[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 7, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36635-36639]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-17210]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[DE039-1021; FRL-6372-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Delaware Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)
Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Delaware. This action proposes
approval of revisions to the enhanced motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) SIP submitted by the Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC). Because EPA has determined
that the conditions of its May 19, 1997 conditional approval of
Delaware's enhanced I/M SIP have now been satisfied, this action
proposes to remove those conditions and to grant full approval of the
enhanced I/M SIP.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 6, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may 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; Delaware Department
of Natural Resources & Environmental Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O.
Box 1401, Dover, Delaware 19903.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill Webster, (215) 814-2033, or by e-
mail at Webster.Jill@epamail.epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this section is organized
as follows:
A. What is today's action?
B. Why is EPA taking this action?
C. Why did Delaware make these changes?
[[Page 36636]]
D. What are the new changes to Delaware's I/M program?
E. How did EPA review Delaware's submittal?
F. How did Delaware satisfy the deficiencies identified in the
conditional approval?
G. What are the specifics of the new I/M program changes?
H. What is the process for EPA approval of this action?
I. Where can I get additional background information on this
action?
J. How this document complies with the Federal Administrative
Requirements for Proposed Rulemaking.
A. What is Today's Action?
On May 19, 1997, EPA conditionally approved Delaware's enhanced
Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program. On June 16, 1998, Delaware
submitted a SIP revision to satisfy the conditions established in the
May 19, 1997 conditional approval. Because EPA has determined that
Delaware has satisfied all of the conditions of its May 19, 1997
conditional approval, EPA is proposing to approve the June 16, 1998 SIP
revision submittal together with additional I/M SIP revisions submitted
by DNREC on May 24, 1999.
B. Why is EPA Taking This Action?
EPA is proposing approval because Delaware has submitted an
enhanced I/M SIP that meets the requirements of the I/M rule as found
in 40 CFR 51.350 through 51.373 (the I/M rule). EPA believes that
Delaware's I/M SIP submittal satisfies the deficiencies imposed in the
May 19, 1997 conditional approval rule. Furthermore, EPA has determined
that recent changes made by Delaware to its enhanced I/M program also
meet the requirements of the I/M Rule.
C. Why did Delaware Make These Changes?
Delaware revised its I/M SIP to improve air quality and to meet
requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (the Act) for an
enhanced I/M program. The Act requires states to make changes to
improve existing I/M programs or to implement new ones for certain
nonattainment areas. Both Kent and New Castle counties, are part of the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton severe ozone nonattainment area. The
DNREC submitted a revised SIP to EPA on February 17, 1995 that included
enhancements to their I/M program. The intent of the revisions was to
meet the requirements of the Act and the I/M rule. The submittal
consisted of Regulation Numbers 26 and 33 of the Delaware Regulations
Governing the Control of Air Pollution.
EPA identified numerous deficiencies of the February 17, 1995
submittal. On May 19, 1997, EPA granted Delaware a conditional approval
of the program, contingent upon Delaware's commitment to submit a
revised enhanced I/M SIP by June 18, 1998 correcting the deficiencies
identified in EPA's conditional approval. On June 16, 1998, Delaware
submitted Regulation 31-Low Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance
Program, for the purpose of addressing the program deficiencies.
Regulation 31 replaced Regulation 26 for Kent and New Castle counties.
Regulation 33 was rescinded and also replaced by Regulation 31.
D. What are the New Changes to Delaware's I/M Program?
Delaware has also made new changes to its enhanced I/M program.
Delaware has adopted regulations that incorporate Low Emitter Profile
(LEP) modeling, expanded model year exemptions, and a two-speed idle
test. The LEP modeling is commonly referred to as ``clean screening''.
These revisions were submitted to EPA on May 24, 1999.
E. How did EPA Review Delaware's Submittal?
First, EPA reviewed the June 16, 1998 SIP revision submittal to
verify that Delaware's enhanced I/M program satisfied the conditions
imposed in the May 19, 1997 conditional approval. Second, EPA reviewed
the new program changes submitted on May 24, 1999 to verify that
Delaware's enhanced I/M program still conformed to requirements of the
Act and the I/M rule.
F. How did Delaware Satisfy the Deficiencies Identified in the
Conditional Approval?
As previously explained, EPA had identified various deficiencies of
Delaware's I/M program. Most of these deficiencies related to
insufficient administrative requirements and lack of supporting
documentation. On June 16, 1998 and on May 24, 1999, DNREC submitted
revisions to its conditionally approved enhanced I/M program. EPA used
the ``Inspection and Maintenance Program SIP Requirements Checklist''
as a guideline for performing a detailed review of both the June 16,
1998 and May 24, 1999 submittals. The checklist is part of the
technical support document (TSD) for this rulemaking. The details of
the checklist review are not outlined in this notice, but are available
in the TSD. The TSD is available, upon request, from the EPA Regional
Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. This document
will briefly describe the conditions satisfied by Delaware.
Table 1. briefly describes how Delaware satisfied the I/M
requirement. The table also identifies the location in the Delaware
submittal that contains the required information.
Table 1.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrective action Location in SIP
Deficiency taken by Delaware submittal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required provisions covering Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
all requirements of 31 includes ZIP 31, section 1 and
Applicability, 40 CFR codes for all Appendix 1(d).
51.350, including ZIP codes covered areas and
for all covered areas and letter from
statement by authorized Secretary of the
Delaware official that the Delaware Department
program requirement will of Natural
not sunset. Resources &
Environmental
Control, Christophe
A.G. Tulou, stating
that the program
will stay in place
throughout
attainment and
maintenance period
for ozone.
Did not submit modeling that Submittal included Delaware Regulation
demonstrated meeting the modeling that 31, section 2; Plan
performance standard by demonstrated for Implementation,
failing to include meeting the section 2 and
provisions for an on-road performance Appendix 2(b).
testing program; Enhanced I/ standard with the
M Performance Standard 40 new program
CFR 51.351. changes, and
included an on-road
testing program.
Insufficient network type Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
description and a long term 31 includes network 31, section 3 and
program evaluation; Network type description Appendix 3(a)(7);
Type and Program Evaluation and the Plan for Plan for
40 CFR 51.353. Implementation Implementation,
includes program section 3.
evaluation
description.
[[Page 36637]]
Did not submit a resource The Plan for Plan for
Budget Plan and other Implementation Implementation,
requirements of Adequate includes resource section 4, Appendix
Tools and Resources 40 CFR budget plan 4(a), and Appendix
51.354. necessary for 4(b).
program operation.
Insufficient description of Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
test frequency other 31 describes the 31, section 4 and
requirements of Test test frequency in Plan for
Frequency and Convenience detail, as well as Implementation,
40 CFR 51.355. how testing and section 5.
short wait times
are insured.
Lack of description of Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
vehicles covered by the 31 provides the 31, section 5 and
program and other necessary Appendix 5(f). Plan
requirements of Vehicle description of for Implementation,
Coverage 40 CFR 51.356. vehicle coverage section 6.
and the Plan for
Implementation
provides estimation
of special
exemptions.
Insufficient detail Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
regarding test procedures 31 includes 31, section 6,
and evaporative test appropriate test Appendix 6(a),
standards; Test Procedures procedures and Appendix 6(a)(5),
and Standards 40 CFR 51.357. standards*. and Appendix
6(a)(8).
Lack of detail regarding The Plan for Plan for
test equipment, including Implementation Implementation,
specifications and other includes all section 8 and
requirements of Test pertinent equipment Appendix 8(a).
Equipment 40 CFR 51.358. specifications and
other necessary
equipment
information.
Did not submit all necessary The Plan for Plan for
equipment calibration Implementation Implementation,
procedures and quality includes all section 9, Appendix
control measures; Quality necessary quality 9(a)(1), Appendix
Control 40 CFR 51.359. control and 9(c), and Appendix
calibration 9(c).
procedures.
Lack of necessary waiver Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
requirement of minimum 31 includes the 31, section 7 and
expenditure of at least necessary waiver Appendix 7(a). Plan
$450, adjusted annually to expenditure for Implementation,
reflect changes in the requirement of section 10.
Consumer Price Index (CPI) minimum $450
and other requirements of adjusted annually
Waivers & Compliance via to reflect changes
Diagnostic Inspection 40 in CPI compared to
CFR 51.360. 1989**.
Insufficient detail Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
regarding Delaware's 31 provides 31, section 8 and
registration denial process sufficient detail Appendix 8 (a).
and how it's linked with regarding Plan for
the inspection process; Delaware's Implementation,
Motorist Compliance registration denial section 11,
Enforcement 40 CFR 51.360. system and motorist Appendix 11(b),
compliance. Appendix 11(c)(1).
Lack of detailed description The Plan for Plan for
of Delaware's quality Implementation Implementation,
assurance program including details all of section 9, Appendix
details of auditing Delaware quality 9 (a)(1), Appendix
procedures, inspector assurance 9(b), and Appendix
training, and fraud procedures and all 9(c).
prevention as well as other necessary quality
requirements of Quality assurance
Assurance 40 CFR 51.363. requirements.
Lack of detail regarding Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
enforcement against 31 provides 31, section 9 and
stations, contractors, and sufficient detail Appendix 9(a).
inspectors; Enforcement of enforcement and
Against Contractors, disciplinary
Stations, and Inspectors 40 actions to be taken
CFR 51.364. with regard to
stations,
contractors, and
inspectors.
Submittal did not include The Plan for Plan for
data collection procedures Implementation Implementation,
or provisions for data details all data section 15.
collection and other collection
requirements of Data procedures and data
Collection 40 CFR 51.365. collected.
Submittal did not include The Plan for Plan for
data analysis and reporting Implementation Implementation,
procedures required in Data details data section 16.
Analysis and Reporting 40 analysis and
CFR 51.366. reporting
procedures.
Lack of description of The Plan for Plan for
Inspector training and Implementation Implementation,
training course; Inspector contains an section 17 and
Training and Licensing or overview of Appendix 17.
Certification 40 CFR 51.367. Inspector training
and other
requirements of
inspector
certification.
Submittal did not include The Plan for Plan for
measures/provisions that Implementation Implementation,
will be implemented to describes section 18 and
protect the consumer and Delaware's process Appendix 18.
provide for public for consumer
awareness; Public protection and
Information and Consumer public education.
Awareness 40 CFR 51.368.
Submittal did not include a The Plan For Delaware Regulation
description of the steps Implementation 31, section 10.
Delaware will take to provides Delaware's Plan for
ensure effective repairs, procedures for Implementation,
as well as other ensuring repair section 19.
requirements of Improving effectiveness.
Repair Effectiveness 40 CFR
51.369.
Submittal did not include EPA advised Delaware Delaware Regulation
methods for ensuring that to reserve this 31, section 11 and
vehicles subject to section in Plan for
emission related recalls Regulation 31 Implementation,
receive necessary repairs Delaware will section 20.
prior to completing supplement the
emission test/registration; reserved section,
Compliance with Recall subsequent to EPA
Notices 40 CFR 51.368. issuing guidance
with regard to
recalls. EPA
believes that by
reserving
compliance with
recalls in the SIP,
Delaware has
satisfied this
condition for the
purpose of this
rulemaking.
Lack of provisions for Delaware Regulation Delaware Regulation
implementing an on-road 31 and the Plan for 31, section 12 and
testing program and other Implementation Plan for
requirements of On-Road sufficiently Implementation,
Testing 40 CFR 51.371. provides for an on- section 21.
road testing
program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The two-speed idle test that Delaware will implement varies slightly
from the EPA test procedure. The length of preconditioning is
shortened as compared to EPA guidance. EPA has previously approved
this test procedure change in other areas.
**Delaware will implement a waiver of $450 January 1, 2000. Delaware
will not meet the requirement to implement a full waiver amount of
$450, plus CPI adjustment until January 1, 2001.
[[Page 36638]]
G. What are the Specifics of the New I/M Program Changes?
LEP Modeling (Clean Screening)
As previously stated, Delaware has also promulgated new program
changes to alleviate long motorist wait times. Delaware incorporated
provisions that allow clean screening when motorists must wait more
than 60 minutes for an inspection.
What is LEP modeling (clean screening) and how does it work? LEP
modeling is the exemption of some vehicles based upon historical
emissions test performance. The LEP model flags certain makes, model
years, and engine families as likely low emitting vehicles. During busy
hours of operations, the Delaware Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) may
exempt vehicles that the LEP model predicts to be low emitting. Clean
screening exemptions will only occur when motorists must wait more than
60 minutes for an inspection. And the DMV will only exempt, by LEP
modeling, a predetermined number of vehicles on an annual basis.
Additional information about the methodology of the LEP model is
contained in a dKC del la Torre report titled ``Assessment of
Alternative I/M Test Scenario,'' February 6, 1998. A copy of that
report is in the rulemaking docket of this proposed rulemaking and is
available for public inspection. Additional information regarding
Delaware's process for LEP modeling (clean screening) and pertinent
regulatory requirements, are also found in the TSD.
Delaware plans to implement LEP modeling provisions starting
January 1, 2000.
Model Year Exemption Expansion and 2-Speed Idle Test
Delaware will expand the model year exemptions to the five newest
model years. The implementation date of the exemption expansion is
September 1, 1999. After this date, the newest five model year vehicles
will be exempt from the emissions inspection process.
Delaware will also change the exhaust test that will be performed
on 1981 and newer vehicles. The new test type will be a two-speed idle
test. The two-speed idle test will measure vehicle emissions at idle
speed and at 2500 rpm. Vehicles that are older than 1981 will continue
to be tested with the current idle test. Delaware will implement the
new test procedure on November 1, 1999.
H. What is the Process for EPA Approval of This Action?
EPA's review of this material indicates that Delaware has met their
commitment to address the conditions identified in the February 5, 1997
conditional approval. EPA is proposing to approve the Delaware SIP
revision for the Low Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance Program, which
was submitted on June 16, 1998. EPA is also proposing to approve
additional revisions to the I/M program, submitted on May 24, 1999. EPA
is soliciting public comments on its proposed approval that Delaware's
June 16, 1998 submittal satisfies the conditions imposed in the May 19,
1997 conditional approval and its proposed approval of additional
revisions to the I/M program, submitted on May 24, 1999. 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 document. We will address all comments in a subsequent final rule.
There will be no second comment period, so those wishing to comment
must do so before the comment period closes.
I. Where can I Get Additional Background Information on This
Action?
EPA proposed conditional approval of Delaware's Low Enhanced
Inspection and Maintenance Program in a Federal Register action dated
February 5, 1997, (62 FR 5361). We conditionally approved the program
in a Federal Register action, dated May 19, 1997 (62 FR 27195).
J. How This Document Complies With the Federal Administrative
Requirements for Proposed Rulemaking
A. Executive Orders 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. 12875 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 proposed 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.
[[Page 36639]]
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, E.O. 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, E.O. 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 proposed 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 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 proposed approval action 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, proposing
to approve Delaware's I/M SIP, 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 to propose approval of
Delaware's enhanced I/M SIP.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 28, 1999.
Thomas C. Voltaggio,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 99-17210 Filed 7-6-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
