[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 23, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38086-38091]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18199]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WA43-7116a; FRL-5514-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Washington; Revision to the State Implementation Plan Vehicle 
Inspection and Maintenance Programs

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is approving the Inspection and 
Maintenance (I/M) State Implementation Plan (SIP), for Washington 
State. On August 21, 1995, Washington submitted SIP revision requests 
to the EPA to satisfy the requirements of sections 182(b)(4) and 
182(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act, as amended and Federal I/M rule 40 CFR 
part 51, subpart S. These SIP revisions will require vehicle owners to 
comply with the Washington I/M program in the two Washington ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as ``marginal'' and in the three carbon 
monoxide nonattainment areas classified as ``moderate''. This revision 
applies to the Washington counties of Clark, King, Pierce, Snohomish, 
and Spokane.

DATES: This action is effective on September 23, 1996, unless adverse 
or critical comments are received by August 22, 1996. If the effective 
date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal 
Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to Montel Livingston SIP 
Manager, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), EPA, 1200 6th Avenue, 
Seattle, WA 98101. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined 
during normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 
10, Office of Air Quality, 1200 Sixth Avenue (OAQ-107), Seattle, 
Washington 98101, and the Washington State Department of Ecology, P.O. 
Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Cooper, Office of Air 
Quality, (OAQ-107), 1200 6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-6917.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Clean Air Act Requirements

    The Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or Act), requires States 
to make changes to improve existing I/M programs or implement new ones. 
Section 182(a)(2)(B) required any ozone nonattainment area which has 
been classified as ``marginal'' (pursuant to section 181(a) of the Act) 
or worse with an existing I/M program that was part of a SIP, or any 
area that was required by the 1977 Amendments to the Act to have an I/M 
program, to immediately submit a SIP revision to bring the program up 
to the level required in past EPA guidance or to what had been 
committed to previously in the SIP, whichever was more stringent. All 
carbon monoxide nonattainment areas were also subject to this 
requirement to improve existing or previously required programs to this 
level. In addition, any ozone nonattainment area classified as moderate 
or worse must implement a basic or an enhanced I/M program depending 
upon its classification, regardless of previous requirements.
    Congress directed the EPA in section 182(a)(2)(B) to publish 
updated guidance for State I/M programs, taking into consideration 
findings of the Administrator's audits and investigations of these 
programs. The States were to incorporate this guidance into the SIP for 
all areas required by the Act to have an I/M program. Ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as ``serious'' or worse with populations 
of 200,000 or more, and CO nonattainment areas with design values above 
12.7 ppm and populations of 200,000 or more, and metropolitan 
statistical areas with populations of 100,000 or more in the northeast 
ozone transport region, were required to meet EPA guidance for enhanced 
I/M programs.
    The EPA has designated two areas as ozone nonattainment in the 
State of Washington. The Puget Sound ozone nonattainment area is 
classified as marginal and contains King, Pierce, and Snohomish 
counties. The Vancouver Air Quality Maintenance Area is classified as 
marginal and contains Clark county. Additionally, three areas in 
Washington state are designated as CO nonattainment areas. Both the 
Spokane Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment area (Spokane County) and the 
Puget Sound Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment area (King, Pierce, and 
portions of Snohomish Counties) have design values greater than 12.7 
ppm and are designated as ``moderate plus''. The Vancouver Air Quality 
Maintenance Area is a ``moderate'' carbon monoxide nonattainment area, 
with a design value below 12.7 ppm. The central Puget Sound has an 
urbanized area population of 1,793,612, and Spokane has an urbanized 
area population of 266,709. Based on these nonattainment designations 
and populations, a basic I/M program is required in the Vancouver and 
Puget Sound ozone nonattainment area, while enhanced I/M programs are 
required in the Puget Sound, and Spokane carbon monoxide nonattainment 
areas.
    By this action, the EPA is approving the submittal of the 
Washington I/M SIP. The EPA has reviewed the State submittal against 
the statutory requirements and for consistency with the EPA 
regulations. A summary of the EPA's analysis is provided below. In 
addition, a history and a summary to support approval of the State 
submittal is contained in a TSD, dated May 10, 1996, which is available 
from the Region 10 Office (address provided above).

II. I/M Regulation General SIP Submittal Requirements

    The original I/M regulation was codified at 40 CFR part 51, Subpart 
S, and required States to submit an I/M SIP revision which includes all 
necessary legal authority and the items specified in 40 CFR 51.372 
(a)(1) through (a)(8) by November 15, 1993. On September 18, 1995, the 
EPA published a final regulation establishing the ``low enhanced'' I/M 
requirements, pursuant to section 182 and 187 of the Act (40 CFR part 
51). These low enhanced I/M requirements superseded the former enhanced 
I/M requirements. The State has met the low enhanced I/M requirements 
established by the September 18, 1995 rulemaking.

[[Page 38087]]

III. State Submittal.

    On August 21, 1995, the State of Washington submitted the I/M SIP 
for its three nonattainment areas. Public hearings for the submittal 
were held in Vancouver, Bellevue, and Spokane on June 6, 7, and 8, 
1995, respectively.
    The submittals provide for the continued implementation of I/M 
programs in the Puget Sound, Spokane, and Vancouver areas. Inspection 
and Maintenance programs have been running in the Puget Sound area 
since 1982, in Spokane since 1985, and in Vancouver since 1993. 
Washington's centralized, test only, biennial program meets the 
requirements of EPA's low enhanced performance standard and other 
requirements contained in the Federal I/M rule in the applicable 
nonattainment counties. Testing will be overseen by the Washington 
State Department of Ecology and its I/M contractor, Systems Control. 
Other aspects of the Washington I/M program include: testing of 1968 
and later light duty vehicles and trucks and heavy duty trucks, a test 
fee to ensure the State has adequate resources to implement the 
program, enforcement by registration denial, a repair effectiveness 
program, contractual requirements for testing convenience, quality 
assurance, data collection, reporting, test equipment and test 
procedure specifications, public information and consumer protection, 
and inspector training and certification. In addition, the low enhanced 
I/M programs will include: a two-speed (2500 and idle) test or a loaded 
idle test, and a program to evaluate on-road testing. An analysis of 
how the Washington I/M program meets the EPA's I/M regulation is 
provided below.

A. Applicability

    The SIP needs to describe the applicable areas in detail and, 
consistent with 40 CFR 51.372, needs to include the legal authority or 
rules necessary to establish program boundaries.
    The Washington I/M regulations specify that I/M programs be 
implemented in the counties as described above. Although Vancouver 
requires only the basic I/M program for both its ozone and carbon 
monoxide nonattainment areas, the state is implementing one ``low 
enhanced'' program in all areas that require I/M programs. In the SIP, 
however, the performance standard for Vancouver is compared to EPA's 
basic performance standard.

B. Enhanced and Basic I/M Performance Standard

    The I/M programs provided for in the SIP are required to meet a 
performance standard, either basic or low enhanced as applicable, for 
the pollutants that caused the affected area to come under I/M 
requirements. The performance standard sets an emission reduction 
target that must be met by a program in order for the SIP to be 
approvable. The SIP must also provide that the program will meet the 
performance standard in actual operation, with provisions for 
appropriate adjustments if the standard is not met.
    The State has submitted a modeling demonstration using the EPA 
computer model MOBILE5ah showing that the low enhanced performance 
standard is met for Puget Sound and Spokane. The State has also 
submitted modeling for the basic I/M area of Vancouver to demonstrate 
that the program meets EPA's basic performance standard.

C. Network Type and Program Evaluation

    The SIP needs to include a description of the network to be 
employed, and the required legal authority. 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, and the legal authority enabling the 
evaluation program.
    The Washington program has chosen to implement a test only I/M 
network program design which will utilize operating contractors to 
implement the inspection portion of the program. The Washington State 
Department of Ecology describes and commits, in its SIP narrative, to 
institute a continuous ongoing evaluation program consistent with the 
low enhanced I/M rule. The results of the evaluation program will be 
reported to EPA on a biennial basis. Legal authority which is contained 
in the Revised Code of Washington section 70.120.170 allows the WDOE to 
authorize, through contracts, the establishment and operation of 
inspection stations to conduct vehicle inspections. Washington commits 
to an ongoing evaluation to quantify the emission reduction benefits of 
the program.

D. Adequate Tools and Resources

    The SIP needs to include a description of the resources that will 
be used for program operation, and discuss how the performance standard 
will be met which includes: (1) A detailed budget plan which describes 
the source of funds for personnel, program administration, program 
enforcement, purchase of necessary equipment (such as vehicles for 
undercover audits), and any other requirements discussed throughout, 
for the period prior to the next biennial self-evaluation required in 
the Federal I/M rule, (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.
    The Emission Check program is funded by a biennial appropriation 
from the state general fund. The fee will be set at the minimum whole 
dollar amount required to (i) compensate the contractor or inspection 
facility owner, and (ii) offset the general fund appropriation to the 
department to cover the administrative costs of the motor vehicle 
emission inspection program (RCW 70.120.170(4)(a)). Currently, the 
inspection fee is $12 and the administrative cost per vehicle is $3.90 
for the 1993-1995 biennium.
    In May, 1996, Ecology submitted a supplement to the SIP providing 
more detail on budget and staffing levels. The I/M program has a 
General Fund budget of $3,861,939 for the 1995-97 biennium, and that 
budget will likely be carried into the 1997-99 biennium. Ecology 
dedicates a staffing level of 31 full-time equivalent employees (FTEs) 
to support the program.

E. Test Frequency and Convenience

    The SIP needs to include the test schedule in detail including the 
test year selection scheme if testing is other than annual. Also, the 
SIP needs to 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 low enhanced I/M programs the SIP needs to demonstrate that the 
network of stations providing test services is sufficient to insure 
short waiting times to get a test and short driving distances.
    The Washington SIP requires biennial inspections for all privately 
owned vehicles within the subject area, and annual tests for state and 
local government vehicles. The inspections will be conducted so that 
odd model year vehicles must test in the odd calendar year and even 
model year vehicles must test in the even calendar year. The authority 
for the enforcement of the testing frequency is contained in the 
Washington I/M rule. Short waiting

[[Page 38088]]

times are addressed the contracts between the State and its managing 
contractors. In terms of driving distances, 95% of the subject public 
are within ten minutes of most test facilities.

F. Vehicle Coverage

    The SIP needs to include 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. 
Also, the SIP needs to include a description of any special exemptions 
which will be granted by the program, and an estimate of the percentage 
and number of subject vehicles which will be impacted. Such exemptions 
need to be accounted for in the emission reduction analysis. In 
addition, the SIP needs to include the legal authority or rule 
necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle coverage requirement.
    The Washington program includes coverage of all 1968 and newer 
model year gasoline powered light-duty vehicles and light-duty and 
heavy-duty trucks up to 8,500 GVWR, registered or required to be 
registered within the nonattainment areas and fleets primarily operated 
within an I/M program area. The starting model year of a vehicle 
testing program may be changed each year to include the most recent 24 
model years. I/M testing exemptions are granted for change of 
ownership, alternative fuel vehicles, electric vehicles, and 
motorcycles.
    All subject fleets must complete the emission inspection process, 
without a waiver option being available. Fleets may be inspected in 
facilities other than Systems Control facilities provided that Ecology 
approves the alternative tests. Vehicles operated on federal 
installations are required to be tested regardless of whether the 
vehicles are registered in the state or local I/M area. Legal authority 
for the vehicle coverage is contained in the Washington I/M rule.

G. Test Procedures and Standards

    The SIP needs to include a description of each test procedure used. 
The SIP also needs to include the rule, ordinance or law describing and 
establishing the test procedures.
    The Washington I/M SIP establishes test vehicle procedures and 
standards that at a minimum are consistent with EPA regulations. Test 
procedures and standards are specified in WAC 173-422-070. In 
Washington, all 1968 and newer gasoline or diesel-fueled vehicles are 
tested. The State will test vehicles on a steady-state dynamometer or 
by a two-speed idle and 2500 RPM unloaded test. Diesel vehicles are 
tested for exhaust opacity only. Specified vehicles are tested using a 
transient emissions test.

H. Test Equipment

    The SIP needs to include written technical specifications for all 
test equipment used in the program and shall address each of the 
requirements in 40 CFR 51.358 of the Federal I/M rule. The 
specifications need to describe the emission analysis process, the 
necessary test equipment, the required features, and written acceptance 
testing criteria and procedures.
    The Washington I/M SIP describes the performance features of 
computerized test systems, gasoline exhaust gas analyzer 
specifications, and exhaust gas analyzer specifications. For transient 
emissions tests, EPA's ``High Tech I/M Test Procedures, Emission 
Standards, Quality Control Requirements and Equipment Specifications'' 
Final Technical Guidance is followed.

I. Quality Control

    The SIP needs to include a description of quality control and 
recordkeeping procedures. The SIP needs to include the procedures 
manual, rule, and ordinance or law describing and establishing the 
procedures of quality control.
    The Washington I/M SIP includes a Quality Control Plan that 
specifies quality control and periodic maintenance procedures. Quality 
control procedures are specified in WAC 173-422-120 and authorized by 
RCW 70.120. The Department of Ecology's Emission Check staff performs 
inspections to ensure that operation of the emission testing 
facilities, calibration and maintenance of exhaust analyzers and test 
procedures, training of management and inspection personnel meet the 
standards as outlined in WAC 173-422.

J. Waivers and Compliance via Diagnostic Inspection

    The SIP needs to include a maximum waiver rate expressed as a 
percentage of initially failed vehicles. This waiver rate needs to be 
used for estimating emission reduction benefits in the modeling 
analysis. Also, the State needs to take corrective action if the waiver 
rate exceeds that estimated in the SIP or revise the SIP and the 
emission reductions claimed accordingly. In addition, the SIP needs to 
describe the waiver criteria and procedures, including cost limits, 
quality assurance methods and measures, and administration. Lastly, the 
SIP shall include the necessary legal authority, ordinance, 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. To receive a waiver 
within basic and enhanced areas within Washington, vehicle owners are 
required to spend at least $100 or more on 1968 to 1980 vehicles, and 
at least $150 or more on 1981 and newer vehicles in an attempt to 
correct applicable emission failure(s). The SIP pledges that by 1998, 
these limits will be adjusted to $450 in the enhanced I/M areas, and in 
basic areas, to $200. Washington's waiver rates (as percentages of 
initially failed vehicles) are, for Central Puget Sound and Vancouver, 
15% for 1980 and older vehicles, and 14% for 1981 and newer vehicles; 
and for Spokane, 13% for 1980 and older vehicles, and 12% for 1981 and 
newer vehicles. These waiver rates are used in the modeling 
demonstration. Ecology states in the SIP that if the waiver rates are 
higher than estimated, the State will take corrective action to address 
the deficiency so that compliance with the performance standard is 
assured. In Washington, a waiver, or ``Certificate of Acceptance'', 
(COA) is issued by the contractor through authority granted by the 
Department of Ecology. These waivers are consistent with the low-
enhanced I/M rule.

K. Motorist Compliance Enforcement

    The SIP needs to provide information concerning the enforcement 
process, including: (1) A description of the existing compliance 
mechanism if it is to be used in the future 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, e.g. those operated in (but not necessarily registered in) 
the program area. Also, the SIP needs to include a determination of the 
current compliance rate based on a study of the system that includes an 
estimate of compliance losses due to loopholes, counterfeiting, and 
unregistered vehicles. In addition, the SIP needs to include the legal 
authority to implement and enforce the

[[Page 38089]]

program. Lastly, the SIP needs to include a commitment to an 
enforcement level to be used for modeling purposes and to be 
maintained, at a minimum, in practice.
    The State has chosen to use registration denial as its primary 
enforcement mechanism in both basic and enhanced I/M areas. Motorists 
will be denied vehicle registration unless the vehicle has complied 
with the I/M program requirements. The motorist licensing compliance 
enforcement program will be implemented by the Washington State 
Department of Licensing (DOL). The DOL will deny registration unless 
the vehicle owner demonstrates proof of having passed an emissions 
test, or has a waiver. Persons who reside in emissions-contributing 
areas and who register their vehicle outside of that area are subject 
to a $250 fine. A $250 fine will also be given to citizens who obtain a 
vehicle license without having an emissions test. The legal authority 
to implement and enforce the program is in Chapter 173-422 WAC.

L. Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight

    The SIP needs to include a description of enforcement program 
oversight and information management activities.
    The Washington I/M SIP provides for monthly reviews of exemptions 
and waivers conducted by I/M field staff. Additionally, the SIP 
provides for the implementation of procedures to ensure effective 
overall performance of the enforcement system. Examples include 
verification of exempt vehicle status by inspecting and confirming such 
vehicles by the program or its delegate, and maintenance of an audit 
trail to allow for assessment of enforcement effectiveness. Ecology 
will establish an information base used to evaluate and enforce the 
program. As part of this effort, the testing database will be reviewed 
for accuracy and compared to the registration database to determine 
program effectiveness, and establish compliance rates. Noncomplying 
motorists will have to pay a $250 fine.

M. Quality Assurance

    The SIP needs to include a description of the quality assurance 
program, and written procedures manuals covering both overt and covert 
performance audits, record audits, and equipment audits. This 
requirement does not include materials or discussion of details of 
enforcement strategies that would ultimately hamper the enforcement 
process.
    The Washington I/M SIP includes a description of its quality 
assurance program. The goal of the quality assurance program is to 
discover, correct, and prevent fraud, waste and abuse within the 
Emission Check program, including the accuracy of equipment and the 
adequacy of procedures. The administration of quality assurance is 
performed by the Emission Check staff and the Department of Ecology's 
DOL liaison. The SIP text describes the performance audits, overt 
performance audits, covert performance audits, record audits, and 
equipment audits to occur under the quality assurance plan.

N. Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and Inspectors

    The SIP needs to include the penalty schedule and the legal 
authority for establishing and imposing penalties, civil fines, license 
suspension, and revocations. In the case of state constitutional 
impediments to immediate suspension authority, the state Attorney 
General shall furnish an official opinion for the SIP explaining the 
constitutional impediment as well as relevant case law. Also, the SIP 
needs to 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 other aspects of the enforcement of the 
program requirements, the resources to be allocated to this function, 
and the source of those funds.
    The Washington I/M SIP includes specific penalties in its 
enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors. The SIP 
includes the State's enforcement procedures which can be pursued 
through either contractual (Systems Control Contract #99-92) or 
regulatory action (WAC 173-422). Specific penalties are outlined 
against the contractor, fleet testers, and emission specialists. 
Emission Check personnel have authority under the Systems Control 
contract to stop inspections if invalid inspections are a possibility. 
Inspectors may be suspended if the Emission Check Program staff 
determines that they are not qualified. Legal authority is contained in 
WAC 173-422-120.

O. Data Analysis and Reporting

    The SIP needs to describe the types of data to be collected.
    The Washington I/M SIP commits the Department of Ecology to provide 
to EPA annual reports containing basic statistics on the program for 
the previous year. The state commits to providing all area specific 
applicable data as required, including computerized test data, quality 
assurance data, quality control, and enforcement data. Ecology's 
Information Data Services maintains the data and evaluates it for 
inclusion in yearly and biennial reports. The biennial reports will 
discuss any changes to the program design or implementation, program 
weaknesses, and cures for those weaknesses.

P. Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification

    The SIP needs to include a description of the training program, the 
written and hands-on tests, and the licensing or certification process.
    The Department of Ecology has a formal training and certification 
program for fleet and centralized contractor testing facilities. 
Washington's program includes training, certification, test procedures, 
and public relations. Certification occurs after an inspector has 
passed an approved Department of Ecology written test with a score of 
80% or better, and after a hands-on test. The legal authority for 
inspectors to attend and pass a course of study and become certified is 
established by RCW 70.120.020.

Q. Improving Repair Effectiveness

    The SIP needs to include a description of the technical assistance 
program to be implemented to improve repair effectiveness, 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 technician training resources 
available in the community.
    Washington has several facets to its repair effectiveness program. 
Technician training is an ongoing element of the Emission Check 
Program, and technical colleges, independent training facilities, etc, 
are working to assess and improve the current program. Emission system 
diagnosis and repair curriculum will be consistent with 40 CFR 51.369 
(c). Also, performance monitoring and evaluation of the repair 
facilities will help to identify the most effective repair shops and 
the emission reductions obtained through these facilities. A list of 
the most effective repair shops will be provided to the public through 
Systems Control. Also, repair shops are visited during audits, and 
technicians are notified of information regarding effective repairs via 
a Department of Ecology newsletter. Technician assistance is available 
through a 1-800 number; the same

[[Page 38090]]

service is available to the public at another 1-800 number.

R. Compliance With Recall Notices

    The SIP needs to describe 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.
    The Washington I/M SIP states that vehicles that were not repaired 
as required by an emission recall for which owner notification was 
attempted after January 1, 1995 will not be inspected until compliance 
with that recall is established. Information on recall notification is 
intended to remind the vehicle owner or operator that an emission test 
is required and that manufacturers recalls must be completed before 
tabs will be renewed. Thereby, notification of recall can be directly 
referenced during the inspection.

S. On-Road Testing

    The SIP needs to 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 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.
    The Washington SIP includes a description of its on-road testing 
program. The Department of Ecology will conduct an evaluation of on-
road testing options beginning in 1996. This testing should involve the 
required .5 percent of the subject fleet. The State did not include 
additional modeling credit for this program in their modeling 
demonstration needed to meet EPA's performance standard.

T. Concluding Statement

    The criteria used to review the submitted SIP revision are based on 
the requirements stated in Section 182 of the CAA and the most recent 
FederalI/M regulations (September 18, 1995). EPA has reviewed the 
Washington I/M SIP revision. The Washington regulations and 
accompanying materials contained in the SIP represent an acceptable 
approach to the I/M requirements and meet the criteria required for 
approvability.

IV. Today's Action

    The EPA is approving the Washington I/M SIP as meeting the 
requirements of the CAA and the Federal I/M rule. All required SIP 
items have been adequately addressed as discussed in this Federal 
Register action.

V. Administrative Review

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the 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. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA 
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan 
for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, 
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this 
action.
    The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-
approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air 
Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined 
that this action conforms with those requirements.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.
    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal 
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision 
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be 
effective September 23, 1996 unless, by August 22, 1996 adverse or 
critical comments are received.
    If the 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 be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a 
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on 
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 23, 1996.
    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 September 23, 1996. Filing a 
petition for

[[Page 38091]]

reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does 
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be 
filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. 
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its 
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).

Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under section 801(a)(1)(A) of the Administrative Procedure Act 
(APA) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives and the Comptroller General of the General Accounting 
Office prior to publication of this rule in today's Federal Register. 
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by section 804(2) of the 
APA as amended.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation 
by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for 
the State of Washington was approved by the Director of the Office 
of Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

    Dated: May 24, 1996.
Jane S. Moore,
Acting Regional Administrator.

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

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart WW--Washington

    2. Section 52.2470 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(61) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.2470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (61) SIP revisions received from WDOE on August 21, 1995, requiring 
vehicle owners to comply with its I/M program in the two Washington 
ozone nonattainment areas classified as ``marginal'' and in the three 
carbon monoxide nonattainment areas classified as ``moderate''. This 
revision applies to the Washington counties of Clark, King, Pierce, 
Snohomish, and Spokane.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) July 26, 1995 letter from Director of WDOE to the Regional 
Administrator of EPA submitting revisions to WDOE's SIP consisting of 
the July 1995 Washington State Implementation Plan for the Motor 
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program (including Appendices A 
through F), adopted August 1, 1995, and a supplement letter and ``Tools 
and Resources'' table dated May 10, 1996.

[FR Doc. 96-18199 Filed 7-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P