Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan, 14442-14446 [2017-05379]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
14442
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2016–0550; FRL–9957–56–
Region 6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso
Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance
Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is taking direct final action to approve
the required second carbon monoxide
(CO) maintenance plan as a revision to
the Texas State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The El Paso, Texas CO
maintenance area (El Paso Area) has
been demonstrating consistent air
quality monitoring at or below 85% of
the CO National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS or standard). Because
of this, the State of Texas, through its
designee, submitted the required second
maintenance plan for the El Paso Area
as a Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP).
DATES: This rule is effective on May 22,
2017 without further notice, unless the
EPA receives relevant adverse comment
by April 20, 2017. If the EPA receives
such comment, the EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that this
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2016–0550, at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact Jeffrey Riley, 214–665–8542,
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. For the full EPA
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
public comment policy, information
about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making
effective comments, please visit https://
www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets.
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:
Jeffrey Riley, 214–665–8542,
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment with Jeffrey Riley or Mr.
Bill Deese at 214–665–7253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA.
I. Background
Under the 1990 CAA Amendments, a
portion of the City of El Paso, Texas was
designated and classified as a moderate
nonattainment area for CO because it
did not meet the NAAQS for this criteria
pollutant 56 FR 56694 (November 1,
1991). The former El Paso CO
nonattainment area is restricted to a
narrow strip along the Rio Grande,
adjacent to Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. El
Paso’s former classification as a
moderate nonattainment area under
sections 107(d)(4)(A) and 186(a) of the
CAA imposed a schedule for attainment
of the CO NAAQS by December 31,
1995.
EPA approved the El Paso Area’s CAA
section 179 attainment demonstration
that showed attainment but for
emissions from Mexico, the motor
vehicle emissions budget, and the
contingency plan 68 FR 39457 (July 2,
2003).
EPA approved the redesignation of
the El Paso CO nonattainment area to
attainment for the CO NAAQS, the
associated CAA section 175A(a)
maintenance plan, and the included
motor vehicle emissions budgets at 73
FR 45162 (August 4, 2008). The
maintenance plan ensures continued
attainment of the CO standard until
2020.
On September 21, 2016, the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality
(TCEQ) submitted a revision to the El
Paso SIP, providing the second 10-year
update to the CO maintenance plan for
the area, as required eight years after
redesignation by section 175A(b) of the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Act and also submitted a request for
approval of the maintenance plan as a
LMP. The purpose of the LMP is to
ensure continued maintenance of CO
NAAQS in the El Paso Area for the
duration of the second 10-year
maintenance period of 2018–2028 by
demonstrating that future emissions of
this criteria pollutant are expected to
remain at or below emission levels
necessary for continued attainment of
the current CO NAAQS.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation
Since there are few specific content
requirements defined in section 175A of
the Act for subsequent (or second)
maintenance plan revisions, EPA has
exercised its discretion in determining
the recommended content of such
plans.1 If an area meets the criteria, the
State (area) may submit a maintenance
plan that is more streamlined than a full
Maintenance Plan.2 Such a streamlined
plan is called a Limited Maintenance
Plan (LMP), and the criteria of a LMP is
detailed more below. EPA’s
interpretation of section 175A of the
CAA, as it pertains to LMP’s for CO, is
contained in the October 6, 1995,
national guidance memorandum titled
‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment
Areas’’ from Joseph Paisie, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards.3 The
LMP guidance allows for areas that can
demonstrate consistent air quality
monitoring data at or below 85% of the
NAAQS for carbon monoxide to elect
for a LMP. Other criteria for the LMP
option are detailed in the 1995 guidance
as well. The TCEQ has opted to develop
a LMP for the El Paso Area to fulfill the
second 10-year CO maintenance period
required by the Act.
Consistent with the above guidance,
EPA will consider the maintenance
demonstration satisfied if the
monitoring data show the 8-hour CO
design value is at or below 7.65 parts
per million (ppm), or 85% of the 8-hour
1 See generally EPA memorandum ‘‘Procedures
for Processing Requests for to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ from John Calgani, Director Air
Quality Management Division to Regional Air
Division Directors (September 4, 1992); and EPA
memorandum ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option
for Nonclassifiable Ozone Nonattainment Areas’’
from Sally L. Shaver, Director Air Quality Strategies
& Standards Division to Regional Air Division
Directors (November 16, 1994). Copies of both
memorandums are included in the docket for this
rulemaking.
2 A limited maintenance plan generally includes
all the elements of a full CAA section 175A
maintenance plan except that a limited
maintenance plan is not required to include motor
vehicle emissions budgets for transportation
conformity purposes.
3 A copy of the October 6, 1995 Guidance
Memorandum is included in the docket for this
rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
CO NAAQS of 9 ppm. The EPA believes
that if the area begins the maintenance
period at or below 85% of the
applicable NAAQS, the continuing
applicability of the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Program (PSD)
and other Federal measures along with
the existing control measures already
adopted should provide adequate
assurance of maintenance of the
NAAQS over the 10-year period.
The EPA has reviewed the State’s SIP
submittal for the El Paso Area. Per our
1995 guidance above, a LMP consists of
several core provisions: An attainment
inventory, a demonstration of
maintenance of the applicable NAAQS,
operation of a monitoring network, a
provision for contingency measures, and
a discussion of the approach necessary
to meet conformity requirements. The
following is a summary of the criteria
for a LMP and the EPA’s evaluation of
how each provision has been met by the
SIP submittal.
A. Base Year Emissions Inventory
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Under the LMP option, a cap on total
emissions is not needed during the first
or second 10-year maintenance period,
and there is no requirement to project
emissions over the maintenance period
because an area’s monitoring data
satisfy the air quality criteria of the LMP
by beginning the maintenance period at
or below 85% of the CO NAAQS.
However, the maintenance plan should
contain an attainment year emission
inventory to identify a level of CO
emissions in the area that is sufficient
to attain the CO NAAQS. Emission
inventories contain estimates of how
much CO is produced by all categories
in the maintenance area on an annual
basis: Point sources, area sources, onroad mobile sources, and non-road
mobile sources. The September 21, 2016
SIP submittal contains a summary of the
CO emissions inventory for the El Paso
Area for the base year 2014. The
methods used to determine the El Paso
CO emission inventory are consistent
with the EPA’s most recent guidance on
developing emission inventories, and
the inventory incorporates the latest
information and planning assumptions
available at the time of its
development.4 Because violations of the
CO NAAQS are most likely to occur on
winter weekdays, the inventory
Procedures for the Preparation of Emission
Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of
Ozone. Volume I: General Guidance for Stationary
Sources, EPA–450/4–91–016, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, May 1991; and Air Emissions Inventory
Improvement Program (EIIP) Technical Report
Series—Volumes 1–10.
year maintenance period of 2018–2028.
The Federal strategies are continued
implementation of the Tier 2 motor
vehicle emission standards along with
the requirement for reduced sulfur in
TABLE I—CO EMISSIONS BY SOURCE gasoline, which became effective on
February 10, 2000. 65 FR 6697
CATEGORY, 2014
(February 10, 2000). Additionally, EPA’s
newly approved Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Tons per
Source category
winter
Emission and Fuel Standards at 79 FR
weekday
23414 (April 28, 2014) will reduce CO
emissions from new, light-duty motor
Point ......................................
5.12
Area ......................................
8.76 vehicles, light-duty trucks, and
Non-road mobile ...................
33.02 medium-duty passenger vehicles
On-road mobile .....................
112.26 beginning model year 2017 and will be
fully phased in by model year 2025. The
Total ...............................
159.16 Tier 3 fuel standards will lower the
sulfur content of gasoline and make
This LMP demonstrates continued
emission control systems more effective
attainment of the CO standard for El
for both existing and new vehicles. As
Paso County in 2014 through
newer vehicles gradually replace older
monitoring data. The 2014 emissions
ones in the fleet, these control programs
inventory shows that emissions
will result in lowered CO emissions in
decreased during the initial 10-year
the El Paso County Area and
maintenance period even with growth
elsewhere.7
in vehicle miles traveled, economic
Local control strategies remaining in
activity, and population.
place for the duration of the second 10year LMP include a vehicle emissions
B. Demonstration of Maintenance
Inspection and Maintenance (I&M)
The State has chosen to demonstrate
Program, an Oxygenated Fuels Program,
maintenance of the NAAQS by
and the PSD Program. 73 FR 45162
continued monitoring of the air quality
(August 4, 2008). The I&M program has
in the El Paso Area. To qualify for the
been in effect in the El Paso Area since
LMP option, the design value for each
January 1, 1987, and initially consisted
monitor should be at or below 85% of
of two-speed idle (TSI) testing for all
the 8-hour CO NAAQS. The value
vehicles. On January 1, 2007, an
corresponding to this 85% threshold is
enhanced vehicle I&M program began
7.65 ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS.
On-Board Diagnostics testing for all
The last monitored violation of the CO
model year 1996 and newer vehicles
NAAQS in the El Paso Area occurred in and continued to use TSI testing for all
1993 and monitored CO levels have
model year 1995 and older vehicles. All
vehicle emissions inspection stations in
been steadily in decline ever since. For
this submission, the State provided data the El Paso I&M program area are
required to offer both tests. The program
showing monitored CO values from
2006–2015, reflecting a 2015 8-hour CO addresses CO emissions as well as
ozone precursor emissions. The original
design value of 2.8 ppm. Thus, the
program as described above will remain
design value for the 8-hour standard is
in place for the duration of the second
less than 31% of the CO NAAQS. The
10-year maintenance period (2018–
EPA believes that if an area begins the
maintenance period at or below the 85% 2028).
The El Paso Oxygenated Fuel Program
threshold, it is unreasonable to expect
aims to reduce vehicle emissions by
that so much growth will occur during
the 10-year maintenance period to cause providing for the use of oxygenated
fuels. Various forms of this program
a violation of the NAAQS.6
have been in place during the winter
The CO control program for El Paso
months (October 1 through March 31)
Area is comprised of both Federal and
since October 1, 1992. The minimum
local measures. The current
oxygenate content of winter fuels in El
maintenance plan 73 FR 45162 (August
Paso County is 2.7% by weight, and this
4, 2008) for the area includes several
requirement will remain in effect for the
control strategies that will remain in
place for the duration of the second 10prepared is for a ‘‘typical winter day’’.5
The table below shows the estimated
tons of CO emitted per winter day by
source category for the 2014 base year.
4 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
14443
5 See the above-referenced October 1995 CO LMP
guidance under ‘‘3.a.—Attainment Inventory’’ and
EPA’s EI guidance titled ‘‘Procedures for the
Preparation of Emission Inventories for Carbon
Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone: Volume I,’’ also
cited in the October 1995 CO LMP guidance.
6 See Section IV.b of the above referenced 11/16/
1994 ozone LMP guidance (November 16, 1994).
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7 The Tier 2 final rule Regulatory Impact Analysis
notes reductions in NO, VOC, particulate, SOX, CO,
and hazardous air pollutant emissions from cars
and light trucks by mandating lower VOC, NOX,
and PM emission standards for these vehicles’
emissions control systems, as well as requiring
gasoline sulfur levels be reduced. Sulfur interferes
with the operation of advanced exhaust treatment
systems; reduced gasoline sulfur content improves
the efficiency of these systems.
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
14444
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
duration of the second 10-year (2018–
2028) maintenance period. This
requirement controls CO emissions by
creating more complete combustion of
fuel.
Although not a direct local control
measure, the State’s PSD Program is a
preconstruction permitting program that
has been approved as part of the Texas
SIP and applies to El Paso County. This
program has been in effect for CO since
the El Paso Area was redesignated to
attainment in 2008. Under this program,
new stationary sources of CO are
evaluated and are required to use the
Best Available Control Technology
(BACT) to control emissions. This
program will continue as a control
strategy during the second maintenance
period of 2018–2028. Therefore, we find
that the State demonstrates continued
maintenance of the standard.
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Monitoring Network and Verification
of Continued Attainment
The Plan includes a commitment to
maintain operation of the existing EPAapproved air quality monitoring
network in accordance with 40 CFR part
58. The TCEQ will continue to monitor
CO through the end of the second 10year maintenance period to ensure the
CO level remains below 85% of the
NAAQS. This data will be reported to
EPA annually.
To comply with national ambient air
monitoring requirements, and to better
understand El Paso’s air quality
problems, the State has operated a CO
monitoring network in the El Paso Area
since the 1970’s. In 2000, the El Paso
monitoring network consisted of seven
sites, including the Ascarate Park site at
the Texas/Mexico border, which
recorded the highest concentrations of
CO that year. In recognition of
significantly declining CO
concentrations in the El Paso Area since
2000, Texas has gradually reduced and
consolidated the El Paso CO monitoring
network to three sites in 2015 with
approval from the EPA. To verify the
attainment status of the area over the
maintenance period, the LMP should
contain provisions for continued
operation of an appropriate, EPAapproved monitoring network in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. The
State has an approved monitoring
network that includes CO monitoring in
the El Paso Area that was most recently
approved by the EPA on October 27,
2016. In the El Paso CO LMP, the State
commits to maintaining a CO
monitoring network to verify continued
attainment of the NAAQS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
D. Contingency Plan
Contingency measures are specific
control strategies that will be activated
if they are triggered by a predefined
event. Section 175A(d) of the Act
requires that a maintenance plan
include contingency provisions to
promptly correct any violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation
of the area to attainment. To meet this
requirement, the State has identified
appropriate contingency measures along
with a schedule for the development
and implementation of such measures.
In the September 21, 2016 submittal, the
State specifies the contingency trigger as
a violation of the CO standard based
upon air quality monitoring data from
the El Paso monitoring network. In the
event that a monitored violation of the
CO standard occurs in any portion of
the maintenance area, the State will first
analyze the data to determine if the
violation was caused by actions outside
TCEQ’s jurisdiction (e.g., emissions
from Mexico or another state) or within
its jurisdiction. If the violation was
caused by actions outside TCEQ’s
jurisdiction, TCEQ will notify the EPA.
If TCEQ determines the violation was
caused by actions within TCEQ’s
jurisdiction, TCEQ commits to adopt
and implement the identified
contingency measures as expeditiously
as practicable, but no later than 18
months.
The State specifically identifies the
following contingency measures to reattain the standard:
• Vehicle idling restrictions.
• Improved vehicle I/M.
The LMP indicates that the State may
evaluate other potential strategies to
address any future violations in the
most appropriate and effective manner
possible. Based on the above, we find
that the contingency measures provided
in the State’s El Paso CO LMP are
sufficient and meet the requirements of
section 175A(d) of the CAA.
E. Transportation and General
Conformity
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176(c) of the CAA. The EPA’s
conformity rule requires that
transportation plans, programs, and
projects that are funded under 23 U.S.C.
or the Federal Transit Act conform to
SIPs. 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.
The transportation conformity rule
(40 CFR parts 51 and 93) and the general
conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and
93) apply to nonattainment areas and
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
maintenance areas covered by an
approved maintenance plan. Under
either conformity rule, an acceptable
method of demonstrating that a Federal
action conforms to the applicable SIP is
to demonstrate that expected emissions
from the planned action are consistent
with the emissions budget for the area.
While the EPA’s LMP Option does not
exempt an area from the need to affirm
conformity, it explains that the area may
demonstrate conformity without
submitting an emissions budget. Under
the LMP Option, emissions budgets are
treated as essentially not constraining
for the length of the maintenance period
because it is unreasonable to expect that
the qualifying areas would experience
so much growth in that period that a
violation of the CO NAAQS would
result.8 Similarly, Federal actions
subject to the general conformity rule
could be considered to satisfy the
‘‘budget test’’ specified in section
93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) for the same reasons
that the budgets are essentially
considered to be unlimited.
While areas with maintenance plans
approved under the LMP Option are not
subject to the budget test, the areas
remain subject to other transportation
conformity requirements of 40 CFR part
93, subpart A. Thus, the metropolitan
planning organization (MPO) in the area
or the State must document and ensure
that:
a. Transportation plans and projects
provide for timely implementation of
SIP transportation control measures in
accordance with 40 CFR 93.113;
b. Transportation plans and projects
comply with the fiscal constraint
element per 40 CFR 93.108;
c. The MPO’s interagency
consultation procedures meet applicable
requirements of 40 CFR 93.105;
d. Conformity of transportation plans
is determined no less frequently than
every four years, and conformity of plan
amendments and transportation projects
is demonstrated in accordance with the
timing requirements specified in 40 CFR
93.104;
e. The latest planning assumptions
and emissions model are used as set
forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR
93.111;
f. Projects do not cause or contribute
to any new localized carbon monoxide
or particulate matter violations, in
accordance with procedures specified in
40 CFR 93.123; and
g. Project sponsors and/or operators
provide written commitments as
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
The EPA confers regularly with the El
Paso Area MPO and Transportation
8 78
FR 48611, 48613 (August 9, 2013).
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Policy Board, TCEQ, the Texas
Department of Transportation, the
Federal Highway Administration, and
the Federal Transit Administration to
review the Transportation Improvement
Program for the El Paso Area to
determine if the area is meeting the
transportation conformity requirements
under 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. The
El Paso Area is currently meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart
A.
Based on the evaluation outlined
above, the LMP satisfies the
requirements of the Act for the second
10-year update to the El Paso CO
maintenance area.
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. Final Action
The EPA is approving the CO LMP for
the El Paso Area submitted by the TCEQ
on September 21, 2016 as a revision to
the Texas SIP because the State
adequately demonstrates that the El
Paso Area will maintain the CO NAAQS
and meet all the criteria of a LMP
through the second 10-year maintenance
period. The EPA is publishing this rule
without prior proposal because we view
this as a non-controversial amendment
and anticipate no adverse comments.
However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
SIP revision if relevant adverse
comments are received. This rule will
be effective on May 22, 2017 without
further notice unless we receive relevant
adverse comment by April 20, 2017. If
we receive relevant adverse comments,
we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect.
We will address all public comments in
a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. We will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so now. Please note that if we
receive relevant adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
IV. 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, the
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:46 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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 CAA; 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, 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, the rule 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).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14445
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by May 22, 2017. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Samuel Coleman was designated the
Acting Regional Administrator on
March 13, 2017, through the order of
succession outlined in Regional Order
R6–1110.1, a copy of which is included
in the docket for this action.
Dated: March 13, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart SS—Texas
2. In § 52.2270 (e), the second table
entitled ‘‘EPA Approved Nonregulatory
Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory
Measures in the Texas SIP’’ is amended
by adding an entry to the end of the
table to read follows:
■
§ 52.2270
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
*
*
14446
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI–REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS
SIP
Name of SIP
provision
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
*
*
Second 10-year Carbon Monoxide maintenance plan (limited maintenance plan)
for the El Paso CO area.
*
El Paso, TX .......
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–05379 Filed 3–20–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0043; FRL–9959–00–
Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; California;
California Mobile Source Regulations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve a revision to the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP) consisting of state regulations
establishing standards and other
requirements relating to the control of
emissions from new on-road and new
and in-use off-road vehicles and
engines. The EPA is approving the SIP
revision because the regulations meet
the applicable requirements of the Clean
Air Act. Approval of the regulations as
part of the California SIP makes them
federally enforceable.
DATES: This rule is effective on May 22,
2017 without further notice, unless the
EPA receives adverse comments by
April 20, 2017. If we receive such
comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that this direct final
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2017–0043 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
John Ungvarsky, at Ungvarsky.John@
epa.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
removed or edited from Regulations.gov.
For either manner of submission, the
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
pmangrum on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Mar 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
State
submittal/
effective
date
9/21/2016
EPA approval date
*
*
3/21/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation].
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Ungvarsky, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3963, ungvarsky.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. The State’s Submittal
A. What regulations did the state submit?
B. Are there other versions of these
regulations?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
regulations?
D. What requirements do the regulations
establish?
III. EPA’s Evaluation and Final Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the
regulations?
B. Do the state regulations meet CAA SIP
evaluation criteria?
C. Final Action and Public Comment.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA or
‘‘Act’’), the EPA establishes national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
to protect public health and welfare,
and has established such ambient
standards for a number of pervasive air
pollutants including ozone, carbon
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Comments
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur
dioxide, lead and particulate matter.
Under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA,
states must submit plans that provide
for the implementation, maintenance,
and enforcement of the NAAQS within
each state. Such plans are referred to as
SIPs and revisions to those plans are
referred to as SIP revisions. Section
110(a)(2) of the CAA sets forth the
content requirements for SIPs. Among
the various requirements, SIPs must
include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures,
means, or techniques as may be
necessary or appropriate to meet the
applicable requirements of the CAA. See
CAA section 110(a)(2)(a).
As a general matter, the CAA assigns
mobile source regulation to the EPA
through title II of the Act and assigns
stationary source regulation and SIP
development responsibilities to the
states through title I of the Act. In so
doing, the CAA preempts various types
of state regulation of mobile sources as
set forth in section 209(a) (preemption
of state emissions standards for new
motor vehicles and engines), section
209(e) (preemption of state emissions
standards for new and in-use off-road
vehicles and engines),1 and section
211(c)(4)(A) [preemption of state fuel
requirements for motor vehicle emission
control, i.e., other than California’s
motor vehicle fuel requirements for
motor vehicle emission control—see
section 211(c)(4)(B)]. For certain types
of mobile source emission standards,
the State of California may request a
waiver (for motor vehicles) or
authorization (for off-road engines and
equipment) for standards relating to the
control of emissions and accompanying
enforcement procedures. See CAA
sections 209(b) (new motor vehicles)
and 209(e)(2) (most categories of new
and in-use off-road vehicles).
1 EPA regulations refer to ‘‘nonroad’’ vehicles and
engines whereas California regulations refer to ‘‘offroad’’ vehicles and engines. These terms refer to the
same types of vehicles and engines, and for the
purposes of this action, we will be using the state’s
chosen term, ‘‘off-road,’’ to refer to such vehicles
and engines.
E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM
21MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 21, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14442-14446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05379]
[[Page 14442]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0550; FRL-9957-56-Region 6]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso
Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to
approve the required second carbon monoxide (CO) maintenance plan as a
revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). The El Paso,
Texas CO maintenance area (El Paso Area) has been demonstrating
consistent air quality monitoring at or below 85% of the CO National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard). Because of this, the
State of Texas, through its designee, submitted the required second
maintenance plan for the El Paso Area as a Limited Maintenance Plan
(LMP).
DATES: This rule is effective on May 22, 2017 without further notice,
unless the EPA receives relevant adverse comment by April 20, 2017. If
the EPA receives such comment, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal
in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not
take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2016-0550, at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact Jeffrey Riley, 214-665-
8542, riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
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: Jeffrey Riley, 214-665-8542,
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment with Jeffrey Riley or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-
665-7253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' means the EPA.
I. Background
Under the 1990 CAA Amendments, a portion of the City of El Paso,
Texas was designated and classified as a moderate nonattainment area
for CO because it did not meet the NAAQS for this criteria pollutant 56
FR 56694 (November 1, 1991). The former El Paso CO nonattainment area
is restricted to a narrow strip along the Rio Grande, adjacent to
Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. El Paso's former classification as a moderate
nonattainment area under sections 107(d)(4)(A) and 186(a) of the CAA
imposed a schedule for attainment of the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1995.
EPA approved the El Paso Area's CAA section 179 attainment
demonstration that showed attainment but for emissions from Mexico, the
motor vehicle emissions budget, and the contingency plan 68 FR 39457
(July 2, 2003).
EPA approved the redesignation of the El Paso CO nonattainment area
to attainment for the CO NAAQS, the associated CAA section 175A(a)
maintenance plan, and the included motor vehicle emissions budgets at
73 FR 45162 (August 4, 2008). The maintenance plan ensures continued
attainment of the CO standard until 2020.
On September 21, 2016, the Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality (TCEQ) submitted a revision to the El Paso SIP, providing the
second 10-year update to the CO maintenance plan for the area, as
required eight years after redesignation by section 175A(b) of the Act
and also submitted a request for approval of the maintenance plan as a
LMP. The purpose of the LMP is to ensure continued maintenance of CO
NAAQS in the El Paso Area for the duration of the second 10-year
maintenance period of 2018-2028 by demonstrating that future emissions
of this criteria pollutant are expected to remain at or below emission
levels necessary for continued attainment of the current CO NAAQS.
II. The EPA's Evaluation
Since there are few specific content requirements defined in
section 175A of the Act for subsequent (or second) maintenance plan
revisions, EPA has exercised its discretion in determining the
recommended content of such plans.\1\ If an area meets the criteria,
the State (area) may submit a maintenance plan that is more streamlined
than a full Maintenance Plan.\2\ Such a streamlined plan is called a
Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP), and the criteria of a LMP is detailed
more below. EPA's interpretation of section 175A of the CAA, as it
pertains to LMP's for CO, is contained in the October 6, 1995, national
guidance memorandum titled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards.\3\ The LMP guidance allows for
areas that can demonstrate consistent air quality monitoring data at or
below 85% of the NAAQS for carbon monoxide to elect for a LMP. Other
criteria for the LMP option are detailed in the 1995 guidance as well.
The TCEQ has opted to develop a LMP for the El Paso Area to fulfill the
second 10-year CO maintenance period required by the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See generally EPA memorandum ``Procedures for Processing
Requests for to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' from John
Calgani, Director Air Quality Management Division to Regional Air
Division Directors (September 4, 1992); and EPA memorandum ``Limited
Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone Nonattainment
Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Director Air Quality Strategies &
Standards Division to Regional Air Division Directors (November 16,
1994). Copies of both memorandums are included in the docket for
this rulemaking.
\2\ A limited maintenance plan generally includes all the
elements of a full CAA section 175A maintenance plan except that a
limited maintenance plan is not required to include motor vehicle
emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes.
\3\ A copy of the October 6, 1995 Guidance Memorandum is
included in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with the above guidance, EPA will consider the
maintenance demonstration satisfied if the monitoring data show the 8-
hour CO design value is at or below 7.65 parts per million (ppm), or
85% of the 8-hour
[[Page 14443]]
CO NAAQS of 9 ppm. The EPA believes that if the area begins the
maintenance period at or below 85% of the applicable NAAQS, the
continuing applicability of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Program (PSD) and other Federal measures along with the existing
control measures already adopted should provide adequate assurance of
maintenance of the NAAQS over the 10-year period.
The EPA has reviewed the State's SIP submittal for the El Paso
Area. Per our 1995 guidance above, a LMP consists of several core
provisions: An attainment inventory, a demonstration of maintenance of
the applicable NAAQS, operation of a monitoring network, a provision
for contingency measures, and a discussion of the approach necessary to
meet conformity requirements. The following is a summary of the
criteria for a LMP and the EPA's evaluation of how each provision has
been met by the SIP submittal.
A. Base Year Emissions Inventory
Under the LMP option, a cap on total emissions is not needed during
the first or second 10-year maintenance period, and there is no
requirement to project emissions over the maintenance period because an
area's monitoring data satisfy the air quality criteria of the LMP by
beginning the maintenance period at or below 85% of the CO NAAQS.
However, the maintenance plan should contain an attainment year
emission inventory to identify a level of CO emissions in the area that
is sufficient to attain the CO NAAQS. Emission inventories contain
estimates of how much CO is produced by all categories in the
maintenance area on an annual basis: Point sources, area sources, on-
road mobile sources, and non-road mobile sources. The September 21,
2016 SIP submittal contains a summary of the CO emissions inventory for
the El Paso Area for the base year 2014. The methods used to determine
the El Paso CO emission inventory are consistent with the EPA's most
recent guidance on developing emission inventories, and the inventory
incorporates the latest information and planning assumptions available
at the time of its development.\4\ Because violations of the CO NAAQS
are most likely to occur on winter weekdays, the inventory prepared is
for a ``typical winter day''.\5\ The table below shows the estimated
tons of CO emitted per winter day by source category for the 2014 base
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories
for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone. Volume I: General
Guidance for Stationary Sources, EPA-450/4-91-016, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, May 1991; and Air
Emissions Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) Technical Report
Series--Volumes 1-10.
\5\ See the above-referenced October 1995 CO LMP guidance under
``3.a.--Attainment Inventory'' and EPA's EI guidance titled
``Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories for Carbon
Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone: Volume I,'' also cited in the
October 1995 CO LMP guidance.
Table I--CO Emissions by Source Category, 2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tons per
Source category winter
weekday
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point................................................... 5.12
Area.................................................... 8.76
Non-road mobile......................................... 33.02
On-road mobile.......................................... 112.26
---------------
Total............................................... 159.16
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This LMP demonstrates continued attainment of the CO standard for
El Paso County in 2014 through monitoring data. The 2014 emissions
inventory shows that emissions decreased during the initial 10-year
maintenance period even with growth in vehicle miles traveled, economic
activity, and population.
B. Demonstration of Maintenance
The State has chosen to demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by
continued monitoring of the air quality in the El Paso Area. To qualify
for the LMP option, the design value for each monitor should be at or
below 85% of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. The value corresponding to this 85%
threshold is 7.65 ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS. The last monitored
violation of the CO NAAQS in the El Paso Area occurred in 1993 and
monitored CO levels have been steadily in decline ever since. For this
submission, the State provided data showing monitored CO values from
2006-2015, reflecting a 2015 8-hour CO design value of 2.8 ppm. Thus,
the design value for the 8-hour standard is less than 31% of the CO
NAAQS. The EPA believes that if an area begins the maintenance period
at or below the 85% threshold, it is unreasonable to expect that so
much growth will occur during the 10-year maintenance period to cause a
violation of the NAAQS.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Section IV.b of the above referenced 11/16/1994 ozone
LMP guidance (November 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CO control program for El Paso Area is comprised of both
Federal and local measures. The current maintenance plan 73 FR 45162
(August 4, 2008) for the area includes several control strategies that
will remain in place for the duration of the second 10-year maintenance
period of 2018-2028. The Federal strategies are continued
implementation of the Tier 2 motor vehicle emission standards along
with the requirement for reduced sulfur in gasoline, which became
effective on February 10, 2000. 65 FR 6697 (February 10, 2000).
Additionally, EPA's newly approved Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and
Fuel Standards at 79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014) will reduce CO emissions
from new, light-duty motor vehicles, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty
passenger vehicles beginning model year 2017 and will be fully phased
in by model year 2025. The Tier 3 fuel standards will lower the sulfur
content of gasoline and make emission control systems more effective
for both existing and new vehicles. As newer vehicles gradually replace
older ones in the fleet, these control programs will result in lowered
CO emissions in the El Paso County Area and elsewhere.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Tier 2 final rule Regulatory Impact Analysis notes
reductions in NO, VOC, particulate, SOX, CO, and
hazardous air pollutant emissions from cars and light trucks by
mandating lower VOC, NOX, and PM emission standards for
these vehicles' emissions control systems, as well as requiring
gasoline sulfur levels be reduced. Sulfur interferes with the
operation of advanced exhaust treatment systems; reduced gasoline
sulfur content improves the efficiency of these systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local control strategies remaining in place for the duration of the
second 10-year LMP include a vehicle emissions Inspection and
Maintenance (I&M) Program, an Oxygenated Fuels Program, and the PSD
Program. 73 FR 45162 (August 4, 2008). The I&M program has been in
effect in the El Paso Area since January 1, 1987, and initially
consisted of two-speed idle (TSI) testing for all vehicles. On January
1, 2007, an enhanced vehicle I&M program began On-Board Diagnostics
testing for all model year 1996 and newer vehicles and continued to use
TSI testing for all model year 1995 and older vehicles. All vehicle
emissions inspection stations in the El Paso I&M program area are
required to offer both tests. The program addresses CO emissions as
well as ozone precursor emissions. The original program as described
above will remain in place for the duration of the second 10-year
maintenance period (2018-2028).
The El Paso Oxygenated Fuel Program aims to reduce vehicle
emissions by providing for the use of oxygenated fuels. Various forms
of this program have been in place during the winter months (October 1
through March 31) since October 1, 1992. The minimum oxygenate content
of winter fuels in El Paso County is 2.7% by weight, and this
requirement will remain in effect for the
[[Page 14444]]
duration of the second 10-year (2018-2028) maintenance period. This
requirement controls CO emissions by creating more complete combustion
of fuel.
Although not a direct local control measure, the State's PSD
Program is a preconstruction permitting program that has been approved
as part of the Texas SIP and applies to El Paso County. This program
has been in effect for CO since the El Paso Area was redesignated to
attainment in 2008. Under this program, new stationary sources of CO
are evaluated and are required to use the Best Available Control
Technology (BACT) to control emissions. This program will continue as a
control strategy during the second maintenance period of 2018-2028.
Therefore, we find that the State demonstrates continued maintenance of
the standard.
C. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
The Plan includes a commitment to maintain operation of the
existing EPA-approved air quality monitoring network in accordance with
40 CFR part 58. The TCEQ will continue to monitor CO through the end of
the second 10-year maintenance period to ensure the CO level remains
below 85% of the NAAQS. This data will be reported to EPA annually.
To comply with national ambient air monitoring requirements, and to
better understand El Paso's air quality problems, the State has
operated a CO monitoring network in the El Paso Area since the 1970's.
In 2000, the El Paso monitoring network consisted of seven sites,
including the Ascarate Park site at the Texas/Mexico border, which
recorded the highest concentrations of CO that year. In recognition of
significantly declining CO concentrations in the El Paso Area since
2000, Texas has gradually reduced and consolidated the El Paso CO
monitoring network to three sites in 2015 with approval from the EPA.
To verify the attainment status of the area over the maintenance
period, the LMP should contain provisions for continued operation of an
appropriate, EPA-approved monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. The State has an approved monitoring network that includes CO
monitoring in the El Paso Area that was most recently approved by the
EPA on October 27, 2016. In the El Paso CO LMP, the State commits to
maintaining a CO monitoring network to verify continued attainment of
the NAAQS.
D. Contingency Plan
Contingency measures are specific control strategies that will be
activated if they are triggered by a predefined event. Section 175A(d)
of the Act requires that a maintenance plan include contingency
provisions to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs
after redesignation of the area to attainment. To meet this
requirement, the State has identified appropriate contingency measures
along with a schedule for the development and implementation of such
measures. In the September 21, 2016 submittal, the State specifies the
contingency trigger as a violation of the CO standard based upon air
quality monitoring data from the El Paso monitoring network. In the
event that a monitored violation of the CO standard occurs in any
portion of the maintenance area, the State will first analyze the data
to determine if the violation was caused by actions outside TCEQ's
jurisdiction (e.g., emissions from Mexico or another state) or within
its jurisdiction. If the violation was caused by actions outside TCEQ's
jurisdiction, TCEQ will notify the EPA. If TCEQ determines the
violation was caused by actions within TCEQ's jurisdiction, TCEQ
commits to adopt and implement the identified contingency measures as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 18 months.
The State specifically identifies the following contingency
measures to re-attain the standard:
Vehicle idling restrictions.
Improved vehicle I/M.
The LMP indicates that the State may evaluate other potential
strategies to address any future violations in the most appropriate and
effective manner possible. Based on the above, we find that the
contingency measures provided in the State's El Paso CO LMP are
sufficient and meet the requirements of section 175A(d) of the CAA.
E. Transportation and General Conformity
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
The EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs,
and projects that are funded under 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act
conform to SIPs. 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.
The transportation conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) and the
general conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) apply to nonattainment
areas and maintenance areas covered by an approved maintenance plan.
Under either conformity rule, an acceptable method of demonstrating
that a Federal action conforms to the applicable SIP is to demonstrate
that expected emissions from the planned action are consistent with the
emissions budget for the area.
While the EPA's LMP Option does not exempt an area from the need to
affirm conformity, it explains that the area may demonstrate conformity
without submitting an emissions budget. Under the LMP Option, emissions
budgets are treated as essentially not constraining for the length of
the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to expect that the
qualifying areas would experience so much growth in that period that a
violation of the CO NAAQS would result.\8\ Similarly, Federal actions
subject to the general conformity rule could be considered to satisfy
the ``budget test'' specified in section 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) for the
same reasons that the budgets are essentially considered to be
unlimited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 78 FR 48611, 48613 (August 9, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While areas with maintenance plans approved under the LMP Option
are not subject to the budget test, the areas remain subject to other
transportation conformity requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.
Thus, the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in the area or the
State must document and ensure that:
a. Transportation plans and projects provide for timely
implementation of SIP transportation control measures in accordance
with 40 CFR 93.113;
b. Transportation plans and projects comply with the fiscal
constraint element per 40 CFR 93.108;
c. The MPO's interagency consultation procedures meet applicable
requirements of 40 CFR 93.105;
d. Conformity of transportation plans is determined no less
frequently than every four years, and conformity of plan amendments and
transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance with the timing
requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104;
e. The latest planning assumptions and emissions model are used as
set forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111;
f. Projects do not cause or contribute to any new localized carbon
monoxide or particulate matter violations, in accordance with
procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; and
g. Project sponsors and/or operators provide written commitments as
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
The EPA confers regularly with the El Paso Area MPO and
Transportation
[[Page 14445]]
Policy Board, TCEQ, the Texas Department of Transportation, the Federal
Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration to
review the Transportation Improvement Program for the El Paso Area to
determine if the area is meeting the transportation conformity
requirements under 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. The El Paso Area is
currently meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.
Based on the evaluation outlined above, the LMP satisfies the
requirements of the Act for the second 10-year update to the El Paso CO
maintenance area.
III. Final Action
The EPA is approving the CO LMP for the El Paso Area submitted by
the TCEQ on September 21, 2016 as a revision to the Texas SIP because
the State adequately demonstrates that the El Paso Area will maintain
the CO NAAQS and meet all the criteria of a LMP through the second 10-
year maintenance period. The EPA is publishing this rule without prior
proposal because we view this as a non-controversial amendment and
anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we are publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if
relevant adverse comments are received. This rule will be effective on
May 22, 2017 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse
comment by April 20, 2017. If we receive relevant adverse comments, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect. We will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will
not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so now. Please note that if we receive
relevant adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment.
IV. 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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
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 CAA; 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, 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, the rule 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).
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. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 22, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Samuel Coleman was designated the Acting Regional Administrator on
March 13, 2017, through the order of succession outlined in Regional
Order R6-1110.1, a copy of which is included in the docket for this
action.
Dated: March 13, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart SS--Texas
0
2. In Sec. 52.2270 (e), the second table entitled ``EPA Approved
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas
SIP'' is amended by adding an entry to the end of the table to read
follows:
Sec. 52.2270 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
[[Page 14446]]
EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Applicable geographic submittal/
Name of SIP provision or nonattainment area effective EPA approval date Comments
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Second 10-year Carbon Monoxide El Paso, TX........... 9/21/2016 3/21/2017 [Insert ...................
maintenance plan (limited Federal Register
maintenance plan) for the El citation].
Paso CO area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-05379 Filed 3-20-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
