Loading (50 kb)...'
(continued)
(i) Allowances. For each source in the program, the implementation plan must either identify the specific allocation of allowances, on a tons per year basis, for each calendar year from 2009 to 2018 or the formula or methodology that will be used to calculate the allowances if the program is triggered. The implementation plan must provide that eligible renewable energy resources that begin operation after October 1, 2000 will receive 2.5 tons of SO2 allowances per megawatt of installed nameplate capacity per year. Allowance allocations for renewable energy resources that begin operation prior to the program trigger will be retroactive to the time of initial operation. The implementation plan may provide for an upper limit on the number of allowances provided for eligible renewable energy resources. The total of the tons per year allowances across all participating States and Tribes, including the renewable energy allowances, may not exceed the amounts in Table 4 of this paragraph, less a 20,000 ton amount that must be set aside for use by Tribes. The implementation plan may include procedures for redistributing the allowances in future years, if as the amounts in Table 4 of this paragraph, less a 20,000 ton amount, are not exceeded. The implementation plan must provide that any adjustment for a calendar year applied to the milestones under paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section must also be applied to the amounts in Table 4. Table 4 follows:
Table 4_Total Amount of Allowances by Year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the two If the two
smelters smelters do
resume not resume
operations, operations,
the total the total
number of number of
For this year: allowances allowances
issued by issued by
States and States and
Tribes may not Tribes may not
exceed this exceed this
amount: amount:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009.................................... 715,000 677,000
2010.................................... 715,000 677,000
2011.................................... 715,000 677,000
2012.................................... 715,000 677,000
2013.................................... 655,000 625,000
2014.................................... 655,000 625,000
2015.................................... 655,000 625,000
2016.................................... 655,000 625,000
2017.................................... 655,000 625,000
2018.................................... 510,000 480,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Compliance with allowances. The implementation plan must provide that, beginning with the compliance period 6 years following the calendar year for which emissions exceeded the milestone and for each compliance period thereafter, the owner or operator of each source in the program must hold allowances for each ton of sulfur dioxide emitted by the source.
(iii) Emissions quantification protocols. The implementation plan must include specific emissions quantification protocols for each source category included within the program, including the identification of sources subject to part 75 of this chapter. For sources subject to part 75 of this chapter, the implementation plan may rely on the emissions quantification protocol in part 75. For source categories with sources in more than one State or tribal area submitting an implementation plan under this section, each State or Tribe should use the same protocol to quantify emissions for sources in the source category. The protocols must provide for reliability (repeated application obtains results equivalent to EPA-approved test methods), and replicability (different users obtain the same or equivalent results that are independently verifiable). The protocols must include procedures for addressing missing data, which provide for conservative calculations of emissions and provide sufficient incentives for sources to comply with the monitoring provisions. If the protocols are not the same for sources within a given source category, and where the protocols are not based upon part 75 or equivalent methods, the State or Tribes must provide a demonstration that each such protocol meets all of the criteria of this paragraph.
(iv) Monitoring and Recordkeeping. The implementation plan must include monitoring provisions which are consistent with the emissions quantification protocol. Monitoring required by these provisions must be timely and of sufficient frequency to ensure the enforceability of the program. The implementation plan must also include requirements that the owner or operator of each source in the program keep records consistent with the emissions quantification protocols, and keep all records used to determine compliance for at least 5 years. For source owners or operators which use banked allowances, all records relating to the banked allowance must be kept for at least 5 years after the banked allowances are used.
(v) Tracking system. The implementation plan must provide for submitting data to a centralized system for the tracking of allowances and emissions. The implementation plan must provide that all necessary information regarding emissions, allowances, and transactions is publicly available in a secure, centralized data base. In the system, each allowance must be uniquely identified. The system must allow for frequent updates and include enforceable procedures for recording data.
(vi) Authorized account representative. The implementation plan must include provisions requiring the owner or operator of each source in the program to identify an authorized account representative. The implementation plan must provide that all matters pertaining to the account, including, but not limited to, the deduction and transfer of allowances in the account, and certifications of the completeness and accuracy of emissions and allowances transactions required in the annual report under paragraph (h)(4)(vii) of this section shall be undertaken only by the authorized account representative.
(vii) Annual report. The implementation plan must include provisions requiring the authorized account representative for each source in the program to demonstrate and report within a specified time period following the end of each calendar year that the source holds allowances for each ton per year of SO2 emitted in that year. The implementation plan must require the authorized account representative to submit the report within 60 days after the end of each calendar year, unless an alternative deadline is specified consistent with emission monitoring and reporting procedures.
(viii) Allowance transfers. The implementation plan must include provisions detailing the process for transferring allowances between parties.
(ix) Emissions banking. The implementation plan may provide for the banking of unused allowances. Any such provisions must state whether unused allowances may be kept for use in future years and describe any restrictions on the use of any such allowances. Allowances kept for use in future years may be used in calendar year 2018 only if the implementation plan ensures that such allowances would not interfere with the achievement of the year 2018 amount in Table 4 in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section.
(x) Penalties. The implementation plan must:
(A) Provide that if emissions from a source in the program exceed the allowances held by the source, the source's allowances will be reduced by an amount equal to two times the source's tons of excess emissions,
(B) Provide for appropriate financial penalties for excess emissions, either $5000 per ton (year 2000 dollars) or an alternative amount that is the same for each participating State and Tribe and that substantially exceeds the expected cost of allowances,
(C) Ensure that failure to comply with any program requirements (including monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements) are violations which are subject to civil and criminal remedies provided under applicable State or tribal law and the Clean Air Act, that each day of the control period is a separate violation, and that each ton of excess emissions is a separate violation. Any allowance reduction or penalty assessment required under paragraphs (h)(4)(x)(A) and (B) of this section shall not affect the liability of the source for remedies under this paragraph.
(xi) Provisions for periodic evaluation of the trading program. The implementation plan must provide for an evaluation of the trading program no later than 3 years following the first full year of the trading program, and at least every 5 years thereafter. Any changes warranted by the evaluation should be incorporated into the next periodic implementation plan revision required under paragraph (d)(10) of this section. The evaluation must be conducted by an independent third party and must include an analysis of:
(A) Whether the total actual emissions could exceed the values in §51.309(h)(4)(i), even though sources comply with their allowances;
(B) Whether the program achieved the overall emission milestone it was intended to reach;
(C) The effectiveness of the compliance, enforcement and penalty provisions;
(D) A discussion of whether States and Tribes have enough resources to implement the trading program;
(E) Whether the trading program resulted in any unexpected beneficial effects, or any unintended detrimental effects;
(F) Whether the actions taken to reduce sulfur dioxide have led to any unintended increases in other pollutants;
(G) Whether there are any changes needed in emissions monitoring and reporting protocols, or in the administrative procedures for program administration and tracking; and
(H) The effectiveness of the provisions for interstate trading, and whether there are any procedural changes needed to make the interstate nature of the program more effective.
(5) Other provisions—(i) Permitting of affected sources. The implementation plan must provide that for sources subject to part 70 or part 71 of this chapter, the implementation plan requirements for emissions reporting and for the trading program under paragraph (h) of this section must be incorporated into the part 70 or part 71 permit. For sources not subject to part 70 or part 71 of this chapter, the requirements must be incorporated into a permit that is enforceable as a practical matter by the Administrator, and by citizens to the extent permitted under the Clean Air Act.
(ii) Integration with other programs. The implementation plan must provide that in addition to the requirements of paragraph (h) of this section, any applicable restrictions of Federal, State, and tribal law remain in place. No provision of paragraph (h) of this section should be interpreted as exempting any source from compliance with any other provision of Federal, State, tribal or local law, including an approved implementation plan, a Federally enforceable permit, or any other Federal regulations.
[64 FR 35769, July 1, 1999, as amended at 68 FR 33784, June 5, 2003; 68 FR 39846, July 3, 2003; 68 FR 61369, Oct. 28, 2003; 68 FR 71014, Dec. 22, 2003]
Subpart Q—Reports
top
Authority: Secs. 110, 301(a), 313, 319, Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410, 7601(a), 7613, 7619).
Source: 44 FR 27569, May 10, 1979, unless otherwise noted.
Air Quality Data Reporting
top
§ 51.320 Annual air quality data report.
top
The requirements for reporting air quality data collected for purposes of the plan are located in subpart C of part 58 of this chapter.
Source Emissions and State Action Reporting
top
§ 51.321 Annual source emissions and State action report.
top
The State agency shall report to the Administrator (through the appropriate Regional Office) information as specified in §§51.322 through 51.326.
[67 FR 39615, June 10, 2002]
§ 51.322 Sources subject to emissions reporting.
top
The requirements for reporting emissions data under the plan are in subpart A of this part 51.
[67 FR 39615, June 10, 2002]
§ 51.323 Reportable emissions data and information.
top
The requirements for reportable emissions data and information under the plan are in subpart A of this part 51.
[67 FR 39615, June 10, 2002]
§ 51.324 Progress in plan enforcement.
top
(a) For each point source, the State shall report any achievement made during the reporting period of any increment of progress of compliance schedules required by:
(1) The applicable plan, or
(2) Any enforcement order or other State action required to be submitted pursuant to §51.327.
(b) For each point source, the State shall report any enforcement action taken during the reporting period and not submitted under §51.327 which results in civil or criminal penalties.
§ 51.326 Reportable revisions.
top
The State shall identify and describe all substantive plan revisions during the reporting period of the applicable plan other than revisions to rules and regulations or compliance schedules submitted in accordance with §51.6(d). Substantive revisions shall include but are not limited to changes in stack-test procedures for determining compliance with applicable regulations, modifications in the projected total manpower needs to carry out the approved plan, and all changes in responsibilities given to local agencies to carry out various portions of the plan.
§ 51.327 Enforcement orders and other State actions.
top
(a) Any State enforcement order, including any State court order, must be submitted to the Administrator within 60 days of its issuance or adoption by the State.
(b) A State enforcement order or other State action must be submitted as a revision to the applicable implementation plan pursuant to §51.104 and approved by the Administrator in order to be considered a revision to such plan.
[36 FR 22398, Nov. 25, 1971, as amended at 51 FR 40675, Nov. 7, 1986]
§ 51.328 [Reserved]
top
Subpart R—Extensions
top
§ 51.341 Request for 18-month extension.
top
(a) Upon request of the State made in accordance with this section, the Administrator may, whenever he determines necessary, extend, for a period not to exceed 18 months, the deadline for submitting that portion of a plan that implements a secondary standard.
(b) Any such request must show that attainment of the secondary standards will require emission reductions exceeding those which can be achieved through the application of reasonably available control technology.
(c) Any such request for extension of the deadline with respect to any State's portion of an interstate region must be submitted jointly with requests for such extensions from all other States within the region or must show that all such States have been notified of such request.
(d) Any such request must be submitted sufficiently early to permit development of a plan prior to the deadline in the event that such request is denied.
[51 FR 40675, Nov. 7, 1986]
Subpart S—Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements
top
Source: 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, unless otherwise noted.
§ 51.350 Applicability.
top
Inspection/maintenance (I/M) programs are required in both ozone and carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment areas, depending upon population and nonattainment classification or design value.
(a) Nonattainment area classification and population criteria. (1) States or areas within an ozone transport region shall implement enhanced I/M programs in any metropolitan statistical area (MSA), or portion of an MSA, within the State or area with a 1990 population of 100,000 or more as defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regardless of the area's attainment classification. In the case of a multi-state MSA, enhanced I/M shall be implemented in all ozone transport region portions if the sum of these portions has a population of 100,000 or more, irrespective of the population of the portion in the individual ozone transport region State or area.
(2) Apart from those areas described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, any area classified as serious or worse ozone nonattainment, or as moderate or serious CO nonattainment with a design value greater than 12.7 ppm, and having a 1980 Bureau of Census-defined (Census-defined) urbanized area population of 200,000 or more, shall implement enhanced I/M in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area.
(3) Any area classified, as of November 5, 1992, as marginal ozone nonattainment or moderate CO nonattainment with a design value of 12.7 ppm or less shall continue operating I/M programs that were part of an approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) as of November 15, 1990, and shall update those programs as necessary to meet the basic I/M program requirements of this subpart. Any such area required by the Clean Air Act, as in effect prior to November 15, 1990, as interpreted in EPA guidance, to have an I/M program shall also implement a basic I/M program. Serious, severe and extreme ozone areas and CO areas over 12.7 ppm shall also continue operating existing I/M programs and shall upgrade such programs, as appropriate, pursuant to this subpart.
(4) Any area classified as moderate ozone nonattainment, and not required to implement enhanced I/M under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, shall implement basic I/M in any 1990 Census-defined urbanized area with a population of 200,000 or more.
(5) [Reserved]
(6) If the boundaries of a moderate ozone nonattainment area are changed pursuant to section 107(d)(4)(A)(i)-(ii) of the Clean Air Act, such that the area includes additional urbanized areas with a population of 200,000 or more, then a basic I/M program shall be implemented in these additional urbanized areas.
(7) If the boundaries of a serious or worse ozone nonattainment area or of a moderate or serious CO nonattainment area with a design value greater than 12.7 ppm are changed any time after enactment pursuant to section 107(d)(4)(A) such that the area includes additional urbanized areas, then an enhanced I/M program shall be implemented in the newly included 1990 Census-defined urbanized areas, if the 1980 Census-defined urban area population is 200,000 or more.
(8) If a marginal ozone nonattainment area, not required to implement enhanced I/M under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, is reclassified to moderate, a basic I/M program shall be implemented in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area(s) with a population of 200,000 or more. If the area is reclassified to serious or worse, an enhanced I/M program shall be implemented in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area, if the 1980 Census-defined urban area population is 200,000 or more.
(9) If a moderate ozone or CO nonattainment area is reclassified to serious or worse, an enhanced I/M program shall be implemented in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area, if the 1980 Census-defined population is 200,000 or more.
(b) Extent of area coverage. (1) In an ozone transport region, the program shall cover all counties within subject MSAs or subject portions of MSAs, as defined by OMB in 1990, except largely rural counties having a population density of less than 200 persons per square mile based on the 1990 Census and counties with less than 1% of the population in the MSA may be excluded provided that at least 50% of the MSA population is included in the program. This provision does not preclude the voluntary inclusion of portions of an excluded county. Non-urbanized islands not connected to the mainland by roads, bridges, or tunnels may be excluded without regard to population.
(2) Outside of ozone transport regions, programs shall nominally cover at least the entire urbanized area, based on the 1990 census. Exclusion of some urban population is allowed as long as an equal number of non-urban residents of the MSA containing the subject urbanized area are included to compensate for the exclusion.
(3) Emission reduction benefits from expanding coverage beyond the minimum required urban area boundaries can be applied toward the reasonable further progress requirements or can be used for offsets, provided the covered vehicles are operated in the nonattainment area, but not toward the enhanced I/M performance standard requirement.
(4) In a multi-state urbanized area with a population of 200,000 or more that is required under paragraph (a) of this section to implement I/M, any State with a portion of the area having a 1990 Census-defined population of 50,000 or more shall implement an I/M program. The other coverage requirements in paragraph (b) of this section shall apply in multi-state areas as well.
(5) Notwithstanding the limitation in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, in an ozone transport region, States which opt for a program which meets the performance standard described in §51.351(h) and claim in their SIP less emission reduction credit than the basic performance standard for one or more pollutants, may apply a geographic bubble covering areas in the State not otherwise subject to an I/M requirement to achieve emission reductions from other measures equal to or greater than what would have been achieved if the low enhanced performance standard were met in the subject I/M areas. Emissions reductions from non-I/M measures shall not be counted towards the OTR low enhanced performance standard.
(c) Requirements after attainment. All I/M programs shall provide that the program will remain effective, even if the area is redesignated to attainment status or the standard is otherwise rendered no longer applicable, until the State submits and EPA approves a SIP revision which convincingly demonstrates that the area can maintain the relevant standard(s) without benefit of the emission reductions attributable to the I/M program. The State shall commit to fully implement and enforce the program until such a demonstration can be made and approved by EPA. At a minimum, for the purposes of SIP approval, legislation authorizing the program shall not sunset prior to the attainment deadline for the applicable National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall describe the applicable areas in detail and, consistent with §51.372 of this subpart, shall include the legal authority or rules necessary to establish program boundaries.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 60 FR 48034, Sept. 18, 1995; 61 FR 39036, July 25, 1996; 65 FR 45532, July 24, 2000]
§ 51.351 Enhanced I/M performance standard.
top
Link to an amendment published at 71 FR 17710, Apr. 7, 2006.
(a) [Reserved]
(b) On-road testing. The performance standard shall include on-road testing (including out-of-cycle repairs in the case of confirmed failures) of at least 0.5% of the subject vehicle population, or 20,000 vehicles whichever is less, as a supplement to the periodic inspection required in paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of this section. Specific requirements are listed in §51.371 of this subpart.
(c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall include inspection of all 1996 and later light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks equipped with certified on-board diagnostic systems, and repair of malfunctions or system deterioration identified by or affecting OBD systems as specified in §51.357. For States using some version of MOBILE5 prior to mandated use of the MOBILE6 and subsequent versions of EPA's mobile source emission factor model, the OBD-I/M portion of the State's program as well as the applicable enhanced I/M performance standard may be assumed to be equivalent to performing the evaporative system purge test, the evaporative system fill-neck pressure test, and the IM240 using grams-per-mile (gpm) cutpoints of 0.60 gpm HC, 10.0 gpm CO, and 1.50 gpm NOX on MY 1996 and newer vehicles and assuming a start date of January 1, 2002 for the OBD-I/M portion of the performance standard. This interim credit assessment does not add to but rather replaces credit for any other test(s) that may be performedon MY 1996 and newer vehicles, with the exception of the gas-cap-only evaporative system test, which may be added to the State's program to generate additional HC reduction credit. This interim assumption shall apply even in the event that the State opts to discontinue its current I/M tests on MY 1996 and newer vehicles in favor of an OBD-I/M check on those same vehicles, with the exception of the gas-cap evaporative system test. If a State currently claiming the gas-cap test in its I/M SIP decides to discontinue that test on some segment of its subject fleet previously covered, then the State will need to revise its SIP and I/M modeling to quantify the resulting loss in credit, per established modeling policy for the gas-cap pressure test. Once MOBILE6 is released and its use required, the interim, MOBILE5-based modeling methodology described in this section will be replaced by the OBD-I/M credit available from the MOBILE6 and subsequent mobile source emission factor models.
(d) Modeling requirements. Equivalency of the emission levels which will be achieved by the I/M program design in the SIP to those of the model program described in this section shall be demonstrated using the most current version of EPA's mobile source emission model, or an alternative approved by the Administrator, using EPA guidance to aid in the estimation of input parameters. States may adopt alternative approaches that meet this performance standard. States may do so through program design changes that affect normal I/M input parameters to the mobile source emission factor model, or through program changes (such as the accelerated retirement of high emitting vehicles) that reduce in-use mobile source emissions. If the Administrator finds, under section 182(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act pertaining to reasonable further progress demonstrations or section 182(f)(1) of the Act pertaining to provisions for major stationary sources, that NOX emission reductions are not beneficial in a given ozone nonattainment area, then NOX emission reductions are not required of the enhanced I/M program, but the program shall be designed to offset NOX increases resulting from the repair of HC and CO failures.
(e) [Reserved]
(f) High Enhanced Performance Standard. Enhanced I/M programs shall 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), achieved from highway mobile sources as a result of the program. The emission levels achieved by the State's program design shall be calculated using the most current version, at the time of submittal, of the EPA mobile source emission factor model or an alternative model approved by the Administrator, and shall meet the minimum performance standard both in operation and for SIP approval. Areas shall 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 subject to enhanced I/M and subject areas in the Ozone Transport Region, the performance standard must be met for both oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section. Except as provided in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this section, the model program elements for the enhanced I/M performance standard shall be as follows:
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. For areas with existing I/M programs, 1983. For areas newly subject, 1995.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and later vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles, and light duty trucks, rated up to 8,500 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR).
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Transient mass-emission testing on 1986 and later model year vehicles using the IM240 driving cycle, two-speed testing (as described in appendix B of this subpart S) of 1981–1985 vehicles, and idle testing (as described in appendix B of this subpart S) of pre-1981 vehicles is assumed.
(7) Emission standards. (i) Emission standards for 1986 through 1993 model year light duty vehicles, and 1994 and 1995 light-duty vehicles not meeting Tier 1 emission standards, of 0.80 gpm hydrocarbons (HC), 20 gpm CO, and 2.0 gpm NOX;
(ii) Emission standards for 1986 through 1993 light duty trucks less than 6000 pounds gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), and 1994 and 1995 trucks not meeting Tier 1 emission standards, of 1.2 gpm HC, 20 gpm CO, and 3.5 gpm NOX;
(iii) Emission standards for 1986 through 1993 light duty trucks greater than 6000 pounds GVWR, and 1994 and 1995 trucks not meeting the Tier 1 emission standards, of 1.2 gpm HC, 20 gpm CO, and 3.5 gpm NOX;
(iv) Emission standards for 1994 and later light duty vehicles meeting Tier 1 emission standards of 0.70 gpm HC, 15 gpm CO, and 1.4 gpm NOX;
(v) Emission standards for 1994 and later light duty trucks under 6000 pounds GVWR and meeting Tier 1 emission standards of 0.70 gpm HC, 15 gpm CO, and 2.0 gpm NOX;
(vi) Emission standards for 1994 and later light duty trucks greater than 6000 pounds GVWR and meeting Tier 1 emission standards of 0.80 gpm HC, 15 gpm CO and 2.5 gpm NOX;
(vii) Emission standards for 1981–1985 model year vehicles of 1.2% CO, and 220 gpm HC for the idle, two-speed tests and loaded steady-state tests (as described in appendix B of this subpart S); and
(viii) Maximum exhaust dilution measured as no less than 6% CO plus carbon dioxide (CO2) on vehicles subject to a steady-state test (as described in appendix B of this subpart S); and
(viii) Maximum exhaust dilution measured as no less than 6% CO plus carbon dioxide (CO2) on vehicles subject to a steady-state test (as described in appendix B of this subpart S).
(8) Emission control device inspections. (i) Visual inspection of the catalyst and fuel inlet restrictor on all 1984 and later model year vehicles.
(ii) Visual inspection of the positive crankcase ventilation valve on 1968 through 1971 model years, inclusive, and of the exhaust gas recirculation valve on 1972 through 1983 model year vehicles, inclusive.
(9) Evaporative system function checks. Evaporative system integrity (pressure) test on 1983 and later model year vehicles and an evaporative system transient purge test on 1986 and later model year vehicles.
(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test failure rate among pre-1981 model year vehicles.
(11) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as a percentage of failed vehicles.
(12) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate.
(13) Evaluation date. Enhanced I/M program areas subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall be shown to obtain the same or lower emission levels as the model program described in this paragraph by January 1, 2002 to within ±0.02 gpm. Subject programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to maintain this level of emission reduction (or better) through their attainment deadline for the applicable NAAQS standard(s).
(g) Alternate Low Enhanced I/M Performance Standard. An enhanced I/M area which is either not subject to or has an approved State Implementation Plan pursuant to the requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 for Reasonable Further Progress in 1996, and does not have a disapproved plan for Reasonable Further Progress for the period after 1996 or a disapproved plan for attainment of the air quality standards for ozone or CO, may select the alternate low enhanced I/M performance standard described below in lieu of the standard described in paragraph (f) of this section. The model program elements for this alternate low enhanced I/M performance standard are:
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. For areas with existing I/M programs, 1983. For areas newly subject, 1995.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and newer vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles, and light duty trucks, rated up to 8,500 pounds GVWR.
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Idle testing of all covered vehicles (as described in appendix B of subpart S).
(7) Emission standards. Those specified in 40 CFR part 85, subpart W.
(8) Emission control device inspections. Visual inspection of the positive crankcase ventilation valve on all 1968 through 1971 model year vehicles, inclusive, and of the exhaust gas recirculation valve on all 1972 and newer model year vehicles.
(9) Evaporative system function checks. None.
(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test failure rate among pre-1981 model year vehicles.
(11) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as a percentage of failed vehicles.
(12) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate.
(13) Evaluation date. Enhanced I/M program areas subject to the provisions of this paragraph (g) shall be shown to obtain the same or lower emission levels as the model program described in this paragraph by January 1, 2002 to within ±0.02 gpm. Subject programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to maintain this level of emission reduction (or better) through their attainment deadline for the applicable NAAQS standard(s).
(h) Ozone Transport Region Low-Enhanced Performance Standard. An attainment area, marginal ozone area, or moderate ozone area with a 1980 Census population of less than 200,000 in the urbanized area, in an ozone transport region, that is required to implement enhanced I/M under section 184(b)(1)(A) of the Clean Air Act, but was not previously required to or did not in fact implement basic I/M under the Clean Air Act as enacted prior to 1990 and is not subject to the requirements for basic I/M programs in this subpart, may select the performance standard described below in lieu of the standard described in paragraph (f) or (g) of this section as long as the difference in emission reductions between the program described in paragraph (g) and this paragraph are made up with other measures, as provided in §51.350(b)(5). Offsetting measures shall not include those otherwise required by the Clean Air Act in the areas from which credit is bubbled. The program elements for this alternate OTR enhanced I/M performance standard are:
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. January 1, 1999.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and newer vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles, and light duty trucks, rated up to 8,500 pounds GVWR.
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Remote sensing measurements on 1968–1995 vehicles; on-board diagnostic system checks on 1996 and newer vehicles.
(7) Emission standards. For remote sensing measurements, a carbon monoxide standard of 7.5% (with at least two separate readings above this level to establish a failure).
(8) Emission control device inspections. Visual inspection of the catalytic converter on 1975 and newer vehicles and visual inspection of the positive crankcase ventilation valve on 1968–1974 vehicles.
(9) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as a percentage of failed vehicles.
(10) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate.
(11) Evaluation date. Enhanced I/M program areas subject to the provisions of this paragraph shall be shown to obtain the same or lower VOC and NOx emission levels as the model program described in this paragraph (h) by January 1, 2002 to within ±0.02 gpm. Subject programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to maintain this level of emission reduction (or better) through their attainment deadline for the applicable NAAQS standard(s). Equality of substituted emission reductions to the benefits of the low enhanced performance standard must be demonstrated for the same evaluation date.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 59 FR 32343, June 23, 1994; 60 FR 48035, Sept. 18, 1995; 61 FR 39036, July 25, 1996; 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 24433, May 4, 1998; 65 FR 45532, July 24, 2000; 66 FR 18176, Apr. 5, 2001]
§ 51.352 Basic I/M performance standard.
top
Link to an amendment published at 71 FR 17711, Apr. 7, 2006.
(a) Basic I/M programs shall be designed and implemented to meet or exceed a minimum performance standard, which is expressed as emission levels achieved from highway mobile sources as a result of the program. The performance standard shall be established using the following model I/M program inputs and local characteristics, such as vehicle mix and local fuel controls. Similarly, the emission reduction benefits of the State's program design shall be estimated using the most current version of the EPA mobile source emission model, and shall meet the minimum performance standard both in operation and for SIP approval.
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. For areas with existing I/M programs, 1983. For areas newly subject, 1994.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and later model year vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles.
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Idle test.
(7) Emission standards. No weaker than specified in 40 CFR part 85, subpart W.
(8) Emission control device inspections. None.
(9) Stringency. A 20% emission test failure rate among pre-1981 model year vehicles.
(10) Waiver rate. A 0% waiver rate.
(11) Compliance rate. A 100% compliance rate.
(12) Evaluation date. Basic I/M programs shall be shown to obtain the same or lower emission levels as the model inputs by 1997 for ozone nonattainment areas and 1996 for CO nonattainment areas; and, for serious or worse ozone nonattainment areas, on each applicable milestone and attainment deadline, thereafter.
(b) Oxides of nitrogen. Basic I/M testing in ozone nonattainment areas shall be designed such that no increase in NOX emissions occurs as a result of the program. If the Administrator finds, under section 182(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act pertaining to reasonable further progress demonstrations or section 182(f)(1) of the Act pertaining to provisions for major stationary sources, that NOX emission reductions are not beneficial in a given ozone nonattainment area, then the basic I/M NOX requirement may be omitted. States shall implement any required NOX controls within 12 months of implementation of the program deadlines required in §51.373 of this subpart, except that newly implemented I/M programs shall include NOX controls from the start.
(c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall include inspection of all 1996 and later light-duty vehicles equipped with certified on-board diagnostic systems, and repair of malfunctions or system deterioration identified by or affecting OBD systems as specified in §51.357. For States using some version of MOBILE5 prior to mandated use of the MOBILE6 and subsequent versions of EPA's mobile source emission factor model, the OBD-I/M portion of the State's program as well as the applicable I/M performance standard may be assumed to be equivalent to performing the evaporative system purge test, the evaporative system fill-neck pressure test, and the IM240 using grams-per-mile (gpm) cutpoints of 0.60 gpm HC, 10.0 gpm CO, and 1.50 gpm NOX on MY 1996 and newer vehicles and assuming a start date of January 1, 2002 for the OBD-I/M portion of the performance standard. This interim credit assessment does not add to but rather replaces credit for any other test(s) that may be performed on MY 1996 and newer vehicles, with the exception of the gas-cap-only evaporative system test, which may be added to the State's program to generate additional HC reduction credit. This interim assumption shall apply even in the event that the State opts to discontinue its current I/M tests on MY 1996 and newer vehicles in favor of an OBD-I/M check on those same vehicles, with the exception of the gas-cap evaporative system test. If a State currently claiming the gas-cap test in its I/M SIP decides to discontinue that test on some segment of its subject fleet previously covered, then the State will need to revise its SIP and I/M modeling to quantify the resulting loss in credit, per established modeling policy for the gas-cap pressure test. Once MOBILE6 is released and its use required, the interim, MOBILE5-based modeling methodology described in this section will be replaced by the OBD-I/M credit available from the MOBILE6 and subsequent mobile source emission factor models.
(d) Modeling requirements. Equivalency of emission levels which will be achieved by the I/M program design in the SIP to those of the model program described in this section shall be demonstrated using the most current version of EPA's mobile source emission model and EPA guidance on the estimation of input parameters. Areas required to implement basic I/M programs shall meet the performance standard for the pollutants which cause them to be subject to basic requirements. Areas subject as a result of ozone nonattainment shall meet the standard for VOCs and shall demonstrate no NOX increase, as required in paragraph (b) of this section.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 24433, May 4, 1998; 66 FR 18177, Apr. 5, 2001]
§ 51.353 Network type and program evaluation.
top
Link to an amendment published at 71 FR 17711, Apr. 7, 2006.
Basic and enhanced I/M programs can be centralized, decentralized, or a hybrid of the two at the State's discretion, but shall be demonstrated to achieve the same (or better) level of emission reduction as the applicable performance standard described in either §51.351 or 51.352 of this subpart. For decentralized programs other than those meeting the design characteristics described in paragraph (a) of this section, the State must demonstrate that the program is achieving the level of effectiveness claimed in the plan within 12 months of the plan's final conditional approval before EPA can convert that approval to a final full approval. The adequacy of these demonstrations will be judged by the Administrator on a case-by-case basis through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
(a) Presumptive equivalency. A decentralized network consisting of stations that only perform official I/M testing (which may include safety-related inspections) and in which owners and employees of those stations, or companies owning those stations, are contractually or legally barred from engaging in motor vehicle repair or service, motor vehicle parts sales, and motor vehicle sale and leasing, either directly or indirectly, and are barred from referring vehicle owners to particular providers of motor vehicle repair services (except as provided in §51.369(b)(1) of this subpart) shall be considered presumptively equivalent to a centralized, test-only system including comparable test elements. States may allow such stations to engage in the full range of sales not covered by the above prohibition, including self-serve gasoline, pre-packaged oil, or other, non-automotive, convenience store items. At the State's discretion, such stations may also fulfill other functions typically carried out by the State such as renewal of vehicle registration and driver's licenses, or tax and fee collections.
(b) [Reserved]
(c) Program evaluation. Enhanced I/M programs shall 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 Clean Air Act and this subpart.
(1) The State shall report the results of the program evaluation on a biennial basis, starting two years after the initial start date of mandatory testing as required in §51.373 of this subpart.
(2) The evaluation shall be considered in establishing actual emission reductions achieved from I/M for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of sections 182(g)(1) and 182(g)(2) of the Clean Air Act, relating to reductions in emissions and compliance demonstration.
(3) The evaluation program shall consist, at a minimum, of those items described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section and program evaluation data using a sound evaluation methodology, as approved by EPA, and evaporative system checks, specified in §51.357(a) (9) and (10) of this subpart, for model years subject to those evaporative system test procedures. The test data shall be obtained from a representative, random sample, taken at the time of initial inspection (before repair) on a minimum of 0.1 percent of the vehicles subject to inspection in a given year. Such vehicles shall receive a State administered or monitored test, as specified in this paragraph (c)(3), prior to the performance of I/M-triggered repairs during the inspection cycle under consideration.
(4) The program evaluation test data shall be submitted to EPA and shall be capable of providing accurate information about the overall effectiveness of an I/M program, such evaluation to begin no later than November 30, 1998.
(5) Areas that qualify for and choose to implement an OTR low enhanced I/M program, as established in §51.351(h), and that claim in their SIP less emission reduction credit than the basic performance standard for one or more pollutants, are exempt from the requirements of paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section. The reports required under §51.366 of this part shall be sufficient in these areas to satisfy the requirements of Clean Air Act for program reporting.
(d) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall include a description of the network to be employed, the required legal authority, and, in the case of areas making claims under paragraph (b) of this section, the required demonstration.
(2) The SIP shall include a description of the evaluation schedule and protocol, the sampling methodology, the data collection and analysis system, the resources and personnel for evaluation, and related details of the evaluation program, and the legal authority enabling the evaluation program.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 61 FR 39037, July 25, 1996; 63 FR 1368, Jan. 9, 1998; 65 FR 45532, July 24, 2000]
§ 51.354 Adequate tools and resources.
top
(a) Administrative resources. The program shall maintain the administrative resources necessary to perform all of the program functions including quality assurance, data analysis and reporting, and the holding of hearings and adjudication of cases. A portion of the test fee or a separately assessed per vehicle fee shall be collected, placed in a dedicated fund and retained, to be used to finance program oversight, management, and capital expenditures. Alternatives to this approach shall be acceptable if the State can demonstrate that adequate funding of the program can be maintained in some other fashion (e.g., through contractual obligation along with demonstrated past performance). Reliance on future uncommitted annual or biennial appropriations from the State or local General Fund is not acceptable, unless doing otherwise would be a violation of the State's constitution. This section shall in no way require the establishment of a test fee if the State chooses to fund the program in some other manner.
(b) Personnel. The program shall employ sufficient personnel to effectively carry out the duties related to the program, including but not limited to administrative audits, inspector audits, data analysis, program oversight, program evaluation, public education and assistance, and enforcement against stations and inspectors as well as against motorists who are out of compliance with program regulations and requirements.
(c) Equipment. The program shall possess equipment necessary to achieve the objectives of the program and meet program requirements, including but not limited to a steady supply of vehicles for covert auditing, test equipment and facilities for program evaluation, and computers capable of data processing, analysis, and reporting. Equipment or equivalent services may be contractor supplied or owned by the State or local authority.
(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the resources that will be used for program operation, and discuss how the performance standard will be met.
(1) The SIP shall include 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 §51.366 of this subpart.
(2) The SIP shall include a description of personnel resources. The plan shall 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.
§ 51.355 Test frequency and convenience.
top
(a) The performance standards for I/M programs assume an annual test frequency; other schedules may be approved if the required emission targets are achieved. The SIP shall describe the test schedule in detail, including the test year selection scheme if testing is other than annual. The SIP shall 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. (continued)