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

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

EPA is approving state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of California on June 5, 2009 and October 28, 2009 relating to the State's basic and enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. The effect of this action is to make the revisions federally enforceable as part of the California SIP.

DATES:

This final rule is effective August 2, 2010.

ADDRESSES:

EPA has established a docket for this action under EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0470. The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material) and some may not be available in either location [(e.g., confidential business information (CBI))]. To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Buss, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4152, buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, the terms “we”, “us”, and “our” refer to EPA.

I. Summary of the Proposed Actions

On August 19, 2009 (74 FR 41818), EPA proposed to approve a SIP revision submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on June 5, 2009 relating to the State's basic and enhanced vehicle I/M program (“2009 I/M Revision”) contingent upon the State's submittal of revisions to the enhanced program performance standard evaluations to address: (1) A different attainment year for the Western Mojave Desert 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, and (2) California's base-year program performance for the six areas subject to the enhanced I/M program.

More specifically and with the exception of the enhanced program performance standard evaluations, we concluded that the 2009 I/M Revision met the procedural requirements for adoption and submittal of SIP revisions, and the substantive requirements for I/M programs under the Clean Air Act (CAA or “Act”) and our regulations. In addition, we concluded that the 2009 I/M Revision would not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQSs) or any other applicable requirement of the Act. In so doing, we took into consideration changes in EPA's I/M regulations since our previous approval of the California I/M program, changes in the California I/M programs since our previous approval, initial area designations for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards, and the requirements of the implementation rules for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. For more background on California's I/M program, a more detailed description of the changes in EPA's I/M regulations since our previous approval of the program and of the 2009 I/M Revision itself, and a more detailed explanation of our evaluation of the 2009 I/M Revision and of our rationale for our proposed action, please see the August 19, 2009 proposed rule and related Technical Support Document.

In our August 19, 2009 proposed rule, we indicated that our proposed approval of the 2009 I/M Revision was contingent upon the State's submittal of revisions to the enhanced program performance standard evaluations to address certain issues as described above. On October 28, 2009, CARB submitted revisions to the enhanced program performance standard evaluations to address these issues.

On November 18, 2009 (74 FR 59496), EPA published a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) and request for comment on these revisions to the enhanced program performance standard evaluations. In that notice we stated that we had reviewed the additional modeling information submitted by CARB on October 28, 2009 and believed that the analyses support our conclusions that the California program: (1) Achieved greater percent emissions reductions (relative to the no I/M scenario) for volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO_X) in each of the six areas than the EPA model enhanced I/M program in 2002, and (2) would achieve greater percent emissions reductions (relative to the no I/M scenario) for VOC and NO_X in each of the six areas in the year before the attainment year than would the EPA model enhanced I/M program in 2002. Please see our November 18, 2009 NODA for a more detailed discussion of CARB's October 28, 2009 submittal and our evaluation of it.

II. EPA's Response to Comments

Our August 19, 2009 proposed rule provided for a 30-day comment period, and our November 18, 2009 NODA provided for a 14-day comment period. We did not receive any public comments in response to the proposed rule or the NODA.

III. Final Action

Under section 110(k)(3) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is approving CARB's 2009 I/M Revision, as submitted by CARB on June 5, 2009, and revised by CARB on October 28, 2009, as a revision to the California SIP. For the reasons set forth in this document and in the August 19, 2009 proposed rule, we conclude that CARB's I/M SIP revisions meet the requirements of CAA sections 182(a)(2)(B) and 182(c)(3) in the geographic areas where the statutory requirements apply, and applicable EPA I/M regulations set forth in 40 CFR part 51, subpart S. The updated elements of the California I/M program that we are approving include the following:

(1) Discussion of each of the required design elements of the I/M program;

(2) Description of the current geographic coverage of the program, including updated maps and list of program requirements by zip code;

(3) I/M-related statutes and regulations;

(4) High enhanced I/M performance standard evaluations for the urbanized areas within six California ozone nonattainment areas (South Coast Air Basin, San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Metro, Coachella Valley, Ventura County, and Western Mojave Desert), as meeting the requirements of CAA section 182(c)(3);

(5) Basic I/M performance standard evaluation for the urbanized area within the San Francisco Bay Area ozone nonattainment area under section 182(a)(2)(B); and

(6) Emission analyzer specifications and test procedures, including BAR-97 specifications.

Lastly, we are codifying today's approval by adding new paragraphs to 40 CFR 52.220 and 40 CFR 52.241, and we are deleting regulatory language [see 40 CFR 52.241(a)] that codified EPA's 1997 interim approval of California's enhanced I/M program because today's final approval of the revised I/M program makes that language obsolete.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
• Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and
• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

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

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 30, 2010. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

• Air pollution control
• Carbon monoxide
• Incorporation by reference,

Editorial Note:

This document was received in the Office of the Federal Register on June 28, 2010.

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

PART 52—[AMENDED]

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

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

2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(234)(i)(A)(2) and (c)(234)(i)(A)(3), and by adding paragraphs (c)(372) and (c)(373) to read as follows:

3. Section 52.241 is revised to read as follows: