[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 5, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17232-17237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8313]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[AK7-1-6588a; FRL-5171-5]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Alaska
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the state of Alaska. This revision establishes and
requires the implementation of a basic motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program in the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) and
the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB). The intended effect of this
action is approval of a basic motor vehicle I/M program. This action is
being taken under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This final rule is effective on June 5, 1995 unless adverse or
critical comments are received by May 5, 1995. If the effective date is
delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,
SIP Manager, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, Washington 98101.
Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for
public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during
normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Air &
Radiation Branch, 1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington
98101, and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, 410
Willoughby, Suite 105, Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Lee, EPA, Air and Radiation
Branch (AT-082), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206)
553-1814.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Clean Air Act Requirements
The Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAAA or Act), requires
states to make changes to improve existing I/M programs or implement
new ones. Section 187(a)(4) and section 182(a)(2)(B) requires any
carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area which has been classified as
``moderate'' (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 past EPA guidance or to what had been committed to
previously in the SIP whichever was more stringent.
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.
On November 5, 1992 (57 FR 52950), the EPA published a final
regulation establishing the I/M requirements, pursuant to section 182
and 187 of the Act. The I/M regulation was codified at 40 CFR part 51,
Subpart S, and requires states to submit an I/M SIP revision which
includes all necessary legal authority and the items specified in 40
CFR 51.372 (a)(1) through (a)(8) by November 15, 1993. The state of
Alaska has met these requirements.
The EPA has designated two areas as CO nonattainment in the state
of Alaska. The Anchorage CO nonattainment area, classified as Moderate
greater than or equal to 12.7 ppm, is bounded by the Municipality of
Anchorage (MOA) urban area. The Fairbanks CO nonattainment area,
classified as Moderate less than or equal to 12.7 ppm, is bounded by
the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) urban area. The nonattainment
and boundary designations for CO 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-
81.437. Based on these nonattainment designations, basic I/M programs
are required in both the Anchorage and Fairbanks nonattainment areas.
By this action, the EPA is approving this submittal. The EPA has
reviewed the state submittal against the statutory requirements and for
consistency with the EPA regulations. EPA summarizes the requirements
of the Federal I/M regulations as found in 40 CFR 51.350-51.373 and its
analysis of the state submittal below. Parties desiring additional
details on the Federal I/M regulation are referred to the November 5,
1992 FR notice (57 FR 52950) or 40 CFR 51.350-51.373.
II. Background
On July 11, 1994 the state of Alaska submitted to EPA a SIP
revision for a basic I/M program that had an adequate public notice and
public hearing process (May 19, 1994) and was adopted on June 9, 1994.
The Lieutenant Governor filed revisions to 18 AAC 52 on May 25, 1994,
and the Air Quality Control Plan revisions on July 6, 1994, becoming
effective on June 24, 1994 and August 5, 1994, respectively.
The July 11, 1994 SIP revision was reviewed by EPA to determine
completeness shortly after submittal, in accordance with the
completeness criteria set out at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. The
submittals were found to be complete and a letter dated July 15, 1994
was forwarded to the Governor of Alaska indicating the completeness of
the submittal.
III. State Submittal
Both Anchorage and Fairbanks are classified as moderate CO
nonattainment areas. Since the 1980 [[Page 17233]] census population of
each urbanized area was under 200,000, neither community is required to
implement an enhanced I/M program. The state submittal provides for
upgrading the existing I/M programs to EPA approved basic I/M programs
in the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) and Fairbanks North Star Borough
(FNSB). Both the MOA and the FNSB programs will consist of annual,
decentralized, test-and-repair which meets the requirements of EPA's
performance standard and other requirements contained in the Federal I/
M rule. All testing will be performed by certified stations or referee
facilities. Other aspects of the Alaska I/M program include: an
``Valley'' I/M program for vehicles commuting into Anchorage from the
Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) borough, testing of 1968 and later vehicles
in Anchorage and testing of 1975 and later vehicles in Fairbanks, a
test fee to ensure the state has adequate resources to oversee the
implementing agencies and implement the valley program, enforcement by
registration denial, commitment to testing convenience, quality
assurance, data collection and analysis, reporting, test equipment and
test procedure specifications, commitment to ongoing public
information, inspector training and certification, and penalties
against inspector incompetence. An analysis of how the Alaska I/M
program meets the Federal SIP requirements (by section of the Federal
I/M rule) is provided below.
A. Applicability
The SIP needs to describe the applicable areas in detail and,
consistent with 40 CFR 51.372, needs to include the legal authority or
rules necessary to establish program boundaries.
The Alaska I/M program specified in 18 AAC 52 is divided into two
programs (Anchorage and Fairbanks), based on the designated
implementing agency. Both programs are locally implemented and
operated, with the MOA and the FNSB having legal and administrative
responsibility for their respective programs. The existing programs
cover the entire MOA and FNSB. An additional I/M program, Matanuska-
Susitna Valley (Valley) is not linked to a specific geographical area,
but is aimed at vehicles that are regularly operated in but not
registered in the Anchorage I/M program area. The Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation (ADEC) is responsible for administering the
Valley I/M program. The state regulations establishing Alaska's I/M
program requirements and boundaries are included in 18 AAC 52.
B. Basic I/M Performance Standard
The I/M programs provided for in the SIP are required to meet a
performance standard for basic I/M for the pollutants that caused the
affected area to come under I/M requirements. The performance standard
sets an emission reduction target that must be met by a program in
order for the SIP to be approvable. The SIP must also provide that the
program will meet the performance standard in actual operation, with
provisions for appropriate adjustments if the standard is not met. The
state has submitted a modeling demonstration using the EPA computer
model, MOBILE 5a showing that the basic performance standard is met for
both Anchorage and Fairbanks I/M programs.
C. Network Type
The SIP needs to include a description of the network to be
employed, the required legal authority, and, in the case of areas
making claims for case-by-case equivalency, the required demonstration.
Alaska has chosen to implement decentralized, test-and-repair I/M
programs which are managed and operated by MOA, FNSB and the state with
a small amount of contractor support.
Legal authority contained in AS 46.03.020(10), 46.14.030 and
46.14.510; and 18 AAC 52.045 authorizes the state to implement this
program.
D. Adequate Tools and Resources
The SIP needs to include a description of the resources that will
be used for program operation, which includes: (1) A detailed budget
plan which describes the source of funds for personnel, program
administration, program enforcement, purchase of necessary equipment,
and any other requirements discussed throughout, and (2) a description
of personnel resources, the number of personnel dedicated to overt and
covert auditing, data analysis, program administration, enforcement,
and other necessary functions and the training attendant to each
function.
The Alaska I/M program as stipulated in 18 AAC 52.020 is funded
solely by collection of a ten dollar certificate of inspection fee
assessed to each vehicle passing the I/M test. Legal authority
contained in AS 44.46.025 authorizes the state to collect fees for this
program. The MOA, FNSB and the state commit to providing the necessary
administrative, personnel, and equipment resources to fully implement
and maintain the Alaska I/M program. The I/M programs will be carried
out under local or state oversight, with assistance from contractors.
In the event that either the MOA or FNSB is unable or unwilling in the
future to provide adequate tools or resources, the state commits to
take over the administration of the program (18 AAC 52.030).
The SIP narrative also describes the budget, staffing support, and
equipment needed to implement the program. The MOA funds approximately
7.0 full-time employees (FTE), the FNSB funds 3.5 FTE and the state
funds .25 FTE. The MOA and the state will utilize 3.0 FTE contractor
personnel to support their programs.
Referee facilities in the MOA and FNSB provide public information
and assistance, motorist and certified mechanic assistance, referee
functions, and training and testing of inspectors and certified
mechanics. The MOA program, which incorporates the Valley program,
contracts out for referee facility services while the FNSB referee
facility is operated by FNSB staff.
E. Test Frequency and Convenience
The SIP needs to include the test schedule in detail including the
test year selection scheme if testing is other than annual. Also, the
SIP needs to include the legal authority necessary to implement and
enforce the test frequency requirement and explain how the test
frequency will be integrated with the enforcement process.
The MOA and FNSB I/M programs require annual inspections for all
subject motor vehicles (18 AAC 52.005). However, an implementing agency
may, with approval from ADEC and the DMV, authorize the owner or lessee
of a vehicle to obtain a biennial certificate of inspection during the
first six years of vehicle life, if the failure rates of the designated
categories of vehicles are below a minimum rate set by the implementing
agency and approved by ADEC (18 AAC 52.035(e)). In addition the MOA
exempts new vehicles from their first annual inspection.
Since the test-and-repair inspection program has been in operation
since 1985 for both programs, no special start-up testing scheme is
required. The network is satisfactorily addressed in the SIP.
Legal authority for registration and testing of used vehicles newly
arriving into the I/M area is contained in AS 46.14.510 and 18 AAC
52.005.
F. Vehicle Coverage
The SIP needs to include 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
[[Page 17234]] routinely operated in the area but may not be registered
in the area. Also, the SIP needs to include a description of any
special exemptions which will be granted by the program, and an
estimate of the percentage and number of subject vehicles which will be
impacted. Such exemptions need to be accounted for in the emission
reduction analysis. In addition, the SIP needs to include the legal
authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle
coverage requirement.
In the MOA, program coverage includes all 1968 and newer model year
light-duty cars and trucks and heavy-duty gasoline powered trucks,
registered or required to be registered within the nonattainment areas.
The FNSB program covers the above vehicles from 1975 and newer.
Vehicles will be identified through the state of Alaska's Driver and
Motor Vehicle Services database. In addition, any 1968 or newer model
used to commute into MOA is subject to I/M testing through the Valley
program.
Fleet vehicles are subject to the same program requirements and
testing procedures as other vehicles. However, fleets are allowed to
self-test, as long as they are certified as official test stations;
they must use certified I/M mechanics; all tests and certificate
issuance must be conducted using certified Alaska BAR-90 TAS; and they
must comply with all other I/M program requirements. Fleet licenses can
be removed if fleet operation does not meet standards.
The FNSB vehicles that obtain seasonal exemptions are subject to
the program but prohibited from being driven during the winter CO
season. Approximately 4,000 FNSB vehicles are in this category. Since
they are not operated during the CO nonattainment period there is no
discounting of those vehicles.
In addition to the required I/M programs, ADEC is now subjecting
those vehicles registered outside the MOA but primarily operated within
the MOA to a Mat-Su Valley I/M program. The Valley program has the same
basic design features as the Anchorage program.
Further, vehicles registered in one AK I/M area but primarily
operated in the other may be tested in either area, but must pass an
annual I/M test.
G. Test Procedures and Standards
The SIP needs to include a description of each test procedure used.
The SIP also needs to include the rule, ordinance or law describing and
establishing the test procedures.
The legal authority to establish test procedures and standards is
contained in AS 46.03..020, 46.14.030 and 46.14.510. Written test
procedures for a 2-speed idle test and pass/fail standards for all
subject vehicles have been established. All vehicles are subject to the
HC and CO emission cutpoints set forth in 18 AAC 52.050, and repairs
must be made if a vehicle fails any of these cutpoints.
H. Test Equipment
The SIP needs to include written technical specifications for all
test equipment used in the program and shall address each of the
requirements in 40 CFR 51.358 of the Federal I/M rule. The
specifications need to describe the emission analysis process, the
necessary test equipment, the required features, and written acceptance
testing criteria and procedures.
The Alaska I/M SIP commits to meeting the California BAR 90
accuracy standards. The SIP addresses the requirements in 40 CFR 51.358
and includes descriptions of performance features and functional
characteristics of the computerized test systems in the submitted
respective program design documents. The necessary test equipment,
required features, and acceptance testing criteria are also contained
in the SIP.
I. Quality Control
The SIP needs to include a description of quality control and
recordkeeping procedures. The SIP needs to include the procedures
manual, rule, and ordinance or law describing and establishing the
procedures of quality control and requirements.
The Alaska I/M SIP narrative contains descriptions and requirements
establishing quality control procedures which are similar but not
identical to the Federal I/M rule. Alaska's program provides for less
frequent calibration requirements than the federal I/M rule requires.
However, the frequency requirements for gas calibrations and leak
checks contained in the Alaska BAR-90 Test Analyzer Systems are
identical to those contained in the current California BAR-90
specification. In addition, Alaska's program does not require ambient
zero air to be drawn from outside the test bay due to the extreme
weather conditions in Alaska. EPA believes there is adequate
justification for these exceptions. Alaska's quality control procedures
will help ensure that equipment calibrations are properly performed and
recorded as well as maintaining compliance document security.
J. Waivers and Compliance Via Diagnostic Inspection
The SIP needs to include a maximum waiver rate expressed as a
percentage of initially failed vehicles. This waiver rate needs to be
used for estimating emission reduction benefits in the modeling
analysis. Also, the state needs to take corrective action if the waiver
rate exceeds that estimated in the SIP or revise the SIP and the
emission reductions claimed accordingly. In addition, the SIP needs to
describe the waiver criteria and procedures, including cost limits,
quality assurance methods and measures, and administration. Lastly, the
SIP shall include the necessary legal authority, ordinance, or rules to
issue waivers, set and adjust cost limits as required, and carry out
any other functions necessary to administer the waiver system,
including enforcement of the waiver provisions.
Legal authority to issue waivers and administer the waiver system
is contained in AS 46.03.020, 46.14.030 and 46.14.510. Under 18 AAC
52.060 waivers may be issued in the Alaska I/M programs for the
following reasons: repair cost exceedance, diesel engine, seasonal
waiver, special circumstances that make it impractical to test a
vehicle, modification to the dedicated use of an approved alternate
fuel, out-of-area use, economic hardship, parts unavailability or grey
market vehicle.
For the MOA and state programs, necessary emissions-related repairs
must be made up to a maximum annual repair cost of $450 for non-
tampering-related repairs. The FNSB program has a minimum annual repair
cost of $350 for non-tampering-related repairs. For all programs a
maximum annual repair cost of $500 exists for vehicles tampered with
prior to July 1, 1985. If the least expensive repair would be in excess
of $500, then one repair must be made regardless of cost. Vehicles that
have been tampered with since July 1985 must be completely repaired,
regardless of cost.
A waiver rate of 1% is assumed for both the MOA and FNSB. If the
waiver rate for either program, as reported to EPA in the annual Alaska
I/M report, is higher, the state will take corrective action to lower
the applicable waiver rate by possibly requiring motorists that apply
for a waiver to reduce initial emissions by a specified amount before a
waiver may be issued or limiting the model years that are eligible for
a waiver or limiting waivers on vehicles to only one inspection cycle.
If any of the waiver rates cannot be lowered to the level committed to
in the SIP, the state [[Page 17235]] will revise the I/M emission
reduction projections in the SIP and will implement other program
changes as necessary to ensure the performance standard is met.
The seasonal waiver is issued to a vehicle owner who agrees that
the vehicle will not be operated in an I/M area during the winter CO
season. Vehicles which acquire such waivers are issued different
colored license tabs, to make it easier to identify seasonally waived
vehicles that are being operated illegally during winter months. If a
motorist violates the seasonal waiver, no seasonal waiver may be issued
in the future to any vehicle owned by that motorist.
K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement
The SIP needs to provide information concerning the enforcement
process, including: (1) A description of the existing compliance
mechanism if it is to be used in the future and the demonstration that
it is as effective or more effective than registration-denial
enforcement; (2) an identification of the agencies responsible for
performing each of the applicable activities in this section; (3) a
description of and accounting for all classes of exempt vehicles; and
(4) a description of the plan for testing fleet vehicles, rental car
fleets, leased vehicles, and any other special classes of subject
vehicles, e.g. those operated in (but not necessarily registered in)
the program area. Also, the SIP needs to include a determination of the
current compliance rate based on a study of the system that includes an
estimate of compliance losses due to loopholes, counterfeiting, and
unregistered vehicles. Estimates of the effect of closing such
loopholes and otherwise improving the enforcement mechanism need to be
supported with detailed analyses. In addition, the SIP needs to include
the legal authority to implement and enforce the program. Lastly, the
SIP needs to include a commitment to an enforcement level to be used
for modeling purposes and to be maintained, at a minimum, in practice.
The motorist compliance enforcement program will be implemented,
primarily, by Alaska's Department of Motor Vehicle Services (DMV),
which will ensure that owners of all subject vehicles are denied
registration unless they provide valid proof of having received a
certificate indicating they passed an emissions test or a valid I/M
waiver, which was issued within a 90-day period prior to the
registration renewal date. Owners of noncomplying vehicles operating
illegally in I/M areas will be identified and issued notices of
violation (NOV). A vehicle owner that is issued an NOV will have 30
days to provide proof of I/M compliance. The I/M programs will request
DMV to revoke the vehicle's registration in cases of continued
noncompliance. The Alaska State Troopers and local law enforcement
agencies will provide on-road enforcement of the program.
In addition, the Department will identify program evaders and other
noncomplying vehicles (e.g. out-of-area commuter vehicles) through
interactive searches of several databases. Owners of vehicles
identified in this manner will be notified by the Department of the
need to obtain an annual inspection.
The following vehicle types are exempt from the Alaska I/M program:
A vehicle not principally located or operated in an I/M area; a 1967 or
older vehicle for the MOA program (1974 or older in the FNSB program);
a new vehicle with less than 2,500 miles; a gasoline-powered vehicle
that is 12,000 pounds unladen weight or heavier, a special test vehicle
that has received a state exemption; a military tactical vehicle;
motorcycles, golf carts, all-terrain vehicles, snow machines and
mopeds; and a vehicle in Alaska for less that 30 days.
All fleet vehicles, including rental cars, are subject to the same
program requirements and testing procedures as other vehicles. Leased
vehicles and other vehicles subject to one of the Alaska programs but
not necessarily registered in an I/M area must also comply with all
applicable program requirements.
The state commits to the level of enforcement needed to ensure
compliance rates of no less than 95 percent and 96 percent, in the MOA
and FNSB respectively. The legal authority to implement and enforce the
program is included in AS 46.03, 46.014 and 18 AAC 52.100.
L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight
The SIP needs to include a description of enforcement program
oversight and information management activities.
ADEC will audit the local I/M programs on a regular basis, and will
implement a quality assurance program to ensure effective overall
performance of the enforcement systems in both areas. ADEC will allow
EPA to conduct regular audits of the I/M enforcement program. ADEC,
MOA, and FNSB will also perform periodic parking lot surveys to assess
the compliance rate of the in-use fleet.
M. Quality Assurance (QA)
The SIP needs to include a description of the quality assurance
program, and written procedures manuals covering both overt and covert
performance audits, record audits, and equipment audits. This
requirement does not include materials or discussion of details of
enforcement strategies that would ultimately hamper the enforcement
process.
The Alaska I/M SIP includes a description of its quality assurance
program. The ongoing QA program will be conducted to discover, correct
and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. The program includes quarterly
performance audits following established written procedures, performed
at certified I/M stations. The audits will include, at a minimum,
checks for appropriate certificate security, recordkeeping practices,
proper display of licenses and other required information, proper
maintenance and calibration of the TAS, and ability of the certified
mechanic to properly perform an I/M test.
In addition to the quarterly audit, overt and covert vehicle audits
will be conducted on an unscheduled and as-needed basis. Alaska has
proposed the following exceptions to the federal performance audit
requirements provided under 40 CFR 51.363(a): the state will perform
one quarterly audit per facility (i.e. four audits per station per
year), plus at least one overt vehicle audit per station per year. EPA
believes this to be adequate to ensure program quality and comply with
the federal I/M rule. Alaska also believes that the remote covert
auditing requirement is infeasible in Alaska due to the state's unique
weather conditions, and resultant station design and operation. Unlike
most other states, inspections in Alaska are conducted in enclosed test
stations where remote covert observations are impossible, particularly
during the wintertime. The state believes that other performance
tracking and auditing tools dramatically reduce the need to use remote
covert audits to maintain effective quality assurance and compliance
enforcement programs against certified stations and mechanics. Given
Alaska's unique circumstances EPA concurs.
Test records will be audited on a monthly basis, using established
written procedures to assess individual certified mechanic and station
performance. Equipment audits will be performed during each quarterly
performance audit, using established written procedures, to ensure the
accuracy and reliability of all required test equipment. Each I/M
inspector will be formally [[Page 17236]] trained and knowledgeable in
all aspects of the I/M program. Ongoing training will be provided to I/
M inspectors to insure that they maintain an adequate level of
knowledge. The performance of each I/M inspector will be evaluated at
least once annually to identify any possible problem areas.
N. Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors
The SIP needs to include the penalty schedule and the legal
authority for establishing and imposing penalties, civil fines, license
suspension, and revocations. In the case of state constitutional
impediments to immediate suspension authority, the state Attorney
General shall furnish an official opinion for the SIP explaining the
constitutional impediment as well as relevant case law. Also, the SIP
needs to 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 other aspects of the enforcement of the
program requirements, the resources to be allocated to this function,
and the source of those funds. In states without immediate suspension
authority, the SIP needs to demonstrate that sufficient resources,
personnel, and systems are in place to meet the three day case
management requirement for violations that directly affect emission
reductions.
Under the Administrative Procedures Act (AS 44.62), the Department
or other I/M implementing agency must provide notice and opportunity
for hearing before suspending, revoking, or refusing to renew a
station's or mechanic's certification issued under 18 AAC 52 or the MOA
or FNSB local implementing ordinances. In addition, neither the
Department nor the local I/M implementing agencies have citation powers
under Alaska Statute. As a result of these factors, Alaska is unable to
comply with requirements contained in 40 CFR 51.364 for the imposition
of mandatory minimum penalties or the immediate suspension of station
or mechanic certifications. If the Department files a civil action
under AS 46.03.760, there are mandatory court imposed damages of $500
for the first day. Because of this, the state is proposing an
alternative enforcement mechanism which will allow the I/M office to
issue an NOV upon finding a violation of the I/M program requirements.
A hearing will be held within three working days of the NOV which will
allow penalties to be assessed depending on the nature and severity of
the violation. If the hearing results support a serious violation the
station or mechanic's certification will be suspended for a minimum of
6 months under the Department's emergency powers authority, if the
criteria for an emergency exists as provided in AS 46.03.820. Continued
violation of program requirements may result in permanent revocation of
certification under 18 AAC 52, after notice and opportunity for
hearing, or the filing of a civil or criminal action against a
certified station or mechanic under AS 46.03.760 or 46.03.790. A
finding of incompetence will result in mandatory training before
inspection privileges are restored. EPA concludes that this satisfies
federal requirements for enforcement against contractors and
inspectors.
O. Data Analysis and Reporting
The SIP needs to describe the types of data to be collected. The
SIP commits ADEC to submitting an annual report to EPA by July of each
year, which will cover the preceding calendar year and contain
statistics for the I/M test data, quality assurance results, quality
control activities, and enforcement activities. In addition, the state
commits to submitting a biennial report on the overall status of the
Alaska I/M program to EPA. At a minimum, Alaska commits to address all
of the data elements listed in 51.366 of the federal I/M rule.
P. Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification
The SIP needs to include a description of the training program, the
written and hands-on tests, and the licensing or certification process.
Under 18 AAC 52. and the MOA and FNSB I/M implementing ordinances,
formal training and licensing is required for all inspectors (certified
mechanics). The Alaska I/M SIP provides for the implementation of
training, certification, and refresher programs for emission
inspectors. Training will include all elements required by 51.367(a) of
the EPA I/M rule. Certification is good for a period of two years, with
passage of a refresher training course required for license renewal.
Q. Improving Repair Effectiveness
The SIP needs to include a description of the technical assistance
program to be implemented, and a description of the repair technician
training resources available in the community.
The Alaska SIP commits the Department to working with MOA and FNSB
to assist the motor vehicle industry in properly diagnosing and
repairing emission-related defects. This assistance will include each
program's establishment of a telephone hotline service to assist
certified mechanics and other qualified technicians with specific
repair problems. Mechanics newsletters will also be distributed to all
certified mechanics on an as-needed basis, to inform them of program
changes, training course schedules, common problems being experienced
in the I/M program, and diagnostic tips.
PC-based I/M management software will be used to provide the I/M
programs with station and mechanic specific estimates of repair
effectiveness. Effectiveness estimates applicable to each certified
station will be distributed by the I/M program to that station on at
least an annual basis.
IV. This Action
The EPA is approving the Alaska I/M SIP (Section 3.1, OAR 340-24-
300 through 340-24-355; and section 5.4) as meeting the requirements of
the CAAA and the Federal I/M rule. All required SIP items have been
adequately addressed as discussed in this Federal Register action.
V. Administrative 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 CAA
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 CAA,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
CAA 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).
The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse [[Page 17237]] comments. However, in a separate document in
this Federal Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the
SIP revision should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action
will be effective June 5, 1995 unless, within 30 days of its
publication, adverse or critical comments are received.
If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should
do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this action will be effective June 5, 1995.
The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-
approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined
that this action conforms with those requirements.
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 the SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register 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 OMB has exempted this regulatory action from
E.O. 12866 review.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 5, 1995. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C.
7607(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for
the state of Alaska was approved by the Director of the Office of
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: March 2, 1995.
Chuck Clarke,
Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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 C--Alaska
2. Section 52.70 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (21) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.70 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(21) On July 11, 1994 ADEC submitted a SIP revision for a basic
motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in the
Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) and the Fairbanks North Star Borough
(FNSB).
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) July 11, 1994 letter from the Governor of Alaska to the
Regional Administrator of EPA submitting Alaska's amendments to the Air
Quality Control Plan and to 18 AAC 52, Emissions Inspection and
Maintenance Requirements for Motor Vehicles; the amendments to 18 AAC
52 (52.005, .015, .020, .030, .035, .040, .045, .050, .055, .060, .065,
.070, .075, .080, .085, .090, .095, .100, .105, .400, .405, .410, .415,
.420, .425, .430, .440, .445, .500, .505, .510, .515, .520, .525, .527,
.530, .535, .540, .545, .550, and .990), effective February 1, 1994;
and the State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II: Analysis of Problems,
Control Actions, Modifications to Section I, June 9, 1994; Vol. II:
Analysis of Problems, Control Actions, Modifications to Section I, II,
III and V, adopted January 10, 1994; Vol. III: Appendices,
Modifications to Section III.A, June 9, 1994; Vol. III: Appendices,
Modifications to Section III.B, June 9, 1994; and Vol. III: Appendices,
Modifications to Section III.C, June 9, 1994.
[FR Doc. 95-8313 Filed 4-4-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
