[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 11, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25074]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 11, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MI29-02-6658; FRL-5079-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Michigan; Revision to the State Implementation Plan Vehicle Inspection
and Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this action, the EPA is approving a revision to the
Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attainment of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone. On November 12, 1993 and on
July 19, 1994 Michigan submitted a SIP revision request to the EPA to
satisfy the requirements of sections 182(b)(4) and 182(c)(3) of the
Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (Act), and the Federal motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M) rule at 40 CFR part 51, subpart S.
This revision establishes and requires the implementation of an I/M
program in the Grand Rapids and Muskegon ozone nonattainment areas. On
July 15, 1994, the EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
for the State of Michigan. The NPRM proposed approval of the Michigan
I/M SIP provided that the State submitted materials sufficient to
address the deficiencies found in the original submittal. No public
comments were received on the NPRM and the State submitted materials
sufficient to remedy all the deficiencies in the original submittal,
therefore, the EPA is publishing this final action.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become effective on November 10, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the State's submittals and the EPA's technical
support document (TSD) are available for public review at U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
Air Toxics and Radiation Branch, Regulation Development Section, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604. Interested persons
wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment at least
24 hours before the visiting day.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brad J. Beeson, at the EPA, Region 5,
(312) 353-4779.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I. Introduction
The Act requires States to make changes to improve existing I/M
programs or implement new ones. Section 182 requires any ozone
nonattainment area which has been classified as ``marginal'' (pursuant
to section 181(a) of the Act) or worse with an existing I/M program
that was part of a SIP, or any area that was required by the 1977
Amendments to the Act to have an I/M program, to immediately submit a
SIP revision to bring the program up to the level required in the past
the EPA guidance or to what had been committed to previously in the
SIP, whichever was more stringent. All carbon monoxide nonattainment
areas were also subject to this requirement to improve existing or
previously required programs to this level. In addition, all ozone
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or worse must implement a
``basic'' or an ``enhanced'' I/M program depending upon its
classification, regardless of previous requirements.
In addition, Congress directed the EPA in section 182(a)(2)(B) to
publish updated guidance for State I/M programs, taking into
consideration findings of the Administrator's audits and investigations
of these programs. The States were to incorporate this guidance into
the SIP for all areas required by the Act to have an I/M program.
II. Background
The State of Michigan currently contains 3 ozone nonattainment
areas which are required to implement I/M programs in accordance with
the Act. The Detroit-Ann Arbor ozone nonattainment area is classified
as moderate and contains the following 7 counties: Wayne, Oakland,
Macomb, Washtenaw, St. Clair, Livingston, and Monroe. The Grand Rapids
ozone nonattainment area is classified as moderate and contains 2
counties: Kent and Ottawa. The Muskegon ozone nonattainment area is
classified as moderate and is comprised of Muskegon county. These
designations for ozone were published in the Federal Register (FR) on
November 6, 1991 and November 30, 1992 and have been codified in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991)
and 57 FR 56762 (November 30, 1992), codified at 40 CFR 81.300 through
81.437.
On November 12, 1993 the Michigan Department of Natural Resources
(MDNR) submitted to the EPA a revision that provided for an I/M program
in Western Michigan (i.e., the Grand Rapids and Muskegon nonattainment
areas). Under the requirements of the EPA completeness review
procedures (40 CFR Part 51, appendix V) and the requirements of section
110(k) of the Act, the submittal, as it applies to Western Michigan,
was deemed complete by the EPA on April 18, 1994.
In its original review, the EPA found several areas in the State's
submittal that did not meet the requirements of the I/M rule. The
sections of the State's submittal found to be insufficient included:
Motorist compliance enforcement program oversight; enforcement against
contractors, stations, and inspectors; public information and consumer
protection; improving repair effectiveness; and compliance with recall
notices.
While the EPA found the State's submittal deficient in several
respects, the EPA published on July 15, 1994 at 59 FR a document 36123
proposing to approve the majority of the State's submittal, and to
conditionally approve or disapprove the insufficient sections of the
original submittal unless necessary, appropriate, and approvable
materials were submitted by the State 2 weeks prior to the close of the
public comment period.
III. State's Supplemental Submittal
On July 19, 1994 the Michigan Department of Natural Resources
(MDNR) submitted supplementary materials to the EPA related to the I/M
program in Western Michigan. The supplementary submittal was made to
remedy the deficiencies in the State's original submittal.
IV. The EPA's Analysis of the State's Supplemental Submittal
The EPA has reviewed the State's supplemental submittal for
consistency with the statutory requirements of the EPA regulations. A
summary of the EPA's analysis is provided below. The following summary
is limited to the sections of the State's original submittal that were
deficient. For a discussion of the rest of the State's submittal, see
the July 15, 1994 (59 FR 36123) NPRM.
A. Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight
While the original submittal addressed some of the required
elements of this section (40 CFR 51.362), it did not fully satisfy all
the elements, in particular procedures through which the activities of
enforcement personnel are quality-controlled.
However, the State's original and supplemental submittals taken
together provide an approvable basis for this section. The original and
supplemental submittals provide for regular auditing of the State's
enforcement program and the following of effective management
practices, including adjustments to improve the program when necessary.
These program oversight and information management activities are
described in the State's submittals and include: the establishment of
written procedures for personnel engaged in I/M document handling and
processing and an I/M database which will be compared to the
registration database to determine program effectiveness.
B. Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors
While the initial SIP submittal established an innovative Total
Quality Management (TQM) program for ensuring that the I/M program will
be run effectively, the submittal did not satisfy all the elements of
the I/M rule, 40 CFR 51.364.
The State's supplemental submittal together with the original
submittal, however, includes sufficient materials to approve this
section. The original and supplemental submittals, in addition to the
TQM program, include specific penalties for offenses committed by
contractors, stations, and inspectors in accordance with the Federal I/
M rule. The SIP also includes the State's enforcement procedures. The
MDOT has the authority to immediately suspend a station inspector for
violations that directly affect emission reduction benefits. The
enforcement procedures also include the authority to immediately
dismiss inspectors that intentionally cause a vehicle to improperly
pass or fail.
C. Public Information and Consumer Protection
The State's original submission addressed all the elements of this
section (40 CFR 51.368), except for a provision to automatically supply
test repair facility performance data and diagnostic information to
motorists that fail the emissions test.
However, the supplemental submittal details the information that
will be provided to motorists that fail the emissions test, including
test repair facility performance data and diagnostic information.
Therefore, taken together, the original and supplemental submittals
sufficiently address all the elements of this section.
D. Improving Repair Effectiveness
The original submittal sufficiently addressed all the elements of
the section (40 CFR 51.369), except for the issue of repair facility
performance monitoring.
The State's supplemental submittal, however, provides the necessary
materials to establish an acceptable system of repair facility
performance monitoring. The supplemental submittal establishes a
program to provide motorists whose vehicles fail the I/M test with
performance monitoring statistics of certified repair facilities.
Therefore, the supplemental submittal together with the original
submittal sufficiently addresses all the elements of this section.
E. Compliance with Recall Notices
The State's original submittal did not sufficiently address the
elements required by this section, 40 CFR 51.370.
However the State's supplemental submission along with the original
submittal provides a sufficient basis for approval of this section. The
original and supplemental submittals ensure that vehicles included in
either a voluntary emission recall or a remedial plan determination
pursuant to the CAA, have had the appropriate repair made prior to the
inspection. The managing contractor will identify vehicles which have
not been identified as having completed recall repairs. Motorists with
unresolved recall notices will be required to show proof of compliance
or will be denied the opportunity for inspection. The SIP also commits
to comply with the policies of the National Recall Committee and
additional the EPA rulemaking when available.
F. Concluding Statement
The EPA has reviewed the Western Michigan I/M SIP revision
submitted to the EPA, using the criteria stated above. The State's
original submittal along with the supplemental submittal represent an
acceptable approach to the I/M requirements and meet all the criteria
required for approvability.
A more detailed analysis of the State's supplemental submittal and
how it meets Federal requirements is contained in the EPA's Technical
Support Document (TSD), dated August 30, 1994 which is available from
the Region 5 Office, listed above.
V. Response to Comments
On July 15, 1994 (59 FR 36123), the EPA published an NPRM for the
State of Michigan. The NPRM proposed approval in part, and conditional
approval or disapproval depending upon the materials submitted by the
State 2 weeks prior to close of the comment period. No public comments
were received on the NPRM.
Final Action
By this action, the EPA is fully approving this submittal. The EPA
has reviewed the State submittal against the statutory requirements and
for consistency with the EPA regulations and finds it to be acceptable.
The rationale for the EPA's action is explained in the NPRM and will
not be restated here.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to a SIP shall be
considered in light of specific technical, economical, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
As noted elsewhere in this action, the EPA received no adverse
public comment on the proposed action. As a direct result, the Regional
Administrator has reclassified this action from Table 1 to Table 3
under the processing procedures published in the FR on January 19, 1989
(54 FR 2214), and revisions to these procedures issued on October 4,
1993 in an the EPA memorandum entitled ``Changes to State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Tables.''
Regulatory Process
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures published in the FR on January 19,
1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993 memorandum
from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action
from Executive Order 12866 review.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the 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, the 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 the EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds
(Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256 (S.Ct. 1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Environmental protection,
Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen oxide, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: September 15, 1994.
Robert Springer,
Acting Regional Administrator.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The Authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart X--Michigan
2. Section 52.1170 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(97) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1170 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(97) On November 12, 1993, the State of Michigan submitted a
revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the implementation
of a motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in the
Grand Rapids and Muskegon ozone nonattainment areas. This revision
included House Bill No. 4165 which establishes an I/M program in
Western Michigan, SIP narrative, and the State's Request for Proposal
(RFP) for implementation of the program. House Bill No. 4165 was signed
and effective on November 13, 1993.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) House Bill No. 4165; signed and effective November 13, 1993.
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) SIP narrative plan titled ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection
and Maintenance Program for Southeast Michigan, Grand Rapids MSA, and
Muskegon MSA Moderate Nonattainment Areas,'' submitted to the EPA on
November 12, 1993.
(B) RFP, submitted along with the SIP narrative on November 12,
1993.
(C) Supplemental materials, submitted on July 19, 1994, in a letter
to EPA.
[FR Doc. 94-25074 Filed 10-7-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
