[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 159 (Thursday, August 16, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42949-42956]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-20503]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WI42-7306a; FRL-7029-3]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; 
Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision submitted by the State of Wisconsin. This revision requires 
the implementation of an enhanced motor vehicle inspection and 
maintenance (I/M) program in seven counties in southeast Wisconsin. The 
program reduces air pollution from motor vehicles by identifying and 
requiring repair of high emitting vehicles. This action is being taken 
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This ``direct final'' rule is effective October 15, 2001, unless 
EPA receives adverse written or critical comments by September 17, 
2001. If the rule must be withdrawn, EPA will publish timely notice in 
the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief, Regulation 
Development Section, Air Programs Branch (A-18J), United States 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604. (We recommend that you telephone John Mooney at (312) 
886-

[[Page 42950]]

6043 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
    A copy of the SIP revision is available for inspection at the 
Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) Docket and Information Center (Air 
Docket 6102), Room M1500, United States Environmental Protection 
Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) 260-7548.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John M. Mooney, Regulation Development 
Section (A-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, 
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6043.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA taking today?
II. What Wisconsin SIP revision is EPA approving?
III. What are the major items included in this state submittal?
IV. What are the EPA requirements for approving the Wisconsin I/M 
program and how has the State addressed each?
V. Where is the public record and where do I send comments?
VI. EPA Action
VII. What administrative requirements did EPA consider?
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Executive Order 13045
    C. Executive Order 13084
    D. Executive Order 13132
    E. Executive Order 13175
    F. Executive Order 13211
    G. Regulatory Flexibility
    H. Unfunded Mandates
    I. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    K. Petitions for Judicial Review

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving Wisconsin's enhanced I/M plan for the Milwaukee-
Kenosha-Racine and Sheboygan areas. Wisconsin originally submitted the 
I/M SIP to EPA on November 15, 1992, and made several supplements, 
dated January 15, 1993, November 15, 1993, July 28, 1994, February 13, 
1996, July 3, 1997, August 11, 1998, December 30, 1998, December 22, 
2000, and July 27, 2001.

II. What Wisconsin SIP Revision Is EPA Approving?

    On November 15, 1992, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 
(WDNR) submitted its original I/M SIP revision to the EPA. Since that 
time, the state has made a number of program revisions to address 
changes to federal I/M regulations and to meet subsequent I/M program 
submittal deadlines. As the state made changes to its I/M program, the 
WDNR submitted additional I/M SIP revisions to the EPA. The following 
list contains a general description of the contents of each supplement 
to Wisconsin's I/M SIP. Full copies of the SIP revisions are located in 
EPA's docket.

--November 15, 1992--Wisconsin's initial revision which contains the 
general program description, program elements, and submittal schedules.
--January 15, 1993--commitments for submitting additional program 
revisions.
--November 15, 1993--implementation schedules for I/M program.
--July 28, 1994--response to EPA's July 14, 1994 (59 FR 35883) proposed 
conditional approval.
--February 13, 1996--response to EPA's January 12, 1995 (60 FR 2881) 
conditional approval, includes the final, signed I/M contract (I/M 
contract), final versions of NR 484, and 485, Wiscosnsin Administrative 
Code and the emergency rule for TRANS 131, Wisconsin Administrative 
Code.
--July 3, 1997--final version of TRANS 131.
--August 11, 1998--submittal addressing federal on-board diagnostic 
(OBD) testing of motor vehicles.
--December 30, 1998--revisions to NR 485 with revised emissions 
cutpoints.
--December 22, 2000--revisions to NR 485 authorizing the implementation 
of oxides of nitrogen tailpipe testing.
--July 27, 2001--revisions to TRANS 131 detailing final procedures for 
OBD testing and performance standard modeling.

    These submittals revise the Wisconsin SIP for the enhanced I/M 
program, which is required by EPA's I/M regulation, codified at 40 CFR 
part 51, subpart S--Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and 
Submittal of Implementation Plans (I/M regulation). This approval will 
apply to the I/M program that is now operating in the state and will 
not require any changes to the program. Motor vehicle testing is 
required in the Milwaukee-Kenosha-Racine severe ozone nonattainment 
area, comprised of Kenosha, Racine, Milwaukee, Waukesha, Ozaukee, and 
Washington Counties, and in the Sheboygan moderate ozone nonattainment 
area (Sheboygan County). Wisconsin's rules require testing every two 
years, using the IM240 loaded mode, transient emission test using a 
dynamometer. Starting in July 2001, Wisconsin will test 1996 and newer 
vehicles through a computer link to the OBD system, instead of the 
tailpipe test. Wisconsin enforces the program through registration 
denial.

III. What Are the Major Items Included in This State Submittal?

    The revisions include a narrative description of the program, 
copies of the pertinent Wisconsin statutes, the WDNR and Wisconsin 
Department of Transportation (WDOT) regulations, equipment and test 
specifications, emission factor modeling, the I/M contract, which 
contains information on vehicle inspection procedures, the quality 
assurance and quality control plan, technician training information, 
and a public awareness plan.

IV. What Are the EPA Requirements for Approving the Wisconsin I/M 
Program and How Has the State Addressed Each?

    On January 12, 1995 (60 FR 2882), EPA approved many of the 
Wisconsin I/M program elements. At that time, however, EPA could not 
approve the entire program because the state had not finalized all of 
its I/M regulations and had not yet signed a formal contract with the 
contractor that performs the I/M inspections. Wisconsin has now 
completed these activities and EPA has reviewed Wisconsin's revised 
submittal to ensure that the program meets all aspects of the CAA and 
EPA's I/M regulation. The I/M program requirements and the analysis of 
Wisconsin's program are summarized below:

Applicability--40 CFR 51.350

    Sections 182(c)(3) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.350(a)(2) require 
states that contain ozone nonattainment areas, which are classified as 
serious or worse, with populations of over 200,000 to implement 
enhanced I/M programs. In addition, section 182(b)(4) of the CAA and 40 
CFR 51.530(a)(3) require states that contain moderate ozone 
nonattainment areas, which were required to implement I/M programs 
prior to November 15, 1990, to upgrade those programs to meet the basic 
I/M program requirements.
    Wisconsin contains two nonattainment areas that meet these 
criteria, the Milwaukee-Kenosha-Racine severe ozone nonattainment area 
and the Sheboygan moderate ozone nonattainment area. Wisconsin's 
program covers all required areas, and EPA approved Wisconsin's 
authorities establishing program boundaries in the January 1995 (60 FR 
2882) approval of the program.

[[Page 42951]]

Enhanced and Basic I/M Performance Standards--40 CFR 51.351 and 40 CFR 
51.351

    The I/M program must be designed and implemented to meet or exceed 
a minimum performance standard, which is expressed as emission levels 
in area-wide average grams per mile (gpm) for certain pollutants. The 
performance standards are established using local characteristics, such 
as vehicle age mix and local fuel controls, and the following model I/M 
program parameters: network type, start date, test frequency, model 
year, vehicle type coverage, exhaust emission test type, emission 
standards, emission control device inspection, evaporative system 
function checks, stringency, waiver rate, compliance rate and 
evaluation date. The emission levels achieved by the state's program 
design must be calculated using the most current version of the EPA's 
computerized mobile source emission factor model at the time of 
submittal, MOBILE5a. Areas must meet the performance standard for the 
pollutants which cause them to be subject to enhanced I/M requirements. 
In the case of ozone nonattainment areas, the performance standard must 
be met for both nitrogen oxides (NOX) and hydrocarbons (HC). 
Since the Milwaukee-Kenosha-Racine area is a severe ozone nonattainment 
area, Wisconsin must meet the enhanced I/M performance standard for HC 
and NOX. The state must meet the basic I/M performance 
standard for the Sheboygan moderate ozone nonattainment area.
    The Wisconsin submittal includes a MOBILE5a analysis with the 
following program design parameters:
Network type--Test only
Start date--1984
Test frequency--biennial
Model year/vehicle type coverage--1968 and newer, light and heavy duty, 
gasoline
Exhaust emission test type--IM240
Emission standards--1968-1986 = 1.2 HC, 20.0 CO, 3.0 NOX 
1987 and newer = 0.8 HC, 15 CO, 2.0 NOX
Emission control device check--yes
Evaporative system function checks--gas cap only
Stringency (pre-1981 failure rate)--N/A
Waiver rate--3%
Compliance rate--96%
Evaluation date(s)--2000, 2003, 2006, and 2008

    Wisconsin has submitted modeling demonstrations using the EPA 
computer model MOBILE5a showing that the low enhanced performance 
standard reductions will be met in 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2008, (the 
years required by EPA's I/M regulation) with the existing program, as 
well as with planned program changes. This demonstration assumed a 96% 
compliance rate, 3% waiver rate, and full IM240 credits.
    Wisconsin's modeling shows that the program will meet the low 
enhanced 
I/M performance standard for HC and NOX for all evaluation 
years. This part of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR 
51.351 of the federal I/M regulation.

Network Type and Program Evaluation--40 CFR 51.353

    The enhanced program must include an ongoing evaluation to quantify 
the emission reduction benefits of the program, and to determine if the 
program is meeting the requirements of the CAA and the federal I/M 
regulation. The SIP must include details on the program evaluation and 
must include a schedule for submittal of biennial evaluation reports, 
data from a state monitored or administered mass emission test of at 
least 0.1% of the vehicles subject to inspection each year, description 
of the sampling methodology, the data collection and analysis system 
and the legal authority enabling the evaluation program.
    Wisconsin operates a centralized I/M program and has made all 
necessary commitments and schedules for program evaluation. EPA 
approved these program elements in the January 1995 approval of the 
program.

Adequate Tools and Resources--40 CFR 51.354

    The federal I/M regulation requires Wisconsin to demonstrate that 
adequate funding of the program is available. A portion of the test fee 
or separately assessed per vehicle fee must be collected, placed in a 
dedicated fund and used to finance the program. Alternative funding 
approaches are acceptable if it is demonstrated that the funding can be 
maintained. Reliance on funding from the state or local General Fund is 
not acceptable unless doing otherwise would be a violation of the 
state's constitution. The SIP must include a detailed budget plan that 
describes the source of funds for personnel, program administration, 
program enforcement, and purchase of equipment. The SIP must also 
detail the number of personnel dedicated to the quality assurance 
program, data analysis, program administration, enforcement, public 
education and assistance and other necessary functions.
    EPA approved this program element in the January 1995 approval of 
the program.

Test Frequency and Convenience--40 CFR 51.355

    The enhanced I/M performance standard assumes an annual test 
frequency; however, other schedules may be approved if the performance 
standard is achieved. The SIP must describe the test year selection 
scheme and how the test frequency is integrated into the enforcement 
process, and must include the legal authority, regulations or contract 
provisions to implement and enforce the test frequency. The program 
must be designed to provide convenient service to the motorist by 
ensuring short wait times, short driving distances and regular testing 
hours.
    The Wisconsin program calls for biennial testing in a centralized, 
test-only network. The state has included this test frequency in its 
performance standard modeling and still meets the applicable standards. 
EPA approved this program element in the January 1995 approval of the 
program.

Vehicle Coverage--40 CFR 51.356

    The performance standard for enhanced I/M programs assumes coverage 
of all 1968 and later model years light duty vehicles and light duty 
trucks up to 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), and 
includes vehicles operating on all fuel types. Other levels of coverage 
may be approved if the necessary emission reductions are achieved. 
Vehicles registered or required to be registered within the I/M program 
area boundaries and fleets primarily operated within the I/M program 
area boundaries and belonging to the covered model year and vehicle 
classes comprise the subject vehicles. Fleets may be officially 
inspected outside of the normal I/M program test facilities, if such 
alternatives are approved by the program administration, but must be 
subject to the same test requirements using the same quality control 
standards as non-fleet vehicles and must be inspected in the same type 
of test network as other vehicles in the state, according to the 
requirements of 40 CFR 51.353(a).
    The federal I/M regulation requires that the SIP include the legal 
authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle 
coverage requirement, a detailed description of the number and types of 
vehicles to be covered by the program and a plan for how those vehicles 
are to be identified, including vehicles that are routinely operated in 
the area but may not be registered in the area, and a description of 
any special exemptions, including the percentage and number of vehicles 
to be

[[Page 42952]]

impacted by the exemption. Such exemptions must be accounted for in the 
analysis of the program's potential emission reduction.
    The Wisconsin program tests 1968 and newer light and heavy duty 
gasoline vehicles. Legal authority is provided in section 110.20(6)(a) 
of the Wisconsin Statutes and TRANS 131.03(2). In the July 3, 1997 
submittal letter, Wisconsin provides an estimate of covered vehicles, 
the methods for identifying covered vehicles, and a description of 
exempted vehicles. The MOBILE5a modeling uses this data in making the 
performance standard demonstration. Starting in July 2001, Wisconsin 
will exempt 1996 and newer model year vehicles from the tailpipe 
portion of the emissions test. Instead, Wisconsin will perform an 
inspection of the OBD systems on these vehicles. This is consistent 
with recent changes to 40 CFR 51.356 that EPA published on April 5, 
2001 (66 FR 18156). This part of the submittal meets the requirements 
of 40 CFR 51.356.
    Federally owned vehicles operated in Wisconsin are required to meet 
the same requirements as Wisconsin registered vehicles. However, EPA is 
not requiring states to implement 40 CFR 51.356(a)(4) dealing with 
federal installations within I/M areas at this time. The Department of 
Justice has recommended to EPA that this regulation be revised since it 
appears to grant states authority to regulate federal installations in 
circumstances where the federal government has not waived sovereign 
immunity. It would not be appropriate to require compliance with this 
regulation if it is not constitutionally authorized. EPA will be 
revising this provision in the future and will review state I/M SIPs 
with respect to this issue when this new rule is final. Therefore, for 
these reasons, EPA is not proposing approval or disapproval of the 
specific requirements which apply to federal facilities at this time.

Test Procedures and Standards--40 CFR 51.357

    Written test procedures and pass/fail standards must be established 
and followed for each model year and vehicle type included in the 
program. Test procedures and standards are detailed in 40 CFR 51.357 
and in the EPA documents entitled ``High-Tech I/M Test Procedures, 
Emission Standards, Quality Control Requirements, and Equipment 
Specifications,'' EPA-AA-EPSD-IM-93-1, dated April 1994. EPA's test 
procedure requirements were recently revised on April 5, 2001 (66 FR 
18156) to incorporate new OBD test procedures for 1996 and newer 
vehicles. These new requirements provide detailed procedures and pass/
fail standards for performing tests on OBD equipped vehicles as a 
replacement to the tailpipe test.
    Wisconsin submitted its test procedures to EPA in its February 16, 
1996, July 3, 1997, and July 27, 2001 submittals. Test procedures and 
standards are specified in: (1) Section C.7.b of the final I/M 
contract; (2) TRANS 131.03(4)-(9); and (3) NR 485.04. The OBD test 
procedures are contained in TRANS 131.03(6)(d). This part of the rule 
contains detailed procedures for connecting to the OBD system in 1996 
and newer vehicles, information on readiness codes for OBD tests, and 
pass/fail standards for OBD equipped vehicles. This part of the 
submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.357 of the federal I/M 
regulation.

Test Equipment--40 CFR 51.358

    Computerized test systems are required for performing any 
measurement on subject vehicles. The federal I/M regulation requires 
that the state SIP submittal include written technical specifications 
for all test equipment used in the program. The specifications must 
describe the emission analysis process, the necessary test equipment, 
the required features, and written acceptance testing criteria and 
procedures.
    Wisconsin provides the technical specifications for program test 
equipment in section C.4 of the I/M contract and in TRANS 131.12(2). 
These requirements mirror EPA's requirements and guidance on test 
equipment specifications. This part of the submittal meets the 
requirements of 40 CFR 51.358 of the federal I/M regulation.

Quality Control--40 CFR 51.359

    Quality control measures must ensure that emission measurement 
equipment is calibrated and maintained properly and that inspection, 
calibration records, and control charts are accurately created, 
recorded and maintained.
    Wisconsin's quality control requirements are specified in section 
C.7.g of the I/M contract and in TRANS 131.12(1) and (3). In addition, 
quality control procedures are outlined in the document entitled 
``Wisconsin Vehicle Inspection Program, Quality Assurance Procedures'', 
which Wisconsin submitted in the July 3, 1997 submittal. These 
requirements mirror EPA's recommended quality control procedures 
contained in the EPA ``High Tech Guidance'' document and include 
detailed procedures on system calibration surveillance and equipment 
maintenance. This part of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 
CFR 51.359 of the federal I/M regulation.

Waivers and Compliance Via Diagnostic Inspection--40 CFR 51.360

    The federal I/M regulation allows for the issuance of a waiver, 
which is a form of compliance with the program requirements that allows 
a motorist to comply without meeting the applicable test standards. An 
expenditure of at least $450 in repairs, adjusted annually to reflect 
the change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as compared to the CPI for 
1989, is required in order to qualify for a waiver in enhanced I/M 
areas. An expenditure of at least $75 for pre-1981 vehicles and $200 
for 1981 and newer vehicles is required in order to qualify for a 
waiver in basic I/M areas. Waivers can only be issued after a vehicle 
has failed a retest performed after all qualifying repairs have been 
made. Any available warranty coverage must be used to obtain repairs 
before expenditures can be counted toward the cost limit. Tampering 
related repairs must not be applied toward the cost limit. Repairs must 
be appropriate to the cause of the test failure. Repairs for 1980 and 
newer model year vehicles must be performed by a recognized repair 
technician. The federal regulation allows for compliance via a 
diagnostic inspection after failing a retest on emissions and requires 
quality control of waiver issuance. The SIP must set a maximum waiver 
rate and must describe corrective action that would be taken if the 
waiver rate exceeds that committed to in the SIP.
    Wisconsin establishes waiver limits in section 110.20(13) of the 
Wisconsin Statutes and in NR 485.045(1). This regulation requires an 
expenditure of at least $75 for pre-1981 vehicles and $200 for 1981 and 
newer vehicles is required in order to qualify for a waiver in 
Sheboygan County and an expenditure of at least $450 in repairs, 
adjusted annually to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index 
(CPI) as compared to the CPI for 1989, as established by the EPA, for 
the remaining I/M counties. Wisconsin is not currently making the CPI 
adjustment, pending the resolution of several issues associated with 
it. The Wisconsin regulation provides for this adjustment once the 
issues are resolved. Actual waiver rates in the area remain within the 
3% assumed in the performance standard modeling, and emission reduction 
credit is unaffected. Therefore, EPA is approving this part of the 
regulation.
    A description of the corrective action if waiver rates assumed in 
the

[[Page 42953]]

performance standard modeling are not met are contained in the document 
entitled ``U.S. EPA's Enhanced I/M Performance Standard, Wisconsin's 
Demonstration with Discussion,'' written by the Wisconsin Department of 
Natural Resources and dated July 28, 1994, which is part of ``Exhibit 
C'' of the July 28, 1994, submittal. Waiver issuance procedures are 
specified in TRANS 131.04. This part of the submittal is part of the 
basis for EPA's approval of the I/M SIP.

Motorist Compliance Enforcement--40 CFR 51.361

    The federal regulation requires that compliance be ensured through 
the denial of motor vehicle registration in enhanced I/M programs 
unless an exception for use of an existing alternative is approved.
    Wisconsin's program uses registration denial and has committed to a 
96 percent compliance rate. EPA approved this program element in the 
January 1995 approval of the program.

Motorist Compliance Enforcement Program Oversight--40 CFR 51.362

    The federal I/M regulation requires that the enforcement program be 
audited regularly and follow effective program management practices, 
including adjustments to improve operation when necessary. The SIP must 
include quality control and quality assurance procedures to be used to 
ensure the effective overall performance of the enforcement system. The 
regulation requires the establishment of an information management 
system that will characterize, evaluate, and enforce the program.
    Contractor requirements pertaining to these enforcement program 
oversight activities are specified in section C.7.j of the I/M 
contract. This part of the contract requires the contractor to report 
test data to a centralized computer database which the state uses to 
ensure effective performance of the enforcement system. The contract 
also contains provisions regarding proper document handling and 
inspection procedures. This part of the submittal satisfies the 
requirements of 40 CFR 51.362 of the federal I/M regulation.

Quality Assurance--40 CFR 51.363

    The state must implement an ongoing quality assurance to discover, 
correct and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in the program. The program 
must include covert and overt performance audits of the inspectors, 
audits of station and inspector records, equipment audits, and formal 
training of all state I/M enforcement officials and auditors. The state 
must submit as part of the SIP a description of the quality assurance 
program that includes written procedure manuals on the above discussed 
items.
    Requirements for audits of testing equipment, procedures, personnel 
and records are specified in TRANS 131.11 and 131.13(4). Section 
C.7.g(2) of the I/M contract sets forth the contractor requirements 
pertaining to 40 CFR 51.363. The requirements in the state rules and 
the I/M contract mirror EPA's recommendations for quality assurance 
procedures. In addition, the contractor's quality assurance procedures 
are presented in the document entitled ``Wisconsin Vehicle Inspection 
Program, Quality Assurance Procedures'' and the state's quality 
assurance and auditing procedures are presented in ``Section 6000--
Contractor Audit Procedures,'' which Wisconsin included in its July 3, 
1997 submittal. This part of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 
CFR 51.363.

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

    Enforcement against licensed stations, contractors and inspectors 
must include swift, sure, effective, and consistent penalties for 
violations of program requirements. The federal I/M regulation requires 
the establishment of minimum penalties for violations of program rules 
and procedures that can be imposed against stations, contractors and 
inspectors. The state must include in the SIP the legal authority for 
establishing and imposing penalties, civil fines, license suspensions 
and revocations. State quality assurance officials must have the 
authority to temporarily suspend station and/or inspector licenses 
immediately upon finding a violation that directly affects emission 
reduction benefits, unless constitutionally prohibited. An official 
opinion explaining any state constitutional impediments to immediate 
suspension authority must be included in the submittal. The SIP must 
describe the administrative and judicial procedures and 
responsibilities relevant to the enforcement process, including which 
agencies, courts and jurisdictions are involved, who will prosecute and 
adjudicate cases and the resources that will support this function.
    The requirements for penalties for stations, contractors, and 
inspectors are specified in TRANS 131.11(3) and 131.13(5). Appendix G 
of the I/M contract sets forth the penalty schedules for stations, 
contractors, and inspectors. Appendix G includes penalties for a broad 
variety of improper practices, including failure to calibrate 
equipment, improper test procedures, extended wait times at test 
stations, and failure to provide proper training to technicians. 
Penalties are clearly specified and increase with subsequent 
violations. This part of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR 
51.364.

Data Collection--40 CFR 51.365

    Accurate data collection is essential to the management, evaluation 
and enforcement of an I/M program. The federal I/M regulation requires 
data to be gathered on each individual test conducted and on the 
results of the quality control checks of test equipment required under 
40 CFR 51.359.
    A detailed description of these data is contained in section C.7.l 
of the I/M contract. This section requires data to be collected for 
each test, including data on waivers, quality control, repairs, and 
other program features. This part of the submittal meets the 
requirements of 40 CFR 51.365.

Data Analysis and Reporting--40 CFR 51.366

    Monitoring and evaluation of the program by the state and EPA 
require data analysis and reporting. The federal I/M regulation 
requires annual reports to be submitted that provide information and 
statistics and that summarize activities performed for each of the 
following programs: testing, quality assurance, quality control and 
enforcement. These reports are due in July and must provide statistics 
for the period of January to December of the previous year. The state 
must submit a biennial report to EPA, which addresses changes in 
program design, regulations, legal authority, and program procedures, 
identifies any weaknesses found in the program during the two-year 
period and states how these problems will be or were corrected.
    These procedures, including provisions for all required reports, 
are specified in section C.8 of the I/M contract. The state also 
commits to submit annual and biennial reports to the EPA in accordance 
with the I/M regulation and any ensuing EPA guidance in its July 3, 
1997 submittal. This part of the submittal meets all of the 
requirements of 40 CFR 51.366 of the federal I/M regulation and is part 
of the basis for approving the Wisconsin 
I/M SIP.

Inspector Training and Licensing or Certification--40 CFR 51.367

    The federal I/M regulation requires all inspectors to be formally 
trained and licensed or certified to perform inspections.

[[Page 42954]]

    Requirements for the training and licensing of inspectors are 
specified in TRANS 131.13 and in section C.5.i of the I/M contract. 
This section requires all inspectors to undergo training prior to 
performing vehicle inspections. The training requires inspectors to 
pass a written and a practical exam administered by a third party for 
inspector licensing. In addition, Attachment I of the July, 3, 1997 
submittal contains the contractor's training plan and Attachment J 
contains part of the contractor's training manual for new employees. 
This part of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.367 of 
the federal I/M regulation.

Public Information and Consumer Protection--40 CFR 51.368

    The federal I/M regulation requires the SIP to include public 
information and consumer protection programs.
    Public information provisions are specified in appendix E of the I/
M contract, and in TRANS 131.03(15)(b) and (c) and 131.15(3)(b). 
Consumer protection program elements are specified in TRANS 131.13(6) 
and in sections C.5.c, and C.7.h(2) of the I/M contract. Wisconsin 
operates an extensive public information program that notifies the 
public of testing requirements, program changes, and environmental 
benefits of I/M testing. In addition, the I/M contract has detailed 
provisions for handling customer complaints, customer challenge 
mechanisms, and dispute resolution mechanisms. This part of the 
submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.368 of the federal I/M 
regulation.

Improving Repair Effectiveness--40 CFR 51.369

    Effective repairs are the key to achieving program goals. The 
federal regulation requires states to take steps to ensure that the 
capability exists in the repair industry to repair vehicles. The SIP 
must include a description of the technical assistance program to be 
implemented, the procedures and criteria to be used in meeting the 
performance monitoring requirements of the federal regulation, and the 
repair technician training resources available in the community.
    Requirements and procedures pertaining to technical assistance and 
repair facility monitoring are specified in TRANS 131.03(10)(a)2., 
131.15, and 131.16 and in section C.9 of the I/M contract. In addition, 
WDOT periodically publishes a newsletter, ``The Analyzer,'' which 
presents information on the state's I/M program and vehicle diagnosis 
and repair. The last page of this newsletter lists the repair 
technician training resources available in the program area. This part 
of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.369 of the federal 
I/M regulation.

Compliance with Recall Notices--40 CFR 51.370

    The federal regulation requires the states to establish methods to 
ensure that vehicles that are subject to enhanced I/M and are included 
in an emission related recall receive the required repairs prior to 
completing the emission test and/or renewing the vehicle registration.
    EPA will adopt regulations to require submittal of this information 
by manufacturers to develop a database to support this requirement.
    Requirements and procedures for compliance with recall notices are 
presented in TRANS 131.03(11)(j) and in section C.7.a(3) of the I/M 
contract. These procedures call for the operation of a recall database 
on the centralized host computer system. This database will be used to 
notify motorists of recall issues, as well as to determine whether 
vehicles have been repaired in accordance with recall notices. This 
part of the submittal meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.370 of the 
federal I/M regulation.

On-Road Testing--40 CFR 51.371

    On-road testing is required in enhanced I/M areas. The use of 
either remote sensing devices (RSD) or roadside pullovers including 
tailpipe emission testing can be used to meet the federal regulations. 
The program must include on-road testing of 0.5% of the subject fleet 
or 20,000 vehicles, whichever is less, in the nonattainment area or the 
I/M program area.
    Requirements and procedures for the onroad testing program are 
presented in TRANS 131.14 and in appendix J of the I/M contract. The 
on-road testing program meets the minimum testing requirements of the 
federal I/M regulation.

V. Where is the Public Record and Where do I Send Comments?

    The official record for this direct final rule is located at the 
addresses in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document. 
The addresses for sending comments are also provided in the ADDRESSES 
section at the beginning of this document. If EPA receives adverse 
written comments on this action, we will withdraw this final rule and 
address the comments received in response to this action in a final 
rule on the related proposed rule. We will not open a second public 
comment period. Parties interested in commenting on this action should 
do so at this time.

VI. EPA Action

    EPA is approving the Wisconsin I/M program as a revision to the 
Wisconsin SIP.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
establishing a precedent for any future request for a revision to any 
SIP. Each request for a revision to the SIP must be considered 
separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental 
factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory 
requirements.

VII. What Administrative Requirements did EPA Consider?

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 13045

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is 
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under 
Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or 
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate 
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the 
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the 
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is 
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible 
alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does 
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects 
the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes 
substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the 
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults 
with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 
13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, 
in a separately identified section of the preamble to the

[[Page 42955]]

rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve 
or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces 
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the 
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on the states, on the 
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by state and local governments, or EPA 
consults with state and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts state law unless the 
Agency consults with state and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the states, 
on the relationship between the national government and the states, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various 
levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it 
merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this 
rule.

E. Executive Order 13175

    This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship 
between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13211

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

G. Regulatory Flexibility

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D, of the Clean Air Act do not create any new 
requirements but simply approve requirements that the state is already 
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create 
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the federal-state relationship under 
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976).

H. Unfunded Mandates

    Under sections 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 government 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 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

I. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective October 15, 2001 unless EPA 
receives adverse written comments by September 17, 2001.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new

[[Page 42956]]

regulation. To comply with NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary 
consensus standards'' (VCS) if available and applicable when developing 
programs and policies unless doing so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action, because 
it does not require the public to perform activities conducive to the 
use of VCS.

K. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 October 15, 2001. Filing a 
petition for 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).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Volatile organic 
compounds, Ozone.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671 et seq.

    Dated: July 31, 2001.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    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 YY--Wisconsin

    2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(101) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.2570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (101) On November 15, 1992, the state of Wisconsin submitted a 
revision to the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan for ozone 
establishing an enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance 
program in Southeast Wisconsin. The state made several supplements to 
the original plan, dated January 15, 1993, November 15, 1993, July 28, 
1994, February 13, 1996, July 3, 1997, August 11, 1998, December 30, 
1998, December 22, 2000, and July 27, 2001. This revision included 
Wisconsin statutes providing authorities for implementing the program, 
Wisconsin Administrative Rules, the contract between the state of 
Wisconsin and the vehicle testing contractor, schedules for 
implementation, and technical materials related to test equipment 
specifications, reports, and quality assurance procedures.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Wisconsin Statutes, Section 110.20, effective January 1, 1996, 
Section 285.30, effective January 1, 1997.
    (B) Wisconsin Administrative Code, Chapter NR 485, effective 
February 1, 2001.
    (C) Wisconsin Administrative Code, Chapter TRANS 131, effective 
June 1, 2001.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-20503 Filed 8-15-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P