Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[W142-01-6260; FRL-5012-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Wisconsin; Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve portions and to conditionally

approve other portions of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of Wisconsin on November 15, 1993, if the State

submits certain items prior to final action. This revision establishes

and requires the implementation of an enhanced motor vehicle inspection

and maintenance (I/M) program in the Milwaukee Severe ozone

nonattainment area, which has 17 years to attain the National Ambient

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) pursuant to section 181(a)(2) of the

Clean Air Act (Act), and the Sheboygan Moderate ozone nonattainment

area. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Act. Should

the State fail to timely submit the items described below, EPA is

proposing in the alternative to disapprove or conditionally approve the

SIP.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 15, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Carlton Nash, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,

Air Toxics and Radiation Branch, Regulation Development Section, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available at

the above address for public inspection during normal business hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John M. Mooney, (312) 886-6043.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

Motor vehicles are significant contributors of volatile organic

compounds (VOC), carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxide (NOX)

emissions. An important control measure to reduce these emissions is

the implementation of a motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M)

program. Despite being subject to the most rigorous vehicle pollution

control program in the world, cars and trucks still create about half

of the ozone air pollution and nearly all of the carbon monoxide and

other toxic contaminant air pollution in U.S. cities. Of all highway

vehicles, passenger cars and light trucks emit most of the vehicle-

related carbon monoxide and ozone-forming hydrocarbons. They also emit

substantial amounts of nitrogen oxides and air toxics. Although the

U.S. has made progress in reducing emissions of these pollutants, total

fleet emissions remain high. This is because the number of vehicle

miles travelled on U.S. roads has doubled in the last 20 years to 2

trillion miles per year, offsetting much of the technological progress

in vehicle emission control over the same 2 decades. Projections

indicate that the steady growth in vehicle travel will continue.

Today's cars are absolutely dependent on properly functioning

emission controls to reduce pollution levels. Minor malfunctions in the

emission control system can increase emissions significantly, and the

average car on the road emits three to four times the new car standard.

Major malfunctions in the emission control system can cause emissions

to skyrocket. As a result, 10 to 30 percent of cars are causing a

significantly larger percentage of the vehicle-related pollution

problem. Unfortunately, it is rarely obvious which cars fall into this

category, as the emissions themselves may not be noticeable and

emission control malfunctions do not necessarily affect the performance

of the vehicle.

Effective I/M programs, however, can identify these problem cars

and assure their repair. I/M programs ensure that cars are properly

maintained, producing emission reductions soon after the program is put

in place.

EPA projects that ``enhanced'' I/M programs in the most polluted

cities around the country would cut vehicle VOC emissions by 32

percent, at a cost of about $12.50 per vehicle per year. This

represents a major step toward fulfilling, at a relatively low cost,

the Act's (the Act) requirement that the most seriously polluted cities

achieve a 24 percent overall emissions reduction by 2000.

The Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 requires that most polluted

cities adopt either ``basic'' or ``enhanced'' I/M programs, depending

on the severity of the problem and the population of the area. The

Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, as well as Marginal ozone areas

with existing or previously required I/M programs, fall under the

``basic'' I/M requirements. Enhanced programs will be required in

serious, severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas with urbanized

populations of 200,000 or more; CO areas that exceed a 12.7 parts per

million (ppm) design value\1\ with urbanized populations of 200,000 or

more; and all metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) with populations of

100,000 or more in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region (OTR).

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

\1\The air quality design value is estimated using EPA guidance.

Generally, the fourth highest monitored value with 3 complete years

of data is selected as the ozone design value because the standard

allows one exceedance for each year. The highest of the second high

monitored values with 2 complete years of data is selected as the

carbon monoxide design value.

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

``Basic'' and ``enhanced'' I/M programs both achieve their

objectives by identifying vehicles that have high emissions as a result

of one or more malfunctions, and requiring them to be repaired. An

``enhanced'' program covers more of the vehicles in operation, employs

inspection methods better suited to finding high emitting vehicles, and

has additional features to better assure that all vehicles are tested

properly and effectively repaired.

The Act requires States to make changes to improve existing I/M

programs or to implement new ones for certain nonattainment areas.

Section 182(a)(2)(B) of the Act requires EPA to publish updated

guidance for State I/M programs, taking into consideration findings of

the Administrator's audits and investigations of these programs. The

Act further requires each area required to have an I/M program to

incorporate this guidance into the SIP. Based on these requirements,

EPA promulgated I/M regulations on November 5, 1992 (57 FR 52950,

codified at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 51.350-51.373).

Under sections 182(c)(3), 187(a)(6) and 187(b)(1) of the Act, any

area having a 1980 Bureau of Census-defined urbanized area population

of 200,000 or more and that is designated as either: (1) a serious or

worse ozone nonattainment area or (2) a moderate or serious CO

nonattainment areas with a design value greater than 12.7 ppm, shall

implement enhanced I/M in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area.

The Act requires basic I/M programs to be implemented in the 1990

Census-defined urbanized area of the following nonattainment areas: (1)

Any area which is classified as moderate ozone nonattainment and is not

required to implement enhanced I/M, or (2) any area outside the OTR

that is classified as serious or worse ozone nonattainment or moderate

or serious CO nonattainment with a design value greater than 12.7 ppm

and having a 1990 Census-defined urbanized area population of less than

200,000. Any areas classified as marginal ozone nonattainment or

moderate CO nonattainment with a design value of 12.7 ppm or less shall

continue operating existing programs that are part of an approved SIP

as of November 15, 1990, or implement the basic program required for

the area by the pre-Amended Act, and shall update the program to meet

the basic I/M requirements set forth in 40 CFR parts 51.350-373.

The I/M regulation establishes minimum performance standards for

basic and enhanced I/M programs as well as requirements for the

following: network type and program evaluation; adequate tools and

resources; test frequency and convenience; vehicle coverage; test

procedures and standards; test equipment; quality control; waivers and

compliance via diagnostic inspection; motorist compliance enforcement;

motorist compliance enforcement program oversight; quality assurance;

enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors; data

collection; data analysis and reporting; inspector training and

licensing or certification; public information and consumer protection;

improving repair effectiveness; compliance with recall notices; on-road

testing; SIP revisions; and implementation deadlines. The performance

standard for basic I/M programs remains the same as it has been since

initial I/M policy was established in 1978, pursuant to the 1977

amendments to the Act. The performance standard for enhanced I/M

programs is based on a high-technology test, known as IM240, for new

technology vehicles (i.e., those with closed-loop control and,

especially, fuel-injected engines), including a transient loaded

exhaust short test incorporating hydrocarbons (HC), CO and NOX

cutpoints, an evaporative system integrity (pressure) test and an

evaporative system performance (purge) test. The Federal regulation

requires enhanced I/M programs to be implemented by January 1, 1995,

except for: (1) Existing test-and-repair programs which may test 30

percent of the subject fleet in the test-only system during 1995 and

test all subject vehicles in the test-only system beginning January 1,

1996 (during the phase in period, existing requirements may continue to

apply for the test-and-repair portion of the program until it is phased

out by January 1, 1996) or (2) Areas starting new test-only programs

and those with existing test-only programs may phase in the new test

procedures between January 1, 1995 and January 1, 1996; however, all

other program requirements must be fully implemented by January 1,

1995.

II. Background

The State of Wisconsin currently contains 2 ozone nonattainment

areas which are required to implement I/M programs in accordance with

the Act. The Milwaukee severe-17 ozone nonattainment area contains the

Milwaukee-Racine MSA which has a 1980 Census-defined population of

1,572,000 and therefore must implement an enhanced I/M program. The

Sheboygan moderate ozone nonattainment area contains the Sheboygan MSA

and, as a result, is subject to the basic I/M requirements. 40 CFR part

51.372(b)(2)) requires affected States to submit full I/M SIP revisions

that meet the requirements of the Act to EPA by November 15, 1993.

On November 15, 1993, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

(WDNR) submitted to EPA a revised SIP for an enhanced I/M program to

cover areas where both the basic and the enhanced requirements apply.

The revision included Wisconsin Statutes Sections 110.20 and 144.42 and

Chapter 341; Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapters TRANS 131 and NR

485; and the ``Wisconsin Motor Vehicle Inspection Program Request for

Proposal for the Establishment and Operation of Motor Vehicle

Inspection Program Facilities.'' The State I/M regulations were adopted

by WDNR in June 1993 and became effective on July 1, 1993.

EPA's summary of the requirements of the Federal I/M regulations as

found in 40 CFR part 51.350-51.373 and its analysis of the State

submittal are below. A more detailed analysis of the State submittal is

contained in a Technical Support Document (TSD) dated June 6, 1994,

which is available from the Region 5 office, listed in the ADDRESSES

section. Parties desiring additional details on the Federal I/M

regulation are referred to the November 5, 1992 Federal Register notice

(57 FR 52950) or 40 CFR parts 51.350-51.373.

III. EPA's Analysis of Wisconsin's Enhanced I/M Program

Applicability--40 CFR 51.350

Section 182(c)(3) of the Act and 40 CFR 51.350(a) require States

which contain areas classified as serious or worse ozone nonattainment

and containing MSAs with a population of 200,000 or more to implement

an enhanced I/M program. As noted above, the State of Wisconsin

contains the Milwaukee-Racine MSA in its Milwaukee Severe-17 ozone

nonattainment area. In addition, section 182(b)(4) of the Act and 40

CFR part 51.530(a) require States with moderate ozone nonattainment

areas containing 1990 Census-defined urbanized areas to implement a

basic I/M program. The State of Wisconsin contains the Sheboygan

urbanized area where this requirement applies.

There are 6 counties in Wisconsin that are required to implement an

enhanced I/M program: Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington,

and Waukesha Counties. There is one county, Sheboygan County, that is

required to implement a basic I/M program. The State has, however,

expanded the existing program in the Milwaukee area to cover Sheboygan.

The State submittal does contain the legal authority necessary to

establish the program boundaries for enhanced I/M. The program

boundaries meet the Federal I/M requirements under section 51.350 and

are approvable. Wisconsin legislation provides that the I/M program

shall apply where an area will not be able to attain the National

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) without it, and that such

coverage can be deleted if demonstrated that the area will attain the

NAAQS. This provision allows Wisconsin to add areas to the existing

program but does not limit the applicability of the program in the

required areas.

The Federal I/M regulation requires that the State program shall

not terminate until it is no longer necessary. EPA has determined that

a SIP which does not terminate prior to the attainment deadline for

each applicable area (i.e., 2007 for the Milwaukee severe-17 ozone

nonattainment area, and 1996 for the Sheboygan moderate ozone

nonattainment area) satisfies this requirement. The Wisconsin program

does not contain a termination provision and is therefore approvable.

Enhanced I/M Performance Standard--40 CFR 51.351

The enhanced I/M program must be designed and implemented to meet

or exceed a minimum performance standard, which is expressed as

emission levels in area-wide average grams per mile (gpm) for certain

pollutants. Areas shall meet the performance standard for the

pollutants which cause them to be subject to enhanced I/M requirements.

In the case of ozone nonattainment areas, the performance standard must

be met for both NOX and VOCs. The performance standard shall be

established using 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. The emission levels achieved

by the state's program design shall be calculated using the most

current version, at the time of submittal, of the EPA mobile source

emission factor model. At the time of the Wisconsin submittal the most

current version was MOBILE5a.

The Wisconsin submittal includes the following program design

parameters:

network type--centralized

start date--1984 for exhaust testing; 1995 for evaporative testing

test frequency--biennial

model year coverage--1968+

vehicle type coverage--LDGV, LDGT1, LDGT2, & HDGV

exhaust emission test type--IM240 on 1968+ model years

emission standards--0.8/20/2.0 gms/mile for HC/CO/NOX to year

2000; 0.6/15/1.5 gms/mile for HC/CO/NOX after year 2000

emission control device visual inspection--none

evaporative system function checks--pressure and purge on 1971+

model years

stringency (pre-1981 failure rate)--40%

waiver rate (pre-1981/1981 and newer)--3%

compliance rate--96%

evaluation date(s)--2000, 2003, 2006, 2008

The Wisconsin program design parameters meet the Federal I/M

regulations and are approvable.

The emission levels achieved by the State were modeled using

MOBILE5a. The modeling demonstration was performed correctly, used

local characteristics and demonstrated that the program design will

exceed the minimum enhanced I/M performance standard, expressed in gpm,

for VOCs and NOX for each milestone and for the attainment

deadline. As noted below, this modeling demonstration does not account

for the impact of vehicle exemptions. In addition, this modeling

demonstration was not included in the State's November 15, 1993,

submittal and has yet to be formally submitted to EPA as a revision to

the SIP. In order to receive full approval of its SIP, the State must

revise its modeling demonstration to account for exempted vehicles and

must formally submit this demonstration in time to allow EPA to place

it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment

period which is 30 days following the publication of this notice.

Network Type and Program Evaluation--40 CFR 51.353

Enhanced I/M programs shall be operated in a centralized test-only

format, unless the State can demonstrate that a decentralized program

is equally effective in achieving the enhanced I/M performance

standard. The enhanced program shall include an ongoing evaluation to

quantify the emission reduction benefits of the program and to

determine if the program is meeting the requirements of the Act and the

Federal I/M regulation. The SIP shall include details on the program

evaluation and shall include a schedule for submittal of biennial

evaluation reports, data from a State monitored or administered mass

emission test of at least 0.1 percent of the vehicles subject to

inspection each year, description of the sampling methodology, the data

collection and analysis system and the legal authority enabling the

evaluation program.

The State legislative authority and the State I/M regulations

provide for a centralized, test-only network. Wisconsin's centralized,

test-only network type is approvable. The submittal does not, however,

include provisions for ongoing program evaluation and, as a result,

does not meet the Federal I/M regulations. In order to receive final

full approval of its program, the State must submit to EPA provisions

for ongoing program evaluation satisfying all of the requirements of 40

CFR part 51.353. Specifically, the State must submit schedules for

program evaluation and methodologies by which this biennial program

evaluation will be carried out, as required by 40 CFR part 51.353. EPA

proposes to approve the Wisconsin enhanced I/M SIP if the State submits

these provisions in time to allow EPA to place them in the docket for

public comment at least 2 weeks prior to the close of the public

comment period.

Adequate Tools and Resources--40 CFR 51.354

The Federal regulation requires the State to demonstrate that

adequate funding of the program is available. A portion of the test fee

or a separately assessed per vehicle fee shall be collected, placed in

a dedicated fund and used to finance the program. Alternative funding

approaches are acceptable if it is demonstrated that the funding can be

maintained. Reliance on funding from the State or local General Fund is

not acceptable unless doing otherwise would be a violation of the

State's constitution. The SIP shall include a detailed budget plan

which describes the source of funds for personnel, program

administration, program enforcement, and purchase of equipment. The SIP

shall also detail the number of personnel dedicated to the quality

assurance program, data analysis, program administration, enforcement,

public education and assistance and other necessary functions.

The Wisconsin submittal does not contain a description of funding

sources for the I/M program. In order to receive full approval, the

State must submit to EPA a description of the method by which the

program will be funded. This description must demonstrate that

sufficient funds, equipment and personnel have been appropriated to

meet the program operation requirements of the I/M rule and must be

submitted prior to EPA's final rulemaking on this submittal. EPA

proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits this description in

time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close

of the public comment period.

Test Frequency and Convenience--40 CFR 51.355

The enhanced I/M performance standard assumes an annual test

frequency; however, other schedules may be approved if the performance

standard is achieved. The SIP shall describe the test year selection

scheme, shall State how the test frequency is integrated into the

enforcement process and shall include the legal authority, regulations,

or contract provisions necessary to implement and enforce the test

frequency requirement. The program shall be designed to provide

convenient service to the motorist by ensuring short waiting times,

short driving distances and regular testing hours.

The Wisconsin enhanced I/M regulation provides for a biennial test

frequency. Based on the performance standard modeling provided by the

State, the enhanced I/M program meets the performance standard

accounting for the biennial test frequency. On April 13, 1994, The

Wisconsin State Legislature enacted legislation which provides the

legal authority to implement and enforce the biennial test frequency.

This newly adopted legislation has not yet been formally submitted to

EPA as a revision to the SIP, however, once submitted, this authority

will be acceptable. EPA proposes to approve the Wisconsin SIP if the

State formally submits this revised legislation prior to EPA's final

action. EPA has included this legislation in the docket for this

proposed rulemaking. The Wisconsin I/M Request for Proposal (RFP)

provides sufficient evidence that convenient services will be provided

to the motorist. The Wisconsin submittal will meet the test frequency

and convenience requirements of the Federal I/M regulations and is

approvable upon EPA's receipt of the state's newly enacted legislation.

Vehicle Coverage--40 CFR 51.356

The performance standard for enhanced I/M programs assumes coverage

of all 1968 and later 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. Other levels of coverage

may be approved if the necessary emission reductions are achieved.

Vehicles registered or required to be registered within the I/M program

area boundaries and fleets primarily operated within the I/M program

area boundaries and belonging to the covered model years and vehicle

classes comprise the subject vehicles. Fleets may be officially

inspected outside of the normal I/M program test facilities, if such

alternatives are approved by the program administration, but shall be

subject to the same test requirements using the same quality control

standards as non-fleet vehicles and shall be inspected in independent,

test-only facilities, according to the requirements of 40 CFR part

51.353(a).

The Federal I/M regulation requires that the SIP shall include the

legal authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle

coverage requirement, 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 routinely operated in

the area but may not be registered in the area, and a description of

any special exemptions including the percentage and number of vehicles

to be impacted by the exemption.

The Wisconsin enhanced I/M legislation, enacted April 13, 1994,

requires coverage of all 1968 and newer light duty vehicles and trucks

up to 14,000 pounds GVWR, which are registered or required to be

registered in the I/M program area. The Wisconsin legislation and the

state's I/M regulations provide the legal authority to implement and

enforce the vehicle coverage. This level of coverage is approvable

because it provides the necessary emission reductions. The State RFP

also describes general requirements related to vehicle coverage. The

State submittal does not contain estimates of the number of registered

or unregistered vehicles in the area or methods for identifying subject

vehicles. These items will be described in more detail in the states

final, signed I/M contract, which must be submitted to EPA prior to

EPA's final rulemaking, in order to receive full approval on its

submittal. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the

contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior

to the close of the public comment period.

The state's November 15, 1993, SIP submittal does not adequately

address fleet testing requirements. Existing regulations allow for the

self testing and repair of fleets and directly contradict the

requirements of the final I/M rule. The State is moving forward to

amend its TRANS 131 rule to establish detailed provisions for the

testing of fleets in accordance with EPA's final rule. In its

submittal, the State indicates that these rule changes cannot be

completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA proposes to conditionally

approve this portion of the state's submittal if the State commits

prior to final rulemaking to completing these amendments within one

year of EPA's final conditional approval. The state's plan for testing

fleet vehicles must meet the requirements of the Federal I/M

regulation.

The State regulation provides for limited special exemptions. In

its submittal the State did not provide a description of the

exemptions' impact on the subject fleet. In addition, the modeling

demonstration submitted by the State does not account for these

exemptions in the emission reduction analysis. The State must describe

the extent of the exemptions impact in accordance with 40 CFR part

51.356 in order for EPA to fully approve the state's submittal. EPA

proposes to approve the SIP if the State submits, in time to allow EPA

to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public

comment period, a description that indicates that the performance

standard will not be adversely affected.

Test Procedures and Standards--40 CFR 51.357

Written test procedures and pass/fail standards shall be

established and followed for each model year and vehicle type included

in the program. Test procedures and standards are detailed in 40 CFR

part 51.357 and in the EPA document entitled ``High-Tech I/M Test

Procedures, Emission Standards, Quality Control Requirements, and

Equipment Specifications'', EPA-AA-EPSD-IM-93-1, dated July 1993.

The State I/M RFP includes a general provision for loaded tailpipe

emission, evaporative system purge, and evaporative system pressure

testing. Detailed descriptions of the test procedures and standards

will be contained in the state's final, signed I/M contract. After

reviewing the state's RFP, EPA believes that these test procedures and

standards will conform to EPA approved test procedures and will be

approvable. In order to receive full approval, the State must submit

its final, signed contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part

51.357 to EPA prior to final rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the

SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in time to allow EPA to place it

in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.

In addition, the State is currently in the process of amending its

rule NR 485 to establish a series of increasingly stringent emission

limits (cutpoint schedule) for VOC and NOX to correspond to those

used in the state's modeling demonstration. In its submittal, the State

indicates that these rule changes cannot be completed prior to EPA's

final action. EPA proposes to conditionally approve this portion of the

state's submittal if the State submits a commitment to EPA prior to

final rulemaking committing to complete these amendments within one

year of EPA's final conditional approval.

The State is also in the process of applying for an exemption from

NOX control requirements under section 182(f) of the Act. The

state's contract and regulations should contain provisions for

establishing a NOX testing requirement, however, these provisions

may allow for establishing the NOX cutpoint in accordance with

EPA's action on the section 182(f) petition. If EPA approves this

petition for exemption, the I/M rule does not require NOX emission

reductions from the program but the program must be designed to offset

NOX increases resulting from HC and CO failures pursuant to 40 CFR

part 51.351(d). EPA proposes to approve this portion of the SIP if the

State submits the final contract containing NOX provisions

consistent with this discussion in time to allow EPA to place it in the

docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.

The State RFP also contains provisions requiring vehicles that have

been altered from their original certified configuration (i.e. engine

or fuel switching) to be tested in the same manner as other subject

vehicles. However, detailed descriptions of these procedures will be

contained in the state's final, signed I/M contract. After reviewing

the state's RFP, EPA believes that these test procedures and standards

will conform to EPA approved test procedures and will be approvable. In

order to receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed

contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.357 to EPA prior

to final rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin

submits the contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2

weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.

Test Equipment--40 CFR 51.358

Computerized test systems are required for performing any

measurement on subject vehicles. The Federal I/M regulation requires

that the State SIP submittal include written technical specifications

for all test equipment used in the program. The specifications shall

describe the emission analysis process, the necessary test equipment,

the required features, and written acceptance testing criteria and

procedures.

The State RFP contains general specifications for test equipment to

be used in the program. The specifications require the use of

computerized test systems. The specifications will be further developed

in the final I/M contract. In order to receive full approval, the State

must submit its final, signed contract addressing the requirements of

40 CFR part 51.358 to EPA prior to final rulemaking. The contract must

include performance features and functional characteristics of the

computerized test systems which meet the Federal I/M regulations. EPA

proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in time

to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of

the public comment period.

Quality Control--40 CFR 51.359

Quality control measures shall insure that emission measurement

equipment is calibrated and maintained properly, and that inspection,

calibration records, and control charts are accurately created,

recorded and maintained.

The State RFP contains general provisions for the establishment of

quality control measures for the emission measurement equipment, record

keeping requirements, and measures to maintain the security of all

documents used to establish compliance with the inspection

requirements. These measures and practices will be further developed in

the state's final I/M contract. In order to receive full approval, the

State must submit its final, signed contract addressing the

requirements of 40 CFR part 51.359 to EPA prior to final rulemaking.

EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in

time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close

of the public comment period.

Waivers and Compliance Via Diagnostic Inspection--40 CFR 51.360

The Federal I/M regulation allows for 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. For

enhanced I/M programs, an expenditure of at least $450 in repairs,

adjusted annually to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index

(CPI) as compared to the CPI for 1989, is required in order to qualify

for a waiver. Waivers can only be issued after a vehicle has failed a

retest performed after all qualifying repairs have been made. Any

available warranty coverage must be used to obtain repairs before

expenditures can be counted toward the cost limit. Tampering related

repairs shall not be applied toward the cost limit. Repairs must be

appropriate to the cause of the test failure. Repairs for 1980 and

newer model year vehicles must be performed by a recognized repair

technician. The Federal regulation allows for compliance via a

diagnostic inspection after failing a retest on emissions and requires

quality control of waiver issuance. The SIP must set a maximum waiver

rate and must describe corrective action that must be taken if the

waiver rate exceeds that committed to in the SIP.

The legislative authority and State regulation provides the

necessary authority to issue waivers, set and adjust cost limits, and

administer and enforce the waiver system. The Wisconsin I/M regulation

sets a $450 cost limit and allows for an annual adjustment of the cost

limit to reflect the change in the CPI as compared to the CPI in 1989

for the 6 county Milwaukee nonattainment area and a $200 cost limit for

1981 and newer models and a $75 cost limit for vehicles older than

model year 1981 in Sheboygan county. Although amended legislative

authority requires actual expenditure of funds to qualify towards the

cost limit, existing regulations still allow estimates of repair costs

to qualify. The provisions of the Wisconsin legislative authority

override the previous administrative rule in this situation. In

addition, Wisconsin is amending its regulations to correct this

contradiction. EPA proposes to conditionally approve the SIP based on

Wisconsin's commitment to adopt and submit these regulatory amendments

within one year of final action. The State must submit this commitment

to EPA prior to final action in order to receive conditional approval.

The regulation and RFP include provisions which address waiver criteria

and procedures, including cost limits, tampering and warranty related

repairs, quality control and administration. These provisions will be

further developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to

receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract

addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.360 to EPA prior to final

rulemaking. The contract must require repairs for vehicles to be

performed by a recognized or certified repair technician. The contract

may allow for compliance via diagnostic inspection provided the

policies and procedures outlined in the submittal meet Federal I/M

regulations. The State regulation allows for time extensions. The

contract must specify the criteria for allowing time extensions and for

tracking extensions.

The State has set a maximum waiver rate of 3 percent for both pre-

1981 and for 1981 and later vehicles. While the State has a good

history of maintaining the program's waiver rate, EPA is concerned that

the State may have a problem maintaining the 3 percent waiver rate

given the lower expenditure waiver limit in Sheboygan county (i.e.,

$450 versus $200). Therefore, in order to receive full approval the

State must describe corrective actions to be taken if the waiver rate

exceeds 3 percent. This waiver rate has been used in the performance

standard modeling demonstration and is approvable. However, in its SIP

submittal, the State did not include a formal commitment to the waiver

and compliance rates used in the modeling demonstration. EPA proposes

to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract, description of

corrective actions, and appropriate commitments in time to allow EPA to

place them in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public

comment period.

Motorist Compliance Enforcement--40 CFR 51.361

The Federal regulation requires that compliance shall be ensured

through the denial of motor vehicle registration in enhanced I/M

programs unless an exception for use of an existing alternative is

approved. Registration denial enforcement consists of rejecting an

application for initial registration or reregistration of a used

vehicle unless the vehicle has complied with the I/M requirement prior

to the granting of the application. The SIP shall provide information

concerning the enforcement process, legal authority to implement and

enforce the program, a commitment to a compliance rate to be used for

modeling purposes and to be maintained in practice.

Wisconsin's legislative authority and I/M regulations provide the

legal authority to implement a registration denial system. Wisconsin

has set a compliance rate of 96 percent, which was used in the

performance standard modeling demonstration. However, in its SIP

submittal, the State did not include a formal commitment to this

compliance rate. The submittal includes detailed information concerning

the registration denial enforcement process which meets the Federal I/M

regulation requirements and is approvable. The State has not submitted

a detailed penalty schedule including a description of mandatory,

meaningful fines for the program. The State is in the process of

amending its TRANS 131 rule to establish a more thorough penalty

schedule. In its submittal, the State indicates that these rule changes

cannot be completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA proposes to

conditionally approve this portion of the state's submittal if the

State submits a commitment to EPA prior to final rulemaking committing

to completing these amendments within one year of EPA's final

conditional approval. The state's penalty schedule must meet the

requirements of the Federal I/M regulation.

Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight--40 CFR 51.362

The Federal I/M regulation requires that the enforcement program

shall be audited regularly and shall follow effective program

management practices, including adjustments to improve operation when

necessary. The SIP shall include quality control and quality assurance

procedures to be used to insure the effective overall performance of

the enforcement system. An information management system shall be

established which will characterize, evaluate and enforce the program.

The Wisconsin RFP contains general provisions for quality control

of the enforcement program and includes the establishment of an

information management system. These provisions will be further

developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to receive full

approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract addressing

the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.362 to EPA prior to final

rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the

contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior

to the close of the public comment period.

Quality Assurance--40 CFR 51.363

An ongoing quality assurance program shall be implemented to

discover, correct and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in the program.

The program shall include covert and overt performance audits of the

inspectors, audits of station and inspector records, equipment audits,

and formal training of all State I/M enforcement officials and

auditors. The State must submit a description of the quality assurance

program, including written procedure manuals on the above discussed

items, as part of the SIP.

The Wisconsin RFP includes general provisions for a quality

assurance program. The final, signed I/M contract will provide specific

details and procedures for inspections, records, equipment audits, and

formal training for all State enforcement officials will be specified

by the final, signed I/M contract.

In order to receive full approval, the State must submit its final,

signed contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.360 to

EPA prior to final rulemaking. Detailed procedures for performing overt

and covert audits are being developed separately from the final, signed

I/M contract. The State must submit a description of these procedures

to EPA in order to receive full approval of its submittal. EPA proposes

to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract and description of

audit procedures in time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2

weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.

Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors--40 CFR 51.364

Enforcement against licensed stations or contractors and inspectors

shall include swift, sure, effective, and consistent penalties for

violation of program requirements. 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. The legal authority for establishing and imposing

penalties, civil fines, license suspensions and revocations must be

included in the SIP. State quality assurance officials shall have the

authority to temporarily suspend station and/or inspector licenses

immediately upon finding a violation that directly affects emission

reduction benefits. The SIP shall 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, the resources to be

allocated to this function, and the source of those funds.

The Wisconsin submittal includes the legal authority to establish

and impose penalties against stations, contractors and inspectors. The

State I/M regulation and legislation includes general penalty

provisions for stations, contractors and inspectors. Specific penalty

schedules will be detailed in the final signed, I/M contract. In order

to receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed

contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.364 to EPA prior

to final rulemaking. In addition, the submittal does not include a

description of administrative and judicial procedures relevant to the

enforcement process which meets Federal I/M regulations. The State must

submit this documentation to EPA in order for the submittal to be fully

approved. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the

contract and description of administrative and judicial procedures in

time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2 weeks prior to the

close of the public comment period.

Data Collection--40 CFR 51.365

Accurate data collection is essential to the management, evaluation

and enforcement of an I/M program. The Federal I/M regulation requires

data to be gathered on each individual test conducted and on the

results of the quality control checks of test equipment required under

40 CFR part 51.359.

The RFP contains provisions regarding the collection of data on

each individual test conducted and generally describes the type of data

to be collected. These provisions will be further developed in the

final, signed I/M contract. In order to receive full approval, the

State must submit its final, signed contract addressing the

requirements of 40 CFR part 51.365 to EPA prior to final rulemaking.

The submittal also commits to gather and report the results of the

quality control checks required under 40 CFR part 51.359 and will be

approvable upon EPA's receipt of the final, signed I/M contract. EPA

proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in time

to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the close of

the public comment period.

Data Analysis and Reporting--40 CFR 51.366

Data analysis and reporting are required to allow for monitoring an

evaluation of the program by the State and EPA. The Federal I/M

regulation requires annual reports to be submitted that provide

information and statistics and summarize activities performed for each

of the following programs: testing, quality assurance, quality control

and enforcement. These reports are to be submitted by July of each year

and shall provide statistics for the period of January to December of

the previous year. A biennial report shall be submitted to EPA that

addresses changes in program design, regulations, legal authority,

program procedures, any weaknesses in the program found during the

previous two-year period and how these problems will be or were

corrected.

The RFP provides general provisions for the analysis and reporting

of data for the testing program, quality assurance program, quality

control program and the enforcement program. These provisions will be

further developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to

receive full approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract

addressing the requirements of 40 CFR 51.364 to EPA prior to final

rulemaking. The State must also commit to submit annual reports on

these programs to EPA by July of the subsequent year. A commitment to

submit a biennial report to EPA, which addresses reporting requirements

set forth in 40 CFR 51.366(e), must also be submitted to EPA in order

to receive full approval. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin

submits the contract, a commitment to submit annual reports and a

biennial report in time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2

weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.

Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification--40 CFR 51.376

The Federal I/M regulation requires all inspectors to be formally

trained and licensed or certified to perform inspections.

The RFP contains general provisions regarding requirements for

inspectors' formal training, certification and licensing. The signed

contract will include a description of the training program, the

written and hands-on tests, and the licensing, certification processes.

In order to receive full approval, the State must submit its final,

signed contract addressing the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.376 to

EPA prior to final rulemaking. EPA proposes to approve the SIP if

Wisconsin submits the contract in time to allow EPA to place it in the

docket 2 weeks prior to the close of the public comment period.

Public Information and Consumer Protection--40 CFR 51.368

The Federal I/M regulation requires the SIP to include public

information and consumer protection programs. The RFP includes a public

information program, which educates the public on I/M, State and

Federal regulations, air quality, the contribution of motor vehicles to

the air pollution problem, and other items as described in the Federal

rule. The consumer protection program, which includes provisions for a

challenge mechanism, protection of whistle blowers and assistance to

motorists in obtaining warranty covered repairs, will be further

developed in the final contract. In order to receive full approval, the

State must submit its final, signed contract addressing the

requirements of 40 CFR part 51.364 to EPA prior to final rulemaking.

EPA proposes to approve the SIP if Wisconsin submits the contract in

time to allow EPA to place them in the docket 2 weeks prior to the

close of the public comment period.

Improving Repair Effectiveness--40 CFR 51.369

Effective repairs are the key to achieving program goals. The

Federal regulation requires states to take steps to ensure that the

capability exists in the repair industry to repair vehicles. The State

shall provide the repair industry with information and assistance

related to vehicle inspection diagnosis and repair. The SIP must

include a description of the technical assistance program to be

implemented, a description of the procedures and criteria to be used in

meeting the performance monitoring requirements required in the Federal

regulation and a description of the repair technician training

resources available in the community.

The RFP includes general provisions for the implementation of a

technical assistance program, which includes a hot line service to

assist repair technicians and a method of regularly informing the

repair facilities of changes in the program, training courses, and

common repair problems. A repair facility performance monitoring

program is also included in the RFP. This program provides the motorist

whose vehicle fails the test a summary of local repair facilities'

performances, and requires the submittal of a completed repair form at

the time of retest. The program also provides feedback to each repair

facility on its repair performance. These provisions will be further

developed in the final, signed I/M contract. In order to receive full

approval, the State must submit its final, signed contract addressing

the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.369 to EPA prior to final

rulemaking. The State must also submit a description of available

repair technician training resources. EPA proposes to approve the SIP

if Wisconsin submits the contract and description of training resources

in time to allow EPA to place it in the docket 2 weeks prior to the

close of the public comment period.

Compliance With Recall Notices--40 CFR 51.370

The Federal regulation requires the states to establish methods to

ensure that vehicles that are subject to enhanced I/M and are included

in a emission related recall receive the required repairs prior to

completing the emission test or renewing the vehicle registration.

The Wisconsin legislation provides the legal authority to require

owners to comply with emission related recalls before completing the

emission test. Specific procedures to be used to incorporate national

database recall information into the State inspection database and

quality control methods to insure that recall repairs are properly

documented and tracked will be provided in the final, signed I/M

contract, and will also be specified through amendments to the state's

TRANS 131 rule. The submittal does not include a commitment to submit

an annual report to EPA that includes the information required in 40

CFR part 51.370(c). In its submittal, the State indicates that these

rule changes cannot be completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA

proposes to conditionally approve this portion of the state's submittal

if the State submits a commitment to EPA prior to final rulemaking

committing to completing these amendments and submitting annual reports

within one year of EPA's final conditional approval.

On-Road Testing--40 CFR 51.371

On-road testing is required in enhanced I/M areas. The use of

either remote sensing devices (RSD) or roadside pullovers including

tailpipe emission testing can be used to meet the Federal regulations.

The program must include on-road testing of 0.5 percent of the subject

fleet or 20,000 vehicles, whichever is less, in the nonattainment area

or the I/M program area. Motorists that have passed an emission test

and are found to be high emitters as a result of a on-road test shall

be required to pass an out-of-cycle test.

Legal authority to implement the on-road testing program and

enforce off-cycle inspection and repair requirements is contained in

the State legislation. The SIP submittal requires the use of RSD and

roadside pullovers to test at least 0.5 percent of the subject fleet

per year in the I/M program area. A description of the program which

includes test limits and criteria, resource allocations, and methods of

collecting, analyzing and reporting the results of the testing will be

detailed in the final I/M contract and amendments to the state's TRANS

131 rule. In its submittal, the State indicates that these rule changes

cannot be completed prior to EPA's final action. EPA proposes to

conditionally approve this portion of the state's submittal if the

State submits a commitment to EPA prior to final rulemaking committing

to completing these amendments within one year of EPA's final

conditional approval.

State Implementation Plan Submissions/Implementation Deadlines--40 CFR

51.372-373

The Federal regulation requires enhanced I/M programs to be

implemented by January 1, 1995 except for: (1) Existing test-and-repair

programs, which may test 30 percent of the subject fleet in the test-

only system during 1995 and test all subject vehicles in the test-only

system beginning January 1, 1996 (during the phase-in period, existing

requirements may continue to apply for the test-and-repair portion of

the program until it is phased out by January 1, 1996) or (2) Areas

starting new test-only programs and those with existing test-only

programs may phase in the new test procedures between January 1, 1995

and January 1, 1996; however, all other program requirements must be

fully implemented by January 1, 1995.

The Wisconsin submittal included final State I/M regulations,

preliminary legislative authority to implement the program, final

specifications, a final RFP, procedural documents, and a discussion on

each of the required program design elements. The submittal states that

all inspectors and stations will be certified, that mandatory testing

has already started, and that the start date for implementation will be

July 3, 1995. The submittal also includes a commitment to include

onboard diagnostic checks in the I/M program within 2 years after

promulgation of onboard diagnostic check regulations for I/M programs.

As noted in this proposed rulemaking, the State must timely submit its

final, signed I/M contract, most recent changes to its I/M legislation

enacted on April 13, 1994, final modeling demonstration, narrative

descriptions of certain program elements, commitments to minimum

compliance and enforcement related activity levels, and final rule

changes or appropriate commitments prior to EPA's final rulemaking in

order to receive final approval and conditional approval of its I/M

submittal.

EPA's review of the material indicates that, subject to the

conditions and contingencies noted above, the State has adopted an

enhanced I/M program in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

EPA is proposing to approve and conditionally approve the Wisconsin SIP

revision for an enhanced I/M program, which was submitted on November

15, 1993, contingent on the timely receipt of the materials noted above

from the State. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues

discussed in this notice and the additional material to be placed in

the docket during the public comment period, or on other relevant

matters. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure

by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional office listed in the

ADDRESSES section of this notice.

Proposed Action

EPA is proposing to approve portions and conditionally approve

other portions of this revision to the Wisconsin SIP for an enhanced I/

M program. In the alternative, if Wisconsin fails to timely submit the

materials discussed above, or if such materials do not meet the

requirements of the Federal I/M rule, EPA proposes to disapprove the

SIP or to conditionally approve these portions of the plan if the State

submits the appropriate commitment(s) to remedy any deficiencies within

one year of final conditional approval.

I. Basis for Conditional Approval

The EPA believes conditional approval is appropriate in this case

because the State has developed final, fully adopted rules for the

enhanced I/M program and needs only to amend these rules to address a

number of enhanced I/M program requirements. As a condition of the U.S.

EPA's proposed conditional approval, the State must submit final, fully

adopted rules to EPA no later than one year after EPA's final

conditional approval.

II. Statement of Approvability

Under the authority of the Governor, the Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources submitted a SIP revision to satisfy the requirements

of the I/M regulation to the EPA on November 15, 1993. The Agency has

reviewed this submittal and is proposing to approve portions and

proposing to conditionally approve other portions of it pursuant to

Sections 110(k) of the Act, on the condition that the portions of the

I/M program noted above are adopted and/or submitted on the schedules

noted in this proposed rulemaking.

If the State fails to timely submit the required regulations and

other material or commit to do so within one year of EPA's final

conditional approval, EPA proposes in the alternative to disapprove the

SIP as failing to comply with section 110 and Part D.

If the EPA takes final conditional approval on the commitment, the

State must meet its commitment to adopt and submit the final rule

amendments within one year of the conditional approval. Once the EPA

has conditionally approved this committal, if the State fails to adopt

or submit the required rules to EPA, final approval will become a

disapproval. EPA will notify the State by letter to this effect. Once

the SIP has been disapproved, these commitments will no longer be a

part of the approved nonattainment area SIPs. The EPA subsequently will

publish a notice to this effect in the notice section of the Federal

Register indicating that the commitment or commitments have been

disapproved and removed from the SIP. If the State adopts and submits

the final rule amendments to the EPA within the applicable time frame,

the conditionally approved commitments will remain part of the SIP

until the EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new

submittal. If the EPA approves the subsequent submittal, those newly

approved rules will become a part of the SIP.

If after considering comments on the proposal, the EPA issues a

final disapproval or if the conditional approval portions are converted

to a disapproval, the sanctions clock under section 179(a) will begin.

This clock will begin on the effective date of the final disapproval or

at the time the EPA notifies the State by letter that a conditional

approval has been converted to a disapproval. If the State does not

submit and the EPA does not approve the rule on which the disapproval

was based within 18 months of the disapproval, the EPA must impose one

of the sanctions under section 179(b)--highway funding restrictions or

the offset sanction. In addition, the final disapproval starts the 24

month clock for the imposition of a section 110(c) Federal

Implementation Plan. Finally, under section 110(m) the EPA has

discretionary authority to impose sanctions at any time after a final

disapproval.

Procedural Background

The OMB has exempted this action rule from Executive Order 12866

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 Act

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 Act,

preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The

Act 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental Protection, Air Pollution Control, Carbon Monoxide,

Nitrogen oxide, Ozone, Volatile Organic Compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Dated: June 24, 1994.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 94-17006 Filed 7-13-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P