Environmental Protection Agency 

Subpart 0-Miscellaneous Plan Content 

Requirements 

51.280 Resources. 

51.281 Copies of rules and regulations. 

51.285 Public notification. 51.286 Electronic reporting. 

Subpart P-Protection of Visibility 

51.300 Purpose and applicability. 

51.301 Definitions. 51.302 Implementation control strategies for 

reasonably attributable visibility impairment. 51.303 Exemptions from control. 

51.304 Identification of Integral vistas. 

51.305 Monitoring for reasonably attributable visibility impairment. 51.306 Long-term strategy requirements for 

reasonably attributable visibility impairment. 

51.307 New source review. 

51.308 Regional haze program requirements. 

51.309 Requirements related to the Grand 

Canyon Visibility Transport Commission. 

Subpart Q-Reports 

AIR QUALITY DATA REPORTING 

51.320 Annual air quality data report. 

SOURCE EMISSIONS AND STATE ACTION 

REPORTING 

51.321 Annual source emissions and State 

action report. 51.322 Sources subject to emissions reportIng. 

51.323 Reportable emissions data and Information. 

51.324 Progress In plan enforcement. 

51.326 Reportable revisions. 

51.327 Enforcement orders and other State 

actions. 

51.328 [Reserved] 

Subpart R-Extensions 

51.341 Request for 18-month extension. 

Subpart 5-tnspection/Maintenance 

Program Requirements 

51.350 Applicability. 

51.351 Enhanced 11M performance standard. 

51.352 Basic 11M performance standard. 

51.353 Network type and program evaluation. 

51.354 Adequate tools and resources. 51.355 Test frequency and convenience. 

51.356 Vehicle coverage. 

51.357 Test procedures and standards. 

51.356 Test equipment. 

51.359 Quality control. 

51.360 Waivers and compliance via diagnostic Inspection. 

Pf. 51 

51.361 Motorist compliance enforcement. 

51.362 Motorist compliance enforcement 

program oversight. 

51.363 Quail ty assurance. 

51.364 Enforcement against contractors, 

stations and Inspectors. 

51.365 Data collection. 

51.366 Data analysis and reporting. 

51.367 Inspector training and licensing or 

certification. 

51.368 Public Information and consumer 

protection. 

51.369 Improving repair effect! veness. 

51.370 Compliance with recall notices. 

51.371 On-road testing. 

51.372 State Implementation Plan submissions. 

51.373 Implementation deadlines. 

APPENDIX A TO SUBPART S- CALIBRATIONS, 

ADJUSTMENTS AND QUALITY CONTROL 

APPENDIX B TO SUBPART S- TEST PROCEDURES 

APPENDIX C TO SUBPART S-STEADY-STATE 

SHORT TEST STANDARDS 

APPENDIX D TO SUBPART S-STEADY-STATE 

SHORT TEST EQUIPMENT 

APPENDIX E TO SUBPART S-TRANSIENT TEST 

DRIVING CYCLE 

Subpart T-conformity to State or Federal 

Implementation Plans of Transportation 

Plans, Programs, and Projects Developed, Funded or Approved Under Title 

23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws 

51.390 Implementation plan revision. 

Subpart U-Economic Incentive Programs 

51.490 Appllcabill ty. 

51.491 Definitions. 51.492 State program election and submittal. 

51.493 State program requirements. 

51.494 Use of program revenues. 

Subpart W-Determlning Conformity of 

General Federal Actions to State or 

Federal Implementation Plans 

51.850 [Reserved] 

51.851 State Implementation plan (SIP) or Tribal implementation plan (TIP) revision. 

51 .852--51.860 [Reserved] 

Subpart X-Provisions for Implementation 

of 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard 

51.900 Definitions. 51.901 Applicability of part 51. 

51.902 Which classification and nonattain- ment area planning provisions of the 

CAA shall apply to areas designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour NAAQS? 

153 
d 

§51.350 

(d) Any such request must be submitted sufficiently early to permit development of a plan prior to the deadline in the event that such request is 

denied. 

[51 FR 40675, Nov. 7, 1986) 

Subpart 

nonce 

ments 

S-lnspection/MainteProgram RequireSOURCE: 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, unless 

otherwise noted. 

§ 51.350 Applicability. 

Inspection/maintenance (I!M) programs are required in both ozone and 

carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment 

areas, depending upon population and 

nonattainment classification or design 

value. 

(a) Nonattainment area classification 

and population criteria. (1) States or 

areas within an ozone transport region 

shall implement enhanced liM programs in any metropolitan statistical 

area (MSA), or portion of an MSA, 

within the State or area with a 1990 

population of 100,000 or more as defined 

by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regardless of the area's attainment classification. In the case of a multi-state MSA, enhanced I!M shall 

be implemented in all ozone transport 

region portions if the sum of these portions has a population of 100,000 or 

more, irrespective of the population of 

the portion in the individual ozone 

transport region State or area. (2) Apart from those areas described 

in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, any 

area classified as serious or worse ozone nonattainment, or as moderate or serious CO nonattainment with a design value greater than 12.7 ppm, and 

having a 1980 Bureau of Census-defined 

(Census-defined) urbanized area population of 200,000 or more, shall implement enhanced liM in the 1990 Censusdefined urbanized area. (3) Any area classified, as of November 5, 1992, as marginal ozone nonattainment or moderate CO nonattainment with a design value of 12.7 ppm or less shall continue operating liM programs that were part of an approved 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) as of 

November 15, 1990, and shall update 

40 CFR Ch. I (7- 1-12 Edition) 

those programs as necessary to meet 

the basic liM program requirements of 

this subpart. Any such area required by 

the Clean Air Act, as in effect prior to 

November 15, 1990, as interpreted in 

EPA guidance, to have an liM program 

shall also implement a basic liM program. Serious, severe and extreme 

ozone areas and CO areas over 12.7 ppm 

shall also continue operating existing 

liM programs and shall upgrade such 

programs, as appropriate, pursuant to 

this subpart. (4) Any area classified as moderate ozone nonattainment, and not required 

to implement enhanced liM under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, shall implement basic liM in any 1990 Census-defined urbanized area with a population 

of 200,000 or more . (5) [Reserved] 

(6) If the boundaries of a moderate ozone nonattainment area are changed 

pursuant to section 107(d)(4)(A)(i)-(ii) of 

the Clean Air Act, such that the area 

includes additional urbanized areas with a population of 200,000 or more, then a basic liM program shall be implemented in these additional urbanized areas. (7) If the boundaries of a serious or worse ozone nonattainment area or of a 

moderate or serious CO nonattainment 

area with a design value greater than 

12.7 ppm are changed any time after enactment pursuant to section 

107(d)(4)(A) such that the area includes 

additional urbanized areas, then an en- hanced liM program shall be implemented in the newly included 1990 Census-defined urbanized areas, if the 1980 

Census-defined urban area population 

is 200,000 or more. (8) If a marginal ozone nonattainment area, not required to implement 

enhanced liM under paragraph (a)(1) of 

this section, is reclassified to moderate, a basic liM program shall be implemented in the 1990 Census-defined 

urbanized area(s) with a population of 

200,000 or more. If the area is reclassified to serious or worse, an enhanced II 

M program shall be implemented in the 

1990 Census-defined urbanized area, if 

the 1980 Census-defined urban area population is 200,000 or more. (9) If a moderate ozone or CO nonattainment area is reclassified to seri- ous or worse , an enhanced liM program 

314 
Environmental Protection Agency 

shall be implemented in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area, if the 1980 

Census-defined population is 200,000 or 

more. 

(b) Extent of area coverage. (1) In an ozone transport region, the program 

shall cover all counties within subject 

MSAs or subject portions of MSAs, as defined by OMB in 1990, except largely 

rural counties having a population density of less than 200 persons per square 

mile based on the 1990 Census and 

counties with less than 1% of the population in the MSA may be excluded 

provided that at least 50% of the MSA 

population is included in the program. 

This provision does not preclude the 

voluntary inclusion of portions of an excluded county. Non-urbanized islands 

not connected to the mainland by 

roads, bridges, or tunnels may be ex- cluded without regard to population. 

(2) Outside of ozone transport re- gions, programs shall nominally cover at least the entire urbanized area, 

based on the 1990 census. Exclusion of some urban population is allowed as long as an equal number of non-urban 

residents of the MSA containing the 

subject urbanized area are included to 

compensate for the exclusion. 

(3) Emission reduction benefits from 

expanding coverage beyond the min- imum required urban area boundaries can be applied toward the reasonable 

further progress requirements or can be used for offsets, provided the cov- ered vehicles are operated in the non- attainment area, but not toward the 

enhanced IJM performance standard re- quirement. 

(4) In a multi-state urbanized area with a population of 200,000 or more that is required under paragraph (a) of 

this section to implement IIM, any 

State with a portion of the area having a 1990 Census-defined population of 

50,000 or more shall implement an IIM 

program. The other coverage requirements in paragraph (b) of this section 

shall apply in multi-state areas as well. 

(5) Notwithstanding the limitation in 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section, in an ozone transport region, States which 

opt for a program which meets the performance standard described in 

§ 51.351(h) and claim in their SIP less 

emission reduction credit than the 

basic performance standard for one or 

§51.351 

more pollutants, may apply a geographic bubble covering areas in the 

State not otherwise subject to an IIM 

requirement to achieve emission reductions from other measures equal to or greater than what would have been 

achieved if the low enhanced perform- ance standard were met in the subject 

IIM areas. Emissions reductions from 

non-IIM measures shall not be counted 

towards the OTR low enhanced performance standard. 

(c) Requirements after attainment. All 

IIM programs shall provide that the 

program will remain effective, even if 

the area is redesignated to attainment 

status or the standard is otherwise ren- dered no longer applicable, until the 

State submits and EPA approves a SIP 

revision which convincingly demonstrates that the area can maintain 

the relevant standard(s) without benefit of the emission reductions attributable to the IIM program. The State 

shall commit to fully implement and 

enforce the program until such a demonstration can be made and approved 

by EPA. At a minimum, for the purposes of SIP approval, legislation au- thorizing the program shall not sunset 

prior to the attainment deadline for 

the applicable National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). 

(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall de- scribe the applicable areas in detail 

and, consistent with §51.372 of this subpart, shall include the legal authority or rules necessary to establish program 

boundaries. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 60 

FR 48034, Sept. 18, 1995; 61 FR 39036, July 25, 

1996; 65 FR 45532, July 24, 2000) 

§ 51.351 Enhanced 11M performance. standard. 

(a) [Reserved] 

(b) On-road testing . The performance 

standard shall include on-road testing 

(including out-of-cycle repairs in the case of confirmed failures) of at least 

0.5% of the subject vehicle population, or 20,000 vehicles whichever is less, as a supplement to the periodic inspection 

required in paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) 

of this section. Specific requirements are listed in § 51.371 of this subpart. 

(c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). For 

those areas required to implement an 

315 
§51.351 

enhanced I/M program prior to the effective date of designation and classifications under the 8-hour ozone standard, the performance standard shall include inspection of all model year 1996 

and later light-duty vehicles and lightduty trucks equipped with certified on- board diagnostic systems, and repair of 

malfunctions or system deterioration 

identified by or affecting OBD systems 

as specified in § 51.357, and assuming a 

start date of 2002 for such testing. For areas required to implement enhanced 

I/M as a result of designation and classification under the 8-hour ozone standard, the performance standard defined in paragraph (i) of this section 

shall include inspection of all model 

year 2001 and later light-duty vehicles 

and light-duty trucks equipped with 

certified on-board diagnostic systems, 

and repair of malfunctions or system 

deterioration identified by or affecting 

OBD systems as specified in §51.357, 

and assuming a start date of 4 years 

after the effective date of designation 

and classification under the 8-hour ozone standard. 

(d) Modeling requirements. Equivalency of the emission levels which will 

be achieved by the I/M program design 

in the SIP to those of the model program described in this section shall be 

demonstrated using the most current 

version of EPA's mobile source emission model, or an alternative approved 

by the Administrator, using EPA guidance to aid in the estimation of input 

parameters. States may adopt alternative approaches that meet this performance standard. States may do so through program design changes that 

affect normal IJM input parameters to 

the mobile source emission factor 

model, or through program changes 

(such as the accelerated retirement of 

high emitting vehicles) that reduce inuse mobile source emissions. If the Administrator finds, under section 

182(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act pertaining to 

reasonable further progress demonstrations or section 182(f)(1) of the Act pertaining to provisions for major stationary sources, that NOx emission re- ductions are not beneficial in a given 

ozone nonattainment area, then NOx 

emission reductions are not required of 

the enhanced IJM program, but the program shall be designed to offset NOx 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

increases resulting from the repair of 

HC and CO failures. (e) [Reserved) 

(f) High Enhanced Performance Standard. Enhanced I/M programs shall be 

designed and implemented to meet or 

exceed a minimum performance standard, which is expressed as emission levels in area-wide average grams per mile 

(gpm), achieved from highway mobile 

sources as a result of the program. The 

emission levels achieved by the State's program design shall be calculated 

using the most current version, at the 

time of submittal, of the EPA mobile 

source emission factor model or an alternative model approved by the Administrator, and shall meet the minimum performance standard both in 

operation and for SIP approval. Areas 

shall meet the performance standard 

for the pollutants which cause them to 

be subject to enhanced IJM requirements. In the case of ozone nonattainment areas subject to enhanced IJM and 

subject areas in the Ozone Transport 

Region, the performance standard must 

be met for both oxides of nitrogen 

(NOx) and volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section. Except as provided in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this 

section, the model program elements 

for the enhanced I/M performance 

standard shall be as follows: (1) Network type. Centralized testing. 

(2) Start date. For areas with existing 

I!M programs, 1983. For areas newly 

subject, 1995. 

(3) Test frequency . Annual testing. 

(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 

1968 and later vehicles. 

(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty 

vehicles, and light duty trucks, rated 

up to 8,500 pounds Gross Vehicle 

Weight Rating (GVWR). 

(6) Exhaust emission test type. Transient mass-emission testing on 1986 and 

later model year vehicles using the 

IM240 driving cycle, two-speed testing 

(as described in appendix B of this subpart S) of 1981-1985 vehicles, and idle 

testing (as described in appendix B of 

this subpart S) of pre-1981 vehicles is 

assumed. 

(7) Emission standards. (i) Emission 

standards for 1986 through 1993 model 

year light duty vehicles, and 1994 and 

1995 light-duty vehicles not meeting 

316 
Environmental Protection Agency 

Tier 1 emission standards, of 0.80 gpm 

hydrocarbons (HC), 20 gpm CO, and 2.0 

gpm NOx; 

(ii) Emission standards for 1986 

through 1993 light duty trucks less 

than 6000 pounds gross vehicle weight 

rating (GVWR), and 1994 and 1995 

trucks not meeting Tier 1 emission 

standards, of 1.2 gpm HC, 20 gpm CO, 

and 3.5 gpm NOx; 

(iii) Emission standards for 1986 

through 1993 light duty trucks greater 

than 6000 pounds GVWR, and 1994 and 

1995 trucks not meeting the Tier 1 

emission standards, of 1.2 gpm HC, 20 

gpm CO, and 3.5 gpm NOx; 

(iv) Emission standards for 1994 and 

later light duty vehicles meeting Tier 1 

emission standards of 0.70 gpm HC, 15 

gpm CO, and 1.4 gpm NOx; 

(v) Emission standards for 1994 and 

later light duty trucks under 6000 

pounds GVWR and meeting Tier 1 emission standards of 0.70 gpm HC, 15 gpm 

CO, and 2.0 gpm NOx; 

(vi) Emission standards for 1994 and 

later light duty trucks greater than 

6000 pounds GVWR and meeting Tier 1 

emission standards of 0.80 gpm HC, 15 

gpm CO and 2.5 gpm NOx; 

(vii) Emission standards for 1981-1985 

model year vehicles of 1.2% CO, and 220 

gpm HC for the idle, two-speed tests 

and loaded steady-state tests (as described in appendix B of this subpart 

S); and 

(viii) Maximum exhaust dilution 

measured as no less than 6% CO plus 

carbon dioxide (C02) on vehicles subject to a steady-state test (as described 

in appendix B of this subpart S); and 

(viii) Maximum exhaust dilution 

measured as no less than 6% CO plus 

carbon dioxide (C02) on vehicles subject to a steady-state test (as described 

in appendix B of this subpart S). (8) Emission control device inspections. 

(i) Visual inspection of the catalyst 

and fuel inlet restrictor on all 1984 and 

later model year vehicles. 

(ii) Visual inspection of the positive 

crankcase ventilation valve on 1968 

through 1971 model years, inclusive, 

and of the exhaust gas recirculation 

valve on 1972 through 1983 model year 

vehicles, inclusive. 

(9) Evaporative system function checks. 

Evaporative system integrity {pressure) test on 1983 and later model year 

§51.351 

vehicles and an evaporative system 

transient purge test on 1986 and later 

model year vehicles. 

(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test 

failure rate among pre-1981 model year 

vehicles. 

(11) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as 

a percentage of failed vehicles. 

(12) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate. 

(13) Evaluation date. Enhanced liM 

program areas subject to the provisions 

of this paragraph shall be shown to obtain the same or lower emission levels as the model program described in this 

paragraph by January 1, 2002 to within 

±0.02 gpm. Subject programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability 

to maintain this level of emission re- duction (or better) through their attainment deadline for the applicable 

NAAQS standard(s). 

(g) Alternate Low Enhanced JIM Performance Standard. An enhanced liM 

area which is either not subject to or has an approved State Implementation 

Plan pursuant to the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 

for Reasonable Further Progress in 

1996, and does not have a disapproved 

plan for Reasonable Further Progress 

for the period after 1996 or a disapproved plan for attainment of the air 

quality standards for ozone or CO, may 

select the alternate low enhanced liM 

performance standard described below 

in lieu of the standard described in 

paragraph (f) of this section. The model 

program elements for this alternate 

low enhanced liM performance standard are: 

(1) Network type. Centralized testing. 

(2) Start date. For areas with existing 

liM programs, 1983. For areas newly 

subject, 1995. 

(3) Test frequency. Annual testing. 

(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 

1968 and newer vehicles. 

(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty 

vehicles, and light duty trucks, rated 

up to 8,500 pounds GVWR. 

(6) Exhaust emission test type. Idle 

testing of all covered vehicles (as described in appendix B of subpart S). 

(7) Emission standards. Those specified 

in 40 CFR part 85, subpart W. 

(8) Emission control device inspections. 

Visual inspection of the positive crank- case ventilation valve on all 1968 

317 
§51.351 

through 1971 model year vehicles, inclusive, and of the exhaust gas recirculation valve on all 1972 and newer 

model year vehicles. 

(9) Evaporative system Junction checks. 

None. 

(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test 

failure rate among pre-1981 model year 

vehicles. 

(11) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as 

a percentage of failed vehicles. 

(12) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate. 

(13) Evaluation date. Enhanced liM 

program areas subject to the provisions 

of this paragraph (g) shall be shown to 

obtain the same or lower emission levels as the model program described in 

this paragraph by January 1, 2002 to 

within ±0.02 gpm. Subject programs 

shall demonstrate through modeling 

the ability to maintain this level of 

emission reduction (or better) through 

their attainment deadline for the applicable NAAQS standard(s). 

(h) Ozone Transport Region Low-Enhanced Performance Standard. An attainment area, marginal ozone area, or 

moderate ozone area with a 1980 Census 

population of less than 200,000 in the 

urbanized area, in an ozone transport 

region, that is required to implement 

enhanced IJM under section 184(b)(1)(A) 

of the Clean Air Act, but was not previously required to or did not in fact 

implement basic liM under the Clean 

Air Act as enacted prior to 1990 and is 

not subject to the requirements for 

basic liM programs in this subpart, 

may select the performance standard 

described below in lieu of the standard 

described in paragraph (f) or (g) of this 

section as long as the difference in 

emission reductions between the program described in paragraph (g) and 

this paragraph are made up with other 

measures, as provided in § 51.350(b)(5). Offsetting measures shall not include 

those otherwise required by the Clean 

Air Act in the areas from which credit 

is bubbled. The program elements for 

this alternate OTR enhanced liM performance standard are: 

(1) Network type. Centralized testing. 

(2) Start date. January 1, 1999. 

(3) Test frequency. Annual testing. 

(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 

1968 and newer vehicles. 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty 

vehicles, and light duty trucks, rated 

up to 8,500 pounds GVWR. 

(6) Exhaust emission test type. Remote 

sensing measurements on 1968-1995 ve- hicles; on-board diagnostic system 

checks on 1996 and newer vehicles. 

(7) Emission standards. For remote 

sensing measurements, a carbon monoxide standard of 7.5% (with at least 

two separate readings above this level 

to establish a failure ). 

(8) Emission control device inspections. 

Visual inspection of the catalytic con- verter on 1975 and newer vehicles and 

visual inspection of the positive crankcase ventilation valve on 1968-1974 ve- hicles. 

(9) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as a 

percentage of failed vehicles. 

(10) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate. 

(11) Evaluation date. Enhanced liM 

program areas subject to the provisions 

of this paragraph shall be shown to obtain the same or lower VOC and NOx 

emission levels as the model program 

described in this paragraph (h) by January 1, 2002 to within ±0.02 gpm. Subject programs shall demonstrate 

through modeling the ability to maintain this level of emission reduction 

(or better) through their attainment 

deadline for the applicable NAAQS 

standard(s). Equality of substituted 

emission reductions to the benefits of 

the low enhanced performance standard must be demonstrated for the same evaluation date. 

(i) Enhanced performance standard for 

areas designated and classified under the 

8-hour ozone standard. Areas required to 

implement an enhanced IJM program as 

a result of being designated and classified under the 8-hour ozone standard, 

must meet or exceed the HC and NOx 

emission reductions achieved by the 

model program defined as follows: 

(1) Network type. Centralized testing. 

(2) Start date. 4 years after the effective date of designation and classification under the 8-hour ozone standard. 

(3) Test frequency. Annual testing. 

(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 

1968 and newer vehicles. 

(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty 

vehicles, and light duty trucks, rated 

up to 8,500 pounds GVWR. 

318 
Environmental Protection Agency 

(6) Emission test type. Idle testing (as 

described in appendix B of this subpart) 

for 1968--2000 vehicles; onboard diagnostic checks on 2001 and newer vehicles. 

(7) Emission standards. Those specified 

in 40 CFR part 85, subpart W. 

(8) Emission control device inspections. 

Visual inspection of the positive crankcase ventilation valve on all 1968 

through 1971 model year vehicles, inclusive, and of the exhaust gas recirculation valve on all 1972 and newer 

model year vehicles. 

(9) Evaporative system function checks. 

None, with the exception of those performed by the OED system on vehicles 

so-equipped and only for model year 

2001 and newer vehicles. 

(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test 

failure rate among pre-1981 model year 

vehicles. 

(11) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as 

a percentage of failed vehicles. 

(12) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate. 

(13) Evaluation date. Enhanced IIM 

program areas subject to the provisions 

of this paragraph (i) shall be shown to 

obtain the same or lower emission levels for HC and NOx as the model program described in this paragraph assuming an evaluation date set 6 years 

after the effective date of designation 

and classification under the 8-hour 

ozone standard (rounded to the nearest 

July) to within ±0.02 gpm. Subject programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to maintain this percent level of emission reduction (or 

better) through their applicable attainment date for the 8-hour ozone standard, also rounded to the nearest July. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 

FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 59 FR 32343, June 23, 

1994; 60 FR 48035, Sept. 18, 1995; 61 FR 39036, 

July 25, 1996; 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 

24433, May 4, 1998; 65 FR 45532, July 24, 2000; 

66 FR 18176, Apr. 5, 2001; 71 FR 17710, Apr. 7, 

2006] 

§ 51.352 Basic 11M performance stand· 

ard. 

(a) Basic IIM programs shall be designed and implemented to meet or ex- ceed a minimum performance standard, 

which is expressed as emission levels 

achieved from highway mobile sources as a result of the program. The per-

§51.352 

formance standard shall be established 

using the following model IIM program 

inputs and local characteristics, such 

as vehicle mix and local fuel controls. 

Similarly, the emission reduction benefits of the State's program design 

shall be estimated using the most current version of the EPA mobile source emission model, and shall meet the 

minimum performance standard both 

in operation and for SIP approval. 

(1) Network type . Centralized testing. 

(2) Start date. For areas with existing 

IIM programs, 1983. For areas newly 

subject, 1994. 

(3) Test frequency . Annual testing. 

(4) Model year coverage . Testing of 

1968 and later model year vehicles. 

(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty 

vehicles. 

(6) Exhaust emission test type. Idle 

test. 

(7) Emission standards. No weaker 

than specified in 40 CFR part 85, subpart W. 

(8) Emission control device inspections. 

None. 

(9) Stringency . A 20% emission test 

failure rate among pre-1981 model year 

vehicles. 

(10) Waiver rate. A 0% waiver rate. 

(11) Compliance rate. A 100% compliance rate. 

(12) Evaluation date. Basic IIM programs shall be shown to obtain the 

same or lower emission levels as the 

model inputs by 1997 for ozone nonattainment areas and 1996 for CO nonattainment areas; and, for serious or worse ozone nonattainment areas, on 

each applicable milestone and attainment deadline, thereafter. 

(b) Oxides of nitrogen. Basic IIM testing in ozone nonattainment areas shall 

be designed such that no increase in 

NOx emissions occurs as a result of the 

program. If the Administrator finds, 

under section 182(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act 

pertaining to reasonable further 

progress demonstrations or section 

182(f)(1) of the Act pertaining to provisions for major stationary sources, 

that NOx emission reductions are not 

beneficial in a given ozone nonattainment area, then the basic IIM NOx re- quirement may be omitted. States 

shall implement any required NOx controls within 12 months of implementation of the program deadlines required 

319 
§51.353 

in §51.373 of this subpart, except that 

newly implemented I/M programs shall 

include NOx controls from the start. (c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). For 

those areas required to implement a basic liM program prior to the effective 

date of designation and classification 

under the 8-hour ozone standard, the 

performance standard shall include inspection of all model year 1996 and 

later light-duty vehicles equipped with 

certified on-board diagnostic systems, 

and repair of malfunctions or system 

deterioration identified by or affecting 

OBD systems as specified in §51.357, and assuming a start date of 2002 for 

such testing. For areas required to implement basic I/M as a result of designation and classification under the 8-

hour ozone standard, the performance 

standard defined in paragraph (e) of 

this section shall include inspection of 

all model year 2001 and later light-duty 

vehicles equipped with certified on- board diagnostic systems, and repair of 

malfunctions or system deterioration 

identified by or affecting OBD systems as specified in § 51.357, and assuming a 

start date of 4 years after the effective 

date of designation and classification 

under the 8-hour ozone standard. 

(d) Modeling requirements. Equivalency of emission levels which will be 

achieved by the I/M program design in 

the SIP to those of the model program 

described in this section shall be demonstrated using the most current 

version of EPA's mobile source emission model and EPA guidance on the 

estimation of input parameters. Areas 

required to implement basic I/M programs shall meet the performance 

standard for the pollutants which cause them to be subject to basic re- quirements. Areas subject as a result of ozone nonattainment shall meet the 

standard for VOCs and shall demonstrate no NOx increase, as required 

in paragraph (b) of this section. 

(e) Basic performance standard [or 

areas designated non-attainment for the 

8-hour ozone standard. Areas required to 

implement a basic liM program as are- sult of being designated and classified 

under the 8-hour ozone standard, must 

meet or exceed the emission reductions 

achieved by the model program defined 

for the applicable ozone precursor(s): 

(1) Network type. Centralized testing. 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

(2) Start date. 4 years after the effective date of designation and classification under the 8-hour ozone standard. 

(3) Test frequency. Annual testing. 

(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 

1968 and newer vehicles. (5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty 

vehicles. (6) Emission test type. Idle testing (as 

described in appendix B of this subpart) 

for 1968-2000 vehicles; onboard diagnostic checks on 2001 and newer vehicles. 

(7) Emission standards. Those specified 

in 40 CFR part 85, subpart W. (8) Emission control device inspections. 

None. 

(9) Evaporative system function checks. 

None, with the exception of those performed by the OBD system on vehicles 

so-equipped and only for model year 

2001 and newer vehicles. 

(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test 

failure rate among pre-1981 model year 

vehicles. 

(11) Waiver rate. A 0% waiver rate, as a percentage of failed vehicles. 

(12) Compliance rate. A 100% compliance rate. 

(13) Evaluation date. Basic liM program areas subject to the provisions of 

this paragraph (e) shall be shown to obtain the same or lower emission levels 

as the model program described in this 

paragraph by an evaluation date set 6 

years after the effective date of designation and classification under the 8-

hour ozone standard (rounded to the 

nearest July) for the applicable ozone precursor(s). 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 

FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 24433, May 4, 

1998; 66 FR 18177, Apr. 5, 2001; 71 FR 17711, 

Apr. 7, 2006] 

§ 51.353 Network type and program 

evaluation. 

Basic and enhanced liM programs can be centralized, decentralized, or a hybrid of the two at the State's discretion, but shall be demonstrated to 

achieve the same (or better) level of 

emission reduction as the applicable 

performance standard described in either §51.351 or 51.352 of this subpart. 

For decentralized programs other than 

those meeting the design characteristics described in paragraph (a) of this 

section, the State must demonstrate 

320 
Environmental Protection Agency 

that the program is achieving the level 

of effectiveness claimed in the plan 

within 12 months of the plan's final 

conditional approval before EPA can convert that approval to a final full approval. The adequacy of these demonstrations will be judged by the Administrator on a case-by-case basis 

through notice-and-comment rulemaking. 

(a) Presumptive equivalency. A decentralized network consisting of stations 

that only perform official liM testing 

(which may include safety-related inspections) and in which owners and em- ployees of those stations, or companies 

owning those stations, are contractually or legally barred from engaging 

in motor vehicle repair or service, motor vehicle parts sales, and motor 

vehicle sale and leasing, either directly or indirectly, and are barred from re- ferring vehicle owners to particular 

providers of motor vehicle repair serv- ices (except as provided in §51.369(b)(1) 

of this subpart) shall be considered presumptively equivalent to a centralized, 

test-only system including comparable 

test elements. States may allow such 

stations to engage in the full range of 

sales not covered by the above prohibition, including self-serve gasoline, prepackaged oil, or other, non-automotive, convenience store items. At 

the State's discretion, such stations 

may also fulfill other functions typically carried out by the State such as renewal of vehicle registration and 

driver's licenses, or tax and fee collections. 

(b) [Reserved] 

(c) Program evaluation. Enhanced liM 

programs shall include an ongoing 

evaluation to quantify the emission re- duction benefits of the program, and to 

determine if the program is meeting 

the requirements of the Clean Air Act 

and this subpart. (1) The State shall report the results 

of the program evaluation on a biennial basis, starting two years after the 

initial start date of mandatory testing as required in § 51.373 of this subpart. (2) The evaluation shall be considered 

in establishing actual emission reductions achieved from liM for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of 

sections 182(g)(1) and 182(g)(2) of the 

Clean Air Act, relating to reductions in 

§51.353 

emissions and compliance demonstration. 

(3) The evaluation program shall consist, at a minimum, of those items described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section and program evaluation data 

using a sound evaluation methodology, as approved by EPA, and evaporative 

system checks, specified in § 51.357(a ) 

(9) and (10) of this subpart, for model 

years subject to those evaporative system test procedures. The test data 

shall be obtained from a representative, random sample, taken at the time 

of initial inspection (before repair) on a 

minimum of 0.1 percent of the vehicles 

subject to inspection in a given year. 

Such vehicles shall receive a State administered or monitored test, as specified in this paragraph (c)(3), prior to 

the performance of liM-triggered repairs during the inspection cycle under 

consideration. 

(4) The program evaluation test data 

shall be submitted to EPA and shall be 

capable of providing accurate information about the overall effectiveness of 

an liM program, such evaluation to 

begin no later than 1 year after program start-up. 

(5) Areas that qualify for and choose 

to implement an OTR low enhanced liM 

program, as established in § 51.351(h), 

and that claim in their SIP less emission reduction credit than the basic 

performance standard for one or more 

pollutants, are exempt from the re- quirements of paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(4) of this section. The reports required under § 51.366 of this part 

shall be sufficient in these areas to satisfy the requirements of Clean Air Act 

for program reporting. 

(d) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall 

include a description of the network to 

be employed, the required legal authority, and, in the case of areas making 

claims under paragraph (b) of this section, the required demonstration. 

(2) The SIP shall include a description of the evaluation schedule and 

protocol, the sampling methodology, 

the data collection and analysis system, the resources and personnel for 

evaluation, and related details of the 

321 
§51.354 

evaluation program, and the legal authority enabling the evaluation program. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 

FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 61 FR 39037, July 25, 

1996; 63 FR 1368, Jan. 9, 1998; 65 FR 45532, July 

24, 2000; 71 FR 17711, Apr. 7, 2006] 

§ 51.354 Adequate tools and resources. 

(a ) Administrative resources. The pro- gram shall maintain the administrative resources necessary to perform all 

of the program functions including 

quality assurance, data analysis and 

reporting, and the holding of hearings 

and adjudication of cases. A portion of 

the test fee or a separately assessed per 

vehicle fee shall be collected, placed in 

a dedicated fund and retained, to be 

used to finance program oversight, management, and capital expenditures. 

Alternatives to this approach shall be 

acceptable if the State can demonstrate that adequate funding of the 

program can be maintained in some other fashion (e.g., through contractual obligation along with demonstrated past performance). Reliance 

on future uncommitted annual or biennial appropriations from the State or 

local General Fund is not acceptable, 

unless doing otherwise would be a violation of the State's constitution. This 

section shall in no way require the establishment of a test fee if the State 

chooses to fund the program in some other manner. (b) Personnel. The program shall employ sufficient personnel to effectively 

carry out the duties related to the program, including but not limited to administrative audits, inspector audits, 

data analysis, program oversight, program evaluation, public education and 

assistance, and enforcement aga inst 

stations and inspectors as well as 

against motorists who are out of com- pliance with program regulations and 

requirements. (c) Equipment. The program shall possess equipment necessary to achieve 

the objectives of the program and meet 

program requirements, including but 

not limited to a steady supply of vehicles for covert auditing, test equipment 

and facilities for program evaluation, 

and computers capable of data processing, analysis, and reporting. Equipment or equivalent services may be 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

contractor supplied or owned by the 

State or local authority. 

(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the resources that will be used for program operation, and discuss how the performance 

standard will be met. 

(1) The SIP shall include a detailed 

budget plan which describes the source of funds for personnel, program administration, program enforcement, purchase of necessary equipment (such as vehicles for undercover audits), and 

any other requirements discussed 

throughout, for the period prior to the 

next biennial self-evaluation required 

in § 51.366 of this subpart. 

(2) The SIP shall include a description of personnel resources. The plan 

shall include the number of personnel 

dedicated to overt and covert auditing, data analysis, program administration, 

enforcement, and other necessary functions and the training attendant to 

each function. 

§ 51.355 Test frequency and conven- ience. 

(a) The performance standards for IJ 

M programs assume an annual test frequency; other schedules may be approved if the required emission targets 

are achieved. The SIP shall describe 

the test schedule in detail, including 

the test year selection scheme if testing is other than annual. The SIP shall 

include the legal authority necessary 

to implement and enforce the test frequency requirement and explain how 

the test frequency will be integrated 

with the enforcement process. 

(b) In enhanced IJM programs, test 

systems shall be designed in such a 

way as to provide convenient service to 

motorists required to get their vehicles 

tested. The SIP shall demonstrate that 

the network of stations providing test 

services is sufficient to insure short 

waiting times to get a test and short 

driving distances. Stations shall be re- quired to adhere to regular testing 

hours and to test any subject vehicle 

presented for a test during its test period. 

§ 51.356 Vehicle coverage. 

The performance standard for en- hanced IJM programs assumes coverage of all 1968 and later model year light 

322 
Environmental Protection Agency 

duty vehicles and light duty trucks up 

to 8,500 pounds GVWR, and includes ve- hicles operating on all fuel types. The 

standard for basic IJM programs does 

not include light duty trucks. Other 

levels of coverage may be approved if 

the necessary emission reductions are achieved. Vehicles registered or re- quired to be registered within the IJM 

program area boundaries and fleets primarily operated within the I/M program area boundaries and belonging to 

the covered model years and vehicle 

classes comprise the subject vehicles. 

(a) Subject vehicles. (1) All vehicles of a covered model year and vehicle type 

shall be tested according to the appli- cable test schedule, including leased 

vehicles whose registration or titling is 

in the name of an equity owner other 

than the lessee or user. (2) All subject fleet vehicles shall be 

inspected. Fleets may be officially inspected outside of the normal liM program test facilities, if such alternatives are approved by the program 

administration, but shall be subject to 

the same test requirements using the same quality control standards as non- fleet vehicles. If all vehicles in a particular fleet are tested during one part 

of the cycle, then the quality control 

requirements shall be met during the 

time of testing only. Any vehicle available for rent in the liM area or for use in the liM area shall be subject. Fleet 

vehicles not being tested in normal IJM 

test facilities in enhanced IJM pro- grams, however, shall be inspected in 

independent, test-only facilities, ac- cording to the requirements of 

§ 51.353(a) of this subpart. 

(3) Subject vehicles which are registered in the program area but are primarily operated in another liM area shall be tested, either in the area of 

primary operation, or in the area of 

registration. Alternate schedules may 

be established to permit convenient 

testing of these vehicles (e.g., vehicles 

belonging to students away at college 

should be rescheduled for testing during a visit home). liM programs shall 

make provisions for providing official 

testing to vehicles registered elsewhere. 

(4) Vehicles which are operated on Federal installations located within an liM program area shall be tested, re-

§51.356 

gardless of whether the vehicles are registered in the State or local IJM area. This requirement applies to all 

employee-owned or leased vehicles (including vehicles owned, leased, or operated by civilian and military personnel on Federal installations) as well as agency-owned or operated vehicles, ex- cept tactical military vehicles, operated on the installation. This requirement shall not apply to visiting agen- cy, employee, or military personnel ve- hicles as long as such visits do not ex- ceed 60 calendar days per year. In areas without test fees collected in the lane, arrangements shall be made by the installation with the liM program for re- imbursement of the costs of tests provided for agency vehicles, at the discretion of the IJM agency. The installation 

shall provide documentation of proof of 

compliance to the liM agency. The doc- umentation shall include a list of subject vehicles and shall be updated periodically, as determined by the liM program administrator, but no less frequently than each inspection cycle. 

The installation shall use one of the 

following methods to establish proof of 

compliance: 

(i) Presentation of a valid certificate 

of compliance from the local I/M program, from any other liM program at 

least as stringent as the local program, or from any program deemed acceptable by the I/M program administrator. 

(ii) Presentation of proof of vehicle 

registration within the geographic area covered by the liM program, except for 

any program whose enforcement is not 

through registration denial. 

(iii) Another method approved by the 

State or local IJM program administrator. (5) Special exemptions may be permitted for certain subject vehicles provided a demonstration is made that the 

performance standard will be met. (6) States may also exempt MY 1996 

and newer OBD-equipped vehicles that 

receive an OBD-IJM inspection from the 

tailpipe, purge, and fill-neck pressure 

tests (where applicable) without any 

loss of emission reduction credit. (b) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall 

include a detailed description of the 

number and types of vehicles to be cov- ered by the program, and a plan for 

how those vehicles are to be identified, 

323 
§51.357 

including vehicles that are routinely 

operated in the area but may not be 

registered in the area. (2) The SIP shall include a description of any special exemptions which 

will be granted by the program, and an estimate of the percentage and number 

of subject vehicles which will be impacted. Such exemptions shall be ac- counted for in the emission reduction 

analysis. 

(3) The SIP shall include the legal au- thority or rule necessary to implement 

and enforce the vehicle coverage re- quirement. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 66 

FR 18177, Apr. 5, 2001] 

§ 51.357 Test procedures and stand- ards. 

Written test procedures and pass/fail 

standards shall be established and followed for each model year and vehicle 

type included in the program. 

(a) Test procedure requirements. Emission tests and functional tests shall be 

conducted according to good engineering practices to assure test accuracy. 

(1) Initial tests (i.e., those occurring 

for the first time in a test cycle) shall 

be performed without repair or adjustment at the inspection facility, prior 

to the test, except as provided in paragraph (a)(10)(i) of this section. 

(2) The vehicle owner or driver shall 

have access to the test area such that 

observation of the entire official inspection process on the vehicle is permitted. Such access may be limited but 

shall in no way prevent full observation. 

(3) An official test, once initiated, shall be performed in its entirety regardless of intermediate outcomes ex- cept in the case of invalid test condition, unsafe conditions, fast pass/fail 

algorithms, or, in the case of the on- board diagnostic (OBD) system check, 

unset readiness codes. (4) Tests involving measurement 

shall be performed with program-approved equipment that has been calibrated according to the quality procedures contained in appendix A to this 

subpart. 

(5) Vehicles shall be rejected from 

testing if the exhaust system is missing or leaking, or if the vehicle is in an unsafe condition for testing. Coinci40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

dent with mandatory OBD-I!M testing 

and repair of vehicles so equipped, MY 

1996 and newer vehicles shall be rejected from testing if a scan of the OBD 

system reveals a "not ready" code for 

any component of the OBD system. At 

a state's option it may choose alternatively to reject MY 1996-2000 vehicles 

only if three or more "not ready" codes are present and to reject MY 2001 and 

later model years only if two or more "not ready" codes are present. This 

provision does not release manufacturers from the obligations regarding 

readiness status set forth in 40 CFR 

86.094-17(e)(1): "Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and 

New Motor Vehicle Engines: Regulations RequiringOn-Board Diagnostic 

Systems on 1994 and Later Model Year 

Light-Duty Vehicles and Light-Duty 

Trucks." Once the cause for rejection 

has been corrected, the vehicle must 

return for testing to continue the testing process. Failure to return for testing in a timely manner after rejection 

shall be considered non-compliance 

with the program, unless the motorist 

can prove that the vehicle has been 

sold, scrapped, or is otherwise no longer in operation within the program area. 

(6) Vehicles shall be retested after repair for any portion of the inspection 

that is failed on the previous test to 

determine if repairs were effective. To 

the extent that repair to correct a previous failure could lead to failure of 

another portion of the test, that portion shall also be retested. Evaporative 

system repairs shall trigger an exhaust 

emissions retest (in programs which 

conduct an exhaust emission test as part of the initial inspection). 

(7) Steady-state testing. Steady-state 

tests shall be performed in accordance 

with the procedures contained in appendix B to this subpart. 

(8) Emission control device inspection. 

Visual emission control device checks 

shall be performed through direct observation or through indirect observation using a mirror, video camera or other visual aid. These inspections 

shall include a determination as to 

whether each subject device is present 

and appears to be properly connected 

and appears to be the correct type for 

the certified vehicle configuration. 

324 
Environmental Protection Agency 

(9) Evaporative system purge test procedure. The purge test procedure shall 

consist of measuring the total purge 

flow (in standard liters) occurring in 

the vehicle's evaporative system during the transient dynamometer emission test specified in paragraph (a)(ll) 

of this section. The purge flow meas- urement system shall be connected to 

the purge portion of the evaporative 

system in series between the canister 

and the engine, preferably near the 

canister. The inspector shall be responsible for ensuring that all items that are disconnected in the conduct of the 

test procedure are properly re-con- nected at the conclusion of the test 

procedure. Alternative procedures may 

be used if they are shown to be equivalent or better to the satisfaction of the 

Administrator. Except in the case of 

government-run test facilities claiming 

sovereign immunity, any damage done 

to the evaporative emission control 

system during this test shall be re- paired at the expense of the inspection 

facility . (10) Evaporative system integrity test 

procedure. The test sequence shall con- sist of the following steps: 

(i) Test equipment shall be connected 

to the fuel tank canister hose at the 

canister end. The gas cap shall be 

checked to ensure that it is properly, 

but not excessively tightened, and 

shall be tightened if necessary. 

(ii) The system shall be pressurized 

to 14 ±0.5 inches of water without ex- ceeding 26 inches of water system pres- sure. (iii) Close off the pressure source, 

seal the evaporative system and mon- itor pressure decay for up to two minutes. 

(iv) Loosen the gas cap after a max- imum of two minutes and monitor for a sudden pressure drop, indicating that 

the fuel tank was pressurized. 

(v) The inspector shall be responsible 

for ensuring that all items that are disconnected in the conduct of the test 

procedure are properly re-connected at 

the conclusion of the test procedure. 

(vi) Alternative procedures may be 

used if they are shown to be equivalent or better to the satisfaction of the Administrator. Except in the case of government-run test facilities claiming 

sovereign immunity, any damage done 

§51.357 

to the evaporative emission control 

system during this test shall be re- paired at the expense of the inspection 

facility. 

(11) Transient emission test. The transient emission test shall consist of mass emission measurement using a constant volume sampler (or an Administrator-approved alternative 

methodology for accounting for ex- haust volume) while the vehicle is driv- en through a computer-monitored driving cycle on a dynamometer. The driving cycle shall include acceleration, deceleration, and idle operating modes as specified in appendix E to this subpart 

(or an approved alternative). The driving cycle may be ended earlier using 

approved fast pass or fast fail algorithms and multiple pass/fail algorithms may be used during the test 

cycle to eliminate false failures. The 

transient test procedure, including algorithms and other procedural details, 

shall be approved by the Administrator 

prior to use in an liM program. 

(12) On-board diagnostic checks. Beginning January 1, 2002, inspection of the 

on-board diagnostic (OBD) system on MY 1996 and newer light-duty vehicles 

and light-duty trucks shall be con- ducted according to the procedure described in 40 CFR 85.2222, at a minimum. This inspection may be used in 

lieu of tailpipe, purge, and fill-neck 

pressure testing. Alternatively, states 

may elect to phase-in OBD-1/M testing 

for one test cycle by using the OBD-11 

M check to screen clean vehicles from 

tailpipe testing and require repair and 

retest for only those vehicles which 

proceed to fail the tailpipe test. An additional alternative is also available to 

states with regard to the deadline for 

mandatory testing, repair, and re- testing of vehicles based upon the OBD1/M check. Under this third option, if a state can show good cause (and the Ad- ministrator takes notice-and-comment 

action to approve this good cause showing as a revision to the State's 

Implementation Plan), up to an additional 12 months' extensionmay be 

granted, establishing an alternative 

start date for such states of no later 

than January 1, 2003. States choosing 

to make this showing will also have 

available to them the phase-in approach described in this section, with 

325 
§51.357 

the one-cycle time limit to begin coincident with the alternative start date 

established by Administrator approval 

of the showing, but no later than January 1, 2003. The showing of good cause 

(and its approval or disapproval) will 

be addressed on a case-by-case basis by 

the Administrator. 

(13) Approval of alternative tests. Alternative test procedures may be approved if the Administrator finds that 

such procedures show a reasonable correlation with the Federal Test Procedure and are capable of identifying 

comparable emission reductions from 

the liM program as a whole, in combination with other program elements, 

as would be identified by the test(s) 

which they are intended to replace. 

(b) Test standards-(1) Emissions standards. HC, CO, and CO+C02 (or C02 

alone) emission standards shall be applicable to all vehicles subject to the 

program with the exception of MY 1996 

and newer OBD-equipped light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, which will 

be held to the requirements of 40 CFR 

85.2207, at a minimum. Repairs shall be 

required for failure of any standard regardless of the attainment status of 

the area. NOx emission standards shall 

be applied to vehicles subject to a loaded mode test in ozone nonattainment areas and in an ozone transport region, 

unless a waiver of NOx controls is provided to the State under §51.351(d). 

(2) Visual equipment inspection standards. (i) Vehicles shall fail visual inspections of subject emission control 

devices if such devices are part of the 

original certified configuration and are 

found to be missing, modified, disconnected, or improperly connected. 

(ii) Vehicles shall fail visual inspections of subject emission control devices if such devices are found to be incorrect for the certified vehicle configuration under inspection. 

Aftermarket parts, as well as original 

equipment manufacture parts, may be 

considered correct if they are proper 

for the certified vehicle configuration. 

Where an EPA aftermarket approval or 

self-certification program exists for a particular class of subject parts, vehicles shall fail visual equipment inspections if the part is neither original 

equipment manufacture nor from an 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

approved or self-certified aftermarket 

manufacturer. 

(3) Functional test standards-(i) Evaporative system integrity test. Vehicles 

shall fail the evaporative system pres- sure test if the system cannot maintain a system pressure above eight 

inches of water for up to two minutes 

after being pressurized to 14 ±0.5 inches 

of water or if no pressure drop is detected when the gas cap is loosened as described in paragraph (a)(10)(iv) of 

this section. Additionally, vehicles 

shall fail the evaporative test if the 

canister is missing or obviously damaged, if hoses are missing or obviously 

disconnected, or if the gas cap is missing. 

(ii) Evaporative canister purge test. Vehicles with a total purge system flow 

measuring less than one liter, over the 

course of the transient test required in 

paragraph (a)(9) of this section, shall 

fail the evaporative purge test. 

(4) On-board diagnostic test standards. 

Vehicles shall fail the on-board diagnostic test if they fail to meet the re- quirements of 40 CFR 85.2207, at a minimum. Failure of the on-board diagnostic test need not result in failure of 

the vehicle inspection/maintenance 

test until January 1, 2002. Alternatively, states may elect to phase-in 

OBD-1/M testing for one test cycle by 

using the OBD- liM check to screen clean vehicles from tailpipe testing and 

require repair and retest for only those 

vehicles which proceed to fail the tailpipe test. An additional alternative is 

also available to states with regard to 

the deadline for mandatory testing, re- pair, and retesting of vehicles based 

upon the OBD-1/M check. Under this 

third option, if a state can show good cause (and the Administrator takes no- tice-and-comment action to approve 

this good cause showing), up to an additional 12 months' extension may be 

granted, establishing an alternative 

start date for such states of no later 

than January 1, 2003. States choosing 

to make this showing will also have 

available to them the phase-in ap- proach described in this section, with 

the one-cycle time limit to begin coin- cident with the alternative start date 

established by Administrator approval 

of the showing, but no later than January 1, 2003. The showing of good cause 

326 
Environmental Protection Agency 

(and its approval or disapproval) will 

be addressed on a case-by-case basis. (c) Fast test algorithms and standards. 

Special test algorithms and pass/fail 

algorithms may be employed to reduce 

test time when the test outcome is predictable with near certainty, if the Administrator approves by letter the 

equivalency to full procedure testing. 

(d) Applicability. In general, section 

203(a)(3)(A) of the Clean Air Act prohibits altering a vehicle's configuration such that it changes from a cer- tified to a non-certified configuration. 

In the inspection process, vehicles that 

have been altered from their original 

certified configuration are to be tested 

in the same manner as other subject 

vehicles with the exception of MY 1996 

and newer, QED-equipped vehicles on 

which the data link connector is missing, has been tampered with or which 

has been altered in such a way as to 

make QED system testing impossible. Such vehicles shall be failed for the on- board diagnostics portion of the test 

and are expected to be repaired so that 

the vehicle is testable. Failure to re- turn for retesting in a timely manner after failure and repair shall be considered non-compliance with the program, 

unless the motorist can prove that the 

vehicle has been sold, scrapped, or is 

otherwise no longer in operation within the program area. (1) Vehicles with engines other than 

the engine originally installed by the 

manufacturer or an identical replacement of such engine shall be subject to 

the test procedures and standards for 

the chassis type an~ model year including visual equipment inspections for 

all parts that are part of the original or now-applicable certified configuration and part of the normal inspection. 

States may choose to require vehicles 

with such engines to be subject to the 

test procedures and standards for the 

engine model year if it is newer than 

the chassis model year. 

(2) Vehicles that have been switched 

from an engine of one fuel type to an- other fuel type that is subject to the 

program (e.g., from a diesel engine to a gasoline engine) shall be subject to the 

test procedures and standards for the 

current fuel type, and to the requirements of paragraph (d)(1) of this sec- tion. 

§51.358 

(3) Vehicles that are switched to a fuel type for which there is no certified 

configuration shall be tested according 

to the most stringent emission standards established for that vehicle type 

and model year. Emission control device requirements may be waived if the 

program determines that the alternatively fueled vehicle configuration 

would meet the new vehicle standards 

for that model year without such devices. 

(4) Mixing vehicle classes (e.g., lightduty with heavy-duty) and certification types (e.g., California with Federal) within a single vehicle configuration shall be considered tampering. 

(e) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of each test procedure used. The SIP shall include the 

rule, ordinance or law describing and 

establishing the test procedures. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 

FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 24433, May 4, 

1998; 65 FR 45533, July 24, 2000; 66 FR 18178, 

Apr. 5, 2001] 

§ 51.358 Te st equipment. 

Computerized emission test systems are required for performing an official 

emissions test on subject vehicles. 

(a) Performance features of computerized emission test systems. The emission 

test equipment shall be certified by the 

program, and newly acquired emission 

test systems shall be subjected to ac- ceptance test procedures to ensure compliance with program specifications. 

(1) Emission test equipment shall be 

capable of testing all subject vehicles 

and shall be updated from time to time 

to accommodate new technology vehicles as well as changes to the program. 

In the case of QED-based testing, the 

equipment used to access the onboard 

computer shall be capable of testing all 

MY 1996 and newer, QED-equipped 

light-duty vehicles and light-duty 

trucks. 

(2) At a minimum, emission test 

equipment: 

(i) Shall make automatic pass/fail decisions; 

(ii) Shall be secured from tampering 

and/or abuse; 

(iii) Shall be based upon written 

specifications; and 

327 
§51.359 

(iv) Shall be capable of simultaneously sampling dual exhaust vehicles 

in the case of tailpipe-based emission 

test equipment. 

(3) The vehicle owner or driver shall 

be provided with a record of test re- sults, including all of the items listed 

in 40 CFR part 85, subpart W as being 

required on the test record (as applicable). The test report shall include : 

(i) A vehicle description, including license plate number, vehicle identification number, and odometer reading; 

(ii) The date and time of test; 

(iii) The name or identification num- ber of the individual(s) performing the 

tests and the location of the test sta- tion and lane; 

(iv) The type(s) of test(s) performed; 

(v) The applicable test standards; 

(vi) The test results, by test, and, 

where applicable, by pollutant; 

(vii) A statement indicating the 

availability of warranty coverage as required in section 207 of the Clean Air 

Act; 

(viii) Certification that tests were 

performed in accordance with the regulations and, in the case of decentralized 

programs, the signature of the individual who performed the test; and 

(ix) For vehicles that fail the emission test, information on the possible cause(s) of the failure . 

(b) Functional characteristics of com- puterized emission test systems. The test 

system is composed of motor vehicle test equipment controlled by a computerized processor and shall make automatic pass/fail decisions. 

(1) [Reserved] 

(2) Test systems in enhanced liM programs shall include a real-time data 

link to a host computer that prevents 

unauthorized multiple initial tests on the same vehicle in a test cycle and to 

insure test record accuracy. For areas which have demonstrated the ability to 

meet their other, non-liM Clean Air 

Act requirements without relying on 

emission reductions from the liM program (and which have also elected to 

employ stand-alone test equipment as part of the liM program), such areas may adopt alternative methods for preventing multiple initial tests, subject 

to approval by the Administrator. 

(3) [Reserved] 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

(4) On-board diagnostic test equipment requirements. The test equipment used 

to perform on-board diagnostic inspections shall function as specified in 40 

CFR 85.2231. 

(c) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include written technical specifications 

for all test equipment used in the program and shall address each of the 

above requirements (as applicable). 

The specifications shall describe the 

testing process, the necessary test 

equipment, the required features, and 

written acceptance testing criteria and 

procedures. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended a t 61 

FR 40945, Aug . 6, 1996; 65 FR 45533, July 24, 

2000; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5, 2001] 

§ 51.359 Quality control. 

Quality control measures shall insure 

that emission testing equipment is 

calibrated and maintained properly, 

and that inspection, calibration 

records, and control charts are accurately created, recorded and maintained (where applicable). 

(a) General requirements. (1) The practices described in this section and in 

appendix A to this subpart shall be followed for those tests (or portions of 

tests) which fall into the testing categories identified. Alternatives or exceptions to these procedures or frequencies may be approved by the Administrator based on a demonstration 

of comparable performance. 

(2) Preventive maintenance on all inspection equipment necessary to insure 

accurate and repeatable operation 

shall be performed on a periodic basis. 

(3) [Reserved] 

(b ) Requirements for steady-state emissions testing equipment. (1) Equipment 

shall be maintained according to demonstrated good engineering practices to 

assure test accuracy. The calibration 

and adjustment requirements in appendix A to this subpart shall apply to all 

steady-state test equipment. States 

may adjust calibration schedules and 

other quality control frequencies by 

using statistical process control to 

monitor equipment performance on an 

ongoing basis. 

(2) For analyzers that use ambient 

air as zero air, provision shall be made 

328 
Environmental Protection Agency 

to draw the air from outside t he inspection bay or lane in which the ana- lyzer is situated. 

(3) The analyzer housing shall be constructed to protect the analyzer bench 

and electrical components from ambient temperature and humidity fluctuations that exceed the range of the ana- lyzer's design specifications. 

(4) Analyzers shall automatically 

purge the analytical system after each 

test. 

(c) Requirements [or transient exhaust 

emission test equipment. Equipment shall 

be maintained according to demonstrated good engineering practices to assure test accuracy. Computer control 

of quality assurance checks and quality control charts shall be used when- ever possible. Exceptions to the procedures and the frequency of the checks 

described in appendix A of this subpart 

may be approved by the Administrator 

based on a demonstration of com- parable performance. (d) Requirements tor evaporative system 

functional test equipment. Equipment 

shall be maintained according to demonstrated good engineering practices to assure test accuracy. Computer control 

of quality assurance checks and quality control charts shall be used when- ever possible. Exceptions to the procedures and the frequency of the checks 

described in appendix A of this subpart 

may be approved by the Administrator 

based on a demonstration of com- parable performance. (e) Document security. Measures shall 

be taken to maintain the security of 

all documents by which compliance 

with the inspection requirement is es- tablished including, but not limited to 

inspection certificates, waiver certificates, license plates, license tabs, and 

stickers. This section shall in no way 

require the use of paper documents but 

shall apply if they are used by the program for these purposes. 

(1) Compliance documents shall be 

counterfeit resistant. Such measures as the use of special fonts, water marks, 

ultra-violet inks, encoded magnetic 

strips, unique bar-coded identifiers, and difficult to acquire materials may 

be used to accomplish this requirement. 

(2) All inspection certificates, waiver 

certificates, and stickers shall be 

§51.360 

printed with a unique serial number 

and an official program seal. 

(3) Measures shall be taken to ensure that compliance documents cannot be 

stolen or removed without being damaged. 

(f) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of quality control 

and record keeping procedures. The 

SIP shall include the procedure man- ual, rule, ordinance or law describing 

and establishing the quality control 

procedures and requirements. 

(57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 

FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 65 FR 45533, July 24, 

2000) 

§ 51.360 Waivers and compliance via 

diagnostic inspection. 

The program may allow the issuance 

of a waiver, which is a form of compli- ance with the program requirements 

that allows a motorist to comply without meeting the applicable test standards, as long as the prescribed criteria 

described below are met. 

(a) Waiver issuance criteria. The waiv- er criteria shall include the following 

at a minimum. 

(1) Waivers shall be issued only after a vehicle has failed a retest performed 

after all qualifying repairs have been 

completed. Qualifying repairs include 

repairs of the emission control components, listed in paragraph (a)(5) of this 

section, performed within 60 days of 

the test date. 

(2) Any available warranty coverage 

shall be used to obtain needed repairs 

before expenditures can be counted towards the cost limits in paragraphs 

(a)(5) and (a)(6) of this section. The operator of a vehicle within the statutory 

age and mileage coverage under section 

207(b) of the Clean Air Act shall 

present a written denial of warranty 

coverage from the manufacturer or au- thorized dealer for this provision to be 

waived for approved tests applicable to 

the vehicle. 

(3) Waivers shall not be issued to ve- hicles for tampering-related repairs. 

The cost of tampering-related repairs 

shall not be applicable to the minimum 

expenditure in paragraphs (a)(5) and 

(a)(6) of this section. States may issue 

exemptions for tampering-related re- pairs if it can be verified that the part 

329 
§51.360 

in question or one similar to it is no longer available for sale. 

(4) Repairs shall be appropriate to 

the cause of the test failure , and a visual check shall be made to determine if 

repairs were actually made if, given 

the nature of the repair, it can be visually confirmed. Receipts shall be submitted for review to further verify that 

qualifying repairs were performed. 

(5) General repairs shall be performed 

by a recognized repair technician (i.e. , one professionally engaged in vehicle 

repair, employed by a going concern whose purpose is vehicle repair, or possessing nationally recognized certification for emission-related diagnosis 

and repair) in order to qualify for a 

waiver. liM programs may allow the 

cost of parts (not labor) utilized by 

non-technicians (e.g., owners) to apply 

toward the waiver limit. The waiver 

would apply to the cost of parts for the 

repair or replacement of the following 

list of emission control components: 

oxygen sensor, catalytic converter, 

thermal reactor, EGR valve, fuel filler 

cap, evaporative canister, PCV valve, 

air pump, distributor, ignition wires, coil, and spark plugs. The cost of any 

hoses, gaskets, belts, clamps, brackets or other accessories directly associated 

with these components may also be applied to the waiver limit. 

(6) In basic programs, a minimum of 

$75 for pre-81 vehicles and $200 for 1981 

and newer vehicles shall be spent in 

order to qualify for a waiver. These 

model year cutoffs and the associated 

dollar limits shall be in full effect by 

January 1, 1998, or coincident with program start-up, whichever is later. Prior 

to January 1, 1998, States may adopt 

any minimum expenditure commensu- rate with the waiver rate committed to 

for the purposes of modeling compli- ance with the basic liM performance 

standard. 

(7) Beginning on January 1, 1998, enhanced liM programs shall require the 

motorist to make an expenditure of at 

least $450 in repairs to qualify for a 

waiver. The liM program shall provide 

that the $450 minimum expenditure 

shall be adjusted in January of each 

year by the percentage, if any, by 

which the Consumer Price Index for 

the preceding calendar year differs 

from the Consumer Price Index of 1989. 

40 CFR Ch. I (7- 1-12 Edition) 

Prior to January 1, 1998, States may 

adopt any minimum expenditure commensurate with the waiver rate committed to for the purposes of modeling 

compliance with the relevant enhanced 

liM performance standard. 

(i) The Consumer Price Index for any 

calendar year is the average of the 

Consumer Price Index for all-urban consumers published by the Department of Labor, as of the close of the 12-

month period ending on August 31 of 

each calendar year. A copy of the current Consumer Price Index may be obtained from the Emission Planning and 

Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105. 

(ii) The revision of the Consumer 

Price Index which is most consistent 

with the Consumer Price Index for calendar year 1989 shall be used. 

(8) States may establish lower minimum expenditures if a program is es- tablished to scrap vehicles that do not 

meet standards after the lower expe 

nditure is made. (9) A time extension, not to exceed 

the period of the inspection frequency, 

may be granted to obtain needed re- pairs on a vehicle in the case of eco- nomic hardship when waiver requirements have not been met. After having 

received a time extension, a vehicle 

must fully pass the applicable test 

standards before becoming eligible for 

another time extension. The extension 

for a vehicle shall be tracked and reported by the program. (b) Compliance via diagnostic inspection. Vehicles subject to a transient 

IM240 emission test at the cutpoints es- tablished in §§ 51.351 (f)(7 ) and (g)(7) of 

this subpart may be issued a certificate 

of compliance without meeting the prescribed emission cutpoints, if, after 

failing a retest on emissions, a com- plete, documented physical and functional diagnosis and inspection performed by the liM agency or a con- tractor to the liM agency show that no additional emission-related repairs are 

needed. Any such exemption policy and 

procedures shall be subject to approval 

by the Administrator. 

(c) Quality control of waiver issuance. 

(1) Enhanced programs shall control 

waiver issuance and processing by es- tablishing a system of agency-issued 

330 
Environmental Protection Agency 

waivers. The State may delegate this 

authority to a single contractor but inspectors in stations and lanes shall not 

issue waivers. Basic programs may permit inspector-issued waivers as long as quality assurance efforts include a comprehensive review of waiver 

issuance. 

(2) The program shall include methods of informing vehicle owners or les- sors of potential warranty coverage, 

and ways to obtain warranty repairs. 

(3) The program shall insure that re- pair receipts are authentic and cannot 

be revised or reused. 

(4) The program shall insure that 

waivers are only valid for one test 

cycle. 

(5) The program shall track, manage, 

and account for time extensions or ex- emptions so that owners or lessors can- not receive or retain a waiver improperly. 

(d) SIP requirements . (1) The SIP shall 

include a maximum waiver rate ex- pressed as a percentage of initially 

failed vehicles. This waiver rate shall 

be used for estimating emission reduction benefits in the modeling analysis. 

(2) The State shall take corrective 

action if the waiver rate exceeds that· 

committed to in the SIP or revise the 

SIP and the emission reductions 

claimed. 

(3) The SIP shall describe the waiver 

criteria and procedures, including cost 

limits, quality assurance methods and 

measures, and administration. 

(4) The SIP shall include the nec- essary legal authority, ordinance, or rules to issue waivers, set and adjust 

cost limits as required in paragraph 

(a)(5) of this section, and carry out any 

other functions necessary to administer the waiver system, including en- forcement of the waiver provisions. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 

FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 60 FR 48036, Sept. 18, 

1995; 71 FR 17711, Apr. 7, 2006] 

§ 51.361 Motorist compliance enforce- ment. 

Compliance shall be ensured through 

the denial of motor vehicle registration in enhanced liM programs unless an exception for use of an existing alternative is approved. An enhanced liM 

area may use an existing alternative if 

it demonstrates that the alternative 

§51.361 

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 liM program with that mechanism in operation prior to passage of the 1990 

Amendments to the Act. A basic liM 

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 liM programs if demonstrated to have been more effective 

than enforcement of the registration 

requirement in the past: Sticker-based 

enforcement programs and computermatching programs. States that did 

not adopt an liM program for any area 

of the State before November 15, 1990, 

may not use an enforcement alternative in connection with an enhanced 

liM program required to be adopted 

after that date. 

(a) Registration denial. Registration 

denial enforcement is defined as rejecting an application for initial registration or reregistration of a used vehicle 

(i.e., a vehicle being registered after 

the initial retail sale and associated 

registration) unless the vehicle has 

complied with the liM requirement 

prior to granting the application. Pursuant to section 207(g)(3) of the Act, 

nothing in this subpart shall be con- strued to require that new vehicles 

shall receive emission testing prior to 

initial retail sale. In designing its en- forcement program, the State shall: 

(1) Provide an external, readily visible means of determining vehicle com- pliance with the registration requirement to facilitate enforcement of the 

program; 

(2) Adopt a schedule of testing (either 

annual or biennial) that clearly determines when a vehicle shall comply 

prior to registration; 

(3) Design a testing certification 

mechanism (either paper-based or electronic) that shall be used for registration purposes and clearly indicates 

whether the certification is valid for 

purposes of registration, including: 

(i) Expiration date of the certificate; 

(ii) Unambiguous vehicle identification information; and 

331 
§51.361 

(iii) Whether the vehicle passed or received a waiver; 

(4) Routinely issue citations to motorists with expired or missing license 

plates, with either no registration or an expired registration, and with no license plate decals or expired decals, 

and provide for enforcement officials 

other than police to issue citations 

(e.g., parking meter attendants) to 

parked vehicles in noncompliance; 

(5) Structure the penalty system to 

deter non-compliance with the registration requirement through the use 

of mandatory minimum fines (meaning 

civil, monetary penalties, in this subpart) constituting a meaningful deterrent and through a requirement that 

compliance be demonstrated before a case can be closed; 

(6) Ensure that evidence of testing is 

available and checked for validity at 

the time of a new registration of a used 

vehicle or registration renewal; 

(7) Prevent owners or lessors from 

avoiding testing through manipulation 

of the title or registration system; title 

transfers may re-start the clock on the 

inspection cycle only if proof of cur- rent compliance is required at title 

transfer; 

(8) Prevent the fraudulent initial 

classification or reclassification of a vehicle from subject to non-subject or exempt by requiring proof of address 

changes prior to registration record 

modification, and documentation from 

the testing program (or delegate) certifying based on a physical inspection 

that the vehicle is exempt; 

(9) Limit and track the use of time 

extensions of the registration requirement to prevent repeated extensions; 

(10) Provide for meaningful penalties 

for cases of registration fraud; 

(11) Limit and track exemptions to 

prevent abuse of the exemption policy 

for vehicles claimed to be out-of-state; 

and 

(12) Encourage enforcement of vehicle registration transfer requirements 

when vehicle owners move into the I/M 

area by coordinating with local and 

State enforcement agencies and structuring other activities (e.g., drivers license issuance) to effect registration 

transfers. 

(b) Alternative enforcement mechanisms-(1) General requirements. The pro40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

gram shall demonstrate that a non-registration-based enforcement program is 

currently more effective than registration-denial enforcement in enhanced II 

M programs or, prospectively, as effective as registration denial in basic programs. The following general requirements shall apply: 

(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; 

(ii) The State shall assess the alternative program's effectiveness, as well 

as the current effectiveness of the registration system, including the following: 

(A) Determine the number and percentage of vehicles subject to the IJM 

program that were in compliance with 

the program over the course of at least 

one test cycle; and 

(B) Determine the number and fraction of the same group of vehicles as in 

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A) of this section 

that were in compliance with the registration requirement over the same 

period. Late registration shall not be 

considered non-compliance for the purposes of this determination. The precise definition of late registration 

versus a non-complying vehicle shall 

be explained and justified in the SIP; 

(iii) An alternative mechanism shall 

be considered more effective if the fraction of vehicles complying with the existing program, as determined according to the requirements of this section, 

is greater than the fraction of vehicles 

complying with the registration requirement. An alternative mechanism 

is as effective if the fraction complying 

with the program is at least equal to 

the fraction complying with the registration requirement. 

(2) Sticker-based enforcement. In addition to the general requirements, a 

sticker-based enforcement program 

332 
Environmental Protection Agency 

shall demonstrate that the enforcement mechanism will swiftly and effectively prevent operation of subject ve- hicles that fail to comply. Such demonstration shall include the following: 

(i) An assessment of the current ex- tent of the following forms of non-com- pliance and demonstration that mechanisms exist to keep such non-compli- ance within acceptable limits: 

(A) Use of stolen, counterfeit, or 

fraudulently obtained stickers; 

(B) In States with safety inspections, 

the use of " Safety Inspection Only" 

stickers on vehicles that should be subject to the liM requirement as well; and 

(C) Operation of vehicles with expired 

stickers, including a stratification of 

non-compliance by length of non- compliance and model year. 

(ii) The program as currently implemented or as proposed to be improved 

shall also: 

(A) Require an easily observed external identifier such as the county name on the license plate, an obviously 

unique license plate tab, or other means that shows whether or not a ve- hicle is subject to the IJM requirement; 

(B) Require an easily observed external identifier, such as a windshield 

sticker or license plate tab that shows 

whether a subject vehicle is in compli- ance with the inspection requirement; 

(C) Impose monetary fines at least as great as the estimated cost of compli- ance with IJM requirements (e.g., test 

fee plus minimum waiver expenditure) 

for the absence of such identifiers; 

(D) Require that such identifiers be 

of a quality that makes them difficult 

to counterfeit, difficult to remove without destroying once installed, and 

durable enough to last until the next 

inspection without fading, peeling, or other deterioration; 

(E) Perform surveys in a variety of 

locations and at different times for the 

presence of the required identifiers 

such that at least 10% of the vehicles or 10,000 vehicles (whichever is less) in 

the subject vehicle population are sam- pled each year; 

(F) Track missing identifiers for all 

inspections performed at each station, 

with stations being held accountable 

for all such identifiers they are issued; 

and 

§51.361 

(G) Assess and collect significant 

fines for each identifier that is unac- counted for by a station. 

(3) Computer matching. In addition to 

the general requirements, computermatching programs shall demonstrate 

that the enforcement mechanism will 

swiftly and effectively prevent operation of subject vehicles that fail to 

comply. Such demonstration shall: 

(i) Require an expeditious system 

that results in at least 90% of the subject vehicles in compliance within 4 

months of the compliance deadline; 

(ii) Require that subject vehicles be 

given compliance deadlines based on the regularly scheduled test date, not 

the date of previous compliance; 

(iii) Require that motorists pay mon- etary fines at least as great as the estimated cost of compliance with IJM re- quirements (e.g., test fee plus minimum waiver expenditure) for the con- tinued operation of a noncomplying ve- hicle beyond 4 months of the deadline; 

(iv) Require that continued non-com- pliance will eventually result in preventing operation of the non-com- plying vehicle (no later than the date 

of the next test cycle) through, at a minimum, suspension of vehicle registration and subsequent denial of re- registration; 

(v) Demonstrate that the computer 

system currently in use is adequate to 

store and manipulate the IJM vehicle 

database, generate computerized no- tices, and provide regular backup to 

said system while maintaining auxiliary storage devices to insure ongoing 

operation of the system and prevent 

data losses; 

(vi) Track each vehicle through the 

steps taken to ensure compliance, including: 

(A) The compliance deadline; 

(B) The date of initial notification; 

(C) The dates warning letters are sent to non-complying vehicle owners; 

(D) The dates notices of violation or other penalty notices are sent; and 

(E) The dates and outcomes of other 

steps in the process, including the final 

compliance date; 

(vii) Compile and report monthly 

summaries including statistics on the 

percentage of vehicles at each stage in 

the enforcement process; and 

333 
§51.362 

(viii) Track the number and percentage of vehicles initially identified as requiring testing but which are never tested as a result of being junked, sold 

to a motorist in a non-IIM program 

area, or for some other reason. (c) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall 

provide information concerning the enforcement process, including: (i) A description of the existing compliance mechanism if it is to be used in 

the future and the demonstration that 

it is as effective or more effective than 

registration-denial enforcement; 

(ii) An identification of the agencies 

responsible for performing each of the 

applicable activities in this section; 

(iii) A description of and accounting 

for all classes of exempt vehicles; and 

(iv) A description of the plan for testing fleet vehicles, rental car fleets, 

leased vehicles, and any other subject 

vehicles, e.g. , those operated in (but 

not necessarily registered in) the program area. (2) The SIP shall include a determination of the current compliance 

rate based on a study of the system 

that includes an estimate of compli- ance losses due to loopholes, counterfeiting, and unregistered vehicles. Estimates of the effect of closing such 

loopholes and otherwise improving the 

enforcement mechanism shall be supported with detailed analyses. 

(3) The SIP shall include the legal authority to implement and enforce the 

program. 

(4) The SIP shall include a commitment to an enforcement level to be 

used for modeling purposes and to be 

maintained, at a minimum, in practice. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 

FR 49682, Sept. 23, 1996] 

§ 51.362 Motorist compliance enforcement program oversight. 

The enforcement program shall be 

audited regularly and shall follow effective program management practices, including adjustments to improve operation when necessary. 

(a) Quality assurance and quality control. A quality assurance program shall 

be implemented to insure effective 

overall performance of the enforcement 

system. Quality control procedures are 

required to instruct individuals in the 

enforcement process regarding how to 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

properly conduct their activities. At a 

minimum, the quality control and 

quality assurance program shall include: 

(1) Verification of exempt vehicle 

status by inspecting and confirming 

such vehicles by the program or its delegate; 

(2) Facilitation of accurate critical 

test data and vehicle identifier collection through the use of automatic data 

capture systems such as bar-code scanners or optical character readers, or through redundant data entry (where 

applicable); 

(3) Maintenance of an audit trail to 

allow for the assessment of enforcement effectiveness; 

(4) Establishment of written procedures for personnel directly engaged in 

IIM enforcement activities; 

(5) Establishment of written procedures for personnel engaged in IIM document handling and processing, such as 

registration clerks or personnel involved in sticker dispensing and waiver 

processing, as well as written proce- dures for the auditing of their perform- ance; 

(6) Follow-up validity checks on outof-area or exemption-triggering registration changes; 

(7) Analysis of registration-change 

applications to target potential violators; 

(8) A determination of enforcement 

program effectiveness through periodic 

audits of test records and program 

compliance documentation; 

(9) Enforcement procedures for disciplining, retraining, or removing enforcement personnel who deviate from 

established requirements, or in the case of non-government entities that 

process registrations, for 

defranchising, revoking or otherwise 

discontinuing the activity of the entity 

issuing registrations; and 

(10) The prevention of fraudulent procurement or use of inspection documents by controlling and tracking document distribution and handling, and 

making stations financially liable for 

missing or unaccounted for documents 

by assessing monetary fines reflecting 

the "street value" of these documents 

(i.e., the test fee plus the minimum 

waiver expenditure). 

334 
Environmental Protection Agency 

(b) Information management. In establishing an information base to be used 

in characterizing, evaluating, and en- forcing the program, the State shall: 

(1) Determine the subject vehicle 

population; 

(2) Permit EPA audits of the enforcement process; 

(3) Assure the accuracy of registration and other program document files; 

(4) Maintain and ensure the accuracy 

of the testing database through periodic internal and/or third-party review; 

(5) Compare the testing database to 

the registration database to determine 

program effectiveness, establish com- pliance rates, and to trigger potential 

enforcement action against non-com- plying motorists; and 

(6) Sample the fleet as a determination of compliance through parking lot 

surveys, road-side pull-overs, or other 

in-use vehicle measurements. 

(c) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of enforcement program oversight and information man- agement activities. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 

FR 45534, July 24, 2000] 

§ 51.363 Quality assurance. 

An ongoing quality assurance program shall be implemented to discover, 

correct and prevent fraud, waste, and 

abuse and to determine whether procedures are being followed, are adequate, 

whether equipment is measuring accu- rately, and whether other problems 

might exist which would impede program performance. The quality assur- ance and quality control procedures 

shall be periodically evaluated to as- sess their effectiveness and relevance 

in achieving program goals. 

(a) Performance audits. Performance 

audits shall be conducted on a regular 

basis to determine whether inspectors are correctly performing all tests and 

other required functions. Performance 

audits shall be of two types: overt and covert, and shall include: 

(1) Performance audits based upon 

written procedures and results shall be 

reported using either electronic or written forms to be retained in the inspector and station history files, with 

sufficient detail to support either an administrative or civil hearing; 

§51.363 

(2) Performance audits in addition to 

regularly programmed audits for stations employing inspectors suspected 

of violating regulations as a result of 

audits, data analysis, or consumer complaints; 

(3) Overt performance audits shall be 

performed at least twice per year for 

each lane or test bay and shall include: 

(i) A check for the observance of appropriate document security; 

(ii) A check to see that required 

record keeping practices are being fol- lowed; 

(iii) A check for licenses or certificates and other required display information; and 

(iv) Observation and written evaluation of each inspector's ability to properly perform an inspection; 

(4) Covert performance audits shall 

include: 

(i) Remote visual observation of inspector performance, which may in- clude the use of aids such as binoculars or video cameras, at least once per 

year per inspector in high-volume stations (i.e., those performing more than 

4000 tests per year); 

(ii) Site visits at least once per year 

per number of inspectors using covert 

vehicles set to fail (this requirement 

sets a minimum level of activity, not a requirement that each inspector be involved in a covert audit); 

(iii) For stations that conduct both 

testing and repairs, at least one covert 

vehicle visit per station per year including the purchase of repairs and 

subsequent retesting if the vehicle is initially failed for tailpipe emissions 

(this activity may be accomplished in 

conjunction with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of 

this section but must involve each station at least once per year); 

(iv) Documentation of the audit, including vehicle condition and prepara- tion, sufficient for building a legal case and establishing a performance record; 

(v) Covert vehicles covering the 

range of vehicle technology groups 

(e.g., carbureted and fuel-injected vehi- cles) included in the program, including a full range of introduced malfunc- tions covering the emission test, the 

evaporative system tests, and emission 

control component checks (as applica- ble); 

335 
§51.364 

(vi) Sufficient numbers of covert vehicles and auditors to a llow for frequent rotation of both to prevent detection by station personnel; and 

(vii) Where applicable, access to online inspection databases by State personnel to permit the creation and 

maintenance of covert vehicle records. 

(b) Record audits. Station and inspector records shall be reviewed or screened at least monthly to assess station performance and identify problems that may indicate potential fraud or incompetence. Such review shall include: 

(1) Automated record analysis to 

identify statistical inconsistencies, unusual patterns, and other discrepancies; 

(2) Visits to inspection stations toreview records not already covered in the 

electronic analysis (if any); and 

(3) Comprehensive accounting for all 

official forms that can be used to demonstrate compliance with the program. 

(c) Equipment audits. During overt 

site visits, auditors shall conduct qual- ity control evaluations of the required 

test equipment, including (where applicable): 

(1) A gas audit using gases of known 

concentrations at least as accurate as those required for regular equipment 

quality control and comparing these 

concentrations to actual readings; 

(2) A check for tampering, worn instrumentation, blocked filters, and 

other conditions that would impede ac- curate sampling; 

(3) A check for critical flow in critical now CVS units; 

(4) A check of the Constant Volume 

Sampler now calibration; 

(5) A check for the optimization of 

the Flame Ionization Detection fuel-air 

ratio using methane; 

(6) A leak check; 

(7) A check to determine that station 

gas bottles used for calibration purposes are properly labelled and within 

the relevant tolerances; 

(8) Functional dynamometer checks 

addressing coast-down, roll speed and 

roll distance, inertia weight selection, 

and power absorption; 

(9) A check of the system's ability to 

accurately detect background pollutant concentrations; 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

(10) A check of the pressure monitoring devices used to perform the 

evaporative canister pressure test(s); 

and 

(11) A check of the purge flow metering system. 

(d) Auditor training and proficiency. (1) 

Auditors shall be formally trained and 

knowledgeable in: 

(i) The use of test equipment and/or 

procedures; 

(ii) Program rules and regulations; 

(iii) The basics of air pollution con- trol; 

(iv) Basic principles of motor vehicle 

engine repair, related to emission performance; 

(v) Emission control systems; 

(vi) Evidence gathering; 

(vii) State administrative procedures 

laws; 

(viii) Quality assurance practices; 

and 

(ix) Covert audit procedures. 

(2) Auditors shall themselves be au- dited at least once annually. 

(3) The training and knowledge re- quirements in paragraph (d)(1) of this 

section may be waived for temporary 

auditors engaged solely for the purpose 

of conducting covert vehicle runs. 

(e) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the quality assurance program, and written procedures manuals covering both overt and 

covert performance audits, record audits, and equipment audits. This re- quirement does not include materials 

or discussion of details of enforcement 

strategies that would ultimately hamper the enforcement process. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 

FR 45534, July 24, 2000) 

§ 51.364 Enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors. 

Enforcement against licensed stations or contractors, and inspectors 

shall include swift, sure, effective, and 

consistent penalties for violation of 

program requirements. 

(a) Imposition of penalties. A penalty 

schedule shall be developed that establishes minimum penal ties for violations of program rules and procedures. 

(1) The schedule shall categorize and 

list violations and the minimum penalties to be imposed for first, second, 

336 
Environmental Protection Agency 

and subsequent violations and for multiple violation of different requirements. In the case of contracted systems, the State may use compensation 

retainage in lieu of penalties. 

(2) Substantial penalties or retainage 

shall be imposed on the first offense for 

violations that directly affect emission 

reduction benefits. At a minimum, in 

test-and-repair programs inspector and 

station license suspension shall be imposed for at least 6 months whenever a vehicle is intentionally improperly 

passed for any required portion of the 

test. In test-only programs, inspectors 

shall be removed from inspector duty 

for at least 6 months (or a retainage 

penalty equivalent to the inspector's 

salary for that period shall be imposed). 

(3) All findings of serious violations 

of rules or procedural requirements 

shall result in mandatory fines or retainage. In the case of gross neglect, a first offense shall result in a fine or retainage of no less than $100 or 5 times 

the inspection fee, whichever is greater, for the contractor or the licensed 

station, and the inspector if involved. 

(4) Any finding of inspector incompetence shall result in mandatory 

training before inspection privileges 

are restored. 

(5) License or certificate suspension or revocation shall mean the individual 

is barred from direct or indirect involvement in any inspection operation 

during the term of the suspension or 

revocation. 

(b) Legal authority. (1) The quality as- surance officer shall have the authority to temporarily suspend station and 

inspector licenses or certificates (after 

approval of a superior) immediately 

upon finding a violation or equipment 

failure that directly affects emission 

reduction benefits, pending a hearing 

when requested. In the case of immediate suspension, a hearing shall be 

held within fourteen calendar days of a written request by the station licensee or the inspector. Failure to hold a hearing within 14 days when requested 

shall cause the suspension to lapse. In 

the event that a State's constitution 

precludes such a temporary license sus- pension, the enforcement system shall 

be designed with adequate resources and mechanisms to hold a hearing to 

§51.364 

suspend or revoke the station or inspector license within three station 

business days of the finding. 

(2) The oversight agency shall have 

the authority to impose penalties 

against the licensed station or con- tractor, as well as the inspector, even if the licensee or contractor had no direct knowledge of the violation but was found to be careless in oversight of inspectors or has a history of violations. 

Contractors and licensees shall be held 

fully responsible for inspector perform- ance in the course of duty. 

(c) Recordkeeping. The oversight 

agency shall maintain records of all 

warnings, civil fines, suspensions, rev- ocations, and violations and shall com- pile statistics on violations and pen- alties on an annual basis. 

(d) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall 

include the penalty schedule and the 

legal authority for establishing and imposing penalties, civil fines, license 

suspension, and revocations. 

(2) In the case of State constitutional 

impediments to immediate suspension 

authority, the State Attorney General 

shall furnish an official opinion for the 

SIP explaining the constitutional impediment as well as relevant case law. 

(3) The SIP shall describe the administrative and judicial procedures and 

responsibilities relevant to the enforcement process, including which agencies, courts, and jurisdictions are involved; who will prosecute and adjudicate cases; and other aspects of the 

enforcement of the program requirements, the resources to be allocated to 

this function, and the source of those 

funds. In States without immediate 

suspension authority, the SIP shall 

demonstrate that sufficient resources, personnel, and systems are in place to 

meet the three day case management 

requirement for violations that directly affect emission reductions. 

(e) Alternative quality assurance procedures or frequencies that achieve 

equivalent or better results may be approved by the Administrator. Statistical process control shall be used 

whenever possible to demonstrate the 

efficacy of alternatives. 

(f) Areas that qualify for and choose 

to implement an OTR low enhanced liM 

program, as established in § 51.351(h), 

337 
§51.365 

and that claim in their SIP less emission reduction credit than the basic 

performance standard for one or more 

pollutants, are not required to meet 

the oversight specifications of this sec- tion. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 

FR 39037, July 25, 1996] 

§ 51.365 Data collection. 

Accurate data collection is essential 

to the management, evaluation, and 

enforcement of an IJM program. The 

program shall gather test data on individual vehicles, as well as quality control data on test equipment (with the 

exception of test procedures for which 

either no testing equipment is required 

or those test procedures relying upon a vehicle 's OBD system). 

(a) Test data . The goal of gathering 

test data is to unambiguously link specific test results to a specific vehicle, II 

M program registrant, test site, and inspector, and to determine whether or 

not the correct testing parameters were observed for the specific vehicle 

in question. In turn, these data can be 

used to distinguish complying and noncomplying vehicles as a result of analyzing the data collected and com- paring it to the registration database, 

to screen inspection stations and inspectors for investigation as to possible 

irregularities, and to help establish the 

overall effectiveness of the program. At a minimum, the program shall collect the following with respect to each 

test conducted: 

(1) Test record number; 

(2) Inspection station and inspector 

numbers; 

(3) Test system number (where applicable); 

(4) Date of the test; 

(5) Emission test start time and the 

time final emission scores are determined; 

(6) Vehicle Identification Number; 

(7) License plate number; 

(8) Test certificate number; 

(9) Gross Vehicle Weight Rating 

(GVWR); 

(10) Vehicle model year, make , and 

type; 

(11) Number of cylinders or engine 

displacement; 

(12) Transmission type; 

(13) Odometer reading; 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

(14) Category of test performed (i.e. 

initial test, first retest, or subsequent 

retest); 

(15) Fuel type of the vehicle (i.e., gas, 

diesel, or other fuel); 

(16) Type of vehicle preconditioning 

performed (if any); 

(17) Emission test sequence(s) used; 

(18) Hydrocarbon emission scores and 

standards for each applicable test 

mode; 

(19) Carbon monoxide emission scores 

and standards for each applicable test 

mode; 

(20) Carbon dioxide emission scores 

(CO+C02) and standards for each applicable test mode; 

(21) Nitrogen oxides emission scores 

and standards for each applicable test 

mode; 

(22) Results (Pass/Fail/Not Applicable) of the applicable visual inspections 

for the catalytic converter, air system, 

gas cap, evaporative system, positive 

crankcase ventilation (PCV) valve fuel 

inlet restrictor, and any other visual 

inspection for which emission reduction credit is claimed; 

(23) Results of the evaporative system pressure test(s) expressed as a pass or fail; 

(24) Results of the evaporative system purge test expressed as a pass or 

fail along with the total purge flow in 

liters achieved during the test (where 

applicable); and 

(25) Results of the on-board diagnostic check expressed as a pass or fail 

along with the diagnostic trouble codes 

revealed (where applicable). 

(b) Quality control data. At a minimum, the program shall gather andreport the results of the quality control 

checks required under § 51.359 of this 

subpart, identifying each check by station number, system number, date, and 

start time. The data report shall also 

contain the concentration values of the 

calibration gases used to perform the 

gas characterization portion of the 

quality control checks (where applicable). 

[ 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 

FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 65 FR 45534 July 24 

2000] • . 

§ 51.366 Data analysis and reporting. 

Data analysis and reporting are re- quired to allow for monitoring and 

338 
Environmental Protection Agency 

evaluation of the program by program 

management and EPA, and shall provide information regarding the types of 

program activities performed and their 

final outcomes, including summary 

statistics and effectiveness evaluations 

of the enforcement mechanism, the 

quality assurance system, the quality 

control program, and the testing element. Initial submission of the following annual reports shall commence 

within 18 months of initial implementation of the program as required by 

§51.373 of this subpart. The biennial report shall commence within 30 months 

of initial implementation of the program as required by § 51.373 of this subpart. 

(a) Test data report. The program 

shall submit to EPA by July of each 

year a report providing basic statistics on the testing program for January 

through December of the previous year, 

including: 

(1) The number of vehicles tested by 

model year and vehicle type; 

(2) By model year and vehicle type, 

the number and percentage of vehicles: 

(i) Failing initially, per test type; 

(ii) Failing the first retest per test 

type; 

(iii) Passing the first retest per test 

type; 

(iv) Initially failed vehicles passing 

the second or subsequent retest per 

test type; 

(v) Initially failed vehicles receiving 

a waiver; and 

(vi) Vehicles with no known final 

outcome (regardless of reason). 

(vii}-(x) [Reserved] 

(xi) Passing the on-board diagnostic 

check; 

(xii) Failing the on-board diagnostic 

check; 

(xiii) Failing the on-board diagnostic 

check and passing the tailpipe test (if 

applicable); 

(xiv) Failing the on-board diagnostic 

check and failing the tailpipe test (if 

applicable); 

(xv) Passing the on-board diagnostic 

check and failing the liM gas cap evaporative system test (if applicable); 

(xvi) Failing the on-board diagnostic 

check and passing the liM gas cap evaporative system test (if applicable); 

§51.366 

(xvii) Passing both the on-board diagnostic check and liM gas cap evaporative system test (if applicable); 

(xviii) Failing both the on-board diagnostic check and liM gas cap evaporative system test (if applicable); 

(xix) MIL is commanded on and no codes are stored; 

(xx) MIL is not commanded on and 

codes are stored; 

(xxi) MIL is commanded on and codes are stored; 

(xxii) MIL is not commanded on and 

codes are not stored; 

(xxiii) Readiness status indicates 

that the evaluation is not complete for 

any module supported by on-board diagnostic systems; 

(3) The initial test volume by model 

year and test station; 

(4) The initial test failure rate by 

model year and test station; and 

(5) The average increase or decrease 

in tailpipe emission levels for HC, CO, 

and NOx (if applicable) after repairs by 

model year and vehicle type for vehicles receiving a mass emissions test. 

(b) Quality assurance report. The program shall submit to EPA by July of 

each year a report providing basic statistics on the quality assurance program for January through December of 

the previous year, including: 

(1) The number of inspection stations 

and lanes: 

(i) Operating throughout the year; 

and 

(ii) Operating for only part of the 

year; 

(2) The number of inspection stations 

and lanes operating throughout the 

year: 

(i) Receiving overt performance au- dits in the year; 

(ii) Not receiving overt performance 

audits in the year; 

(iii) Receiving covert performance 

audits in the year; 

(iv) Not receiving covert performance 

audits in the year; and 

(v) That have been shut down as are- sult of overt performance audits; 

(3) The number of covert audits: 

(i) Conducted with the vehicle set to 

fail per test type; 

(ii) Conducted with the vehicle set to 

fail any combination of two or more test types; 

339 
§51.366 

(iii) Resulting in a false pass per test 

type; 

(iv) Resulting in a false pass for any 

combination of two or more test types; 

(v}-(viii) [Reserved] 

(4) The n umber of inspectors and stations: 

(i) That were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from testing as a re- sult of covert audits; 

(ii) That were suspended, fired, or 

otherwise prohibited from testing for 

other causes; and 

(iii) That received fines; 

(5) The number of inspectors licensed or certified to conduct testing; 

(6) The number of hearings: 

(i) Held to consider adverse actions 

against inspectors and stations; and 

(ii) Resulting in adverse actions 

against inspectors and stations; 

(7) The total amount collected in 

fines from inspectors and stations by 

type of violation; 

(8) The total number of covert vehicles available for undercover audits over the year; and 

(9) The number of covert auditors 

available for undercover audits. 

(c) Quality control report. The program shall submit to EPA by July of 

each year a report providing basic statistics on the quality control program 

for January through December of the 

previous year, including: 

(1) The number of emission testing 

sites and lanes in use in the program; 

(2) The number of equipment audits 

by station and lane; 

(3) The number and percentage of stations that have failed equipment au- dits; and 

(4) Number and percentage of stations and lanes shut down as a result of 

equipment audits. 

(d) Enforcement report. (1) All varieties of enforcement programs shall, at a minimum, submit to EPA by July of 

each year a report providing basic statistics on the enforcement program for 

January through December of the previous year, including: 

(i) An estimate of the number of vehicles subject to the inspection program, including the results of an analysis of the registration data base; 

(ii) The percentage of motorist com- pliance based upon a comparison of the 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

number of valid final tests with the 

number of subject vehicles; 

(iii) The total number of compliance 

documents issued to inspection stations; 

(iv) The number of missing compliance documents; 

(v) The number of time extensions 

and other exemptions granted to mo- torists; and 

(vi) The number of compliance surveys conducted, number of vehicles 

surveyed in each, and the compliance 

rates found. 

(2) Registration denial based enforcement programs shall provide the following additional information: 

(i) A report of the program's efforts 

and actions to prevent motorists from 

falsely registering vehicles out of the 

program area or falsely changing fuel 

type or weight class on the vehicle registration, and the results of special 

studies to investigate the frequency of 

such activity; and 

(ii) The number of registration file 

audits, number of registrations reviewed, and compliance rates found in 

such audits. 

(3) Computer-matching based en- forcement programs shall provide the 

following additional information: 

(i) The number and percentage of 

subject vehicles that were tested by 

the initial deadline, and by other milestones in the cycle; 

(ii) A report on the program's efforts 

to detect and enforce against motorists 

falsely changing vehicle classifications 

to circumvent program requirements, 

and the frequency of this type of activity; and 

(iii) The number of enforcement system audits, and the error rate found 

during those audits. 

(4) Sticker-based enforcement systems shall provide the following additional information: 

(i) A report on the program's efforts 

to prevent, detect, and enforce against 

sticker theft and counterfeiting, and 

the frequency of this type of activity; 

(ii) A report on the program's efforts 

to detect and enforce against motorists 

falsely changing vehicle classifications 

to circumvent program requirements, 

and the frequency of this type of activity; and 

340 
Environmental Protection Agency 

(iii) The number of parking lot sticker audits conducted, the number of ve- hicles surveyed in each, and the noncompliance rate found during those audits. 

(e) Additional reporting requirements . 

In addition to the annual reports in 

paragraphs (a) through (d) of this sec- tion, programs shall submit to EPA by 

July of every other year, biennial reports addressing: 

(1) Any changes made in program design, funding, personnel levels, procedures, regulations, and legal authority, with detailed discussion and evaluation 

of the impact on the program of all 

such changes; and 

(2) Any weaknesses or problems identified in the program within the twoyear reporting period, what steps have 

already been taken to correct those 

problems, the results of those steps, 

and any future efforts planned. (f) SIP requirements . The SIP shall describe the types of data to be collected. 

[ 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992. as amended at 61 

FR 40945. Aug. 6, 1996; 65 FR 45534, July 24, 

2000; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5, 2001) 

§ 51.367 Inspector training and licens- ing or certification. 

All inspectors shall receive formal 

training and be licensed or certified to 

perform inspections. 

(a) Training. (1) Inspector training 

shall impart knowledge of the following: 

(i) The air pollution problem, its causes and effects; 

(ii) The purpose, function, and goal of 

the inspection program; 

(iii) Inspection regulations and procedures; 

(iv) Technical details of the test procedures and the rationale for their design; 

(v) Emission control device function, 

configuration, and inspection; 

(vi) Test equipment operation, calibration, and maintenance (with the ex- ception of test procedures which either 

do not require the use of special equipment or which rely upon a vehicle's 

OBD system); 

(vii) Quality control procedures and 

their purpose; 

(viii) Public relations; and 

(ix) Safety and health issues related 

to the inspection process. 

§51.368 

(2) If inspector training is not administered by the program, the responsible 

State agency shall monitor and evalu- ate the training program delivery. (3) In order to complete the training 

requirement, a trainee shall pass (i.e .. a 

minimum of 80% of correct responses or lower if an occupational analysis 

justifies it) a written test covering all 

aspects of the training. In addition, a hands-on test shall be administered in 

which the trainee demonstrates without assistance the ability to conduct a proper inspection and to follow other 

required procedures. Inability to properly conduct all test procedures shall 

constitute failure of the test. The program shall take appropriate steps to 

insure the security and integrity of the 

testing process. 

(b) Licensing and certification. (1) All 

inspectors shall be either licensed by 

the program (in the case of test-and-repair systems that do not use contracts 

with stations) or certified by an orga- nization other than the employer (in 

test-only programs and test-and-repair 

programs that require station owners 

to enter into contracts with the State) 

in order to perform official inspections. 

(2) Completion of inspector training 

and passing required tests shall be a 

condition of licensing or certification. 

(3) Inspector licenses and certificates 

shall be valid for no more than 2 years, 

at which point refresher training and 

testing shall be required prior to re- newal. Alternative approaches based on 

more comprehensive skill examination 

and determination of inspector com- petency may be used. 

(4) Licenses or certificates shall not 

be considered a legal right but rather a privilege bestowed by the program conditional upon adherence to program re- quirements. (c) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the training program, the written and hands-on tests, 

and the licensing or certification proc- ess. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5. 1992, as amended at 65 

FR 45534 , July 24, 2000) 

§ 51.368 Public information and con· sumer pr otection. 

(a) Public awareness. The SIP shall include a plan for informing the public on an ongoing basis throughout the life 

341 
§51.369 

of the IIM program of 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 in 

a low-emission condition, how to find a 

qualified repair technician, and the re- quirements of the IIM program. Motorists that fail the l!M test in enhanced II 

M areas shall be offered a list of repair 

facilities in the area and information 

on the results of repairs performed by 

repair facilities in the area, as described in § 51.369(b)(l) of this subpart. Motorists that fail the l!M test shall 

also be provided with information concerning the possible cause(s) for failing 

the particular portions of the test that 

were failed . 

(b) Consumer protection. The oversight 

agency shall institute procedures and 

mechanisms to protect the public from 

fraud and abuse by inspectors, mechanics, and others involved in the l!M program. This shall include a challenge 

mechanism by which a vehicle owner 

can contest the results of an inspection. It shall include mechanisms for 

protecting whistle blowers and following up on complaints by the public or others involved in the process. It 

shall include a program to assist own- ers in obtaining warranty covered repairs for eligible vehicles that fail a 

test. The SIP shall include a detailed consumer protection plan. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 

FR 45534, July 24, 2000] 

§ 51.369 Improving repair effective- ness. 

Effective repairs are the key to 

achieving program goals and the State 

shall take steps to ensure the capability exists in the repair industry to 

repair vehicles that fail l!M tests. 

(a) Technical assistance. The oversight 

agency shall provide the repair industry with information and assistance related to vehicle inspection diagnosis 

and repair. 

(1) The agency shall regularly inform 

repair facilities of changes in the inspection program, training course schedules, common problems being 

found with particular engine families, 

diagnostic tips and the like. 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

(2) The agency shall provide a hot 

line service to assist repair technicians 

with specific repair problems, answer 

technical questions that arise in the 

repair process, and answer questions 

related to the legal requirements of 

State and Federal law with regard to 

emission control device tampering, en- gine switching, or similar issues. 

(b) Performance monitoring. (1) In en- hanced I/M program areas, the oversight agency shall monitor the performance of individual motor vehicle 

repair facilities, and provide to the 

public at the time of initial failure , a 

summary of the performance of local 

repair facilities that have repaired vehicles for retest. Performance monitoring shall include statistics on the 

number of vehicles submitted for a retest after repair by the repair facility, the percentage passing on first 

retest, the percentage requiring more 

than one repair/retest trip before passing, and the percentage receiving a 

waiver. Programs may provide motorists with alternative statistics that 

convey similar information on the relative ability of repair facilities in providing effective and convenient repair, 

in light of the age and other characteristics of vehicles presented for repair 

at each facility. 

(2) Programs shall provide feedback, including statistical and qualitative 

information to individual repair facilities on a regular basis (at least annu- ally) regarding their success in repairing failed vehicles. 

(3) A prerequisite for a retest shall be 

a completed repair form that indicates 

which repairs were performed, as well 

as any technician recommended repairs 

that were not performed, and identification of the facility that performed 

the repairs. (c) Repair technician training. The 

State shall assess the availability of 

adequate repair technician training in 

the IIM area and, if the types of training described in paragraphs (c)(l) 

through (4) of this section are not currently available, shall insure that 

training is made available to all inter- ested individuals in the community ei- ther through private or public facilities. This may involve working with 

local community colleges or vocational 

schools to add curricula to existing 

342 
Environmental Protection Agency 

programs or start new programs or it 

might involve attracting private training providers to offer classes in the area. The training available shall include: 

(1) Diagnosis and repair of malfunctions in computer controlled, closeloop vehicles; 

(2) The application of emission con- trol theory and diagnostic data to the 

diagnosis and repair of failures on the 

transient emission test and the evaporative system functional checks (where 

applicable); 

(3) Utilization of diagnostic information on systematic or repeated failures 

observed in the transient emission test 

and the evaporative system functional 

checks (where applicable); and 

(4) General training on the various 

subsystems related to engine emission 

control. 

(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the technical assistance program to be implemented, a description of the procedures and criteria to be used in meeting the performance monitoring requirements of 

this section, and a description of the 

repair technician training resources 

available in the community. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 

FR 45535, July 24, 2000] 

§ 51.370 Compliance with recall no· tices. 

States shall establish methods to ensure that vehicles subject to enhanced 

I/M and that are included in either a "Voluntary Emissions Recall" as defined at 40 CFR 85.1902(d), or in a remedial plan determination made pursuant 

to section 207(c) of the Act, receive the 

required repairs. States shall require 

that owners of recalled vehicles have 

the necessary recall repairs completed, 

either in order to complete an annual or biennial inspection process or to obtain vehicle registration renewal. All 

recalls for which owner notification oc- curs after January 1, 1995 shall be included in the enhanced I/M recall re- quirement. 

(a) General requirements. (1) The State 

shall have an electronic means to identify recalled vehicles based on lists of 

VINs with unresolved recalls made 

available by EPA, the vehicle manufacturers, or a third party supplier ap-

§51.370 

proved by the Administrator. The 

State shall update its list of unresolved 

recalls on a quarterly basis at a minimum. 

(2) The State shall require owners or lessees of vehicles with unresolved recalls to show proof of compliance with 

recall notices in order to complete either the inspection or registration 

cycle. 

(3) Compliance shall be required on 

the next registration or inspection 

date, allowing a reasonable period to 

comply, after notification of recall was received by the State. 

(b) Enforcement. (1) A vehicle shall either fail inspection or be denied vehicle 

registration if the required recall repairs have not been completed. 

(2) In the case of vehicles obtaining 

recall repairs but remaining on the updated list provided in paragraph (a)(1) 

of this section, the State shall have a 

means of verifying completion of the 

required repairs; electronic records or 

paper receipts provided by the authorized repair facility shall be required. The vehicle inspection or registration 

record shall be modified to include (or 

be supplemented with other VIN-linked 

records which include) the recall cam- paign number(s) and the date(s) repairs 

were performed. Documentation 

verifying required repairs shall include 

the following: 

(i) The VIN, make, and model year of 

the vehicle; and 

(ii) The recall campaign number and 

the date repairs were completed. 

(c) Reporting requirements. The State 

shall submit to EPA, by July of each 

year for the previous calendar year, an 

annual report providing the following 

information: 

(1) The number of vehicles in the I/M 

area initially listed as having unre- solved recalls, segregated by recall 

campaign number; 

(2) The number of recalled vehicles 

brought into compliance by owners; 

(3) The number of listed vehicles with 

unresolved recalls that, as of the end of 

the calendar year, were not yet due for 

inspection or registration; 

(4) The number of recalled vehicles 

still in non-compliance that have either failed inspection or been denied 

registration on the basis of non-compli- ance with recall; and 

343 
§51.371 

(5) The number of recalled vehicles 

that are otherwise not in compliance. 

(d) SIP submittals. The SIP shall describe the procedures used to incorporate the vehicle lists provided in 

paragraph (a)(1) of this section into the 

inspection or registration database, the 

quality control methods used to insure 

that recall repairs are properly documented and tracked, and the method 

(inspection failure or registration denial) used to enforce the recall requirements. 

§ 51.371 On-road testing. 

On-road testing is defined as testing 

of vehicles for conditions impacting 

the emission of HC, CO, NOx and/or C02 

emissions on any road or roadside in 

the nonattainment area or the liM program area. On-road testing is required 

in enhanced liM areas and is an option 

for basic liM areas. (a) General requirements. (1) On-road 

testing is to be part of the emission 

testing system, but is to be a complement to testing otherwise required. 

(2) On-road testing is not required in 

every season or on every vehicle but 

shall evaluate the emission perform- ance of 0.5% of the subject fleet statewide or 20,000 vehicles, whichever is 

less, per inspection cycle. 

(3) The on-road testing program shall 

provide information about the perform- ance of in-use vehicles, by measuring 

on-road emissions through the use of 

remote sensing devices or by assessing 

vehicle emission performance through 

roadside pullovers including tailpipe or evaporative emission testing or a check of the onboard diagnostic (OBD) 

system for vehicles so equipped. The 

program shall collect, analyze and report on-road testing data. 

(4) Owners of vehicles that have previously been through the normal periodic inspection and passed the final 

retest and found to be high emitters 

shall be notified that the vehicles are required to pass an out-of-cycle followup inspection; notification may be by 

mailing in the case of remote sensing 

on-road testing or through immediate 

notification if roadside pullovers are 

used. (b) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall 

include a detailed description of the 

on-road testing program, including the 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

types of testing, test limits and criteria, the number of vehicles (the percentage of the fleet) to be tested, the 

number of employees to be dedicated to 

the on-road testing effort, the methods 

for collecting, analyzing, utilizing, and 

reporting the results of on-road testing 

and, the portion of the program budget 

to be dedicated to on-road testing. 

(2) The SIP shall include the legal authority necessary to implement the on- road testing program, including the authority to enforce off-cycle inspection 

and repair requirements (where applicable). (3) Emission reduction credit for on- road testing programs shall be granted 

for a program designed to obtain measurable emission reductions over and 

above those already predicted to be 

achieved by other aspects of the liM 

program. Emission reduction credit 

will only be granted to those programs 

which require out-of-cycle repairs for 

confirmed high-emitting vehicles identified under the on-road testing program. The SIP shall include technical 

support for the claimed additional 

emission reductions. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 

FR 45535, July 24, 2000] 

§ 51.372 State Implementation Plan submissions. 

(a) SIP submittals. The SIP shall address each of the elements covered in 

this subpart, including, but not limited 

to: 

(1) A schedule of implementation of 

the program including interim milestones leading to mandatory testing. 

The milestones shall include, at a minimum: 

(i) Passage of enabling statutory or other legal authority; 

(ii) Proposal of draft regulations and 

promulgation of final regulations; 

(iii) Issuance of final specifications 

and procedures; 

(iv) Issuance of final Request for Proposals (if applicable); 

(v) Licensing or certifications of stations and inspectors; 

(vi) The date mandatory testing will 

begin for each model year to be covered 

by the program; 

(vii) The date full-stringency 

cutpoints will take effect; 

(viii) All other relevant dates; 

344 
Environmental Protection Agency 

(2) An analysis of emission level targets for the program using the most 

current EPA mobile source emission 

model or an alternative approved by 

the Administrator showing that the 

program meets the performance standard described in § 51.351 or § 51.352 of 

this subpart, as applicable; 

(3) A description of the geographic 

coverage of the program. including ZIP 

codes if the program is not countywide; 

(4) A detailed discussion of each of 

·the required design elements, including 

provisions for Federal facility compliance; 

(5) Legal authority requiring or allowing implementation of the liM program and providing either broad or specific authority to perform all required 

elements of the program; 

(6) Legal authority for liM program 

operation until such time as it is no 

longer necessary (i.e .. until a Section 

175 maintenance plan without an liM 

program is approved by EPA); 

(7) Implementing regulations, interagency agreements, and memoranda of 

understanding; and 

(8) Evidence of adequate funding and resources to implement all aspects of 

the program. 

(b) Submittal schedule. The SIP shall 

be submitted to EPA according to the 

following schedule--

(1) [Reserved] 

(2) A SIP revision required as a result 

of designation for a National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard in place prior to 

implementation of the 8-hour ozone 

standard and including all necessary 

legal authority and the items specified 

in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(8) of 

this section, shall be submitted no later than November 15, 1993. For nonattainment areas designated and classified under the 8-hour ozone standard, a SIP revision including all necessary 

legal authority and the items specified 

in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(8) of 

this section, shall be submitted by May 

8, 2007 or 1 year after the effective date 

of designation and classification under 

the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard, whichever is later. (3) [Reserved] 

(c) Redesignation requests. Any nonattainment area that EPA determines 

would otherwise qualify for redesigna-

§51.372 

tion from nonattainment to attainment shall receive full approval of a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal under Sections 182(a)(2)(B) or 

182(b)(4) if the submittal contains the 

following elements: 

(1) Legal authority to implement a 

basic liM program (or enhanced if the 

State chooses to opt up) as required by 

this subpart. The legislative authority 

for an liM program shall allow the 

adoption of implementing regulations 

without requiring further legislation. 

(2) A request to place the liM plan (if 

no liM program is currently in place or 

if an liM program has been terminated,) or the liM upgrade (if the existing liM program is to continue without 

being upgraded) into the contingency 

measures portion of the maintenance 

plan upon redesignation. 

(3) A contingency measure consisting 

of a commitment by the Governor or 

the Governor's designee to adopt or 

consider adopting regulations to implement an liM program to correct a violation of the ozone or CO standard or 

other air quality problem, in accordance with the provisions of the mainte- nance plan. 

(4) A contingency commitment that 

includes an enforceable schedule for 

adoption and implementation of the II 

M program, and appropriate milestones. The schedule shall include the 

date for submission of a SIP meeting 

all of the requirements of this subpart. 

Schedule milestones shall be listed in 

months from the date EPA notifies the 

State that it is in violation of the 

ozone or CO standard or any earlier 

date specified in the State plan. Unless 

the State, in accordance with the provisions of the maintenance plan, chooses not to implement liM, it must submit a SIP revision containing an liM 

program no more than 18 months after 

notification by EPA. 

(d) Basic areas continuing operation 

of liM programs as part of their main- tenance plan without implemented upgrades shall be assumed to be 80% as 

effective as an implemented, upgraded 

version of the same liM program design, unless a State can demonstrate 

using operating information that the II 

M program is more effective than the 

80% level. 

345 
§51.373 

(e) SIP submittals to correct violations. 

SIP submissions required pursuant to a 

violation of the ambient ozone or CO 

standard (as discussed in paragraph (c) 

of this section) shall address all of the 

requirements of this subpart. The SIP 

shall demonstrate that performance 

standards in either §51.351 or §51.352 

shall be met using an evaluation date 

(rounded to the nearest January for 

carbon monoxide and July for hydrocarbons) seven years after the date 

EPA notifies the State that it is in violation of the ozone or CO standard or 

any earlier date specified in the State 

plan. Emission standards for vehicles 

subject to an IM240 test may be phased 

in during the program but full standards must be in effect for at least one 

complete test cycle before the end of 

the 5-year period. All other requirements shall take effect within 24 

months of the date EPA notifies the 

State that it is in violation of the 

ozone or CO standard or any earlier 

date specified in the State plan. The 

phase-in allowances of §51.373(c) of this 

subpart shall not apply. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 60 

FR 1738, Jan. 5, 1995; 60 FR 48036, Sept. 18, 

1995; 61 FR 40946, Aug. 6, 1996; 61 FR 44119, 

Aug. 27, 1996; 71 FR 17711, Apr. 7, 2006) 

§ 51.373 Implementation deadlines. 

liM programs shall be implemented as expeditiously as practicable. 

(a) Decentralized basic programs 

shall be fully implemented by January 

1, 1994, and centralized basic programs 

shall be fully implemented by July 1, 

1994. More implementation time may 

be approved by the Administrator if an 

enhanced IJM program is implemented. 

(b) For areas newly required to implement basic IJM as a result of designation under the 8-hour ozone standard, the required program shall be fully 

implemented no later than 4 years 

after the effective date of designation 

and classification under the 8-hour 

ozone standard. (c) All requirements related to en- hanced IJM programs shall be implemented by January 1, 1995, with the following exceptions. 

(1) Areas switching from an existing 

test-and-repair network to a test-only 

network may phase in the change between January of 1995 and January of 

40 CFR Ch. I (7-1-12 Edition) 

1996. Starting in January of 1995 at 

least 30% of the subject vehicles shall 

participate in the test-only system (in 

States with multiple IJM areas, implementation is not required in every area 

by January 1995 as long as statewide, 

30% of the subject vehicles are involved 

in testing) and shall be subject to the 

new test procedures (including the 

evaporative system checks, visual inspections, and tailpipe emission tests). 

By January 1, 1996, all applicable vehicle model years and types shall be included in the test-only system. During 

the phase-in period, all requirements of 

this subpart shall be applied to the 

test-only portion of the program; existing requirements may continue to 

apply for the test-and-repair portion of 

the program until it is phased out by 

January 1, 1996. 

(2) Areas starting new test-only programs and those with existing testonly programs may also phase in the 

new test procedures between January 

1, 1995 and January 1, 1996. Other program requirements shall be fully implemented by January 1, 1995. 

(d) For areas newly required to implement enhanced IJM as a result of 

designation under the 8-hour ozone 

standard, the required program shall be 

fully implemented no later than 4 

years after the effective date of designation and classification under the 8-

hour ozone standard. 

(e) [Reserved] 

(f) Areas that choose to implement 

an enhanced IJM program only meeting 

the requirements of § 51.351(h) shall 

fully implement the program no later 

than July 1, 1999. The availability and 

use of this late start date does not re- lieve the area of the obligation to meet 

the requirements of § 51.351(h)(ll) by 

the end of 1999. 

(g) On-Board Diagnostic checks shall 

be implemented in all basic, low enhanced and high enhanced areas as part 

of the IJM program by January 1, 2002. 

Alternatively, states may elect to 

phase-in OBD-IJM testing for one test 

cycle by using the OBD-IJM check to screen clean vehicles from tailpipe 

testing and require repair and retest 

for only those vehicles which proceed 

to fail the tailpipe test. An additional 

alternative is also available to states 

346 
Environmental Protection Agency 

with regard to the deadline for mandatory testing, repair, and retesting of 

vehicles based upon the OBD-IJM 

check. Under this third option, if a state can show good cause (and the Administrator takes notice-and-comment 

action to approve this good cause showing), up to an additional 12 

months' extension may be granted, es- tablishing an alternative start date for 

such states of no later than January 1, 

2003. States choosing to make this 

showing will also have available to 

them the phase-in approach described 

in this section, with the one-cycle time 

limit to begin coincident with the alternative start date established by Administrator approval of the showing, 

but no later than January 1, 2003. The 

showing of good cause (and its approval or disapproval) will be addressed on a 

case-by-case basis. 

(h) For areas newly required to implement either a basic or enhanced liM 

program as a result of being designated 

and classified under the 8-hour ozone standard, such programs shall begin 

OBD testing on subject OBD-equipped 

vehicles coincident with program 

start-up. 

[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 

FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 61 FR 39037, July 25, 

1996; 61 FR 40946, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 24433, 

May 4, 1998; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5, 2001; 71 FR 

17711, Apr. 7, 2006] 

APPENDIX A TO SUBPARTS OF PART 51-

CALIBRATIONS, ADJUSTMENTS AND 

QUALITY CONTROL 

(I) Steady-State Test Equipment 

States may opt to use transient emission 

test equipment for steady-state tests and follow the quality control requirements In 

paragraph (II) of this appendix Instead of the 

following requirements. 

(a) Equipment shall be calibrated In accordance with the manufacturers' Instructions. 

(b) Prior to each test- (1) Hydrocarbon hangup check . Immediately prior to each test the 

analyzer shall automatically perform a hydrocarbon hang-up check. If the HC reading, 

when the probe Is sampling ambient air, ex- ceeds 20 ppm, the system shall be purged 

with clean air or zero gas. The analyzer shall 

be inhibited from continuing the test until 

HC levels drop below 20 ppm. 

(2) Automatic zero and span. The analyzer 

shall conduct an a utomatic zero and span 

check prior to each test. The span check 

shall Include the HC, CO, and C02 channels, 

Pf. 51 , Subpt. S, App. A 

and the NO and o, channels, if present. If 

zero and/or span drift cause the signal levels to move beyond the adjustment range of the 

analyzer, It shall lock out from testing. 

(3) Low flow. The system shall lock out from testing if sample flow Is below the acceptable level as defined in paragraph 

(I)(b)(6) of appendix D to this subpart. 

(c) Leak check. A system leak check shall 

be performed within twenty-four hours before the test In low volume stations (those 

performing less than the 4,000 Inspections per 

year) and within four hours In high-volume 

stations (4,000 or more inspections per year) 

and may be performed in conjunction with 

the gas calibration described In paragraph 

(l)(d)(1) of this appendix. If a leak check Is not performed within the preceding twentyfour hours In low volume stations and within 

four hours In high-volume stations or If the analyzer falls the leak check, the analyzer 

shall lock out from testing. The leak check 

shall be a procedure demonstrated to effectively check the sample hose and probe for 

leaks and shall be performed In accordance 

with good engineering practices. An error of 

more than ±2% of the reading using low range span gas shall cause the analyzer to lock out from testing and shall require re- pair of leaks. 

(d) Gas calibration. (l) On each operating 

day In high-volume stations, analyzers shall 

a utomatically require and successfully pass a two-point gas calibration for HC, CO, and 

C02 and shall continually compensate for 

changes in barometric pressure. Calibration 

shall be checked within four hours before the test and the analyzer adjusted if the reading 

is more than 2% different from the span gas 

value. In low-volume stations, analyzers 

shall undergo a two-point calibration within 

seventy-two hours before each test, unless 

changes In barometric pressure are com- pensated for automatically and statistical 

process control demonstrates equal or better 

quality control using different frequencies. Gas calibration shall be accomplished by Introducing span gas that meets the require- ments of paragraph (I)(d)(3) of this appendix 

into the analyzer through the calibration 

port. If the analyzer reads the span gas within the allowable tolerance range (i.e., the 

square root of sum of the squares of the span 

gas tolerance described In paragraph (I)(d)(3) 

of this appendix and the calibration tolerance, which shall be equal to 2%), no adjustment of the analyzer is necessary. The gas 

calibration procedure shall correct readings 

that exceed the allowable tolerance range to the center of the allowable tolerance range. 

The pressure In the sample cell shall be the same with the calibration gas flowing during 

calibration as with the sample gas flowing 

during sampling. If the system is not calibrated, or the system falls the calibration 

check, the analyzer shall lock out from test- ing. 

347