Document ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0379-0004
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2011-06-06T04:00Z

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental Protection

 

Final

State Implementation Plan Revision

Visual Inspection Quality Assurance Protocol Revision in the Vehicle
Safety Inspection Program for 42 Counties

March 2009

Bureau of Air Quality

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

P.O. Box 8468

Harrisburg, PA 17105-8468

717-787-9495

www.depweb.state.pa.us

Blank page for copying purposes

Background

Pennsylvania’s Vehicle Safety Inspection Program State Implementation
Plan

On December 1, 2003, the Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection (Department) submitted to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) a revision to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s
(Commonwealth’s or Pennsylvania’s) enhanced vehicle emission
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program and vehicle safety inspection
program.  The December 1, 2003, SIP revision included a requirement for
a visual inspection of pollution control equipment in the vehicle safety
inspection program in the 42 Pennsylvania counties in which an I/M
program is not required.  The SIP submittal included safety inspection
regulations, codified at 67 Pa. Code Chapter 175, and information about
how the Commonwealth will meet federal I/M program requirements
contained in 40 CFR §§ 51.350-51.371.

On October 6, 2005, EPA approved the SIP revision (70 FR 58313).  The
approved SIP revisions are codified in 52 CFR §2020 (relating to
identification of plan).     

Effectiveness of the Anti-Tampering Pilot Program

Pennsylvania safety inspection regulations require, in 67 Pa. Code
§175.80(d) (relating to inspection procedure), that in the 42 counties
in which there is not an emission inspection program (non-I/M counties),
vehicles must be visually checked to ensure that the following emission
control components are not the wrong type for the certified vehicle
configuration and have not been removed or disconnected:

Catalytic converter

Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) valve

Positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) valve

Fuel inlet restrictor

Air pump

Evaporative control system components

The visual inspection is also referred to as the anti-tampering program
(ATP).  The current quality assurance program for the safety
inspections, as it relates to administrative audits of approximately
5,200 safety inspection garages in the 42 non-I/M counties, has
experienced significant operational inefficiencies because of the
frequent need to return to the inspection stations to achieve full
compliance with the following terms of the December 1, 2003 SIP that
reads:

“As part of the audit of the 42 Non-I/M County Program, a vehicle on
the station’s premises which has a safety inspection sticker
indicating that it has passed a safety inspection administered by the
station within the immediately preceding two business days shall be
re-inspected by station personnel in the presence of the personnel
performing the audit to determine whether the vehicle properly passed
the anti-tampering program/visual inspection (ATP) portion of the safety
inspection.  In the event it is determined that a vehicle improperly
passed the ATP portion, in addition to any other sanction available by
law, if the station remains in operation, it shall be revisited
unannounced at least once within the three months following the initial
audit and again within the next three-month period to ascertain
compliance with ATP inspection requirements.  If there is no vehicle
available for re-inspection at the time of the audit, the station shall
be revisited unannounced within 30 days.  The Commonwealth also will
implement a records audit that includes the calculation of failure rates
for ATP inspection components for each inspection station.  The
Commonwealth shall compare these failure rates to rates in areas
conducting both ATP and I/M inspections and, as necessary, will respond
to significant differences in failure rates with adjustments to the
audit process and/or training, as appropriate.”

In fiscal year (FY) 2005/2006, 4,662 administrative audits were
conducted with 2,014 (44%) having a vehicle to re-inspect in conformance
with the criteria outlined above.  Because of the absence of a recently
inspected vehicle (namely, a vehicle inspected within the preceding two
business days) on the premises of the station being audited, it was
necessary to re-visit 2,648 (56%) of the stations to attempt to verify
compliance with the ATP inspection protocol.  During the 2,648 re-visits
conducted in FY 2005/2006, there were vehicles available for
re-inspection at only 450 (17%) stations.

In FY 2006/2007, there were 5,043 administrative audits conducted with
2,937 (58%) having vehicles present to re-inspect to verify compliance. 
For all re-inspections performed in FY 2005/2006 and FY 2006/2007, there
were no measurable ATP inspection failures detected.

In an effort to increase the number of vehicles observed and reduce cost
and wasted effort, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
(PennDOT) instituted a pilot program in which quality assurance staff
checked two vehicles at those garages that had vehicles present at the
time of their visit and examined vehicles that had been inspected in the
preceding five business days rather than in the preceding two business
days.  The pilot procedure, evaluated between March 1, 2007 and June 30,
2007, was conducted as follows:

A vehicle on the station’s premise which had a safety inspection
sticker indicating that it had passed a safety inspection administered
by the station within the preceding five business day was re-inspected
by station personnel in the presence of the PennDOT Quality Assurance
Officer to determine whether the vehicle properly passed the
anti-tampering portion of the safety inspection.  Extending the
“preceding business days” from two to five enabled PennDOT staff to
see more vehicles without having to revisit stations.  The alternate
method piloted resulted in substantial reduced mileage and fuel costs by
eliminating revisits, while increasing the number of stations
PennDOT’s Quality Assurance Officers were able to visit.  This method
of verifying anti-tampering results will more efficiently utilize
PennDOT’s Quality Assurance Staff and permit more targeted station
visits if necessary.

 	During the 120-day pilot program, PennDOT conducted 1,956
administrative audits with 1,677 (85%) stations having a vehicle to
re-inspect according to the pilot program criteria outlined above.  By
continuing to use the above criteria, PennDOT staff will be able to
visit every station at least once a year and see more vehicles for the
purpose of auditing anti-tampering results.  During this pilot program,
staff drove 20,000 fewer miles than in the same time frame from the
previous year.  This will result in substantial fuel cost savings each
year and permit more effective use of quality assurance personnel.

 	The analysis of the pilot program results shows that the required
objective of ensuring that inspection stations are correctly conducting
anti-tampering inspections will be achieved in a more efficient and cost
effective manner and will strengthen the Commonwealth’s I/M SIP.

C.	The Program Changes

	The Commonwealth proposes to revise the Quality Assurance section in
the 

December 1, 2003 SIP revision (pp. 23-24) for the non-I/M counties as
follows.  

§ 51.363	Quality Assurance

	There are no quality assurance changes to the 1996 I/M SIP with respect
to the I/M program.

The Commonwealth’s Quality Assurance program is comprised of both
internal PennDOT personnel and external personnel.  PennDOT’s Vehicle
Inspection Division oversees the 42 Non-I/M County Program.  The
description of the staff is contained in the 1996 I/M SIP.  In addition,
through the contract with the I/M Program Manager, the contractor
provides oversight for the safety inspection program in the 25 I/M
counties.  Both PennDOT staff and the Contractor perform, at least once
per year, safety audits of each safety inspection station in accordance
with established protocol for the audit of stations performing vehicle
safety inspections pursuant to 67 Pa. Code, Chapter 175.  As part of the
audit of the 42 Non-I/M County Program, a vehicle on the station’s
premises which has a safety inspection sticker indicating that it has
passed a safety inspection administered by the station within the
immediately preceding two FIVE business days shall be re-inspected by
station personnel in the presence of the personnel performing the audit
to determine whether the vehicle properly passed the anti-tampering
program/visual inspection (ATP) portion of the safety inspection.  In
the event it is determined that a vehicle improperly passed the ATP
portion, in addition to any other sanction available by law, if the
station remains in operation, it shall be revisited unannounced at least
once within the three months following the initial audit and again
within the next three- month period to ascertain compliance with ATP
inspection requirements.  If there is no vehicle available for
re-inspection at the time of any audit, the station shall be revisited
unannounced within 30 days.  The Commonwealth also will implement a
records audit that includes the calculation of failure rates for ATP
inspection components for each inspection station.  The Commonwealth
shall compare these failure rates to rates in areas conducting both ATP
and I/M inspections and, as necessary, will respond to significant
differences in failure rates with adjustments to the audit process
and/or training, as appropriate.  

D. Public Participation

	Requirements for a public comment process are set forth in Section
110(a)(2) of the CAA and 40 CFR Section 51.102(d).  A public hearing on
the proposed revisions to the quality assurance program was held on
Thursday, March 19, 2009.  Notice of the hearing was published in the
Pennsylvania Bulletin at least 30 days prior to the date of the hearing.
 No public comment was received.

 PAGE   

 PAGE   6 

John Hanger

Secretary

Edward G. Rendell

Governor