Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut; Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program, 74019-74027 [E8-28734]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
understanding the rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking
process.
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year.
Though this rule will not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not effect a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
would not create an environmental risk
to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
74019
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are not
required for this rule.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
■
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guides the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this
rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of the
Instruction, from further environmental
documentation.
Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
the Instruction, an environmental
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. § 117.163 Islais Creek (Channel) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 117.163
Islais Creek (Channel)
(a) The draw of the Illinois Street
drawbridge, mile 0.3 at San Francisco,
shall open on signal if at least 72 hours
advance notice is given to the Port of
San Francisco.
(b) The draw of the 3rd Street
drawbridge, mile 0.4 at San Francisco,
shall open on signal if at least 72 hours
advance notice is given to the San
Francisco Department of Public Works.
Dated: November 17, 2008.
P.F. Zukunft,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8–28809 Filed 12–4–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0194; A–1–FRL–
8717–9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; Enhanced Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted on December 19, 2007 by the
State of Connecticut. This SIP revision
includes regulations to update the
enhanced motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program in
Connecticut. The revised program
includes a test and repair network and
on-board diagnostic (OBD2) testing for
1996 and newer vehicles. The intended
effect of this action is to approve the
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
74020
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
revised program into the Connecticut
SIP. This action is being taken in
accordance with the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective February 3, 2009, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by January
5, 2009. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
Federal Register informing the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R01–OAR–2008–0194 by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918–0047.
4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification
Number EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0194’’,
Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street,
Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston,
MA 02114–2023.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R01–OAR–2008–
0194. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov, or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston,
MA. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding legal holidays.
In addition, copies of the state
submittal and EPA’s technical support
document are also available for public
inspection during normal business
hours, by appointment at the State Air
Agency; the Bureau of Air Management,
Department of Environmental
Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm
Street, Hartford, CT 06106–1630.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert C. Judge, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, EPA New England, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023; 617–918–1045
(phone); 617–918–0045 (fax); e-mail at
judge.robert@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. The following outline is provided
to aid in locating information in this
rulemaking.
I. Background and Purpose
II. What Are the Clean Air Act Requirements
for I/M Programs?
III. What Are the OBD2 Requirements and
How Does Connecticut’s Program
Address Them?
IV. What Are All the Other I/M Regulatory
Requirements and How Does
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Connecticut’s I/M Program Satisfy
Them?
A. Applicability
B. Enhanced I/M Performance Standard
C. Network Type and Program Evaluation
D. Adequate Tools and Resources
E. Test Frequency and Convenience
F. Vehicle Coverage
G. Test Procedures and Standards
H. Test Equipment
I. Quality Control
J. Waivers and Compliance via Diagnostic
Inspection
K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement
L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement
Oversight
M. Quality Assurance
N. Enforcement Against Contractors,
Stations, and Inspectors
O. Data Analysis and Reporting
P. Inspector Training and Licensing or
Certification
Q. Improving Repair Effectiveness
R. Compliance With Recall Notices
S. On-Road Testing
T. Concluding Statement
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
On December 19, 2007, the State of
Connecticut submitted a formal revision
to its State Implementation Plan (SIP).
This SIP revision includes regulations to
update the enhanced motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M)
program in Connecticut. EPA is
approving Connecticut’s revised I/M
program because it is consistent with
the Clean Air Act I/M requirements and
EPA’s I/M regulations, and will
strengthen the SIP. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
II. What Are the Clean Air Act
Requirements for I/M Programs?
The Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C.
7401, et seq., requires certain states to
implement an enhanced inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program to detect
gasoline-fueled motor vehicles which
emit excessive amounts of certain air
pollutants. The enhanced I/M program
is intended to help states meet federal
health-based national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone
and carbon monoxide by requiring
vehicles with excess emissions to have
their emissions control systems
repaired. Section 182 of the CAA
requires I/M programs in those areas of
the nation that are most impacted by
carbon monoxide and ozone pollution.
42 U.S.C. 7411c. Section 184 of the CAA
also created an ‘‘Ozone Transport
Region’’ (OTR) and includes I/M
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
requirements for that region. The OTR
geographically includes the 11 states
from Maryland to Maine (including all
of Connecticut) and the District of
Columbia Consolidated Metropolitan
Statistical Area. In addition, EPA
promulgated I/M regulations at 40 CFR
Part 51 Subpart S. Depending on the
severity of an area’s nonattainment
designation and/or geographic location
within the OTR, EPA’s regulation under
40 CFR 51.350 outlines the appropriate
motor vehicle I/M requirements.
As a result of its ozone nonattainment
designation (see 40 CFR 81.307), and by
virtue of its inclusion in the OTR,
Connecticut has implemented an
enhanced vehicle emissions testing
program throughout the entire State. A
vehicle testing program has been
operating statewide since 1983 in
Connecticut. The Connecticut I/M
program was first approved into the SIP
on May 21, 1984 (49 FR 10542) and the
program has since been revised several
times. Most recently the SIP was
modified on October 27, 2000 (65 FR
64357). Since that time, the program has
been again modified in a number of
ways. Most notably it has been changed
to a test and repair network, and now
also includes on-board diagnostic
(ODB2) testing of 1996 and newer
vehicles.
III. What Are the OBD2 Requirements
and How Does Connecticut’s Program
Address Them?
On April 5, 2001, EPA published in
the Federal Register ‘‘Amendments to
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance
Program Requirements Incorporating the
On-Board Diagnostics Check’’ (66 FR
18156). The revised I/M rule requires
that electronic checks of the On-Board
Diagnostics (OBD2) system on model
year 1996 and newer OBD2-equipped
motor vehicles be conducted as part of
states’ motor vehicle I/M programs.
OBD2 is part of the sophisticated
vehicle powertrain management system
and is designed to detect engine and
transmission problems that might cause
vehicle emissions to exceed allowable
limits. OBD2 requirements are a key
part of this rulemaking action.
The OBD2 system monitors the status
of up to 11 emission control related
subsystems by performing either
continuous or periodic functional tests
of specific components and vehicle
conditions. The first three testing
categories—misfire, fuel trim, and
comprehensive components—are
continuous, while the remaining eight
only run after a certain set of conditions
has been met. The algorithms for
running these eight periodic monitors
are unique to each manufacturer and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
involve such things as ambient
temperature as well as driving
conditions. Most vehicles will have at
least five of the eight remaining
monitors (catalyst, evaporative system,
oxygen sensor, heated oxygen sensor,
and exhaust gas recirculation or EGR
system) while the remaining three (air
conditioning, secondary air, and heated
catalyst) are not necessarily applicable
to all vehicles. When a vehicle is
scanned at an OBD2–I/M test site, these
monitors can appear as either ‘‘ready’’
(meaning the monitor in question has
been evaluated), ‘‘not ready’’ (meaning
the monitor has not yet been evaluated),
or ‘‘not applicable’’ (meaning the
vehicle is not equipped with the
component monitor in question).
The OBD2 system is also designed to
fully evaluate the vehicle emissions
control system. If the OBD2 system
detects a problem that may cause
vehicle emissions to exceed 1.5 times
the Federal Test Procedure (FTP)
standards, then the Malfunction
Indicator Light (MIL) is illuminated. By
turning on the MIL, the OBD2 system
notifies the vehicle operator that an
emission-related fault has been
detected, and the vehicle should be
repaired as soon as possible thus
reducing the harmful emissions
contributed by that vehicle.
EPA’s revised OBD2 I/M rule applies
to those areas that are required to
implement I/M programs under the
CAA, which includes Connecticut. The
revised I/M program submitted by
Connecticut on December 19, 2007
includes OBD2 testing for 1996 and
newer vehicles, and continues to require
that 1995 and older vehicles (up to 25
years old) continue to receive the
previously SIP approved acceleration
simulation mode (ASM) test or, if that
test can not be implemented, gasoline
powered vehicles up to 10,000 pounds
GVWR (gross vehicle weight rating) are
tested with a preconditioned two-speed
idle test.
EPA’s OBD2 program requires scan
tool equipment to read the vehicle’s
built-in computer sensors in model year
1996 and newer vehicles. The OBD2–
I/M check consists of two types of
examination: A visual check of the
dashboard display function and status
and an electronic examination of the
OBD2 computer itself. The failure
criteria for OBD2 testing is any
Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC) or
combination of DTCs that results in the
Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL) to be
commanded on. A DTC is a code that
indicates an emission control system or
component which may cause emissions
to increase to 1.5 times the limit due to
malfunction. Connecticut has
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
74021
incorporated this OBD2 component into
its program.
If the OBD2 scan reveals DTCs that
have not commanded the MIL on, the
motorist should be advised of the issue,
but the vehicle should not be failed
unless other non-DTC-based failure
criteria have been met. Vehicles may fail
inspection if the vehicle connector is
missing, tampered with or otherwise
inoperable, if the MIL is commanded on
and is not visually illuminated, and if
the MIL is commanded on for 1 or more
DTCs as defined in Society of
Automotive Engineering (SAE) J2012
guidance document, and EPA
regulations.
Vehicles are rejected from testing if
the scan of the OBD2 system reveals a
‘‘not ready’’ code for any OBD2
component. EPA guidance allows states
the flexibility to permit model year 1996
to 2000 vehicles with 2 or fewer unset
readiness codes, and model year 2001
and newer with 1 unset readiness code
to complete OBD2–I/M inspection
without being rejected. Vehicles would
still fail if the MIL was commanded on
or if other failure criteria were met, or
be rejected if 3 or more unset readiness
codes were encountered. If the MIL is
not commanded to be illuminated the
vehicle would pass the OBD2 inspection
even if DTCs are present. Connecticut’s
testing program is consistent with the
EPA recommended readiness failure
criteria. Connecticut’s program
regulations, at section 22a–174–27(g)
require that the program meet all the
relevant OBD2 testing ‘‘requirements of
40 CFR 51 and 40 CFR 85 and shall
include procedures set forth in 40 CFR
85.2222.’’
The EPA believes that for an OBD2–
I/M test program to be most effective, it
should be designed to allow for: (1)
Real-time data link connections to a
centralized testing database; (2) qualitycontrolled input of vehicle and owner
identification information; and (3)
automated generation of test reports.
Connecticut has incorporated these
OBD2 program elements into its
program.
IV. What Are All the Other I/M
Regulatory Requirements and Does
Connecticut’s I/M Program Satisfy
Them?
A. Applicability
The SIP describes in detail the areas
subject to the enhanced I/M SIP revision
and, consistent with 40 CFR 51.372,
includes the legal authority necessary to
establish program boundaries. The
Connecticut I/M regulations (‘‘Emission
standards and on-board diagnostic II test
requirements for periodic motor vehicle
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
74022
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
inspection and maintenance’’ at section
22a–174–27, and ‘‘Periodic Motor
Vehicle Emissions Inspection and
Maintenance’’ at section 14–164c–1a to
Section 14–164c–18a) and authorizing
legislation (Connecticut Statutes at
Chapter 246 and 246a) ensure that the
enhanced I/M program be implemented
statewide.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
B. Enhanced I/M Performance Standard
Today’s rulemaking discusses the I/M
program designed, in part, to meet the
enhanced I/M performance standard for
ozone precursors causing air quality
problems in Connecticut. EPA’s
performance standard establishes an
emission reduction target that must be
met by a program in order for the SIP
to be approvable. The program, as
documented in the SIP, must meet the
performance standard in actual
operation, with provisions for
appropriate adjustments if the standard
is not met.
Included in Connecticut’s December
19, 2007 submittal is the appropriate
MOBILE6 vehicle emission modeling
demonstration considering the required
performance standards and the actual
Connecticut program as it is currently
being implemented statewide, as well as
a comparison to the centralized program
that the State is no longer
implementing. The modeling runs
considered evaluations with 2005, 2007
and 2009 compliance dates. Connecticut
has demonstrated that reductions from
its updated program are better than the
pre-existing I/M program and the EPA
performance standard.
The MOBILE6 modeling performed by
Connecticut reflects the fact that
Connecticut tests all gasoline powered
vehicles that are less than 25 years old.
1996 and newer vehicles are tested with
OBD2, and pre-1996 vehicles (i.e., they
are not equipped with OBD2
technology) are tested using the
acceleration simulation mode (ASM
2525), or, if ASM 2525 is not feasible for
that vehicle, those vehicles will receive
a preconditioned two-speed idle
(PCTSI) test. Vehicles are tested every
other year, and vehicles up to 4 years
old are not tested. Vehicle testing
requirements are included in section
22a–174–27, and details of meeting the
performance standard are included in
section 2 of the SIP narrative.
C. Network Type and Program
Evaluation
Under the CAA and EPA’s I/M rule,
the SIP must include a description of
the network to be employed and the
required legal authority. Also, for
enhanced I/M areas, the SIP needs to
include a description of the evaluation
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
schedule and protocol, the sampling
methodology, the data collection and
analysis system, the resources and
personnel for evaluation and related
details of the evaluation program, as
well as the legal authority establishing
the evaluation program.
Connecticut has revised its program to
be a test and repair I/M network
program design utilizing contractors to
manage and oversee the inspection
portion of the program. In its December
19, 2007 submittal, Connecticut states,
in its SIP revision narrative, that it will
institute a continuous ongoing
evaluation program consistent with the
federal I/M rule. The results of the
evaluation program will be reported to
EPA on a biennial basis (40 CFR
51.353). In addition, Connecticut
commits to developing and submitting
the annual reports described by 40 CFR
51.366. The State has sufficient legal
authority to implement this contractor
managed program in concert with local
inspection stations and conduct the
program evaluation, as necessary to
implement I/M consistent with federal
requirements. (Connecticut laws at
Chapter 246a—Motor Vehicle
Emissions, section 14–164c(e)) Details
of the network type and program
evaluation are included in Section 3 of
the SIP narrative.
D. Adequate Tools and Resources
Under the CAA and EPA’s I/M rule,
the SIP must include a description of
the resources that will be used for
program operation and must discuss
how the performance standard will be
met, including: (1) A detailed budget
plan describing the source of funds for
personnel, program administration,
program enforcement, purchase of
necessary equipment (such as vehicles
for undercover audits), and for other
requirements discussed throughout the
I/M rule, for the period prior to the next
biennial self evaluation required by the
federal I/M rule, and (2) a description of
personnel resources, the number of
personnel dedicated to overt and covert
auditing, data analysis, program
administration, enforcement, and other
necessary functions, and the training
attendant to each function.
Connecticut legislation authorizes the
State to collect a fee at registration to
cover the costs of administrating,
overseeing, and enforcing the I/M
program. The December 19, 2007
submittal includes additional detail on
the funding and description of resources
to be used for implementation of the
enhanced I/M program. This narrative at
Section 4, and its attachments describe
the budget, staffing support, and
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
equipment needed to implement the
program.
E. Test Frequency and Convenience
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a detailed test schedule,
including the test year selection scheme
if testing is other than annual. The SIP
must also include the legal authority
necessary to implement and enforce the
test frequency requirement and explain
how the test frequency will be
integrated with the enforcement
process. In addition, in enhanced I/M
programs, the SIP needs to demonstrate
that the network of stations providing
testing services is sufficient to ensure
consumer convenience by providing
short waiting times to get a test, and
short driving distances to get to the test
center.
The Connecticut SIP revision requires
biennial inspections for all subject
motor vehicles that are at least four
years old. The inspections will be
conducted based on when the vehicle is
initially registered. This is described in
more detail in the December submittal.
The authority for enforcing the testing
frequency is contained in the revised
Connecticut Department of Motor
Vehicles’ portion of the I/M rule. Short
waiting times and short driving
distances relating to network design are
addressed by ensuring that local gas
stations can provide the inspection, and
are described in section 5 of the SIP
narrative.
F. Vehicle Coverage
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a detailed description of the
number and types of vehicles to be
covered by the program, and a plan for
identifying subject vehicles, including
vehicles that are routinely operated in
the area but may not be registered in the
area. Also, the SIP must include a
description of any special exemptions
which will be granted by the program,
and an estimate of the percentage and
number of vehicles granted such
exemptions. Such exemptions need to
be accounted for in the emission
reduction analysis. In addition, the SIP
needs to include the legal authority
necessary to implement and enforce the
vehicle coverage requirement.
Connecticut’s I/M program covers all
gasoline and diesel vehicles, light duty
trucks, and heavy duty vehicles that are
25 years old and newer and registered
in the State. In addition, United States
Postal Service and United States GSA
vehicles are also covered. Special
classes, which are exempt from the
emission testing program, include
vehicles weighing more than 10,000
pounds (GVWR), electric vehicles, farm
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
vehicles, motorcycles, and vehicles
which are less than 4 years old. Based
on information provided by the State,
Connecticut has shown that such
exemptions will not prevent the
program from achieving the
performance standard. Additional detail
supporting this conclusion was
included in Section 6 of the December
19, 2007 submittal. Legal authority for
the vehicle coverage requirement is
contained in the Connecticut
Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) and Department of Motor
Vehicles (DMV) I/M rules and the
State’s authorizing legislation.
(Connecticut laws at Chapter
246a—Motor Vehicle Emissions, Section
14–164c)
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
G. Test Procedures and Standards
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a description of each test
procedure used. The SIP also must
include the rule, ordinance or law
describing and establishing the test
procedures. The Connecticut I/M SIP
revision and associated regulations
obligate the State to perform OBD2
testing on all 1996 and newer vehicles,
in accordance with EPA procedures. All
1995 and older covered vehicles up to
8,500 pounds GVWR (excluding full
time four wheel drive) will be tested in
accordance with EPA procedures for the
acceleration simulation mode, or ASM
2525. A vehicle which can not be tested
using either OBD2 or ASM 2525, or has
a GVWR greater than 8500 GVWR and
less than 10,000 GVWR will be given a
pre-conditioned two-speed idle (PCTSI)
test. Details of the test procedures and
standard are included in Section 7 of
the SIP narrative, and in the DEP rules
at section 22a–174–27.
H. Test Equipment
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include written technical specifications
for all test equipment used in the
program and address each of the
requirements set forth at 40 CFR 51.358.
The specifications must describe the
emission analysis process, the necessary
test equipment, the required features,
and written acceptance testing criteria
and procedures.
In its December 19, 2007 submission,
Connecticut provided written
equipment specifications as contained
in EPA’s guidance and the appendices
of EPA’s I/M rule. The Connecticut SIP
submission and its appendices address
the requirements in 40 CFR 51.358 and
include descriptions of performance
features and functional characteristics of
the computerized test systems. It
references 40 CFR Part 51 and 85, and
includes the procedures outlined in 40
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
CFR 85.2222 and associated guidance.
For the ASM test, EPA’s Acceleration
Simulation Mode Test Procedures,
Emissions Standards, Quality Control
Requirements, and Equipment
Specification Final Technical Guidance
(EPA420–B–04–011, July 2004) will be
used. The necessary test equipment,
required features, and acceptance
testing criteria are mandated by the
testing contract specifications, and
section 8 of the SIP narrative.
I. Quality Control
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a description of quality control
and recordkeeping procedures. The SIP
also must include the procedures
manual, rule, and ordinance or law
describing and establishing quality
control procedures and requirements.
The Connecticut I/M SIP narrative
and contract contain descriptions and
requirements establishing the quality
control procedures in accordance with
the federal I/M rule and EPA guidance.
These requirements will help ensure
that equipment calibrations are properly
performed and recorded and that the
necessary compliance document
security is maintained. As described in
section 9 of the SIP narrative, the
Connecticut SIP complies with all
specifications for quality control set
forth in Section 51.359 and Appendix A
of the federal I/M rule, and EPA’s
technical guidance.
J. Waivers and Compliance via
Diagnostic Inspection
Under EPA’s I/M rule the SIP must
include a maximum waiver rate
expressed as a percentage of initially
failed vehicles. This waiver rate is used
for estimating emission reduction
benefits in the modeling analysis.
Corrective action must be taken if the
waiver rate exceeds that estimated in
the SIP, or the state must revise the SIP
and claim emission reductions
accordingly. The SIP also must describe
the waiver criteria and procedures,
including cost limits, quality assurance
methods and measures, and
administration. Lastly, the SIP must
include the necessary legal authority,
ordinance(s), or rules to issue waivers,
set and adjust cost limits as required,
and carry out any other functions
necessary to administer the waiver
system, including enforcement of the
waiver provisions.
Cost limits for the minimum
expenditure waivers must be in
accordance with the CAA and federal
I/M rule. Expenditures of at least $660
for actual, non-tampering related
repairs, must be spent in order to
qualify for a waiver in the enhanced I/
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
74023
M program. The State intends to
annually update the cost to receive a
waiver from the emissions testing
program. In addition, a time extension,
as allowed under EPA’s rule, is also
allowed in Connecticut’s program.
Connecticut has demonstrated that it
can meet the enhanced I/M performance
standard testing with its current
program design.
The Connecticut program includes a
waiver rate of 1% of initially failed
vehicles in the area. These waiver rates
are used in the modeling demonstration.
The DEP has committed in the
December 2007 submittal that, if the
waiver rates are higher than estimated
as determined by its program reports,
the State will take corrective action to
address the deficiency. The SIP
describes the three types of waivers the
State will allow, including: a minimum
expenditure, a time extension, and a
one-time hardship waiver provision.
These issues are dealt with in a manner
consistent with the federal I/M rule. The
proper criteria, procedures, quality
assurance and administration regarding
the issuance of waivers, consistent with
EPA’s I/M rule, will be ensured by the
DEP and its contractor and are detailed
in the SIP submission in section 10 of
the SIP narrative and DMV rules at
section 14–164c–11a.
K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
provide information concerning
motorist enforcement, including: (1) A
description of the existing compliance
mechanism if it will continue to be used
for this program, and the demonstration
that it is as effective or more effective
than registration denial enforcement; (2)
an identification of the agencies
responsible for performing each of the
applicable activities in this section; (3)
a description of, and accounting for, all
classes of exempt vehicles; and (4) a
description of the plan for testing fleet
vehicles, rental car fleets, leased
vehicles, and any other special classes
of subject vehicles, such as those
operated (but not necessarily registered)
in the program area. Also, the SIP must
include a determination of the current
compliance rate based on a study of the
system including an estimate of
compliance losses due to loopholes,
counterfeiting, and unregistered
vehicles. Estimates of the effect of
closing such loopholes and otherwise
improving the enforcement mechanism
must be supported with detailed
analyses. In addition, the SIP needs to
include the legal authority to implement
and enforce the program. Lastly, the SIP
must include a commitment to an
enforcement level and minimum
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
74024
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
compliance level used for modeling
purposes and to be maintained, at a
minimum, in practice.
The State of Connecticut has chosen
to use a program of denying registration
to anyone who fails to meet emission
testing requirements. The motorist
compliance enforcement program will
be implemented primarily by the
Connecticut Department of Motor
Vehicles. The enforcement strategy is
described in the December 19, 2007
submittal. The enforcement strategy is
designed to ensure a high rate of
compliance. Those not receiving the
emissions test as scheduled will be
subject to fines and late penalties, and
also be denied registration when their
registration expires. Connecticut
presently has a 99 percent compliance
rate with the inspection program. The
legal authority to implement and
enforce the program is included in the
Connecticut State law and in DEP and
DMV rules as submitted on December
19, 2007. (Connecticut laws at Chapter
246a—‘‘Motor Vehicle Emissions,
Section 14–164c’’; Connecticut
Department of Environmental Protection
Regulations entitled ‘‘Emission
standards and on-board diagnostic II test
requirements for periodic motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance’’ at Section
22a–174–27; and Connecticut
Department of Motor Vehicles
Regulation entitled ‘‘Periodic Motor
Vehicle Emissions Inspection and
Maintenance’’ at section 14–164c–1a to
section 14–164c–18a). Additional detail
of the motorist compliance enforcement
program is included in section 11 of the
SIP narrative.
L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement
Program Oversight
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a description of enforcement
program oversight and information
management activities.
The Connecticut I/M SIP revision
provides for regular auditing of its
enforcement program and adherence to
effective management practices,
including adjustments to improve the
program when necessary. These
program oversight and information
management activities are described in
the SIP narrative, and include a
description of the Emissions Data Base
Management System (EDBMS) and how
this system interfaces with the
Department of Information Technology
(DoIT) vehicle registration records. If a
vehicle is out of compliance with the
emissions testing requirement,
registration is denied. This is done
through computer matching and is
directly available to law enforcement.
The SIP describes the procedures to be
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
followed in identifying noncomplying
vehicles, along with appropriate followup and program documentation audits
in section 12 of the SIP narrative.
M. Quality Assurance
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a description of the quality
assurance program, and written
procedure manuals covering both overt
and covert performance audits, record
audits, and equipment audits.
The December 19, 2007, submittal
from Connecticut includes a description
of the quality assurance program. The
program will include operation and
progress reports and overt and covert
performance audits. Additionally, all
test centers are video audited through
remote visual observation during all
scheduled hours. Overt audits occur at
each station at least 3 times per month
and covert audits are conducted at least
4 times per year, both in response to
customer complaints and as targeted
follow-up. Detailed QA/QC procedures
are included in the SIP submittal at
section 13 of the SIP narrative and in
the inspection agreement.
N. Enforcement Against Contractors,
Stations and Inspectors
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a penalty schedule and legal
authority for establishing and imposing
penalties, civil fines, station and
inspector license suspension, and
revocations. In the case of state
constitutional impediments precluding
immediate authority to suspend
licenses, the state Attorney General
shall furnish an official opinion within
the SIP explaining the constitutional
impediment as well as relevant case
law. The SIP also must describe the
administrative and judicial procedures
and responsibilities relevant to the
enforcement process, including the
agencies, courts, and jurisdictions
involved; personnel to prosecute and
adjudicate cases; and other aspects of
the enforcement of the program
requirements, the resources to be
allocated to the enforcement function,
and the source of those funds. In states
that are without immediate suspension
authority, the SIP must demonstrate that
sufficient resources, personnel, and
systems are in place to meet the threeday case management requirement for
violations that directly affect emission
reductions.
The Connecticut I/M SIP revision
includes specific penalties in its
enforcement against contractors,
stations and inspectors in accordance
with the federal I/M rule. Based on its
SIP submittal dated December 19, 2007,
the State’s enforcement procedures can
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
be pursued through contractual or
regulatory action. The State, through the
contract that it has been authorized to
enter into and directly under
Connecticut laws at Chapter 246a—
‘‘Motor Vehicle Emissions, section 14–
164c(f)(4)’’, has the authority to
immediately suspend a station inspector
for violations that directly affect
emission reduction benefits and a
variety of other violations of procedures.
Details are found in Appendix 14 of the
SIP submittal and are included in the
contract Inspection Agreement.
O. Data Analysis and Reporting
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
describe the types of data to be
collected.
The Connecticut I/M SIP provides for
collecting test data to link specific test
results to specific vehicles, I/M program
registrants, test sites, and inspectors.
The SIP in Section 16 of the SIP
narrative, lists the specific types of test
data and quality control data which will
be collected. The data will be used to
generate reports concerning test data,
quality assurance, quality control,
enforcement, as well as necessary
changes and identified weaknesses in
the program. The state has also
committed to collecting all data
necessary for the quality assurance and
enforcement reports, as required by
section 51.366 of the federal I/M rule.
P. Inspector Training and Licensing or
Certification
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
include a description of the training
program, the written and hands-on tests,
and the licensing or certification
process.
The I/M SIP submittal from the DEP
provides detail on the inspector training
program. The Connecticut I/M SIP
provides for implementation of training,
licensing, and refresher programs for
emission inspectors. The SIP and the
inspection contract describe this
program and curriculum including
written and hands-on testing at least
once every two years. All inspectors
will be required to be certified to
inspect vehicles in the Connecticut I/M
program. Further details of the Inspector
Training Program are included in
section 17 of the SIP narrative.
Q. Improving Repair Effectiveness
Under EPA’s I/M rule, 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 of
this section for enhanced I/M programs,
and a description of the repair
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
technician training resources available
in the community.
In the December 19, 2007 submittal,
Connecticut provided additional detail
and a description of the technical
assistance, performance monitoring and
repair technician training programs to
be implemented. The SIP revision, as
detailed in section 19 of the SIP
narrative, provides for regularly
informing repair facilities about changes
to the inspection program, training
course schedules, common problems,
and potential solutions for particular
engine families, diagnostic tips, repairs,
and other assistance issues. As
described in the submittal, the State has
also ensured that a repair technician
hotline is be available for repair
technicians, and issued a contract to
serve this purpose. Performance
monitoring statistics of repair facilities
will be provided to motorists whose
vehicles fail the I/M test, as required in
enhanced I/M areas. The State has
committed to ensure that adequate
repair technician training exists by
establishing training courses at
technical schools in the area.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
R. Compliance With Recall Notices
Under EPA’s I/M rule, the SIP must
describe, for enhanced I/M programs,
the procedures used to incorporate the
vehicle recall lists provided into the
inspection or registration database, the
quality control methods used to insure
that recall repairs are properly
documented and tracked, and the
method (inspection failure or
registration denial) used to enforce the
recall requirements. EPA has not yet
established a computerized database
listing all recalled vehicles.
The revised Connecticut I/M SIP will
ensure that vehicles subject to enhanced
I/M programs, that are included in
either a voluntary emission recall or a
remedial plan determination pursuant
to the CAA, have had the appropriate
repairs made prior to the inspection. As
described in section 20 of the SIP
narrative, the State and contractor will
implement this when EPA databases
exist which identify vehicles that have
not completed recall repairs by an
electronic database. At that time,
motorists with unresolved recall notices
will be required to show proof of
compliance or will be denied the
opportunity for inspection.
S. On-Road Testing
Under the CAA and EPA’s I/M rule,
the SIP must include a detailed
description of the on-road testing
program required in enhanced I/M
areas, including the types of testing, test
limits and criteria, the number of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
vehicles (the percentage of the fleet) to
be tested, the number of employees to
be dedicated to the on-road testing
effort, the methods for collecting,
analyzing, utilizing, and reporting the
results of on-road testing and the
portion of the program budget to be
dedicated to on-road testing. Also, the
SIP must include the legal authority
necessary to implement the on-road
testing program, including the authority
to enforce off-cycle inspection and
repair requirements. In addition,
emission reduction credit for on-road
testing programs can only be granted for
a program designed to obtain significant
emission reductions over and above
those predicted to be achieved by other
aspects of the I/M program. The SIP
needs to include technical support for
the claimed additional emission
reductions.
The I/M SIP submitted on December
19, 2007, includes a description of
Connecticut’s on-road testing program
in section 21 of the SIP narrative. The
testing program will include 0.5% of the
subject vehicles, or 20,000 vehicles.
Vehicles with emission readings will be
measured by remote sensing devices.
The State of Connecticut has the legal
authority to require a vehicle to obtain
an out-of-cycle inspection at a vehicle
emission inspection facility
(Connecticut laws at Chapter 246a—
‘‘Motor Vehicle Emissions, section 14–
164c(j)’’). The State did not include
additional modeling credit for this
portion of the program in the modeling
demonstrating that EPA’s performance
standard was met.
T. Concluding Statement
A more detailed analysis of the State’s
submittal and how it meets the federal
requirements is contained in the EPA’s
technical support document (TSD)
prepared for this action. The TSD is
available from the EPA New England
Regional office listed above. The criteria
used to review the submitted SIP
revision are based on the requirements
set forth in section 182 of the CAA and
in the federal I/M regulations. Based on
these requirements, EPA developed a
detailed I/M approvability checklist to
be used nationally to determine if I/M
programs meet the requirements of the
CAA and the federal I/M rule. The
checklist states the federal
requirements, referenced by section of
the rule, and whether the Connecticut
program meets such requirements. This
checklist, the CAA, and the federal I/M
regulation formed the basis for EPA’s
technical review. EPA has reviewed the
Connecticut I/M SIP revision submitted
to the EPA using the criteria stated
above. The Connecticut regulations and
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
74025
accompanying materials contained in
the SIP submittals from the State
represent an acceptable plan to comply
with the I/M requirements and meet all
the criteria required for EPA to approve
the SIP. EPA’s review of the materials
submitted indicates that Connecticut
has revised its I/M program in
accordance with the requirements of the
CAA, 40 CFR Part 51, and all of EPA’s
technical requirements for an
approvable vehicle inspection and
maintenance program, including OBD2.
V. Final Action
EPA is approving the SIP revision
submitted by the State of Connecticut of
December 19, 2007. This SIP revision
contains the State’s revised vehicle
inspection and maintenance program.
Specifically, EPA is approving the
Connecticut Department of Motor
Vehicles Regulation at section 14–164c–
1a to section 14–164c–18a (effective
May 28, 2004), and the Connecticut
Department of Environmental Protection
Regulations at section 22a–174–27
(August 25, 2004) and incorporating
these rules into the Connecticut SIP.
EPA is approving Connecticut’s revised
I/M program because it is consistent
with the CAA I/M requirements and
EPA’s I/M regulations and it will
strengthen the Connecticut SIP.
The EPA is publishing this action
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
amendment and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed
rules section of this Federal Register
publication, EPA is publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposal to approve the SIP revision
should relevant adverse comments be
filed. This rule will be effective
February 3, 2009 without further notice
unless the Agency receives relevant
adverse comments by January 5, 2009.
If the EPA receives such comments,
then EPA will publish a notice
withdrawing the final rule and
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on
the proposed rule. All parties interested
in commenting on the proposed rule
should do so at this time. If no such
comments are received, the public is
advised that this rule will be effective
on February 3, 2009 and no further
action will be taken on the proposed
rule. Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if
that provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
74026
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:58 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
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 action 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. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
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 February 3, 2009.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action 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).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: September 12, 2008.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
Part 52 of 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 et seq.
Subpart H—Connecticut
2. Section 52.370 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(98) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.370
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(98) Revisions to the State
Implementation Plan submitted by the
Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection on December
19, 2007.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection Regulations
entitled ‘‘Emission standards and onboard diagnostic II test requirements for
periodic motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance’’ at section 22a–174–27
(effective in the State of Connecticut on
August 25, 2004).
(B) Connecticut Department of Motor
Vehicles Regulation entitled ‘‘Periodic
Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection and
Maintenance’’ at section 14–164c–1a to
Section 14–164c–18a (effective in the
State of Connecticut on May 28, 2004).
3. In § 52.385, Table 52.385 is
amended by adding new entries to
existing state citations for section 22a–
174–27 and Section 14–164c to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.385 EPA-approved Connecticut
Regulations.
*
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
*
*
05DER1
*
*
74027
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 52.385—EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS
Dates
Connecticut State citation
Title/subject
*
22a–174–27 ................
*
Emission standards
and on-board diagnostic II test requirements for periodic motor vehicle
inspection and
maintenance.
*
*
14–164c ......................
*
Periodic Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance.
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2008–0788; FRL–8745–4]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, South Coast Air
Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the South
Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) emissions from large water
heaters and small boilers and process
heaters. We are approving a local rule
that regulates these emission sources
under the Clean Air Act as amended in
1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on February
3, 2009 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
January 5, 2009. If we receive such
comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that this direct final
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number [EPA–R09–
16:58 Dec 04, 2008
*
8/25/04
Jkt 217001
12/05/08
*
5/28/04
*
[FR Doc. E8–28734 Filed 12–4–08; 8:45 am]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Date
approved by
EPA
Date adopted
by State
12/05/08
*
Federal
Register
citation
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
*
(c)(98)
*
DEP regulations including emissions
standards and
OBD2 requirements.
*
[Insert Federal Register page number
where the document begins].
*
(c)(98)
*
DMV regulation revisions for test and
repair network and
implementing OBD2
and other tests.
*
Sfmt 4700
Comments/description
*
[Insert Federal Register page number
where the document begins].
OAR–2008–0788], by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
https://www.regulations.gov is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA
will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
PO 00000
Section
52.370
*
*
https://www.regulations.gov and in hard
copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revision?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving
with the dates that it was adopted by the
local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 235 (Friday, December 5, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74019-74027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-28734]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2008-0194; A-1-FRL-8717-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted on December 19, 2007 by the State of Connecticut.
This SIP revision includes regulations to update the enhanced motor
vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in Connecticut. The
revised program includes a test and repair network and on-board
diagnostic (OBD2) testing for 1996 and newer vehicles. The intended
effect of this action is to approve the
[[Page 74020]]
revised program into the Connecticut SIP. This action is being taken in
accordance with the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective February 3, 2009,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by January 5, 2009. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2008-0194 by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918-0047.
4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2008-0194'',
Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114-2023.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2008-0194. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov, or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at
all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to
4:30, excluding legal holidays.
In addition, copies of the state submittal and EPA's technical
support document are also available for public inspection during normal
business hours, by appointment at the State Air Agency; the Bureau of
Air Management, Department of Environmental Protection, State Office
Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-1630.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Judge, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, EPA New England, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114-2023; 617-918-1045 (phone); 617-918-0045 (fax); e-mail
at judge.robert@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. The following outline is
provided to aid in locating information in this rulemaking.
I. Background and Purpose
II. What Are the Clean Air Act Requirements for I/M Programs?
III. What Are the OBD2 Requirements and How Does Connecticut's
Program Address Them?
IV. What Are All the Other I/M Regulatory Requirements and How Does
Connecticut's I/M Program Satisfy Them?
A. Applicability
B. Enhanced I/M Performance Standard
C. Network Type and Program Evaluation
D. Adequate Tools and Resources
E. Test Frequency and Convenience
F. Vehicle Coverage
G. Test Procedures and Standards
H. Test Equipment
I. Quality Control
J. Waivers and Compliance via Diagnostic Inspection
K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement
L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement Oversight
M. Quality Assurance
N. Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations, and Inspectors
O. Data Analysis and Reporting
P. Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification
Q. Improving Repair Effectiveness
R. Compliance With Recall Notices
S. On-Road Testing
T. Concluding Statement
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
On December 19, 2007, the State of Connecticut submitted a formal
revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). This SIP revision
includes regulations to update the enhanced motor vehicle inspection
and maintenance (I/M) program in Connecticut. EPA is approving
Connecticut's revised I/M program because it is consistent with the
Clean Air Act I/M requirements and EPA's I/M regulations, and will
strengthen the SIP. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on
an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision
may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final
those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
II. What Are the Clean Air Act Requirements for I/M Programs?
The Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq., requires certain
states to implement an enhanced inspection and maintenance (I/M)
program to detect gasoline-fueled motor vehicles which emit excessive
amounts of certain air pollutants. The enhanced I/M program is intended
to help states meet federal health-based national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for ozone and carbon monoxide by requiring vehicles
with excess emissions to have their emissions control systems repaired.
Section 182 of the CAA requires I/M programs in those areas of the
nation that are most impacted by carbon monoxide and ozone pollution.
42 U.S.C. 7411c. Section 184 of the CAA also created an ``Ozone
Transport Region'' (OTR) and includes I/M
[[Page 74021]]
requirements for that region. The OTR geographically includes the 11
states from Maryland to Maine (including all of Connecticut) and the
District of Columbia Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area. In
addition, EPA promulgated I/M regulations at 40 CFR Part 51 Subpart S.
Depending on the severity of an area's nonattainment designation and/or
geographic location within the OTR, EPA's regulation under 40 CFR
51.350 outlines the appropriate motor vehicle I/M requirements.
As a result of its ozone nonattainment designation (see 40 CFR
81.307), and by virtue of its inclusion in the OTR, Connecticut has
implemented an enhanced vehicle emissions testing program throughout
the entire State. A vehicle testing program has been operating
statewide since 1983 in Connecticut. The Connecticut I/M program was
first approved into the SIP on May 21, 1984 (49 FR 10542) and the
program has since been revised several times. Most recently the SIP was
modified on October 27, 2000 (65 FR 64357). Since that time, the
program has been again modified in a number of ways. Most notably it
has been changed to a test and repair network, and now also includes
on-board diagnostic (ODB2) testing of 1996 and newer vehicles.
III. What Are the OBD2 Requirements and How Does Connecticut's Program
Address Them?
On April 5, 2001, EPA published in the Federal Register
``Amendments to Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program Requirements
Incorporating the On-Board Diagnostics Check'' (66 FR 18156). The
revised I/M rule requires that electronic checks of the On-Board
Diagnostics (OBD2) system on model year 1996 and newer OBD2-equipped
motor vehicles be conducted as part of states' motor vehicle I/M
programs. OBD2 is part of the sophisticated vehicle powertrain
management system and is designed to detect engine and transmission
problems that might cause vehicle emissions to exceed allowable limits.
OBD2 requirements are a key part of this rulemaking action.
The OBD2 system monitors the status of up to 11 emission control
related subsystems by performing either continuous or periodic
functional tests of specific components and vehicle conditions. The
first three testing categories--misfire, fuel trim, and comprehensive
components--are continuous, while the remaining eight only run after a
certain set of conditions has been met. The algorithms for running
these eight periodic monitors are unique to each manufacturer and
involve such things as ambient temperature as well as driving
conditions. Most vehicles will have at least five of the eight
remaining monitors (catalyst, evaporative system, oxygen sensor, heated
oxygen sensor, and exhaust gas recirculation or EGR system) while the
remaining three (air conditioning, secondary air, and heated catalyst)
are not necessarily applicable to all vehicles. When a vehicle is
scanned at an OBD2-I/M test site, these monitors can appear as either
``ready'' (meaning the monitor in question has been evaluated), ``not
ready'' (meaning the monitor has not yet been evaluated), or ``not
applicable'' (meaning the vehicle is not equipped with the component
monitor in question).
The OBD2 system is also designed to fully evaluate the vehicle
emissions control system. If the OBD2 system detects a problem that may
cause vehicle emissions to exceed 1.5 times the Federal Test Procedure
(FTP) standards, then the Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL) is
illuminated. By turning on the MIL, the OBD2 system notifies the
vehicle operator that an emission-related fault has been detected, and
the vehicle should be repaired as soon as possible thus reducing the
harmful emissions contributed by that vehicle.
EPA's revised OBD2 I/M rule applies to those areas that are
required to implement I/M programs under the CAA, which includes
Connecticut. The revised I/M program submitted by Connecticut on
December 19, 2007 includes OBD2 testing for 1996 and newer vehicles,
and continues to require that 1995 and older vehicles (up to 25 years
old) continue to receive the previously SIP approved acceleration
simulation mode (ASM) test or, if that test can not be implemented,
gasoline powered vehicles up to 10,000 pounds GVWR (gross vehicle
weight rating) are tested with a preconditioned two-speed idle test.
EPA's OBD2 program requires scan tool equipment to read the
vehicle's built-in computer sensors in model year 1996 and newer
vehicles. The OBD2- I/M check consists of two types of examination: A
visual check of the dashboard display function and status and an
electronic examination of the OBD2 computer itself. The failure
criteria for OBD2 testing is any Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC) or
combination of DTCs that results in the Malfunction Indicator Light
(MIL) to be commanded on. A DTC is a code that indicates an emission
control system or component which may cause emissions to increase to
1.5 times the limit due to malfunction. Connecticut has incorporated
this OBD2 component into its program.
If the OBD2 scan reveals DTCs that have not commanded the MIL on,
the motorist should be advised of the issue, but the vehicle should not
be failed unless other non-DTC-based failure criteria have been met.
Vehicles may fail inspection if the vehicle connector is missing,
tampered with or otherwise inoperable, if the MIL is commanded on and
is not visually illuminated, and if the MIL is commanded on for 1 or
more DTCs as defined in Society of Automotive Engineering (SAE) J2012
guidance document, and EPA regulations.
Vehicles are rejected from testing if the scan of the OBD2 system
reveals a ``not ready'' code for any OBD2 component. EPA guidance
allows states the flexibility to permit model year 1996 to 2000
vehicles with 2 or fewer unset readiness codes, and model year 2001 and
newer with 1 unset readiness code to complete OBD2-I/M inspection
without being rejected. Vehicles would still fail if the MIL was
commanded on or if other failure criteria were met, or be rejected if 3
or more unset readiness codes were encountered. If the MIL is not
commanded to be illuminated the vehicle would pass the OBD2 inspection
even if DTCs are present. Connecticut's testing program is consistent
with the EPA recommended readiness failure criteria. Connecticut's
program regulations, at section 22a-174-27(g) require that the program
meet all the relevant OBD2 testing ``requirements of 40 CFR 51 and 40
CFR 85 and shall include procedures set forth in 40 CFR 85.2222.''
The EPA believes that for an OBD2-I/M test program to be most
effective, it should be designed to allow for: (1) Real-time data link
connections to a centralized testing database; (2) quality-controlled
input of vehicle and owner identification information; and (3)
automated generation of test reports. Connecticut has incorporated
these OBD2 program elements into its program.
IV. What Are All the Other I/M Regulatory Requirements and Does
Connecticut's I/M Program Satisfy Them?
A. Applicability
The SIP describes in detail the areas subject to the enhanced I/M
SIP revision and, consistent with 40 CFR 51.372, includes the legal
authority necessary to establish program boundaries. The Connecticut I/
M regulations (``Emission standards and on-board diagnostic II test
requirements for periodic motor vehicle
[[Page 74022]]
inspection and maintenance'' at section 22a-174-27, and ``Periodic
Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance'' at section 14-
164c-1a to Section 14-164c-18a) and authorizing legislation
(Connecticut Statutes at Chapter 246 and 246a) ensure that the enhanced
I/M program be implemented statewide.
B. Enhanced I/M Performance Standard
Today's rulemaking discusses the I/M program designed, in part, to
meet the enhanced I/M performance standard for ozone precursors causing
air quality problems in Connecticut. EPA's performance standard
establishes an emission reduction target that must be met by a program
in order for the SIP to be approvable. The program, as documented in
the SIP, must meet the performance standard in actual operation, with
provisions for appropriate adjustments if the standard is not met.
Included in Connecticut's December 19, 2007 submittal is the
appropriate MOBILE6 vehicle emission modeling demonstration considering
the required performance standards and the actual Connecticut program
as it is currently being implemented statewide, as well as a comparison
to the centralized program that the State is no longer implementing.
The modeling runs considered evaluations with 2005, 2007 and 2009
compliance dates. Connecticut has demonstrated that reductions from its
updated program are better than the pre-existing I/M program and the
EPA performance standard.
The MOBILE6 modeling performed by Connecticut reflects the fact
that Connecticut tests all gasoline powered vehicles that are less than
25 years old. 1996 and newer vehicles are tested with OBD2, and pre-
1996 vehicles (i.e., they are not equipped with OBD2 technology) are
tested using the acceleration simulation mode (ASM 2525), or, if ASM
2525 is not feasible for that vehicle, those vehicles will receive a
preconditioned two-speed idle (PCTSI) test. Vehicles are tested every
other year, and vehicles up to 4 years old are not tested. Vehicle
testing requirements are included in section 22a-174-27, and details of
meeting the performance standard are included in section 2 of the SIP
narrative.
C. Network Type and Program Evaluation
Under the CAA and EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a
description of the network to be employed and the required legal
authority. Also, for enhanced I/M areas, the SIP needs to include a
description of the evaluation schedule and protocol, the sampling
methodology, the data collection and analysis system, the resources and
personnel for evaluation and related details of the evaluation program,
as well as the legal authority establishing the evaluation program.
Connecticut has revised its program to be a test and repair I/M
network program design utilizing contractors to manage and oversee the
inspection portion of the program. In its December 19, 2007 submittal,
Connecticut states, in its SIP revision narrative, that it will
institute a continuous ongoing evaluation program consistent with the
federal I/M rule. The results of the evaluation program will be
reported to EPA on a biennial basis (40 CFR 51.353). In addition,
Connecticut commits to developing and submitting the annual reports
described by 40 CFR 51.366. The State has sufficient legal authority to
implement this contractor managed program in concert with local
inspection stations and conduct the program evaluation, as necessary to
implement I/M consistent with federal requirements. (Connecticut laws
at Chapter 246a--Motor Vehicle Emissions, section 14-164c(e)) Details
of the network type and program evaluation are included in Section 3 of
the SIP narrative.
D. Adequate Tools and Resources
Under the CAA and EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a
description of the resources that will be used for program operation
and must discuss how the performance standard will be met, including:
(1) A detailed budget plan describing the source of funds for
personnel, program administration, program enforcement, purchase of
necessary equipment (such as vehicles for undercover audits), and for
other requirements discussed throughout the I/M rule, for the period
prior to the next biennial self evaluation required by the federal I/M
rule, and (2) a description of personnel resources, the number of
personnel dedicated to overt and covert auditing, data analysis,
program administration, enforcement, and other necessary functions, and
the training attendant to each function.
Connecticut legislation authorizes the State to collect a fee at
registration to cover the costs of administrating, overseeing, and
enforcing the I/M program. The December 19, 2007 submittal includes
additional detail on the funding and description of resources to be
used for implementation of the enhanced I/M program. This narrative at
Section 4, and its attachments describe the budget, staffing support,
and equipment needed to implement the program.
E. Test Frequency and Convenience
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a detailed test
schedule, including the test year selection scheme if testing is other
than annual. The SIP must also include the legal authority necessary to
implement and enforce the test frequency requirement and explain how
the test frequency will be integrated with the enforcement process. In
addition, in enhanced I/M programs, the SIP needs to demonstrate that
the network of stations providing testing services is sufficient to
ensure consumer convenience by providing short waiting times to get a
test, and short driving distances to get to the test center.
The Connecticut SIP revision requires biennial inspections for all
subject motor vehicles that are at least four years old. The
inspections will be conducted based on when the vehicle is initially
registered. This is described in more detail in the December submittal.
The authority for enforcing the testing frequency is contained in the
revised Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles' portion of the I/M
rule. Short waiting times and short driving distances relating to
network design are addressed by ensuring that local gas stations can
provide the inspection, and are described in section 5 of the SIP
narrative.
F. Vehicle Coverage
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a detailed description
of the number and types of vehicles to be covered by the program, and a
plan for identifying subject vehicles, including vehicles that are
routinely operated in the area but may not be registered in the area.
Also, the SIP must include a description of any special exemptions
which will be granted by the program, and an estimate of the percentage
and number of vehicles granted such exemptions. Such exemptions need to
be accounted for in the emission reduction analysis. In addition, the
SIP needs to include the legal authority necessary to implement and
enforce the vehicle coverage requirement.
Connecticut's I/M program covers all gasoline and diesel vehicles,
light duty trucks, and heavy duty vehicles that are 25 years old and
newer and registered in the State. In addition, United States Postal
Service and United States GSA vehicles are also covered. Special
classes, which are exempt from the emission testing program, include
vehicles weighing more than 10,000 pounds (GVWR), electric vehicles,
farm
[[Page 74023]]
vehicles, motorcycles, and vehicles which are less than 4 years old.
Based on information provided by the State, Connecticut has shown that
such exemptions will not prevent the program from achieving the
performance standard. Additional detail supporting this conclusion was
included in Section 6 of the December 19, 2007 submittal. Legal
authority for the vehicle coverage requirement is contained in the
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and Department
of Motor Vehicles (DMV) I/M rules and the State's authorizing
legislation. (Connecticut laws at Chapter 246a--Motor Vehicle
Emissions, Section 14-164c)
G. Test Procedures and Standards
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a description of each
test procedure used. The SIP also must include the rule, ordinance or
law describing and establishing the test procedures. The Connecticut I/
M SIP revision and associated regulations obligate the State to perform
OBD2 testing on all 1996 and newer vehicles, in accordance with EPA
procedures. All 1995 and older covered vehicles up to 8,500 pounds GVWR
(excluding full time four wheel drive) will be tested in accordance
with EPA procedures for the acceleration simulation mode, or ASM 2525.
A vehicle which can not be tested using either OBD2 or ASM 2525, or has
a GVWR greater than 8500 GVWR and less than 10,000 GVWR will be given a
pre-conditioned two-speed idle (PCTSI) test. Details of the test
procedures and standard are included in Section 7 of the SIP narrative,
and in the DEP rules at section 22a-174-27.
H. Test Equipment
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include written technical
specifications for all test equipment used in the program and address
each of the requirements set forth at 40 CFR 51.358. The specifications
must describe the emission analysis process, the necessary test
equipment, the required features, and written acceptance testing
criteria and procedures.
In its December 19, 2007 submission, Connecticut provided written
equipment specifications as contained in EPA's guidance and the
appendices of EPA's I/M rule. The Connecticut SIP submission and its
appendices address the requirements in 40 CFR 51.358 and include
descriptions of performance features and functional characteristics of
the computerized test systems. It references 40 CFR Part 51 and 85, and
includes the procedures outlined in 40 CFR 85.2222 and associated
guidance. For the ASM test, EPA's Acceleration Simulation Mode Test
Procedures, Emissions Standards, Quality Control Requirements, and
Equipment Specification Final Technical Guidance (EPA420-B-04-011, July
2004) will be used. The necessary test equipment, required features,
and acceptance testing criteria are mandated by the testing contract
specifications, and section 8 of the SIP narrative.
I. Quality Control
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a description of quality
control and recordkeeping procedures. The SIP also must include the
procedures manual, rule, and ordinance or law describing and
establishing quality control procedures and requirements.
The Connecticut I/M SIP narrative and contract contain descriptions
and requirements establishing the quality control procedures in
accordance with the federal I/M rule and EPA guidance. These
requirements will help ensure that equipment calibrations are properly
performed and recorded and that the necessary compliance document
security is maintained. As described in section 9 of the SIP narrative,
the Connecticut SIP complies with all specifications for quality
control set forth in Section 51.359 and Appendix A of the federal I/M
rule, and EPA's technical guidance.
J. Waivers and Compliance via Diagnostic Inspection
Under EPA's I/M rule the SIP must include a maximum waiver rate
expressed as a percentage of initially failed vehicles. This waiver
rate is used for estimating emission reduction benefits in the modeling
analysis. Corrective action must be taken if the waiver rate exceeds
that estimated in the SIP, or the state must revise the SIP and claim
emission reductions accordingly. The SIP also must describe the waiver
criteria and procedures, including cost limits, quality assurance
methods and measures, and administration. Lastly, the SIP must include
the necessary legal authority, ordinance(s), or rules to issue waivers,
set and adjust cost limits as required, and carry out any other
functions necessary to administer the waiver system, including
enforcement of the waiver provisions.
Cost limits for the minimum expenditure waivers must be in
accordance with the CAA and federal I/M rule. Expenditures of at least
$660 for actual, non-tampering related repairs, must be spent in order
to qualify for a waiver in the enhanced I/M program. The State intends
to annually update the cost to receive a waiver from the emissions
testing program. In addition, a time extension, as allowed under EPA's
rule, is also allowed in Connecticut's program. Connecticut has
demonstrated that it can meet the enhanced I/M performance standard
testing with its current program design.
The Connecticut program includes a waiver rate of 1% of initially
failed vehicles in the area. These waiver rates are used in the
modeling demonstration. The DEP has committed in the December 2007
submittal that, if the waiver rates are higher than estimated as
determined by its program reports, the State will take corrective
action to address the deficiency. The SIP describes the three types of
waivers the State will allow, including: a minimum expenditure, a time
extension, and a one-time hardship waiver provision. These issues are
dealt with in a manner consistent with the federal I/M rule. The proper
criteria, procedures, quality assurance and administration regarding
the issuance of waivers, consistent with EPA's I/M rule, will be
ensured by the DEP and its contractor and are detailed in the SIP
submission in section 10 of the SIP narrative and DMV rules at section
14-164c-11a.
K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must provide information concerning
motorist enforcement, including: (1) A description of the existing
compliance mechanism if it will continue to be used for this program,
and the demonstration that it is as effective or more effective than
registration denial enforcement; (2) an identification of the agencies
responsible for performing each of the applicable activities in this
section; (3) a description of, and accounting for, all classes of
exempt vehicles; and (4) a description of the plan for testing fleet
vehicles, rental car fleets, leased vehicles, and any other special
classes of subject vehicles, such as those operated (but not
necessarily registered) in the program area. Also, the SIP must include
a determination of the current compliance rate based on a study of the
system including an estimate of compliance losses due to loopholes,
counterfeiting, and unregistered vehicles. Estimates of the effect of
closing such loopholes and otherwise improving the enforcement
mechanism must be supported with detailed analyses. In addition, the
SIP needs to include the legal authority to implement and enforce the
program. Lastly, the SIP must include a commitment to an enforcement
level and minimum
[[Page 74024]]
compliance level used for modeling purposes and to be maintained, at a
minimum, in practice.
The State of Connecticut has chosen to use a program of denying
registration to anyone who fails to meet emission testing requirements.
The motorist compliance enforcement program will be implemented
primarily by the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles. The
enforcement strategy is described in the December 19, 2007 submittal.
The enforcement strategy is designed to ensure a high rate of
compliance. Those not receiving the emissions test as scheduled will be
subject to fines and late penalties, and also be denied registration
when their registration expires. Connecticut presently has a 99 percent
compliance rate with the inspection program. The legal authority to
implement and enforce the program is included in the Connecticut State
law and in DEP and DMV rules as submitted on December 19, 2007.
(Connecticut laws at Chapter 246a--``Motor Vehicle Emissions, Section
14-164c''; Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
Regulations entitled ``Emission standards and on-board diagnostic II
test requirements for periodic motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance'' at Section 22a-174-27; and Connecticut Department of
Motor Vehicles Regulation entitled ``Periodic Motor Vehicle Emissions
Inspection and Maintenance'' at section 14-164c-1a to section 14-164c-
18a). Additional detail of the motorist compliance enforcement program
is included in section 11 of the SIP narrative.
L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a description of
enforcement program oversight and information management activities.
The Connecticut I/M SIP revision provides for regular auditing of
its enforcement program and adherence to effective management
practices, including adjustments to improve the program when necessary.
These program oversight and information management activities are
described in the SIP narrative, and include a description of the
Emissions Data Base Management System (EDBMS) and how this system
interfaces with the Department of Information Technology (DoIT) vehicle
registration records. If a vehicle is out of compliance with the
emissions testing requirement, registration is denied. This is done
through computer matching and is directly available to law enforcement.
The SIP describes the procedures to be followed in identifying
noncomplying vehicles, along with appropriate follow-up and program
documentation audits in section 12 of the SIP narrative.
M. Quality Assurance
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a description of the
quality assurance program, and written procedure manuals covering both
overt and covert performance audits, record audits, and equipment
audits.
The December 19, 2007, submittal from Connecticut includes a
description of the quality assurance program. The program will include
operation and progress reports and overt and covert performance audits.
Additionally, all test centers are video audited through remote visual
observation during all scheduled hours. Overt audits occur at each
station at least 3 times per month and covert audits are conducted at
least 4 times per year, both in response to customer complaints and as
targeted follow-up. Detailed QA/QC procedures are included in the SIP
submittal at section 13 of the SIP narrative and in the inspection
agreement.
N. Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a penalty schedule and
legal authority for establishing and imposing penalties, civil fines,
station and inspector license suspension, and revocations. In the case
of state constitutional impediments precluding immediate authority to
suspend licenses, the state Attorney General shall furnish an official
opinion within the SIP explaining the constitutional impediment as well
as relevant case law. The SIP also must describe the administrative and
judicial procedures and responsibilities relevant to the enforcement
process, including the agencies, courts, and jurisdictions involved;
personnel to prosecute and adjudicate cases; and other aspects of the
enforcement of the program requirements, the resources to be allocated
to the enforcement function, and the source of those funds. In states
that are without immediate suspension authority, the SIP must
demonstrate that sufficient resources, personnel, and systems are in
place to meet the three-day case management requirement for violations
that directly affect emission reductions.
The Connecticut I/M SIP revision includes specific penalties in its
enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors in accordance
with the federal I/M rule. Based on its SIP submittal dated December
19, 2007, the State's enforcement procedures can be pursued through
contractual or regulatory action. The State, through the contract that
it has been authorized to enter into and directly under Connecticut
laws at Chapter 246a--``Motor Vehicle Emissions, section 14-
164c(f)(4)'', has the authority to immediately suspend a station
inspector for violations that directly affect emission reduction
benefits and a variety of other violations of procedures. Details are
found in Appendix 14 of the SIP submittal and are included in the
contract Inspection Agreement.
O. Data Analysis and Reporting
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must describe the types of data to be
collected.
The Connecticut I/M SIP provides for collecting test data to link
specific test results to specific vehicles, I/M program registrants,
test sites, and inspectors. The SIP in Section 16 of the SIP narrative,
lists the specific types of test data and quality control data which
will be collected. The data will be used to generate reports concerning
test data, quality assurance, quality control, enforcement, as well as
necessary changes and identified weaknesses in the program. The state
has also committed to collecting all data necessary for the quality
assurance and enforcement reports, as required by section 51.366 of the
federal I/M rule.
P. Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a description of the
training program, the written and hands-on tests, and the licensing or
certification process.
The I/M SIP submittal from the DEP provides detail on the inspector
training program. The Connecticut I/M SIP provides for implementation
of training, licensing, and refresher programs for emission inspectors.
The SIP and the inspection contract describe this program and
curriculum including written and hands-on testing at least once every
two years. All inspectors will be required to be certified to inspect
vehicles in the Connecticut I/M program. Further details of the
Inspector Training Program are included in section 17 of the SIP
narrative.
Q. Improving Repair Effectiveness
Under EPA's I/M rule, 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 of this section for enhanced I/M programs, and
a description of the repair
[[Page 74025]]
technician training resources available in the community.
In the December 19, 2007 submittal, Connecticut provided additional
detail and a description of the technical assistance, performance
monitoring and repair technician training programs to be implemented.
The SIP revision, as detailed in section 19 of the SIP narrative,
provides for regularly informing repair facilities about changes to the
inspection program, training course schedules, common problems, and
potential solutions for particular engine families, diagnostic tips,
repairs, and other assistance issues. As described in the submittal,
the State has also ensured that a repair technician hotline is be
available for repair technicians, and issued a contract to serve this
purpose. Performance monitoring statistics of repair facilities will be
provided to motorists whose vehicles fail the I/M test, as required in
enhanced I/M areas. The State has committed to ensure that adequate
repair technician training exists by establishing training courses at
technical schools in the area.
R. Compliance With Recall Notices
Under EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must describe, for enhanced I/M
programs, the procedures used to incorporate the vehicle recall lists
provided into the inspection or registration database, the quality
control methods used to insure that recall repairs are properly
documented and tracked, and the method (inspection failure or
registration denial) used to enforce the recall requirements. EPA has
not yet established a computerized database listing all recalled
vehicles.
The revised Connecticut I/M SIP will ensure that vehicles subject
to enhanced I/M programs, that are included in either a voluntary
emission recall or a remedial plan determination pursuant to the CAA,
have had the appropriate repairs made prior to the inspection. As
described in section 20 of the SIP narrative, the State and contractor
will implement this when EPA databases exist which identify vehicles
that have not completed recall repairs by an electronic database. At
that time, motorists with unresolved recall notices will be required to
show proof of compliance or will be denied the opportunity for
inspection.
S. On-Road Testing
Under the CAA and EPA's I/M rule, the SIP must include a detailed
description of the on-road testing program required in enhanced I/M
areas, including the types of testing, test limits and criteria, the
number of vehicles (the percentage of the fleet) to be tested, the
number of employees to be dedicated to the on-road testing effort, the
methods for collecting, analyzing, utilizing, and reporting the results
of on-road testing and the portion of the program budget to be
dedicated to on-road testing. Also, the SIP must include the legal
authority necessary to implement the on-road testing program, including
the authority to enforce off-cycle inspection and repair requirements.
In addition, emission reduction credit for on-road testing programs can
only be granted for a program designed to obtain significant emission
reductions over and above those predicted to be achieved by other
aspects of the I/M program. The SIP needs to include technical support
for the claimed additional emission reductions.
The I/M SIP submitted on December 19, 2007, includes a description
of Connecticut's on-road testing program in section 21 of the SIP
narrative. The testing program will include 0.5% of the subject
vehicles, or 20,000 vehicles. Vehicles with emission readings will be
measured by remote sensing devices. The State of Connecticut has the
legal authority to require a vehicle to obtain an out-of-cycle
inspection at a vehicle emission inspection facility (Connecticut laws
at Chapter 246a--``Motor Vehicle Emissions, section 14-164c(j)''). The
State did not include additional modeling credit for this portion of
the program in the modeling demonstrating that EPA's performance
standard was met.
T. Concluding Statement
A more detailed analysis of the State's submittal and how it meets
the federal requirements is contained in the EPA's technical support
document (TSD) prepared for this action. The TSD is available from the
EPA New England Regional office listed above. The criteria used to
review the submitted SIP revision are based on the requirements set
forth in section 182 of the CAA and in the federal I/M regulations.
Based on these requirements, EPA developed a detailed I/M approvability
checklist to be used nationally to determine if I/M programs meet the
requirements of the CAA and the federal I/M rule. The checklist states
the federal requirements, referenced by section of the rule, and
whether the Connecticut program meets such requirements. This
checklist, the CAA, and the federal I/M regulation formed the basis for
EPA's technical review. EPA has reviewed the Connecticut I/M SIP
revision submitted to the EPA using the criteria stated above. The
Connecticut regulations and accompanying materials contained in the SIP
submittals from the State represent an acceptable plan to comply with
the I/M requirements and meet all the criteria required for EPA to
approve the SIP. EPA's review of the materials submitted indicates that
Connecticut has revised its I/M program in accordance with the
requirements of the CAA, 40 CFR Part 51, and all of EPA's technical
requirements for an approvable vehicle inspection and maintenance
program, including OBD2.
V. Final Action
EPA is approving the SIP revision submitted by the State of
Connecticut of December 19, 2007. This SIP revision contains the
State's revised vehicle inspection and maintenance program.
Specifically, EPA is approving the Connecticut Department of Motor
Vehicles Regulation at section 14-164c-1a to section 14-164c-18a
(effective May 28, 2004), and the Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection Regulations at section 22a-174-27 (August 25,
2004) and incorporating these rules into the Connecticut SIP. EPA is
approving Connecticut's revised I/M program because it is consistent
with the CAA I/M requirements and EPA's I/M regulations and it will
strengthen the Connecticut SIP.
The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective
February 3, 2009 without further notice unless the Agency receives
relevant adverse comments by January 5, 2009.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on the proposed rule. All parties
interested in commenting on the proposed rule should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on February 3, 2009 and no further action will
be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
[[Page 74026]]
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
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 action 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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
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 February 3, 2009. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action 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).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: September 12, 2008.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
0
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart H--Connecticut
0
2. Section 52.370 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(98) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.370 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(98) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection on December 19,
2007.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Regulations
entitled ``Emission standards and on-board diagnostic II test
requirements for periodic motor vehicle inspection and maintenance'' at
section 22a-174-27 (effective in the State of Connecticut on August 25,
2004).
(B) Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles Regulation entitled
``Periodic Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance'' at
section 14-164c-1a to Section 14-164c-18a (effective in the State of
Connecticut on May 28, 2004).
0
3. In Sec. 52.385, Table 52.385 is amended by adding new entries to
existing state citations for section 22a-174-27 and Section 14-164c to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.385 EPA-approved Connecticut Regulations.
* * * * *
[[Page 74027]]
Table 52.385--EPA-Approved Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dates
-------------------------------- Federal Register Section
Connecticut State citation Title/subject Date adopted Date approved citation 52.370 Comments/description
by State by EPA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
22a-174-27.......................... Emission standards and 8/25/04 12/05/08 [Insert Federal (c)(98) DEP regulations
on-board diagnostic Register page number including emissions
II test requirements where the document standards and OBD2
for periodic motor begins]. requirements.
vehicle inspection
and maintenance.
* * * * * * *
14-164c............................. Periodic Motor Vehicle 5/28/04 12/05/08 [Insert Federal (c)(98) DMV regulation
Emissions Inspection Register page number revisions for test
and Maintenance. where the document and repair network
begins]. and implementing OBD2
and other tests.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E8-28734 Filed 12-4-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
