this
SIP''. EPA interprets this language as a commitment on the part of the
Commonwealth to publish the bulletin notice announcing the start date
of the program and submit it as an amendment to the SIP by December 31,
1994. EPA also interprets this language to mean that the program will
commence no later than March 1, 1995. Although the federal I/M
regulation requires programs to commence on January 1, 1995, EPA
believes that Pennsylvania can test the appropriate number of vehicles
in calendar year 1995 and that therefore a two-month delay in the start
date is de minimis. EPA is therefore proposing to find that the SIP
submission and implementation deadline requirements set forth in the
federal I/M regulation are substantially satisfied based on the
condition that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will submit to EPA by
December 31, 1994 the Pennsylvania Bulletin notice certifying the need
for the program and that the program begins sixty days after the date
of the Pennsylvania Bulletin notice. EPA is proposing to conditionally
approve the Pennsylvania SIP based on the Commonwealth's commitment to
meet this condition. If the Pennsylvania Bulletin notice is not
received by December 31, 1994, EPA will consider the commitment not met
and will promptly issue a letter to the Commonwealth indicating that
the conditional approval has been converted to a disapproval.
EPA's review of the material indicates that with the conditions and
contingencies described above the Commonwealth has adopted an enhanced
I/M program in accordance with the requirements of the Act. EPA is
proposing to conditionally approve the Pennsylvania SIP revision and
the addendum to the revision for an enhanced I/M program, which were
submitted on November 5, 1993 and March 30, 1994, respectively, subject
to the conditions and contingencies described above. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on other
relevant matters. These comments will be considered before taking final
action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking
procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional office
listed in the Addresses section of this notice.
Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to conditionally approve this revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP for an enhanced I/M program based on certain
contingencies. The conditions for approvability are as follows: (1) by
December 31, 1994 a notice must be published in the Pennsylvania
Bulletin by the Secretary of the Department of Transportation which
certifies that the enhanced I/M program is required in order to comply
with federal law, certifies the geographic areas which are subject to
the enhanced I/M program (the geographic coverage must be identical to
that listed in Appendix A-1 of the November 5, 1993 SIP submittal), and
certifies the commencement date of the enhanced I/M program. This
notice must be submitted to EPA as an amendment to the SIP by December
31, 1994; (2) by December 31, 1994 the Commonwealth must revise and
submit to EPA as a SIP amendment, the amendments to the Pennsylvania I/
M regulation, 67 PA Code Chapter 178.202-205, which require EPA
approval prior to implementation of any alternate purge test procedure
and incorporate the transient emission standards for Tier 1 vehicles,
the Phase 2 standards for all vehicle types and model years, and the
transient and evaporative purge test procedures found in the final
version of the EPA document entitled ``High-Tech I/M Test Procedures,
Emission Standards, Quality Control Requirements, and Equipment
Specifications'', EPA-AA-EPSD-IM-93-1, April 1994, (3) within one year
from the date that EPA conditionally approves the Pennsylvania I/M SIP,
the Commonwealth must submit the PADOT procedures manual for motorist
compliance enforcement program oversight as an amendment to the SIP and
(4) within one year from the date that EPA conditionally approves the
Pennsylvania I/M SIP, the Commonwealth must submit the PADOT procedures
manual for quality assurance as an amendment to the SIP. The
contingencies for approvability are as follows: (1) if penalties are
assessed against the contractor under the Contractor Responsibility
Program in lieu of the penalties in 67 PA Code Sec. 178.602(b) of the
Pennsylvania I/M regulation, the penalties must be equal to or more
stringent than those in the Commonwealth's I/M regulation and (2) the
present contractor or any future contractors for the Pennsylvania I/M
program may not have any business interest in a vehicle repair facility
anywhere in the continental United States.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
Conditional approvals of SIP submittals under section 110 and
subchapter I, part D of the Act do not create any new requirements but
simply approve requirements that the Commonwealth is already imposing.
Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not impose any new
requirements, I certify that it does not have a significant impact on
any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the
Federal-State relationship under the Act, preparation of a flexibility
analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of Commonwealth action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to
base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v.
U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
If the Commonwealth fails to meet any of the conditions of this
approval action, the EPA Regional Administrator would directly make a
finding, by letter, that the conditional approval had converted to a
disapproval and the clock for imposition of sanctions under section
179(a) of the Act would start as of the date of the letter.
Subsequently, a notice would be published in the Federal Register
announcing that the SIP revision has been disapproved.
If the conditional approval is converted to a disapproval under
section 110(k), based on the Commonwealth's failure to meet the
commitment, it will not affect any existing Commonwealth requirements
applicable to small entities. Federal disapproval of the Commonwealth's
submittal does not affect its state-enforceability. Moreover, EPA's
disapproval of the submittal does not impose a new Federal requirement.
Therefore, EPA certifies that this disapproval action does not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because it
does not remove existing requirements nor does it substitute a new
federal requirement.
Under Executive Order 12866, this action is not significant. It has
not been submitted to OMB for review.
The Administrator's decision to approve or disapprove the
Pennsylvania I/M SIP revision will be based on whether it meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)-(K) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended, and EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 51.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: June 23, 1994.
Stanley L. Laskowski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 94-15982 Filed 6-29-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P