Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Utah; Improved Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[UT-NHA-02; FRL-5834-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Utah; Improved Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is granting interim approval of a State Implementation

Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Utah. This revision

establishes and requires the implementation of an improved basic

inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in Utah County. The intended

effect of this action is to approve the State's proposed I/M program

for an interim period to last 18 months, based upon the State's good

faith estimate of the program's performance. This action is being taken

under section 110 of the Clean Air Act and section 348 of the National

Highway Systems Designation Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on July 9, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available for public inspection during normal business hours at the

USEPA Region VIII (P2-A), 999 18th Street--Suite 500, Denver, Colorado

80202-2466. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents

should make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24

hours before the visiting day.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott P. Lee, at (303) 312-6736 or via

e-

[[Page 31350]]

mail at [email protected]. The mailing address is, USEPA

Region VIII (P2-A), 999 18th Street--Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-

2466.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On October 10, 1996 (61 FR 53180), EPA published a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the State of Utah. The NPR proposed

interim approval of Utah's improved basic inspection and maintenance

program for Utah County, submitted to satisfy the applicable

requirements of both the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the National Highway

Safety Designation Act (NHDSA). The formal SIP revision was submitted

by Utah's Governor, Michael O. Leavitt, on March 15, 1996.

As described in the NPR, the NHSDA directs EPA to grant interim

approval for a period of 18 months to approvable I/M submittals under

the NHSDA. The NHSDA also directs EPA and the states to review the

interim program results at the end of that 18-month period, 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

on or before November 15, 1997, so that at least six months of

operational program data can be collected to evaluate the interim

programs. EPA believes that in setting such a strict timetable for

program evaluations under the NHSDA, Congress recognized and attempted

to mitigate any further delay with the start-up of this program. If

Utah County fails to start its program according to this schedule, this

interim approval granted under the provisions of the NHSDA will convert

to a disapproval after a finding letter is sent to the State. The start

date provision will only trigger a disapproval upon EPA's notification

to the State by letter that the start date has been missed. Because the

start date condition is not imposed pursuant to a commitment to correct

a deficient SIP under 110(k)(4), EPA does not believe it is necessary

to have the SIP approval convert to a disapproval automatically if the

start date is missed. EPA is imposing the start date condition under

its general SIP approval authority of section 110(k)(3), which does not

require automatic conversion.

The program evaluation to be used by the State during the 18-month

interim period must be acceptable to EPA. The Environmental Council of

States (ECOS) group has developed such a program evaluation process

which includes both qualitative and quantitative measures, and this

process has been deemed acceptable to EPA. The core requirement for the

quantitative measure is that a mass emission transient test (METT) be

performed on 0.1% of the subject fleet, as required by the I/M Rule at

40 CFR 51.353 and 51.366.

As per the NHSDA requirements, this interim rulemaking will expire

on January 11, 1999. A full approval of Utah's final I/M SIP revision

for Utah County (which will include the State/County program evaluation

and final adopted County/State regulations) is still necessary under

section 110 and under section 182, 184 or 187 of the CAA. After EPA

reviews the State/County's submitted program evaluation and

regulations, final rulemaking on the State/County's SIP revision will

occur.

Specific requirements of the Utah improved basic I/M SIP for Utah

County and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the

NPR and will not be restated here.

II. Public Comment/Response to Comments

No comments were received.

III. Final Rulemaking Action

EPA is approving the improved basic I/M program for Utah County as

a revision to the Utah SIP. The State's I/M program revisions for Utah

County meet requirements pursuant to sections 182 and 187 of the Act

and 40 CFR part 51, subpart S and section 348 of the NHSDA for interim

approval. This approval is being granted on an interim basis for a

period of 18 months, under the authority of section 348 of the National

Highway Systems Designation Act of 1995. At the end of this period, the

approval will lapse.

Following this interim period, full approval of the State's plan

and associated program credit will only be granted if the following

criteria are met:

(1) EPA's review of the State/County's program evaluation confirms

that the appropriate amount of program credit was claimed by the State/

County and achieved with the interim program,

(2) Final program regulations are submitted to EPA.

Following a review of the State/County's credit evaluation and

final rules, EPA will proceed with further rulemaking action under

section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

VI. Administrative Requirements

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to

the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light

of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

A. Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

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.

Approvals of SIP submittals under section 110 and subchapter I,

part D of the CAA do not create any new requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify

that it does not have a significant impact on any small entities

affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship

under the CAA, preparation of a flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);

42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

If this approval is converted to a disapproval, it will not affect

any existing state requirements applicable to small entities. Federal

disapproval of the state submittal would not affect its

[[Page 31351]]

state-enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal

would not impose a new Federal requirement. Therefore, EPA certifies

future conversion to a disapproval would not have a significant impact

on a substantial number of small entities because it does not remove

existing requirements nor would it substitute a new federal

requirement.

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to

private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must

select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that

achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory

requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action proposed/promulgated

does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs

of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments

in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action

approves pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and

imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State,

local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from

this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under section 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report

containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by

section 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 8, 1997.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this

final interim rule, does not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review, nor does it extend the time within which a

petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the

effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged

later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2) of the Administrative Procedures Act).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting

and record keeping requirements.

Dated: May 21, 1997.

Patricia D. Hull,

For Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII.

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

amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

SUBPART TT-UTAH

2. Section 52.2348 is added to Subpart TT to read as follows:

Sec. 52.2348 National Highway Systems Designation Act Motor Vehicle

Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Programs

On March 15, 1996 the Governor of Utah submitted a revised I/M

program for Utah County which included a credit claim, a basis in fact

for the credit claimed, a description of the County's program, draft

County ordinances, and authorizing legislation for the program.

Approval is granted on an interim basis for a period of 18 months,

under the authority of section 348 of the National Highway Systems

Designation Act of 1995. If Utah County fails to start its program by

November 15, 1997 at the latest, this approval will convert to a

disapproval after EPA sends a letter to the State. At the end of the

eighteen month period, the approval will lapse. At that time, EPA must

take final rulemaking action upon the State's SIP, under the authority

of section 110 of the Clean Air Act. Final action on the State/County's

plan will be taken following EPA's review of the State/County's credit

evaluation and final regulations (State and County) as submitted to

EPA.

[FR Doc. 97-14986 Filed 6-6-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P