Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region II Docket No. NJ30-1-177, FRL-6013-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey;

Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing

approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the

State of New Jersey. This action is required because the revision

changes one of the primary design considerations of the existing

automobile inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. The intended

effect of this action is to propose approving changes in the inspection

frequency from annual to biennial and the addition of a gas cap

inspection, which will result in a net increase in overall emissions

reductions as previously approved by EPA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 12, 1998.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Ronald J. Borsellino,

Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region II

Office, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866.

Copies of the State's submittal are available at the following

addresses for inspection during normal business hours:

Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch,

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Air

Quality Management, Bureau of Air Quality Planning, 401 East State

Street, CN418, Trenton, New Jersey 08625.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Graciano, Air Programs Branch,

Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, 290 Broadway, 25th

Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4249

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On February 26, 1998 New Jersey submitted a revision to its State

Implementation Plan (SIP) changing the inspection frequency, from

annual to biennial, of its existing automobile

[[Page 26563]]

inspection and maintenance (I/M) program, through the addition of a

regulation found at N.J.A.C. 13:20-43.7. Prior to this proposal,

neither the New Jersey rules nor statutes adequately addressed the

testing frequency for the transitional phase of the program, during

which New Jersey is converting its basic I/M program to the enhanced I/

M program. New Jersey has had a basic I/M program in place since 1974.

This program, in its current form, was subject to its most recent

amendment on January 21, 1985, which was approved by EPA and

incorporated into the SIP on September 17, 1992. 57 FR 42893. EPA

conditionally approved New Jersey's enhanced I/M program on May 14,

1997. 62 FR 26405. On January 30, 1998, the State submitted performance

standard modeling to EPA, fulfilling the remaining condition required

by EPA in its approval notice.

Under provisions of sections 182, 184, and 187 of the Clean Air Act

(Act), New Jersey is required to implement an enhanced I/M program

throughout the entire State. In its July 10, 1995 and March 27, 1996

SIP submittals, the State indicated that the enhanced I/M program would

require biennial inspections, and suggested that early implementation

of biennial testing may be necessary to facilitate system upgrades.

In the February 26, 1998 request for a SIP revision, New Jersey

indicated that during the transition period between the existing

program and the new enhanced program, the State will require vehicles

to be inspected biennially, rather than annually, to accommodate the

decreased availability of centralized inspection lanes while they are

being retrofitted for enhanced testing. The February 26, 1998 SIP

revision states that, ``[t]he transition period will begin on the start

date of the contract for the implementation of the enhanced I/M program

and will end when the enhanced I/M program becomes mandatory.''

Pursuant to section 193 of the Act, such a change could not be approved

if it results in increased emissions of volatile organic compounds

(VOCs) and/or carbon monoxide (CO). In order to offset the increased

VOC emissions, New Jersey is proposing early implementation of the test

that checks the functional operation of vehicle gas caps. The gas cap

checks will be implemented during the transition period from the

existing program to the enhanced program rather than at the start of

the enhanced program. New Jersey expects that this strategy will offset

the increase in VOCs resulting from the conversion to biennial testing

and has submitted modeling results that support this. New Jersey

estimates that the resulting VOC emissions increase from changing the

program frequency to biennial will be about 0.026 grams per mile. The

VOC emissions reduction associated the functional gas cap test are

estimated to be about 0.033 grams per mile, resulting in a net benefit

of 0.007 grams per mile.

New Jersey also estimates that CO emissions will increase about

0.365 grams per mile as a result of the change in inspection frequency.

In its revision package, the State notes that the carbon monoxide

benefits gained through vehicle fleet turnover from January 1, 1996

through January 1, 1998 are about 0.745 grams per mile. However, EPA

points out that this emission reduction is not a function of the SIP

per se. EPA acknowledges that the most efficient means to achieve

significant carbon monoxide reduction and ultimate attainment is

through the speedy implementation of the State's enhanced I/M program.

Specifically, EPA expects that the State's enhanced I/M implementation

will result in excess carbon monoxide benefits beyond the required

performance standard. These are approximately 0.526 grams per mile.

These air quality benefits cannot be achieved without accommodating

the practical obstacles associated with retrofitting centralized test

only stations, which include transitional biennial testing.

Since the State is currently in the process of awarding

construction and/or operation contracts for its approved enhanced

program, New Jersey has requested that EPA proceed with an expedited

decision process for this revision to the existing program. Therefore,

approval of this revision is being proposed under a procedure called

parallel processing, whereby EPA proposes rulemaking action

concurrently with the State's procedures for amending its regulations.

If the State's proposed revision is substantially changed in areas

other than those identified in this document, EPA will evaluate those

changes and may publish another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no

substantial changes are made other than those areas specified in this

document, EPA will publish a final rulemaking on the revisions. Final

rulemaking action by EPA will occur only after the SIP revision has

been adopted by New Jersey and submitted formally to EPA for

incorporation into the SIP. In addition, any action by the State

resulting in undue delay in the contract award or selection process may

result in a reproposal altering the approvability of the SIP.

Conclusion

EPA believes New Jersey has provided an adequate rationale for

early conversion of the existing program from annual to biennial

testing. Furthermore, EPA supports the calculations submitted by the

State indicating that the emissions shortfalls resulting from this

change will be sufficiently offset by the strategies proposed and by

the benefits of enhanced I/M implementation. Since the State is

reducing the testing frequency of its current program to facilitate the

implementation of the enhanced I/M program, EPA's approval of this

testing frequency conversion under the terms of this SIP revision only

applies after the State awards the necessary construction contracts for

its enhanced I/M program.

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.

Administrative Requirements

Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from review under Executive Order 12866.

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.

SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the

Clean Air 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 CAA, preparation of a flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

[[Page 26564]]

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

grounds. Union Electric Co. versus U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66

(1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

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 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

federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,

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

action.

The Regional Administrator's decision to approve or disapprove the

SIP revision will be based on whether it meets the requirements of

section 110(a)(2)(A)-(K) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, and EPA

regulations in 40 CFR Part 51.

The Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally

provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating

the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,

to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the

United States. EPA will submit 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 United States prior

to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a

``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic

compounds.

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

Dated: April 30, 1998.

William J. Muszynski,

Deputy Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98-12720 Filed 5-12-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U