66670 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: October 29, 2014. 

Samuel Coleman, 

Acting Regional Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26627 Filed 11–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2014–0370; FRL–9918–98- 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; State of 

Utah; Motor Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance and Associated 

Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of Utah. 

The revisions involve amendments to 

Section X, Part A, Vehicle Inspection 

and Maintenance Program, General 

Requirements and Applicability; the 

addition of Section X, Part F, Cache 

County Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program; and revisions to 

Utah Administrative Rules R307–110–1, 

R307–110–31, and R307–110–36. EPA is 

proposing approval of these SIP 

revisions in accordance with the 

requirements of section 110 of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2014–0370, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: russ.tim@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air 

Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, 

Air Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 

8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries 

are only accepted Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

federal holidays. Special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2014– 

0370. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http://

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA, without going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I, 

General Information of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http://

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly-available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, EPA, Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the individual listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

view the hard copy of the docket. You 

may view the hard copy of the docket 

Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 

4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim 

Russ, Air Program, EPA, Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 

312–6479, russ.tim@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean 

or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The initials BRHD mean Bear River 

Health Department. 

(iii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean 

or refer to the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

(iv) The initials DMV mean Department of 

Motor Vehicles. 

(v) The initials I/M mean inspection and 

maintenance. 

(vi) The initials NAAQS mean national 

ambient air quality standard. 

(vii) The initials NOx mean nitrogen 

oxides. 

(viii) The initials OBD mean On-Board 

Diagnostics. 

(ix) The initials PM2.5 mean Particulate 

Matter equal to or less than 2.5 microns in 

diameter. 

(x) The initials RPM mean revolutions per 

minute. 

(xi) The initials SIP mean or refer to State 

Implementation Plan. 

(xii) The initials TSI mean Two Speed Idle. 

(xiii) The initials UAQB mean Utah Air 

Quality Board. 

(xiv) The initials UDAQ mean Utah 

Division of Air Quality. 

(xv) The words Utah and State mean the 

State of Utah. 

(xvi) The initials VOC mean volatile 

organic compound. 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. Background 

III. What was the State’s process? 

IV. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s Revisions 

to Section X, Part A, Vehicle Inspection 

and Maintenance Program, General 

Requirements and Applicability 

V. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s Revisions 

to Section X, Part F, Cache County Motor 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program 

VI. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s Associated 

Revisions to Utah Rules R307–110–1, 

R307–110–31, and R307–110–36 

VII. Consideration of Section 110(1) of the 

Clean Air Act 

VIII. Proposed Action 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. General Information 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI 

to EPA through http://

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 66671 

1PM2.5 is Particulate Matter less than or equal to 

2.5 microns in diameter. 

2For further information and citations to the 

relevant Utah statutes that govern rulemaking, 

please refer to the Web site of the Division of 

Administrative Rules: http://www.rules.utah.gov/. 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

a. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

b. Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

c. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

d. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

e. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

f. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

g. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

h. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Background 

(a.) Utah’s Revisions to SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part A, General Requirements 

and Applicability 

Section X of the Utah SIP addresses 

the provisions and requirements for the 

motor vehicle inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) programs that are 

administered by five counties in Utah. 

Section X of the SIP is divided into six 

subparts ‘‘A’’ through ‘‘F’’; Part A 

addresses general requirements and 

applicability provisions that are 

common to each of the counties’ I/M 

programs, Part B is the Davis County 

vehicle I/M program, Part C is the Salt 

Lake County vehicle I/M program, Part 

D is the Utah County vehicle I/M 

program, Part E is the Weber County 

vehicle I/M program, and Part F is the 

Cache County vehicle I/M program. 

Section X, Part A is entitled ‘‘Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

General Requirements and 

Applicability.’’ The current version of 

Part A, last approved by EPA on 

November 2, 2005 (70 FR 66264), 

provides a discussion of the federal I/M 

requirements, the aspects of On-Board 

Diagnostics (OBD) tests, a brief history 

of the Utah I/M program and the State’s 

general authority and general 

information regarding the applicability 

of the Utah SIP to such I/M program 

aspects as test frequency, enforcement, 

vehicle registration, and change in 

vehicle ownership. Although 

duplicative, each of the four counties’ 

existing I/M programs, found in Parts B, 

C, D, and E to Section X, contained very 

similar language as provided in Part A. 

By a letter dated January 10, 2013, the 

Governor of Utah submitted a revision 

to Section X, Part A that updates and 

expands Part A to contain the relevant 

brief history of the Utah I/M program, 

the State’s general authority, additional 

language on test types, general public 

information, general enforcement 

provisions which are relevant to the 

four counties implementing an existing 

I/M program, and the new I/M program 

in Cache County. As Part A is applicable 

to all five of the counties’ I/M programs, 

this allows the removal of the 

duplicative general language in existing 

Section X and allows the consolidation 

of the common information and 

provisions in each counties’ I/M 

program into Part A. Each of the 

counties’ I/M programs contained in 

Section X, Parts B through F will then 

reference Part A. 

(b.) Utah’s Revisions to SIP Section X, 

To Add Part F, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, Cache County 

On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), 

EPA designated a portion of Cache 

County, Utah as nonattainment for the 

2006 PM2.51 24-hour National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The 

Cache County portion includes the city 

of Logan, Utah. The nonattainment area, 

which also includes portions of 

Franklin County, Idaho, is identified by 

EPA as ‘‘Logan—UT/ID.’’ 

Through the course of the 

development of a dispersion modeled 

attainment demonstration for Utah’s 

attainment plan, a motor vehicle 

inspection and maintenance program 

was identified by the State as a 

reasonable control strategy to achieve 

reductions of PM2.5 precursor emissions 

of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) necessary to 

support the SIP attainment 

demonstration for the Cache County 

portion of the Logan–UT/ID 2006 PM2.5

24-hour NAAQS nonattainment area. 

EPA notes, however, that under the 

applicable subparts of Part D of Title I 

of the Act for PM2.5 attainment plans, 

subparts 1 and 4, Cache County’s I/M 

program is not a CAA mandatory or 

required I/M program and is therefore 

not held to the same level of applicable 

requirements as found in 40 CFR part 

51, subpart S (hereafter ‘‘40 CFR 51, 

subpart S’’), Inspection/Maintenance 

Program Requirements. As an example, 

a performance standard demonstration 

is not required for the Cache County 

I/M program. Part F of Section X, in 

conjunction with Section X, Part A as 

discussed above, was instead designed 

by the County and State to meet the 

minimum, applicable I/M provisions 

and requirements presented in 40 CFR 

51, subpart S. It is also noted in Part F 

that although only a portion of Cache 

County was designated as 

nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 24- 

hour NAAQS, the I/M program will be 

implemented County-wide. 

By a letter dated January 28, 2014, the 

Governor submitted a SIP revision to 

add Section X, Part F, for the new motor 

vehicle I/M program for Cache County. 

As described further below, the Cache 

County I/M program was designed with 

certain necessary components from 40 

CFR 51, subpart S in order to have a 

viable I/M program to help reduce NOx 

and VOC precursor emissions of PM2.5

and to also generate emission reductions 

suitable for use in a PM2.5 attainment 

demonstration that will be submitted to 

EPA as a revision to the SIP. 

(c.) Utah’s Revisions to Rules R307–110– 

1, R307–110–31, and R307–110–36 

As a background, the Utah 

Administrative Code is the body of all 

effective administrative rules as 

compiled and organized by the Utah 

Division of Administrative Rules, Utah 

Department of Administrative Services.2

Utah’s Administrative Rules are a 

portion of Utah’s Codified Law; in Utah, 

statements written by State agencies 

which have the effect of law are called 

administrative rules. Unlike State 

statutes, which change only when the 

Utah Legislature is in session, 

administrative rules change throughout 

the year. A Utah administrative rule 

serves at least two purposes; first, an 

enacted administrative rule has the 

binding effect of law, and second, an 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
66672 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

administrative rule informs citizens of 

actions a State government agency will 

take or how a State agency will conduct 

its business. In view of the above, after 

the Utah Air Quality Board (UAQB), 

under the authority of the Utah Air 

Conservation Act as provided in Utah 

Code Title 19, Chapter 2, adopts certain 

provisions and requirements into the 

Utah SIP, those particular SIP elements 

must then be incorporated by reference 

into the appropriate section of the Utah 

Administrative Rules (hereafter ‘‘Utah 

Rules’’). 

By letters dated January 10, 2013 and 

January 28, 2014, the Governor 

submitted SIP revisions involving 

updates to three sections of the R307– 

110 series air quality Utah Rules. The 

Governor’s submittals requested EPA to 

approve actions taken by the UAQB that 

updated three sections of Utah Rules 

R307–110 series for air quality which 

are entitled ‘‘General Requirements: 

State Implementation Plan.’’ The three 

rules are: 

(1.) R307–110–1 which incorporates 

by reference the Utah SIP into the Utah 

Administrative Rules and advises the 

public the SIP is available on the Utah 

Division of Air Quality’s (UDAQ) Web 

site. 

(2.) R307–110–31 which incorporates 

by reference Utah SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part A, General Requirements 

and Applicability. 

(3.) R307–110–36 which incorporates 

by reference Utah SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part F, Cache County. 

The above SIP actions adopted by the 

UAQB, and subsequently submitted to 

EPA by the Governor of Utah for 

approval, are discussed in greater detail 

in sections III and IV below. 

III. What was the State’s process? 

Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires 

that a state provide reasonable notice 

and public hearing before adopting a 

SIP revision and submitting it to us. 

(a.) The Governor’s January 10, 2013 SIP 

Submittal 

On October 15, 2012, October 16, 

2012, and October 17, 2012 the UAQB 

of the Utah Department of 

Environmental Quality conducted 

public hearings to consider the adoption 

of revisions and additions to the Utah 

SIP and the appropriate sections of the 

Utah Rules. The revisions affecting the 

SIP involved SIP Section X, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

Part A, General Requirements and 

Applicability; SIP Section X, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

Part F, Cache County; and Utah Rules 

R307–110–1, R307–110–31, and R307– 

110–36. After reviewing and responding 

to comments received before and during 

the public hearings, the UAQB adopted 

the proposed revisions on December 5, 

2012. The SIP and Utah Rule revisions 

became State effective on December 6, 

2012 and were submitted by the 

Governor to EPA by a letter dated 

January 10, 2013. By a subsequent letter 

dated February 25, 2013, Bryce Bird, 

Director, UDAQ submitted the necessary 

administrative documentation that 

supported the Governor’s submittal. 

We evaluated the Governor’s January 

10, 2013 submittal for SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part A, General Requirements 

and Applicability; SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part F, Cache County; and 

Rules R307–110–1, R307–110–31, and 

R307–110–36 and have determined that 

the State met the requirements for 

reasonable notice and public hearing 

under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. By 

operation of law under section 

110(k)(1)(B) of the CAA, the Governor’s 

January 10, 2013 submittal was deemed 

complete on July 10, 2013. 

(b.) The Governor’s January 28, 2014 SIP 

Submittal 

On August 7, 2013 the UAQB 

proposed for public comment 

amendments to the Utah SIP for Section 

X, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part F, Cache County and Utah 

Rule R307–110–36. These proposed 

revisions superseded and replaced those 

previous revisions to the SIP for Section 

X, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part F, Cache County and Utah 

Rule R307–110–36 that the Governor 

had submitted to EPA with his letter to 

EPA dated January 10, 2013. Included 

with the State’s administrative 

documentation for these SIP and Rule 

revisions were letters dated October 23, 

2013 and October 24, 2013 from Bryce 

Bird, Director, UDAQ to the UAQB. 

Both of these letters indicated that a 

public comment period was held from 

September 1 through October 1, 2013 

regarding the proposed Cache County I/ 

M program (ref. October 24, 2013 letter) 

and Utah Rule R307–110–36 (ref. 

October 23, 2013 letter) revisions, and 

that no public comments were received 

and no public hearings were requested. 

In consideration of these two letters, the 

UAQB subsequently adopted the 

proposed revisions on November 6, 

2013. The SIP and Rule revisions 

became State effective on November 7, 

2013, and were submitted by the 

Governor to EPA by a letter dated 

January 28, 2014. By a subsequent letter 

dated February 4, 2014, Bryce Bird, 

Director, UDAQ submitted the necessary 

administrative documentation that 

supported the Governor’s submittal. 

We have evaluated Utah’s January 28, 

2014 submittal and have determined 

that the State met the requirements for 

reasonable notice and public hearing 

under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. By 

a letter dated June 30, 2014, we advised 

the Governor that the SIP and Rule 

revisions submittal was deemed to have 

met the minimum ‘‘completeness’’ 

criteria found in 40 CFR part 51, 

Appendix V. 

IV. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s 

Revisions to Section X, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

Part A, General Requirements and 

Applicability 

Section X of the Utah SIP addresses 

the provisions and requirements for the 

motor vehicle I/M programs 

administered by five counties in Utah. 

Section X of the SIP is divided into six 

subparts, ‘‘A’’ through ‘‘F,’’ with Part A 

addressing general requirements and 

applicability provisions that are 

common to each of the counties’ I/M 

programs. Section X, Part A is entitled 

‘‘Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, General Requirements and 

Applicability,’’ and its current 

provisions and requirements, as 

updated by the Governor’s SIP submittal 

of January 10, 2013, are presented 

below: 

(a.) Section 1 ‘‘Requirements’’ of SIP 

Section X, Part A provides information 

on: 

(1.) The history of I/M requirements 

in Utah and the relevant 40 CFR 51, 

subpart S applicable requirements. 

(2.) OBD Checks: By January 1, 2002, 

OBD checks and OBD related repairs 

were required as a routine component of 

Utah I/M programs on model year 1996 

and newer light-duty vehicles and lightduty trucks equipped with certified 

onboard diagnostic systems. 

(3.) Utah I/M program history and 

general authority: The legal authority 

for Utah’s I/M Programs is found in 

Utah Code Annotated Section 41–6– 

163.6. Utah I/M was enacted during the 

First Special Session of the Utah 

legislature in 1983. I/M programs were 

initially implemented in Davis and Salt 

Lake counties in 1984, in Utah County 

in 1986, and in Weber County in 1990. 

The State Legislature made several 

changes and additions to Utah Code 

Annotated Section 41–6–163.6 in 1990, 

1992, 1994, 1995, 2002, 2005, 2009, 

2010, 2011, and 2012. 

(b.) Section 2 ‘‘Applicability’’ of SIP 

Section X, Part A provides information 

on: 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 66673 

(1.) General Applicability: Utah Code 

Annotated 41–6a-1642 gives authority to 

each county to implement and manage 

an I/M program to attain and maintain 

any NAAQS. Davis, Salt Lake, Utah, and 

Weber counties were required by 

Section 182 and 187 of the CAA to 

implement an I/M program to attain and 

maintain, as applicable, the ozone and 

carbon monoxide NAAQS. All of Utah’s 

ozone and carbon monoxide 

maintenance areas are located in Davis, 

Salt Lake, Utah, and Weber counties. In 

addition, a motor vehicle I/M program 

is a control measure relied upon by the 

State for attaining the 2006 PM2.5 24- 

hour NAAQS in Cache, Davis, Salt Lake, 

Utah, and Weber counties. Utah’s SIP 

for I/M is applicable county-wide in 

Cache, Davis, Salt Lake, Utah, and 

Weber counties. 

(c.) Section 3 ‘‘General Summary’’ of 

SIP Section X, Part A provides 

information on: 

(1.) Network Type: All Utah I/M 

programs are comprised of a 

decentralized, test-and-repair network. 

(2.) 1/M program funding 

requirements: Counties with I/M 

programs allocate funding as needed to 

comply with the relevant requirements 

specified in Utah’s SIP; the Utah 

statutes; county ordinances, regulations 

and policies; and the federal I/M 

program regulation. 

(3.) Funding mechanisms: Utah’s I/M 

programs are funded through several 

mechanisms including, but not limited 

to, a fee which is collected at the time 

of registration by the Utah Tax 

Commission Division of Motor Vehicles 

or the respective County Assessor’s 

Office. 

(4.) Government fleet: Section 41–6a– 

1642(1)(b) of the Utah Code requires 

that all vehicles owned or operated in 

the I/M counties by federal, state, or 

local government entities must comply 

with the I/M programs. 

(5.) Vehicles owned by students and 

federal employees: Section 41–6a– 

1642(5) provides that counties may 

require that federal employees and 

students attending universities and 

colleges located in Utah’s I/M areas 

provide proof of compliance with the I/ 

M program for vehicles that are 

permitted to park at facilities or on 

campus regardless of where the vehicle 

is registered. Vehicles operated by 

federal employees and operated on a 

federal installation located within an I/ 

M program area are also subject to the 

I/M program regardless of where they 

are registered. 

(6.) Rental vehicles: All vehicles 

available for rent or use in an I/M 

county are subject to the respective 

county I/M program. 

(7.) Farm truck exemption: Eligibility 

for the farm truck exemption from I/M 

programs is specified in Section 41–6a– 

1642(4). 

(8.) Out-of-state exemption: Vehicles 

registered in an I/M county but operated 

out-of-state are eligible for an 

exemption. The owner must complete 

Utah State Tax Commission form TC– 

81, and explain why the vehicle is 

unavailable for inspection, in order to 

be registered without inspection 

documentation. 

(9.) Motorist Compliance Enforcement 

Mechanism: The I/M programs are 

registration enforced on a county-wide 

basis. 

(10.) Valid registration required: A 

certificate of emissions inspection or a 

waiver or other evidence that the 

vehicle is exempt from the I/M program 

requirements must be presented at the 

time of registration or renewal of 

registration of a motor vehicles as 

specified in Section 41–6a–1642 and 

41–1a–203(1)(c). 

(11.) Change of ownership: Vehicle 

owners are not able to avoid the I/M 

inspection program by changing 

ownership of the vehicle. Upon change 

of vehicle ownership the vehicle must 

be re-registered by the new owner. 

Vehicle registration requires the 

submittal of a valid I/M certificate of 

compliance, waiver, or verified 

evidence of exemption. 

(12.) Utah Tax Commission, and 

County Assessor roles: The Utah Tax 

Commission Motor Vehicle Division 

and respective County Assessors will 

deny applications for vehicle 

registration or renewal of registration 

without submittal of a valid I/M 

certificate of compliance, waiver, or 

verified evidence of exemption. 

(13.) Database quality assurance: The 

vehicle registration database is 

maintained and quality assured by the 

Utah Division of Motor Vehicle (DMV). 

Each county’s I/M inspection database 

is maintained and quality assured by the 

county I/M program staff. 

(14.) Oversight provisions: The 

oversight program includes verification 

of exempt vehicle status through 

inspection, data accuracy through 

automatic and redundant data entry for 

most data elements, an audit trail for 

program documentation to ensure 

control and tracking of enforcement 

documents, identification and 

verification of exemptions that trigger 

changes in registration data, and regular 

audits of I/M inspection records, I/M 

program databases, and the DMV 

database. 

(15.) Enforcement staff quality 

assurance: County I/M program auditors 

and DMV clerks involved in vehicle 

registration are subject to regular 

performance audits by their supervisors. 

(16.) Quality Control: The I/M 

counties maintain records regarding 

inspections, equipment maintenance, 

and the required quality assurance 

activities. 

(17.) Analyzer data collection: Each 

county’s I/M analyzer data collection 

system meets the requirements specified 

under 40 CFR 51, subpart S. 

(18.) Data analysis and reporting— 

Annual: The I/M counties analyze and 

submit to EPA and UDAQ an annual 

report for January through December of 

the previous year, which includes all 

the data elements listed in 40 CFR 

51.366, by July of each year. 

(19.) General enforcement provisions: 

The county I/M programs are 

responsible for enforcement actions 

against incompetent or dishonest 

stations and inspectors. In addition, 

each county I/M ordinance or regulation 

includes a penalty schedule. 

(20.) General public information: The 

I/M counties must have comprehensive 

public education and programs. 

(21.) County I/M technical centers: 

Each I/M county operates an I/M 

technical center staffed with trained 

auditors and capable of performing 

emissions tests. A major function of the 

I/M technical centers is to serve as a 

referee station to resolve conflicts 

between permitted I/M inspectors, 

stations, and motorists. 

(22.) Vehicle inspection report: A 

vehicle inspection report (VIR) is 

printed and provided to the motorist 

after each vehicle inspection. 

(23.) Reciprocity between County I/M 

programs: Utah I/M programs are 

conducted using the same test 

procedures (Two Speed Idle, or TSI, and 

OBD) and thereby agree to recognize the 

validity of a certificate granted by any 

Utah I/M program. 

EPA has reviewed Utah’s revisions to 

SIP Section X, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, Part A, General 

Requirements and Applicability and has 

concluded that our approval is 

warranted. Based on our review, and as 

compared to our prior approval of this 

section of the SIP (see 70 FR 66264, 

November 2, 2005) and applicable 

sections of 40 CFR 51, subpart S 

(sections 51.350 to 51.372), we have 

determined that the revisions to Section 

X, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part A, General Requirements 

and Applicability sufficiently address 

the applicable sections of 40 CFR 51, 

subpart S for these particular aspects of 

Utah’s five counties’ I/M programs. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
66674 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

V. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s 

Revisions to Section X, Part F, Cache 

County Motor Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program 

Section X, Part F of the Utah SIP 

addresses the provisions and 

requirements for the implementation of 

the motor vehicle I/M program in Cache 

County, Utah. Section X, Part F of the 

SIP contains three main components for 

the Cache County I/M program; (a.) The 

SIP language for Section X Part F that 

addresses applicability, a general 

description of the Cache I/M program, 

and the time frame for implementation 

of the I/M program, (b.) the Cache 

County Emission Inspection/

Maintenance Program Ordinance 2013– 

4, and (c.) the Bear River Health 

Department’s Regulation 2013–1. We 

note that the Cache County Ordinance 

2013–4 contains language which 

delegates the implementation of the 

Cache County I/M program to the Bear 

River Health Department (BRHD). All of 

the above documents were adopted by 

the UAQB on November 6, 2013, were 

included with the Governor’s SIP 

submittal of January 28, 2014, were 

supplemented by the February 4, 2014, 

UDAQ submittal of the administrative 

documentation, and are discussed in 

further detail below. 

(a.) Section X, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, Part F, Cache 

County; Applicability, Description of 

the Cache I/M Program, and I/M SIP 

Implementation: 

(1.) Applicability. The SIP states the 

following: ‘‘Cache County was 

designated nonattainment for the PM2.5

NAAQS on December 14, 2009 (74 FR 

58688, November 13, 2009). 

Accordingly, Cache County must 

implement control strategies to attain 

the PM2.5 NAAQS. A motor vehicle 

emission I/M program has been 

identified by the PM2.5 SIP as a 

necessary control strategy to attain the 

PM2.5 NAAQS as expeditiously as 

practicable. Therefore, pursuant to Utah 

Code Annotated 41–6a–1642, Cache 

County must implement an I/M program 

that complies with the minimum 

requirements of 40 CFR 51 Part Subpart 

S. Cache County will implement its I/M 

program county-wide. Parts A and F of 

Section X demonstrate compliance with 

40 CFR Part 51, Subpart S for Cache 

County.’’ 

(2.) Description of Cache County I/M 

Program. The SIP provides information 

regarding the TSI and OBD components 

of the Cache County I/M program. 

Below is a summary of Cache County’s 

I/M program. In addition, we note that 

Section X, Part F, Appendices 1 and 2 

contain the essential documents for the 

authority and implementation of Cache 

County’s I/M program. 

Network Type: Cache County’s I/M 

program will comprise a decentralized 

test-and-repair network. 

Test Convenience: Cache County will 

make every effort to ensure that its 

citizens will have stations conveniently 

located throughout Cache County. 

Subject fleet: All model year 1969 and 

newer vehicles registered or principallyoperated in Cache County are subject to 

the I/M program except for exempt 

vehicles. 

Station/inspector Audits: Cache 

County’s I/M program will regularly 

audit all permitted I/M inspectors and 

stations to ensure compliance with 

county I/M ordinances, regulations, and 

policies. 

Waivers: Cache County’s I/M program 

allows for the issuance of waivers under 

limited circumstances. 

Test frequency: Vehicles less than six 

years old as of January 1 on any given 

year will be exempt from an emissions 

inspection. All model year 1969 and 

newer vehicles are subject to a biennial 

test. 

Test Equipment: For the Cache 

County I/M program, specifications for 

the I/M test procedures, standards and 

analyzers are described in Appendix 2 

of the SIP. 

Test Procedures: The following 

vehicles are subject to an OBD II 

inspection: 1996 and newer light duty 

vehicles and 2008 and newer medium 

duty vehicles. The following vehicles 

are subject to a two-speed idle test: 1995 

and older vehicles, 1996 to 2007 

medium and heavy duty vehicles, and 

2008 and newer heavy duty vehicles. 

Test procedures are outlined in 

Appendix 2 of this part of the SIP. 

(3.) I/M SIP Implementation. The SIP 

states the following: ‘‘The I/M program 

ordinance, regulations, policies, 

procedures, and activities specified in 

this I/M SIP revision shall be 

implemented by January 1, 2014 and 

shall continue until a maintenance plan 

without an I/M program is approved by 

EPA in accordance with Section 175 of 

the Clean Air Act.’’ 

(b.) Section X, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, Part F, Cache 

County; Appendix 1, Cache County 

Emission Inspection/Maintenance 

Program Ordinance 2013–4: This 

section of the SIP provides the County’s 

I/M ordinance which includes section 1, 

Purpose, section 2, Powers and Duties, 

section 3, General Provisions, section 4, 

Guidelines to be Followed by the Bear 

River Board of Health in Implementing 

a Vehicle Emission Inspection and 

Maintenance Program in Cache County, 

section 5, Review of Need for Program, 

and section 6, Effective Date. Of 

particular note is section 2.3, which 

delegates implementation of the I/M 

program to the BRHD, and section 4, 

which sets some parameters for BRHD’s 

implementation, including test 

schedules, fees, and waivers. 

(c.) Section X, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, Part F, Cache 

County; Appendix 2, Bear River Health 

Department Regulation 2013–1: This 

section of the SIP provides the BRHD’s 

I/M regulation. The Cache County I/M 

program is not a CAA mandated 

program and is, therefore, allotted a 

certain amount of flexibility in the level 

of applicable requirements as compared 

to a CAA or otherwise required 

mandatory I/M program. As the purpose 

of the Cache County I/M program is to 

achieve reductions in PM2.5 NAAQS 

precursor emissions of NOx and VOCs, 

to improve air quality and for the use of 

such emission reductions in a 

dispersion modeled SIP attainment 

demonstration, EPA’s analysis of the 

BRHD’s Regulation 2013–1 included a 

comparison of the BRHD’s Regulation 

2013–1 to applicable sections of 40 CFR 

51, subpart S ‘‘Inspection/Maintenance 

Program Requirements.’’ EPA’s analysis 

of the BRHD’s Regulation 2013–1 is as 

follows below. 

EPA has reviewed the BRHD’s 

Regulation 2013–1 for consistency with 

appropriate sections of the federal I/M 

regulations, as applicable to a nonmandatory I/M program, as codified in 

40 CFR 51, subpart S, sections 51.350 

through 51.373. We have summarized 

the applicable federal requirements and 

have referenced the particular sections 

of the BRHD’s Regulation 2013–1 that 

we have determined satisfy those 

requirements: 

(1.) 40 CFR 51.350—Applicability 

The SIP needs to describe the 

applicable areas in detail and must also 

include the legal authority or rules 

necessary to establish program 

boundaries. See 40 CFR 51.350(b). The 

Cache County I/M program will be 

implemented county-wide as described 

in the BRHD Regulation 2013–1, Section 

4 ‘‘Powers and Duties.’’ The legal 

authority for the Cache County I/M 

program and BRHD Regulation 2013–1 

is as authorized by sections 41–6a–1642, 

41–1a–1223, 41–1a–215, 26A–1–121, 

26A–1–114, all as from the Utah Code 

Annotated 1953, as amended. In 

addition, this aspect of the Cache 

County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Applicability’’ and in Section X, Part 

F, Appendix 1, Cache County Ordinance 

2013–4, Section 4. Finally, SIP Section 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 66675 

X, Part F, provides that the Cache 

County I/M program will continue until 

a maintenance plan without an I/M 

program is approved by EPA. See 40 

CFR 51.350(c). 

(2.) 40 CFR 51.351—Enhanced I/M 

Performance Standard and 40 CFR 

51.352—Basic I/M Performance 

Standard 

As the Cache County I/M program is 

not a CAA mandatory or otherwise 

required I/M program, the program is 

not required to meet these federal I/M 

requirements. These provisions were 

not addressed in the SIP and are not 

considered by EPA as applicable 

requirements for the Cache County I/M 

program. The emissions standards for 

the Cache County I/M program are 

specified in BRHD Regulation 2013–1, 

Appendix B. The cutpoints in Appendix 

B became effective January 1, 2014. 

(3.) 40 CFR 51.353—Network Type 

The SIP needs to include a 

description of the network to be 

employed, and the required legal 

authority. See 40 CFR 51.353(d). The 

Cache County I/M program will be 

implemented as a decentralized testand-repair network involving a TSI test 

for 1995 and older vehicles and an OBD 

test for 1996 and newer vehicles. The 

network to be employed is described in 

the BRHD Regulation 2013–1, Section 6 

‘‘General Provisions.’’ The legal 

authority for the Cache County I/M 

program and BRHD Regulation 2013–1 

is as authorized by sections 41–6a–1642, 

Utah Code Annotated, 1953, as 

amended. In addition, this aspect of the 

Cache County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Description of Cache I/M Program’’ 

and in Section X, Part F, Appendix 1, 

Cache County Ordinance 2013–4, 

Section 4. 

(4.) 40 CFR 51.354—Adequate Tools and 

Resources 

The SIP needs to include a 

description of the resources that will be 

used for program operation, which 

include: (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 and, (2) a description of 

personnel resources, overt and covert 

auditing, data analysis, program 

administration, enforcement, and other 

necessary functions. See 40 CFR 

51.354(d). These aspects of the Cache 

County I/M program are described in 

the BRHD Regulation 2013–1. For fees 

to operate the program, Section 3 

‘‘Authority and Jurisdiction of the 

Department,’’ (section 3.4), and Section 

6 ‘‘General Provisions,’’ (section 6.7), 

address this requirement. With regard to 

personnel, audits, and enforcement, 

these aspects are addressed in Section 

8.0 ‘‘Training and Certification of 

Inspectors’’ and Section 12 ‘‘Quality 

Assurance.’’ In addition, this aspect of 

the Cache County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Description of Cache I/M Program’’ 

and in Section X, Part F, Appendix 1, 

Cache County Ordinance 2013–4, 

Section 4. 

(5.) 40 CFR 51.355—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. See 40 CFR 51.355(a). 

These aspects of the Cache County I/M 

program are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 6 ‘‘General 

Provisions,’’ (section 6.1) and in Section 

9 ‘‘Inspection Procedure.’’ In addition, 

this aspect of the Cache County I/M 

program is further addressed in Section 

X, Part F, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, ‘‘Description of 

Cache I/M Program’’ and in Section X, 

Part F, Appendix 1, Cache County 

Ordinance 2013–4, Section 4. As 

mentioned above, the test schedule for 

the Cache County I/M program is 

biennial. 

(6.) CFR 51.356—Vehicle Coverage 

The SIP needs to include a detailed 

description of the number and types of 

vehicles covered by the County-run 

program. See 40 CFR 51.356(b). All 

vehicles model year 1969 and newer are 

subject to the Cache County I/M 

program except those specifically 

exempted. These aspects of the Cache 

County I/M program are described in 

the BRHD Regulation 2013–1, Section 6 

‘‘General Provisions,’’ in sections 6.0, 

6.1, and 6.2, with the vehicle 

exemptions provided in section 6.4; in 

addition, Section 9 ‘‘Inspection 

Procedure’’ addresses the vehicle testing 

procedures. We note this aspect of the 

Cache County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Description of Cache I/M Program’’ 

and in Section X, Part F, Appendix 1, 

Cache County Ordinance 2013–4, 

Section 4. 

(7.) 40 CFR 51.357—Test Procedures 

and Standards 

The SIP needs to include a 

description of each test procedure used, 

and a rule, ordinance, or law describing 

and establishing the test procedures. See 

40 CFR 51.357(e). These aspects of the 

Cache County I/M program are 

described in the BRHD Regulation 

2013–1, Section 9 ‘‘Inspection 

Procedure,’’ Section 11 ‘‘Specifications 

for Certified Testing Equipment and 

Calibration Gases,’’ and Appendix D 

‘‘Test Procedures.’’ In addition, this 

aspect of the Cache County I/M program 

is further addressed in Section X, Part 

F, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, ‘‘Description of Cache I/M 

Program.’’ 

These documents include detailed 

descriptions of the types of tests and 

vehicles to be covered by the Countyrun program. Essentially, as applicable, 

1995 and older vehicles will be subject 

to a TSI test and 1996 and newer 

vehicles will be subject to an OBD test. 

A TSI test involves the insertion of 

probe into the tailpipe of a vehicle to 

measure pollutant emissions at two 

engine idle speeds; one measurement at 

a normal idle of around 700 revolutions 

per minute (RPM) and one measurement 

at a high idle speed of 2,500 RPM. An 

OBD test connects to the vehicle’s onboard computer and polls the 

information stored in the vehicle’s 

computer. The OBD procedures also 

address (among other things) ‘‘not 

ready’’ codes, data link connectors, 

stored Diagnostic Trouble Codes, and 

additional OBD test standards. 

(8.) 40 CFR 51.358—Test Equipment 

The SIP needs to include written 

technical specifications for all test 

equipment used in the program. The 

specifications need to describe the 

emission analysis process, the necessary 

test equipment, the required features, 

and written acceptance testing criteria 

and procedures. See 40 CFR 51.358(c). 

These aspects of the Cache County I/M 

program are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 9 

‘‘Inspection Procedure,’’ Section 11 

‘‘Specifications for Certified Testing 

Equipment and Calibration Gases,’’ 

Appendix D ‘‘Test Procedures,’’ and 

Appendix E ‘‘Technical Specifications 

and Calibration Gas.’’ In addition, this 

aspect of the Cache County I/M program 

is further addressed in Section X, Part 

F, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, ‘‘Description of Cache I/M 

Program.’’ Appendix E contains the 

technical specifications for test 

equipment; OBD inspection equipment 

and TSI analyzers must meet all federal 

requirements. 

(9.) 40 CFR 51.359—Quality Control 

The SIP needs to include a 

description of quality control and 

recordkeeping procedures. The SIP also 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
66676 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

needs to include the procedures 

manual, rule, and ordinance or law 

describing and establishing the quality 

control procedures and requirements. 

See 40 CFR 51.359(f). These aspects of 

the Cache County I/M program are 

described in the BRHD Regulation 

2013–1, Section 4 ‘‘Powers and Duties,’’ 

Section 8 ‘‘Training and Certification of 

Inspectors,’’ and Section 12 ‘‘Quality 

Assurance.’’ In addition, this aspect of 

the Cache County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Description of Cache I/M Program’’ 

and in Section X, Part F, Appendix 1, 

Cache County Ordinance 2013–4, 

Section 2, ‘‘Powers and Duties.’’ 

(10.) 40 CFR 51.360—Waivers 

The SIP needs to describe the waiver 

criteria and procedures, including cost 

limits, quality assurance methods and 

measures, and administration. The SIP 

needs to 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. See 40 CFR 

51.360(d). 

These aspects of the Cache County 

I/M program are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 9 

‘‘Inspection Procedure,’’ with details 

regarding the waiver procedures, 

allowable costs, and timeframe of the 

waiver appearing in section 9.6 

‘‘Certificate of Waiver.’’ In addition, this 

aspect of the Cache County I/M program 

is further addressed in Section X, Part 

F, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, ‘‘Description of Cache I/M 

Program’’ and in Section X, Part F, 

Appendix 1, Cache County Ordinance 

2013–4, Section 4. The BRHD draws its 

legal authority from Sections 41–6a– 

1642, 26A–1–114(1)(h)(i), and 26A–1– 

121(1) from the Utah Code Annotated, 

1953, as amended. In particular, a 

certificate of waiver will not be granted 

unless at least 200 dollars have been 

spent on repairs, and can only be 

granted once during the lifetime of a 

vehicle. 

(11.) 40 CFR 51.361—Motorist 

Compliance Enforcement 

The SIP needs to provide information 

concerning the enforcement process and 

legal authority to implement and 

enforce the program. See 40 CFR 

51.361(c). These aspects of the Cache 

County I/M program are described in 

the BRHD Regulation 2013–1, Section 6 

‘‘General Provisions.’’ In addition, this 

aspect of the Cache County I/M program 

is further addressed in Section X, Part 

F, Appendix 1, Cache County Ordinance 

2013–4, Section 4. The BRHD draws its 

legal authority from Sections 41–6a– 

1642, 26A–1–114(1)(h)(i), and 26A–1– 

121(1) from the Utah Code Annotated, 

1953, as amended. The motorist 

compliance enforcement program will 

be implemented, in part, by the Utah 

Tax Commission DMV, which will take 

the lead in ensuring 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 were 

granted a compliance waiver. 

(12.) 40 CFR 51.362—Motorist 

Compliance Enforcement Program 

Oversight 

The SIP needs to include a 

description of enforcement program 

oversight and information management 

activities. See 40 CFR 51.362(c). These 

aspects of the Cache County I/M 

program are similar to those noted 

above for our evaluation of 40 CFR 

51.361 and are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 6 ‘‘General 

Provisions.’’ The BRHD will be 

reviewing the registration data, as 

appropriate, as provided by the DMV. In 

addition, this aspect of the Cache 

County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, 

Appendix 1, Cache County Ordinance 

2013–4, Section 4. The BRHD draws its 

legal authority from Sections 41–6a– 

1642, 26A–1–114(1)(h)(i), and 26A–1– 

121(1) from the Utah Code Annotated, 

1953, as amended. 

(13.) 40 CFR 51.363—Quality Assurance 

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. See 40 CFR 51.363(e). 

These aspects of the Cache County I/M 

program are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 4 ‘‘Powers 

and Duties,’’ Section 12 ‘‘Quality 

Assurance,’’ Section 15 ‘‘Penalty,’’ and 

Appendix C ‘‘Penalty Schedule.’’ In 

addition, this aspect of the Cache 

County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Description of Cache I/M Program’’ 

and in Section X, Part F, Appendix 1, 

Cache County Ordinance 2013–4, 

Section 4. The BRHD draws its legal 

authority from Sections 41–6a–1642, 

26A–1–114(1)(h)(i), and 26A–1–121(1) 

from the Utah Code Annotated, 1953, as 

amended. 

(14.) 40 CFR 51.364—Enforcement 

Against Contractors, Stations, and 

Inspectors 

The SIP needs to provide for 

enforcement against stations, 

contractors, and inspectors with 

effective and consistent penalties for a 

violation of the program requirements. 

See 40 CFR 51.364(d). Applicable 

provisions include a description of the 

imposition of penalties with a penalty 

schedule, types of potential penalties 

such as suspension and fines, 

requirements for inspectors found to be 

incompetent, the legal authority to 

invoke these types of enforcement 

activities, and proper record keeping 

provisions to document such 

enforcement actions. 

These aspects of the Cache County I/ 

M program are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 4 ‘‘Powers 

and Duties’’ (see especially sections 4.2 

and 4.3), Section 12 ‘‘Quality 

Assurance,’’ Section 14 ‘‘Disciplinary 

Penalties and Right to Appeal,’’ Section 

15 ‘‘Penalty,’’ and Appendix C ‘‘Penalty 

Schedule.’’ In addition, this aspect of 

the Cache County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Description of Cache I/M Program.’’ In 

particular, the penalty schedule in 

Appendix C sets minimum penalties for 

first, second, and subsequent violations, 

including mandatory six month 

suspensions for both the inspector and 

the test station for intentionally and 

improperly passing a vehicle, shorter 

suspensions for gross negligence, and 

mandatory retraining for inspector 

incompetence. The BRHD draws its 

legal authority from Sections 41–6a– 

1642, 26A–1–114(1)(h)(i), and 26A–1– 

121(1) from the Utah Code Annotated, 

1953, as amended. 

(15.) 40 CFR 51.365—Data Collection 

The SIP needs to describe the 

provisions for data collection on 

vehicles evaluated by the I/M program. 

EPA notes that accurate data collection 

is essential to the management, 

evaluation, and enforcement of an I/M 

program. Examples of data to be 

collected include test date, test record 

number, vehicle identification number, 

license plate number, category of test 

performed (TSI or OBD), values of 

emissions from test (for TSI), results of 

an OBD test, and quality control of the 

data gathered. 

The appropriate data for both the TSI 

and OBD tests will be collected by 

Cache County I/M program and these 

provisions are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 12 ‘‘Quality 

Assurance,’’ Appendix B ‘‘Emission 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 66677 

Standards Cutpoints,’’ Appendix D 

‘‘Test Procedures,’’ and Appendix E 

‘‘Technical Specifications and 

Calibration Gas.’’ In addition, this 

aspect of the Cache County I/M program 

is further addressed in Section X, Part 

F, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, ‘‘Description of Cache I/M 

Program.’’ 

(16.) 40 CFR 51.366—Data Analysis and 

Reporting 

The SIP needs to indicate that the 

data analysis and reporting provisions 

are included with respect to applicable 

items as listed in 40 CFR 51.366. See 40 

CFR 51.166(f). These aspects of the 

Cache County I/M program are 

essentially addressed in the Cache 

County I/M SIP Section X, Part F, the 

Cache County’s Ordinance 2013–4, and 

the BRHD’s regulation 2013–1 as they 

all reference the provisions in 40 CFR 

51, subpart S. Further reference, to 

address this I/M program provision, is 

as described in the BRHD Regulation 

2013–1, Section 2 ‘‘Purpose,’’ Section 4 

‘‘Powers and Duties,’’ and Section 12 

‘‘Quality Assurance.’’ This aspect of the 

Cache County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Applicability’’ and ‘‘Description of 

Cache I/M program’’, and in Section X, 

Part F, Appendix 1, Cache County 

Ordinance 2013–4, Section 1 ‘‘Purpose.’’ 

In addition, as required by Section X, 

Part A, Cache County will need to 

provide this I/M program annual data 

reporting information: ‘‘Data analysis 

and reporting—Annual: The I/M 

counties analyze and submit to EPA and 

UDAQ an annual report for January 

through December of the previous year, 

which includes all the data elements 

listed in 40 CFR Subpart S 51.366, by 

July of each year.’’ 

(17.) 40 CFR 51.367—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. See 40 

CFR 51.367(c). These aspects of the 

Cache County I/M program are 

described in the BRHD Regulation 

2013–1, Section 8 ‘‘Training and 

Certification of Inspectors.’’ The BRHD 

has responsibility for certification, 

recertification, and certification 

suspension and revocation. 

(18.) 40 CFR 51.368—Public Information 

and Consumer Protection 

The SIP needs to include information 

for the public on an ongoing basis 

throughout the life of the I/M program 

regarding such aspects as the air quality 

problem, the requirements of federal 

and state law, the role of motor vehicles 

in the air quality problem, the need for 

and benefits of an inspection program, 

how to maintain a vehicle, how to find 

a qualified repair technician, and the 

requirements of the I/M program. See 40 

CFR 51.368(a). In addition, the SIP 

needs to address consumer protection, 

which involves procedures and 

mechanisms to protect the public from 

fraud and abuse by inspectors, 

mechanics, and others involved in the I/ 

M program. See 40 CFR 51.368(b). 

These aspects of the Cache County I/ 

M program are described in the BRHD 

Regulation 2013–1, Section 2 

‘‘Purpose,’’ Section 4 ‘‘Powers and 

Duties,’’ Section 6.0 ‘‘General 

Provisions,’’ Section 8 ‘‘Training and 

Certification of Inspectors,’’ Section 12 

‘‘Quality Assurance,’’ Section 14 

‘‘Disciplinary Penalties and Right to 

Appeal,’’ and Section 15 ‘‘Penalty.’’ In 

addition, these aspects of the Cache 

County I/M program are further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘Applicability,’’ and ‘‘Description of 

Cache I/M Program,’’ and in Section X, 

Part F, Appendix 1, Cache County 

Ordinance 2013–4, Sections 1 through 

4. Also, these aspects of the Cache 

County I/M program are further 

addressed in Section X, Part A, ‘‘General 

Requirements,’’ ‘‘Applicability,’’ and 

‘‘General Summary.’’ 

(19.) 40 CFR 51.369—Improving Repair 

Effectiveness 

The Cache County I/M program is 

only in its first calendar year of 

operation (2014) and will not see all 

required vehicles until the end of 2015. 

Therefore, necessary data to address this 

provision are not currently available. In 

addition, as the Cache County I/M 

program is not a CAA mandatory or 

otherwise required I/M program, the 

program does not need to meet these 

federal I/M requirements. These 

provisions were not addressed in the 

SIP and are not considered by EPA as 

applicable requirements for the Cache 

County I/M program. 

(20.) 40 CFR 51.370—Compliance With 

Recall Notices 

This section of 40 CFR 51, subpart S 

applies to mandatory I/M programs that 

evaluate vehicles that are subject to an 

enhanced I/M program. As the Cache 

County I/M program is not a CAA 

mandatory or otherwise required I/M 

program, the program is not required to 

meet these federal I/M requirements. 

These provisions were not specifically 

addressed in the SIP and are not 

considered by EPA as applicable 

requirements for the Cache County I/M 

program. However, we note that as a 

matter of course, recall notices or other 

technical bulletins that are applicable to 

a vehicle which failed the applicable 

Cache County I/M test (i.e., TSI or OBD) 

would need to be evaluated by the 

vehicle owner prior to applying for a 

retest. Also, this type of evaluation 

would need to be applied to any vehicle 

seeking a waiver from the Cache County 

I/M program. 

(21.) 40 CFR 51.371—On-road Testing 

As the Cache County I/M program is 

not a CAA mandatory or otherwise 

required I/M program, the program is 

not required to meet these federal I/M 

requirements. These provisions were 

not addressed in the SIP and are not 

considered by EPA as applicable 

requirements for the Cache County I/M 

program. 

(22.) 40 CFR 51.372—State 

Implementation Plan Submittals 

The Cache County I/M program is not 

a CAA mandatory or otherwise required 

I/M program. However, we have 

determined that the Governor’s January 

28, 2014 SIP submittal and the UDAQ’s 

February 4, 2014 submittal of necessary 

SIP administrative documentation 

sufficiently address the requirements in 

40 CFR 51.372 to the extent necessary 

for a SIP revision for a non-mandatory 

I/M program. 

(23.) 40 CFR 51.373—Implementation 

Deadlines 

This section of 40 CFR 51, subpart S 

contains several implementation 

deadlines for particular mandatory I/M 

programs. As we have noted above, the 

Cache County I/M program is not a CAA 

mandatory or otherwise required I/M 

program. We, therefore, find acceptable 

the implementation date of January 1, 

2014, as stated in the BRHD Regulation 

2013–1, Section 6 ‘‘General Provisions.’’ 

In addition, this aspect of the Cache 

County I/M program is further 

addressed in Section X, Part F, Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program, 

‘‘I/M SIP Implementation,’’ and in 

Section X, Part F, Appendix 1, Cache 

County Ordinance 2013–4, Section 4. 

(d.) Conclusion: Our review, as 

presented above, involved: (a.) Section 

X, Part F, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, (b.) Section X, 

Part F, Appendix 1, which is the Cache 

County Ordinance 2013–4, and (c.) 

Appendix 2, which is the BRHD’s 

Regulation 2013–1, all as compared to 

the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 51, 

subpart S for a non-mandatory I/M 

program. Based on our review, we have 

determined that the SIP revisions 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
66678 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

3See EPA Office of Transportation and Air 

Quality: ‘‘Best Practices for Addressing OBD 

Readiness in IM Testing of Diesel Vehicles Under 

14,000 Pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating’’, 

March 07, 2013. 

sufficiently address the applicable 

provisions in 40 CFR 51, subpart S for 

a non-mandatory I/M program and that 

our approval is warranted. We are, 

therefore, proposing approval of the 

Cache County I/M program as described 

and authorized in Section X, Part F, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Section X, Part F, Appendix 1 

which is the Cache County Ordinance 

2013–4, and Appendix 2 which is the 

BRHD’s Regulation 2013–1. 

(e.) Special Consideration of the 

Diesel I/M Provisions in the BRHD’s 

Regulation 2013–1. 

As we have noted above, the Cache 

County I/M program is not a CAA 

mandatory or otherwise required I/M 

program. EPA takes note of the 

provisions in the BRHD’s Regulation 

2013–1, Section 9.4.6, which states that 

‘‘All diesel powered vehicles model 

year 1998 and newer shall be tested as 

specified in Appendix D, Diesel Test 

Procedures.’’ Appendix D of Regulation 

2013–1 is entitled ‘‘Test Procedures’’ 

and contains test procedures for OBDII, 

TSI, and for Diesel Powered Vehicles. 

At this point in time, EPA has not 

promulgated specific I/M requirements 

for diesel I/M programs. We have, to 

date, only issued policy guidance 

regarding the gathering of OBD 

information from OBD-equipped diesel 

vehicles.3 As such, we do not have 

regulatory language in 40 CFR part 51, 

subpart S to compare, for potential SIP 

approval and SIP credit, the diesel I/M 

requirements in the BRHD’s Regulation 

2013–1. However, EPA does believe the 

above noted diesel I/M provisions in the 

BRHD’s Regulation 2013–1 do have 

potential merit for evaluating diesel 

vehicles and for reducing emissions 

from diesel vehicles. We are therefore 

proposing approval of the diesel I/M 

provisions in the BRHD’s Regulation 

2013–1; however, our proposed 

approval is only for the purposes of 

strengthening the SIP and we are not 

proposing approval of the provisions as 

a diesel I/M program nor assigning any 

SIP credit. 

VI. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s 

Associated Revisions to Utah Rules 

R307–110–1, R307–110–31, and R307– 

110–36 

(a.) Revisions to Utah Rule R307–110–1; 

Incorporation by Reference 

The purpose of the revisions to R307– 

110–1 is to incorporate by reference the 

Utah SIP into this section of the Utah 

Administrative Rules and to advise the 

public the SIP is available on the 

UDAQ’s Web site. EPA finds this a noncontroversial revision which merely 

incorporates the Utah SIP into the 

State’s Rules, which are a portion of 

Utah’s Codified Law, along with 

providing the public information that 

the SIP can be accessed via the internet 

on the UDAQ’s Web site. The revisions 

to R307–110–1 were adopted by the 

UAQB on December 5, 2012, became 

State-effective on December 6, 2012, and 

were as submitted by the Governor by 

a letter dated January 10, 2013. By a 

subsequent letter dated February 25, 

2013, Bryce Bird, Director, UDAQ, 

submitted the necessary administrative 

documentation that supported the 

Governor’s submittal. 

(b.) Revisions to Utah Rule R307–110– 

31; Section X, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, Part A, General 

Requirements and Applicability 

The purpose of the revisions to R307– 

110–31 is to incorporate by reference 

into the Utah Rules, SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part A, General Requirements 

and Applicability, as adopted by the 

UAQB on December 5, 2012, and which 

became State-effective on December 6, 

2012. The revisions to SIP Section X, 

Part A, were those as we discussed 

above in sections III and IV of this 

action and were as submitted by the 

Governor by a letter dated January 10, 

2013. By a subsequent letter dated 

February 25, 2013, Bryce Bird, Director, 

UDAQ, submitted the necessary 

administrative documentation that 

supported the Governor’s submittal. 

(c.) Revisions to Utah Rule R307–110– 

36; Section X, Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, Part F, Cache 

County 

The purpose of the revisions to R307– 

110–36 is to incorporate by reference 

into the Utah Rules, SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part F, Cache County, as 

initially adopted by the UAQB on 

December 5, 2012, and as superseded by 

the revisions as adopted by the UAQB 

on November 6, 2013. Those revisions 

that were adopted by the UAQB on 

November 6, 2013, became Stateeffective on November 7, 2013, and are 

the revisions to SIP Section X, Part F 

that we discussed above in sections III 

and V of this action. The November 7, 

2013, effective revisions were submitted 

by the Governor by a letter dated 

January 28, 2014 and were supported by 

a subsequent letter, dated February 4, 

2014, from Bryce Bird, Director, UDAQ, 

which submitted the necessary 

administrative documentation. 

The revisions to Utah Rules R307– 

110–1, R307–110–31, and R307–110–36, 

as discussed above, incorporate by 

reference the applicable SIP revisions 

into the Utah Administrative Rules 

which then codifies them in the Utah 

Administrative Code. This is acceptable 

to EPA and we are, therefore, proposing 

to approve these revisions to Utah Rules 

R307–110–1, R307–110–31, and R307– 

110–36. 

VII. Consideration of Section 110(1) of 

the Clean Air Act 

Section 110(1) of the CAA states that 

a SIP revision cannot be approved if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress towards attainment of a 

NAAQS or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. The provisions 

of Utah SIP Section X, Part A contain I/ 

M provisions that were previously 

approved by the EPA and were also 

simultaneously contained in the Utah’s 

SIP Section X for each of the county’s 

I/M programs (i.e., Part B, Part C, Part 

D, and Part E.) The proposed SIP 

revisions to Section X do not weaken 

the previously approved requirements 

and provisions in Section X of the SIP, 

nor do they reduce the emission 

reductions achieved by the original 

program areas. Instead, the revisions to 

SIP Section X reorganize and expand 

the existing Part A requirements and 

provisions, to reflect the redundant 

language that previously appeared in 

Parts B, C, D, and E, and to expand SIP 

Section X to include the Cache County 

I/M program (Part F). The revisions to 

SIP Section X, Part F incorporate a new 

I/M program for Cache County that will 

help to reduce PM2.5 precursor 

emissions of NOx and VOCs. The 

revisions to Utah Rules R307–110–1, 

R307–110–31, and R307–110–36 merely 

incorporate by reference the applicable 

SIP revisions into the Utah 

Administrative Rules which then 

codifies them in the Utah 

Administrative Code. In view of the 

above, EPA proposes to find that the 

revisions to Utah SIP Section X, Part A, 

Utah SIP Section X Part F, and Utah 

Rules R307–110–1, R307–110–31, and 

R307–110–36 will not interfere with 

attainment, reasonable further progress, 

or any other applicable requirement of 

the CAA. 

VIII. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing approval of the 

January 10, 2013 submitted SIP 

revisions to Utah’s SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 217 / Monday, November 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 66679 

Program, Part A, General Requirements 

and Applicability, and to Utah Rules 

R307–110–1 and R307–110–31. In 

addition, EPA is proposing approval of 

the January 28, 2014 submitted SIP 

revisions to Utah’s SIP Section X, 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part F, Cache County, with 

clarification below, and to Utah Rule 

R307–110–36. EPA clarifies that with its 

proposed approval of Utah’s SIP Section 

X, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program, Part F, Cache County, 

Appendix 2, the provisions in the 

BRHD’s Regulation 2013–1, Section 

9.4.6 and the diesel test procedures as 

specified in BRHD’s Regulation 2013–1, 

Appendix D are being proposed for 

approval only for purposes of 

strengthening the SIP. These provisions 

are not being proposed for approval as 

a diesel I/M program and are not being 

assigned any SIP credit. 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: October 20, 2014. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26630 Filed 11–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0621; FRL–9918–59– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS38 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Extension of the Laboratory and 

Analytical Use Exemption for Essential 

Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to extend the 

laboratory and analytical use exemption 

for the production and import of class 

I ozone-depleting substances through 

December 31, 2021. This action is 

proposed under the Clean Air Act in 

anticipation of upcoming actions by the 

Parties to the Montreal Protocol on 

Substances that Deplete the Ozone 

Layer. The exemption allows the 

production and import of controlled 

substances in the United States for 

laboratory and analytical uses that have 

not been already identified by EPA as 

nonessential. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted by 

December 10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2014–0621, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Phone: (202) 566–1742. 

• U.S. Mail: Docket EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2014–0621, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 

28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Docket 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0621, EPA Docket 

Center—Public Reading Room, EPA 

West Building, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20004. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 

0621. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS