# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 60 Fed. Reg. 22518 1995

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Tue Nov 6 14:18:07 2012

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.

### 22518 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 88 / Monday, May 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

(c) * V

* (117) TheTennessee Department of Environment and Conservation has submitted revisions to the Tennessee State Implementation Plan. These revisions address the requirements of section 507 ofTitle V ofthe CAA and establish the Small Business Stationary Source Technical and Environmental Assistance Program (PROGRAM).

(i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Revision to the Tennessee State Implementation Plan to Incorporate Small Business Assistance Program as Required by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, approved by the Tennessee AirPollution Control Board

on February 10, 1993.

(ii) Additional information-None. [FR Doc. 95-10978 Filed 5-5-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING COOE 458060-P

40 CFR Part 52 [AZ 47-1-8945a FRL-6191-11
Approval and Pronuigation of Implementation Plans; Arizona-State Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa Nonattainment Area; Basic and Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance Program for Carbon Monoxide and Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct fiial rule.

SUMMARY: EPA isgiving full approval through a direct final action on revisions tothe Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs) for carbon monoxide (CO) and ozone. The SIP revision provides for the adoption and implementation ofboth basic and enhanced motor vehicle inspection/ maintenance (I/M) programs meeting all requirements ofEPA regulations, published in the Federal Register on November 5. 1992 (I/MRegulations), concerning motor vehicle I/M programs. On November 14, 1994, the Arizona Department ofEnvironmental Quality (ADEQ) submitted a SIP revision to implement both abasic and enhanced I/M program meeting EPA's I/M regulations.

This direct final approval action will incorporate these rules into the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of approving this SIP revision is to regulate emissions ofCO and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in accordance with the requirements ofthe Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). Thus, EPA is finalizing the approval of these revisions into the Arizona SIP under provisions ofthe CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary NAAQS and plan requirements for nonattainment areas. DATES: This action is effective on July 7, 1995, unless adverse orcritical
comments are received by June 7, 1995. Ifthe effective date is delayed, a timely. notice will be published in the Federal Register. ADDRESSES: A docket hasbeen established and contains material relevant tothis action. A copy ofthe docket is available forpublic inspection
at EPA's Region IX office during normal business hours. Copies ofthe submitted SIP revisionsare available for. inspection atthe following locations: Mobile Sources Section (A-2-11), Air

and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102),ANR 443, 401 "M" Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roxanne Johnson, Mobile Sources Section (A-2-1), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1225.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION'
I. Introduction

Motor vehicles are a major contributor ofVOCs, CO, and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions. The motor vehicle I/M program is an effective means of reducing these emissions. Despite improvements in emission control technology in pastyears, mobile sources inurban areas continue to remain responsible forroughly halfof the emissions ofVOC causing ozone, and
most ofthe emissions ofCO. They also emit substantial amounts ofNOx and air toxics. This is because thenumber of vehicle miles traveled has doubled in the last 20 years to 20x1012 (20 trillion) miles per year, offsetting much ofthe technological progress in vehicle emission control over the same period. Projections indicate that the steady growth in vehicle miles will continue.

Under the Act, the U.S. EPA is pursuing a three-point strategy to achieve emission reductions from motor vehicles. The development and commercialization ofcleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels represent the first two elements ofthe strategy. These developments will take many years before cleaner vehicles and fuels dominate the fleet and favorably impact 

### the environment. This noticeaddresses the thirdelement ofthe strategy, I/M, which isaimed atthereduction of emissions from theexisting fleet by ensuring thatvehicles are maintained to meet the emission standards established by EPA. Properly functioning emission controlsare necessary to keep pollution levelslow. The drivingpublic is often' unable to detect amalfunction ofthe 

### emission control system. While some minormalfunctions can increase emissions significantly, they do not affect drivability and may go unnoticed for a long period oftime. Effective I/M programs can identify excessive emissions and assure repairs. The EPA projects that sophisticated I/M programs such Arizona's will identify emission related problems and prompt the vehicle owner toobtain timely repairs, thus reducing emissions.

The Act directed EPA to establish a minimum performance standard for enhanced I/Mprograms. The standard is based onthe performance achievable by annual inspections ina centralized test program. States have flexibility to design their own programs ifthey can show that theirprogram is as effective

as the model program used in the performance standard. The more effective the program themore credit a State will get towards the emission reduction requirement. Aneffective program will help tooffset growth in vehicle use and allow for industrial and

or commercial growth. EPA and the States have learned agreat deal about what makes an I/M program effective since the Clean Air Act of 1977 first required I/M programs forpolluted

areas. There are three major keys to an effective program:

1. Given the advanced state ofcurrent vehicle design and anticipated technology changes, the ability to accurately fail problem vehicles and pass clean ones requires improved test equipment and test procedures;

2.Comprehensive quality control and aggressive enforcement is essential to assuring thetesting is doneproperly;

3.Skillful diagnostics and capable mechanics are important to assure that failed

cars are fixed properly.

These three factors are missing in
most older I/M programs. Specifically, the idle and 2500 RPM/idle short tests and anti-tamper inspections used in 

### current I/M programs are not as effective in identifying and reducing in-use emissions from the types ofvehicles in the current and fiture fleet. Also, covert audits by EPA and State agencies typically discover improper inspection and testing 50 

### percent ofthe time in test-and-repair stations. Experience has shown that quality control at highHeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 22518 1995

### Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 88 / Monday, May 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

volume test-only stations, such as Arizona's I/M program, is usually much better. And, finally, diagnostics and mechanics training are often poor or nonexistent.

EPA'sI/M regulations, dated November 5, 1992, established a hightech emission test forhigh-tech cars. This I/M test, known asthe IM240 test, is so effective that biennial test programs yield almost the same emission reduction benefits as annual programs. The test can also accurately

measure NOx emissions where NOx is important to address an ozone problem. Adding the "pressure and purge" tests increases the benefit even more by reducing problems associated with evaporative emissions losses. The pressure testis designed to find leaks in the fuel system, and the purge test evaluates the functionality of the vapor control system.
II. Background

On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated

a list ofozone and CO nonattainment

areas under the provisions ofthe Clean AirAct, as amended in 1977, that included Maricopa County. 43 FR 8970, 40 R 81.305. Generally, the states containing these designated "nonattainment areas" had to submit revised SIPs by January 1, 1979. The 1979 SIPrevisions were to provide for attainment ofthe NAAQS by December 31, 1982,however an extension until 1987 was available under section 172 if the state could demonstrate as part of its 1979 SIPrevision that attainment by the end of 1982 was not possible, despite the implementation ofall reasonably available control measures:Arizona submitted Maricopa County's initial nonatttainment area plan for CO in 1979 and 1980. On October 30, 1980, the State submitted a request to EPA to extend the CO attainment date in Maricopa County to December 31, 1987. EPA proposed to approve the extension request on February 5, 1982*(47 FR 5439). On May 5, 1982 (47 FR 19826), EPAtook final action to approve the 1979 SIPrevision.

On August 10, 1987, the U.S. District Court forthe District ofArizona ordered EPA to promulgate a federal implementation plan I(FTP) under section 110(c) ofthe Act for CO.2The Maricopa Association ofGovernments developed a plan for the CO nonattainment portions ofMaricopa

'The proposed FIPfor Maricopa County consisted ofamotor vehicle wintertime oxygenated fuels program and an employse-based trip reduction program.

2 The court orderwas the resultof acitizen suit brought against EPA onApril 8.1985.by the Arizona Centerfor Law in Publ4c Intevest (ACLPI). 

### County.The plan claimed credit both implicitly and explicitly, forthe -Arizona vehicle I/Mprogram as expanded through 1987. EPA proposed approval ofthe improvements tothe State's I/Mprogram as adoptedby the Arizona State Legislature in 1985, 1986, and 1987. (51FR 14818 (April26, 1988).) Inthatnotice EPA stated that if theArizona legislature adopted a loaded-mode test requirement, EPA would approve the I/Mprogram through

a direct final rulemaking process. Revisions tothe Arizona I/Mprogram
were adopted and EPA approved the I/ M program.

On June 21, 1994, Arizona Department ofEnvironmental Quality (ADEQ), acting asthe governor's designee, submitted a SIPrevision to implement a motorvehicle basic I/M program meeting EPA's I/M regulations. On July 13, 1994, EPA found that the SIPsubmittal conformed tothe completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V.3 EPA is today taking final 

### action to approvethis program.

Under theAct, Arizona is required to implement only abasic vehicle I/M program (182(b)(4)). To aid the Statein meeting federal requirements for the portion ofits ozone SIP pertaining tothe Maricopa County nonattainment area, Arizona "opted-up" toan enhanced vehicle I/M 4 program to reduce by 15% 

### emissions ofVOCs which contribute to
ozone pollution by 1996 from baseline levels established in 1990, net of growth. Thisrule was adopted as part of Maricopa's effortto achieve the NAAQS for ozone and CO.
Il. Requirements for VM Programs
A. ApplicabilityofBasicandEnhanced IMPrograms

As amended in 1990, the Clean Air Act requires states to make changes to improve existing I/Mprograms or to implement new ones forcertain nonattainment areas. Section 182(a)(2)(B) ofthe Act directed EPA to publish updated guidance for state I/M programs, taking into consideration findings ofthe Administrator's audits and investigations ofthese programs. The Act further requires each area required to have an I/M program to incorporate thisguidance intothe SIP. Based on these requirements, EPA promulgated I/Mregulations.5

3EPA adopted thecompleteness criteria on February 16, 1990(55 FR 5830) and, pursuantto section 110(k)(1)(A) ofitheCAA, revised the criteria

on August 26, 1991 (56FR 42216).

4Meeting EPA performance standards for two levelsofIJM programs: basic andenhanced.

5 November 5, 1992 57FR 52950) 

### Under section 182(b)(4) ofthe Act, basic I/M programs are required in all moderate ozonenonattainment areas. Under sections 182(c)(3) and 187(b)(1),

areas designated as serious andworse
ozone nonattainment areas with 1980 populations of200,000 or more and CO nonattainment areas with design classifications above 12.7 ppm and populations of200,000 or more, in addition to metropolitan statistical areas with populations of100,000 ormore in the northeast ozone transport region, are required to meet EPA regulations for "enhanced" I/M programs.

The I/M regulation establishes minimum performance standards for basic and enhanced I/M programs as Ivell as requirements for the following: Network type and program evaluation; adequate toolsand resources; test frequency and convenience; vehicle coverage; test proceduies and standard; test equipment; quality control; waivers and compliance via diagnostic inspection; motorist compliance enforcement; motorist compliance enforcement program oversight; quality assurance; enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors; data collection; dataanalysis and reporting; inspector training and licensing or certification; public information and consumer protection; improving repair effectiveness; compliance with recall notices; on-road testing; SIP revisions; and implementation deadlines.
B. IMPrograminArizona
1.Arizona SIP

The State ofArizona submitted a basic I/M SIP revision on June 21, 1994 to improve their I/M program for Arizona's ozone and CO nonattainment

areas. In that submittal, Arizona's air quality regulations took effect only until January 1,1995. On November 14, 1994, Arizona submitted a full SIP forboth basic and enhanced motor vehicle I/M programs. Therefore, the November 14, 1994 SIP submission superseded the June 21,.1994 SIPrevision and the EPA is recognizing the November 14, 1994 as the full SIP submission. A public hearing onthe November 14, 1994 submittal was held by the State on November 10, 1994.



### a.Reason forAdoptingEnhancedIM. The Arizona legislature adopted rules to implement enhanced I/Mto meet federal requirements forthe portion of its ozone SIP pertaining to the Maricopa County nonattainment ai-ea. Because of requirements forreasonable further progress, and rapid growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT)projected for Area 22519

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 22519 1995

### 22520 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 88 / Monday, May 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

A,

6 

### the State moved forward and put an enhanced I/M program in place that began January 3, 1995.7 The new 

### upgrades are efficient, enforceable, and did notrequire expensive modifications" to the program. H.B. 2001 established a biennial, transient loaded (IM240) emission test forgasoline powered vehicles model years 1981 ornewer with agross vehicle weight ofup to 8,500 pounds. A purge and pressure check is also required, eliminating Arizona's current tampering check. Gasoline powered vehicles model years 1967-1974 are required to pass a loaded emission test. Motorcycles and or constant four-wheel drive vehicles are required to take.and pass an idle emissions test. A snap idle test for diesel powered vehicles was also required as ofJanuary 1, 1995. Arizona's 

### enhanced I/M program is in Area A and the basic I/M program is implemented inArea B. 8

### Area A vehicles are subject to biennialtests where registration expiration date will come every other year, and area Bvehicles are subject to

- 

### annual testing where registration expiration will come every year.
2. Background



### ADEQ's centralized Vehicle Emission Inspection (VEI) programbegan January 1976. 9

### Major improvements to Arizona's VEI program over the years included: (1) H.B. 2014 enacted in 1988 provided the I/M program under which vehicles must be tested in the loaded-mode condition, 1° 

### aswell as inthe idle mode, to determine pass/fail status; (2)S.B. 1176 enacted in 1989 increased the number ofvehicles subject to the I/M program byremoving the exemption for vehicles manufactured in orbefore the 1966 model year; (3)S.B. 1430 enacted in 1992 made several changes to Arizona's VET Program; (4) H.B. 2001 enacted 1993 gave ADEQ authority to implement an enhanced vehicle program; (5)finally, in 1994 H.B. 2575

8Area A means a CO nonattainment area in a county with apopulation ofone million two hundred thousand ormore persons as determined by themost recent U.S. decennial census.

7Act I ofthe sixth special session ofthe 1993 legislature, more commonly known asHB 2001, gave ADEQ thestatutory authority necessary to implement an enhanced vehicle emissions program, and contains the primary authority formost ofthe rule.

0Arizona defines Area "B" as aCO

nonattainment area in a county with apopulation in excess of fourhundred thousand but fewer than

one million two hundred thousand persons as determined by themost recent U.S. decennial

census.

9Arizona law. ARS 49-404 gives theDirector of ADEQ Director authority to adoptrules related to airquality for SIP purposes.

10Effective January 1,1989. made a number ofcorrections to H.B. 2001.

IV. EPA Evaluation of State Submittal

1.ApplicabilitySection 51.350

EPA's I/M regulations require I/M SIP submittals to describe the applicable

areas in detail and to include the legal authority or rules necessary to establish
program boundaries. The Maricopa County ozone nonattainment :area and CO nonattainment area are both classified as moderate. Pima County-is not classified for CO and is in attainment for the ozone NAAQS.

The legal authority and areas required
to implementbasic I/M are described in the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) §§ 49-542.A and 49-541.17 and Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) R18-2- 1003.A and R18-2-1001.48. Arizona's authority to implement enhanced I/M

was amended by H.B. 2001, 1993 Sixth Special Legislative Session and is found in AAC R18-2-1001 and R18-2-1003, Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 10, Motor Vehicles: Inspection and Maintenance. Arizona's centralized I/M program was implemented August 1, 1988. The geographic coverage of theprogram complies with the requirements ofthe EPA /M regulation for basic I/M areas and is approvable.

2.a.BasicIM PerformanceStandard Section51.352

EPA's I/M regulations outline the method States are to follow to arrive at

a minimum plerformance standard. The performance standard sets an emission reduction target that the program must meet in order for the SIP to be approvable. The SIPmust also demonstrate that the program will meet the performance standard in actual operation, with provisions for appropriate adjustments ifthe standard is not met.

The performance standard for which the ADEQmust be able to demonstrate compliance was established using the MOBILE5a model inputs and local characteristics outlined in §51.352. Arizona's modeling and accompanying documentation indicates that the state program meets the EPA performance standard for hydrocarbons (HC)and for CO, i.e., that the emission factors resulting from modeling the state's program are at or below the EPA performance standard.
2.b. EnhancedI/MPerformance StandardSection 51.351

The EPA MOBILE5a input file used to model the enhanced performance standard reflects EPA-specified inputs tailored to the characteristics ofthe local area. Arizona's beginning date of January 1, 1995 used appropriate inputs and meets EPA's performance standard for the enhanced I/M program. EPA has allowed the assumption ofone full cycle oftesting for summer 1996 ozone modeling."

3.Network Type andEvaluationSection 51.353

EPA's I/M rule requiresSlPs to include a description ofthe network to be employed, the required legal authority, and a description ofthe evaluation schedule and protocol, sampling methodology, the data collection and analysis system, the

resources and personnel for evaluation, and related details of the evaluation
program.

Through a contractual agreement, Arizona operates a centralized program, consisting of eleven inspection stations with 48 testing lanes. The ADEQ compiles data (includingthe enhanced I/M data requirements) supporting modelling assumptions and modelled
program evaluation and effectiveness including failure rate, compliance rate, the number ofcertificates issued, and other similar matters.

The SIP adequately describes these features and is approvable.
4.Adequate Tools andResources Section51.354

Section 51.354 requires States to demonstrate that the appropriate administrative, budgetary, personnel, and equipment resources have been * allocated for the I/M program and discusses how the performance standard will be met.Arizona's submittal, Appendix 1, ARS §§49-544 and 49- 545, describes the personnel, equipment and funding resources to be used for
program operation and maintaining all required program functions. Section 49- 544 insures future dedicated funding and provides for sufficient staffto carry out program duties. Appendix 1, ARS 

### §§ 49-545.A authorizes a contract with

an independent contractor, Gordon Darby. Subsection B ofthat section specifies that the contractor may notbe in the business of maintaining or repairing motor vehicles.

2 nRegarding anypotential increase in.NOx, ADEQ on April 8, 1994 submitted apetition for exemption to NOx reasonable available control* technology (RACT)requirements formajor sources withinthe Marlcopa Countyozone nonattainment

area. EPA proposed to approve ADEQ's request on November 1, 1994 (59FR 54540). NOx testing is not required for basicareas opting-up to anenhanced I/Mprogram.

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 22520 1995

### Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 88 / Monday, May 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

5. TestFrequencyandConvenience Section51.355

The I/M regulations require the SIP to describe in detail the test schedule of the program. Ifthe testing is not performed on an annual basis, the description is to include the test year selection scheme. In addition, the SIP should include the legal authority necessary to implement and enforce the
test frequency requirement and explain how thetest frequency will be integrated with the enforcement
process.

Arizona's program is based upon an annual and biennial test frequency and legal authority for enforcing such frequency is in Appendix 1, ARS § 49- 542 and AAC R18-2-1005. Those provisions state that applicable vehicles may notbe registered nor re-registered without undergoing emissions inspection. Appendix 1, AAC R18-2- 1006 requires thatthe contractor test any subject vehicle presented for inspection, except forvehicles exhibiting unsafe conditions or carrying explosives orother hazardous materials.

6. Vehicle CoverageSection51.356

SIPsare to include a detailed description ofthe number and types of vehicles tobe covered by the program and a plan forhow those vehicles are to be identified. The SIP should also include a description ofany special exemptions granted by the program, an estimate ofthe percentage and number ofsubject vehicles which willbe exempted. Exempted vehicles should be accounted forin the emission reduction analysis. The SIP should also include the legal authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle
coverage requirement.

Requirements forvehicles subject to the Arizona T/M program are presented in Appendix 1. ARS §49-542 and AAC R18-2-1G03 describe vehicular coverage by testmethods, categories ofmodel year, fuel type, result summary for 1993, and displays testsperformed differentiated by those categories. Vehicles exempted from testing are described in ARS § 49-542 and AAC R18-2-1003.B. Modeling conducted in response to §5L352 took into account exempted vehicles. ARS §49-542 and AAC R18-2-1003, -1017 and -1019 (Appendix 1) provide for fleet vehicles, including federally-owned vehicles, that

are subject to the same testing and quality control requirements as are nonfleet vehicles. ARS § 49-542 and AAC R18-21023 (Appendix 1) provide the requirements forvehicles registered in the program area and operated outside the area. The Arizona I/M program exempts the following vehicles from the program:

a. Vehicles manufactured in orbefore

the 1966 model year. b. Vehicles leased to a person residing outside Areas A and B by a leasing
company whose place ofbusiness is in Area A orB.



### c. Vehicles being sold between motor

vehicle dealers. d. Electrically-powered vehicles.

e. Prorate vehicles. f.Golf carts. g. Vehicles withengine displacements ofless than 90cubic centimeters. h. New vehicles originally registered at

the time ofinitial retail sale and titlingin the state. i. Vehicles beingregistered at the time

ofchange of name ofownership except when the change.in registration is accompanied by required fees forthe year following expiration ofthe prior registration or the change results from the sale by a dealership whose place ofbusiness is located in area A or area B. 

### j.Vehicles for which a current

certificate ofexemption orDirector's certificate has been issued. The Arizona SIP submittal provides

an estimate ofthe number ofvehicles exempted due to vehicle age, fuel type, and engine type. These exempted vehicles are accounted for in the compliance area which was used In the MOBILE5a modeling process to demonstrate compliance with the performance standard.

7. TestProcedures andStandards Section51.357

The I/M rule requires SIPs to include

a description ofeach test procedure used, the legal authority or rule describing and establishing the test procedures, and the test standards. The EPA Checklist 12 lists the criteria that State I/M programs must satisfy in order
to be approvable. The Arizona I/M progyanm satisfies the criteria ofthe Checklist. AAC R18-2-1006 provides detailed test procedures and pass/fail standards for all applicable classes of vehicles. Procedures and standards correspond to EPA requirements for short tests. Initial tests areperformed without prior repair atthe test facility,

as the contractor is prohibited from being in the business ofrepairing vehicles.

Requirements forreinspection of failed vehicles are described in AAC R18-2-1013. R18-2-1029 requires that all vehicles must have all emission control devices that were installed by

12Checklist forCompleting the inspection/ Maintenance SIP, published March 1993. 

### the vehicle manufacturer. AAC R18-2- 1001.42 requires vehicles with "switched" enginesto meet standards applicable to the year ofvehicle manufacture.
8. TestEquipmentSection 51.358

The I/Mrule requires SIPs to include written technical specifications forall test equipment used in theprogram. The specifications shoulddescribe the emissions analysis process, the necessary test equipment, the required features, and written acceptance of testing criteria and procedures. Arizona's SIP provides detailed requirerpents for testequipment, automation to the highest degree commercially available to minimize the potential forintentional fraud and/or human error, security, accuracy, recording oftest data and quality

assurance. Also, Arizona'srules require the contractor to provide the necessary computerized testequipment capable of testing all subject vehicles, including test systems that are connected by a real-time data link to ahost computer that prevents unauthorized multiple initial tests on the same vehicle.
9. QualityControlSection 51.359

TheI/M rulerequires SIPs to include

a description ofquality control and recordkeeping procedures. The submittal should include theprocedures manual, rule,ordinance, orlaw establishing the procedures ofquality control and recordkeeping.

Arizona's rules, Appendix 1,'AAC R18-2-1025 through -1028 provide all the required quality control-elements of basic and enhanced I/M programs. Protection ofanalyzer bench and electrical components is assured through the enclosure of such equipment in lockable steel cabinets.
10. WaiversandCompliancevia Diagnostic InspectionSection51.360
Section 51.360 outlines the standards 

### that State SIP submittals must satisfy before owners ofvehicles can be issued waivers or temporary extensions. A waiver or temporary extension allows motorists to renew vehicle registration. These requirements include: A maximum waiver rate used for estimating emission reduction benefits inthe modeling analysis; a commitment by the State totake corrective action if the waiverrate exceeds that which was committed to in the SIP or a commitment torevise the SIP and emissionreductions claimed; description ofwaiver criteria and procedures, including costlimits, quality assurance methods and administration; and the necessary legal 22521

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 22521 1995

### 22522 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 88 / Monday, May 8, 1995 [Rules and Regulations

authority to issue waivers; set and adjust cost limits and carry out any other functions necessary to administer the waiver system.

Section 51.360 established the minimum repair expenditures (both for basic and enhanced I/M programs) that vehicle owners must incur in order to qualify for awaiver. In basic I/M programs, owners must expend a minimumt of$75 for pre-1981 and at least $200 for 1981 and newer vehicles. For enhanced I/M programs, vehicle

owners at a minimum must expend $450 in repairs to qualify for a waiver.

Arizona s rules provide that waivers
may only be issued after failing a retest and after qualifying repairs are made, including performance of a lowemission tune-up. Those provisions exclude costs ofrepair oftampering from applicability to a waiver cost limit, and inspection and review ofreceipts, Owners ofall failing vehicles receive a brochure describing possible eligibility ofwarranty coverage. Waiver limits prescribed in ARS §49-542.L and R18- 3-1010.E for Area A (enhanced I/M program) and R18-2-1010.F forArea B (basic I/M program) differ from those prescribed in EPA's I/M regulation, but

are not overall less stringent. For Area B, 1967-74 model year vehicles are subject to a lower $50 limit, yet 1975- 80 model year vehicles are subject to a $200 limit, exceeding EPA's minimum, standard. Arizona's $350 limit for 1981 and newer vehicles isalso more stringent than EPA's minimum $200 limit forArea B. Waiver limits for Area A exceed the EPA I/M program guidelines for vehicles not subject to the enhanced test procedure. Arizona has provided for vehicle repair grants in R18-2-1014.
11 Motorist ComplianceEnforcement Section 51.361

Under §51.361, SIP submittals must include a description ofthe enforcement
process; a determination ofthe current compliance rate that includes at a minimum an estimate ofcompliance loss due to loopholes; legal authority for enforcement; and a commitment to an enforcement level to be used for modeling purposes and to be main Area B documents.

Appendix 1, ARS § 49-542.D and AAC R18-2-1007 require that no affected motorist can obtain a vehicle registration without demonstrating that the vehicle has completed a vehicle emissions inspection. The State will be able to verify emissions compliance by checking an up-to-date computer database produced directly from
contractor testing data rather than relying on a document. A1050X may not 

### be used for Area A registration purposes. AAC R18-2-1017, -1019 address inspection procedures for fleets, including governmental vehicles. Appendix 2 addresses the assumed level ofenforcement for modeling purposes and ARS 49-542.E provides for the registering officer to issue an air quality compliance sticker to be placed on the subject vehicle.
12.MotoristComplianceEnforcement ProgramOversightSection 51.362

The I/M SIP submittals are to include
adescription ofenforcement program oversight and information management activities. The enforcement program mustbe audited regularly and follow effective program management practices. Arizona's law, ARS 49-542.D sets outthe requirement forregistration enforcement ofI/M requirements for subject vehicles. Subsection J.2 ofthat section defines a list ofreadily exempted vehicles, including vehicle age, engine displacement, mode of power, andtype ofregistration. The Motor Vehicle Division (MVD)of the Arizona Department ofTransportation has the authority for vehicle registration. Inthe case ofMaricopa County, MVD has delegated the authority forprocessing registrations to the Maricopa County Assessor; however, MVD retains responsibility for the registration program and for the registration database. The requirement for inspection ofa vehicle is determined in the MVD database by zip code ofthe physical address ofthe vehicle registration and by otherparameters relating to exemptions listed inARS 49- 542.1I1.

MVD, the Maricopa County Assessor, and ADEQ maintain written procedures governing the issuance and auditing of compliance-related documents, including waivers and validations tabs,

as appropriate. All compliance documents, certificates ofwaiver, and validation tabs are individually numbered and kept according to the respective agencies' security' procedures. AAC R18:-2-1023 provides procedures for processing exemptions forvehicles not available within the State at time ofregistration orreregistration. That rule also requires inspection by an out ofstate I/M program, ifthe subject vehicle is being operated in a program area.

ADEQ and registering agencies have developed procedures to address vehicles physically registered in zip codes which straddle I/M program boundaries. Under that process, emissions applicability is determined by motorist submittal ofa "Code 52" application, which provides verifiable information thatthe physical registration address is outside the I/M
program boundary. The "Code 52" process is conducted by ADEQ in Maricopa County and by MVD in Pima County Arizona law enfordement agencies and MVD'are authorized under
statute to enforce the sticker-based registration and I/M requirements. MVD and Maricopa County routinely make their databases available to ADEQfor compliance and enforcement purposes.
13. QualityAssuranceSection 51.363

The I/M rule requires States to operate on-going quality assurance programs aimed at discovering, correcting, and preventing fraud, waste and abuse. The quality assurance officer should also

assess whether correct operating procedures are being followed and that testing equipment provides accurate.
measurements. SIP submittals must include a description ofthe quality

assurance program, written procedures manuals covering covert and overt audits, records audits, and equipment audits. Quality assurance procedures

can be found in AAC R18-2-1025 and -1026. Performance audits are based
upon written procedures, with audit results recorded and retained in station and inspector files. Records are of sufficient detail to support administrative or civil hearings.

Both the testing contractor and ADEQ conduct routine covert audits and exchange audit findings. Covert audits

are performed at least once per year per licensed inspector employed by the independent contractor. Covert vehicles

are procured through rental or through cooperative agreement with the Department ofPublic Safety to obtain undercover vehicles. A tampering defect

or emissions-related failure condition is introduced and adriver not directly • affiliated with the program is selected. ADEQ monitors the contractor's
response to failed covert audits, including training, disciplinary actions

or dismissal. ADEQ performs remote observation ofinspections, including
covert actions designed to detect fraud

or collusion between inspectors and either repair facilities or dealers. Overt audits are performed-at least twice per year for each inspection lane. In the,
event that an inspector fails any ofthe requirements in AAC R18-2-1025, the inspector's license may be suspended or revoked.

14. EnforcementAgainst Contractors, Stations &InspectorsSection 51.364

I/M programs'are to include enforcement mechanisms that allow for the imposition ofpenalties against licensed stations, contractors or

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 22522 1995

### Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 88 / Monday, May 8, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

inspectors that violate program requirements. SIP submittals must describe the legal authority for imposing penalties, civil fines, license suspension, and revocations. ARS, Section 49-548 prohibits improper representation ofa facility as an official testing site, or false issuance of certificates of inspection by fleets. ARS 49-549 prohibits production and use of false I/M certificates. ARS 49-550 provides civil penalties for violations of I/M requirements. ADEQ has submitted, under separate cover, dated, August 2, 1994, an opinion by the Attorney General related to the applicability of that statute to the deadlines for license suspension contained in 40 CFR 51.364.

15. DataCollectionSection51.365

EPA's I/M rule outlines the test data and quality.control data that must be collected for the management, evaluation, and enforcement ofan I/M program. I/M programs must gather test data on individual vehicles, as well as quality control data on test equipment. The Arizona I/M program contains data gathering provisions that meet all ofthe criteria ofthe EPA Checklist. AAC R18- 2-1011 describes the data collected during an inspection which forms the basis for issuance ofa "Vehicle Inspection Report." Arizona is currently collecting all data required forboth basic and enhanced I/M programs.
15 DataAnalysisandReportingSection 51.366

SIP submittals are to include information on how States will incorporate data analysis andreporting into their I/M programs. Reports should provide information regarding the types ofprogram activities performed and their final outcomes, including
summary statistics and effectiveness evaluations ofthe enforcement mechanism, the quality assurance system, the quality control program, and the testing element. Arizona has committed to provide test, quality control and enforcement reports as specified in this section and applicable to I/M programs. The contract with the independent contractor reflects requirements to collect data necessary for ADEQ to make these submittals.
16 InspectorTrainingandLicensingor CertificationSection51.367.

All inspectors involved in I/M
programs must receive formal training and be licensed or certified to perform inspections. SIP submittals must include a description ofthe training program, the written and practical examinations and-the licensing or certification process. Lane inspectors 

### are employed and trainedby the independent contractor. AAC R18-2- 1016 authorizes ADEQ to license vehicle inspectors and provides. minimum standards for licensure.. ADEQ is authorized to suspend, revoke

orrefuse to renew any inspector license. The contract between ADEQ and the independent contractor allows ADEQto require training ofinspectors consistent with the requirements of40 CFR 51.363. ADEQ monitors the training program conducted by the contractor and performs on-site overt audits to verify inspector proficiency, consistent with EPA's I/M rule.
17. PublicInformationand Consumer

ProtectionSection 51.368



### SIP submittals must include a plan for informing the public on an ongoing basis, throughout the life'ofthe I/M program, ofthe air quality program, the requirements offederal and state law, the role ofmotor vehicles inthe air qualityproblem, and the need for and benefits ofan inspection program. In addition, the submittal must describe procedures and mechanisms to protect the public from fraud and abuse.by inspectors, mechanics, and others involved inthe I/M program. '

ADEQ, in conjunction with its independent contractor, conducts a public awareness program which complies with the requirements of40 CFR 51.368. Information on the air quality problem, the role ofmotor vehicles, and I/M requiiements is contained in a brochure mailed with registration or re-registration documentation to all affected motorists. The independent contractor produces a "Repair Industry Performance Report". which identifies by repair site, the ! number ofvehicles undergoing repairs and the overall pass rate ofvehicles repaired atthat facility.

18. ImprovingRepairEffectiveness Section 51.369



### The State ofArizona provides the technical assistance requirements of both EPA'sbasic and enhanced I/M rule. ADEQprovides newsletters and special purpose mailings to inform the repair industry ofprogram changes,

common problems, and opportunities for training. In addition, ADEQ provides newsletters published by the Coalition for Safer, Cleaner Vehicles to repair industry personnel in the Maricopa nonattainment area. ADEQ employs referee technicians at each ADEQoperated waiver facility who provide diagnostic assistance to the repair industry.

The State currently provides repair.. technician training which focuses on causes ofemissions failures in computer controlled closed-loop vehicles, effective diagnoses and repair. The training also provides information on Arizona's I/M program. ADEQ provides these courses on an as-needed basis, with a minimum oftwo courses in Phoenix and one course in Tucson each month. Technicians are tested at the conclusion ofthe course, and successful candidates are either certified as a trained technician or licensed as a fleet technician. In order to retain certification or licensure, technicians must take and pass the examination annually.

19. Compliance With RecallNotices Section51.370

The I/M rule requires States to 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) ofthe Act, receive the required .repairs. Arizona has committed to comply with section 51.370 when the Agency provides the State with manufacturer recall and unresolved vehicle recall data.

20. On-RoadTesting Section51.371'

Because Arizona is "opting-up" to an enhanced I/M program, the State is not required to implement this section. However, Arizona's regulation, AAC RI 8-2-1015 requires the State to begin on-road testing in January 1995 in Area A only. A minimum ofsix remote sensing units will be used throughout the nonattainment area. Arizona's SIP submittal states that this measure provides an incremental benefit over the existing I/M and anti-tampering

program by increasing compliance with the I/M program and reducing the incidence ofvehicle tampering. AAC R18-2-1015 also includes: That a vehicle shall not have a.waiver on record; an emissions test that isrequired pursuant to aremote sensing identification shall be performed at a state station pursuant to R18-2-1006 and shall not require payment ofany test fee unless the test can be used for the purpose of complying with registration orre-registration requirements; failure ofan emissions
test that is required pursuant to aremote sensing identification shall require the vehicle to be repaired or to receive a waiver from any emission standards not complied with within 30 days ofthe test to avoid suspension of registration; and

one reinspection shall also,be free as provided in R18-2-1012(D)..A full description ofArizona's remote sensing 22523

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 22523 1995

### 22524 Federal Register / Vol- 60., No. 88 / Monday.. May &. 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Nin theirveaimst forproposal (RFP) 

### located in thedocket.
21 Statefmprementation Plan SubmissionsSection 51.372and hmphementationDeadlinesSection 51,73

Arizota iscurrently implementingan annual basic IIM and an enhanced IIM program. The November 1994 I/ M"SIP submittad is fully approvable andiindtudes.a&H elements meeting EPA's I/ NI regulations Le.g..an analysis ofthe elnission level targvts meeting both hasi( ard em;e4amned I/M perfrmance standard, passage ofenabling statutory and legal authority, and regulations).

V. EPA Analysis ofthe Arizona 11M Program Submittal

A complete EPA analysis.of the progra.Isabni'ttal is detailed-in the Agency's technical support document (TSD).which is avalahle in the,docket. A copy oftheTSD can be obtained.by contacting the person listed in the ADDRE Sportion 

### of this notice. The TSD summarizes the requirements of the federarlt V.fregulations and addresses whether the.elements ofthe State's;sabmitta comply with. tile federal rule. Interested parties are en(:ouraged to examine theTSD for additional detailed information about the Arizoiia I/M program.
VI. EPA Action

In determining the approvability ofan" I/M SIP submittal. EPA must evaluate the SIP Sor consistency with the requirements ofCAA and EPA " regulations, asfound in section 110 and part D ofthe CAA and 40.CFR part 51 (Requtirementsr forPreparation, Adoption, an-&Submitta [of Implementation-Plans).

EPA hes evaliratedi the submitted SIP and has determied,that it isconsistent with the.CAA, EPA regulations,. and EPA policy Therefore, Arizona's, SIP revision-, BasicarrdEnhanced J/M Vehicle Einissionsfnspection/ Maintenance(f/M)Program huplementedin Oz'

### ne andCarbon MonoxideNonnttainment Areas of Arizorr isbeing approved under section II0(kl(3.): ofthe GAA as meeting the requirements ofsection 110(a) and Part 1).

Nothing inthi,% :tion should be construed as permitting or allowing or establshing a precedent far an )future implementation pkun. Each request for revision to the state implementation plan sll, be considered separately in light of specific technicaL ecorromic; and en'vironmntal factors and in relation:to relevant statutory and regulatory requixemcnts. EPA is publishing this notice without prior proposal because theAgency views this;asa noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse
comments. However,in a separate document in this.FederaltRegister publication, themEPA isproposing to approve the SIPrevision should adverse

or critical commentsbe filed. This action will be effective Jly-7, 1995, unless, within 30 daysofits publication' adverseor critical
comments are received.

Ifthe EPA receives suchT comments. this action will be withdrawn.before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then he addressed in a subsequent final rule basedon the separate proposed rule..

The EPA will not institute a second
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so;at this time. Ifno such comments are received, the public is advised that this.actiori will be effective July 7, 1995.

VII. Regulatory Process

Under the.Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 etseq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis. assessing theimpact ofany proposed or final rule on small entities. 5U.&.C. 603 and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not havea significant impact on a substantial number ofsmall. entities Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises.and government entities. with jurisdiction over population of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under sections 110 and 301(a) and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing.Therefore, because.the Federal SIP approval does not impose
any new requirements, Icertify that ft does not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover. due to the nature ofthe Federal-state relationship under the CAA, preparation

oraregulatory flexibility analysi's would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness ofstate action.

The AAforhid& EPAta base.its actions concerniag SIPs on suchgrouads. UnionElectricCo. v. U.S E.P.A., 427 U.S. 24&, 256-66 (S, Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2). The OMEL has exempted this-action from re-view under Executtve Order 12866. List ofSubjects iw411CFR Part52
Environmental protection, Air. pollition-control, Hydrocarbons, Carbon monoxide-incorporatfon by reference, Intergovernmental relations, O'zone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,.Volatile organic compounds.

Note:. ncorpoxatihn by reference'of the State Implementation Plan.forthe State of Arizona was approted-by the.Director ofthe Federal Register on

### July 1,1982

Dated: April 5. 1995. 

### John Wise, ActingRegionalAdministrator

40 CFR part,52' is amended as follows:



### PART 52-[AMENDED1

1. "'ho authority citation for part 52 continuesto,read as(follows:

Authority: 4ZU.&.C 740't-7&7Tq. 

### Subpart D-Arizons

2. Section 5Z.120'fs amended by adding paragraph (c)(75) to read as follows: 

### §52.12n Identifeationo pran.

(c) * * (75) 

### Program:efements submitted on November 14, 1994, by the Governores. designe.

(i) Incorporation hy reference. CA) Arizona Department of Environmental Qualfty.

(1) Basic and Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance Vehicle Emissions Program. Adopted on September 15, 1994.

[FR" Dec. 95,-to'8m4 

### Fired 5-5-95: 8:45 anml

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P



### 40 CFR Part271 [FRL-5203-7], Tennessee;. Final.Authorization of Revisionsto State Hazardous Waste Management Program.

AGECY: Environmental Protection 

### Agency. ACTION: Immediate final rule.

SUMMARY: Tennessee hasapplied for final authorization afrevisions to,its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA}: Tennessee's revisionis consist ofthe provisions contained in rules promulgated between July T,1986, and'June 3Y, 11993, otherwise known as Non-HSWA Clusters Iff, V, VI, HSWA Cluster It.and RCRA Clusters t--ITT. 

### Theso requirements are listed n Section

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 22524 1995