16988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

V. Director’s Decision

Based on the findings above, and

except as noted below, the Director is

approving the program amendment

submitted by Indiana on March 21,

1994. As discussed in Finding 2, the

Director is approving IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 to

the extent that the proposed amendment

meets the requirements of SMCRA

section 720(a) from June 30, 1994. In

addition, the Director is deferring

decision on the enforcement of the

provisions of SMCRA section 720(a)

during the period from the effective date

of SMCRA section 720 (October 24,

1992) to the effective date of IC 13–4.1–

9–2.5 (June 30, 1994). As discussed

above in Finding 5, the Director is not

acting on IC 13–4.1–2–3.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR

Part 914 codifying decisions concerning

the Indiana program are being amended

to implement this decision. This final

rule is being made effective immediately

to expedite the State program

amendment process and to encourage

States to bring their programs into

conformity with the Federal standards

without undue delay. Consistency of

State and Federal standards is required

by SMCRA.

Effect of Director’s Decision

Section 503 of SMCRA provides that

a State may not exercise jurisdiction

under SMCRA unless the State program

is approved by the Secretary. Similarly,

30 CFR 732.17(a) requires that any

alteration of an approved State program

be submitted to OSM for review as a

program amendment. Thus, any changes

to the State program are not enforceable

until approved by OSM. The Federal

regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(g) prohibit

any unilateral changes to approved State

programs. In his oversight of the Indiana

program, the Director will recognize

only the statutes, regulations and other

materials approved by him, together

with any consistent implementing

policies, directives and other materials,

and will require the enforcement by

Indiana of only such provisions.

VI. Procedural Determinations

Executive Order 12866

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866

(Regulatory Planning and Review).

Executive Order 12778

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 2 of Executive Order 12778

(Civil Justice Reform) and has

determined that, to the extent allowed

by law, this rule meets the applicable

standards of subsections (a) and (b) of

that section. However, these standards

are not applicable to the actual language

of State regulatory programs and

program amendments since each such

program is drafted and promulgated by

a specific State, not by OSM. Under

sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30

U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and 30 CFR

730.11, 732.15 and 732.17(h)(10),

decisions on proposed State regulatory

programs and program amendments

submitted by the States must be based

solely on a determination of whether the

submittal is consistent with SMCRA and

its implementing Federal regulations

and whether the other requirements of

30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have

been met.

National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since section

702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d))

provides that agency decisions on

proposed State regulatory program

provisions do not constitute major

Federal actions within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by OMB under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal

which is the subject of this rule is based

upon counterpart Federal regulations for

which an economic analysis was

prepared and certification made that

such regulations would not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, this rule will ensure that

existing requirements previously

promulgated by OSM will be

implemented by the State. In making the

determination as to whether this rule

would have a significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 914

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: March 27, 1995.

Ronald C. Recker,

Acting Assistant Director, Eastern Support

Center.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, Title 30, Chapter VII,

Subchapter T of the Code of Federal

Regulations is amended as set forth

below:

PART 914—INDIANA

1. The authority citation for Part 914

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

2. In Section 914.15, paragraph (ggg)

is added to read as follows:

§ 914.15 Approval of regulatory program

amendments.

* * * * *

(ggg) The following amendment

(Program Amendment Number 94–1) to

the Indiana program as submitted to

OSM on April 18, 1994, is approved,

except as noted below, effective April 4,

1995:

IC 13–4.1–6–9 Forfeiture of bond

IC 13–4.1–9–2.5 Subsidence repair or

compensation, to the extent that the

proposed amendment meets the

requirements of SMCRA section

720(a) from June 30, 1994. The

Director is deferring decision on the

enforcement of the provisions of

SMCRA section 720(a) during the

period from the effective date of

SMCRA section 720 (October 24,

1992) to the effective date of IC 13–

4.1–9–2.5 (June 30, 1994).

IC 13–4.1–11–6 Suspension or

revocation of permits

IC 13–4.1–2–4 Petition procedures for

rules

IC 13–4.1–2–4 Rule petition

procedures

IC 13–4.1–4–3 Necessary permit

findings

IC 13–4.1–4–5 Hearing on permit

approval/disapproval

IC 13–4.1–6–7 Release of bond or

deposit

IC 13–4.1–11–6 Suspension or

revocation of permit

IC 13–4.1–11–8 Temporary relief

IC 13–4.1–11–12 Hearings;

intervention

IC 13–4.1–12–1 Civil penalties

IC 13–4.1–13–1 Review of action of the

director/commission

IC 13–4.1–15–9 Hearings; use or

disposition of acquired lands

The Director is not acting on IC 13–

4.1–2–3, Conflict of interest.

[FR Doc. 95–8115 Filed 4–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 16989

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH69–1–6680a; FRL–5175–2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans Ohio;

Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection

and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The USEPA is giving full

approval through a direct final

procedure of the Vehicle Inspection and

Maintenance (I/M) program as a revision

of the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

for ozone for the Cleveland-AkronLorain, the Dayton-Springfield, and

Cincinnati moderate ozone

nonattainment areas in the State of

Ohio. The revision and subsequent

related material was submitted by the

State on November 12, 1993, March 15,

1994 and May 26, 1994. The SIP

revision establishes and requires the

implementation of an enhanced I/M

program in three (3) nonattainment

areas consisting of fourteen (14)

counties in the State, and enables the

development of a basic program in one

(1) other area consisting of two (2)

counties. The Cleveland-Akron-Lorain,

the Dayton-Springfield, and Cincinnati

areas are designated moderate

nonattainment for ozone and have opted

to implement enhanced I/M. The I/M

program is designed to be contract

operated, and the State has taken the

necessary steps to get the program up

and running within the timeframe

required in the USEPA regulations. The

Toledo area was also included as part of

the I/M submittal. This area is

undergoing review for redesignation to

attainment for ozone. As such, the

USEPA will take no action at this time

regarding the submittal of an I/M

program in the Toledo area. The USEPA

is approving the legislation and rules for

the Toledo area but will rulemake on

the need for an I/M program in the

Toledo area at a later date. This I/M SIP

action is being taken under section 110

of the Clean Air Act (the Act).

In the proposed rules section of this

Federal Register, USEPA is proposing

approval of this I/M program and SIP

revision and solicits public comments

on the action. If adverse comments are

received on this direct final rule,

USEPA will withdraw this final rule

and address these comments in a

subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This action will be

effective June 5, 1995 unless by May 4,

1995, someone submits adverse or

critical comments. If the effective date is

delayed, timely notice will be published

in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: William L. MacDowell,

Chief, Regulation Development Section,

Air Enforcement Branch (AE–17J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

Copies of the documents related to

this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following addresses: United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard

(AE–17J), Chicago, Illinois 60604; and

Office of Air and Radiation, Docket and

Information Center, Room M1500, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, S.W. Washington D.C., 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Paskevicz, Regulation Development

Section, Air Enforcement Branch (AE–

17J), U. S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Chicago, Illinois 60604 (312)

886–6084.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

Motor vehicles are a major contributor

of volatile organic compounds (VOC),

carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen

oxide (NOX) emissions. The motor

vehicle inspection and maintenance

program is an effective means of

reducing these emissions. Despite

improvements in emission control

technology in past years, mobile sources

in urban areas continue to remain

responsible for roughly half of the

emissions of VOC causing ozone, and

most of the emissions of CO. They also

emit substantial amounts of nitrogen

oxides and air toxics. This is because

the number of vehicle miles traveled has

doubled in the last 20 years to 20x1012

(20 trillion) miles per year, offsetting

much of the 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 USEPA is pursuing

a three-point strategy to achieve

emission reductions from motor

vehicles. The development and

commercialization of cleaner vehicles

and cleaner fuels represent the first two

elements of the strategy. These

developments will take many years

before cleaner vehicles and fuels

dominate the fleet and favorably impact

the environment. This Notice deals with

the third element of the strategy,

inspection and maintenance, which is

aimed at the reduction of emissions

from the existing fleet by ensuring that

vehicles are maintained to meet the

emission standards established by

USEPA. Properly functioning emission

controls are necessary to keep pollution

levels low. The driving public is often

unable to detect a malfunction of the

emission control system. While some

minor malfunctions can increase

emissions significantly, they do not

affect drivability and may go unnoticed

for a long period of time. Effective I/M

programs can identify excessive

emissions and assure repairs. The

USEPA projects that sophisticated I/M

programs such as the one being

proposed in this rulemaking in Ohio

will identify emission related problems

and prompt the vehicle owner to obtain

timely repairs thus reducing emissions.

The Act requires that polluted cities

adopt either a ‘‘basic’’ or ‘‘enhanced’’

I/M program, depending on the

severity of the pollution and the

population of the area. Moderate ozone

nonattainment areas, plus marginal

ozone areas with existing or previously

required I/M programs in Censusdefined urbanized areas, fall under the

‘‘basic’’ I/M requirements. Basic and

enhanced I/M programs both achieve

their objective by identifying vehicles

that have high emissions as a result of

one or more malfunctions, and requiring

them to be repaired. An ‘‘enhanced’’ I/

M program covers more vehicles in

operation in the fleet, employs

inspection methods which are better at

finding high emitting vehicles, and has

additional features to better assure that

all vehicles are tested properly and

effectively repaired. The Act directed

USEPA to establish a minimum

performance standard for enhanced I/M

programs. The standard is based on the

performance achievable by annual

inspections in a centralized test

program. States have flexibility to

design their own programs if they can

show that their program is as effective

as the model program used in the

performance standard. Naturally, the

more effective the program the more

credit a State will get towards the

emission reduction requirement. An

effective program will help to offset

growth in vehicle use and allow for

industrial and/or commercial growth.

The USEPA and the States have

learned a great deal about what makes

an I/M program effective since the Clean

Air Act of 1977 first required I/M

programs for polluted areas. There are

three major keys to an effective program:
16990 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

(1) Given the advanced state of current

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 the testing is done properly;

(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 of vehicles in

the current and future fleet. Also, covert

audits by USEPA and State agencies

typically discover improper inspection

and testing 50 percent of the time in

test-and-repair stations indicating poor

quality control. Experience has shown

that quality control at high-volume testonly stations is usually much better.

And, finally, diagnostics and mechanics

training are often poor or nonexistent.

On November 5, 1992 (57 FR 52950),

USEPA established a high-tech emission

test for high-tech cars. This I/M test,

known as the 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 test increases the benefit even

more resulting in lower testing costs and

consumer time demands. The pressure

test is designed to find leaks in the fuel

system, and the purge test evaluates the

functionality of the vapor control

system.

II. Background

There are four (4) areas in the State of

Ohio which are required to implement

an I/M program. They are: the

Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, the DaytonSpringfield, Cincinnati, and Toledo

areas. All are classified moderate

nonattainment for ozone.

On September 13, 1993, the State

submitted a request for redesignation to

attainment for the Toledo area. The

State analysis shows that the ozone

standard can be maintained in the

Toledo area without an I/M program.

This request is still pending. The

USEPA will rulemake on this issue at a

later date.

On November 12, 1993, December 12,

1993, March 15, 1994, and May 26,

1994, the State of Ohio submitted

material which comprised the State’s I/

M SIP revision for the areas in the State

required to implement basic I/M. The

November 12, 1993, submittal contained

the program plan, emission inventory,

legislation, draft rules, and draft request

for proposal (RFP) along with

demographic material for the areas of

concern. The December 12, 1993, I/M

submittal contained the official request

from the Director, Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency (OEPA) asking

USEPA for approval. On March 15,

1994, the State submitted the final RFP

and additional support material for

three (3) of the areas (referred to as

‘‘zones’’ in the State SIP) in which

enhanced I/M will be implemented. The

May 26, 1994, submittal contained final

approved rules, public notice material,

proceedings from the public hearings,

written comments and certification

materials. Finally, in a letter dated June

22, 1994, the Director provided

assurances to the USEPA that the State

has completed an RFP for the Toledo

Metropolitan area which will be

released promptly should the State’s

request for redesignation to attainment

be disapproved.

On January 21, 1994, the USEPA

notified the State that the November 12,

1993, I/M revision submittal was not

complete and that the sanctions clock

had started. Upon receipt of the

additional material noted above on July

22, 1994, the USEPA notified the OEPA

that the State’s I/M implementation plan

revision was complete and the sanctions

clock started in January had been

stopped for all of the affected areas.

While the State did not issue a request

for proposal (RFP) for the Toledo area,

it did have an RFP ready to issue in the

event the redesignation to attainment

failed.

The program also included rules

which give the Director of the OEPA

authority to implement a centralized

basic I/M program in any area

designated moderate nonattainment.

The USEPA considered the SIP

submittal complete in part because it

contained all the required authority to

readily implement an I/M program

without any additional action on the

part of the State legislature.

The Ohio I/M program was enabled

by Senate Bill 18, which was signed into

law by Governor Voinovich on June 27,

1993, and became effective on

September 27, 1993. The bill gives the

Director of OEPA authority to

implement the I/M program, and defines

the geographic boundaries of the

program in each nonattainment area

based on county boundaries. The bill

authorizes I/M for the following Ohio

counties which have Census-defined

urbanized areas: In the ClevelandAkron-Lorain CMSA, the counties of

Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain,

Medina, Portage, and Summit; in the

Dayton-Springfield CMSA, the counties

of Clark, Greene, and Montgomery; in

the Cincinnati CMSA, the counties of

Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren;

and in the Toledo MSA, the counties of

Lucas and Wood. Basic I/M is required

in all Census-defined urbanized areas

designated as moderate nonattainment.

The legislation also established a

process under which local governments

in an area classified as moderate

nonattainment can ask the Director of

the OEPA to implement and supervise

an enhanced I/M program instead of the

required basic program. With the

exception of the Toledo area, the other

three nonattainment areas have opted,

through the legislatively prescribed

process, to implement enhanced I/M.

The March 15, 1994, submittal

contained the State’s RFP which

describes in detail the requirements for

a contractor to develop and operate the

enhanced I/M program in these three

areas.

The USEPA has determined that the

Ohio enhanced I/M program meets the

requirements of USEPA’s performance

standard and other requirements

contained in the Federal I/M rule

promulgated on November 5, 1992 (57

FR 52950). The biennial, centralized,

test only program, is required to begin

testing in September 1995, two years

after the legislation became effective.

Testing will be conducted by a

contractor and supervised by the Ohio

EPA, Air Division. Additional aspects of

the program include: IM240 testing of

1981 and newer vehicles; two-speed

idle test of pre-1981 vehicles to 1975;

pressure and purge testing; a test fee to

ensure the State has adequate resources

to supervise the program; enforcement

by registration denial; opacity testing of

diesel powered vehicles; waiver limits

set at $100 for 1975–1980 model year,

and $200, actual expenditures, for 1981

and later model year vehicles;

compilation of a list of repair facilities

which can repair a vehicle to pass the

tailpipe inspection; data collection;

repair effectiveness program; inspector

training and certification; penalties for

inspectors and contractors; and

emission recall enforcement. In addition

to the above, the Director of the Ohio

EPA provided assurances in his letter of

June 22, 1994, to the USEPA Regional

Administrator that in the event the

Toledo redesignation to attainment is

not approved, the State will

immediately obtain a contractor to

operate a basic I/M program in that area.

An analysis of how the Ohio program

meets the Federal program requirements

is provided below.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 16991

A. Applicability

Under the requirements of the Clean

Air Act, basic inspection and

maintenance programs are required in a

number of areas classified as moderate

nonattainment for ozone. These areas

include: Cleveland-Akron-Lorain CMSA

including the counties of Cuyahoga,

Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage,

and Summit; Dayton-Springfield CMSA

including the counties of Clark, Greene,

and Montgomery; Cincinnati CMSA

including the counties of Butler,

Clermont, Hamilton and Warren; and

the Toledo MSA containing the counties

of Lucas and Wood. The State excluded

some smaller urbanized areas in the

CMSAs based on population. However,

because the I/M program is

implemented on a county-wide basis,

exclusion of these areas is offset by the

inclusion of non-urban residents in the

I/M counties. Ashtabula and Miami

counties are excluded from the I/M

testing program because these counties

contain no urban areas. In the

Cleveland-Akron-Lorain CMSA, 96.5

percent of the population is in the

program. In the Dayton-Springfield

CMSA, 90.3 percent of the population is

in the program. All of the counties in

the Cincinnati CMSA are included in

the program.

B. Enhanced I/M Performance Standard

The enhanced I/M program must be

designed and implemented to meet or

exceed a minimum performance

standard. The minimum performance

standard in this case is a basic I/M

program which is required in all four (4)

moderate nonattainment areas of the

State. Areas are required to meet the

performance standard for the pollutants

which cause them to be subject to I/M

requirements. Emission levels are

calculated using the most recent version

of USEPA mobile source emission factor

model. In Ohio the performance

standard must be met for volatile

organic compounds (VOC). The

performance standard is established

using the model I/M program inputs and

local characteristics, such as vehicle

mix and local fuel controls, and model

I/M program parameters for the

following: network type, start date, test

frequency, model year coverage, vehicle

type coverage, exhaust emission test

type, emission standards, emission

control device, evaporative system

function checks, stringency, waiver rate,

compliance rate and evaluation date.

Ohio used the USEPA model known as

MOBILE5a to calculate the emission

levels from the program design. The

Ohio I/M program target design

includes: centralized test, 1983 start

date, biennial frequency, 1970 and

newer model year coverage, vehicle

types include LDGV, LDGT1, LDGT2

and HDGV up to 10,000 pounds, IM240

for 1981 and newer vehicles, and a

steady-state loaded test for pre-1981

vehicles, five (5) element visual

inspection and pressure purge on all

vehicles, stringency rate for all vehicles

will be 20 percent, waiver rate will be

3 percent and a 96 percent compliance

rate. The performance standard is based

on a basic I/M program for all areas in

the State because the areas are classified

as moderate nonattainment areas and

are required to implement a basic I/M

program.

The emission levels achieved by the

State were modeled using MOBILE5a.

The demonstration was performed

correctly, using local characteristics and

shows that the program design will

exceed the minimum required I/M

performance standard. The State

exempts a number of alternatively

powered vehicles from the I/M program.

The USEPA believes these exemptions

for electric, hydrogen powered,

compressed natural gas, methanol,

ethanol and propane, which are

intended to encourage the use of

renewable and alternative energy

sources, will have little or no impact on

emissions in the immediate future.

C. Network Type and Program

Evaluation

Three of the four Ohio ozone

nonattainment areas are opting into the

enhanced I/M program. In these

enhanced areas a contractor will operate

a test-only centralized network for

inspections and reinspection. All

vehicles included in the emission

reduction demonstration will be tested

by a contractor in centralized I/M test

facilities. The contract specifies that the

contractor is barred from involvement in

motor vehicle-related business with the

exception of vehicle testing equipment

fabrication and sales. Authority for this

program is established in Senate Bill 18.

The Ohio legislation specifies

inspections and reinspection under an

enhanced program shall be conducted

by a centralized contractor.

The Ohio I/M program plan calls for

the Ohio EPA to institute an ongoing

evaluation of the enhanced I/M program

consistent with USEPA regulations to

quantify the emissions reductions

benefits of the program to verify that it

is meeting the requirements of the Clean

Air Act. The evaluation will consist of

monitoring the performance of IM240

on a random, representative sample of at

least 0.1 percent of the vehicles subject

to inspection and covering a 25 modelyear rolling window. Evaporative

system purge (1981 and newer) and

pressure tests (all model years) will be

performed on those vehicles subject to

the test requirements. The State program

plan describes the manner in which the

State will perform the evaluation: using

Ohio EPA auditors, visiting each lane at

every station, choosing vehicles at

random at different times of the day,

performing calibration checks, and

ensuring the selected vehicles represent

the fleet mix in the test area. The

evaluation program includes surveys

conducted by the State to assess the

effectiveness of repairs performed on

vehicles which fail any of the required

tests. Tampering rates will be measured

for changes during the life of the

program, and deterrent effects will be

evaluated. Ohio law prohibits the sale of

any tampered vehicle in the State.

Lane inspectors employed by the

contractor will be evaluated using

undercover audit vehicles and State

personnel. The mission of the auditors

will be to conduct surveys for inspector

effectiveness in identifying vehicles in

need of repair. Ohio EPA will submit

biennial reports on the results of the

evaluations. The report will assess

whether the program is meeting the

emission reduction target.

D. Adequate Tools and Resources

The Federal regulation requires the

State to demonstrate that there is

adequate funding of the program

functions including quality assurance,

data analysis and reporting, holding

hearings and adjudication of cases. The

Ohio I/M program will be funded

through a per-vehicle inspection fee

which will be set following award of the

centralized contracts in each of the

ozone nonattainment areas. Legislation

gives the director of the Ohio EPA the

authority to establish an annual or

biennial test fee sufficient to cover all

costs associated with implementation,

administration and operation of the

program. The fee is capped in the State’s

legislation at twenty-five (25) dollars per

test for an enhanced biennial program.

Approximately $1.25 from each test will

be paid to the Ohio EPA for

administrative oversight activities. This

will result in sufficient funding during

the year for the State to administer the

program and provide oversight,

management, and enforcement. The

Ohio EPA will use leased vehicles of a

variety of makes and model years for the

covert auditing program. Arrangements

are made with the Ohio Bureau of Motor

Vehicles (BMV) which provides cover

registrations and license plates.

The contractor(s) selected to perform

the testing will be required to provide

administrative support for Ohio EPA
16992 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

staff at the three area headquarters,

along with a supply of calibration gas

and hardware to perform quality

assurance audits. The Ohio BMV will

provide program oversight of the

registration denial portion of the

enforcement program.

E. Test Frequency and Convenience

The Federal I/M rule requires test

systems to be designed in such a way to

provide convenient service. The Ohio

enhanced program test frequency is

biennial for all subject vehicles. New

vehicles are not tested until two (2)

years after the initial registration. In the

biennial program even model years will

be tested on the even calendar year and

odd numbered model years will be

tested in the odd numbered calendar

year. The State will require that test

facilities are located such that eighty

(80) percent of all motorists in urban

areas do not have to drive more than

five (5) miles to a test facility, and onehundred (100) percent in urban area

will not have to drive more than ten (10)

miles, and one-hundred (100) percent of

the affected population in rural areas

will be within 15 miles of a test facility.

The State RFP specifies at least fiftyeight (58) hours of operation of a test

facility per week.

F. Vehicle Coverage

The Federal rule for enhanced I/M

programs assumes coverage of all 1968

and newer model year light duty

vehicles and light duty trucks up to

8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight

rating (GVWR), and includes vehicles

operating on all fuel types. The Ohio I/

M program requires all gasoline and

diesel powered light duty passenger

cars, light duty trucks, and heavy duty

vehicles up to 10,000 pounds, up to and

including twenty-five (25) years old and

newer are subject to the program. The

BMV data available on the current fleet

does not include vehicles owned by the

U.S. General Services Administration or

vehicles owned by the State BMV.

These government vehicles are required

to be tested but are not currently part of

the State data base. The OEPA is

working with these organizations to

establish a testing routine and schedule

for these vehicles, which are not

presently licensed by the BMV. The

State also exempts vehicles including

historical vehicles (older than 25 years),

licensed collectors vehicles (which have

use restrictions), parade and exhibition

vehicles (which receive temporary road

permits), motor cycles, recreational

vehicles over 10,000 pounds, and

alternative fueled vehicles. The USEPA

agrees with the State that these vehicles

do not make up a significant portion of

the total motor vehicle fleet in the tested

area and most are not included in the

modeling for the performance standard.

Additional information and other

statistical information regarding the

fleet, required to manage the program,

will become available following the first

test cycle.

G. Test Procedures and Standards

Written test procedures and pass/fail

standards are required to be established

and followed for each model year and

vehicle type included in the program.

Federal test procedures and standards

are found in 40 CFR 51.357 and in the

draft USEPA document entitled ‘‘HighTech I/M Test Procedures, Equipment

Standards, Quality Control

Requirements, and Equipment

Specifications’’, EPA–AA–EPSD–IM–

93–1, finalized in April 1994. The

Director of OEPA has the authority to

establish test procedures according to

the needs of the program. The test

procedures are listed in the Ohio EPA

RFP and correspond to the USEPA

procedures. The Ohio procedure for the

evaporative system functional test uses

non-invasive helium in place of

nitrogen as called for in the USEPA

procedure. The contractor will work

with the USEPA to obtain approval for

use of this gas. All vehicles will be

tested in an as-received condition and

vehicle owners will have an opportunity

to view the test from an area at the test

site that affords an unobstructed view.

Each vehicle will be inspected prior to

the emissions test and rejected from

testing if any unsafe condition exists or

if the exhaust is leaking or missing. In

the event of an emission failure of any

kind, all components are retested after

repairs. The State will use the same

emission standards set forth in section

85.2205(a) of the technical guidance

published by USEPA in July 1993. The

State also uses the evaporative test

standards published in the same

document, and a clause in the RFP

allows the State to change the standards

in the event emission cutpoints need to

be changed to adjust failure rates in the

program. The State has established a

twenty-five (25) year ‘‘rolling window’’

for vehicles subject to the emission

standards in the I/M program. This

concept has been taken into account in

the modeling the State performed to

determine emission reduction benefits.

A vehicle with a switched engine is

required to meet the emission standards

of the chassis model year as listed on

the vehicle registration. If the engine is

newer than the chassis, the State’s

tamper provisions apply and the vehicle

will be evaluated on that basis. For the

tamper inspection, such a vehicle must

match a light-duty certified

configuration of chassis model year or of

a newer vehicle if it had originally been

a light-duty configuration.

The State permanently exempts a

number of vehicles. The State exempted

alternatively-fueled vehicles in order to

promote clean burning fuels. Dualfueled vehicles are not subject to this

exemption. Dual-fueled vehicles will be

tested to meet the requirements of the

program while being fueled with

gasoline. Exempted vehicles fall into a

select category defined as ‘‘limited use’’

and are not normally found in common

use on the highway. These include

historic, parade, and collector’s

vehicles, electric vehicles, vehicles over

ten thousand (10,000) pounds, vehicles

with salvage certificates, and any

vehicle over twenty-five (25) years old.

Temporary exemptions and extensions

to the exemptions are also available for

a range of criteria. Motor vehicles

owned by military personnel stationed

outside the State, out-of-State students,

owner’s with a temporary medical

condition, and vehicles undergoing

repair are eligible for temporary

exemptions. Owners of these vehicles

are required to submit documentation to

prove status and are tracked in the

State’s data base to ensure the vehicle

eventually gets tested.

H. Test Equipment

The Federal regulation requires

computerized test systems for

performing any measurement on subject

vehicles. The Ohio EPA lists the details

of the technical specification of the test

equipment in the RFP, and make

reference to the requirements of the

Federal regulations and the technical

guidance document. Computerized test

systems are required for performing any

measurements on subject vehicles.

According to the requirements in the

RFP, these systems must conform to

Federal requirements. Each of the

State’s test lanes shall be equipped with

a dynamometer, constant volume

sampler, non-dispersive infrared

analyzers to measure carbon monoxide,

carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons, and

an analyzer for measuring NOx, and

non-invasive helium pressure and purge

test equipment. All of this equipment

must pass an acceptance test before it is

approved by the State. The State’s

contract will require the contractor(s) to

update emission test equipment to

accommodate new technology vehicles

and any changes to the program. All test

systems will be linked by a real-time

data link in order to prevent

unauthorized multiple initial tests on

the same vehicle in the same test cycle.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 16993

I. Quality Control

Quality control measures will ensure

that emission measurement equipment

are calibrated and maintained properly,

and that inspection, calibration records,

and control charts are accurately

created, recorded and maintained. The

Ohio EPA prepared the RFP to require

the contractor to implement quality

control procedures which comply with

40 CFR 51.359. The compliance

document, the inspection certificate,

that Ohio EPA will issue to motorists

that comply with inspection

requirements are only valid once a

computer generated check redundancy

code (CRC) is printed on each

document. The CRC is analyzed by the

Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV), and

vehicle registration renewals can only

be generated by the BMV computer if

the code is valid. The CRC is only

printed on a compliance document,

which contains test results, once a

vehicle passes all parts of the emission

inspection. The security of compliance

documents for the Ohio program focuses

on the CRC rather than the number of

compliance documents issued to

inspection stations. However,

inspection certificates shall be stored in

a locked container at the inspection

station at all times when not in use, and

the contractor is held responsible for

accountability of all certificates. The

RFP states that the contractor’s quality

control procedures shall ensure that

emission measurement equipment is

properly calibrated and maintained.

Analyzers will automatically record

quality control check information,

lockouts, attempted tampering, and any

other recordable circumstances that

impact quality control.

J. Waivers and Compliance via

Diagnostic Inspection

The I/M program allows the issuance

of a waiver, which is a form of

compliance with the program

requirements that allows a motorist to

comply without meeting the applicable

test standards, as long as the prescribed

criteria are met. The State program plan

contains elements in this section which

generally follow the waiver issuance

criteria listed in the Federal I/M

regulation. In modeling the emission

reduction benefits, Ohio used

MOBILE5a and assumed a maximum

waiver rate of 2 percent for 1980 and

older model year vehicles and 3 percent

for 1981 and newer vehicles. In the

event the actual waiver rate exceeds the

planned maximum used for estimating

the emission reduction benefit, the State

has commited to remodel to assess the

emission reduction benefits based on

the actual waiver rate.

Legislation gives the Director of the

Ohio EPA the authority to issue waivers,

set and adjust cost limits, and

administer the waiver system.

Following a test failure, the subsequent

reinspection must show a thirty (30)

percent improvement in measured

concentrations of each pollutant that

exceeded the standards in the first test

and the minimum waiver limit amount

has been spent on emission related

repairs. A vehicle is eligible for a waiver

when proof is provided that the vehicle

has received all repairs and adjustments

for which it is eligible under any

emissions performance warranty. The

costs associated with repair of any

tampering is not considered valid

towards a waiver. When proof is

provided to the inspection station

manager that appropriate repairs have

been performed on the vehicle, such

vehicle will be eligible for a waiver. The

inspection station manager is

responsible for verifying repairs and

reviewing repair receipts. The station

manager, assistant manager or an Ohio

EPA auditor are authorized to determine

waiver eligibility. Waivers are valid for

one (1) year and are not renewable. The

minimum expenditure made on

emission repairs is one-hundred ($100)

dollars for 1980 and older vehicles and

two-hundred ($200) dollars for 1981 and

newer. While the Clean Air Act requires

a minimum waiver repair expenditure

for enhanced I/M programs of $450,

basic areas such as in Ohio which are

opting up to enhanced I/M do not have

to meet this requirement.

The State allows exemptions to the

inspection requirement and extensions

if a vehicle is undergoing extensive

repair at the time of its registration or

registration renewal. The requirements

for an extension or exemption are

sufficient to allow the State full

understanding of the need by the

consumer for the extension or

exemption, and places a burden on the

consumer to prove to the State that such

an extension or exemption is needed.

The Federal I/M rules also allow the

use of compliance via diagnostic

inspection following repairs after a test

failure. The State of Ohio has chosen

not to allow compliance via diagnostic

repair.

K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement

The Federal regulations require the

use of registration denial to ensure

compliance with the requirements of the

I/M program. The Ohio EPA, along with

the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles

(BMV), will continue to implement a

registration denial enforcement

program. Vehicle owners who do not

renew vehicle registrations, and

continue to drive an unregistered

vehicle in the State, will be subject to

enforcement action by any law

enforcement officer in the State. Local

governments are responsible for

establishing policies for the mandatory

fines of all traffic violations including

failing to comply with registration

requirements. Owners of all vehicles

registered in the State are required to

affix a sticker to the lower right hand

corner of the rear license plate. This

sticker identifies the month and year of

the registration renewal date. If an

owner or driver fails to comply with I/

M or registration requirements, he or

she will be unable to legally drive that

automobile and be subject to

enforcement action. Vehicle owners

who move their residence into an Ohio

I/M testing area will be required to have

an emission test prior to registering the

vehicle in the area. Motorists are

permitted thirty (30) days to register the

vehicle after moving to a new address.

Vehicle owners who fail to complete the

registration process after relocating may

be ticketed by law enforcement agencies

for driving with a registration violation.

L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement

Program Oversight

The Federal rule requires the State to

audit the enforcement program on a

regular basis and the State shall follow

effective program management

practices, including adjustments to

improve operation when necessary. A

quality assurance program shall be

implemented to insure effective overall

performance of the enforcement system.

Ohio Senate Bill 18 authorizes the

Director of Ohio EPA to promulgate,

adopt, amend and rescind rules for

motorist compliance with the I/M

program. The contractors are

responsible for in-house accounting of

documents and compliance certificates.

Documents in the Ohio I/M program are

valid only if a CRC is present. Missing

or unaccounted certificates do not pose

a threat of fraudulent activity because

each CRC is unique for each certificate

at the time the certificate is issued.

The I/M contractor is held responsible

for certificate accountability. In the

event the contractor employees or

inspectors tamper with the records or

documents, the state will take action to

have the employee terminated.

Exemption records will be analyzed

together with the registration database

to determine changes in registration

data. Where it is determined that an

unusually high number of vehicles are

unexplainably not in the registration

area or not being tested, provisions will
16994 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

be made to identify and take action on

the anomalous condition. The

procedures may include methods for

performing covert and overt audits,

preparation of enforcement documents,

I/M test equipment operation, public

relation materials and other applicable

information. The Bureau of Motor

Vehicles (BMV) will issue material

containing procedures for performing

specific operations associated with I/M

inspection and registration

requirements. The BMV materials will

be issued to the Deputy Registrars and

will include information explaining the

evaluation process. Each Deputy

Registrar is evaluated biannually. In

cases where enforcement personnel fail

to follow established procedures, action

may be taken to discipline, retrain, or

remove the employee. In establishing an

information base to be used in

evaluating and enforcing the I/M

program, the State uses actual vehicle

population data obtained from the BMV

and test results from I/M contractors.

The I/M contractors will have access

to the BMV database, but in a ‘‘read

only’’ format to prevent accidental or

intentional data modifications.

Both the State and the contractors will

be able to perform periodic audits of the

testing database. Reports from these

audits will be used to evaluate program

effectiveness. Test data will be analyzed

to determine if facilities are operating

according to procedures. Outlying data

will trigger investigations of the

facilities. If necessary, enforcement

action will be taken against test facilities

found violating State or Federal

regulations.

M. Quality Assurance

The USEPA rule requires an ongoing

quality assurance program in order to

discover, correct and prevent fraud,

waste, and abuse, and to determine

whether procedures being followed are

adequate, whether equipment is

measuring accurately, and whether

other problems may exist which would

impede program performance. The

procedures shall be periodically

evaluated to assess their effectiveness in

achieving program goals. Scheduled

State audits are to ensure that all

facilities are randomly audited on a

regular basis. Directed audits will be

conducted to investigate specific

situations. Any valid consumer

complaint will trigger a directed audit of

a centralized facility. If a problem

appears to exist at a specific station, a

directed audit will be conducted. Covert

audits will be conducted annually by

State staff and equal in number to the

number of inspectors employed by the

contractors. Vehicles presented for audit

testing will be in a range of

manufacturers, models and age to

replicate the current fleet, and will be

leased on a six month basis to ensure

that a variety of vehicles are presented

to the inspection process.

The covert audit will include a gas

audit using gases of known

concentrations that are as accurate as

those used for routine quality control

checks. The audit will include a check

for tampering and general serviceability

of equipment, critical flow in the

constant volume sampler (CVS), CVS

flow calibration, leak check and gas

tolerances. There will be a functional

check of the dynamometer for roll speed

and distance, coast-down, inertia weight

selection and power absorption. The

pressure and purge equipment will also

be checked. The OEPA auditors are

expected to receive formal training in

the use of analyzers, basics of air

pollution control, basic engine repair,

State administrative procedures, quality

assurance practices, covert procedures

and program rules and regulations.

N. Enforcement Against Contractors,

Stations and Inspectors

The Federal I/M regulation requires

the establishment of minimum penalties

for violations of program rules and

procedures which can be imposed

against stations, contractors and

inspectors. Senate Bill 18 of the Ohio

Revised Code gives Ohio EPA authority

to enter into a contract to implement

and maintain an inspection and

maintenance program. This contract

allows the State to impose penalties

when violations occur that adversely

affect the operation of the inspection

network. A penalty schedule, listing a

variety of rules infractions, will be used

for violations discovered at an

inspection facility as a result of overt

and covert audits conducted by Ohio

EPA staff. Penalties range from 100

dollars up to 10,000 dollars to

termination of employment and breech

of contract. In cases of inspector

incompetence, Ohio EPA will require

the contractor retrain the inspector

according to the requirements listed in

the contract. Inspectors will be

prevented from conducting tests until

retraining is complete.

Ohio EPA will maintain field offices

and employ auditors in each of the

zones in which I/M is required to be

implemented. The primary function of

the auditors will be to conduct audits of

the contractor facilities. These audits

will determine the ability of the

contractor and inspectors to conduct a

proper inspection and identify cases of

bribery or fraud. Funding for this

enforcement program will come from a

rotary fund established under section

3704.14 of the Ohio Revised Code.

O. Data Collection

In order to manage, evaluate and

enforce the program requirements an

effective I/M program requires accurate

data collection. The Ohio I/M program

RFP requires the contractor to design

the program to include all of the

elements of data collection listed in the

Federal rule. The contractor is also

required to conduct quality control

checks and report data from those

checks.

P. Data Analysis and Reporting

Data analysis and reporting are

required in order to monitor and

evaluate the program by the State and

the USEPA. The Federal rule requires

annual reports submitted to the USEPA

following a performance period by a

specific time. The Ohio I/M program

requires the contractor to provide the

information to the State in order to meet

the submittal requirements of the

Federal rule. The statistics required are

consistent with those listed in the

Federal rule and are expected to be

submitted on time.

Q. Inspector Training and Licensing or

Certification

The Federal rule requires all

inspectors receive formal training and

be licensed or certified to conduct

inspections. Ohio Senate Bill 18

authorizes the Ohio EPA to develop

rules which establish provisions for

inspector training and certification

requirements. The Ohio EPA requires

the contractor to enter into an

arrangement with local vocational

schools, technical schools or training

organizations to conduct inspector

training. All trainees are required to

pass a comprehensive hands-on and

written examination which requires

inspectors to demonstrate an

understanding of Ohio’s rules,

regulations, test procedures, equipment

usage, quality control procedures and

safety and health issues as used in the

enhanced test. The Ohio EPA has

committed to evaluating and monitoring

the development of the I/M inspector

training program. Recertification is

required on a biennial basis and

inspectors are required to attend

training for updated information and

new program developments.

R. Public Information and Consumer

Protection

The Ohio implementation plan must

include a program for informing the

public on an ongoing basis for the life

of the program about the air quality,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 16995

requirements of State and Federal laws,

the role of motor vehicles in the air

quality problem, and the benefits of an

I/M program. Information must be made

available to the motorist, whose vehicle

fails the test, to provide knowledge of

repair facilities and the relative quality

of repairs performed. The Ohio EPA

assigned some public awareness efforts

to the contractor with State oversight.

These efforts include a toll-free hotline,

sending reminder notices to motorists in

advance of testing deadlines, producing

brochures and participating in public

speaking activities. The State will carry

out its responsibilities by publishing

fact sheets, issuing press releases,

publishing a newsletter for the repair

industry, and participating in special

events. The Ohio I/M consumer

protection plan will include

components to protect the consumer

from fraud and abuse. Both Ohio EPA

and the contractors will perform quality

assurance to ensure integrity of the

inspection process. The State’s

approach in this regard will focus on the

use of undercover audits of the

inspection and test procedure.

Consumers who believe their vehicles

should not have failed will be able to

appeal the test results directly to the

Ohio EPA by scheduling an appeal

inspection within 14 days of the initial

test. Citizens who report incidents of

fraud, theft or other violations are

protected by the State which will grant

confidentiality to encourage such

disclosure. The contractor will operate a

toll-free hotline to provide to motorists

answers to questions about the program.

The contractor is required by the State

to swiftly resolve complaints over

which the contractor has control or

forward the complaint to the State for

disposition. The State will periodically

audit the process to ensure complaints

are resolved. The State will also

intervene on behalf of a consumer in the

event of a conflict with an automobile

dealer for warranty repairs for a vehicle

which fails the I/M test.

S. Improving Repair Effectiveness

Inspection and maintenance program

goals are achieved through effective

repairs of vehicles which have failed the

initial test. The State will provide the

repair industry with information and

assistance on vehicle inspection

diagnosis and repair. Ohio EPA will

provide technical assistance to repair

facilities which are in the business of

repairing emission failures.

These facilities will receive

publications which include I/M test

procedures, common problems with

specific model year vehicles, diagnostic

tips, training and other I/M related

issues. A technician’s hotline also will

be available to respond to specific I/M

repair questions. The State will monitor

the performance of individual motor

vehicle repair facilities, and provide to

the public a summary of the

performance of repair facilities so the

consumer has a choice of locations to

seek repairs. The repair statistics also

will be available to the repair facilities.

The State plans to evaluate the

availability of repair technician training

in the I/M areas. If sufficient training is

not available the State commits to work

with public and private automotive

training institutions to develop a

training program.

T. Compliance With Recall Notices

States are required to establish a

method 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. The Ohio

EPA, at the time of submittal, did not

have a specific plan developed but

included provisions in its RFP for the

contractor to follow to ensure subject

vehicles receive all required recall

repairs. Emissions tests will not be

conducted on a vehicle that has an

unresolved recall notice until all of the

work is done. Vehicles with unresolved

recall work will be identified as

noncomplying by the contractor’s

system. An owner is required to provide

proof that the repairs have been

performed before a test is allowed. The

contractor shall have the ability to

resolve situations where the repairs

have been performed but the database

has not yet been updated. The State

OAC rule 3745–26–12 requires

documented proof that the repairs have

been performed. The cost of these

repairs are not counted towards the

amount needed for a waiver. Unresolved

recall reports from the contractor to the

State are required on an annual basis.

The State requires the contractor to

provide detailed information in the

annual report sufficient for the State to

inform the USEPA of the status of

operations of the program.

U. On-Road Testing

On-road testing is required in

enhanced I/M areas and is an option for

basic I/M areas. The Ohio

nonattainment areas at issue are all

moderate areas requiring basic I/M.

Since the enhanced I/M program is an

option in the nonattainment areas of

Ohio, on-road testing is not required.

Accordingly, the State did not plan for

conducting on-road testing.

V. State Implementation Plan

Submission

The State submitted a committal SIP

to USEPA on November 12, 1993. The

committal included: a schedule of

events leading up to the implementation

of the I/M program, mobile modeling

which shows that the program meets the

performance standard, a description of

the geographic area, a detailed

discussion of the design elements, final

copy of the legal authority, regulations,

and funding and resources. Additional

information was submitted through May

26, 1994. On July 22, 1994, the USEPA

notified the State that the submittal was

complete. This notification stopped the

sanctions clock which was started on

January 21, 1994, because at that time

the State’s submittal was not complete.

III. Comments and Approval Procedure

The USEPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because USEPA

views this action as a noncontroversial

revision amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, USEPA is

publishing a separate document in this

Federal Register publication, which

constitutes a ‘‘proposed approval’’ of the

requested SIP revision and clarifies that

the rulemaking will not be deemed final

if timely adverse or critical comments

are filed. The ‘‘direct final’’ approval

shall be effective on June 5, 1995, unless

USEPA receives adverse or critical

comments by May 4, 1995.

If USEPA receives comments adverse

or critical of the approval discussed

above, USEPA will withdraw this

approval before its effective date by

publishing a subsequent Federal

Register notice which withdraws this

final action. All public comments

received will then be addressed in a

subsequent rulemaking notice. The

USEPA will institute another comment

period on this action only if warranted

by significant revisions to the

rulemaking based on any comments

received in response to today’s action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this action should do so at this time.

If no comments are received, USEPA

hereby advises the public that this

action will be effective on June 5, 1995.

IV. The USEPA’s Analysis of the Ohio

I/M Program Submittal

A complete USEPA analysis of the

program submittal is detailed in the

Agency’s technical support document

(TSD) which is available in the docket.

A copy of the TSD can be obtained by

contacting the person listed in the

ADDRESSES portion of this notice. The

TSD summarizes the requirements of

the Federal I/M regulations and address
16996 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

whether the elements of the State’s

submittal comply with the Federal rule.

Interested parties are encouraged to

examine the TSD for additional detailed

information about the Ohio I/M

program.

Final Action

The USEPA is approving the I/M SIP

for the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain,

Cincinnati, and Dayton-Springfield

areas and takes no action on the I/M SIP

for the Toledo area.

Precedential Effect

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting, allowing, or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. The

USEPA shall consider each request for

revision to the SIP in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors, and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a

Table 2 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214–2225), as

revised by an October 4, 1993,

memorandum from Michael Shapiro,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air

and Radiation. The OMB has exempted

this regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

Regulatory Flexibility

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. Section 600 et seq., USEPA

should prepare a regulatory flexibility

analysis assessing the impact of any

proposed or final rule on small entities.

(5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.) Alternatively,

USEPA may certify that the rule will not

have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses,

small not-for-profit enterprises, and

government entities with jurisdiction

over populations of less than 50,000.

This limited approval does not create

any new requirements. Therefore, I

certify that this action does not have a

significant impact on any small entities

affected. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-State relationship under the

CAA, preparation of the regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of the State action. The

CAA forbids USEPA to base its final

limited approval of Ohio’s I/M on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA,

427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control, Incorporation

by reference, Intergovernmental

relations, Ozone, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile

organic compounds.

Dated: March 10, 1995.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

Title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, chapter I, part 52, subpart

KK is amended as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. Section 52.1870 is amended as

follows by adding paragraph (c)(101) to

read as follows:

§ 52.1870 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(101) On November 12, 1993 the Ohio

Environmental Protection Agency

submitted a vehicle inspection and

maintenance program in accordance

with section 110 of the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990. The new program

replaces I/M programs in operation in

the Cleveland and Cincinnati areas and

establishes new programs in Dayton and

any area designated moderate

nonattainment or any area where local

planning authorities have requested the

State to implement a program.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Ohio Administrative Code

Amended Rules 3745–26–01, 3754–26–

02, 3745–26–10, and rules 3745–26–12,

3745–26–13, and 3745–26–14, all made

effective on June 13, 1994.

(ii) Other material.

(A) Certification letter from the

Director of the Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency regarding the State

process in developing the I/M rules and

the I/M program.

(B) Letter dated June 22, 1994, from

the Director of OEPA regarding

implementation of an I/M program in

the Toledo area in the event the State’s

request for redesignation to attainment

for that area is not approved by USEPA.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–8221 Filed 4–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[IL116–1–6792a; FRL–5182–3]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes; State of Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The USEPA is approving a

November 10, 1994 State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

request to redesignate two sulfur

dioxide (SO2) nonattainment areas in

the State of Illinois to attainment and

approving the accompanying

maintenance plans as SIP revisions

because they satisfy the requirements of

the Clean Air Act (Act). The

redesignation requests and maintenance

plans were submitted by the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency

(IEPA) for the following SO2

nonattainment areas: Peoria County

(Hollis and Peoria Townships) and

Tazewell County (Groveland

Township). The redesignation requests

are based on ambient monitoring data

and modeling demonstrations that show

no violations of the SO2 National

Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS). In the proposed rules section

of this Federal Register, USEPA is

proposing approval of and soliciting

public comments on these requested

redesignations and SIP revisions. If

adverse comments are received on this

direct final rule, USEPA will withdraw

this final rule and address these

comments in a final rule on the related

proposed rule which is being published

in the proposed rules section of this

Federal Register. Adverse comments

received concerning a specific

geographic area, Peoria or Tazewell

Counties, will only affect this final rule

as it pertains to that area and only the

portion of this final rule concerning the

area receiving adverse comments will be

withdrawn.

DATES: This final rule is effective June

5, 1995, unless notice is received by

May 4, 1995, that someone wishes to

submit adverse comments. If the

effective date is delayed, timely notice

will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revision

and USEPA’s analyses are available for

inspection at the following address: (It

is recommended that you telephone

Fayette Bright at (312) 886–6069 before

visiting the Region 5 Office.) United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation