[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 5, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17232-17237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8313]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[AK7-1-6588a; FRL-5171-5]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Alaska

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 
submitted by the state of Alaska. This revision establishes and 
requires the implementation of a basic motor vehicle inspection and 
maintenance (I/M) program in the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) and 
the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB). The intended effect of this 
action is approval of a basic motor vehicle I/M program. This action is 
being taken under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This final rule is effective on June 5, 1995 unless adverse or 
critical comments are received by May 5, 1995. If the effective date is 
delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston, 
SIP Manager, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 
Seattle, Washington 98101.
    Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for 
public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, 
DC 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during 
normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Air & 
Radiation Branch, 1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington 
98101, and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, 410 
Willoughby, Suite 105, Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Lee, EPA, Air and Radiation 
Branch (AT-082), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 
553-1814.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Clean Air Act Requirements

    The Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAAA or Act), requires 
states to make changes to improve existing I/M programs or implement 
new ones. Section 187(a)(4) and section 182(a)(2)(B) requires any 
carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area which has been classified as 
``moderate'' (pursuant to section 181(a) of the Act) or worse with an 
existing I/M program that was part of a SIP, or any area that was 
required by the 1977 Amendments to the Act to have an I/M program, to 
immediately submit a SIP revision to bring the program up to the level 
required in past EPA guidance or to what had been committed to 
previously in the SIP whichever was more stringent.
    In addition, Congress directed the EPA in section 182(a)(2)(B) to 
publish updated guidance for state I/M programs, taking into 
consideration findings of the Administrator's audits and investigations 
of these programs. The states were to incorporate this guidance into 
the SIP for all areas required by the Act to have an I/M program.
    On November 5, 1992 (57 FR 52950), the EPA published a final 
regulation establishing the I/M requirements, pursuant to section 182 
and 187 of the Act. The I/M regulation was codified at 40 CFR part 51, 
Subpart S, and requires states to submit an I/M SIP revision which 
includes all necessary legal authority and the items specified in 40 
CFR 51.372 (a)(1) through (a)(8) by November 15, 1993. The state of 
Alaska has met these requirements.
    The EPA has designated two areas as CO nonattainment in the state 
of Alaska. The Anchorage CO nonattainment area, classified as Moderate 
greater than or equal to 12.7 ppm, is bounded by the Municipality of 
Anchorage (MOA) urban area. The Fairbanks CO nonattainment area, 
classified as Moderate less than or equal to 12.7 ppm, is bounded by 
the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) urban area. The nonattainment 
and boundary designations for CO were published in the Federal Register 
(FR) on November 6, 1991, and November 30, 1992, and have been codified 
in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 
1991) and 57 FR 56762 (November 30, 1992), codified at 40 CFR 81.300-
81.437. Based on these nonattainment designations, basic I/M programs 
are required in both the Anchorage and Fairbanks nonattainment areas.
    By this action, the EPA is approving this submittal. The EPA has 
reviewed the state submittal against the statutory requirements and for 
consistency with the EPA regulations. EPA summarizes the requirements 
of the Federal I/M regulations as found in 40 CFR 51.350-51.373 and its 
analysis of the state submittal below. Parties desiring additional 
details on the Federal I/M regulation are referred to the November 5, 
1992 FR notice (57 FR 52950) or 40 CFR 51.350-51.373.

II. Background

    On July 11, 1994 the state of Alaska submitted to EPA a SIP 
revision for a basic I/M program that had an adequate public notice and 
public hearing process (May 19, 1994) and was adopted on June 9, 1994. 
The Lieutenant Governor filed revisions to 18 AAC 52 on May 25, 1994, 
and the Air Quality Control Plan revisions on July 6, 1994, becoming 
effective on June 24, 1994 and August 5, 1994, respectively.
    The July 11, 1994 SIP revision was reviewed by EPA to determine 
completeness shortly after submittal, in accordance with the 
completeness criteria set out at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. The 
submittals were found to be complete and a letter dated July 15, 1994 
was forwarded to the Governor of Alaska indicating the completeness of 
the submittal.

III. State Submittal

    Both Anchorage and Fairbanks are classified as moderate CO 
nonattainment areas. Since the 1980 [[Page 17233]] census population of 
each urbanized area was under 200,000, neither community is required to 
implement an enhanced I/M program. The state submittal provides for 
upgrading the existing I/M programs to EPA approved basic I/M programs 
in the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) and Fairbanks North Star Borough 
(FNSB). Both the MOA and the FNSB programs will consist of annual, 
decentralized, test-and-repair which meets the requirements of EPA's 
performance standard and other requirements contained in the Federal I/
M rule. All testing will be performed by certified stations or referee 
facilities. Other aspects of the Alaska I/M program include: an 
``Valley'' I/M program for vehicles commuting into Anchorage from the 
Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) borough, testing of 1968 and later vehicles 
in Anchorage and testing of 1975 and later vehicles in Fairbanks, a 
test fee to ensure the state has adequate resources to oversee the 
implementing agencies and implement the valley program, enforcement by 
registration denial, commitment to testing convenience, quality 
assurance, data collection and analysis, reporting, test equipment and 
test procedure specifications, commitment to ongoing public 
information, inspector training and certification, and penalties 
against inspector incompetence. An analysis of how the Alaska I/M 
program meets the Federal SIP requirements (by section of the Federal 
I/M rule) is provided below.

A. Applicability

    The SIP needs to describe the applicable areas in detail and, 
consistent with 40 CFR 51.372, needs to include the legal authority or 
rules necessary to establish program boundaries.
    The Alaska I/M program specified in 18 AAC 52 is divided into two 
programs (Anchorage and Fairbanks), based on the designated 
implementing agency. Both programs are locally implemented and 
operated, with the MOA and the FNSB having legal and administrative 
responsibility for their respective programs. The existing programs 
cover the entire MOA and FNSB. An additional I/M program, Matanuska-
Susitna Valley (Valley) is not linked to a specific geographical area, 
but is aimed at vehicles that are regularly operated in but not 
registered in the Anchorage I/M program area. The Alaska Department of 
Environmental Conservation (ADEC) is responsible for administering the 
Valley I/M program. The state regulations establishing Alaska's I/M 
program requirements and boundaries are included in 18 AAC 52.

B. Basic I/M Performance Standard

    The I/M programs provided for in the SIP are required to meet a 
performance standard for basic I/M for the pollutants that caused the 
affected area to come under I/M requirements. The performance standard 
sets an emission reduction target that must be met by a program in 
order for the SIP to be approvable. The SIP must also provide that the 
program will meet the performance standard in actual operation, with 
provisions for appropriate adjustments if the standard is not met. The 
state has submitted a modeling demonstration using the EPA computer 
model, MOBILE 5a showing that the basic performance standard is met for 
both Anchorage and Fairbanks I/M programs.

C. Network Type

    The SIP needs to include a description of the network to be 
employed, the required legal authority, and, in the case of areas 
making claims for case-by-case equivalency, the required demonstration.
    Alaska has chosen to implement decentralized, test-and-repair I/M 
programs which are managed and operated by MOA, FNSB and the state with 
a small amount of contractor support.
    Legal authority contained in AS 46.03.020(10), 46.14.030 and 
46.14.510; and 18 AAC 52.045 authorizes the state to implement this 
program.

D. Adequate Tools and Resources

    The SIP needs to include a description of the resources that will 
be used for program operation, which includes: (1) A detailed budget 
plan which describes the source of funds for personnel, program 
administration, program enforcement, purchase of necessary equipment, 
and any other requirements discussed throughout, and (2) a description 
of personnel resources, the number of personnel dedicated to overt and 
covert auditing, data analysis, program administration, enforcement, 
and other necessary functions and the training attendant to each 
function.
    The Alaska I/M program as stipulated in 18 AAC 52.020 is funded 
solely by collection of a ten dollar certificate of inspection fee 
assessed to each vehicle passing the I/M test. Legal authority 
contained in AS 44.46.025 authorizes the state to collect fees for this 
program. The MOA, FNSB and the state commit to providing the necessary 
administrative, personnel, and equipment resources to fully implement 
and maintain the Alaska I/M program. The I/M programs will be carried 
out under local or state oversight, with assistance from contractors. 
In the event that either the MOA or FNSB is unable or unwilling in the 
future to provide adequate tools or resources, the state commits to 
take over the administration of the program (18 AAC 52.030).
    The SIP narrative also describes the budget, staffing support, and 
equipment needed to implement the program. The MOA funds approximately 
7.0 full-time employees (FTE), the FNSB funds 3.5 FTE and the state 
funds .25 FTE. The MOA and the state will utilize 3.0 FTE contractor 
personnel to support their programs.
    Referee facilities in the MOA and FNSB provide public information 
and assistance, motorist and certified mechanic assistance, referee 
functions, and training and testing of inspectors and certified 
mechanics. The MOA program, which incorporates the Valley program, 
contracts out for referee facility services while the FNSB referee 
facility is operated by FNSB staff.

E. Test Frequency and Convenience

    The SIP needs to include the test schedule in detail including the 
test year selection scheme if testing is other than annual. Also, the 
SIP needs to include the legal authority necessary to implement and 
enforce the test frequency requirement and explain how the test 
frequency will be integrated with the enforcement process.
    The MOA and FNSB I/M programs require annual inspections for all 
subject motor vehicles (18 AAC 52.005). However, an implementing agency 
may, with approval from ADEC and the DMV, authorize the owner or lessee 
of a vehicle to obtain a biennial certificate of inspection during the 
first six years of vehicle life, if the failure rates of the designated 
categories of vehicles are below a minimum rate set by the implementing 
agency and approved by ADEC (18 AAC 52.035(e)). In addition the MOA 
exempts new vehicles from their first annual inspection.
    Since the test-and-repair inspection program has been in operation 
since 1985 for both programs, no special start-up testing scheme is 
required. The network is satisfactorily addressed in the SIP.
    Legal authority for registration and testing of used vehicles newly 
arriving into the I/M area is contained in AS 46.14.510 and 18 AAC 
52.005.

F. Vehicle Coverage

    The SIP needs to include a detailed description of the number and 
types of vehicles to be covered by the program, and a plan for how 
those vehicles are to be identified, including vehicles that are 
[[Page 17234]] routinely operated in the area but may not be registered 
in the area. Also, the SIP needs to include a description of any 
special exemptions which will be granted by the program, and an 
estimate of the percentage and number of subject vehicles which will be 
impacted. Such exemptions need to be accounted for in the emission 
reduction analysis. In addition, the SIP needs to include the legal 
authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle 
coverage requirement.
    In the MOA, program coverage includes all 1968 and newer model year 
light-duty cars and trucks and heavy-duty gasoline powered trucks, 
registered or required to be registered within the nonattainment areas. 
The FNSB program covers the above vehicles from 1975 and newer. 
Vehicles will be identified through the state of Alaska's Driver and 
Motor Vehicle Services database. In addition, any 1968 or newer model 
used to commute into MOA is subject to I/M testing through the Valley 
program.
    Fleet vehicles are subject to the same program requirements and 
testing procedures as other vehicles. However, fleets are allowed to 
self-test, as long as they are certified as official test stations; 
they must use certified I/M mechanics; all tests and certificate 
issuance must be conducted using certified Alaska BAR-90 TAS; and they 
must comply with all other I/M program requirements. Fleet licenses can 
be removed if fleet operation does not meet standards.
    The FNSB vehicles that obtain seasonal exemptions are subject to 
the program but prohibited from being driven during the winter CO 
season. Approximately 4,000 FNSB vehicles are in this category. Since 
they are not operated during the CO nonattainment period there is no 
discounting of those vehicles.
    In addition to the required I/M programs, ADEC is now subjecting 
those vehicles registered outside the MOA but primarily operated within 
the MOA to a Mat-Su Valley I/M program. The Valley program has the same 
basic design features as the Anchorage program.
    Further, vehicles registered in one AK I/M area but primarily 
operated in the other may be tested in either area, but must pass an 
annual I/M test.

G. Test Procedures and Standards

    The SIP needs to include a description of each test procedure used. 
The SIP also needs to include the rule, ordinance or law describing and 
establishing the test procedures.
    The legal authority to establish test procedures and standards is 
contained in AS 46.03..020, 46.14.030 and 46.14.510. Written test 
procedures for a 2-speed idle test and pass/fail standards for all 
subject vehicles have been established. All vehicles are subject to the 
HC and CO emission cutpoints set forth in 18 AAC 52.050, and repairs 
must be made if a vehicle fails any of these cutpoints.

H. Test Equipment

    The SIP needs to include written technical specifications for all 
test equipment used in the program and shall address each of the 
requirements in 40 CFR 51.358 of the Federal I/M rule. The 
specifications need to describe the emission analysis process, the 
necessary test equipment, the required features, and written acceptance 
testing criteria and procedures.
    The Alaska I/M SIP commits to meeting the California BAR 90 
accuracy standards. The SIP addresses the requirements in 40 CFR 51.358 
and includes descriptions of performance features and functional 
characteristics of the computerized test systems in the submitted 
respective program design documents. The necessary test equipment, 
required features, and acceptance testing criteria are also contained 
in the SIP.

I. Quality Control

    The SIP needs to include a description of quality control and 
recordkeeping procedures. The SIP needs to include the procedures 
manual, rule, and ordinance or law describing and establishing the 
procedures of quality control and requirements.
    The Alaska I/M SIP narrative contains descriptions and requirements 
establishing quality control procedures which are similar but not 
identical to the Federal I/M rule. Alaska's program provides for less 
frequent calibration requirements than the federal I/M rule requires. 
However, the frequency requirements for gas calibrations and leak 
checks contained in the Alaska BAR-90 Test Analyzer Systems are 
identical to those contained in the current California BAR-90 
specification. In addition, Alaska's program does not require ambient 
zero air to be drawn from outside the test bay due to the extreme 
weather conditions in Alaska. EPA believes there is adequate 
justification for these exceptions. Alaska's quality control procedures 
will help ensure that equipment calibrations are properly performed and 
recorded as well as maintaining compliance document security.

J. Waivers and Compliance Via Diagnostic Inspection

    The SIP needs to include a maximum waiver rate expressed as a 
percentage of initially failed vehicles. This waiver rate needs to be 
used for estimating emission reduction benefits in the modeling 
analysis. Also, the state needs to take corrective action if the waiver 
rate exceeds that estimated in the SIP or revise the SIP and the 
emission reductions claimed accordingly. In addition, the SIP needs to 
describe the waiver criteria and procedures, including cost limits, 
quality assurance methods and measures, and administration. Lastly, the 
SIP shall include the necessary legal authority, ordinance, or rules to 
issue waivers, set and adjust cost limits as required, and carry out 
any other functions necessary to administer the waiver system, 
including enforcement of the waiver provisions.
    Legal authority to issue waivers and administer the waiver system 
is contained in AS 46.03.020, 46.14.030 and 46.14.510. Under 18 AAC 
52.060 waivers may be issued in the Alaska I/M programs for the 
following reasons: repair cost exceedance, diesel engine, seasonal 
waiver, special circumstances that make it impractical to test a 
vehicle, modification to the dedicated use of an approved alternate 
fuel, out-of-area use, economic hardship, parts unavailability or grey 
market vehicle.
    For the MOA and state programs, necessary emissions-related repairs 
must be made up to a maximum annual repair cost of $450 for non-
tampering-related repairs. The FNSB program has a minimum annual repair 
cost of $350 for non-tampering-related repairs. For all programs a 
maximum annual repair cost of $500 exists for vehicles tampered with 
prior to July 1, 1985. If the least expensive repair would be in excess 
of $500, then one repair must be made regardless of cost. Vehicles that 
have been tampered with since July 1985 must be completely repaired, 
regardless of cost.
    A waiver rate of 1% is assumed for both the MOA and FNSB. If the 
waiver rate for either program, as reported to EPA in the annual Alaska 
I/M report, is higher, the state will take corrective action to lower 
the applicable waiver rate by possibly requiring motorists that apply 
for a waiver to reduce initial emissions by a specified amount before a 
waiver may be issued or limiting the model years that are eligible for 
a waiver or limiting waivers on vehicles to only one inspection cycle. 
If any of the waiver rates cannot be lowered to the level committed to 
in the SIP, the state [[Page 17235]] will revise the I/M emission 
reduction projections in the SIP and will implement other program 
changes as necessary to ensure the performance standard is met.
    The seasonal waiver is issued to a vehicle owner who agrees that 
the vehicle will not be operated in an I/M area during the winter CO 
season. Vehicles which acquire such waivers are issued different 
colored license tabs, to make it easier to identify seasonally waived 
vehicles that are being operated illegally during winter months. If a 
motorist violates the seasonal waiver, no seasonal waiver may be issued 
in the future to any vehicle owned by that motorist.

K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement

    The SIP needs to provide information concerning the enforcement 
process, including: (1) A description of the existing compliance 
mechanism if it is to be used in the future and the demonstration that 
it is as effective or more effective than registration-denial 
enforcement; (2) an identification of the agencies responsible for 
performing each of the applicable activities in this section; (3) a 
description of and accounting for all classes of exempt vehicles; and 
(4) a description of the plan for testing fleet vehicles, rental car 
fleets, leased vehicles, and any other special classes of subject 
vehicles, e.g. those operated in (but not necessarily registered in) 
the program area. Also, the SIP needs to include a determination of the 
current compliance rate based on a study of the system that includes an 
estimate of compliance losses due to loopholes, counterfeiting, and 
unregistered vehicles. Estimates of the effect of closing such 
loopholes and otherwise improving the enforcement mechanism need to be 
supported with detailed analyses. In addition, the SIP needs to include 
the legal authority to implement and enforce the program. Lastly, the 
SIP needs to include a commitment to an enforcement level to be used 
for modeling purposes and to be maintained, at a minimum, in practice.
    The motorist compliance enforcement program will be implemented, 
primarily, by Alaska's Department of Motor Vehicle Services (DMV), 
which will ensure that owners of all subject vehicles are denied 
registration unless they provide valid proof of having received a 
certificate indicating they passed an emissions test or a valid I/M 
waiver, which was issued within a 90-day period prior to the 
registration renewal date. Owners of noncomplying vehicles operating 
illegally in I/M areas will be identified and issued notices of 
violation (NOV). A vehicle owner that is issued an NOV will have 30 
days to provide proof of I/M compliance. The I/M programs will request 
DMV to revoke the vehicle's registration in cases of continued 
noncompliance. The Alaska State Troopers and local law enforcement 
agencies will provide on-road enforcement of the program.
    In addition, the Department will identify program evaders and other 
noncomplying vehicles (e.g. out-of-area commuter vehicles) through 
interactive searches of several databases. Owners of vehicles 
identified in this manner will be notified by the Department of the 
need to obtain an annual inspection.
    The following vehicle types are exempt from the Alaska I/M program: 
A vehicle not principally located or operated in an I/M area; a 1967 or 
older vehicle for the MOA program (1974 or older in the FNSB program); 
a new vehicle with less than 2,500 miles; a gasoline-powered vehicle 
that is 12,000 pounds unladen weight or heavier, a special test vehicle 
that has received a state exemption; a military tactical vehicle; 
motorcycles, golf carts, all-terrain vehicles, snow machines and 
mopeds; and a vehicle in Alaska for less that 30 days.
    All fleet vehicles, including rental cars, are subject to the same 
program requirements and testing procedures as other vehicles. Leased 
vehicles and other vehicles subject to one of the Alaska programs but 
not necessarily registered in an I/M area must also comply with all 
applicable program requirements.
    The state commits to the level of enforcement needed to ensure 
compliance rates of no less than 95 percent and 96 percent, in the MOA 
and FNSB respectively. The legal authority to implement and enforce the 
program is included in AS 46.03, 46.014 and 18 AAC 52.100.

L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight

    The SIP needs to include a description of enforcement program 
oversight and information management activities.
    ADEC will audit the local I/M programs on a regular basis, and will 
implement a quality assurance program to ensure effective overall 
performance of the enforcement systems in both areas. ADEC will allow 
EPA to conduct regular audits of the I/M enforcement program. ADEC, 
MOA, and FNSB will also perform periodic parking lot surveys to assess 
the compliance rate of the in-use fleet.

M. Quality Assurance (QA)

    The SIP needs to include a description of the quality assurance 
program, and written procedures manuals covering both overt and covert 
performance audits, record audits, and equipment audits. This 
requirement does not include materials or discussion of details of 
enforcement strategies that would ultimately hamper the enforcement 
process.
    The Alaska I/M SIP includes a description of its quality assurance 
program. The ongoing QA program will be conducted to discover, correct 
and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. The program includes quarterly 
performance audits following established written procedures, performed 
at certified I/M stations. The audits will include, at a minimum, 
checks for appropriate certificate security, recordkeeping practices, 
proper display of licenses and other required information, proper 
maintenance and calibration of the TAS, and ability of the certified 
mechanic to properly perform an I/M test.
    In addition to the quarterly audit, overt and covert vehicle audits 
will be conducted on an unscheduled and as-needed basis. Alaska has 
proposed the following exceptions to the federal performance audit 
requirements provided under 40 CFR 51.363(a): the state will perform 
one quarterly audit per facility (i.e. four audits per station per 
year), plus at least one overt vehicle audit per station per year. EPA 
believes this to be adequate to ensure program quality and comply with 
the federal I/M rule. Alaska also believes that the remote covert 
auditing requirement is infeasible in Alaska due to the state's unique 
weather conditions, and resultant station design and operation. Unlike 
most other states, inspections in Alaska are conducted in enclosed test 
stations where remote covert observations are impossible, particularly 
during the wintertime. The state believes that other performance 
tracking and auditing tools dramatically reduce the need to use remote 
covert audits to maintain effective quality assurance and compliance 
enforcement programs against certified stations and mechanics. Given 
Alaska's unique circumstances EPA concurs.
    Test records will be audited on a monthly basis, using established 
written procedures to assess individual certified mechanic and station 
performance. Equipment audits will be performed during each quarterly 
performance audit, using established written procedures, to ensure the 
accuracy and reliability of all required test equipment. Each I/M 
inspector will be formally [[Page 17236]] trained and knowledgeable in 
all aspects of the I/M program. Ongoing training will be provided to I/
M inspectors to insure that they maintain an adequate level of 
knowledge. The performance of each I/M inspector will be evaluated at 
least once annually to identify any possible problem areas.

N. Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors

    The SIP needs to include the penalty schedule and the legal 
authority for establishing and imposing penalties, civil fines, license 
suspension, and revocations. In the case of state constitutional 
impediments to immediate suspension authority, the state Attorney 
General shall furnish an official opinion for the SIP explaining the 
constitutional impediment as well as relevant case law. Also, the SIP 
needs to describe the administrative and judicial procedures and 
responsibilities relevant to the enforcement process, including which 
agencies, courts, and jurisdictions are involved; who will prosecute 
and adjudicate cases; and other aspects of the enforcement of the 
program requirements, the resources to be allocated to this function, 
and the source of those funds. In states without immediate suspension 
authority, the SIP needs to demonstrate that sufficient resources, 
personnel, and systems are in place to meet the three day case 
management requirement for violations that directly affect emission 
reductions.
    Under the Administrative Procedures Act (AS 44.62), the Department 
or other I/M implementing agency must provide notice and opportunity 
for hearing before suspending, revoking, or refusing to renew a 
station's or mechanic's certification issued under 18 AAC 52 or the MOA 
or FNSB local implementing ordinances. In addition, neither the 
Department nor the local I/M implementing agencies have citation powers 
under Alaska Statute. As a result of these factors, Alaska is unable to 
comply with requirements contained in 40 CFR 51.364 for the imposition 
of mandatory minimum penalties or the immediate suspension of station 
or mechanic certifications. If the Department files a civil action 
under AS 46.03.760, there are mandatory court imposed damages of $500 
for the first day. Because of this, the state is proposing an 
alternative enforcement mechanism which will allow the I/M office to 
issue an NOV upon finding a violation of the I/M program requirements. 
A hearing will be held within three working days of the NOV which will 
allow penalties to be assessed depending on the nature and severity of 
the violation. If the hearing results support a serious violation the 
station or mechanic's certification will be suspended for a minimum of 
6 months under the Department's emergency powers authority, if the 
criteria for an emergency exists as provided in AS 46.03.820. Continued 
violation of program requirements may result in permanent revocation of 
certification under 18 AAC 52, after notice and opportunity for 
hearing, or the filing of a civil or criminal action against a 
certified station or mechanic under AS 46.03.760 or 46.03.790. A 
finding of incompetence will result in mandatory training before 
inspection privileges are restored. EPA concludes that this satisfies 
federal requirements for enforcement against contractors and 
inspectors.

O. Data Analysis and Reporting

    The SIP needs to describe the types of data to be collected. The 
SIP commits ADEC to submitting an annual report to EPA by July of each 
year, which will cover the preceding calendar year and contain 
statistics for the I/M test data, quality assurance results, quality 
control activities, and enforcement activities. In addition, the state 
commits to submitting a biennial report on the overall status of the 
Alaska I/M program to EPA. At a minimum, Alaska commits to address all 
of the data elements listed in 51.366 of the federal I/M rule.

P. Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification

    The SIP needs to include a description of the training program, the 
written and hands-on tests, and the licensing or certification process.
    Under 18 AAC 52. and the MOA and FNSB I/M implementing ordinances, 
formal training and licensing is required for all inspectors (certified 
mechanics). The Alaska I/M SIP provides for the implementation of 
training, certification, and refresher programs for emission 
inspectors. Training will include all elements required by 51.367(a) of 
the EPA I/M rule. Certification is good for a period of two years, with 
passage of a refresher training course required for license renewal.

Q. Improving Repair Effectiveness

    The SIP needs to include a description of the technical assistance 
program to be implemented, and a description of the repair technician 
training resources available in the community.
    The Alaska SIP commits the Department to working with MOA and FNSB 
to assist the motor vehicle industry in properly diagnosing and 
repairing emission-related defects. This assistance will include each 
program's establishment of a telephone hotline service to assist 
certified mechanics and other qualified technicians with specific 
repair problems. Mechanics newsletters will also be distributed to all 
certified mechanics on an as-needed basis, to inform them of program 
changes, training course schedules, common problems being experienced 
in the I/M program, and diagnostic tips.
    PC-based I/M management software will be used to provide the I/M 
programs with station and mechanic specific estimates of repair 
effectiveness. Effectiveness estimates applicable to each certified 
station will be distributed by the I/M program to that station on at 
least an annual basis.

IV. This Action

    The EPA is approving the Alaska I/M SIP (Section 3.1, OAR 340-24-
300 through 340-24-355; and section 5.4) as meeting the requirements of 
the CAAA and the Federal I/M rule. All required SIP items have been 
adequately addressed as discussed in this Federal Register action.

V. Administrative Review

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must 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, EPA 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.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA 
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements 
that the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP-
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it 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 a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute 
federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 
Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates 
no adverse [[Page 17237]] comments. However, in a separate document in 
this Federal Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the 
SIP revision should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action 
will be effective June 5, 1995 unless, within 30 days of its 
publication, adverse or critical comments are received.
    If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn 
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will 
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a 
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on 
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should 
do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is 
advised that this action will be effective June 5, 1995.
    The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-
approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air 
Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined 
that this action conforms with those requirements.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.
    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 H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. The OMB has exempted this regulatory action from 
E.O. 12866 review.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 5, 1995. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. 
7607(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for 
the state of Alaska was approved by the Director of the Office of 
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

    Dated: March 2, 1995.
Chuck Clarke,
Regional Administrator.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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.

Subpart C--Alaska

    2. Section 52.70 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (21) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.70  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (21) On July 11, 1994 ADEC submitted a SIP revision for a basic 
motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in the 
Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) and the Fairbanks North Star Borough 
(FNSB).
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) July 11, 1994 letter from the Governor of Alaska to the 
Regional Administrator of EPA submitting Alaska's amendments to the Air 
Quality Control Plan and to 18 AAC 52, Emissions Inspection and 
Maintenance Requirements for Motor Vehicles; the amendments to 18 AAC 
52 (52.005, .015, .020, .030, .035, .040, .045, .050, .055, .060, .065, 
.070, .075, .080, .085, .090, .095, .100, .105, .400, .405, .410, .415, 
.420, .425, .430, .440, .445, .500, .505, .510, .515, .520, .525, .527, 
.530, .535, .540, .545, .550, and .990), effective February 1, 1994; 
and the State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II: Analysis of Problems, 
Control Actions, Modifications to Section I, June 9, 1994; Vol. II: 
Analysis of Problems, Control Actions, Modifications to Section I, II, 
III and V, adopted January 10, 1994; Vol. III: Appendices, 
Modifications to Section III.A, June 9, 1994; Vol. III: Appendices, 
Modifications to Section III.B, June 9, 1994; and Vol. III: Appendices, 
Modifications to Section III.C, June 9, 1994.

[FR Doc. 95-8313 Filed 4-4-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P