[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 193 (Thursday, October 3, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51651-51659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-25397]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[TX55-1-6879; FRL-5611-6]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality State Implementation 
Plans (SIP); Texas: Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) 
Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed interim rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing a conditional interim approval of an I/M 
program proposed by the State, based upon the State's good faith 
estimate of emission reductions indicating that the State's network 
design credits are appropriate and the revision is otherwise in 
compliance with the Clean Air Act (the Act). This action is being taken 
under section 348 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 
1995 (NHSDA) and section 110 of the Act. The EPA is proposing a 
conditional approval because the State's SIP revision is lacking 
legislative authority needed to implement certain elements of the 
program.
    If the State corrects these deficiencies within 1 year of the final 
interim ruling, then this interim approval shall expire on the earlier 
of 18-months from final interim approval, or on the date of EPA action 
taking final full approval of this program. If the conditions are not 
met within 1 year, EPA proposes in the alternative to disapprove the 
SIP revision. The EPA will notify the State by letter that the 
conditions have not been met and that the conditional approval has 
converted to a disapproval. Furthermore, EPA proposes that the State's 
program must start no later than November 15, 1997 in all I/M program 
areas. The EPA also proposes that if the State fails to start its 
program as defined in this document, the approval granted under the 
provisions of the NHSDA will convert to a disapproval. The EPA will 
notify the State by letter that the approval has converted to a 
disapproval for failure to start the program according to the schedule.
    The EPA is also proposing removal of the previously approved I/M 
program from the SIP which was approved on August 22, 1994.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 4, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section, at the EPA Regional 
Office listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this action 
are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
following locations. Persons interested in examining these documents 
should make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24 
hours before the visiting day.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, 12100 Park 35 Circle, 
Austin, Texas 78711-3087.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James F. Davis, Air Planning 
Section (6PD-L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733, telephone (214) 665-7584.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Previous State Submittal Under the 1990 Act

    On November 12, 1993, and in several later submittals, the State of 
Texas made its submission of an I/M program which met the requirements 
of the Act and Federal I/M rule promulgated on November 5, 1992. This 
program was given final approval by EPA in a Federal Register notice 
dated August 22, 1994 (59 FR 43046-43048). The program was designed to 
be a test-only testing program with most vehicles receiving an I/M 
loaded mode transient emission test known as the IM240. The program was 
designed, developed and began operation in January 1995 before being 
halted by the Texas Legislature and Governor.
    While EPA fully supported this program and believes it would have 
been very effective in reducing mobile source emissions if continued, 
various states including Texas desired greater flexibility in 
implementing their I/M programs. In response to this desire, on 
September 18, 1995, EPA revised and finalized I/M rules which gave 
states much greater flexibility in implementing their I/M programs. One 
element of the I/M flexibility amendments included a provision for a 
new low enhanced performance standard which would allow for less 
stringent I/M programs if other required air quality goals were met. 
Also, included in these rules was a provision that nonattainment areas 
with populations under 200,000 such as Beaumont/Port Arthur would not 
need to implement an I/M program if other required air quality goals 
were met. In addition, on November 28, 1995, the NHSDA was signed which 
allowed even greater flexibility in I/M programs for states especially 
in the area of emission reduction estimates. The revised Texas I/M 
program, while meeting the minimum of Federal requirements (with the 
exceptions identified in this notice), represents a substantially less 
effective I/M program than the previously approved program.

B. Impact of the National Highway System Designation Act on the Design 
and Implementation of Inspection and Maintenance Programs under the 
Clean Air Act

    The NHSDA establishes two key changes to the enhanced I/M rule 
requirements previously developed by EPA. Under the NHSDA, EPA cannot 
require states to adopt or implement centralized, test-only IM240 
enhanced vehicle I/M programs as a means of compliance with section 
182, 184 or 187 of the Act. Also under the NHSDA, EPA cannot disapprove 
a state SIP revision, nor apply an automatic discount to a state SIP 
revision under section 182, 184 or 187 of the Act, because the I/M 
program in such plan revision is decentralized, or a test-and-repair 
program. Accordingly, the so-called ``50 percent credit discount'' that 
was established by the EPA's I/M Program Requirements Final Rule, 
(published November 5, 1992, at 57 FR 52950, and herein referred to as 
the I/M Rule) has been effectively replaced with a presumptive 
equivalency criteria, which places the emission reductions credits for 
decentralized networks on par with credit assumptions for centralized 
networks, based upon a state's good faith estimate of reductions as 
provided by the NHSDA and explained below in this section.
    EPA's I/M Rule established many other criteria unrelated to network 
design or test type for states to use in designing enhanced I/M 
programs. All other elements of the I/M Rule, and the statutory 
requirements established in the Act continue to be required of those 
states submitting I/M SIP revisions under the NHSDA, and the NHSDA 
requires that these submittals must otherwise comply in all respects 
with the I/M Rule and the Act.
    The NHSDA also requires states to swiftly develop, submit, and 
begin implementation of these enhanced I/M programs, since the 
anticipated start-up dates developed under the Act and EPA's rules have 
already been delayed. In requiring states to submit these plans within 
120 days of the NHSDA passage,

[[Page 51652]]

and in allowing these states to submit proposed regulations for this 
plan (which can be finalized and submitted to EPA during the interim 
period), it is clear that Congress intended for states to begin testing 
vehicles as soon as practicable, now that the decentralized credit 
issue has been clarified and directly addressed by the NHSDA.
    Submission criteria described under the NHSDA allows for a state to 
submit proposed regulations for this interim program, provided that the 
State has all of the statutory authority necessary to carry out the 
program. Also, in proposing the interim credits for this program, 
states are required to make good faith estimates regarding the 
performance of their enhanced I/M program. Since these estimates are 
expected to be difficult to quantify, the State need only provide that 
the proposed credits claimed for the submission have a basis in fact. A 
good faith estimate of a state's program may be an estimate that is 
based on any of the following: the performance of any previous I/M 
program; the results of remote sensing or other roadside testing 
techniques; fleet and vehicle miles traveled profiles; demographic 
studies; or other evidence which has relevance to the effectiveness or 
emissions reducing capabilities of an I/M program.
    This action is being taken under the authority of both the NHSDA 
and section 110 of the Act. Section 348 of the NHSDA expressly directs 
EPA to issue this interim approval for a period of 18 months, at which 
time the interim program will be evaluated in concert with the 
appropriate state agencies and EPA. The Conference Report on section 
348 of the NHSDA states that it is expected that the proposed credits 
claimed by the State in its submittal, and the emissions reductions 
demonstrated through the program data may not match exactly at that 
time. Therefore, the Conference Report suggests that EPA use the 
program data to appropriately adjust these credits on a program basis 
as demonstrated by the program data.
    Furthermore, EPA believes that in also taking action under section 
110 of the Act, it is appropriate to propose granting a conditional 
approval to this submittal since there are some deficiencies with 
respect to Act statutory and regulatory requirements (identified 
herein) that EPA believes can be corrected by the State during the 
interim period.

C. Interim Approvals Under the NHSDA

    The NHSDA directs EPA to grant interim approval for a period of 18 
months to approvable I/M submittals under this Act. This Act also 
directs EPA and the states to review the interim program results at the 
end of 18 months, and to make a determination as to the effectiveness 
of the interim program. Following this demonstration, EPA will adjust 
any credit claims made by the State in its good faith effort to reflect 
the emission reductions actually measured by the state during the 
program evaluation period. The NHSDA is clear that the interim approval 
period shall last for only 18 months, and that the program evaluation 
is due to EPA at the end of that period. Therefore, EPA believes 
Congress intended for these programs to start-up as soon as possible, 
which EPA believes should be at the latest by November 15, 1997. The 
EPA believes that in setting such a strict timetable for program 
evaluations under the NHSDA, that Congress recognized and attempted to 
mitigate any further delay with the start-up of this program. For the 
purposes of this program, ``start-up'' is defined as a fully 
operational program which has begun regular, mandatory inspections and 
repairs, using the final test strategy and covering each of a state's 
required areas. The EPA proposes that if the State fails to start its 
program on this schedule, the approval granted under the provisions of 
the NHSDA will convert to a disapproval after a finding letter is sent 
to the State.
    The program evaluation to be used by the State during the 18-month 
interim period must be acceptable to EPA. The EPA anticipates that such 
a program evaluation process will be developed by the Environmental 
Council of States group that has convened and that was organized for 
this purpose. The EPA further anticipates that in addition to the 
interim, short term evaluation, the State will conduct a long term, 
ongoing evaluation of the I/M program as required by the I/M rule in 
sections 51.353 and 51.366.

D. Process for Full Approvals of This Program Under the Act

    In accordance with NHSDA requirements, this interim rulemaking will 
expire 18 months of the final interim approval, or the date of final 
full approval, whichever comes first. A full approval of the State's 
final I/M SIP revision (which will include the State's program 
evaluation) is still necessary under section 110 and under section 182, 
184 or 187 of the Act. After EPA reviews the State's submitted program 
evaluation, final rulemaking on the State's SIP revision will occur.

II. EPA's Analysis of Texas's Submittal

    In response to this flexibility, in a letter dated March 12, 1996, 
Texas submitted its revised I/M program to EPA Region 6 within the 
submission deadlines contained in the NHSDA. The submission was 
received in our office on March 14, 1996. It contained a SIP narrative, 
proposed Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) I/M 
rules, and several appendices addressing the requirements of the I/M 
program. In addition, the 
I/M SIP including finalized TNRCC regulations, revised SIP narrative 
and responses to comments received during the State's public comment 
period was received in the Region 6 office on June 27, 1996. The 
submittals were intended to fulfill the requirements of the Act and the 
NHSDA for the nonattainment areas of Texas which are required to 
implement I/M programs. The SIP revision also contains enabling 
legislation that will allow the State to implement most of the elements 
of the I/M program (with the exceptions noted in this conditional 
rulemaking), their modeling analysis, and a good faith estimate that 
includes the State's basis for emission reductions claims of the 
program. The State's credit assumptions were based upon the removal of 
the 50 percent credit discount for all portions of the program that are 
based on a test-and-repair network, and the application of the State's 
own good faith estimate of the effectiveness of its decentralized test 
and repair program.
    The EPA has reviewed the State's submittal against the requirements 
contained in the NHSDA, the Act, and Federal I/M rules (40 CFR part 51 
subpart S). On April 10, 1996, the Region provided its comments to the 
State resulting from this review. The Region highlighted the need for 
the State to obtain all of the additional legislative and regulatory 
authority required to implement the proposed program.
    As outlined in the Governor's Executive Order, the additional 
legislative authority that the Governor intends to support includes: 
(1) The denial of reregistration of vehicles that have not complied 
with I/M program requirements, (2) the establishment of a class C 
misdemeanor penalty for operating a gross polluting vehicle in a 
nonattainment area, and (3) the requirement for an inspection within 60 
days of resale and prior to transfer of title to nonfamily member 
consumers in Dallas, Tarrant, or Harris counties. In addition, the 
Region commented that the Texas Department of Safety (DPS) rules for 
the I/M program were needed before EPA could take a final full approval 
action on this plan. The other comments and questions stated in our 
letter reflected a comparison of the

[[Page 51653]]

revised Texas I/M SIP with the Federal I/M rules.
    The EPA has reviewed the State responses to comments which were in 
large part satisfactory to EPA. The major deficiencies of legislative 
authority outlined in this notice can be corrected in the next Texas 
legislative session. The State must correct these major deficiencies 
within 12 months of final action by EPA, or this approval will 
automatically convert to a disapproval under the Act section 110(k)(4). 
The EPA has also identified certain minor deficiencies in the SIP, 
which are itemized below. In the response to EPA comments at the 
State's public hearing, the State has made commitments to correct two 
minor deficiencies concerning the future submittal a State Attorney 
General's opinion regarding State constitutional impediments to 
immediate suspension authority of inspectors (and seek additional 
immediate suspension authority if needed) and a penalty schedule. The 
EPA has determined that delayed correction of these minor deficiencies 
will have a de minimis impact on implementation of the I/M program. 
Therefore, EPA will not impose conditions on interim approval with 
respect to these deficiencies. However, the State must correct these 
deficiencies during the 18-month term of the interim approval to 
support full approval of its I/M SIP. So long as the State corrects 
these minor deficiencies prior to final action on the State's full I/M 
SIP, EPA concludes that failure to correct the deficiencies in the 
short term is de minimis and will not adversely affect EPA's ability to 
give interim approval to the proposed I/M program.
    The following analysis addresses how the State intends to fulfill 
the requirements of the Federal I/M rules. A more detailed analysis of 
the State submittals and copy of EPA's comments on the plan are 
included in the Technical Support Document for this action and may be 
obtained from the EPA Region 6 office. A summary of the EPA's findings 
follows.

Section 51.350  Applicability

    The SIP needs to describe the applicable areas in detail and, 
consistent with Sec. 51.372 of the Federal I/M rule, shall include the 
legal authority or rules necessary to establish program boundaries.
    The revised Texas I/M regulations specify that I/M programs will be 
implemented in Dallas, Tarrant, Harris, and El Paso counties. A basic 
I/M program will be implemented in Dallas and Tarrant counties, while 
low enhanced I/M programs will be implemented in Harris and El Paso 
counties. As the State's submittal indicates, vehicles traveling in 
from counties surrounding the Dallas, Tarrant and Harris counties will 
be subject to the I/M program through remote sensing to ensure that the 
entire urbanized area coverage requirements are minimally met. Without 
the additional remote sensing coverage the Dallas/Fort Worth area would 
have fallen approximately 147,000 vehicles short of the requirements, 
while the Houston area would have fallen about 65,000 vehicles short. 
The State has committed to cover at least these amounts of commuting 
vehicles in the remote sensing program. The Federal I/M flexibility 
rule promulgated September 18, 1995, allowed for the removal of the 
Beaumont/Port Arthur area from the I/M program. Currently, the State 
does not have the legislative authority to enforce the remote sensing 
program, but the Governor's Executive Order states the Governor intends 
to support such legislation in the next State legislative session. If 
the remote sensing program proves to be ineffective or not practicable 
by the end of this interim approval action, the Texas I/M program area 
will need to be expanded to make up the urbanized area shortfall. The 
State submittal meets the applicability requirements of the Federal I/M 
regulations for conditional interim approval.

Section 51.351-2  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 enhanced as applicable. 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. Equivalency of the emission levels which need to be 
achieved by the I/M program design in the SIP to those of the model 
program described in this section must be demonstrated using the most 
current version of EPA's mobile source emission model, or an 
alternative approved by the Administrator.
    The State has submitted a modeling demonstration using the EPA 
computer model MOBILE5a showing that the low enhanced performance 
standard is met in the Houston and El Paso areas, and the basic I/M 
performance standard is met in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. The low 
enhanced performance standard is established in 40 CFR 51.351(g). That 
section provides that states may select the low enhanced performance 
standard if they have an approved SIP for reasonable further progress 
in 1996, commonly known as a 15 percent reduction SIP. In fact, EPA 
approval of 15 percent plans has been delayed, and although EPA is 
preparing to take action on 15 percent plans in the near future, it is 
unlikely that EPA will have completed final action on most 15 percent 
plans prior to the time EPA believes it would be appropriate to give 
final interim approval to I/M programs under the NHSDA.
    In enacting the NHSDA, Congress evidenced an intent to have states 
promptly implement I/M programs under interim approval status to gather 
the data necessary to support state claims of appropriate credit for 
alternative network design systems. By providing that such programs 
must be submitted within a four month period, that EPA could approve I/
M programs on an interim basis based only upon proposed regulations, 
and that such approvals would last only for an 18-month period, it is 
clear that Congress anticipated both that these programs would start 
quickly and that EPA would act quickly to give them interim approval.
    Many states have designed a program to meet the low enhanced 
performance standard, and have included that program in their 15 
percent plan submitted to EPA for approval. Such states anticipated 
that EPA would propose approval both of the I/M programs and the 15 
percent plans on a similar schedule, and thus that the I/M programs 
would qualify for approval under the low performance standard. The EPA 
does not believe it would be consistent with the intent of the NHSDA to 
delay action on interim I/M approvals until the agency has completed 
action on the corresponding 15 percent plans. Although EPA acknowledges 
that under its regulations, full final approval of a low enhanced I/M 
program after the 18-month evaluation period would have to await 
approval of the corresponding 15 percent plan, EPA believes that in 
light of the NHSDA it can take final interim approval of such I/M plans 
provided that the agency has determined as an initial matter that 
approval of the 15 percent plan is appropriate, and has issued a 
proposed approval of that 15 percent plan.
    The State has adopted and submitted a revised 15 percent plan which 
includes the low enhanced I/M program. The EPA is currently reviewing 
that plan and plans to propose action on it shortly. The EPA here 
proposes to approve the I/M program as satisfying the low enhanced

[[Page 51654]]

performance standard provided that EPA does propose to approve the 15 
percent plan containing that program. Should EPA propose approval of 
the 15 percent plan, EPA will proceed to take final interim approval 
action on the I/M plan. The EPA proposes in the alternative that if EPA 
proposes instead to disapprove the 15 percent plan, EPA would then 
disapprove the I/M plan as well because the State would no longer be 
eligible to select the low enhanced performance standard under the 
terms of 51.351(g).
    The State's modeling originally assumed 40 percent of the vehicles 
received loaded mode tests. However, the State is removing loaded mode 
testing commitments from its SIP. While EPA fully supports the use of 
loaded mode testing and believes loaded testing to be more effective, 
revised modeling has been submitted to EPA which shows that removing 
loaded mode testing from the SIP will still enable the State to meet 
the low enhanced and basic performance zstandard for each respective 
area. Neither the low enhanced or basic performance standard modeling 
input parameters include a loaded mode component or requirement. Under 
the provisions of the NHSDA, the State is claiming full credit for 
vehicles that are tested at test-and-repair stations based on the 
State's program design, and claiming full credit for self-testing of 
fleets. At the end of the 18-month approval, the program demonstration 
will have to verify the appropriateness of the State's credit 
estimates.
    In its submittals, the State has claimed more credit for its gas 
cap evaporative system pressure test than can be justified by EPA's own 
current data or any other source of data provided to the EPA. The EPA's 
guidance for emission reduction credit for the gas cap check is 
expressed in a December 1994 policy memorandum entitled, ``Credit for 
Gas Cap Check plus Purge Test.'' However, the additional credit claimed 
does not make a difference with regard to the general approvability of 
the I/M program under the NHSDA, since the program appears to meet the 
low enhanced I/M performance standard with or without the additional 
credit claimed for the gas cap test. The EPA anticipates the State will 
gather data during the operation of its program or may choose to seek 
out alternative data sources to share with EPA which potentially could 
justify a higher level of credit than EPA's current policy. As always, 
EPA would evaluate any data submitted by a state as the basis for 
credit claims made and convey the results of such evaluation to the 
state. If such data indicates a higher level of credit is justified, 
EPA will evaluate the appropriateness of its current policy based on 
such new data at that time. The State submittal meets the enhanced and 
basic performance standard requirements of the Federal 
I/M regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.353  Network Type and Program Evaluation

    The SIP must include a description of the network to be employed, 
and the required legal authority. Also, for enhanced areas, the SIP 
must include a description of the evaluation schedule and protocol, the 
sampling methodology, the data collection and analysis system, the 
resources and personnel for evaluation, related details of the 
evaluation program, and the legal authority enabling the evaluation 
program.
    The State is implementing a decentralized testing network which 
will allow for both test-only and test-and-repair stations. While the 
State is planning to allow for some types of maintenance functions at 
test-only facilities, EPA believes that such network design issues as 
they relate to credit estimates are essentially moot due to the passage 
of the NHSDA. The TNRCC commits in the SIP to develop an acceptable one 
time evaluation of the I/M program to meet the NHSDA requirements. In 
addition, the SIP commits to meet the ongoing program evaluation of 
mass emission testing of at least 0.1 percent of subject vehicles and 
reporting the results of such evaluation on a biennial basis beginning 
on January 1, 1999. Resources and personnel adequate for the program 
evaluation are described in the SIP. Legal authority which is contained 
in the Texas Health and Safety Code Sections 382.017 and 382.037 
(changed to 382.027) (Vernon 1992) authorizes TNRCC to implement the 
program and conduct the program evaluation. The State submittal meets 
the network type and program evaluation requirements of the Federal I/M 
regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.354  Adequate Tools and Resources

    The SIP is required 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, and (2) a description of personnel 
resources. The plan is required to include 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.
    Section 159 of the State's General Appropriations Act allows for 
the transfer of funds and for fees collected from the I/M program for 
the purpose of implementation of the program. The TNRCC anticipates 
that at least $1.75 per paid vehicle inspection will be available to 
the TNRCC and DPS for the continuance of the I/M program. The SIP 
narrative also describes the budget, staffing support, and equipment 
needed to implement the program. The State has committed to dedicate a 
staffing level of 40 full-time-equivalent employees to support the 
program. The State submittal meets the adequate tools and resources 
requirements of the Federal I/M regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.355  Test Frequency and Convenience

    The SIP must describe the test schedule in detail, including the 
test year selection scheme if testing is other than annual. Also, the 
SIP must 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, test systems shall be designed in such a way as to provide 
convenient service to motorists required to get their vehicles tested. 
The SIP must include a demonstration that the network of stations 
providing test services is sufficient to ensure short waiting times to 
get a test and short driving distances.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP commits to testing all gasoline powered 
vehicles that are between two and twenty-four years old. Inspections 
will be required annually unless the vehicle is tested at a loaded mode 
facility in which case the test is biennial. The vehicle emission 
testing will be integrated as part of the annual safety inspection. 
Vehicles receiving a biennial emission test must still receive an 
annual safety inspection. Also, within 60 days of resale, or prior to 
registration, vehicles registered in Dallas, Tarrant or Harris counties 
will be required to undergo an emission test.
    Currently, the State does not have the legislative authority to 
require test on resale, but the Governor's Executive Order states the 
Governor intends to support such legislation in the next

[[Page 51655]]

State legislative session. In addition, at least 10 percent of the 
vehicle population will be subject to remote sensing. The program is 
decentralized and stations will be open at least eight hours per day, 
five days per week, for a minimum of 40 hours per week for motorist 
convenience. The TNRCC anticipates that over 2,000 facilities will 
participate in the program. The State submittal meets the test 
frequency and convenience requirements of the Federal I/M regulations 
for conditional interim approval.

Section 51.356  Vehicle Coverage

    The SIP must 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 is required 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 is required to include the legal authority or rule 
necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle coverage requirement.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP includes coverage of gasoline powered 
light-duty vehicles and light and heavy-duty trucks registered or 
required to be registered in the I/M program area including fleets. 
Subject vehicles will be identified through the Texas Department of 
Transportation database. While the State statute does allow for the 
exemption of ``circus'' or ``slow moving'' vehicles from the program, 
TNRCC does not anticipate modeling results to be affected. Legal 
authority for vehicle coverage is contained in the Texas I/M rule. The 
State submittal meets the vehicle coverage requirements of the Federal 
I/M regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.357  Test Procedures and Standards

    The SIP must include a description of each test procedure used. The 
SIP also is required to include the rule, ordinance or law describing 
and establishing the test procedures.
    Vehicles tested in the Texas program shall be subject to a two 
speed idle test or vehicle owners may elect an ASM loaded mode test. 
Idle test procedures shall meet requirements in Appendix B of the 
Federal I/M rule. Idle test emission standards are contained in the SIP 
modeling analysis and are consistent with the Federal I/M rule. The 
Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) loaded mode test procedures and 
standards were developed between EPA and the States. They were recently 
issued in July 1996 in a document entitled, ``Acceleration Simulation 
Mode Test Procedures, Emission Standards, Quality Control Requirements 
and Equipment Specifications.'' The SIP states that loaded mode test 
equipment procedures shall meet EPA requirements for two-mode ASM 
equipment or an acceptable alternative. As was stated previously, the 
State is removing loaded mode testing commitments from its SIP, 
however, EPA anticipates that loaded mode testing will still be an 
option in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston I/M program areas. In 
addition, the SIP states that vehicles shall receive a gas cap 
integrity test in accordance with EPA procedures. The Texas I/M rule 
requires that vehicles comply with the inspection requirements of the 
revised Texas I/M SIP. The State submittal meets the test procedure and 
standards requirements of the Federal I/M regulations for interim 
approval.

Section 51.358  Test Equipment

    The SIP is required to include written technical specifications for 
all test equipment used in the program and must address each of the 
requirements contained 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 revised Texas I/M SIP contains written technical specifications 
for the two speed idle test equipment consistent with the Federal I/M 
rule and EPA guidance. The ASM loaded mode test specifications were 
developed between EPA and the States. They were recently issued in July 
1996 in a document entitled, ``Acceleration Simulation Mode Test 
Procedures, Emission Standards, Quality Control Requirements and 
Equipment Specifications.'' The SIP states that loaded mode test 
equipment specifications shall meet EPA requirements for two-mode ASM 
equipment or an acceptable alternative. In addition, the SIP states 
that vehicles shall receive a gas cap integrity test in accordance with 
EPA test procedures and equipment specifications. The Texas I/M rule 
requires that vehicles comply with the inspection requirements of the 
revised Texas I/M SIP. The State submittal meets the test equipment 
requirements of the Federal I/M regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.359  Quality Control

    The SIP must include a description of quality control and record 
keeping procedures. The SIP must include the procedure manual, rule, 
ordinance or law describing and establishing the quality control 
procedures and requirements.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP contains descriptions and requirements 
establishing the quality control procedures in accordance with the 
Federal I/M rule. These requirements will help ensure that equipment 
calibrations are properly performed and recorded as well as maintaining 
document security. Analyzer manufacturers will prepare a manual of 
quality control procedures, periodic maintenance schedules, and 
calibration procedures to ensure proper operation of the test 
equipment. The revised I/M SIP commits to meet calibration practices 
contained in Appendix A of the Federal I/M rule. The State submittal 
meets the quality control requirements of the Federal I/M regulations 
for interim approval.

Section 51.360  Waivers and Compliance via Diagnostic Inspection.

    The SIP must include a maximum waiver rate expressed as a 
percentage of initially failed vehicles. This waiver rate must be used 
for estimating emission reduction benefits in the modeling analysis. 
Also, the State must take corrective action if the waiver rate exceeds 
that committed to in the SIP, or revise the SIP and the emission 
reductions claimed accordingly. In addition, the SIP should describe 
the waiver criteria and procedures, including cost limits, quality 
assurance methods and measures, and administration. Lastly, the SIP 
should 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 waiver in the Texas SIP are 
in accordance with the Act and Federal I/M rules. These limits are $450 
adjusted annually in the enhanced areas of Houston and El Paso, and 
$200 for 1981 and later model year vehicles and $75 for 1980 and 
earlier model year vehicles in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. The revised 
Texas I/M program includes waiver rates as percentages of initially 
failed vehicles of 3 percent in all three I/M areas. These waiver rates 
are used in the modeling demonstration. The TNRCC commits in the SIP 
that if the

[[Page 51656]]

waiver rates are higher than estimated the State will take corrective 
action to address the deficiency. The SIP describes the three types of 
waivers the State will allow, which include a minimum expenditure 
waiver, individual vehicle waiver, parts availability time extension 
and low income time extension. The DPS will have the responsibility of 
ensuring that waivers are issued properly. In addition, the waiver 
criteria including the minimum expenditure requirements are contained 
in the Texas I/M rule. The State submittal meets the waiver and 
compliance via diagnostic inspection requirements of the Federal I/M 
regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.361  Motorist Compliance Enforcement

    The SIP is required 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 subject vehicles, 
e.g. those operated in (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 that includes 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 shall be 
supported with detailed analyses. In addition, the SIP must include the 
legal authority to implement and enforce the program. Lastly, the SIP 
must 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 enforce the
I/M program with a combination of sticker-based enforcement and 
comparing registration data with inspection data to address vehicles 
not complying with the program. Contingent upon legislation being 
passed, continual noncompliance would result in denial of re-
registration. The motorist compliance enforcement program will be 
implemented by the DPS, the Texas Department of Transportation, and the 
TNRCC. Vehicle coverage requirements are described in the previous 
section. Gasoline powered vehicles greater than 24 years old, 
motorcycles, dedicated alternative fueled vehicles and diesel vehicles 
are not included in the program. Fleet vehicles will be allowed to 
conduct self-testing provided that they meet the required equipment 
standards, are licensed by DPS, and tests are performed in accordance 
with established inspection procedures. Motorists operating vehicles in 
the I/M areas with an expired or invalid state inspection certificate 
will be subject to citations by local and state law enforcement 
officials. The SIP includes a recent safety inspection compliance 
survey from the Dallas/Fort Worth area that indicates a compliance rate 
of 95 percent, but this information is only preliminary. The proposed 
program with enhancements estimates compliance at 95 percent and TNRCC 
commits to maintain this rate in practice. The legal authority to 
implement and enforce the program is included in the Texas statutes and 
regulations cited in the SIP. Currently, the State does not have the 
legislative authority to enforce the denial of reregistration, but the 
Governor's Executive Order states the Governor intends to support such 
legislation in the next State legislative session.
    In the State's response to comments given at the public hearing, it 
stated that the State's I/M program is complying with the requirements 
of this section through a sticker based enforcement program. The 
Federal I/M rule does contain a provision for alternative enforcement 
mechanisms other than registration denial, however a demonstration must 
be made per Sec. 51.361(b) that an alternative such as sticker 
enforcement is more effective than registration denial for enhanced
I/M areas and as effective for basic areas. The State submittal does 
not include such a complete demonstration. Thus, EPA cannot provide 
approval on the basis of sticker enforcement unless a complete 
demonstration is made. However, the State does not have to comply with 
the alternative enforcement mechanisms in Sec. 51.361 if registration 
denial requirements are met. The EPA is proposing to conditionally 
approve this provision conditioned upon the State obtaining authority 
for a reregistration denial system as is stated in the Governor's 
Executive Order and Texas I/M SIP. The State submittal meets the 
motorist compliance enforcement requirements of the Federal I/M 
regulations for conditional interim approval.

Section 51.362  Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight

    The SIP must include a description of enforcement program oversight 
and information management activities.
    The Texas I/M SIP provides for regular auditing of its enforcement 
efforts and for following 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: the establishment of written audit 
procedures and/or checklists for I/M document handling and processing, 
audit procedures, notification of motorists and inspection facilities 
suspected of violating program rules, an on-line telecommunication 
network to support the State's oversight and management requirements, 
and an I/M database which will be compared to the registration database 
to determine program effectiveness. The State submittal meets the 
motorist compliance enforcement program oversight requirements of the 
Federal
I/M regulations for interim approval.

 Section 51.363  Quality Assurance

    The SIP must 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 revised Texas I/M SIP includes a description of its quality 
assurance program. The program includes both covert and overt audits. 
The SIP commits to a minimum of three performance audits, two overt for 
each lane or test bay and one covert for each full time equivalent 
inspector to be conducted each year. Audits will include the inspection 
of records and equipment. Procedures for overt and covert audits will 
be based upon written instructions and will be updated as necessary. 
The State submittal meets the quality assurance requirements of the 
Federal I/M regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.364  Enforcement Against Contractors, Stations and 
Inspectors

    The SIP must 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

[[Page 51657]]

state Attorney General must furnish an official opinion for the SIP 
explaining the constitutional impediment as well as relevant case law. 
Also, the SIP is required 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. In states 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 revised Texas I/M SIP states that TNRCC may assess penalties of 
up to $10,000 in its enforcement against stations and inspectors and 
will develop a more specific penalty schedule at a later date. The SIP 
describes the enforcement process. The DPS is planning to assign six 
full time equivalent employees to covert and overt auditing as well as 
seven additional full time equivalent employees for other enforcement 
activities. The TNRCC is currently seeking an Attorney General opinion 
seeking whether there are any constitutional impediments to immediate 
suspension authority and is in the process of developing a penalty 
schedule. Once the opinion is obtained by the State, EPA will be 
working with the State to consider the necessary action that will be 
needed to comply with the requirements of this section. The legal 
authority for TNRCC to asses penalties is contained in the Texas Clean 
Air Act, subchapter D. The authority for DPS to deny application for 
license or revoke or suspend an outstanding certificate of any 
inspection station or the certificate of any person to inspect vehicles 
is found in the Texas Transportation Code, Section 548.407. The minor 
deficiencies regarding the State Attorney General's opinion regarding 
State constitutional impediments to immediate suspension authority of 
inspectors (and seek additional immediate suspension authority if 
needed) and a penalty schedule must be corrected by the end of the 18-
month interim period.

Section 51.365-6  Data Collection, Analysis and Reporting

    The SIP must describe the types of data to be collected and 
reported.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP provides for the collecting of test data 
to link specific test results to specific vehicles, I/M program 
registrants, test sites, and inspectors. The SIP lists the specific 
types of test data and quality control data which will be collected. 
The data will be used to generate reports in the areas of test data, 
quality assurance, quality control, and enforcement. It will also be 
used to assess changes and weaknesses in the program. The State 
submittal meets the data collection, analysis and reporting 
requirements of the Federal I/M regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.367  Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification

    The SIP must include a description of the training program, the 
written and hands-on tests, and the licensing or certification process.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP provides for the implementation of 
training, certification, and refresher programs for emission 
inspectors. The SIP describes this program and curriculum which 
includes hands-on testing. Certified inspector appointments will expire 
on August 31 of the even numbered year following the first date of 
appointment and afterwards will be made for two year periods. All 
inspectors will be required to be certified to inspect vehicles in the 
Texas I/M program. The State submittal meets the inspector training and 
licensing or certification requirements of the Federal I/M regulations 
for interim approval.

Section 51.368  Public Information and Consumer Protection

    The SIP must include a plan for informing the public on an ongoing 
basis throughout the life of the I/M program of the air quality 
problem, the requirements of Federal and state law, the role of motor 
vehicles in the air quality problem, the need for and benefits of an 
inspection program, how to maintain a vehicle in a low-emission 
condition, how to find a qualified repair technician, and the 
requirements of the I/M program. Also, the SIP shall include a detailed 
consumer protection plan.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP commits to the establishment of an 
ongoing public awareness plan addressing the significance of the air 
quality problem, the requirements of Federal and State law, the role of 
motor vehicles in the air quality problem, the benefits of an 
inspection program, steps to maintain a vehicle in a low-emission 
condition, how to find a qualified repair technician, and the 
requirements of the I/M program. The SIP commits that motorists will be 
offered general repair information including a list or repair 
facilities, information on the results of the repairs by repair 
facilities in the area, diagnostic information and warranty 
information. The SIP also includes consumer protection provisions which 
include DPS challenge/referee facilities, DPS oversight of the program 
though the use of audits, whistle blower protection, and complaint 
handling procedures. The State submittal meets the public information 
and consumer protection requirements of the Federal I/M regulations for 
interim approval.

Section 51.369  Improving Repair Effectiveness

    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 the 
Federal I/M rule, and a description of the repair technician training 
resources available in the community.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP includes a description of the technical 
assistance plan, repair industry performance monitoring plan, repair 
technician training assessment, and recognized repair technician 
requirements. The State will regularly inform repair facilities through 
the use of a newsletter regarding changes to the inspection program, 
training course schedules, common problems and potential solutions for 
particular engine families, diagnostic tips, repair, and other 
technical assistance issues. The newsletter will also contain 
information on technical assistance hotlines that meet the State's 
criteria. Repair facility performance monitoring statistics will be 
available to motorists whose vehicles fail the I/M test. The State will 
monitor the need for additional training resources for repair 
technicians. If motorist demand for repair technicians is not being 
satisfied, the State will also ensure that adequate repair technician 
training resources are available to the repair community. The State 
submittal meets the improving repair effectiveness requirements of the 
Federal I/M regulations for interim approval.

Section 51.370  Compliance With Recall Notices

    The SIP must describe the procedures used to incorporate the 
vehicle lists provided into the inspection or registration database, 
the quality control methods used to ensure that recall repairs are 
properly documented and tracked, and the method (inspection failure or 
registration denial) used to enforce the recall requirements.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP contains a plan describing the procedures 
for

[[Page 51658]]

ensuring that vehicles that are included in either a voluntary emission 
recall, or a remedial plan determination pursuant to the Act, have had 
the appropriate repair made prior to the inspection. The TNRCC commits 
in the SIP to complying with the policies of the National Recall 
Committee and additional rulemaking when it becomes available. 
Additional rulemaking by EPA is needed before the State will be able to 
implement this provision. The State submittal meets the compliance with 
recall notices requirements of the Federal I/M regulations for interim 
approval.

Section 51.371  On-Road Testing

    The SIP must include a detailed description of the on-road testing 
program, 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 
shall be granted for a program designed to obtain significant emission 
reductions over and above those already predicted to be achieved by 
other aspects of the I/M program. The SIP must include technical 
support for the claimed additional emission reductions.
    The revised Texas I/M SIP includes a detailed description of its 
on-road testing program. The State is planning to use remote sensing to 
help meet the requirement of covering the entire urbanized areas of 
Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston. As was stated previously in the 
applicability section of this notice, the State has committed to cover 
at least the amount of commuting vehicles in the remote sensing program 
to ensure adequate area coverage. In addition, the State will test at 
least 20,000 of the vehicles subject to I/M tests in all of the I/M 
areas. As has been stated previously, the State needs additional legal 
authority to enforce this program. The State submittal meets the on-
road requirements of the Federal I/M regulations for conditional 
interim approval.

Section 51.372  State Implementation Plan Submissions.

    The NHSDA called for submissions of I/M SIPs that were going to be 
eligible for its provisions to be submitted by March 27, 1996. The 
NHSDA allowed EPA to grant interim approval of the plan based on State 
proposed regulations if the State had its statutory authority and was 
in otherwise compliance with the Act. In a letter dated March 12, 1996, 
the revised Texas I/M SIP was submitted on March 14, 1996. In addition, 
in a letter dated June 27, 1996, the I/M SIP with finalized regulations 
and responses to comments received during the State's public comment 
period was submitted to EPA Region 6. While some enforcement authority 
is lacking, Texas does have authority to implement major portions of 
the program. The Governor has signed an Executive Order stating his 
intention to support the additional needed legal authority. The State 
submittal meets the NHSDA requirements for interim approval.

Section 51.373  Implementation Deadlines

    EPA is expecting that I/M programs submitted under the NHSDA be 
implemented by November 15, 1997. The revised Texas I/M SIP includes a 
schedule for program implementation. The emission testing start date 
contained in the schedule is January 1, 1997, or earlier for all 
program areas.

III. Discussion for Rulemaking Action

A. Concluding Statement of Conditional Interim Approval

    EPA's review of this material indicates that it meets the minimum 
requirements of the Act, NHSDA, and Federal I/M rules with the 
exceptions of the deficiencies explained in this notice. Based upon the 
discussion contained in the previous analysis sections and technical 
support document, EPA concludes the State's submittal represents an 
acceptable approach to the I/M requirements and meets the requirements 
for conditional interim approval. Therefore, EPA is proposing a 
conditional interim approval of the Texas I/M SIP revision which was 
submitted on March 14, 1996, and June 27, 1996. The Regional office, in 
conjunction with EPA's Office of Mobile Sources and other Regional 
offices, has taken efforts to help ensure that overall this action is 
consistent with other EPA actions on I/M programs. The EPA is 
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on 
other relevant matters. These comments will be considered before taking 
final action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal 
rulemaking procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional 
office listed in the Addresses section of this notice.

B. Withdrawal of Previous I/M Program

    As was stated in the Summary section of this notice, the EPA is 
also proposing removal of the previously approved I/M program from the 
SIP which was finally approved on August 22, 1994 (59 FR 43046-43048). 
Also, the EPA will not be processing an I/M SIP revision submittal 
relating to the previously approved I/M program which was submitted on 
November 10, 1994 relating to the hardship waiver eligibility criteria 
and repair effectiveness program. In addition, the EPA will not be 
acting on portions of two previously submitted revisions which relate 
to the pre-1990 Act Dallas/Fort Worth I/M program submitted on February 
21, 1989, and September 20, 1990. The portions of these submittals 
which are superseded by this proposed action are contained in 31 TAC 
sections 114.3-4.

IV. Explanation of the Interim Approval

    At the end of the 18-month interim period, the approval status for 
this program will automatically lapse pursuant to the NHSDA. It is 
expected that the State will, at that time, be able to make a 
demonstration of the program's effectiveness using an appropriate 
evaluation criteria. As EPA expects that these programs will have 
started by November 15, 1997, the State will have at least 6 months of 
program data that can be used for the demonstration. If the State fails 
to provide a demonstration of the program's effectiveness to EPA within 
18 months of the final interim rulemaking, the interim approval will 
lapse, and EPA will be forced to disapprove the State's permanent I/M 
SIP revision if the State does not demonstrate the interim program's 
effectiveness. If the State's program evaluation demonstrates a lesser 
amount of emission reductions actually realized than were claimed in 
the State's previous submittal, EPA will adjust the State's credits 
accordingly, and use this information to act on the State's permanent 
I/M program.

V. Further Requirements for Permanent I/M SIP Approval

    Final approval of the State's plan will be granted based upon the 
following criteria:

[[Page 51659]]

    1. The State has complied with all the major conditions listed in 
this proposed notice.
    2. The EPA's review of the State's program evaluation confirms that 
the appropriate amount of program credit was claimed by the State and 
achieved with the interim program.
    3. Final DPS program regulations are submitted to EPA.
    4. The State I/M program meets all of the requirements of EPA's I/M 
rule, including those deficiencies found de minimis for the purposes of 
interim approval.
    5. The remote sensing program proves to be effective in identifying 
and obtaining repairs on vehicles with high levels of emissions, or the 
Texas I/M core program area is expanded to include the entire urbanized 
area for both Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston.

VI. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to grant conditional interim approval of the 
State's submission contingent upon the State obtaining all of the 
additional authority needed to implement the program outlined in the 
Governor's Executive Order. In addition, the EPA is issuing conditional 
interim approval contingent upon the program starting by November 15, 
1997. The EPA proposes that if the State fails to obtain the needed 
additional legal authority as outlined in the Governor's Executive 
Order, or fails to start the program by November 15, 1997, the approval 
will convert to a disapproval after a letter is sent notifying the 
State of the conversion to disapproval. The minor or de minimis 
deficiencies regarding immediate suspension authority of inspectors and 
a penalty schedule will need to be corrected before final full approval 
will be granted.
    As stated previously, interim approvals granted under the NHSDA are 
valid for 18 months subject to an adequate program demonstration 
justifying the program is achieving the claimed emission reductions.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any State implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
the State implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

VII. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted 
this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. See 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.
    Conditional approvals of SIP submittals under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the Act do not create any new requirements but 
simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing. 
Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not impose any new 
requirements, I certify that it does not have a significant impact on 
any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the 
Federal-State relationship under the Act, preparation of a flexibility 
analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of State action. The Act forbids EPA to base its actions 
concerning SIPs on such grounds. See Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 
427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    If the conditional approval is converted to a disapproval under 
section 110(k), based on the State's failure to meet the commitment, it 
will not affect any existing State requirements applicable to small 
entities. Federal disapproval of the State submittal does not affect 
its State-enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal 
does not impose a new Federal requirement. Therefore, EPA certifies 
that this disapproval action does not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because it does not remove 
existing requirements nor does it substitute a new Federal requirement.

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Unfunded Mandates Act), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must 
prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or final 
rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs 
to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 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.
    The EPA has determined that the conditional approval action 
proposed does not include a Federal mandate that may result in 
estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or 
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This 
Federal action approves preexisting 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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 9, 1996.
Jane N. Saginaw,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-25397 Filed 10-2-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-01-P