Air Plan Approval; Texas; Beaumont-Port Arthur Area Second Maintenance Plan for 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 54504-54507 [2020-17228]
Download as PDF
54504
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645,
September 26, 2018).
Documents mentioned in this interim
final rule as being available in the
docket, and all public comments, will
be in our online docket at https://
www.regulations.gov and can be viewed
by following that website’s instructions.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T05–0545 to read as
follows:
■
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 165.T05–0545 Safety Zones, Delaware
River Dredging; Marcus Hook, PA.
(a) Location. The following areas are
safety zones:
(1) Safety zone one includes all waters
within 250 yards of the dredge
displaying lights and shapes for vessels
restricted in ability to maneuver as
described in 33 CFR 83.27, as well as all
related dredge equipment, while the
dredge is operating in Marcus Hook
Range. For enforcement purposes
Marcus Hook Range includes all
navigable waters of the Delaware River
shoreline to shoreline, bound by a line
drawn perpendicular to the center line
of the channel at the farthest upriver
point of the range to a line drawn
perpendicular to the center line of the
channel at the farthest downriver point
of the range.
(2) Safety zone two includes all the
waters of Anchorage 7 off Marcus Hook
Range, as described in 33 CFR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
110.157(a)(8) and depicted on U.S.
Nautical Chart 12312.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section, designated representative
means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been
authorized by the Captain of the Port to
assist with enforcement of the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section.
(c) Regulations. (1) Entry into or
transiting within the safety zone one is
prohibited unless vessels obtain
permission from the Captain of the Port
via VHF–FM channel 16 or 215–271–
4807, or make satisfactory passing
arrangements via VHF–FM channel 13
or 16 with the operating dredge per this
section and the rules of the road (33
CFR subchapter E). Vessels requesting to
transit shall contact the operating
dredge via VHF–FM channel 13 or 16 at
least 1 hour prior to arrival.
(2) Vessels desiring to anchor in safety
zone two, Anchorage 7 off Marcus Hook
Range, must obtain permission from the
Captain of the Port (COTP) at least 24
hours in advance by calling (215) 271–
4807. The COTP will permit, at
minimum, one vessel at a time to anchor
on a ‘‘first-come, first-served’’ basis.
Vessels will only be allowed to anchor
for a 12 hour period. Vessels that
require an examination by the Public
Health Service, Customs, or Immigration
authorities will be directed to an
anchorage for the required inspection by
the COTP.
(3) Vessels desiring to anchor in safety
zone two, Anchorage 7 off Marcus Hook
Range, must be at least 650 feet in
length overall.
(4) This section applies to all vessels
except those engaged in the following
operations: Enforcement of laws, service
of aids to navigation, and emergency
response.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast
Guard may be assisted by Federal, state,
and local agencies in the patrol and
enforcement of the zone.
(e) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from August 25, 2020,
through October 15, 2020, unless
cancelled earlier by the Captain of the
Port.
Dated: August 25, 2020.
Jonathan D. Theel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2020–19328 Filed 9–1–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2018–0716; FRL–10012–
88–Region 6]
Air Plan Approval; Texas; BeaumontPort Arthur Area Second Maintenance
Plan for 1997 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is approving a revision to the Texas
State Implementation Plan (SIP). The
EPA is approving a second ten-year
maintenance plan for maintaining the
1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or
standard) through 2032 in the
Beaumont-Port Arthur (BPA) area.
DATES: This rule is effective on October
2, 2020.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R06–OAR–2018–0716. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically
through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Riley, EPA Region 6 Office,
Infrastructure and Ozone Section, 214–
665–8542, riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. Out of
an abundance of caution for members of
the public and our staff, the EPA Region
6 office will be closed to the public to
reduce the risk of transmitting COVID–
19. Please call or email the contact
listed above if you need alternative
access to material indexed but not
provided in the docket.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA.
SUMMARY:
I. Background
The background for this action is
discussed in detail in our June 8, 2020
Proposal (85 FR 35041, ‘‘Proposal’’). In
that document we proposed to approve,
as a revision to the Texas SIP, an
updated (second) 1997 ozone NAAQS
maintenance plan for the BPA area. On
E:\FR\FM\02SER1.SGM
02SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
February 5, 2019, the Texas Commission
on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
submitted the second maintenance plan
for the BPA area. The maintenance plan
is designed to keep the area in
attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS
through the end of the second 10-year
maintenance period (2032).
Our June 8, 2020 Proposal provided a
detailed description of the revisions 1
and the rationale for EPA’s proposed
action, together with a discussion of the
opportunity to comment. The public
comment period for the action closed on
July 8, 2020. See the docket for this
rulemaking for a copy of the public
comments received and our Proposal at
85 FR 35041 for more information.
We received comments on our
proposal from two commenters: TCEQ
and an anonymous citizen. Our
responses to the comments are below.
II. Response to Comments
Comment 1: TCEQ expressed support
of EPA’s proposed approval of the BPA
area’s second 10-year maintenance plan
under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
and stated its intent to withdraw from
EPA’s consideration both the request to
redesignate the BPA area to attainment
for the revoked 1-hour ozone standard
and the 10-year maintenance plan for
the 1-hour ozone standard.
Response 1: EPA appreciates TCEQ’s
support of our June 8, 2020 Proposal,
and informing us of their plans to
withdraw the 1-hour ozone standard
redesignation request and 10-year
maintenance plan for the BPA area.
Comment 2: The Commenter argues
that EPA cannot approve maintenance
plans which rely on emission
reductions attributable to Federal
mobile source control strategies which
EPA is actively attempting to roll back.
Response 2: We disagree with the
assertion that EPA is taking steps to roll
back Federal mobile source control
strategies. The Commenter appears to
reference the final rulemaking entitled
‘‘The Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient
(SAFE) Vehicles Final Rule for Model
Years 2021–2026’’ (SAFE Rule Part
Two). This is the sole example given by
the Commenter of EPA’s alleged
rollback of Federal mobile source
control strategies. This rulemaking was
developed by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
and EPA to finalize updated Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
standards for passenger cars and light
trucks and establish new standards,
covering model years 2021 through
2026. See 85 FR 24174 (April 30, 2020).
We note that CAFE and GHG standards
are separate and distinct from EPA
standards for control of criteria
pollutants from motor vehicles, such as
those in the Tier 3 motor vehicle
emission and fuel standards.2 As such,
auto manufacturers must
simultaneously comply with unique
requirements under both of these sets of
standards, as well as any other Federal
standards applicable to specific vehicle
types. The SAFE Rule Part Two does not
weaken or affect the regulatory
framework for any of the Federal mobile
source control strategies the State of
Texas relied upon (e.g. Tier 1, Tier 2,
and Tier 3 light-duty and medium-duty
passenger vehicle standards; heavy-duty
vehicle standards; low sulfur gasoline
and diesel standards; National Low
Emission Vehicle standards; and
gasoline volatility standards) for
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile
organic compound (VOC) ozone
precursor emissions reductions in
developing the BPA area’s second 10year maintenance plan for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS, and therefore the
state’s reliance upon these standards as
valid Federal control measures is
appropriate for this SIP action.
The SAFE Rule Part Two is a
component of a larger proposed
rulemaking 3 which also yielded the
final action entitled ‘‘The Safer
Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE)
Vehicles Rule Part One: One National
Program’’ (One National Program). See
84 FR 51310 (September 27, 2019). The
One National Program negates the
ability of California and states that
adopted California’s zero emissions
vehicle (ZEV) sales mandate and/or
GHG emissions standards to enforce
such standards. Neither the State of
Texas nor the BPA area have adopted
local tailpipe GHG emissions standards
2 See
79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014).
August 24, 2018, the EPA and the NHTSA
jointly published in the Federal Register a notice
of proposed rulemaking entitled, ‘‘The Safer
Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for
Model Years 2021–2026 Passenger Cars and Light
Trucks.’’ In the NPRM, EPA proposed new GHG
standards and NHTSA proposed new CAFE
standards for model year 2021 to 2026 light duty
vehicles. EPA also proposed to withdraw the waiver
it had previously provided to California for that
State’s model year 2021 to 2025 GHG and ZEV
standards under section 209 of the Clean Air Act.
See 83 FR 42986.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
3 On
1 The revision included motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) for the last year of the
maintenance plan (in this case 2032). Since EPA’s
current transportation conformity regulation
requires a regional emissions analysis only during
the time period beginning one year after a
nonattainment designation for a particular NAAQS
until the effective date of revocation of that NAAQS
(40 CFR 93.109(c)), a regional emissions analysis
using MVEBs is not required for conformity
determinations for the 1997 ozone NAAQS because
that NAAQS has been revoked (80 FR 12264).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
54505
or local ZEV mandates; therefore, the
One National Program rulemaking also
does not affect any of the Federal mobile
source control strategies relied upon by
the State of Texas in developing the
BPA area’s second 10-year maintenance
plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
SAFE Rule Part Two will not result in
on-road emissions increases of NOX or
VOCs in the BPA area; however, there
may be some small NOX and VOC
emissions increases in area and point
source emissions due to potential
increases in sales, transport and
production of gasoline. As was noted by
the Commenter, the maintenance plan
has projected some growth in emissions
from these categories. Even if this
growth is slightly underestimated due to
SAFE Rule Part Two changes or other
reasons, EPA is confident that any such
underestimate would be substantially
less than the overall decreases in NOX
and VOC emissions that are projected to
occur between 2014 and 2032, which
are discussed in the notice of proposed
rulemaking for this action.
Contrary to the assertion that EPA is
taking steps to roll back Federal mobile
source control strategies, on January 6,
2020, the Administrator signed an
Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking soliciting pre-proposal
comments on the Clean Truck Initiative
(CTI), which, if finalized, would tighten
NOX emissions standards for heavy-duty
vehicles for the first time since 2001.
Finally, we note that Texas has
adopted a contingency plan, as part of
the maintenance plan for the BPA area,
to address possible future ozone air
quality problems, as required by section
175A of the CAA. As explained in our
June 8, 2020 Proposal, this contingency
plan includes such contingency
measures as EPA deems necessary to
assure that the state will promptly
correct a violation of the NAAQS that
occurs after redesignation of the area to
attainment of the NAAQS. The
maintenance plan provides that a
monitored and certified violation of the
NAAQS triggers the requirement to
consider, adopt, and implement the
plan’s contingency measures.
Additionally, in the event that any of
the Federal measures upon which the
State has relied are repealed or
weakened, the EPA has Clean Air Act
authority, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
7410(k)(5), to require a state to revise an
approved SIP if it finds that it has
become substantially inadequate to
maintain the NAAQS. Moreover, CAA
section 175A provides the EPA
discretion to require the state to submit
a revised SIP should the area fail to
maintain the NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\02SER1.SGM
02SER1
54506
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
II. Final Action
We are approving the second
maintenance plan for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS for the BPA area, submitted by
TCEQ on February 5, 2019, as a revision
to the Texas SIP. This maintenance plan
is designed to keep the area in
attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS
through the second 10-year maintenance
period. As further explained in our
Proposal, we are not approving the
submitted 2032 NOX and VOC motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for
transportation conformity purposes
because a regional emissions analysis
using MVEBs is not required for
conformity determinations for the 1997
ozone NAAQS because that NAAQS has
been revoked. We are finding that the
projected emissions inventory which
reflects these budgets is consistent with
maintenance of the revoked 1997 ozone
standard. This action is being taken
under section 175A of the Act.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
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. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by November 2,
2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this action 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: August 3, 2020.
Kenley McQueen,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
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, in paragraph (e),
amend the table ‘‘EPA Approved
Nonregulatory Provisions and QuasiRegulatory Measures in the Texas SIP’’
by adding an entry for ‘‘Beaumont-Port
Arthur Second 10-Year Maintenance
Plan for the 1997 8-hour Ozone
Standard.’’ at the end of the table to read
as follows:
■
§ 52.2270
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
E:\FR\FM\02SER1.SGM
02SER1
*
*
54507
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP
Name of SIP provision
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment area
*
*
*
Beaumont-Port Arthur Second 10-Year Maintenance
Plan for the 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard.
*
Hardin, Jefferson and Orange Counties.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2020–17228 Filed 9–1–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2019–0217; FRL–10013–
28–Region 4]
Air Plan Approvals; KY; Prevention of
Significant Deterioration and Modeling
Infrastructure Requirements for 2015
Ozone NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve portions of the Kentucky
infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submission for the 2015 8hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) submitted
to EPA in a letter dated January 11,
2019. Whenever EPA promulgates a new
or revised NAAQS, the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) requires that each state
adopt and submit a SIP submission to
establish that the state’s SIP meets
infrastructure requirements for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of each such NAAQS.
Specifically, EPA is taking final action
to approve portions of the Kentucky
infrastructure SIP submission that
address the prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) and modeling
requirements for the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
DATES: This rule is effective October 2,
2020.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2019–0217. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
State
submittal/
effective
date
*
2/5/2019
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials can
either be retrieved electronically via
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Regulatory Management Section,
Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air and Radiation Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that
if at all possible, you contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The Regional Office’s
official hours of business are Monday
through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andres Febres, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
The telephone number is (404) 562–
8966. Mr. Febres can also be reached via
electronic mail at febresmartinez.andres@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Overview
On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated
revised primary and secondary NAAQS
for ozone, revising the 8-hour ozone
standards from 0.075 parts per million
(ppm) to a new more protective level of
0.070 ppm. See 80 FR 65292 (October
26, 2015). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1)
of the CAA, states are required to submit
SIP revisions meeting the applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(2) within
three years after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS or within such
shorter period as EPA may prescribe.
Section 110(a)(2) requires states to
address basic SIP elements such as
requirements for monitoring, basic
program requirements, and legal
authority that are designed to assure
attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. This particular type of SIP is
commonly referred to as an
‘‘infrastructure SIP.’’ States were
required to submit such SIP revisions
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EPA approval date
*
9/2/2020, [Insert Federal
Register citation].
Comments
*
for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS to
EPA no later than October 1, 2018.1
As explained in a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) published on July
6, 2020 (85 FR 40165), Kentucky cites to
several regulations 2 to demonstrate that
their respective SIPs meet the PSDrelated requirements of sections
110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (Prong
3),3 110(a)(2)(J), and 110(a)(2)(K). In
addition to the regulations approved
into the SIP, a state may also rely on
EPA’s January 17, 2017 (82 FR 5182),
final rulemaking entitled, ‘‘Revisions to
the Guideline on Air Quality Models:
Enhancements to the AERMOD
Dispersion Modeling System and
Incorporation of Approaches To
Address Ozone and Fine Particulate
Matter’’ (also referred to as the 2017
Guideline) 4 to satisfy the modeling
requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(K). On
February 4, 2020, the Commonwealth of
Kentucky submitted a letter to EPA to
demonstrate that its existing SIPapproved regulations provide the state
with the authority to integrate and
implement the requirements and
recommendations of the current version
of EPA’s 2017 Guideline. In its February
4, 2020, letter, the Commonwealth
clarified that, pursuant to 401 KAR
50:040 and 401 KAR 51:017, the
Commonwealth has the authority to use
1 In infrastructure SIP submissions, states
generally certify evidence of compliance with
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a
combination of state regulations and statutes, some
of which have been incorporated into the SIP. In
addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP
regulations may also be appropriate for
demonstrating compliance with sections 110(a)(1)
and (2).
2 Kentucky’s January 11, 2019, infrastructure SIP
submission cites several SIP-approved regulations
under Chapters 50 and 51, including the following:
401 KAR 51:010,1 Attainment status designations;
401 KAR 51:017, Prevention of significant
deterioration of air quality; and 401 KAR 50:040,
Air quality models, to meet the PSD program
requirements of sections
110(a)(2)(C),110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (Prong 3), 110(a)(2)(J),
and 110(a)(2)(K).
3 Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) contains a provision
that prohibits emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures required to prevent
significant deterioration of air quality in another
state, which is commonly referred to as ‘‘prong 3.’’
4 EPA’s Guideline on Air Quality Models is
codified at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W and is
generically referred to as Guideline herein.
E:\FR\FM\02SER1.SGM
02SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 2, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54504-54507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17228]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2018-0716; FRL-10012-88-Region 6]
Air Plan Approval; Texas; Beaumont-Port Arthur Area Second
Maintenance Plan for 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to the
Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). The EPA is approving a second
ten-year maintenance plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standard) through 2032
in the Beaumont-Port Arthur (BPA) area.
DATES: This rule is effective on October 2, 2020.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2018-0716. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Riley, EPA Region 6 Office,
Infrastructure and Ozone Section, 214-665-8542, [email protected].
Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff,
the EPA Region 6 office will be closed to the public to reduce the risk
of transmitting COVID-19. Please call or email the contact listed above
if you need alternative access to material indexed but not provided in
the docket.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' means the EPA.
I. Background
The background for this action is discussed in detail in our June
8, 2020 Proposal (85 FR 35041, ``Proposal''). In that document we
proposed to approve, as a revision to the Texas SIP, an updated
(second) 1997 ozone NAAQS maintenance plan for the BPA area. On
[[Page 54505]]
February 5, 2019, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
submitted the second maintenance plan for the BPA area. The maintenance
plan is designed to keep the area in attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS
through the end of the second 10-year maintenance period (2032).
Our June 8, 2020 Proposal provided a detailed description of the
revisions \1\ and the rationale for EPA's proposed action, together
with a discussion of the opportunity to comment. The public comment
period for the action closed on July 8, 2020. See the docket for this
rulemaking for a copy of the public comments received and our Proposal
at 85 FR 35041 for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The revision included motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) for the last year of the maintenance plan (in this case
2032). Since EPA's current transportation conformity regulation
requires a regional emissions analysis only during the time period
beginning one year after a nonattainment designation for a
particular NAAQS until the effective date of revocation of that
NAAQS (40 CFR 93.109(c)), a regional emissions analysis using MVEBs
is not required for conformity determinations for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS because that NAAQS has been revoked (80 FR 12264).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received comments on our proposal from two commenters: TCEQ and
an anonymous citizen. Our responses to the comments are below.
II. Response to Comments
Comment 1: TCEQ expressed support of EPA's proposed approval of the
BPA area's second 10-year maintenance plan under the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, and stated its intent to withdraw from EPA's consideration both
the request to redesignate the BPA area to attainment for the revoked
1-hour ozone standard and the 10-year maintenance plan for the 1-hour
ozone standard.
Response 1: EPA appreciates TCEQ's support of our June 8, 2020
Proposal, and informing us of their plans to withdraw the 1-hour ozone
standard redesignation request and 10-year maintenance plan for the BPA
area.
Comment 2: The Commenter argues that EPA cannot approve maintenance
plans which rely on emission reductions attributable to Federal mobile
source control strategies which EPA is actively attempting to roll
back.
Response 2: We disagree with the assertion that EPA is taking steps
to roll back Federal mobile source control strategies. The Commenter
appears to reference the final rulemaking entitled ``The Safer
Affordable Fuel Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Final Rule for Model Years
2021-2026'' (SAFE Rule Part Two). This is the sole example given by the
Commenter of EPA's alleged rollback of Federal mobile source control
strategies. This rulemaking was developed by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and EPA to finalize updated
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks and establish
new standards, covering model years 2021 through 2026. See 85 FR 24174
(April 30, 2020). We note that CAFE and GHG standards are separate and
distinct from EPA standards for control of criteria pollutants from
motor vehicles, such as those in the Tier 3 motor vehicle emission and
fuel standards.\2\ As such, auto manufacturers must simultaneously
comply with unique requirements under both of these sets of standards,
as well as any other Federal standards applicable to specific vehicle
types. The SAFE Rule Part Two does not weaken or affect the regulatory
framework for any of the Federal mobile source control strategies the
State of Texas relied upon (e.g. Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 light-duty
and medium-duty passenger vehicle standards; heavy-duty vehicle
standards; low sulfur gasoline and diesel standards; National Low
Emission Vehicle standards; and gasoline volatility standards) for
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compound (VOC)
ozone precursor emissions reductions in developing the BPA area's
second 10-year maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and
therefore the state's reliance upon these standards as valid Federal
control measures is appropriate for this SIP action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SAFE Rule Part Two is a component of a larger proposed
rulemaking \3\ which also yielded the final action entitled ``The Safer
Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National
Program'' (One National Program). See 84 FR 51310 (September 27, 2019).
The One National Program negates the ability of California and states
that adopted California's zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) sales mandate
and/or GHG emissions standards to enforce such standards. Neither the
State of Texas nor the BPA area have adopted local tailpipe GHG
emissions standards or local ZEV mandates; therefore, the One National
Program rulemaking also does not affect any of the Federal mobile
source control strategies relied upon by the State of Texas in
developing the BPA area's second 10-year maintenance plan for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ On August 24, 2018, the EPA and the NHTSA jointly published
in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking entitled,
``The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model
Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks.'' In the NPRM, EPA
proposed new GHG standards and NHTSA proposed new CAFE standards for
model year 2021 to 2026 light duty vehicles. EPA also proposed to
withdraw the waiver it had previously provided to California for
that State's model year 2021 to 2025 GHG and ZEV standards under
section 209 of the Clean Air Act. See 83 FR 42986.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAFE Rule Part Two will not result in on-road emissions increases
of NOX or VOCs in the BPA area; however, there may be some
small NOX and VOC emissions increases in area and point
source emissions due to potential increases in sales, transport and
production of gasoline. As was noted by the Commenter, the maintenance
plan has projected some growth in emissions from these categories. Even
if this growth is slightly underestimated due to SAFE Rule Part Two
changes or other reasons, EPA is confident that any such underestimate
would be substantially less than the overall decreases in
NOX and VOC emissions that are projected to occur between
2014 and 2032, which are discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking
for this action.
Contrary to the assertion that EPA is taking steps to roll back
Federal mobile source control strategies, on January 6, 2020, the
Administrator signed an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
soliciting pre-proposal comments on the Clean Truck Initiative (CTI),
which, if finalized, would tighten NOX emissions standards
for heavy-duty vehicles for the first time since 2001.
Finally, we note that Texas has adopted a contingency plan, as part
of the maintenance plan for the BPA area, to address possible future
ozone air quality problems, as required by section 175A of the CAA. As
explained in our June 8, 2020 Proposal, this contingency plan includes
such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the
state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation of the area to attainment of the NAAQS. The maintenance
plan provides that a monitored and certified violation of the NAAQS
triggers the requirement to consider, adopt, and implement the plan's
contingency measures. Additionally, in the event that any of the
Federal measures upon which the State has relied are repealed or
weakened, the EPA has Clean Air Act authority, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
7410(k)(5), to require a state to revise an approved SIP if it finds
that it has become substantially inadequate to maintain the NAAQS.
Moreover, CAA section 175A provides the EPA discretion to require the
state to submit a revised SIP should the area fail to maintain the
NAAQS.
[[Page 54506]]
II. Final Action
We are approving the second maintenance plan for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS for the BPA area, submitted by TCEQ on February 5, 2019, as a
revision to the Texas SIP. This maintenance plan is designed to keep
the area in attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS through the second 10-
year maintenance period. As further explained in our Proposal, we are
not approving the submitted 2032 NOX and VOC motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEBs) for transportation conformity purposes
because a regional emissions analysis using MVEBs is not required for
conformity determinations for the 1997 ozone NAAQS because that NAAQS
has been revoked. We are finding that the projected emissions inventory
which reflects these budgets is consistent with maintenance of the
revoked 1997 ozone standard. This action is being taken under section
175A of the Act.
III. 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);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 2, 2020. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: August 3, 2020.
Kenley McQueen,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
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, in paragraph (e), amend the table ``EPA Approved
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas
SIP'' by adding an entry for ``Beaumont-Port Arthur Second 10-Year
Maintenance Plan for the 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard.'' at the end of
the table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2270 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
[[Page 54507]]
EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable State
Name of SIP provision geographic or submittal/ EPA approval date Comments
nonattainment area effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Beaumont-Port Arthur Second 10- Hardin, Jefferson 2/5/2019 9/2/2020, [Insert
Year Maintenance Plan for the and Orange Federal Register
1997 8-hour Ozone Standard. Counties. citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-17228 Filed 9-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P