41080 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Indirect Food Additives: Polymers (21 

CFR part 177), to remove authorizations 

for the use of BPA in §§ 175.105, 

175.300, and 177.2440; establish a 

migration limit for BPA from the 

authorized uses of BPA in food contact 

articles in §§ 177.1440, 177.1580, 

177.1585, and 177.2280; and add a new 

provision to part 174 with a restriction 

on the use of BPA, stating that the 

substance is subject to a specific 

migration limit of 0.5 nanograms per 

kilogram of food. The petition is 

available in Docket No. FDA–2022–F– 

1108. 

II. Amendment of §§ 175.105, 175.300, 

177.1440, 177.1580, 177.1585, 177.2280, 

and 177.2440 and Addition of New 

Provision With BPA Restriction 

In accordance with the procedures for 

amending or repealing a food additive 

regulation in § 171.130 (21 CFR 

171.130), the petition asks us to amend 

§§ 175.105, 175.300, 177.1440, 

177.1580, 177.1585, 177.2280, and 

177.2440 to remove authorizations for 

the use of BPA in §§ 175.105, 175.300, 

and 177.2440; establish a migration 

limit for BPA from the authorized uses 

of BPA in food contact articles in 

§§ 177.1440, 177.1580, 177.1585, and 

177.2280; and add a new provision to 

part 174 with a restriction on the use of 

BPA. The petitioners cite, as evidence, 

a draft opinion by the European Food 

Safety Authority (EFSA), which 

analyzed studies related to the health 

effects of dietary BPA exposure that 

were published between January 1, 

2013, through October 15, 2018. EFSA’s 

draft opinion entitled ‘‘Re-evaluation of 

the risks to public health related to the 

presence of bisphenol (BPA) in 

foodstuffs,’’ was published in December 

2021 for public comment. Based on the 

analysis in the draft EFSA opinion, the 

petitioners conclude that the use of BPA 

in food and food contact articles is toxic 

and disrupts the ‘‘proper functioning of 

the immune and reproductive systems.’’ 

To support their conclusion, the 

petitioners also cite publications 

referred to in comments to EFSA on the 

draft opinion and an epidemiology 

study that petitioners assert show an 

association of in utero exposure to BPA 

with an increased risk of asthma and 

wheezing in school-age girls. 

We invite comments, additional 

scientific data, and other information 

related to the issues raised by this 

petition. If we determine that the 

available data justify removing 

authorizations for the use of BPA as 

listed under §§ 175.105, 175.300, and 

177.2440; establishing a migration limit 

for BPA from authorized uses of BPA in 

food contact articles as listed under 

§§ 177.1440, 177.1580, 177.1585, and 

177.2280; or adding a new provision 

with a restriction on the use of BPA, we 

will publish our decision in the Federal 

Register in accordance with § 171.130. 

The petitioners have claimed that this 

action is categorically excluded under 

21 CFR 25.32(m) because this action 

would prohibit or otherwise restrict the 

use of a substance in food packaging. In 

addition, the petitioners have stated 

that, to their knowledge, no 

extraordinary circumstances exist. If 

FDA determines a categorical exclusion 

applies, neither an environmental 

assessment nor an environmental 

impact statement is required. If FDA 

determines a categorical exclusion does 

not apply, we will request an 

environmental assessment and make it 

available for public inspection. 

Dated: July 1, 2022. 

Lauren K. Roth, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14682 Filed 7–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2021–0342; FRL–9971–01– 

R4] 

Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Vehicle 

Inspection and Maintenance Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of 

Georgia through the Georgia Department 

of Natural Resources (GA DNR), 

Environmental Protection Division (GA 

EPD) on April 30, 2021. The revisions 

remove obsolete references and 

provisions, update and clarify the 

State’s inspection and maintenance (I/ 

M) requirements, and update 

terminology, in part to reflect advances 

in test and vehicle technology. EPA has 

evaluated the SIP revisions and has 

preliminarily determined the changes 

will not increase emissions under the 

Georgia 

I/M program. EPA is proposing to 

approve these changes pursuant to the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 10, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2021–0342 at 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air and 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

The telephone number is (404) 562– 

9222. Ms. Sheckler can also be reached 

via electronic mail at sheckler.kelly@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What is the background of Georgia’s 

SIP-approved I/M program? 

The CAA requires areas that are 

designated as moderate, serious, severe, 

or extreme ozone nonattainment areas to 

establish a motor vehicle I/M program to 

ensure regular monitoring of gasoline 

fueled motor vehicle emissions. See 

CAA sections 182(b)(4), (c)(3). The 

required monitoring is performed by 

periodic emissions testing of vehicles. 

See CAA sections 182(a)(2)(B), (c)(3). 

This emissions testing ensures that 

vehicles are well maintained, operating 

as designed, and do not exceed 

established vehicle pollutant limits. A 

basic I/M program is required for 

moderate ozone nonattainment areas, 

and an enhanced I/M program is 

required for serious, severe, or extreme 

ozone nonattainment areas. 

In 1991, EPA classified a 13-county 

area in and around the Atlanta, Georgia, 

metropolitan area as a serious ozone 

nonattainment area for the 1979 1-hour 

ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS), triggering the 

requirement for the State to establish an 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 41081 

1On November 6, 1991, EPA designated and 

classified the following counties in and around the 

Atlanta, Georgia, metropolitan area as a serious 

ozone nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS: Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, 

Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, 

Paulding, and Rockdale. See 56 FR 56694. 2Since granting full approval for the State’s I/M 

program, EPA has approved several SIP revisions 

concerning the State’s I/M program. 3The nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard consisted of the following counties: 

Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, 

Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, 

Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, 

Rockdale, Spalding, and Walton. 4The nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone standard consisted of the following counties: 

Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, 

Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, 

Newton, Paulding, and Rockdale. 

5The nonattainment area for the 2015 8-hour 

ozone standard consists of the following counties: 

Bartow, Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton, Gwinnett, 

and Henry. 

6See 182(a)(2)(B)(ii); David Sosnowski, Edward 

Gardetto, Performing Onboard Diagnostic System 

Checks as a Part of a Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance Program, EPA 420–R–01–015, June 

2001. This document is available at https://

nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ 

ZyPdf.cgi?Dockey=P1002KRN.pdf. 

7See Edward Gardetto, Ted Trimble, Evaluation 

of On-Board Diagnostics for Use in Detecting 

Malfunctioning and High Emitting Vehicles, EPA 

420–R–00–13, August 2000. This document is 

available at https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/ 

P1002KM8.PDF?Dockey=P1002KM8.PDF. 

8The IM240 test is a test that measures emissions 

while the vehicle is driven on a dynamometer. The 

vehicle is operated over different speeds to 

resemble typical city driving and includes tests of 

the vehicle’s acceleration and deceleration. The 

IM240 test captures the entire exhaust stream 

emitted during the test and measures the total mass 

of emissions from the vehicle. 

enhanced I/M program for this area.1 In 

1996, Georgia submitted its enhanced 

I/M program to EPA for incorporation 

into the SIP. EPA granted interim 

approval of the State’s program in 1997. 

See 62 FR 42916 (August 11, 1997). A 

few years later, EPA granted full 

approval.2 See 65 FR 4133 (January 26, 

2000). Despite this, the 13-county area 

failed to attain the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS by November 15, 1999. EPA 

issued a final rulemaking action (68 FR 

55469) on September 26, 2003, to 

reclassify the area to a severe ozone 

nonattainment area. Subsequently, this 

area attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 

and thus EPA redesignated the 

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 70 FR 34660 

(June 15, 2005). On April 30, 2004, EPA 

issued a final rulemaking action (69 FR 

23951) to revoke the 1979 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS, effective June 15, 2005. 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA 

established an 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

and subsequently designated areas. On 

April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), EPA 

designated a 20-county area in and 

around metropolitan Atlanta as a 

marginal ozone nonattainment area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.3 EPA 

reclassified this area as a moderate 

ozone nonattainment area on March 6, 

2008 (73 FR 12013), because the area 

failed to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by the required attainment date 

of June 15, 2007. Subsequently, the area 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard, and on December 2, 2013 (78 

FR 72040), EPA redesignated the 

counties to attainment for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

On March 12, 2008, EPA revised the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 16436 

(March 27, 2008). EPA designated a 15- 

county area in and around metropolitan 

Atlanta as a marginal ozone 

nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2012 

(effective July 20, 2012).4 See 77 FR 

30088 (May 21, 2012). EPA reclassified 

these counties as a moderate ozone 

nonattainment area on April 11, 2016 

(effective June 3, 2016), because the area 

failed to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by the required attainment date 

of July 20, 2015. See 81 FR 26697 (May 

4, 2016). Subsequently, the area attained 

the 2008 8-hour ozone standard and 

EPA redesignated the counties to 

attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. See 82 FR 25523 (June 2, 

2017). 

On October 1, 2015, EPA again 

revised the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 

80 FR 65291 (October 26, 2015). EPA 

designated a 7-county area in and 

around metropolitan Atlanta as a 

marginal ozone nonattainment area for 

the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 

30, 2018 (effective August 3, 2018).5 See 

83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). 

II. Background on EPA’s I/M Program 

After the 1990 amendments, the CAA 

required EPA to set guidelines for states 

in designing and running I/M 

programs.6 The guidelines were 

required to distinguish between basic 

and enhanced I/M programs and clarify 

how states must meet minimum I/M 

design requirements set by the CAA. 

One of the minimum design 

requirements included Onboard 

Diagnostic (OBD) system checks as a 

part of periodic inspections. This design 

requirement applied to both basic and 

enhanced I/M programs. 

In November of 1992, EPA published 

an I/M rule at 40 CFR part 51 subpart 

S. At the time of promulgation however, 

federal standards for OBD certification 

had not been published. As a stopgap, 

EPA reserved sections in the 1992 rule 

for the CAA’s OBD–I/M requirement 

based on the understanding that these 

sections would be amended in the 

future. A federal requirement to 

incorporate OBD into new vehicles 

began with the 1994 model year. 

However, manufacturers could request 

waivers on vehicles for model years 

1994–95, so full compliance for lightduty cars and trucks sold in the United 

States was not required until model year 

1996. 

EPA published amendments to the 

1992 I/M rule that created OBD–I/M 

requirements for I/M performance 

standards and I/M SIPs on August 6, 

1996. These amendments included the 

following requirements: data collection, 

summary reporting, and analysis 

requirements for the OBD–I/M testing 

element. Additionally, the amendments 

established OBD test equipment 

requirements, the OBD test result 

reporting format, and identified 

conditions to determine if a test resulted 

in an OBD–I/M pass, failure, or 

rejection. Finally, these amendments 

established OBD–I/M as an official 

performance warranty short test under 

section 207(b) of the Act by revising 40 

CFR part 85, subpart W. 

In August 2000, EPA published a 

study evaluating the use of OBD to 

detect vehicle malfunctions that caused 

increased emissions.7 In this study, EPA 

concluded that the OBD technology is a 

viable I/M test for 1996 and newer 

vehicles. The magnitude of emissions 

reductions available from basing repairs 

on OBD were found to be at least as 

large, if not greater than those resulting 

from available I/M tailpipe tests. In 

direct comparison to the IM240,8 the 

study found that OBD technology 

offered a better ability to identify 

vehicles with tailpipe emissions that 

exceed certified standards. With some 

exceptions, the study found that OBD 

identified the same vehicles as IM240, 

but additionally identified components 

which have degraded and may cause 

future emissions problems. By 

identifying and repairing these 

components early, OBD was found to 

provide a type of preventative 

maintenance that extended the longterm durability of expensive 

components (catalytic converter, fuel 

injectors, oxygen sensors, 

transmissions). Additionally, repairs 

based on OBD testing effectively 

returned vehicles to their proper 

operating conditions and for a majority, 

returned tailpipe emissions to below 

certification levels. 

III. What is being proposed? 

EPA is proposing to approve changes 

to the Georgia SIP that were provided to 

EPA through a cover letter dated April 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
41082 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

9EPA officially received Georgia’s I/M SIP 

revisions on May 4, 2021. 

10ASM testing is testing that uses a dynamometer 

so that the vehicle can be tested under load. The 

ASM test accelerates the vehicle to 15 miles per 

hour (mph) with 50% of the vehicle’s horsepower, 

and a second portion of the test accelerates the 

vehicle to 25 mph with 25% of the vehicle’s 

horsepower. This test is performed while an 

exhaust gas analyzer measures the vehicle’s levels 

of nitrogen oxide, hydrocarbon, and carbon 

monoxide during acceleration. 

11The TSI test is an exhaust emission test where 

the vehicle is run at an idle revolutions per minute 

(RPM) speed, and then a higher RPM speed. An 

analyzer measures the tailpipe exhaust emissions of 

the vehicles at both settings to determine 

compliance with motor vehicle emission standards. 

12 Id. 

13As mentioned previously, OBD testing receives 

the same emission reduction credit as other forms 

of enhanced testing (i.e., ASM or TSI) because OBD 

is more sensitive to problems that might cause 

emissions to rise above the standard. 

14For the few vehicles with model years 1996 or 

newer that are not equipped with OBD, Georgia 

does not currently require an emissions test. 

30, 2021.9 Specifically, GA EPD 

submitted changes to Georgia’s Rule 

391–3–20—Enhanced Inspection and 

Maintenance (‘‘Georgia I/M 

Regulation’’), which were adopted by 

the GA DNR Board of Directors and 

became state-effective on April 13, 2021. 

With regards to revisions to SIPs, 

CAA section 110(l) provides that EPA 

shall not approve a revision to a plan if 

the revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (as defined in CAA Section 

171), or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. Section 193 of 

the CAA provides, in part, that: 

No control requirement in effect, or 

required to be adopted by an order, 

settlement agreement, or plan in effect before 

November 16, 1990, in any area for any air 

pollutant may be modified after November 

15, 1990, in any manner unless the 

modification insures equivalent or greater 

emission reductions of such air pollutant. 

The proposed changes remove 

obsolete references and provisions, 

update and clarify the State’s inspection 

and maintenance (I/M) requirements, 

and update terminology, in part to 

reflect advances in test and vehicle 

technology. EPA believes the proposed 

changes submitted by Georgia will not 

lead to any increases of any NAAQS 

pollutant and will not otherwise 

interfere with any CAA applicable 

requirement. Additional detail on the 

changes and EPA’s analysis is contained 

in Section IV, below. 

IV. State’s Submittal and EPA’s 

Analysis 

Georgia’s April 30, 2021, SIP 

submittal modifies the following 

sections of Georgia’s SIP-approved I/M 

Regulation: Rule 391–3–20–.01— 

‘‘Definitions’’; Rule 391–3–20–.04— 

‘‘Emission Inspection Procedures’’; Rule 

391–3–20–.05—‘‘Emission Standards’’; 

Rule 391–3–20–.07—‘‘Inspection 

Equipment System Specifications’’; Rule 

391–3–20–.09—‘‘Inspection Station 

Requirements’’; and Rule 391–3–20– 

.11—‘‘Inspector Qualifications and 

Certification.’’ EPA’s analysis of these 

changes is provided in sections IV.A 

through IV.F. 

Georgia’s current SIP-approved I/M 

regulation covers all gasoline-powered 

light duty trucks and vehicles 24 model 

years old and newer. See Georgia Rule 

391–3–20–.03(1); 62 FR 42916 (August 

11, 1997). This means the I/M program 

currently applies to all gasolinepowered light duty trucks and vehicles 

with a model year of 1998 or later. 

Georgia’s current SIP-approved I/M 

regulation also has specific testing 

requirements. As mentioned above, all 

light-duty vehicles and trucks with 

model years of 1996 or newer are 

federally required to have an OBD 

system. As a result, Georgia’s SIPapproved rule requires OBD testing for 

‘‘newer’’ vehicles and Acceleration 

Simulation Mode (ASM) 10 or 2-speed 

idle (TSI) 11 tailpipe testing on ‘‘older’’ 

vehicles. The SIP-approved Georgia rule 

defines ‘‘older vehicles’’ as those with a 

designated model year of 1995 and older 

and ‘‘newer vehicles’’ as those with a 

designated model year of 1996 and 

newer. See Georgia Rules 391–3–20– 

.01(mm) and (kk), respectively. As 

discussed further in this section of the 

notice, the terms ‘‘older vehicles’’ and 

‘‘newer vehicles’’ are obsolete because 

Georgia’s SIP-approved I/M program 

only applies to light duty trucks and 

vehicles that are 24 model years old and 

newer. 

A. Rule 391–3–20–.01, ‘‘Definitions’’ 

Georgia’s SIP revisions include the 

following changes to Rule 391–3–20– 

.01. All other definitions in this Rule 

were renumbered accordingly to reflect 

the changes below. 

1. Acceleration Simulation Mode 2525/ 

5015 Exhaust Emission Test 

The submittal deletes the term 

‘‘Acceleration Simulation Mode 2525/ 

5015 exhaust emission test (ASM test)’’ 

from Rule 391–3–20–.01 as the test is 

now obsolete. EPA’s I/M program 

requirements stipulate that state and 

local agencies are free to design their 

testing protocol as they choose, 

provided they meet the appropriate 

performance standard. See 40 CFR 

51.351(d). EPA approved Georgia’s I/M 

Program SIP revision stipulating that the 

program would cover all gasolinepowered light duty trucks and vehicles 

24 model years old and newer in 1997. 

See 62 FR 42916 (August 11, 1997). As 

a result, Georgia’s I/M program is only 

required to cover vehicles with a model 

year of 1998 and later. See Georgia Rule 

391–3–20–.03(1). The SIP-approved 

Georgia rules require ASM or TSI testing 

on ‘‘older’’ vehicles and OBD testing for 

‘‘newer’’ vehicles.12 See Georgia Rules 

391–3–20–.04(2)(b) and .04(2)(a), 

respectively. Because Georgia’s I/M 

program only covers vehicles with a 

model year of 1998 or newer currently, 

the provisions of the SIP-approved rule 

that require ASM testing for older 

vehicles are no longer applicable.13

Since the ASM requirement no longer 

applies to vehicles covered by Georgia’s 

I/M program for the reason stated above, 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that the removal of this 

definition from Rule 391–3–20–.01(b) 

has no impact on emissions and is 

consistent with CAA requirements. 

2. Calibration 

The submittal revises the term 

‘‘Calibration’’ by removing a reference to 

the dynamometer, a part of the ASM 

test. The ASM test uses tailpipe 

emissions sensing equipment that 

measures emissions as the vehicle is 

driven under load at a steady speed on 

a chassis dynamometer. As stated above, 

the ASM test is no longer applicable to 

motor vehicles subject to Georgia’s SIPapproved I/M program. Therefore, EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that this revision to Rule 391–3–20– 

.01(c) has no impact on emissions and 

is consistent with CAA requirements. 

3. Exhaust Emission Test 

The submittal revises the term 

‘‘Exhaust Emissions Test’’ by removing 

a reference to the ASM test. As stated 

above, the ASM test is no longer 

applicable to motor vehicles subject to 

the I/M program. An exhaust emission 

test, when conducted, will now use the 

TSI test instead of the ASM test to 

determine the amount of specified gases 

in a vehicle’s exhaust. Inspectors may 

use the TSI test on non-OBD equipped 

vehicles when prompted by the Georgia 

Analyzer System (GAS).14 Additionally, 

inspectors must continue to use the TSI 

test on grandfathered vehicles. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that this revision to Rule 391–3–20– 

.01(r) has no impact on emissions and 

is consistent with CAA requirements. 

4. Malfunction Indicator Light 

The submittal revises the term 

‘‘Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL)’’ by 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 41083 

15As mentioned previously, Georgia does not 

currently require an emissions test for the few 

vehicles with model years 1996 or newer that are 

not equipped with OBD. 

16For those vehicles that are grandfathered in, 

inspectors must continue to use the TSI test in lieu 

of the ASM test. 

replacing the term ‘‘newer’’ with ‘‘OBD 

equipped’’ to describe vehicles with an 

MIL. A MIL is a light on the dashboard 

of OBD equipped vehicles that notifies 

the driver that an emission related fault 

has been detected and the vehicle 

should be repaired as soon as possible. 

The word ‘‘newer’’ previously referred 

to vehicles with a model year of 1996 

or later and is now obsolete because the 

I/M program only covers those vehicles 

with a designated model year of 1998 or 

later. EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that this revision to Rule 

391–3–20–.01(jj) has no impact on 

emissions and is consistent with CAA 

requirements. 

5. Newer Vehicles 

The submittal deletes the term 

‘‘Newer Vehicles,’’ which refers to 

vehicles with a designated model year 

of 1996 and newer, as it is obsolete. All 

vehicles covered under Georgia’s SIPapproved I/M program are necessarily 

those with a designated model year later 

than 1996 as the program only covers 

vehicles as far back as 24 model years 

old or newer. See Georgia Rule 391–3– 

20–.03(1). Currently, Georgia’s I/M 

program covers those vehicles with a 

model year of 1998 or newer. As a 

result, the rules no longer need to 

distinguish between ‘‘older’’ and 

‘‘newer’’ vehicles since the I/M program 

only covers those vehicles with a 

designated model year of 1998 or later. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that the removal of this 

definition from Rule 391–3–20–.01(kk) 

has no impact on emissions and is 

consistent with CAA requirements. 

6. Older Vehicles 

The submittal deletes the term ‘‘Older 

Vehicles,’’ which means vehicles with a 

designated model year of 1995 and 

older, as it is obsolete. As mentioned 

above, the only vehicles covered under 

Georgia’s SIP-approved I/M program 

currently are those with a designated 

model year of 1998 or later. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that the removal of this definition from 

Rule 391–3–20–.01(mm) has no impact 

on emissions and is consistent with 

CAA requirements. 

B. Rule 391–3–20–.04, ‘‘Emission 

Inspection Procedures’’ 

The submittal amends Rule 391–3– 

20–.04, ‘‘Emission Inspection 

Procedures,’’ by removing obsolete 

language referring to outdated 

requirements and inserting language 

referring to the OBD test. Specifically, 

the submittal makes changes to 

distinguish what emission inspection 

procedures will be used for OBD 

equipped vehicles versus non-OBD 

equipped vehicles. It does this first in 

Rule 391–3–20–.04(2)(a) by replacing 

the term ‘‘newer’’ with ‘‘OBD equipped’’ 

in reference to vehicles subject to 

particular emission inspection 

procedures. In 391–3–20–.04(3)(b) the 

term ‘‘older’’ is replaced with ‘‘non-OBD 

equipped’’ in reference to vehicles 

subject to a different set of emission 

inspection procedures. These changes 

are appropriate delineations between 

vehicles as the ‘‘older’’ and ‘‘newer’’ 

distinction is now obsolete for the 

reasons described above. 

The submittal also adds a new 

provision to the emission inspection 

procedures for newer non-OBD 

equipped vehicles.15 Specifically, for 

those non-OBD equipped vehicles that 

are not grandfathered in, inspectors may 

use the TSI test when prompted by 

GAS.16 EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that the revisions to Rule 

391–3–20–.04 have no impact on 

emissions and are consistent with CAA 

requirements. 

C. Rule 391–3–20–.05, ‘‘Emission 

Standards’’ 

The submittal amends Rule 391–3– 

20–.05, ‘‘Emission Standards,’’ to delete 

an outdated reference to the ASM test. 

Specifically, the submittal deletes 391– 

3–20–.05(2)(b)(2), which describes the 

standard under which a vehicle would 

pass an ASM test. As the ASM test is no 

longer applicable, this provision is no 

longer necessary. Rule 391–3–20–.05 is 

renumbered to adjust for the removal of 

this provision. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that this 

revision to Rule 391–3–20–.05 has no 

impact on emissions and is consistent 

with CAA requirements. 

D. Rule 391–3–20–.07, ‘‘Inspection 

Equipment System Specification’’ 

The submittal amends Rule 391–3– 

20–.07, ‘‘Inspection Equipment System 

Specification’’ by deleting language 

referring to newer vehicles, older 

vehicles, and the ASM test as this 

language is outdated and obsolete. This 

is consistent with the changes to the 

definitions portion of the rule which 

removed those terms. The ASM test is 

replaced with the TSI test in 391–3–20– 

.07 (b) and (d) as the ASM test is no 

longer applicable. The change to 

paragraph (b) has substantively made it 

identical to SIP-approved paragraph (c), 

so paragraph (c) has been removed 

completely. Rule 391–3–20–.07 is 

renumbered thereafter to account for 

this change. 

The submittal also deletes language in 

391–3–20–.07 that refers to distinctions 

between ‘‘newer’’ and ‘‘older’’ vehicles. 

First, in 391–3–20–.07(a), the submittal 

deletes language that gave station 

owners the option to apply for a 

Certificate of Authorization as either a 

regular inspection station or a newervehicle only inspection station. This 

distinction is now obsolete and the 

Certificate of Authorization was 

optional originally. Additionally, the 

submittal deletes language in 391–3–20– 

.07(d) referring to ‘‘newer and older’’ 

vehicles and removes a requirement 

from the same provision that only 

applied previously to fleet station 

inspection stations with respect to 

‘‘newer’’ vehicles. The removal of this 

language has resulted in a requirement 

that all fleet inspection station owners 

have an EPD-approved GAS which 

meets the OBD and TSI requirements of 

Chapter 391–3–20. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that these 

revisions to Rule 391–3–20–.07 have no 

impact on emissions and are consistent 

with CAA requirements. 

E. Rule 391–3–20–.09, ‘‘Inspection 

Station Requirements’’ 

The April 30, 2021, submittal amends 

Rule 391–3–20–.09, ‘‘Inspection Station 

Requirements,’’ by removing language 

that makes distinctions between older 

and newer stations as the delineation 

between older and newer vehicles is 

obsolete. The removal of requirements 

that depended upon this distinction has 

resulted in two classes of stations, 

regular inspection stations and fleet 

inspection stations. The removal of 

‘‘Newer-Vehicle Only Inspection 

Stations’’ will not result in any 

emissions impact as all vehicles that 

were required to be covered by the I/M 

program will still be subject to 

inspections under the new classes of 

stations. Rule 391–3–20–.09 is 

renumbered to account for the removal 

of this section. 

In addition to the changes described 

above, the submittal removes references 

and requirements related to the ASM 

test. One particular requirement that has 

been removed is a requirement for 

inspection station owners to provide 

proof of a bond or garage owner’s 

liability insurance for any damage to a 

vehicle during inspection. This 

requirement was primarily directed 

towards damage that would be caused 

using dynamometers during ASM 

testing. As TSI testing, which is 

performed at idle instead of on a 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
41084 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

dynamometer, will be used instead of 

ASM testing, the requirement is no 

longer necessary because the risks that 

gave rise to it no longer exist. No 

emissions impact will result from these 

changes. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that these revisions to 

Rule 391–3–20–.09 have no impact on 

emissions and are consistent with CAA 

requirements. 

F. Rule 391–3–20–.11, ‘‘Inspector 

Qualifications and Certification’’ 

The April 30, 2021, submittal amends 

Rule 391–3–20–.11, ‘‘Inspector 

Qualifications and Certification,’’ to 

remove references to ‘‘newer’’ vehicles, 

specifically in 391–3–20–.11(4) and (7). 

As described above, the distinction 

between ‘‘newer’’ and ‘‘older’’ vehicles 

is obsolete. The submittal specifically 

removes language that specifies 

requirements for inspectors who hold 

certificates that authorize them to only 

work on ‘‘newer’’ vehicles. As ‘‘newer’’ 

vehicle only certificates will no longer 

exist, the result of this removal will 

mean that inspectors will receive a 

certificate that authorizes them to 

inspect all vehicles. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that this revision to Rule 

391–3–20–.11 has no impact on 

emissions and is consistent with CAA 

requirements. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.5, and as 

explained in Sections I through IV of 

this preamble, EPA is proposing to 

incorporate by reference Georgia Rules 

391–3–20–.01—Definitions; 391–3–20– 

.04—Emission Inspection Procedures; 

391–3–20–.05—Emission Standards; 

391–3–20–.07—Inspection Equipment 

System Specifications; 391–3–20–.09— 

Inspection Station Requirements; and 

391–3–20–.11—Inspector Qualifications 

and Certification, all of which have an 

effective date of April 13, 2021, into the 

Georgia SIP. EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 4 office (please contact the 

person identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section of this 

preamble for more information). 

VI. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

aforementioned changes to the Georgia 

SIP. Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

approve the changes to Georgia Rules 

391–3–20–.01—Definitions; 391–3–20– 

.04—Emission Inspection Procedures; 

391–3–20–.05—Emission Standards; 

391–3–20–.07—Inspection Equipment 

System Specifications; 391–3–20–.09— 

Inspection Station Requirements; and 

391–3–20–.11—Inspector Qualifications 

and Certification into the Georgia SIP. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that these changes have 

no impact on emissions and are 

consistent with CAA requirements. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. This action merely proposes to 

approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 30, 2022. 

Daniel Blackman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14537 Filed 7–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 697 

[Docket No. 220701–0149] 

RIN 0648–BF01 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Atlantic Coastal Fisheries 

Cooperative Management Act 

Provisions; American Lobster Fishery 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: Based on the Atlantic States 

Marine Fisheries Commission’s 

recommendations, we are proposing to 

establish individual and aggregate trap 

caps in Lobster Conservation 

Management Areas 2 and 3, and 

institute mandatory coastwide 

electronic harvester reporting for all 

Federal lobster vessels. The proposed 

ownership caps and trap cap reduction 

measures are intended to reduce fishing 

exploitation and latent effort in the trap 

fishery by scaling the fishery to the size 

of the Southern New England lobster 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS