Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Texas; Attainment Demonstration for the Dallas/Fort Worth 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area; Determination of Attainment of the 1997 Ozone Standard, 23487-23493 [2015-09901]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 81 (Tuesday, April 28, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23487-23493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09901]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2012-0098; FRL-9926-92-Region-6]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Texas; Attainment Demonstration for the Dallas/Fort Worth 1997 8-Hour 
Ozone Nonattainment Area; Determination of Attainment of the 1997 Ozone 
Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

[[Page 23488]]

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
disapprove revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
submitted to meet certain requirements under section 182(c) of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) 
nonattainment area under the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The revisions 
address the attainment demonstration submitted on January 17, 2012, by 
the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for the DFW 
Serious nonattainment area. The EPA is also proposing to determine that 
the DFW 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is currently attaining the 1997 
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This determination 
is based upon certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area 
has monitored attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the 2012-2014 
monitoring period. If this proposed determination is made final, the 
requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, a 
reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, contingency measures, and other 
planning SIPs related to attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS shall be 
suspended for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS. This proposed action is consistent with the requirements of 
section 110 and part D of the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 28, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2012-0098, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.
     Email: Ms. Carrie Paige at paige.carrie@epa.gov.
     Mail or delivery: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning 
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2012-
0098. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in 
the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The 
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which 
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment 
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the 
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you 
include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6, 
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 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 publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carrie Paige, telephone (214) 665-
6521, email address paige.carrie@epa.gov. To inspect the hard copy 
materials, please contact Ms. Paige or Mr. Bill Deese at (214) 665-
7253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' 
and ``our'' means EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is the EPA proposing?
II. Our Action Under Section 182(c) of the CAA (the Serious Area 
Requirements)
    A. Background
    B. What is the EPA proposing to disapprove?
    C. What are the consequences of a disapproved SIP?
III. Our Action Under the Clean Data Determination
    A. Background
    B. EPA's Analysis of the Relevant Air Quality Data
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the EPA proposing?

    The EPA is proposing to disapprove Texas's 8-hour ozone attainment 
demonstration for the DFW Serious nonattainment area because the area 
failed to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS by the June 15, 2013 attainment 
date. EPA's analysis and findings are discussed in this proposed 
rulemaking.
    We are also proposing to determine that the DFW ozone nonattainment 
area is currently in attainment of the 1997 ozone standard based on the 
most recent 3 years of quality-assured air quality data. Certified 
ambient air monitoring data show that the area has monitored attainment 
of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the 2012-2014 monitoring period. This 
action is also known as a ``Clean Data Determination'' (see 40 CFR 
51.1118).
    This proposal is based on EPA's review of complete, quality assured 
and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2010-2012 and 
2012-2014 monitoring periods that are available in the EPA Air Quality 
System (AQS). The AQS report for these monitors, for 2010 through 2014, 
is provided in the docket for this rulemaking.

II. Our Action Under Section 182(c) of the CAA (the Serious Area 
Requirements)

A. Background

1. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards
    Section 109 of the CAA requires the EPA to establish NAAQS for 
pollutants that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health 
and welfare and to develop a primary and secondary standard for each 
NAAQS. The primary standard is designed to protect human health with an 
adequate margin of safety and the secondary standard is designed to 
protect public welfare. The EPA has set NAAQS for six common air 
pollutants, also referred to as criteria pollutants: Carbon monoxide, 
lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. 
These standards present state and local governments with the minimum 
air quality levels they must meet to comply with the Act.
2. What is a State Implementation Plan?
    The SIP is a plan for clean air, required by section 110 and other 
provisions of the CAA. The Act requires states to develop air pollution 
regulations and control strategies to ensure that for each area 
designated nonattainment for a NAAQS, state air quality will improve 
and meet the NAAQS established by the EPA. A SIP is a set of air 
pollution regulations, control strategies, other means or techniques, 
and technical analyses developed by the state, to ensure that the state 
meets the NAAQS. A SIP protects air quality primarily by addressing air 
pollution at its point of origin. A SIP can be extensive, containing 
state regulations or other enforceable documents, and supporting

[[Page 23489]]

information such as emissions inventories, monitoring networks, and 
modeling demonstrations. When a state makes changes to the regulations 
and control strategies in its SIP, such revisions must be submitted to 
the EPA for approval and incorporation into the federally-enforceable 
SIP.
3. What is ozone and what is the 1997 8-hour ozone standard?
    Ozone is a gas composed of three oxygen atoms. Ground-level ozone 
is generally not emitted directly from a vehicle's exhaust or an 
industrial smokestack, but is created by a chemical reaction between 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) in the presence of sunlight.\1\ Ozone is known 
primarily as a summertime air pollutant. Motor vehicle exhaust and 
industrial emissions, gasoline vapors, chemical solvents and natural 
sources emit NOX and VOCs. Urban areas tend to have high 
concentrations of ground-level ozone, but areas without significant 
industrial activity and with relatively low vehicular traffic are also 
subject to increased ozone levels because wind carries ozone and its 
precursors hundreds of miles from their sources.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ VOC and NOX are often referred to as 
``precursors'' to ozone formation.
    \2\ For additional information on ozone, please visit 
www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 18, 1997, the EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 
parts per million (ppm), known as the 1997 ozone standard.\3\ See 62 FR 
38856 and 40 CFR 50.10. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, 
Appendix I, the 1997 ozone standard is attained when the 3-year average 
of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient ozone 
concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), the EPA promulgated a 
revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm, known as the 2008 ozone 
standard. On April 30, 2012, the EPA promulgated designations under 
the 2008 ozone standard (77 FR 30088) and in that action, the EPA 
designated 10 counties in the DFW area as a Moderate ozone 
nonattainment area: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, 
Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant, and Wise. The EPA's actions herein do not 
address the DFW nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. The DFW Nonattainment Area and Its Current Nonattainment 
Classification Under the 1997 Ozone Standard
    On April 30, 2004, the EPA designated and classified the 9-county 
DFW area (consisting of Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, 
Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall and Tarrant counties) as a Moderate 
nonattainment area under the 1997 ozone standard with an attainment 
date of no later than June 15, 2010 (see 69 FR 23858 and 69 FR 23951). 
However, the DFW area failed to attain the 1997 ozone standard by June 
15, 2010, and was accordingly reclassified as a Serious ozone 
nonattainment area with an attainment date of no later than June 15, 
2013 (75 FR 79302, December 20, 2010). Following reclassification to 
Serious, the State submitted a revised attainment plan for the DFW area 
dated January 17, 2012. The area failed to attain the 1997 ozone 
standard by June 15, 2013, and in a separate rulemaking, the EPA 
proposed to determine that the area did not attain the standard by the 
attainment date and to reclassify the area to Severe (see 80 FR 8274, 
February 17, 2015).
5. What is an attainment demonstration?
    In general, an attainment demonstration shows how an area will 
achieve the standard as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 
the attainment date specified for its classification. A typical 
attainment demonstration is made with the use of air quality models 
that simulate the changes of pollutant concentrations in the atmosphere 
encompassing the nonattainment area and thus is an estimate.\4\ As a 
part of this showing, the demonstration should simulate projected 
emissions growth due to factors such as population growth and pollution 
reductions due to imposition of controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For more information regarding an attainment demonstration, 
please see the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of 
the CAA Amendments of 1990 at 57 FR 13498, 13510 (April 16, 1992); 
40 CFR 51.112; and 40 CFR 51.908.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. What did the state submit?
    The TCEQ's January 17, 2012 attainment demonstration submittal for 
the DFW Serious nonattainment area included air quality modeling and a 
weight-of-evidence analysis in which the state purported that the area 
would attain by the area's attainment date of June 13, 2013; Motor 
Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) for transportation conformity 
purposes; an analysis for Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM); 
an analysis for Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT); and a 
contingency plan. In addition, as part of the submission, the state 
addressed the CAA requirements for enhanced ambient monitoring and the 
clean-fuel fleet programs (CFFPs) at section 182(c) of the Act. On 
November 12, 2014, the EPA approved the RFP plan for the DFW Serious 
nonattainment area \5\ and the associated contingency plan and found 
that the State has fulfilled the CAA requirements for enhanced ambient 
monitoring and the CFFPs (see 79 FR 67068). On March 27, 2015, the EPA 
approved the portion of the January 17, 2012 submittal that addresses 
the RACT requirements (see 80 FR 16291).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Separately on January 17, 2012, the TCEQ submitted the RFP 
plan, with contingency measures, for the DFW Serious nonattainment 
area. That submittal and EPA's action are available at 
www.regulations.gov, docket number EPA-R06-OAR-2012-0099.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What is the EPA proposing to disapprove?

    We are proposing to disapprove the DFW Serious area attainment 
demonstration because it was not adequate for the area to attain the 
1997 ozone standard by its attainment date. Because we are disapproving 
the attainment demonstration, we must also disapprove the associated 
RACM analysis and MVEBs that are included within that attainment 
demonstration. Under the Act's RACM requirements, a State must 
implement all reasonable measures. EPA relates this requirement to the 
attainment demonstration by interpreting the requirement to call for 
any reasonable measures be implemented that would accelerate attainment 
of the standard. Because of the relationship to the attainment 
demonstration, the RACM analysis cannot be approved. Finally, 
approvable MVEBs must be consistent with an approvable attainment plan.

C. What are the consequences of a disapproved SIP?

    This section explains the consequences of disapproval of a SIP that 
addresses a mandatory requirement under the CAA. The CAA stipulates the 
imposition of sanctions and the promulgation of a federal 
implementation plan (FIP) if EPA disapproves a required plan submission 
and the deficiency is not corrected within the relevant timeframe.
1. What are the Act's provisions for sanctions?
    If the EPA disapproves a required SIP or component(s) of a required 
SIP, section 179(a) of the Act provides for the imposition of sanctions 
unless the deficiency is corrected within 18 months of the effective 
date of the final disapproval. The imposition of sanctions would be 
stayed if the state submits a SIP for which the EPA proposes full or 
conditional approval and sanctions would not apply or would be lifted 
once EPA approves a SIP correcting the deficiency. Additionally, if EPA 
finalizes a clean data determination (CDD) for the area within

[[Page 23490]]

the 18 months, the sanctions clocks will be tolled so long as the area 
remains clean. If the deficiency is not corrected within such timeframe 
and no CDD is finalized, the first sanction would apply 18 months after 
the EPA's disapproval of the SIP is effective. Under the EPA's 
sanctions regulations at 40 CFR 52.31, the first sanction would be an 
offset ratio of 2:1 for sources subject to the new source review 
requirements under section 173 of the Act. The second sanction would 
apply 24 months after the effective date of the final disapproval, 
unless the deficiency is corrected by that time. The second sanction is 
a limitation on the use of federal highway funds as provided by section 
179(b)(1) of the Act. The EPA also has authority under CAA section 
110(m) to sanction a broader area, but is not proposing to take such 
action in today's rulemaking.
2. What are the Act's provisions for a Federal Implementation Plan?
    In addition to sanctions, if the EPA disapproves the required SIP 
revision, or a portion thereof, section 110(c)(1) of the Act provides 
that the EPA must promulgate a FIP no later than 2 years from the 
effective date of the disapproval if the deficiency has not been 
corrected within that time period. The deficiency would be corrected if 
the state submits and EPA approves a SIP correcting the deficiency.
3. What action would stop the imposition of sanctions and a FIP?
    The State must address the deficiency forming the basis of the 
disapproval. The sanctions and FIP clocks would also stop (or any 
imposed sanctions would be lifted) if the area attains the 1997 ozone 
standard and EPA approves a redesignation substitute for the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS.\6\ Alternatively, if EPA finalizes the Clean Data Determination 
(CDD) it is proposing in this action, the sanctions clock and EPA's 
obligation to promulgate an attainment demonstration FIP would be 
tolled for so long as the CDD remains in place.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In EPA's final rule to implement SIP requirements under the 
2008 ozone standard (the SIP requirements rule or SRR), among other 
things, we revoked the 1997 ozone standard and finalized a 
redesignation substitute procedure for a revoked standard. See 80 FR 
12264, March 6, 2015 and 40 CFR 51.1105(b). Under this redesignation 
substitute procedure for a revoked NAAQS, the demonstration must 
show that the area has attained that revoked NAAQS due to permanent 
and enforceable emission reductions and that the area will maintain 
that revoked NAAQS for 10 years from the date of EPA's approval of 
this showing.
    \7\ In the SRR, the EPA finalized the same approach with respect 
to the Clean Data Policy for the 2008 ozone NAAQS as it applied in 
the Phase 1 Rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. That is, a determination 
of attainment would suspend the obligation to submit attainment 
planning SIP elements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Such a determination 
would suspend the obligation to submit any attainment-related SIP 
elements not yet approved in the SIP, for so long as the area 
continues to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS. In addition, the EPA 
replaced 40 CFR 51.918 with 40 CFR 51.1118 to consolidate in one 
regulation a comprehensive provision applicable to determinations of 
attainment for the current and former ozone NAAQS. Thus, 40 CFR 
51.1118 will apply to a determination of attainment that is made 
with respect to any revoked or current ozone NAAQS--the 1-hour, the 
1997 or the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, a final CDD would suspend 
the duty to submit the Serious area SIP revisions and the sanctions 
and FIP clocks. However, should the area violate the 1997 ozone 
standard after the CDD is finalized, the EPA would rescind the CDD 
and the sanctions and FIP clocks would resume. See 80 FR 12264, 
12296 and 12317 and 40 CFR 51.1118.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. What are the ramifications regarding conformity?
    In an attainment demonstration SIP the state addresses, among other 
issues, transportation conformity. Conformity to a SIP means that 
transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, 
worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. 
Conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Act for ensuring that 
the effects of emissions from all on-road sources are consistent with 
attainment of the standard. The federal conformity rules at 40 CFR 
93.120 require the implementation of a conformity freeze when the EPA 
disapproves an attainment demonstration SIP. A conformity freeze can 
affect an area's long range transportation plans and transportation 
improvement programs (TIPs). However, EPA's final rule addressing SIP 
requirements under the 2008 ozone standard and revoking the 1997 ozone 
standard for all purposes, including transportation conformity, became 
effective on April 6, 2015 (see 80 FR 12264). Therefore, no conformity 
freeze will occur for the DFW area upon a final disapproval (see 80 FR 
12264, 12284).

III. Our Action Under the Clean Data Determination

A. Background

    If EPA's determination that the area is currently attaining the 
eight-hour ozone standard is finalized, 40 CFR 51.1118 of EPA's ozone 
implementation rule provides that the requirements for the States to 
submit certain RFP plans, attainment demonstrations, contingency 
measures and any other attainment planning requirements of the CAA 
related to attainment of that standard shall be suspended for as long 
as the area continues to attain the standard. However, a CDD does not 
constitute a redesignation to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the Act, and if EPA determines that the area subsequently violates the 
standard, that suspension of the requirement to submit the attainment 
planning SIP provisions is lifted, and those requirements are once 
again due. Even though EPA has finalized revocation of the 1997 eight-
hour ozone NAAQS, under 40 CFR 51.1118, an area remains subject to the 
obligations for a revoked NAAQS under 40 CFR 51, Appendix S to Subpart 
AA, Section VII(A) until either (i) the area is redesignated to 
attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS; or (ii) the EPA approves a 
demonstration for the area in a redesignation substitute procedure for 
a revoked NAAQS per the provisions of Sec.  51.1105(b). Under this 
redesignation substitute procedure for a revoked NAAQS, and for this 
limited anti-backsliding purpose, the demonstration must show that the 
area has attained that revoked NAAQS due to permanent and enforceable 
emission reductions and that the area will maintain that revoked NAAQS 
for 10 years from the date of EPA's approval of this showing. We also 
note that the Clean Data Determination does not constitute a 
Determination of Attainment by an Area's Attainment Date under sections 
179(c) and 181(b)(2) of the Act.

B. EPA's Analysis of the Relevant Air Quality Data

    For ozone, an area is considered to be attaining the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40 
CFR part 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of 
quality-assured air quality monitoring data. Under EPA regulations at 
40 CFR part 50, the 1997 ozone standard is attained when the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentrations at an ozone monitor is less than or equal to 0.08 parts 
per million (ppm), (i.e., 0.084 ppm, when rounding, based on the 
truncating conventions in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P). This 3-year 
average is referred to as the design value. When the design value is 
less than or equal to 0.084 ppm at each monitor within the area, then 
the area is meeting the NAAQS. Also, the data completeness requirement 
is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring 
data is greater than or equal to 90%, and no single year has less than 
75% data completeness as determined in Appendix P of 40 CFR part 50. 
The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 
CFR part 58, and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). The 
monitors generally should have remained at the same

[[Page 23491]]

location for the duration of the monitoring period required for 
demonstrating attainment. For ease of communication, many reports of 
ozone concentrations are given in parts per billion (ppb); ppb = ppm x 
1,000. Thus, 0.084 ppm equals 84 ppb.
    The EPA reviewed the DFW area ozone monitoring data from ambient 
ozone monitoring stations for the ozone seasons 2012 through 2014. The 
2012-2014 ozone season data for all the ozone monitors in the DFW area 
have been quality assured and certified by the EPA. The design value 
for 2012-2014 is 81 ppb. At the time of this writing, the preliminary 
ozone data for 2015 are posted on the TCEQ Web site, but are not yet 
posted in AQS.\8\ The data for the three ozone seasons 2012-2014, and 
preliminary data for 2015, show that the DFW area is attaining the 1997 
ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See https://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/data/ozone_data.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 1 shows the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentrations for the DFW nonattainment area monitors for the years 
2012-2014. (To find the overall design value for the area for a given 
year, simply find the highest design value from any of the 17 monitors 
for that year.)

   Table 1--The DFW Area Fourth High 8-Hour Ozone Average Concentrations and Design Values (ppm) for 2012-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               4th Highest daily max
                Site name and No.                ------------------------------------------------  Design value
                                                       2012            2013            2014         (2012-2014)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Worth Northwest, 48-439-1002...............           0.077           0.084           0.079           0.080
Keller, 48-439-2003.............................           0.079           0.080           0.074           0.077
Frisco, 48-085-0005.............................           0.084           0.078           0.074           0.078
Midlothian OFW, 48-139-0016.....................           0.078           0.075           0.062           0.071
Denton Airport South, 48-121-0034...............           0.081           0.085           0.077           0.081
Arlington Municipal Airport, 48-439-3011........           0.092           0.068           0.065           0.075
Dallas North No. 2, 48-113-0075.................           0.086           0.077           0.070           0.077
Rockwall Heath, 48-397-0001.....................           0.080           0.073           0.066           0.073
Grapevine Fairway, 48-439-3009..................           0.086           0.083           0.073           0.080
Kaufman, 48-257-0005............................           0.073           0.075           0.062           0.070
Eagle Mountain Lake, 48-439-0075................           0.087           0.077           0.073           0.079
Parker County, 48-367-0081......................           0.076           0.074           0.072           0.074
Cleburne Airport, 48-251-0003...................           0.082           0.077           0.071           0.076
Dallas Hinton St., 48-113-0069..................           0.087           0.081           0.066           0.078
Dallas Executive Airport, 48-113-0087...........           0.085           0.074           0.062           0.073
Pilot Point, 48-121-1032........................           0.078           0.084           0.075           0.079
Italy, 48-139-1044..............................           0.071           0.072           0.060           0.067
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As shown in Table 1, the 8-hour ozone design value for 2012-2014, which 
is based on a three-year average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 
average ozone concentration at the monitor recording the highest 
concentrations, is 81 ppb, which meets the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Data for 
2015 not yet certified also indicate that the area continues to attain 
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The AQS data reports for the DFW area for the 
three years 2012 through 2014 and a technical support document are 
included in the docket for this rulemaking.

IV. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to disapprove certain elements of the 
attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the TCEQ for the DFW Serious 
ozone nonattainment area under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
Specifically, we are proposing to disapprove the attainment 
demonstration, the demonstration for RACM, and the attainment 
demonstration MVEBs for 2012. The EPA is proposing to disapprove these 
SIP revisions because the area failed to attain the standard by its 
June 15, 2013 attainment date, and thus we have determined that the 
plan was insufficient to demonstrate attainment by the attainment date. 
The EPA is also proposing to determine that the DFW 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area is currently attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS. This 
determination is based upon certified ambient air monitoring data that 
show the area has monitored attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the 
2012-2014 monitoring period.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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 act on state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) 
and is therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed action does not impose an information collection 
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq., because this proposed SIP disapproval under section 110 
and subchapter I, part D of the CAA will not in-and-of itself create 
any new information collection burdens but simply disapproves certain 
State requirements for inclusion into the SIP. Burden is defined at 5 
CFR 1320.3(b).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct

[[Page 23492]]

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. 
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule does not 
impose any requirements or create impacts on small entities. This 
proposed SIP disapproval under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of 
the CAA will not in-and-of itself create any new requirements but 
simply disapproves certain State requirements for inclusion into the 
SIP. Accordingly, it affords no opportunity for EPA to fashion for 
small entities less burdensome compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables or exemptions from all or part of the rule. The fact that 
the CAA prescribes that various consequences (e.g., higher offset 
requirements) may or will flow from this disapproval does not mean that 
EPA either can or must conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis for 
this action. Therefore, this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of this 
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related 
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of 
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 
1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private 
sector.'' EPA has determined that the proposed disapproval action 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 action proposes to 
disapprove 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.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), 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.''
    This proposed action does not have federalism implications. It 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 disapproves 
certain State requirements for inclusion into the SIP and does not 
alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the CAA. Thus, Executive Order 13132 
does not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, this proposed 
action does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or 
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of 
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it 
because it is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997). This proposed SIP disapproval under section 110 
and subchapter I, part D of the CAA will not in-and-of itself create 
any new regulations but simply disapproves certain State requirements 
for inclusion into the SIP.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to 
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not 
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    The EPA believes that this proposed action is not subject to 
requirements of Section 12(d) of NTTAA because application of those 
requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental 
justice in this proposed action. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's 
role is to approve or

[[Page 23493]]

disapprove state choices, based on the criteria of the CAA. 
Accordingly, this action merely proposes to disapprove certain State 
requirements for inclusion into the SIP under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the CAA and will not in-and-of itself create 
any new requirements. Accordingly, it 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.

K. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this action is provided by section 110 
of the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7410).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 17, 2015.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2015-09901 Filed 4-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P