99-15163. Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 116 (Thursday, June 17, 1999)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 32411-32414]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-15163]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [PA 133-4087o; FRL-6354-9]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
    Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 
    Program
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Direct final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on the latest revision to 
    the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP) consisting of the plan 
    the Commonwealth will use to conduct the ongoing evaluation of its 
    enhanced inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. With the submission 
    of this program evaluation plan, Pennsylvania has remedied all 
    conditions that EPA had placed upon approval of the Commonwealth's 
    enhanced I/M program. Therefore, EPA is today converting its 
    conditional approval of Pennsylvania's enhanced I/M program SIP 
    revisions to full approval, in accordance with the requirements of the 
    Clean Air Act.
    
    DATES: This rule is effective on August 2, 1999 without further notice, 
    unless EPA receives adverse written comment by July 19, 1999. If EPA 
    receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
    direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that 
    the rule will not take effect.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to David Arnold, Chief, 
    Ozone and Mobile Sources Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental 
    Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, 
    Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are 
    available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air 
    Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 
    1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; or at the Air and 
    Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection 
    Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. They may also be viewed 
    at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of 
    Air Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 
    17105.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian K. Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or via 
    e-mail at rehn.brian@epa.gov.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    [[Page 32412]]
    
    I. Background
    
        On January 28, 1997, EPA published in the Federal Register a final 
    rulemaking action (62 FR 4004) granting conditional interim approval to 
    Pennsylvania's enhanced I/M program SIP revision submitted by 
    Pennsylvania on March 22, 1996, and formally amended on June 27, 1996 
    and on July 29, 1996. The interim nature of the approval was granted 
    under authority provided by the National Highway Systems Designation 
    Act of 1995 (NHSDA). At the end of the specified 18-month interim 
    approval period, the Commonwealth was required to make a demonstration 
    of the effectiveness of their I/M program network, per NHSDA 
    requirements, based upon actual program data. The conditional nature of 
    the approval was granted under the Clean Air Act and required 
    Pennsylvania to remedy, within a 12-month period, certain major program 
    deficiencies. EPA's January 28, 1997 approval also required the 
    Commonwealth to remedy certain minor deficiencies within the 18-month 
    interim approval period.
        Pennsylvania submitted supplements to its I/M SIP to EPA on 
    November 13, 1997; February 24, 1998; and August 21, 1998. The purpose 
    of these supplemental submittals was to bolster the enhanced I/M SIP to 
    include updated information and to satisfy the conditions imposed by 
    EPA in its January 28, 1998 conditional interim approval.
        On September 2, 1998, EPA published a direct final rule in the 
    Federal Register (63 FR 46664) approving Pennsylvania's November 13, 
    1997 and February 24, 1998 SIP revisions. That approval action removed 
    four major conditions and seven minor conditions identified in EPA's 
    January 28, 1997 interim conditional approval of Pennsylvania's I/M 
    SIP.
        On September 16, 1998, EPA published a direct final rule in the 
    Federal Register (63 FR 49436) approving Pennsylvania's August 21, 1998 
    SIP revision supplement consisting of the Commonwealth's network 
    effectiveness demonstration (per requirements of section 348 of the 
    NHSDA). However, EPA received adverse comments upon the direct final 
    rule, and withdrew it on October 21, 1998 in accordance with federal 
    rulemaking procedures. EPA has since issued a final rule approving the 
    August 21, 1998 submittal of the Commonwealth's network effectiveness 
    demonstration. In the preamble to that final rule EPA addressed the 
    adverse comments. That final rule also removed the remaining minor 
    conditions identified in EPA's January 28, 1997 interim conditional 
    approval of Pennsylvania's I/M SIP. As a result of these two rulemaking 
    actions, EPA converted its interim conditional approval of the 
    Commonwealth's I/M program to a conditional approval--leaving only a 
    single condition remaining to be addressed. That one remaining 
    condition was the submittal by Pennsylvania of a plan for conducting 
    the required ongoing evaluation of its enhanced I/M program. On 
    November 25, 1998, Pennsylvania submitted the required evaluation plan 
    to fulfill this last condition. The November 25, 1998 submittal, as 
    amended on March 3, 1999, is the subject of this rulemaking.
    
    II. Summary of the Commonwealth's Submittal
    
        On November 25, 1998, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania submitted a 
    supplement to its enhanced I/M SIP consisting of its plan for 
    conducting the required ongoing program evaluation of its enhanced I/M 
    program. On March 3, 1999, the Commonwealth bolstered the November 25, 
    1998 submittal to include documentation that public notice and hearing 
    had been conducted on its chosen evaluation plan. The submitted plan 
    reflects the Commonwealth's choice of an EPA-approved method for 
    conducting an ongoing program evaluation. The purpose of the 
    Commonwealth's November 25, 1998 and March 3, 1999 SIP submittals is to 
    address and remedy the final condition set forth in EPA's January 28, 
    1997 interim conditional approval (62 FR 4004) of Pennsylvania's I/M 
    program SIP, and codified at 40 CFR 52.2026(a)(2).
    
    III. EPA Review of the SIP Revision
    
        EPA conditioned its January 28, 1997 approval of the Commonwealth's 
    SIP upon submission, by November 30 1998, of a final plan for 
    conducting the required enhanced I/M program evaluation, which requires 
    the use of an EPA approved methodology to be performed on 0.1 percent 
    of the I/M subject vehicles in the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia program 
    areas. EPA required the Commonwealth to select a methodology that 
    complies with Federal I/M rule requirements set forth at 40 CFR 
    51.353(c)(3). On October 30, 1998, EPA's Office of Mobile Sources 
    issued a guidance memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Alternative I/M 
    Program Evaluation Methods''. This document outlined three EPA accepted 
    alternative I/M program evaluation methodologies available to states to 
    comply with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.353(c). The approved 
    alternatives include: (1) the Sierra Research method; (2) the NYTEST 
    (or VMAS) method; and (3) the RG240 method. The guidance also addressed 
    the need to establish a baseline from which to determine I/M program 
    emissions benefits, in order to fully evaluate enhanced I/M program 
    effectiveness. For areas that had previously existing I/M programs 
    prior to implementation of an enhanced I/M program, the guidance 
    established a methodology for determining a benchmark, since a direct 
    comparison between pre-program and post-program baselines for subsets 
    of such vehicles would not be possible.
        For its evaluation methodology, Pennsylvania chose to use the 
    Sierra Research method, utilizing a correlation between another state's 
    IM240 program and its own acceleration simulation mode (ASM) and idle 
    testing programs, per EPA's October 30, 1998 guidance. These 
    correlations will then be used to convert Pennsylvania's idle/ASM 
    measurements to IM240-equivalent measurements for each vehicle. These 
    will then form the basis for a modeled comparison between the 
    Commonwealth's program and the benchmark IM240 program. For its 
    benchmark comparison of estimating a baseline, Pennsylvania intends to 
    correlate its idle/ASM program data to IM240 data from New Jersey's or 
    Maryland's program.
    
    IV. Final Action
    
        EPA is hereby approving Pennsylvania's November 25, 1998 and March 
    3, 1999 SIP submittals.
        EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
    Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
    adverse comment, since the Commonwealth's SIP revision complies with 
    applicable guidance and with the requirements at 40 CFR 51.353(c). The 
    Commonwealth has fully met the requirements of the relevant condition 
    set by EPA in its January 28, 1997 conditional approval of the 
    Pennsylvania I/M program SIP revision.
        However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal 
    Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as a 
    proposal to approve the SIP revision in the event adverse comments are 
    filed. This rule will be effective on August 2, 1999 without further 
    notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 19, 1999. If EPA 
    receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
    Federal Register informing the public
    
    [[Page 32413]]
    
    that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public 
    comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA 
    will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
    interested in commenting must do so at this time.
        EPA, through previous rulemaking actions, approved Pennsylvania's 
    enhanced I/M program SIP revisions submitted prior to November 25, 
    1998. Those SIP revisions satisfied all but one of the major and minor 
    conditions set forth by EPA in its January 28, 1997 (62 FR 4004) 
    approval of Pennsylvania's enhanced I/M program. EPA also taken final 
    action to approve the Commonwealth's I/M program network effectiveness 
    demonstration, required under section 348 of the NHSDA. Because the 
    Commonwealth has now addressed all of the deficiencies identified by 
    EPA with respect to its enhanced I/M program SIP, EPA is acting today 
    to incorporate by reference all of Pennsylvania's enhanced I/M SIP 
    revisions into the Code of Federal Regulations, at 40 CFR 
    52.2020(c)(139).
        Since EPA has previously taken final approval actions on all of 
    Pennsylvania's enhanced I/M SIP revisions submitted prior to November 
    25, 1998, EPA is now providing opportunity for comment only upon 
    today's approval of the Commonwealth's program evaluation plan--
    submitted on November 25, 1998 and amended on March 3, 1999.
        By taking final, full approval upon Pennsylvania's submitted 
    enhanced I/M program SIP revisions, the mandatory sanctions and Federal 
    Implementation Plan obligations under the Clean Air Act have been 
    satisfied. All sanctions and FIP clocks related to approval of 
    Pennsylvania's I/M program are terminated upon the effective date of 
    today's action.
    
    V. Administrative Requirements
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
    regulatory action from review under E.O. 12866, entitled ``Regulatory 
    Planning and Review.''
    
    B. Executive Order 12875
    
        Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
    required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or 
    tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
    necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those 
    governments. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. requires EPA to 
    provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the 
    extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected 
    state, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, 
    copies of written communications from the governments, and a statement 
    supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 
    requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected 
    officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal 
    governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
    of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.'' 
    Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal 
    governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these 
    entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 
    do not apply to this rule.
    
    C. Executive Order 13045
    
        E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
    Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies 
    to any rule that the EPA determines (1) is ``economically 
    significant,'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) the environmental 
    health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a disproportionate 
    effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the 
    Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the 
    planned rule on children and explain why the planned regulation is 
    preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible 
    alternatives considered by the Agency.
        This final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not an 
    economically significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866, 
    and it does not address an environmental health or safety risk that 
    would have a disproportionate effect on children.
    
    D. Executive Order 13084
    
        Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
    required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the 
    communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
    direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
    government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
    costs incurred by the tribal governments. If EPA complies by 
    consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office 
    of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section of the 
    preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
    consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a 
    summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the 
    need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 
    requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected and 
    other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide 
    meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies 
    on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' 
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities 
    of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve or impose 
    any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 
    requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
    
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
    to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
    notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
    that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
    businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
    jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under 
    section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air 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 
    create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
    significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the 
    Clean Air Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would constitute 
    Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
    Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
    grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
    42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    
        Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
    (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
    must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
    final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
    annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; 
    or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
    must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
    that achieves the objectives of the rule and
    
    [[Page 32414]]
    
    is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to 
    establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that 
    may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
        EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not 
    include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of 
    $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in 
    the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves 
    pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
    requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
    tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
    
    G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
    
        The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
    provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
    the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
    to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
    United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
    required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
    Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
    to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a 
    ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    
    H. Petitions for Judicial Review
    
        Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
    judicial review of this action to fully approve Pennsylvania's enhanced 
    I/M program SIP must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
    the appropriate circuit by August 16, 1999. 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).)
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
    Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
    Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone.
    
        Dated: May 27, 1999.
    W. Michael McCabe,
    Regional Administrator, Region III.
    
        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 et seq.
    
    Subpart NN--Pennsylvania
    
        2. Section 52.2020 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(139) to read 
    as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 52.2020  Identification of plan.
    
    * * * * *
        (c) * * *
        (139) Revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan 
    adopting an enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) 
    program, submitted on March 22, 1996, and formal amendments submitted 
    by the Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
    Protection on June 27, 1996; July 29, 1996; November 1, 1996; October 
    22, 1997; November 13, 1997; February 24, 1998; August 21, 1998; 
    November 25, 1998; and March 3, 1999.
        (i) Incorporation by reference.
        (A) Letter of November 13, 1997 from the Secretary of the 
    Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection transmitting 
    regulations for an enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance 
    program.
        (B) Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Enhanced Motor 
    Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program regulations (contained 
    in Title 67 of the PA Code), effective September 27, 1997.
        (1) A definition for ``temporary inspection approval indicator'', 
    added to section 175.2.
        (2) Section 175.11
        (3) Paragraph (f)(4) of section 175.29
        (4) Paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of section 175.41. Paragraph 
    (b)(3) of section 175.41. Subparagraphs (d)(2)(ii) and (d)(2)(iii), and 
    paragraphs (e)(5) and (f)(4) of section 175.41.
        (5) Sections 175.42, 175.43, 175.44, and 175.45.
        (6) Sections 177.1, 177.2, 177.3, 177.21, 177.22, 177.23, 177.24, 
    177.51, 177.52, 177.53, 177.101, 177.102, 177.103, 177.104, 177.105, 
    177.106.
        (7) Sections 177.201, 177.202, 177.203, 177.204, 177.231, 177.233, 
    177.251, 177.252, 177.253, 177.271, 177.272, 177.273, 177.274, 177.281, 
    177.282, 177.291, 177.292, 177.301, 177.302, 177.304, and 177.305.
        (8) Sections 177.401, 177.402, 177.403, 177.404, 177.405, 177.406, 
    177.407, 177.408, 177.421, 177.422, 177.423, 177.424, 177.425, 177.426, 
    177.427, and 177.431.
        (9) Sections 177.501, 177.502, 177.503, 177.504, and 177.521.
        (10) Sections 177.602, 177.603, 177.605, 177.606, 177.651, 177.652, 
    177.671, 177.672, 177.673, and 177.691.
        (11) Appendix A to Title 67 of the Pennsylvania Code.
        (12) Appendix B to Title 67 of the Pennsylvania Code.
    (ii) Additional Material.--Remainder of Submittals
        The Commonwealth submitted materials in support of its enhanced 
    motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program regulation. 
    These materials were submitted in formal SIP revisions dated: March 27, 
    1996; July 29, 1996; November 1, 1996; November 13, 1997; February 24, 
    1998; August 21, 1998; November 25, 1998; and March 3, 1999, and 
    include:
        (A) Submittal submitted under a letter dated March 22, 1996, from 
    the Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
    Protection.
        (B) Materials submitted under a letter dated June 27, 1996, from 
    the Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection.
        (C) Materials submitted under a letter of July 29, 1996, from the 
    Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection.
        (D) Materials submitted under a letter of November 1, 1996, from 
    the Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection.
        (E) Materials submitted under a letter of October 27, 1997, from 
    the Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection.
        (F) Materials submitted under a letter of February 24, 1998, from 
    the Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection.
        (G) Documents submitted by a letter dated August 21, 1998, from the 
    Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection.
        (H) Materials submitted by the Secretary of the Department of 
    Environmental Protection, in a letter dated November 25, 1998, and 
    amended by a letter dated March 3, 1999.
        3. In Section 52.2026, the introductory sentence is removed and 
    paragraph (a) and paragraph (b) are removed and reserved.
    [FR Doc. 99-15163 Filed 6-16-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
8/2/1999
Published:
06/17/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Direct final rule.
Document Number:
99-15163
Dates:
This rule is effective on August 2, 1999 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by July 19, 1999. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.
Pages:
32411-32414 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
PA 133-4087o, FRL-6354-9
PDF File:
99-15163.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52.2020