Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program |
|---|
|
David A. Ullrich
Environmental Protection Agency
14 July 1994
[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 134 (Thursday, July 14, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-17006]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: July 14, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[W142-01-6260; FRL-5012-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Wisconsin; Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve portions and to conditionally
approve other portions of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Wisconsin on November 15, 1993, if the State
submits certain items prior to final action. This revision establishes
and requires the implementation of an enhanced motor vehicle inspection
and maintenance (I/M) program in the Milwaukee Severe ozone
nonattainment area, which has 17 years to attain the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) pursuant to section 181(a)(2) of the
Clean Air Act (Act), and the Sheboygan Moderate ozone nonattainment
area. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Act. Should
the State fail to timely submit the items described below, EPA is
proposing in the alternative to disapprove or conditionally approve the
SIP.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 15, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Carlton Nash, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
Air Toxics and Radiation Branch, Regulation Development Section, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available at
the above address for public inspection during normal business hours.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John M. Mooney, (312) 886-6043.
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 and
other toxic contaminant air pollution in U.S. cities. Of all highway
vehicles, passenger cars and light 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 2 decades. Projections
indicate that the steady growth in vehicle travel will continue.
Today's cars are absolutely dependent on properly functioning
emission controls to reduce pollution levels. 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 a
significantly larger percentage 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 the performance
of the vehicle.
Effective I/M programs, however, can identify these problem cars
and assure their repair. I/M programs ensure that cars are properly
maintained, producing emission reductions 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 VOC emissions by 32
percent, at a cost of about $12.50 per vehicle per year. This
represents a major step toward fulfilling, at a relatively low cost,
the Act's (the Act) requirement that the most seriously polluted cities
achieve a 24 percent overall emissions reduction by 2000.
The Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 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, as well as Marginal ozone areas
with existing or previously required I/M programs, fall under the
``basic'' I/M requirements. Enhanced programs will be 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 value\1\ with urbanized populations of 200,000 or
more; and all metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) with populations of
100,000 or more in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region (OTR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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
objectives 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 better suited to 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 requires 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) parts 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 that is designated as either: (1) a serious or
worse ozone nonattainment area or (2) a 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 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 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 the basic program required for
the area by the pre-Amended Act, and shall update the program to meet
the basic I/M requirements set forth in 40 CFR parts 51.350-373.
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 Act. The performance standard for enhanced I/M
programs is based on a high-technology 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. The Federal regulation
requires enhanced I/M programs to be implemented by January 1, 1995,
except for: (1) Existing test-and-repair programs which may test 30
percent of the subject fleet in the test-only system during 1995 and
test all subject vehicles in the test-only system beginning January 1,
1996 (during the phase in period, existing requirements may continue to
apply for the test-and-repair portion of the program until it is phased
out by January 1, 1996) or (2) Areas starting new test-only programs
and those with existing test-only programs may phase in the new test
procedures between January 1, 1995 and January 1, 1996; however, all
other program requirements must be fully implemented by January 1,
1995.
II. Background
The State of Wisconsin currently contains 2 ozone nonattainment
areas which are required to implement I/M programs in accordance with
the Act. The Milwaukee severe-17 ozone nonattainment area contains the
Milwaukee-Racine MSA which has a 1980 Census-defined population of
1,572,000 and therefore must implement an enhanced I/M program. The
Sheboygan moderate ozone nonattainment area contains the Sheboygan MSA
and, as a result, is subject to the basic I/M requirements. 40 CFR part
51.372(b)(2)) requires affected States to submit full I/M SIP revisions
that meet the requirements of the Act to EPA by November 15, 1993.
On November 15, 1993, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR) submitted to EPA a revised SIP for an enhanced I/M program to
cover areas where both the basic and the enhanced requirements apply.
The revision included Wisconsin Statutes Sections 110.20 and 144.42 and
Chapter 341; Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters TRANS 131 and NR
485; and the ``Wisconsin Motor Vehicle Inspection Program Request for
Proposal for the Establishment and Operation of Motor Vehicle
Inspection Program Facilities.'' The State I/M regulations were adopted
by WDNR in June 1993 and became effective on July 1, 1993.
EPA's summary of the requirements of the Federal I/M regulations as
found in 40 CFR part 51.350-51.373 and its analysis of the State
submittal are below. A more detailed analysis of the State submittal is
contained in a Technical Support Document (TSD) dated June 6, 1994,
which is available from the Region 5 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 parts 51.350-51.373.
III. EPA's Analysis of Wisconsin's Enhanced I/M Program
Applicability--40 CFR 51.350
Section 182(c)(3) of the Act and 40 CFR 51.350(a) require States
which contain areas classified as serious or worse ozone nonattainment
and containing MSAs with a population of 200,000 or more to implement
an enhanced I/M program. As noted above, the State of Wisconsin
contains the Milwaukee-Racine MSA in its Milwaukee Severe-17 ozone
nonattainment area. In addition, section 182(b)(4) of the Act and 40
CFR part 51.530(a) require States with moderate ozone nonattainment
areas containing 1990 Census-defined urbanized areas to implement a
basic I/M program. The State of Wisconsin contains the Sheboygan
urbanized area where this requirement applies.
There are 6 counties in Wisconsin that are required to implement an
enhanced I/M program: Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington,
and Waukesha Counties. There is one county, Sheboygan County, that is
required to implement a basic I/M program. The State has, however,
expanded the existing program in the Milwaukee area to cover Sheboygan.
The State submittal does contain the legal authority necessary to
establish the program boundaries for enhanced I/M. The program
boundaries meet the Federal I/M requirements under section 51.350 and
are approvable. Wisconsin legislation provides that the I/M program
shall apply where an area will not be able to attain the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) without it, and that such
coverage can be deleted if demonstrated that the area will attain the
NAAQS. This provision allows Wisconsin to add areas to the existing
program but does not limit the applicability of the program in the
required areas.
The Federal I/M regulation requires that the State program shall
not terminate until it is no longer necessary. EPA has determined that
a SIP which does not terminate prior to the attainment deadline for
each applicable area (i.e., 2007 for the Milwaukee severe-17 ozone
nonattainment area, and 1996 for the Sheboygan moderate ozone
nonattainment area) satisfies this requirement. The Wisconsin program
does not contain a termination provision and is therefore approvable.
Enhanced I/M Performance Standard--40 CFR 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. 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 VOCs. The performance standard shall be
established using local characteristics, such as vehicle mix and local
fuel controls, and model I/M program parameters for the following:
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 Wisconsin submittal the most
current version was MOBILE5a.
The Wisconsin submittal includes the following program design
parameters:
network type--centralized
start date--1984 for exhaust testing; 1995 for evaporative testing
test frequency--biennial
model year coverage--1968+
vehicle type coverage--LDGV, LDGT1, LDGT2, & HDGV
exhaust emission test type--IM240 on 1968+ model years
emission standards--0.8/20/2.0 gms/mile for HC/CO/NOX to year
2000; 0.6/15/1.5 gms/mile for HC/CO/NOX after year 2000
emission control device visual inspection--none
evaporative system function checks--pressure and purge on 1971+
model years
stringency (pre-1981 failure rate)--40%
waiver rate (pre-1981/1981 and newer)--3%
compliance rate--96%
evaluation date(s)--2000, 2003, 2006, 2008
The Wisconsin program design parameters meet the Federal I/M
regulations and are approvable.
The emission levels achieved by the State were modeled using
MOBILE5a. The modeling demonstration was performed correctly, used
local characteristics and demonstrated that the program design will
exceed the minimum enhanced I/M performance standard, expressed in gpm,
for VOCs and NOX for each milestone and for the attainment
deadline. As noted below, this modeling demonstration does not account
for the impact of vehicle exemptions. In addition, this modeling
demonstration was not included in the State's November 15, 1993,
submittal and has yet to be formally submitted to EPA as a revision to
the SIP. In order to receive full approval of its SIP, the State must
revise its modeling demonstration to account for exempted vehicles and
must formally submit this demonstration in time to allow EPA to place
it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment
period which is 30 days following the publication of this notice.
Network Type and Program Evaluation--40 CFR 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 percent 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.
The State legislative authority and the State I/M regulations
provide for a centralized, test-only network. Wisconsin's centralized,
test-only network type is approvable. The submittal does not, however,
include provisions for ongoing program evaluation and, as a result,
does not meet the Federal I/M regulations. In order to receive final
full approval of its program, the State must submit to EPA provisions
for ongoing program evaluation satisfying all of the requirements of 40
CFR part 51.353. Specifically, the State must submit schedules for
program evaluation and methodologies by which this biennial program
evaluation will be carried out, as required by 40 CFR part 51.353. EPA
proposes to approve the Wisconsin enhanced I/M SIP if the State submits
these provisions in time to allow EPA to place them in the docket for
public comment at least 2 weeks prior to the close of the public
comment period.
Adequate Tools and Resources--40 CFR 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 a 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 it is 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 Wisconsin submittal does not contain a description of funding
sources for the I/M program. In order to receive full approval, the
State must submit to EPA a description of the method by which the
program will be funded. This description must demonstrate that
sufficient funds, equipment and personnel have been appropriated to
meet the program operation requirements of the I/M rule and must be
submitted prior to EPA's final rulemaking on this submittal. EPA
proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits this description in
time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close
of the public comment period.
Test Frequency and Convenience--40 CFR 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, shall State how the test frequency is integrated into the
enforcement process and shall include the legal authority, regulations,
or contract provisions necessary to implement and enforce the test
frequency requirement. The program shall be designed to provide
convenient service to the motorist by ensuring short waiting times,
short driving distances and regular testing hours.
The Wisconsin enhanced I/M regulation provides for a biennial test
frequency. Based on the performance standard modeling provided by the
State, the enhanced I/M program meets the performance standard
accounting for the biennial test frequency. On April 13, 1994, The
Wisconsin State Legislature enacted legislation which provides the
legal authority to implement and enforce the biennial test frequency.
This newly adopted legislation has not yet been formally submitted to
EPA as a revision to the SIP, however, once submitted, this authority
will be acceptable. EPA proposes to approve the Wisconsin SIP if the
State formally submits this revised legislation prior to EPA's final
action. EPA has included this legislation in the docket for this
proposed rulemaking. The Wisconsin I/M Request for Proposal (RFP)
provides sufficient evidence that convenient services will be provided
to the motorist. The Wisconsin submittal will meet the test frequency
and convenience requirements of the Federal I/M regulations and is
approvable upon EPA's receipt of the state's newly enacted legislation.
Vehicle Coverage--40 CFR 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 gross vehicle weight rating (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).
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 Wisconsin enhanced I/M legislation, enacted April 13, 1994,
requires coverage of all 1968 and newer light duty vehicles and trucks
up to 14,000 pounds GVWR, which are registered or required to be
registered in the I/M program area. The Wisconsin legislation and the
state's I/M regulations provide the legal authority to implement and
enforce the vehicle coverage. This level of coverage is approvable
because it provides the necessary emission reductions. The State RFP
also describes general requirements related to vehicle coverage. The
State submittal does not contain estimates of the number of registered
or unregistered vehicles in the area or methods for identifying subject
vehicles. These items will be described in more detail in the states
final, signed I/M contract, which must be submitted to EPA prior to
EPA's final rulemaking, in order to receive full approval on its
submittal. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the
contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior
to the close of the public comment period.
The state's November 15, 1993, SIP submittal does not adequately
address fleet testing requirements. Existing regulations allow for the
self testing and repair of fleets and directly contradict the
requirements of the final I/M rule. The State is moving forward to
amend its TRANS 131 rule to establish detailed provisions for the
testing of fleets in accordance with EPA's final rule. In its
submittal, the State indicates that these rule changes cannot be
completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA proposes to conditionally
approve this portion of the state's submittal if the State commits
prior to final rulemaking to completing these amendments within one
year of EPA's final conditional approval. The state's plan for testing
fleet vehicles must meet the requirements of the Federal I/M
regulation.
The State regulation provides for limited special exemptions. In
its submittal the State did not provide a description of the
exemptions' impact on the subject fleet. In addition, the modeling
demonstration submitted by the State does not account for these
exemptions in the emission reduction analysis. The State must describe
the extent of the exemptions impact in accordance with 40 CFR part
51.356 in order for EPA to fully approve the state's submittal. EPA
proposes to approve the SIP if the State submits, in time to allow EPA
to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public
comment period, a description that indicates that the performance
standard will not be adversely affected.
Test Procedures and Standards--40 CFR 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 July 1993.
The State I/M RFP includes a general provision for loaded tailpipe
emission, evaporative system purge, and evaporative system pressure
testing. Detailed descriptions of the test procedures and standards
will be contained in the state's final, signed I/M contract. After
reviewing the state's RFP, EPA believes that these test procedures and
standards will conform to EPA approved test procedures and will be
approvable. In order to receive full approval, the State must submit
its final, signed contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part
51.357 to EPA prior to final rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the
SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in time to allow EPA to place it
in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.
In addition, the State is currently in the process of amending its
rule NR 485 to establish a series of increasingly stringent emission
limits (cutpoint schedule) for VOC and NOX to correspond to those
used in the state's modeling demonstration. In its submittal, the State
indicates that these rule changes cannot be completed prior to EPA's
final action. EPA proposes to conditionally approve this portion of the
state's submittal if the State submits a commitment to EPA prior to
final rulemaking committing to complete these amendments within one
year of EPA's final conditional approval.
The State is also in the process of applying for an exemption from
NOX control requirements under section 182(f) of the Act. The
state's contract and regulations should contain provisions for
establishing a NOX testing requirement, however, these provisions
may allow for establishing the NOX cutpoint in accordance with
EPA's action on the section 182(f) petition. If EPA approves this
petition for exemption, the I/M rule does not require NOX emission
reductions from the program but the program must be designed to offset
NOX increases resulting from HC and CO failures pursuant to 40 CFR
part 51.351(d). EPA proposes to approve this portion of the SIP if the
State submits the final contract containing NOX provisions
consistent with this discussion in time to allow EPA to place it in the
docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.
The State RFP also contains provisions requiring 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. However, detailed descriptions of these procedures will be
contained in the state's final, signed I/M contract. After reviewing
the state's RFP, EPA believes that these test procedures and standards
will conform to EPA approved test procedures and will be approvable. In
order to receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed
contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.357 to EPA prior
to final rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin
submits the contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2
weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.
Test Equipment--40 CFR 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 State RFP contains general specifications for test equipment to
be used in the program. The specifications require the use of
computerized test systems. The specifications will be further developed
in the final I/M contract. In order to receive full approval, the State
must submit its final, signed contract addressing the requirements of
40 CFR part 51.358 to EPA prior to final rulemaking. The contract must
include performance features and functional characteristics of the
computerized test systems which meet the Federal I/M regulations. EPA
proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in time
to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of
the public comment period.
Quality Control--40 CFR 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 State RFP contains general provisions for the establishment of
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. These measures and practices will be further developed in
the state's final I/M contract. In order to receive full approval, the
State must submit its final, signed contract addressing the
requirements of 40 CFR part 51.359 to EPA prior to final rulemaking.
EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in
time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close
of the public comment period.
Waivers and Compliance Via Diagnostic Inspection--40 CFR 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 must be taken if the
waiver rate exceeds that committed to in the SIP.
The legislative authority and State regulation provides the
necessary authority to issue waivers, set and adjust cost limits, and
administer and enforce the waiver system. The Wisconsin I/M regulation
sets a $450 cost limit and allows for an annual adjustment of the cost
limit to reflect the change in the CPI as compared to the CPI in 1989
for the 6 county Milwaukee nonattainment area and a $200 cost limit for
1981 and newer models and a $75 cost limit for vehicles older than
model year 1981 in Sheboygan county. Although amended legislative
authority requires actual expenditure of funds to qualify towards the
cost limit, existing regulations still allow estimates of repair costs
to qualify. The provisions of the Wisconsin legislative authority
override the previous administrative rule in this situation. In
addition, Wisconsin is amending its regulations to correct this
contradiction. EPA proposes to conditionally approve the SIP based on
Wisconsin's commitment to adopt and submit these regulatory amendments
within one year of final action. The State must submit this commitment
to EPA prior to final action in order to receive conditional approval.
The regulation and RFP include provisions which address waiver criteria
and procedures, including cost limits, tampering and warranty related
repairs, quality control and administration. These provisions will be
further developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to
receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract
addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.360 to EPA prior to final
rulemaking. The contract must require repairs for vehicles to be
performed by a recognized or certified repair technician. The contract
may allow for compliance via diagnostic inspection provided the
policies and procedures outlined in the submittal meet Federal I/M
regulations. The State regulation allows for time extensions. The
contract must specify the criteria for allowing time extensions and for
tracking extensions.
The State has set a maximum waiver rate of 3 percent for both pre-
1981 and for 1981 and later vehicles. While the State has a good
history of maintaining the program's waiver rate, EPA is concerned that
the State may have a problem maintaining the 3 percent waiver rate
given the lower expenditure waiver limit in Sheboygan county (i.e.,
$450 versus $200). Therefore, in order to receive full approval the
State must describe corrective actions to be taken if the waiver rate
exceeds 3 percent. This waiver rate has been used in the performance
standard modeling demonstration and is approvable. However, in its SIP
submittal, the State did not include a formal commitment to the waiver
and compliance rates used in the modeling demonstration. EPA proposes
to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract, description of
corrective actions, and appropriate commitments in time to allow EPA to
place them in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public
comment period.
Motorist Compliance Enforcement--40 CFR 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. Registration denial enforcement consists of rejecting an
application for initial registration or reregistration of a used
vehicle unless the vehicle has complied with the I/M requirement prior
to the granting of the application. The SIP shall provide information
concerning the enforcement process, legal authority to implement and
enforce the program, a commitment to a compliance rate to be used for
modeling purposes and to be maintained in practice.
Wisconsin's legislative authority and I/M regulations provide the
legal authority to implement a registration denial system. Wisconsin
has set a compliance rate of 96 percent, which was used in the
performance standard modeling demonstration. However, in its SIP
submittal, the State did not include a formal commitment to this
compliance rate. The submittal includes detailed information concerning
the registration denial enforcement process which meets the Federal I/M
regulation requirements and is approvable. The State has not submitted
a detailed penalty schedule including a description of mandatory,
meaningful fines for the program. The State is in the process of
amending its TRANS 131 rule to establish a more thorough penalty
schedule. In its submittal, the State indicates that these rule changes
cannot be completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA proposes to
conditionally approve this portion of the state's submittal if the
State submits a commitment to EPA prior to final rulemaking committing
to completing these amendments within one year of EPA's final
conditional approval. The state's penalty schedule must meet the
requirements of the Federal I/M regulation.
Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight--40 CFR 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 Wisconsin RFP contains general provisions for quality control
of the enforcement program and includes the establishment of an
information management system. These provisions will be further
developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to receive full
approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract addressing
the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.362 to EPA prior to final
rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the
contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior
to the close of the public comment period.
Quality Assurance--40 CFR 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. The State must submit a description of the quality assurance
program, including written procedure manuals on the above discussed
items, as part of the SIP.
The Wisconsin RFP includes general provisions for a quality
assurance program. The final, signed I/M contract will provide specific
details and procedures for inspections, records, equipment audits, and
formal training for all State enforcement officials will be specified
by the final, signed I/M contract.
In order to receive full approval, the State must submit its final,
signed contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.360 to
EPA prior to final rulemaking. Detailed procedures for performing overt
and covert audits are being developed separately from the final, signed
I/M contract. The State must submit a description of these procedures
to EPA in order to receive full approval of its submittal. EPA proposes
to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract and description of
audit procedures in time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2
weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.
Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors--40 CFR 51.364
Enforcement against licensed stations or 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. 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, the resources to be
allocated to this function, and the source of those funds.
The Wisconsin submittal includes the legal authority to establish
and impose penalties against stations, contractors and inspectors. The
State I/M regulation and legislation includes general penalty
provisions for stations, contractors and inspectors. Specific penalty
schedules will be detailed in the final signed, I/M contract. In order
to receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed
contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.364 to EPA prior
to final rulemaking. In addition, the submittal does not include a
description of administrative and judicial procedures relevant to the
enforcement process which meets Federal I/M regulations. The State must
submit this documentation to EPA in order for the submittal to be fully
approved. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the
contract and description of administrative and judicial procedures in
time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2 weeks prior to the
close of the public comment period.
Data Collection--40 CFR 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 RFP contains provisions regarding the collection of data on
each individual test conducted and generally describes the type of data
to be collected. These provisions will be further developed in the
final, signed I/M contract. In order to receive full approval, the
State must submit its final, signed contract addressing the
requirements of 40 CFR part 51.365 to EPA prior to final rulemaking.
The submittal also commits to gather and report the results of the
quality control checks required under 40 CFR part 51.359 and will be
approvable upon EPA's receipt of the final, signed I/M contract. EPA
proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in time
to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of
the public comment period.
Data Analysis and Reporting--40 CFR 51.366
Data analysis and reporting are required to allow for monitoring an
evaluation of the program by the State and EPA. The Federal I/M
regulation requires annual reports to be submitted that 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 of each year
and shall provide statistics for the period of January to December of
the previous year. A biennial report shall be submitted to EPA that
addresses changes in program design, regulations, legal authority,
program procedures, any weaknesses in the program found during the
previous two-year period and how these problems will be or were
corrected.
The RFP provides general provisions for the analysis and reporting
of data for the testing program, quality assurance program, quality
control program and the enforcement program. These provisions will be
further developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to
receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract
addressing the requirements of 40 CFR 51.364 to EPA prior to final
rulemaking. The State must also commit 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 51.366(e), must also be submitted to EPA in order
to receive full approval. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin
submits the contract, a commitment to submit annual reports and a
biennial report in time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2
weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.
Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification--40 CFR 51.376
The Federal I/M regulation requires all inspectors to be formally
trained and licensed or certified to perform inspections.
The RFP contains general provisions regarding requirements for
inspectors' formal training, certification and licensing. The signed
contract will include a description of the training program, the
written and hands-on tests, and the licensing, certification processes.
In order to receive full approval, the State must submit its final,
signed contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.376 to
EPA prior to final rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if
Wisconsin submits the contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the
docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.
Public Information and Consumer Protection--40 CFR 51.368
The Federal I/M regulation requires the SIP to include public
information and consumer protection programs. The RFP includes a public
information program, which educates the public on I/M, State and
Federal regulations, air quality, the contribution of motor vehicles to
the air pollution problem, and other items as described in the Federal
rule. The consumer protection program, which includes provisions for a
challenge mechanism, protection of whistle blowers and assistance to
motorists in obtaining warranty covered repairs, will be further
developed in the final contract. In order to receive full approval, the
State must submit its final, signed contract addressing the
requirements of 40 CFR part 51.364 to EPA prior to final rulemaking.
EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in
time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2 weeks prior to the
close of the public comment period.
Improving Repair Effectiveness--40 CFR 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 State
shall provide the repair industry with information and assistance
related to vehicle inspection diagnosis and repair. 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 RFP includes general provisions for 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 RFP. This program provides the motorist
whose vehicle fails the test a summary of local repair facilities'
performances, and requires the submittal of a completed repair form at
the time of retest. The program also provides feedback to each repair
facility on its repair performance. These provisions will be further
developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to receive full
approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract addressing
the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.369 to EPA prior to final
rulemaking. The State must also submit a description of available
repair technician training resources. EPA proposes to approve the SIP
if Wisconsin submits the contract and description of training resources
in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the
close of the public comment period.
Compliance With Recall Notices--40 CFR 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 a emission related recall receive the required repairs prior to
completing the emission test or renewing the vehicle registration.
The Wisconsin legislation provides the legal authority to require
owners to comply with emission related recalls before completing the
emission test. Specific procedures to be used to incorporate national
database recall information into the State inspection database and
quality control methods to insure that recall repairs are properly
documented and tracked will be provided in the final, signed I/M
contract, and will also be specified through amendments to the state's
TRANS 131 rule. The submittal does not include a commitment to submit
an annual report to EPA that includes the information required in 40
CFR part 51.370(c). In its submittal, the State indicates that these
rule changes cannot be completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA
proposes to conditionally approve this portion of the state's submittal
if the State submits a commitment to EPA prior to final rulemaking
committing to completing these amendments and submitting annual reports
within one year of EPA's final conditional approval.
On-Road Testing--40 CFR 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 percent 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 a 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
the State legislation. The SIP submittal requires the use of RSD and
roadside pullovers to test at least 0.5 percent of the subject fleet
per year in the I/M program area. 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 will be
detailed in the final I/M contract and amendments to the state's TRANS
131 rule. In its submittal, the State indicates that these rule changes
cannot be completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA proposes to
conditionally approve this portion of the state's submittal if the
State submits a commitment to EPA prior to final rulemaking committing
to completing these amendments within one year of EPA's final
conditional approval.
State Implementation Plan Submissions/Implementation Deadlines--40 CFR
51.372-373
The Federal regulation requires enhanced I/M programs to be
implemented by January 1, 1995 except for: (1) Existing test-and-repair
programs, which may test 30 percent of the subject fleet in the test-
only system during 1995 and test all subject vehicles in the test-only
system beginning January 1, 1996 (during the phase-in period, existing
requirements may continue to apply for the test-and-repair portion of
the program until it is phased out by January 1, 1996) or (2) Areas
starting new test-only programs and those with existing test-only
programs may phase in the new test procedures between January 1, 1995
and January 1, 1996; however, all other program requirements must be
fully implemented by January 1, 1995.
The Wisconsin submittal included final State I/M regulations,
preliminary legislative authority to implement the program, final
specifications, a final RFP, procedural documents, and a discussion on
each of the required program design elements. The submittal states that
all inspectors and stations will be certified, that mandatory testing
has already started, and that the start date for implementation will be
July 3, 1995. 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.
As noted in this proposed rulemaking, the State must timely submit its
final, signed I/M contract, most recent changes to its I/M legislation
enacted on April 13, 1994, final modeling demonstration, narrative
descriptions of certain program elements, commitments to minimum
compliance and enforcement related activity levels, and final rule
changes or appropriate commitments prior to EPA's final rulemaking in
order to receive final approval and conditional approval of its I/M
submittal.
EPA's review of the material indicates that, subject to the
conditions and contingencies noted above, the State has adopted an
enhanced I/M program in accordance with the requirements of the Act.
EPA is proposing to approve and conditionally approve the Wisconsin SIP
revision for an enhanced I/M program, which was submitted on November
15, 1993, contingent on the timely receipt of the materials noted above
from the State. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues
discussed in this notice and the additional material to be placed in
the docket during the public comment period, 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 approve portions and conditionally approve
other portions of this revision to the Wisconsin SIP for an enhanced I/
M program. In the alternative, if Wisconsin fails to timely submit the
materials discussed above, or if such materials do not meet the
requirements of the Federal I/M rule, EPA proposes to disapprove the
SIP or to conditionally approve these portions of the plan if the State
submits the appropriate commitment(s) to remedy any deficiencies within
one year of final conditional approval.
I. Basis for Conditional Approval
The EPA believes conditional approval is appropriate in this case
because the State has developed final, fully adopted rules for the
enhanced I/M program and needs only to amend these rules to address a
number of enhanced I/M program requirements. As a condition of the U.S.
EPA's proposed conditional approval, the State must submit final, fully
adopted rules to EPA no later than one year after EPA's final
conditional approval.
II. Statement of Approvability
Under the authority of the Governor, the Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources submitted a SIP revision to satisfy the requirements
of the I/M regulation to the EPA on November 15, 1993. The Agency has
reviewed this submittal and is proposing to approve portions and
proposing to conditionally approve other portions of it pursuant to
Sections 110(k) of the Act, on the condition that the portions of the
I/M program noted above are adopted and/or submitted on the schedules
noted in this proposed rulemaking.
If the State fails to timely submit the required regulations and
other material or commit to do so within one year of EPA's final
conditional approval, EPA proposes in the alternative to disapprove the
SIP as failing to comply with section 110 and Part D.
If the EPA takes final conditional approval on the commitment, the
State must meet its commitment to adopt and submit the final rule
amendments within one year of the conditional approval. Once the EPA
has conditionally approved this committal, if the State fails to adopt
or submit the required rules to EPA, final approval will become a
disapproval. EPA will notify the State by letter to this effect. Once
the SIP has been disapproved, these commitments will no longer be a
part of the approved nonattainment area SIPs. The EPA subsequently will
publish a notice to this effect in the notice section of the Federal
Register indicating that the commitment or commitments have been
disapproved and removed from the SIP. If the State adopts and submits
the final rule amendments to the EPA within the applicable time frame,
the conditionally approved commitments will remain part of the SIP
until the EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new
submittal. If the EPA approves the subsequent submittal, those newly
approved rules will become a part of the SIP.
If after considering comments on the proposal, the EPA issues a
final disapproval or if the conditional approval portions are converted
to a disapproval, the sanctions clock under section 179(a) will begin.
This clock will begin on the effective date of the final disapproval or
at the time the EPA notifies the State by letter that a conditional
approval has been converted to a disapproval. If the State does not
submit and the EPA does not approve the rule on which the disapproval
was based within 18 months of the disapproval, the EPA must impose one
of the sanctions under section 179(b)--highway funding restrictions or
the offset sanction. In addition, the final disapproval starts the 24
month clock for the imposition of a section 110(c) Federal
Implementation Plan. Finally, under section 110(m) the EPA has
discretionary authority to impose sanctions at any time after a final
disapproval.
Procedural Background
The OMB has exempted this action rule from Executive Order 12866
review.
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.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the Act
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the State 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 regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S. Ct. 1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental Protection, Air Pollution Control, Carbon Monoxide,
Nitrogen oxide, Ozone, Volatile Organic Compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: June 24, 1994.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-17006 Filed 7-13-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P