[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 145 (Friday, July 28, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38694-38700]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-18511]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TN131-1-6794a; TN136-1-6795a; TN137-1-6796a; FRL-5257-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Tennessee; Basic Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving three state implementation plan (SIP) 
revisions submitted on March 17, July 8 and July 13, 1994, by the State 
of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Division. The 
revisions submitted March 17, 1994, modify the existing basic motor 
vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in Davidson County to 
meet the requirements of the EPA I/M regulations, as published on 
November 5, 1992. The revisions submitted on July 8 and July 13, 1994, 
establish and require the implementation of a basic I/M program in the 
four middle Tennessee counties of Rutherford, Sumner, Williamson, and 
Wilson. These counties, along with Davidson County, form the Nashville 
ozone nonattainment area. The regulations establishing the I/M program 
constituted the July 8, 1994, submittal while the nonregulatory 
components of the program were discussed in the July 13, 1994, 
submittal.

DATES: This final rule will be effective September 26, 1995 unless 
adverse or critical comments are received by August 28, 1995. If the 
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the 
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Dale 
Aspy at the EPA Regional office listed below.
    Copies of the documents relative to this action are available for 
public inspection during normal business hours at the following 
locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents 
should make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24 
hours before the visiting day.

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

[[Page 38695]]
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20460.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Programs Branch, 345 
Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30365.
Air Pollution Control Division, Tennessee Department of Environment and 
Conversation, 9th Floor, L & C Annex, 401 Church Street, Nashville, 
Tennessee 37243-1531.
Bureau of Environmental Health Services, Nashville and Davidson County 
Metropolitan Health Department, 311 23rd Street, North, Nashville, 
Tennessee 37203.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Aspy, Mobile Source Planning 
Unit, Regulatory Planning and Development Section, Air Programs Branch, 
Air, Pesticides & Toxics Management Division, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 4, 345 Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30365. 
The telephone number is 404/347-3555, extension 4214. Reference files 
TN131, TN136 and TN137.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the Act) requires that most 
ozone nonattainment areas adopt either ``basic'' or ``enhanced'' I/M 
programs, depending on the severity of the problem and the population 
of the area. The moderate ozone nonattainment areas, plus marginal 
ozone areas with existing or previously required I/M programs, fall 
under the ``basic'' I/M requirements. Enhanced programs are required in 
serious, severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas with 1980 
urbanized populations of 200,000 or more.
    The Act requires states to make changes to improve existing I/M 
programs or to implement new ones for certain nonattainment areas. 
Section 182(a)(2)(B) of the Act directed EPA to publish updated 
guidance for state I/M programs, taking into consideration findings of 
the Administrator's audits and investigations of these programs. The 
Act further requires each area required to have an I/M program to 
incorporate this guidance into the SIP. Based on these requirements, 
EPA promulgated I/M regulations on November 5, 1992 (57 FR 52950, 
codified at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.350-51.373).
    The I/M regulation establishes minimum performance standards for 
basic I/M programs as well as requirements for the following: network 
type and program evaluation; adequate tools and resources; test 
frequency and convenience; vehicle coverage; test procedures and 
standards; test equipment; quality control; waivers and compliance via 
diagnostic inspection; motorist compliance enforcement; motorist 
compliance enforcement program oversight; quality assurance; 
enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors; data 
collection; data analysis and reporting; inspector training and 
licensing or certification; public information and consumer protection; 
improving repair effectiveness; compliance with recall notices; on-road 
testing; SIP revisions; and implementation deadlines. The performance 
standard for basic I/M programs remains the same as it has been since 
initial I/M policy was established in 1978, pursuant to the 1977 
amendments to the Clean Air Act.
    The State of Tennessee contains the Nashville urbanized area which 
is designated as moderate nonattainment for ozone. Section 51.372(b)(2) 
of the federal I/M regulation (codified at 40 CFR Part 51.372(b)(2)) 
required affected states to submit full I/M SIP revisions that met the 
requirements of the Act to EPA by November 15, 1993.
    On March 17, 1994, the Davidson County Health Department, through 
the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Division (APCD), submitted a SIP 
revision addressing required changes to the existing I/M program in 
Davidson County. The major changes made to the Davidson County I/M 
program were the elimination of the exemption for vehicles over 12 
model years old and the addition of a three point anti-tampering 
program. The proposed amendments will include a visual check for 
catalytic converters, gasoline fuel inlet restrictors and fuel filler 
caps, and the requirement that all vehicles manufactured in model year 
1975 or newer be tested as a condition of renewing registration.
    On July 8 and July 13, 1994, the State of Tennessee, through the 
Tennessee APCD, submitted to EPA SIP revisions for a basic I/M program 
for the four counties surrounding Davidson County. The counties of 
Rutherford, Sumner, Williamson, and Wilson constitute the remainder of 
the Nashville ozone nonattainment area. An I/M program was required to 
be implemented in the urbanized area, which includes a portion of these 
counties by the I/M applicability requirements which were revised in 40 
CFR Part 51.350 on November 5, 1992. The first submittal was for the 
purpose of adding Chapter 1200-3-29, Light Duty Motor Vehicle 
Inspection and Maintenance, of the Tennessee Air Regulation to the 
Tennessee SIP. The second submission was made to add all required 
nonregulatory elements of the I/M program to the SIP. The I/M 
regulations were approved by the Tennessee Air Pollution Board on 
September 8, 1993, and became state effective on June 29, 1994. 
Mandatory vehicle testing in the four counties of Rutherford, Sumner, 
Williamson, and Wilson began on December 1, 1994. EPA summarizes the 
requirements of the federal I/M regulations as found in 40 CFR Part 
51.350-51.373 and its analysis of the state submittal below. Parties 
desiring additional details on the federal I/M regulation are referred 
to the November 5, 1992, Federal Register notice (57 FR 52950) or 40 
CFR Part 51.350-51.373.
II. EPA's Analysis of Middle Tennessee Basic I/M Program

    As discussed above, section 182(a)(2)(B) of the Act requires that 
states adopt and implement updated regulations for I/M programs in 
moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas. The following sections of 
this notice summarize the requirements of the federal I/M regulations 
and address whether the elements of the State's submittal comply with 
the federal rule.

Applicability--40 CFR 51.350

    Section 182(b)(4) of the Act and 40 CFR 51.350(a)(4) require that 
any area classified as moderate ozone nonattainment and not required to 
implement enhanced I/M under 40 CFR 51.350(a)(1) shall implement basic 
I/M in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized nonattainment area. The 
urbanized portion of the Nashville nonattainment area contains Davidson 
County, and sections of Rutherford County, Sumner County, Williamson 
County, and Wilson County. Davidson County has operated an I/M program 
since 1985 and submitted on March 17, 1994, through the Tennessee APCD, 
the required revisions to that program. An analysis of the urbanized 
area utilizing the revised provisions of this section, identified the 
need to expand the current, Davidson County only program, to include 
the remainder of the nonattainment area. The program boundaries 
described in the Tennessee submittal meet the federal I/M requirements 
under section 51.350 and are approvable.
    The federal I/M regulation requires that the state program shall 
not lapse prior to the time it is no longer needed. EPA believes that a 
program that does not lapse prior to the attainment deadline for each 
applicable area would meet this requirement. The attainment 

[[Page 38696]]
date for the Nashville ozone nonattainment area is November 15, 1996, 
and the I/M regulations contained in the Tennessee submittal does not 
establish an I/M program implementation sunset date prior to the 
attainment deadline.

Basic I/M Performance Standard--40 CFR 51.352

    The basic I/M program must be designed and implemented to meet or 
exceed a minimum performance standard, which is expressed as emission 
levels in area-wide average grams per mile (gpm) for certain 
pollutants. The performance standard shall be established using local 
characteristics, such as vehicle mix and local fuel controls, and the 
following model I/M program parameters: network type, start date, test 
frequency, model year coverage, vehicle type coverage, exhaust emission 
test type, emission standards, emission control device, evaporative 
system function checks, stringency, waiver rate, compliance rate and 
evaluation date. The emission levels achieved by the state's program 
design shall be calculated using the most current version, at the time 
of submittal, of the EPA mobile source emission factor model. At the 
time of the Tennessee submittal the most current version was MOBILE5a. 
Areas shall meet or exceed the performance standard for the pollutants 
which cause them to be subject to basic I/M requirements. In the case 
of ozone nonattainment areas, the performance standard must be met for 
both NOX and VOCs.
    The Tennessee submittal for the Davidson County I/M program 
includes the following program design parameters:

network type--centralized, test-only
start date--1985
test frequency--annual
model year coverage--1975 and later
vehicle type coverage--light gasoline powered vehicles
emission test--Idle
emission standards--1.2% CO, 220 ppm HC
emission control device--Catalytic converter, gas cap, fuel inlet 
restrictor
stringency (pre-1981 failure rate)--20%
waiver rate (pre-81/81 and newer)--0%/0%
compliance rate--98%
evaluation date(s)--January 1, 1997

    The Tennessee submittal for the four additional counties includes 
the following program design parameters:

network type--centralized, test-only
start date--1995
test frequency--annual
model year coverage--1975 and later
vehicle type coverage--light gasoline powered vehicles
emission test--Idle
emission standards--1.2% CO, 220 ppm HC
emission control device--Catalytic converter, gas cap, fuel inlet 
restrictor
stringency (pre-1981 failure rate)--20%
waiver rate (pre-81/81 and newer)--0%/0%
compliance rate--98%
evaluation date(s)--January 1, 1997

    The Tennessee program design parameters meet the federal I/M 
regulations and are approvable.
    The emission levels achieved by these programs were modeled using 
MOBILE5a. The modeling demonstration was performed correctly, used 
local characteristics and demonstrated that the program design will 
exceed the minimum basic I/M performance standard, expressed in gpm, 
for VOCs and NOX for each milestone and for the attainment 
deadline. The modeling demonstration is approvable.

Network Type and Program Evaluation--40 CFR 51.353

    Basic I/M programs can be operated in a centralized test-only 
format, in a decentralized test and repair, or in any hybrid version as 
long as the state can demonstrate that the selected program is 
effective in achieving the basic I/M performance standard. The 
Tennessee APCD will administer a centralized I/M program in the four 
counties previously identified while the Davidson County Health 
Department will continue to administer the centralized I/M program in 
that county. The enhanced program evaluation requirements of this 
section do not pertain to the Tennessee program as it is a basic I/M 
program. The network type is approvable.
Adequate Tools and Resources--40 CFR 51.354

    The federal regulation requires the state to demonstrate that 
adequate funding of the program is available. A portion of the test fee 
or separately assessed per vehicle fee shall be collected, placed in a 
dedicated fund and used to finance the program. Alternative funding 
approaches are acceptable if demonstrated that the funding can be 
maintained. Reliance on funding from the state or local General Fund is 
not acceptable unless doing otherwise would be a violation of the 
state's constitution. The SIP shall include a detailed budget plan 
which describes the source of funds for personnel, program 
administration, program enforcement, and purchase of equipment. The SIP 
shall also detail the number of personnel dedicated to the quality 
assurance program, data analysis, program administration, enforcement, 
public education and assistance and other necessary functions.
    The Tennessee program is to be funded by direct reimbursement of 
the primary contractor from vehicle inspection fees. A portion of the 
vehicle inspection fee will be returned to APCD to cover the cost of 
program oversight and will be sufficient to cover the program related 
activities. This method meets the federal regulation and is approvable. 
The submittal demonstrates that sufficient funds, equipment and 
personnel have been appropriated to meet program operation 
requirements. The Tennessee submittal meets the adequate tools and 
resources requirements set forth in the federal I/M regulations.

Test Frequency and Convenience--40 CFR 51.355

    The SIP shall describe the test year selection scheme, how the test 
frequency is integrated into the enforcement process and shall include 
the legal authority, regulations or contract provisions to implement 
and enforce the test frequency. The program shall be designed to 
provide convenient service to the motorist by ensuring short wait 
times, short driving distances and regular testing hours.
    The Tennessee and Davidson County I/M regulations provide for an 
annual test frequency for all covered vehicles. A vehicle is assigned a 
registration month. The vehicle owner must present a valid, passing, 
emission certificate in order to renew the registration of the vehicle. 
The emission certificate is valid for 90 days after the test. The 
program contractor notifies the vehicle owner when their vehicles may 
be tested. The program also defines acceptable wait times in the 
contract. Waiting times shall not exceed a daily average of 15 minutes 
for more than five consecutive days. If this time is exceeded, the 
state can require additional lanes to be opened. The submittal meets 
the requirements for testing frequency and convenience.

Vehicle Coverage--40 CFR 51.356

    The performance standard for basic I/M programs assumes coverage of 
all 1968 and later model year light duty vehicles (LDV) and light duty 
trucks (LDT) up to 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), and 
includes vehicles operating on all fuel types. Other levels of coverage 
may be approved if the necessary emission reductions are achieved. 
Vehicles registered or required to be registered within the I/M program 
area boundaries and fleets primarily operated within the I/M program 
area boundaries and 

[[Page 38697]]
belonging to the covered model years and vehicle classes comprise the 
subject vehicles. Fleets may be officially inspected outside of the 
normal I/M program test facilities, if such alternatives are approved 
by the program administration, but shall be subject to the same test 
requirements using the same quality control standards as non-fleet 
vehicles and shall be inspected in independent, test-only facilities, 
according to the requirements of 40 CFR Part 51.353(a). Vehicles which 
are operated on federal installations located within an I/M program 
area shall be tested, regardless of whether the vehicles are registered 
in the state or local I/M area.
    The federal I/M regulation requires that the SIP shall include the 
legal authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle 
coverage requirement, a detailed description of the number and types of 
vehicles to be covered by the program and a plan for how those vehicles 
are to be identified including vehicles that are routinely operated in 
the area but may not be registered in the area, and a description of 
any special exemptions including the percentage and number of vehicles 
to be impacted by the exemption.
    The Davidson County and Tennessee I/M regulations require all 1975 
and newer model year gasoline powered vehicles up to 8,500 pounds gross 
vehicle weight registered in Davidson, Rutherford, Sumner, Williamson, 
and Wilson Counties except motorcycles, and vehicles which the APCD 
Administrator has determined shall not be tested because of fuel or 
engine characteristics, to be tested annually. This includes light duty 
vehicles and light duty trucks up to 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight 
rating. The SIP submittals contain a listing of the number of subject 
vehicles in each county. Quality control requirements apply equally to 
both the centralized testing stations and the fleet self testers. 
Federally owned vehicles are subject to the testing requirements. 
Vehicles from other areas may be tested. Owners of subject vehicles 
that will be outside of the test area during the assigned test period 
may request an extension. However, they must submit the vehicle for an 
emission test upon return to the area.
    The State's plan for testing fleet vehicles is acceptable and meets 
the requirements of the federal I/M regulation.
Test Procedures and Standards--40 CFR 51.357

    Written test procedures and pass/fail standards shall be 
established and followed for each model year and vehicle type included 
in the program. Test procedures and standards are detailed in 40 CFR 
Part 51.357 and in the EPA document entitled ``Recommended I/M Short 
Test Procedures For the 1990's: Six Alternatives.''
    The Tennessee I/M submittals include a description of the test 
procedure used in the Tennessee I/M program. The program contract 
requires an idle test procedure to be utilized. This procedure is an 
EPA short test procedure. A vehicle failing the initial test is 
preconditioned at 2500 revolutions per minute for about 25-30 seconds 
and retested at idle. These test procedures conform to EPA approved 
test procedures and are approvable. The State I/M regulation 
establishes hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) pass/fail exhaust 
standards for all test procedures for each applicable model year and 
vehicle type. The exhaust standards adopted by the state conform to EPA 
established standards and are approvable.

Test Equipment--40 CFR 51.358

    Computerized test systems are required for performing any 
measurement on subject vehicles. The federal I/M regulation requires 
that the state SIP submittal include written technical specifications 
for all test equipment used in the program. The specifications shall 
describe the emission analysis process, the necessary test equipment, 
the required features, and written acceptance testing criteria and 
procedures.
    The Davidson County and Tennessee I/M contracts require exhaust 
analyzers that meet the BAR90 performance specifications. These 
specifications require the use of computerized test systems. The 
specifications also include performance features and functional 
characteristics of the computerized test systems which meet the federal 
I/M regulations and are approvable.

Quality Control--40 CFR 51.359

    Quality control measures shall insure that emission measurement 
equipment is calibrated and maintained properly, and that inspection, 
calibration records, and control charts are accurately created, 
recorded and maintained.
    Section 8 of the contract and section 8 of the Tennessee APCD 
portion of the SIP submittal discuss quality control and assurance. The 
Davidson County contract also discusses these items. These portions of 
the submittal include the quality control requirements for the emission 
measurement equipment, record keeping requirements and measures to 
maintain the security of all documents used to establish compliance 
with the inspection requirements. This portion of the Tennessee 
submittal complies with the quality control requirements set forth in 
the federal I/M regulation and is approvable.

Waivers and Compliance Via Diagnostic Inspection--40 CFR 51.360

    The federal I/M regulation allows for the issuance of a waiver, 
which is a form of compliance with the program requirements that allows 
a motorist to comply without meeting the applicable test standards.
    The Davidson County and Tennessee regulations do not provide for 
waivers. These provisions meet the federal I/M regulations requirements 
and are approvable.

Motorist Compliance Enforcement--40 CFR 51.361

    The federal regulation requires that compliance shall be ensured 
through the denial of motor vehicle registration in I/M programs. 
However, a basic area may use an alternative enforcement mechanism if 
it demonstrates that the alternative will be as effective as 
registration denial. The SIP shall provide information concerning the 
enforcement process, legal authority to implement and enforce the 
program, a commitment to a compliance rate to be used for modeling 
purposes and to be maintained in practice.
    The Davidson County and Tennessee I/M regulations provide the legal 
authority to implement a registration denial enforcement mechanism. The 
County Clerk's office can not issue a registration renewal without a 
passing emission test. Section 9 of the Tennessee APCD SIP submittal 
and Appendix 1 of the Davidson County SIP submittal discuss penalties 
to vehicle owners not complying with the requirement. The Davidson 
County Health Department and APCD will conduct reviews in their 
respective program areas of the Clerk's office registration to insure 
the regulation is enforced. The SIP contains a commitment to maintain 
the modeled compliance rate in practice. This portion of the Tennessee 
submittal meets the federal requirements and is approvable. 

[[Page 38698]]


Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight--40 CFR 51.362

    The federal I/M regulation requires that the enforcement program 
shall be audited regularly and shall follow effective program 
management practices, including adjustments to improve operation when 
necessary. The SIP shall include quality control and quality assurance 
procedures to be used to insure the effective overall performance of 
the enforcement system. An information management system shall be 
established which will characterize, evaluate and enforce the program.
    The Davidson County and Tennessee I/M regulations provide the legal 
authority to implement a registration denial enforcement system. The 
Davidson County Health Department and Tennessee APCD will audit the 
County Clerk's Office to insure the regulation is enforced. This 
portion of the Tennessee submittal meets the federal requirements and 
is approvable.

Quality Assurance--40 CFR 51.363

    An ongoing quality assurance program shall be implemented to 
discover, correct and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in the program. 
The program shall include covert and overt performance audits of the 
inspectors, audits of station and inspector records, equipment audits, 
and formal training of all state I/M enforcement officials and 
auditors. A description of the quality assurance program which includes 
written procedure manuals on the above discussed items must be 
submitted as part of the SIP.
    The Tennessee submittal includes a quality assurance program which 
describes details and procedures for implementing inspector, records, 
and equipment audits. Performance audits of inspectors and testing 
equipment will be performed by Davidson County Health Department and 
APCD personnel in their respective jurisdictions. Section 8 of the 
Tennessee APCD contract addresses quality assurance requirements. 
Section 8 of the Tennessee APCD SIP submittal addresses quality 
assurance procedures as well. Appendices 1 and 7 of the Davidson County 
submittal discuss these items as well. In both cases, overt and covert 
audits and remote observation of inspection personnel performing 
testing are included. Overt audits may be performed by Davidson County 
Health Department and APCD personnel at any time, unannounced, during 
station operation. Covert audits are required to use a range of 
vehicles which have been set to fail the inspection test. The quality 
assurance requirements and procedures in the Tennessee I/M program meet 
the federal I/M regulation requirements and are approvable.

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

    Enforcement against licensed stations or contractors, and 
inspectors shall include swift, sure, effective, and consistent 
penalties for violation of program requirements. The federal I/M 
regulation requires the establishment of minimum penalties for 
violations of program rules and procedures which can be imposed against 
stations, contractors and inspectors. The legal authority for 
establishing and imposing penalties, civil fines, license suspensions 
and revocations must be included in the SIP. State quality assurance 
officials shall have the authority to temporarily suspend station and/
or inspector licenses immediately upon finding a violation that 
directly affects emission reduction benefits. An official opinion 
explaining any state constitutional impediments to immediate suspension 
authority must be included in the submittal. The SIP shall describe the 
administrative and judicial procedures and responsibilities relevant to 
the enforcement process, including which agencies, courts and 
jurisdictions are involved, who will prosecute and adjudicate cases and 
the resources and sources of those resources which will support this 
function.
    The Tennessee submittal includes the legal authority to establish 
and impose penalties against stations, contractors and inspectors. 
Section 9 of the Tennessee APCD SIP submittal states that civil 
penalties of up to $25,000 per day can be imposed for violations. 
Appendix 4 of the Davidson County submittal discusses this issue in 
that county's program. In both programs, the program auditors also have 
the ability to immediately shut down any testing lane they find not to 
be in compliance. The testing lane will remain out of operation until 
the necessary corrective action has been taken and a followup audit 
confirms the lane is operating properly. Per contract agreements with 
the system contractor and the State of Tennessee, the contractor is 
required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and county 
regulations. The contractor has to post a performance bond to help 
insure program operations comply with all regulations. The Tennessee I/
M enforcement program can suspend and/or revoke fleet inspection 
licenses for violations. Inspectors may be decertified. The Tennessee 
I/M program meets the requirements of this section and is approvable.

Data Collection--40 CFR 51.365

    Accurate data collection is essential to the management, evaluation 
and enforcement of an I/M program. The federal I/M regulation requires 
data to be gathered on each individual test conducted and on the 
results of the quality control checks of test equipment required under 
40 CFR Part 51.359.
    Section 10 of the Tennessee SIP submittal specifies the information 
contained on the inspection form. Appendix 4, the contract, of the 
Davidson County submittal, contains the specifications for equipment 
and data. The contract, in section 12 of the Tennessee APCD submittal, 
requires the contractor to work with Davidson County and the State in 
the development of the test forms and the associated data fields. Data 
requirements are also specified in the covert and overt audit section 
of the Procedures and Policies section of the SIP. The type of test 
data collected meets the federal I/M regulation requirements and is 
approvable. The submittal also commits to gather and report the results 
of the quality control checks required under 40 CFR Part 51.359 and is 
approvable.

Data Analysis and Reporting--40 CFR 51.366

    Data analysis and reporting are required to allow for monitoring 
and evaluation of the program by the state and EPA. The federal I/M 
regulation requires annual reports to be submitted which provide 
information and statistics and summarize activities performed for each 
of the following programs: testing, quality assurance, quality control 
and enforcement. These reports are to be submitted by July and shall 
provide statistics for the period of January to December of the 
previous year. A biennial report shall be submitted to EPA which 
addresses changes in program design, regulations, legal authority, 
program procedures and any weaknesses in the program found during the 
two year period and how these problems will be or were corrected.
    The Tennessee I/M program SIP provides for the analysis and 
reporting of data for the testing program, quality assurance program, 
quality control program and the enforcement program. The type of data 
to be analyzed and reported meets the federal I/M regulation 
requirements and is approvable. Tennessee commits to submit annual 
reports on these programs to EPA by July of the 

[[Page 38699]]
subsequent year. These annual reports will be submitted July 1, 1996, 
and each July 1 thereafter, covering the previous test year. Biennial 
reports will be submitted to discuss any changes in program design and 
procedures, and the appropriate corrective action taken.

Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification--40 CFR 51.376

    The federal I/M regulation requires all inspectors to be formally 
trained and licensed or certified to perform inspections.
    Both the Tennessee regulations and the contract require all 
inspectors to receive formal training, be licensed by the Davidson 
County Health Department or the APCD and renew the certification every 
year. In order to be licensed, the inspector must attend a training 
course and pass an examination. Currently, policies are being drafted 
by the APCD to officially require a score of at least 80% to pass. The 
SIP meets the federal I/M regulation requirements for inspector 
training and certification and is approvable.

Public Information and Consumer Protection--40 CFR 51.368

    The federal I/M regulation requires the SIP to include public 
information and consumer protection programs.
    The contracts provided with both SIP submittals include a public 
information program which educates the public on I/M, State and federal 
regulations, air quality and the role of motor vehicles in the air 
pollution problem and other items as described in the federal rule. The 
consumer protection program includes provisions for a challenge 
mechanism, and providing assistance to motorists in obtaining warranty 
covered repairs. Section 11 of the Tennessee APCD SIP submittal and 
Appendices 10, 11, and 13 of the Davidson County submittal discusses 
the various components of the public information and consumer 
protection program that will be implemented as part of the I/M program. 
The public information and consumer protection programs contained in 
the SIP submittal meet the federal regulations and are approvable.

Improving Repair Effectiveness--40 CFR 51.369

    Effective repairs are the key to achieving program goals. The 
federal regulation requires states to take steps to ensure that the 
capability exists in the repair industry to repair vehicles. The SIP 
must include a description of the technical assistance program to be 
implemented, and a description of the repair technician training 
resources available in the community.
    Section 10 of the Tennessee APCD contract contains a provision 
identifying the State as being responsible for interfacing with the 
repair industry with respect to technical assistance and technician 
training. The repair effectiveness program described in the SIP meets 
the federal regulation and is approvable.

Compliance With Recall Notices--40 CFR 51.370

    The federal regulation requires the states to establish methods to 
ensure that vehicles that are subject to enhanced I/M and are included 
in an emission related recall receive the required repairs prior to 
completing the emission test or renewing the vehicle registration.
    The Nashville ozone nonattainment area is classified as moderate 
and therefore not subject to this provision.

On-road Testing--40 CFR 51.371

    On-road testing is required in enhanced I/M areas.
    The Nashville ozone nonattainment area is classified as moderate 
and therefore not subject to this provision.

State Implementation Plan Submissions/Implementation Deadlines--40 CFR 
51.372-373

    The federal regulation requires centralized basic I/M programs to 
be fully implemented by July 1, 1994. The Davidson County portion of 
the Nashville nonattainment area has been in operation since 1985. This 
constitutes the largest portion of the vehicles in the area. Testing 
began on December 1, 1994 in the four surrounding counties. Although 
this testing began several months late, the SIP revision is now 
approvable as the program has been implemented in the four additional 
counties as required.
    On April 1, 1994, the State of Tennessee was notified by EPA of a 
failure to submit the I/M plan as required. This action started the 
sanctions clock and the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) clocks. 
Letters were sent on July 18 and August 2, 1994, notifying the 
Tennessee APCD that the submitted middle Tennessee I/M SIP revisions 
had been determined to be complete. This action stopped the sanctions 
clock. The FIP clock will be stopped by the final approval of this SIP 
provision.
    EPA's review of the material indicates that the State has adopted a 
basic I/M program in accordance with the requirements of the Act. EPA 
is approving the Tennessee SIP revision for revisions to the Davidson 
County I/M program, as submitted on March 17, 1994, and for a basic I/M 
program in Rutherford, Sumner, Williamson, and Wilson counties which 
was submitted on July 8 and July 13, 1994.

Final Action

    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
the agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates 
no adverse public comments. However, in a separate document in this 
Federal Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP 
revision should adverse or critical comment be filed. This action will 
be effective September 26, 1995 unless, by August 28, 1995, adverse or 
critical comments are received.
    If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before 
the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will 
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be 
discussed in a subsequent final rule based on the separate proposed 
rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period for this 
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do 
so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is 
advised that this action will be effective September 26, 1995.
    EPA is approving this revision to the Tennessee SIP for a basic I/M 
program. The Agency has reviewed this request for revision of the 
Federally-approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 
Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The Agency has determined that 
this action conforms with those requirements.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607 (b)(1), 
petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the 
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 
26, 1995. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of 
this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for purposes 
of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition 
for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the 
effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged 
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 
307(b)(2) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607 (b)(2).)
    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the 
requirements of section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
    Nothing in this action shall be construed as permitting or allowing 
or establishing a precedent for any future request for a revision to 
any state 

[[Page 38700]]
implementation plan. Each request for revision to the state 
implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific 
technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to 
relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA do not 
create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements that the 
State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval 
does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does not have a 
significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the 
nature of the Federal-state relationship under the CAA, preparation of 
a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into 
the economic reasonableness of state action. The CAA forbids EPA to 
base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. 
U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. section 
7410(a)(2).
    Under Sections 202, 203 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, 
EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed or 
final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to State, 
local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
    Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan 
revision, the State and any local or tribal governments have elected to 
adopt the program provided for under Section 182 of the Clean Air Act. 
These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments to perform 
certain actions and also require the private sector to perform certain 
duties. To the extent that the rules being approved by this action will 
impose any mandate upon the State, local, or tribal governments either 
as the owner or operator of a source or as a regulator, or would impose 
any mandate upon the private sector, EPA's action will impose no new 
requirements; such sources are already subject to these regulations 
under State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action. 
EPA has also determined that this final action does not include a 
mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to 
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private 
sector.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 28, 1995.
Patrick M. Tobin,
Acting Regional Administrator.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart RR--Tennessee

    2. Section 52.2220, is amended by adding paragraph (c)(126) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.2220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (126) Modifications to the existing basic I/M program in Davidson 
County to implement an anti-tampering check, and to require testing of 
vehicles from model year 1975 and newer, submitted on March 17, 1994. 
Addition of a basic I/M program in the remainder of the middle 
Tennessee ozone nonattainment area, submitted on July 8, 1994.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (a) Metropolitan Health Department Pollution Control Division 
Regulation 8, approved by the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board on 
March 9, 1994.
    (b) Regulation 1200-3-29, effective on September 8, 1993.
    (ii) Other material. None.
    3. Section 52.2235 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.2235  Control Strategy for Ozone.

* * * * *
    (b) Nonregulatory provisions for the implementation of a basic I/M 
program in Rutherford, Sumner, Williamson, and Wilson Counties, 
submitted on July 13, 1994, were approved by EPA on September 26, 1995.

[FR Doc. 95-18511 Filed 7-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P