[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 185 (Monday, September 23, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49680-49682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-23652]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[FRL-5610-4]
Minor Amendments to Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule changes a provision of the federal vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M) rules relating to motorist compliance
enforcement mechanisms for pre-existing programs. The current rule
limits the use of pre-existing enforcement mechanisms, other than
denial of vehicle registration, to those geographic areas previously
subject to the I/M program. This rule change allows states to employ
such effective pre-existing enforcement mechanisms as sticker
enforcement in any area in the state adopting an I/M program. This
amendment is consistent with the relevant requirements of the Clean Air
Act. These changes will not result in any change in health and
environmental benefits.
DATES: This rule will take effect November 22, 1996 unless EPA receives
adverse comments on a parallel proposal of this action, published
elsewhere in this Federal Register, by October 23, 1996. Should EPA
receive such comments, EPA will publish a subsequent document in the
Federal Register withdrawing this direct final rule prior to the
effective date. Anyone wishing to submit comments on the parallel
proposal should do so at this time.
ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this rulemaking are contained in the
Public Docket No. A-91-75. The docket is located at the Air Docket,
Room M-1500 (6102), Waterside Mall SW, Washington, DC 20460. The docket
may be inspected between 8:30 a.m. and 12 noon and between 1:30 p.m.
until 5:30 p.m. on weekdays. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket material. Electronic copies of the preamble and the
regulatory text of this rulemaking are available on the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) Technology Transfer Network
Bulletin Board System (TTN BBS) and the Office of Mobile Sources' World
Wide Web cite, http://ww.epa.gov/OMSWWW/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leila Cook, Office of Mobile Sources,
National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, 48105. Telephone (313) 741-7820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by the minor amendment to the I/M
rule are those which adopt, approve, or fund I/M programs. Regulated
categories and entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local government.................... Local air quality agencies.
State government.................... State air quality agencies
responsible for I/M programs.
Federal............................. EPA.
government..........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
that could potentially be regulated by this I/M amendment. Other types
of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To
determine whether your organization is regulated by this action, you
should carefully examine the applicability criteria of 40 CFR 51.361 of
the I/M rule. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the Act), 42 U.S.C.
7401 et seq., the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published
in the Federal Register on November 5, 1992 (40 CFR part 51, subpart S)
rules relating to motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M)
programs (hereafter referred to as the I/M rule; see 57 FR 52950). EPA
here amends those rules to broaden the geographic area in which pre-
existing enforcement mechanisms can be employed.
Section 182(c)(3) of the Act establishes the statutory requirements
for enhanced I/M programs. Subsection (c)(3)(C)(iv) requires the use of
vehicle registration denial enforcement mechanisms except in certain
cases. The statute allows the use of alternative enforcement mechanisms
that are demonstrated to be more effective than vehicle registration
denial for any program in operation before enactment of the 1990
amendments of the Act.
In the 1992 I/M rules, EPA interpreted this statutory requirement
to allow the use of pre-existing alternative enforcement mechanisms
only in the same geographic area where the prior program had been
implemented using that alternative 40 CFR 51.361. That regulation did
not provide for the use of alternative enforcement mechanisms in
[[Page 49681]]
any areas within a state that had not previously had an I/M program,
even where an effective alternative enforcement mechanism was in place
elsewhere in the state. In addition, the 1992 I/M rule required pre-
existing alternative enforcement mechanisms to have been approved into
the SIP.
Based on experience implementing the I/M rule, EPA now believes
that the provisions limiting the geographic scope of pre-existing
enforcement mechanisms should be altered. EPA is amending 40 CFR 51.361
to allow, anywhere within a state, the use of more effective pre-
existing enforcement mechanisms that the state had previously used in
only some portion of the state. In states where a pre-existing
enforcement mechanism can be demonstrated to be more effective than
registration denial, it would be incongruous to allow the use of that
mechanism only in those areas that had previously employed the
mechanism, but require areas within the state newly implementing I/M to
use a registration denial system that had already been demonstrated to
be less effective within the state.
EPA believes that the amendment to section 51.361 is consistent
with the Act. The statute does not impose a geographic limitation on
the scope of applicability of pre-existing enforcement mechanisms. The
statute merely requires that the I/M program have been in place prior
to the 1990 amendments to the Act, and that the enforcement mechanism
be demonstrated to be more effective than registration denial. EPA
believes that where this demonstration can be made, expansion of the
program, including the pre-existing enforcement mechanism, to other
areas within the state is appropriate and consistent with the statute.
Further, EPA is removing the requirement in Sec. 51.361 that pre-
existing enforcement mechanisms have been approved into the SIP. The
statute requires only that such mechanism have been in operation prior
to the 1990 amendments to the Act, and says nothing about SIP approval.
Where a state can demonstrate that its pre-existing enforcement
mechanism is more effective than registration denial, EPA believes it
would be inconsistent with the statute to require use of the less
effective registration denial system merely because the program
previously in operation had not been approved into the SIP.
Administrative Requirements
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 605(b), I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and,
therefore, is not subject to the requirement of a Regulatory Impact
Analysis. A small entity may include a small government entity or
jurisdiction. A small government jurisdiction is defined as governments
of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or
special districts, with a population of less than 50,000. This
certification is based on the fact that the I/M areas impacted by this
rulemaking do not meet the definition of a small government
jurisdiction, that is, governments of cities, counties, towns,
townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a
population of less than 50,000. This rule affects only the enforcement
mechanism states may include in their I/M programs. Furthermore, the
impact created by this action does not increase the pre-existing burden
which this proposal seeks to amend.
Unfunded Mandates Act
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 where the estimated costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, will be $100 million or more.
Under Section 205, EPA must select the most cost-effective and least
burdensome alternative that achieves the objective 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 impacted by the rule.
To the extent that the requirements in this action would impose any
mandate at all as defined in Section 101 of the Unfunded Mandates Act
upon the state, local, or tribal governments, or the private sector, as
explained above, this rule is not estimated to impose costs in excess
of $100 million. Therefore, EPA has not prepared a statement with
respect to budgetary impacts. As noted above, this rule offers
opportunities to states that would enable them to lower economic
burdens from those resulting from the currently existing I/M rule.
Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. The rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 12866
It has been determined that this amendment to the I/M rule is not a
significant regulatory action under the terms of Executive Order 12866
and has been waived from Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review.
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
There are no information requirements in this final rule which
requires the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Effective Date
This rule will take effect on November 22, 1996, unless EPA
receives adverse comment on a parallel document proposing these same
changes published elsewhere in this Federal Register. EPA is using the
direct final rulemaking procedure in this case because EPA believes
that these amendments are noncontroversial and does not anticipate
receiving any adverse comment. Should EPA receive any such comments,
EPA will publish a subsequent document in the Federal Register
withdrawing this direct final rule prior to the effective date. EPA
will then publish another final rule responding to the comments
received and taking final action on the parallel proposal. Anyone
wishing to comment on the parallel proposal should do so at this time.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Motor vehicle pollution, Nitrogen oxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
[[Page 49682]]
Dated: September 10, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, part 51 of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 51--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
2. Section 51.361 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraph (b)(1)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 51.361 Motorist compliance enforcement.
Compliance shall be ensured through the denial of motor vehicle
registration in enhanced I/M programs unless an exception for use of an
existing alternative is approved. An enhanced I/M area may use an
existing alternative if it demonstrates that the alternative has been
more effective than registration denial. An enforcement mechanism may
be considered an ``existing alternative'' only in states that, for some
area in the state, had an I/M program with that mechanism in operation
prior to passage of the 1990 Amendments to the Act. A basic I/M area
may use an alternative enforcement mechanism if it demonstrates that
the alternative will be as effective as registration denial. Two other
types of enforcement programs may qualify for enhanced I/M programs if
demonstrated to have been more effective than enforcement of the
registration requirement in the past: Sticker-based enforcement
programs and computer-matching programs. States that did not adopt an
I/M program for any area of the state before November 15, 1990, may not
use an enforcement alternative in connection with an enhanced I/M
program required to be adopted after that date.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) For enhanced I/M programs, the area in question shall have had
an operating I/M program using the alternative mechanism prior to
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. While modifications
to improve compliance may be made to the program that was in effect at
the time of enactment, the expected change in effectiveness cannot be
considered in determining acceptability;
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-23652 Filed 9-20-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
