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

Federal RegisterDec 13, 1996

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[GA-34-2-9644; FRL-5656-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Georgia: Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed interim rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a conditional, interim approval of a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Georgia.

This revision establishes and requires the implementation of an

enhanced inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in Cherokee, Clayton,

Cobb, Coweta, Dekalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett,

Henry, Paulding, and Rockdale Counties. The intended effect of this

action is to propose conditional interim approval of an I/M program

proposed by the State, based upon the State's good faith estimate,

which asserts that the State's network design credits are appropriate

and the revision is otherwise in compliance with the Clean Air Act

(CAA). This action is being taken under the National Highway System

Designation Act of 1995 (NHSDA) and section 110 of the CAA.

If the State commits within 30 days of this proposed conditional

interim approval notice to correct the major deficiencies by dates

certain as described below, then this proposed conditional approval

shall expire pursuant to the NHSDA and section 110 of the CAA on the

earlier of 18 months from final interim approval, or on the date of EPA

takes final action on the states full I/M SIP. In the event that the

State fails to submit a commitment to correct all of the major

deficiencies within 30 days after the publication of this proposed

conditional interim approval notice, then EPA is proposing in the

alternative to dissaprove the SIP revision. If the State does make a

timely commitment but the conditions are not met by the specified date

within one year, EPA proposes that this proposed conditional interim

approval will convert to final disapproval. If the conditional interim

approval is converted to a disapproval, EPA will notify the State by

letter that the conditions have not been met and that the conditional

approval has converted to a disapproval.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 13, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Benjamin Franco at the EPA

Regional Office listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public inspection during normal business hours

at the following locations. The interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before visiting day.

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 100

Alabama St., SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.

Georgia Environmental Protection Division, 4244 International Parkway,

Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benjamin Franco, Mobile Source and

Community Planning Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides &

Toxics Management Division, Region 4 Environmental Protection Agency,

100 Alabama St., SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The telephone number is

404/562-9039. Reference file GA 34-2-9644.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Impact of the National Highway System Designation Act on the Design

and Implementation of Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance Programs

Under the Clean Air Act

The National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (NHSDA)

establishes two key changes to the enhanced I/M rule requirements

previously developed by EPA. Under the NHSDA, EPA cannot require states

to adopt or implement centralized, test-only IM240 enhanced vehicle

inspection and maintenance programs as a means of compliance with

section 182, 184 or 187 of the CAA. Also under the NHSDA, EPA cannot

disapprove a SIP revision, nor apply an automatic discount to a SIP

revision under section 182, 184 or 187 of the CAA, because the I/M

program in such plan revision is decentralized, or a test-and-repair

program. Accordingly, the so-called 50% credit discount that was

established by the EPA's I/M Program Requirements Final Rule,

(published November 5, 1992, and herein referred to as the I/M Rule)

has been effectively replaced with a presumptive equivalency criteria,

which places the emission reductions credits for decentralized networks

on par with credit assumptions for centralized networks, based upon a

state's good faith estimate of reductions as provided by the NHSDA and

explained below in this section.

EPA's I/M Rule established many other criteria unrelated to network

design or test type for states to use in designing enhanced I/M

programs. All other elements of the I/M Rule, and the statutory

requirements established in the CAA continue to be required of those

states submitting I/M SIP revisions under the NHSDA, and the NHSDA

specifically requires that these submittals must otherwise comply in

all respects with the I/M Rule and the CAA.

The NHSDA also requires states to swiftly develop, submit, and

begin implementation of these enhanced I/M programs, since the

anticipated start-up dates developed under the CAA and EPA's rules have

already been delayed. In requiring states to submit these plans within

120 days of the NHSDA passage, and in allowing these states to submit

proposed regulations for this plan (which can be finalized and

submitted to EPA during the interim period) it is clear that Congress

intended for states to begin testing vehicles as soon as practicable,

now that the decentralized credit issue has been clarified and directly

addressed by the NHSDA.

Submission criteria described under the NHSDA allow a state to

submit proposed regulations for this interim program, provided that the

state has all of the statutory authority necessary to carry out the

program. Also, in proposing the interim credits for this program,

states are required to make good faith estimates regarding the

performance of their enhanced I/M program. Since these estimates are

expected to be difficult to quantify, the state need only provide that

the proposed credits claimed for the submission have a basis in fact. A

good faith estimate of a state's program may be one based on any of the

following: the performance of any previous I/M program; the results of

remote sensing or other roadside testing techniques; fleet and vehicle

miles traveled (VMT) profiles; demographic studies; or other evidence

which has relevance to the effectiveness or emissions reducing

capabilities of an I/M program.

[[Page 65497]]

This action is being taken under the authority of both the NHSDA

and section 110 of the CAA. Section 348 of the NHSDA expressly directs

EPA to issue this interim approval for a period of 18 months, at which

time the interim program will be evaluated. At that time, the

Conference Report on section 348 of the NHSDA states that it is

expected that the proposed credits claimed by the state in its

submittal, and the emissions reductions demonstrated through the

program data may not match exactly. Therefore, the Conference Report

suggests that EPA use the program data to appropriately adjust these

credits.

Furthermore, EPA believes that in also taking action under section

110 of the CAA, it is appropriate to grant a conditional approval to

this submittal since there are some deficiencies with respect to CAA

statutory or regulatory requirements (identified herein) that EPA

believes can be corrected by the State during the interim period.

B. Interim Approvals Under the NHSDA

The NHSDA directs EPA to grant interim approval for a period of 18

months to approvable I/M submittals under this Act. This Act also

directs EPA and the states to review the interim program results at the

end of 18 months, and to make a determination as to the effectiveness

of the interim program. Following this demonstration, EPA will adjust

any credit claims made by the state in its good faith effort to reflect

the emissions reductions actually measured by the state during the

program evaluation period. The NHSDA is clear that the interim approval

shall last for only 18 months, and that the program evaluation is due

to EPA at the end of that period. Therefore, EPA believes Congress

intended for these programs to start-up as soon as possible, which EPA

believes should be at the latest, November 15, 1997, so that

approximately six months of operational program data can be collected

to evaluate the interim program. EPA believes that in setting such a

strict timetable for program evaluations under the NHSDA, that Congress

recognized and attempted to mitigate any further delay with the start-

up of this program. For the purposes of this program, start-up is

defined as a fully operational program which has begun regular,

mandatory inspections and repairs, using the final test strategy and

covering each of a state's required areas. EPA proposes that if the

state fails to start its program on this schedule, the approval granted

under the provisions of the NHSDA will convert to a disapproval after a

finding letter is sent to the state.

The program evaluation to be used by the state during the 18 month

interim period must be acceptable to EPA. EPA anticipates that such a

program evaluation process will be developed by the Environmental

Council of State (ECOS) group that is convening now and that was

organized for this purpose. EPA further anticipates that in addition to

the interim, short term evaluation, the state will conduct a long term,

ongoing evaluation of the I/M program as required by the I/M Rule in

Secs. 51.353 and 51.366.

C. Process for Full Approvals of This Program Under the CAA

As per the NHSDA requirements, this interim rulemaking will expire

within 18 months of the final interim approval, or the date of final

full approval. A full approval of the state's final I/M SIP revision

(which will include the state's program evaluation and final adopted

state regulations) is still necessary under section 110 and under

section 182, 184 or 187 of the CAA. After EPA reviews the state's

submitted program evaluation, final rulemaking on the state's SIP

revision will occur.

II. EPA's Analysis of Georgia's Submittal

On March 27, 1996, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division

(GAEPD) submitted a revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) for

an enhanced I/M program to qualify under the NHSDA. The revision

consists of enabling legislation that will allow the State to implement

the I/M program, proposed regulations, a description of the I/M program

(including a modeling analysis and detailed description of program

features), and a good faith estimate that includes the State's basis in

fact for emission reductions claims. The State's credit assumptions

were based upon the removal of the 50% credit discount for all portions

of the program that are based on a test-and-repair network, and the

application of the State's own good faith estimate of the effectiveness

of its decentralized test and repair program. Georgia's credit

assumption were based upon a remote sensing study performed by Georgia

Tech. Subsequently, on June 17, 1996, GAEPD submitted amendments to the

earlier SIP revisions.

A. Analysis of the NHSDA Submittal Criteria

Transmittal Letter

On March 27, 1996, Georgia submitted an enhanced I/M SIP revision

to EPA, requesting action under the NHSDA of 1995 and the CAA of 1990.

A subsequent submittal amending the I/M program was submitted to EPA on

June 17, 1996. The official submittal was made by the appropriate State

official, Harold Reheis of the Georgia EPD, and was addressed to the

appropriate EPA official, John Hankinson, the Regional Administrator.

Enabling Legislation

The State of Georgia has legislation in Chapter 391-3-10 and 391-3-

20 enabling the implementation of a hybrid program consisting of the

use of a two speed idle exhaust emission test and an Accelerated

Simulation Mode (ASM) exhaust emission test.

Proposed Regulations

On August 16, 1995, the State of Georgia, proposed regulations in

accordance with 40 CFR part 51, establishing an enhanced I/M program.

The State adopted, under emergency rule, Chapter 39-3-20, Rules for

Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance, on May 29, 1996. This rule was

permanently adopted by Georgia on August 26, 1996. Also, Chapter 391-3-

10, Rules for Inspection and Maintenance, was adopted on June 24, 1996.

Program Description

The Georgia program is a decentralized hybrid program consisting of

an Acceleration Simulation Mode test for older vehicles, and a 2 speed

idle test for newer vehicles. All vehicles will receive a gas cap

pressure integrity test. The primary compliance mechanism is

registration denial. Newer vehicles are those with a designated model

year which is of the current test year and up to five years older than

the current test year. Older vehicles are those more than five years

older than the current test year and through the 1975 model year.

Stations may be either test-only or test-and-repair. Fleets are allowed

to self test. Vehicles that are 10 or more years old, driven less than

5000 miles per year, and owned by persons aged 65 years or older are

exempt from testing, as are antique or collector cars or trucks 25

years old or older. The Management Contractor will be responsible for

quality control, quality assurance, program oversight, and outreach.

The idle test portion of the program was expanded to all 13 metro

Atlanta nonattainment counties on October 1, 1996. ASM testing will

begin on July 1, 1997.

[[Page 65498]]

Emission Reduction Claim and Basis for the Claim

B. Analysis of the EPA I/M Regulation and CAA Requirements

As previously stated, the NHSDA left those elements of the I/M Rule

that do not pertain to network design or test type intact. Based upon

EPA's review of Georgia's submittal, EPA believes the State has not

complied with all aspects of the NHSDA, the CAA and the I/M Rule. For

those sections of the I/M Rule, or of the CAA identified below, with

which the State has not yet fully complied, EPA proposes to

conditionally approve the SIP if it receives a commitment from the

State to correct said deficiency. Before EPA can continue with the

interim rulemaking process, the State must make a commitment within 30

days of December 13, 1996 to correct these major SIP elements by a date

certain within one year of interim approval. If the State does not make

this commitment, EPA proposes in the alternative to disapprove the

State submittal. The State must correct these major deficiencies by the

date specified in the commitment or this proposed approval will convert

to a disapproval under CAA section 110(k)(4).

Applicability--40 CFR 51.350

The Atlanta area is classified as a serious ozone nonattainment

area and also required to implement an enhanced I/M program as per

section 182(c)(3) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.350(2).

Under the requirements of the Clean Air Act, the following counties

in Georgia are subject to the enhanced I/M program requirements:

Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dekalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth,

Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, and Rockdale.

The Georgia I/M legislative authority provides the legal authority

to establish the geographic boundaries. The program boundaries are

listed in Chapter 391-3-20-0.32-.02. EPA is proposing to find that the

geographic applicability requirements are satisfied. The federal I/M

regulation requires that the state program shall not sunset until it is

no longer necessary.

EPA interprets the federal regulation as stating that a SIP which

does not sunset prior to the attainment deadline for each applicable

area satisfies this requirement. The Georgia I/M regulation provides

for the program to continue past the attainment dates for all

applicable nonattainment areas in the Georgia.

The State submission meets the Applicability requirements of the

Federal I/M regulation for interim approval.

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. The performance standard shall be established using local

characteristics, such as vehicle mix and local fuel controls, and the

following model I/M program parameters: 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 Georgia submittal the most current version was MOBILE5a.

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 nitrogen oxides (NOx) and hydrocarbons (HC). The state's

submittal must meet the enhanced I/M performance standard for HC and

NOx in the subject I/M area.

The Georgia submittal includes the following program design

parameters:

Network type--Hybrid, consisting of a test and repair program and a

test only program, modeled as test-only for 100% emission reduction

credit.

Start date--1982.

Test frequency--Biennial.

Model year/vehicle type coverage--1975/LDGV, LDGT1, LDGT2.

Exhaust emission test type--ASM for vehicles seven years old back

to 1975, 2-speed idle for newest six model years.

Emission standards--ASM: .8 g/mile HC, 15.0 g/mile CO, 2.0 g/mile

NOx. 2-speed idle: 220 ppm HC, 1.2 ppm CO, and 999 ppm NOx.

Emission control device--Visual inspections of catalyst.

Evaporative system function checks--gas cap pressure test.

Stringency (pre-1981 failure rate)--20%.

Waiver rate--3% for all model years.

Compliance rate--97%.

Evaluation dates--January 2000.

The Georgia program design parameters meet the federal I/M

regulations and are approvable.

The State program demonstrates compliance with the low enhanced

performance standard established in 40 CFR 51.351(g). That section

provides that states may select the low enhanced performance standard

if they have an approved SIP for reasonable further progress in 1996,

commonly known as a 15 percent reduction SIP. In fact EPA approval of

15 percent plans has been delayed, and although EPA is preparing to

take action on 15 percent plans in the near future, it is unlikely that

EPA will have completed final action on most 15 percent plans prior to

the time EPA believes it would be appropriate to give final interim

approval to I/M programs under the NHSDA.

In enacting the NHSDA, Congress evidenced an intent to have states

promptly implement I/M programs under interim approval status to gather

the data necessary to support state claims of appropriate credit for

alternative network design systems. By providing that such programs

must be submitted within a four month period, that EPA could approve I/

M programs on an interim basis based only upon proposed regulations,

and that such approvals would last only for an 18 month period, it is

clear that Congress anticipated both that these programs would start

quickly and that EPA would act quickly to give them interim approval.

Many states have designed a program to meet the low enhanced

performance standard, and have included that program in their 15

percent plan submitted to EPA for approval. Such states anticipated

that EPA would propose approval both of the I/M programs and the 15

percent plans on a similar schedule, and thus that the I/M programs

would qualify for approval under the low performance standard. EPA does

not believe it would be consistent with the intent of the NHSDA to

delay action on interim I/M approval until the Agency has completed

action on the corresponding 15 percent plans. Although EPA acknowledges

that under its regulations full final approval of a low enhanced I/M

program after the 18 month evaluation period would have to await

approval of the corresponding 15 percent plan, EPA believes that in

light of the NHSDA it can take final interim approval of such I/M plans

provided that the Agency has determined as an initial matter that

approval of the 15 percent plan is appropriate, and has issued a

proposed approval of that 15 percent plan.

Georgia has submitted a 15 percent plan which includes the low

enhanced I/M program. EPA is currently reviewing that program and plans

[[Page 65499]]

propose action on it shortly. EPA here proposes to approve the I/M

program as satisfying the low enhanced performance standard provided

that EPA does propose to approve the 15 percent plan containing that

program. Should EPA propose approval of the 15 percent plan, EPA will

proceed to take final interim approval action on the I/M plan. EPA

proposes in the alternative that if the Agency proposes instead to

disapprove the 15 percent plan, EPA would then disapprove the I/M plan

as well because the State would no longer be eligible to select the low

enhanced performance standard under the terms of 51.351(g).

The emission levels achieved by GAEPD were modeled using MOBILE5a

and utilizing the ASM2 credit matrix in that model. The modeling

demonstration was performed correctly, used local characteristics and

demonstrated that the program design will meet the minimum enhanced I/M

performance standard, expressed in gpm, for HC, and NOx, for each

milestone and for the attainment deadline. In addition, the existing I/

M rules require that the modeling demonstrate that the state program

has met the performance standard by fixed evaluation dates. The first

such date is January 1, 2000. However, few state programs will be able

to demonstrate compliance with the performance standard by that date as

a result of delays in program start up and phase in of testing

requirements. EPA believes that based on the provisions of the NHSAD,

the evaluation dates in the current I/M rule have been superseded.

Congress provided in the NHSDA for programs that would start

significantly later than the start dates in the current I/M rule.

Consistent with Congressional intent, such programs by definition will

not achieve full compliance with the performance standard by the

beginning of 2000.

As explained above, EPA has concluded that the NHSDA superseded the

start date requirements of the I/M rule, but that states should still

be required to start their programs as soon as possible, which EPA has

determined would be by November 15, 1997. Therefore, EPA believes that

pursuant to the NHSDA, delaying program implementation for

approximately two years, the initial evaluation date for modeling

purposes should also be pushed back two years to January 1, 2002. This

evaluation date will allow states to fully implement their I/M programs

and complete one cycle of testing at full cut points in order to

demonstrate compliance with the performance standard.

Georgia will be required to repeat the modeling demonstration if

EPA provides the appropriate ASM1 credit matrix as part of the MOBILE

model. The enhanced performance standard required for the Georgia

program is 1.684 grams per mile for VOC and 1.968 grams per mile for

NOx. The low enhanced performance standard required for the Georgia

program is 2.254 grams per mile for VOC and 2.231 grams per mile for

NOx. The model results for the Georgia I/M program are 2.002 grams per

mile for VOC and 1.996 grams per mile for NOx. While the Georgia

program falls below the enhanced I/M performance standard, it is above

the low enhanced I/M performance standard. GAEPD will achieve

additional emission reductions elsewhere, consistent with the

requirements of the EPA flexibility rule creating the low enhanced

standard. Georgia will implement a ban on all open-burning in addition

to a 7.0 Reid Vapor Pressure program in order to achieve the necessary

reductions.

The State submittal meets the Performance Standard requirements of

the federal I/M regulation for interim approval.

Network Type and Program Evaluation--40 CFR 51.353

The enhanced program must 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 must include details on the program evaluation and

must include a schedule for submittal of biennial evaluation reports,

data from a state monitored or administered mass emission test of at

least 0.1% 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. ECOS has

formed a committee to develop an evaluation protocol to be used by

states in order to evaluate program effectiveness. ECOS has recommended

that states follow the evaluation procedure in EPA's Final I/M rule. In

a letter dated October 2, 1996, the Georgia EPD committed to a program

evaluation that will comply with both the ECOS recommendation and 40

CFR 51.353(c). EPA interprets this to mean the evaluation program shall

consist, at a minimum, of those items described in 40 CFR 51.353(b)(1)

and mass emission test data using the procedure specified in 40 CFR

51.357(a)(11), or any other transient, mass emission test procedure

approved as equivalent, and evaporative system checks. The first of the

required biennial reports will be provided to EPA by July 1, 1998, with

subsequent reports on July 1 every second year following.

The network is composed of private and public testing stations.

Public testing stations may be test-only or test and repair. Fleets are

allowed to conduct tests on their own vehicles, and are considered

private testing stations.

The Georgia submittal meets the Network Type and Program Evaluation

requirements of the federal I/M regulation for interim approval.

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 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.

Georgia requires quality assurance, data analysis and reporting,

audits, and other oversight and management functions to be performed by

the Management Contractor. A portion of the test fee will be used to

pay the Management Contractor, and another portion will be paid to

GAEPD to cover program oversight. The Management Contractor will

receive $5.45 for each vehicle inspected at a public test station.

GAEPD will receive $0.95 per vehicle inspected at a public test station

in order to cover the cost of providing oversight and implementation of

the program. The inspection fee at a fleet test station will be $8.40.

The Management Contractor will receive $5.45 per vehicle inspected at a

fleet testing station. GAEPD will receive $1.95 per vehicle inspected

at a fleet test station in order to cover the cost of providing

oversight and implementation of the program. The State constitution

prohibits a dedicated fund for the operation of the program. The

General Assembly will provide appropriations

[[Page 65500]]

equal to fees collected. The expected staff level at GAEPD will be

approximately five persons. Most of the work will be done by the

Management Contractor, therefore the State's primary function is to

oversee contractor's operation. The Georgia submittal meets the

Adequate Tools and Resources requirements set forth in the federal I/M

regulations and is approvable.

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, how the test frequency is integrated into the enforcement

process and shall include the legal authority, regulations or contract

provisions to implement and enforce the test frequency. The program

shall be designed to provide convenient service to the motorist by

ensuring short wait times, short driving distances and regular testing

hours.

The Georgia I/M program will be a biennial program testing even

model year vehicles in even test years, and testing odd model years in

odd test years. Legislation was passed to allow for a 12-month

registration period beginning in January 1, 1998. Currently, all

vehicles are required to be registered in a four month period (January-

April). Stations will be required to operate a minimum of 40 hours per

week. As the program will operate on a decentralized basis, it is

anticipated that there will be ample coverage in the I/M program.

The State submittal meets the Test Frequency and Convenience

requirements of the federal I/M regulation for interim approval.

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 the same type

of test network as other vehicles in the state, according to the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.353(a). Vehicles which are operated on

Federal installations located within an I/M program area shall be

tested, regardless of whether the vehicles are registered in the state

or local I/M area.

The federal I/M regulation requires that the SIP must 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. Such exemptions shall be accounted for

in the emissions reduction analysis.

The Georgia program will cover 1975 and later model years light

duty vehicles and light duty trucks weighing up to 8500 pounds gross

vehicle weight rating (GVWR). Based on parking lot surveys, the current

program compliance rate is estimated at 99 percent. GAEPD used 97

percent in its demonstration allowing for vehicles operating in but not

registered in the program area, and for changes in the compliance rate

as a result of the more stringent emission standards. Vehicles that are

10 years old, driven less than 5000 miles and owned by persons aged 65

or older are exempted from the test. The loss of credit due to this

exemption was accounted for in the performance demonstration. The

Georgia I/M program requires that federal fleets operating and

registered in the covered area be tested. The Georgia submittal meets

the Vehicle Coverage requirements of the federal I/M regulations for

interim approvable.

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

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

Procedures, Emission Standards, Quality Control Requirements, and

Equipment Specifications,'' EPA-AA-EPSD-IM-93-1, dated April 1994 and

``Acceleration Simulation Mode Test Procedures, Emission Standards,

Quality Control Requirements, and Equipment Specifications,'' EPA-AA-

RSPD-IM-96-2, dated July 1996. The federal I/M regulation also requires

vehicles that have been altered from their original certified

configuration (i.e. engine or fuel switching) to be subject to the

requirements of Sec. 51.357(d).

The Georgia I/M program will consist of a single mode ASM and two-

speed idle test, and a gas cap integrity test. A visual emission

control inspection for the presence of the catalytic converter on all

1975 and newer model year vehicles will be required. The ASM test will

be conducted using a chassis dynamometer. Georgia has been working with

other states and the equipment manufacturers, in coordination with EPA,

to develop their own procedures, specifications and standards. Georgia,

in the June 17, 1996 amendments, stated a two phase approach for the

ASM portion of the program. They included a copy of the draft EPA ASM

specifications and noted that due to the short time available to

manufacturers, current specifications would be used to the maximum

extent possible. They also noted that Phase I will only require the

analyzer portion of ASM needed to perform the two speed idle testing

and that the Phase II upgrade will include the hardware and software

needed to perform ASM. It is anticipated that these test procedures,

specifications and standards will be released in the near future. The 2

speed idle test procedure is one of the test methods described in EPA's

``Recommended I/M Short Test Procedures for the 1990's: Six

Alternatives.'' All vehicles will receive a gas cap pressure integrity

test. For 1996 and later vehicles, a check of the on-board diagnostic

system to detect any emission control system problems will be

performed. Georgia will use a form of phased in cutpoints while

implementing the ASM portion of their enhanced I/M program. Less

stringent phase in cutpoints will be utilized from the start of ASM

testing, on July 1, 1997, till December 31, 1997. Final ASM cutpoints

will be utilized after that time. The reason for this is two fold. One

is to introduce ASM testing to the area. However, the primary reason is

to encourage people to have their cars tested before they are required.

This unique situation is due to the current four month registration

window (January-April) in Georgia. However, Georgia will start a 12

month registration period beginning January 1, 1998. This is why final

cutpoints will be implemented at that time. Georgia is hoping to

encourage people to bring

[[Page 65501]]

their cars in after they have their 1997 registration (again, after

January-April), but prior to the 1998 registration in order to more

evenly distribute the testing load. The two-speed idle test will start

with the final cutpoints and experience no phase in standards.

Georgia's submittal does not include a description of the final ASM

test procedure which is acceptable to both Georgia and EPA for one-mode

ASM testing and the gas cap integrity test. The Georgia submittal does

not establish HC, CO, and CO2 pass/fail exhaust standards for the

one-mode ASM test procedure. The Georgia regulation does not establish

gas cap integrity standards. The final Georgia I/M regulation must

include the test procedures and emission standards for these items. The

emission standards found in the final regulation must be identical to

the standards found in the modeling in the March 27, 1996 SIP revision

and the June 17, 1996 SIP supplement.

If the State: (a) commits within 30 days of this proposal, to

correct these deficiencies by a date certain within one year of interim

approval; and (b) corrects the deficiencies by that date, then this

interim approval shall expire pursuant to the NHSDA on the earlier of

18-months from final interim approval, or on the date of EPA action

taking final full approval of this program. If the commitment is not

made within 30 days, EPA proposes in the alternative to disapprove the

SIP revision. If the State does make a timely commitment but the

conditions are not met by the date committed to, EPA proposes that this

rulemaking will convert to a final disapproval. EPA will notify the

State by letter that the conditions have not been met and that the

conditional approval has converted to a disapproval.

The Georgia submittal does not meet the Test Procedures and

Standards requirements of the federal I/M regulations and is not

approvable. Georgia must commit to correct the deficiencies to enable

EPA to conditionally approve the program.

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 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.

Georgia has proposed a hybrid program requiring subject vehicles to

be tested with either a one-mode ASM exhaust test or a two speed idle

test, depending upon the age of the vehicle, and all vehicles to be

tested with a gas cap integrity test in the 13 county metro Atlanta

area. Older vehicles would be subject to the ASM test while newer

vehicles are subject to a two speed idle test. Georgia has been working

with other states and the equipment manufacturers, in coordination with

EPA, to develop their own procedures, specifications and standards for

one mode ASM testing. As noted above, Georgia, in the June 17, 1996,

amendments identified a two phase equipment specification. Phase I will

allow manufacturers to produce an analyzer that perform the two speed

idle test. Phase II will include the hardware and software needed to

perform the ASM test. It is anticipated that these test procedures,

specifications and standards will be released in the near future. In

addition to the emission testing and gas cap integrity check, a visual

emission control inspection for the presence of the catalytic converter

on 1975 and newer model year vehicles will be required.

Georgia's regulation does not include a description of a final ASM

test procedure. Georgia's submittal does not establish final equipment

specifications for the one-mode ASM test procedure. The State

regulation also does not establish gas cap integrity test

specifications. The final Georgia I/M regulation must include the test

procedures, equipment specifications and emission standards for these

items.