Air Plan Disapproval; Texas; Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Area Section 185 Fee Program; Cessation of Program, 103734-103737 [2024-29935]
Download as PDF
103734
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2018–0715; FRL–12462–
01–R6]
Air Plan Disapproval; Texas; HoustonGalveston-Brazoria Area Section 185
Fee Program; Cessation of Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is proposing to disapprove revisions to
the Texas State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The revisions were submitted by
the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ or State)
on November 27, 2018, to address CAA
requirements for the HoustonGalveston-Brazoria (HGB) area relevant
to the 1979 1-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or
standard). The EPA approved most
portions of this submission on February
14, 2020. In this current action, we are
proposing to disapprove the remaining
portions not addressed in the February
14, 2020 action. This submission, titled
‘‘Severe Ozone Nonattainment Area
Failure to Attain Fee,’’ addresses the
CAA section 185 requirement for fee
collection programs, which applies to
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
Severe or Extreme that fail to attain by
the required attainment date.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 21, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2018–0715, 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
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:21 Dec 18, 2024
Jkt 265001
contact Jeff 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://
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may not be
publicly available due to docket file size
restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Riley, EPA Region 6 Office,
Infrastructure & Ozone Section, 214–
665–8542, riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. We
encourage the public to submit
comments via https://
www.regulations.gov. 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 wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
the EPA.
I. Background
The background for this proposed
action is discussed in detail in two
preceding EPA rulemaking actions: our
May 16, 2019 Proposed Rule (84 FR
22093) and our February 14, 2020 Final
Rule (85 FR 8411, ‘‘Final Rule’’) to
approve revisions to the Texas SIP
pertaining to the HGB area and the
revoked 1979 1-hour and 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.1 2 In EPA’s Final rule,
we: (1) Approved the State’s December
14, 2018 maintenance plan for
maintaining both the 1-hour and 1997
ozone NAAQS through the year 2032 in
the HGB area; (2) Determined that the
HGB area continues to attain both the 1hour and 1997 ozone NAAQS; (3)
Determined that the HGB area met the
five criteria in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)
for redesignation with respect to both
the 1-hour and 1997 ozone NAAQS; (4)
Terminated the anti-backsliding
obligations for the HGB area with
respect to the revoked 1-hour and 1997
ozone NAAQS; and, (5) Approved
sufficient provisions of the State’s
November 27, 2018 SIP submission
titled ‘‘Severe Ozone Nonattainment
Area Failure to Attain Fee’’ such that
there was as an equivalent alternative
1 Throughout this document, we refer to the 1979
1-hour ozone NAAQS as the ‘‘1-hour ozone
NAAQS’’ and the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS as the
‘‘1997 ozone NAAQS.’’
2 The EPA revoked both the 1-hour and 1997
ozone NAAQS along with associated designations
and classifications (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004;
and 80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
185 fee program to address CAA section
185 requirements for the HGB 1-hour
ozone NAAQS nonattainment area.3
In our February 14, 2020 Final Rule,
EPA did not act on two provisions of the
State’s submitted 185 fee program for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the HGB
area: Title 30 of the Texas
Administrative Code (30 TAC) sections
101.118(a)(2) and 101.118(b). The Final
Rule stated that the provisions that were
approved at the time were sufficient to
fulfill the requirement to have an
equivalent alternative section 185 fee
program for the HGB nonattainment
area with respect to the 1-hour ozone
standard. However, the two not actedupon provisions have not been
withdrawn by Texas, and therefore
remain pending before the Agency for
consideration as SIP submissions. These
two outstanding 185 fee program
provisions are the focus of this proposed
rule.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation
1. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
CAA section 185 (Enforcement for
Severe and Extreme ozone
nonattainment areas for failure to attain)
requirements apply to ozone
nonattainment areas classified as Severe
or Extreme that fail to attain by the
required attainment date. It requires
each major stationary source of Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOC) located in
an area that fails to attain by its
attainment date to pay a fee to the State
for each ton of VOC the source emits in
excess of 80 percent of a baseline
amount. CAA section 182(f) extends the
application of this provision to major
stationary sources of nitrogen oxides
(NOX). States with ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Severe or Extreme
must submit a SIP revision that includes
procedures for assessment and
collection of such fees should the area
fail to attain the standard by its
attainment date. Under the 1-hour ozone
standard, the HGB area, consisting of
Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend,
Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery,
and Waller Counties, was designated as
nonattainment and classified as Severe–
17 with an attainment deadline of
November 15, 2007 (56 FR 56694,
November 6, 1991). Because the HGB
3 The following elements of the November 27,
2018 submission were approved as an equivalent
alternative 185 fee program to address CAA section
185: 30 TAC sections 101.100–101.102, 101.104,
101.106–101.110, 101.113, 101.116, 101.117,
101.118(a)(1), 101.118(a)(3), and 101.120–101.122.
When this approval was subsequently challenged,
EPA took a voluntary remand without vacatur of
this approval. See Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Circuit
Docket No. 20–1121 (January 11, 2022).
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
area was classified as a Severe area,
Texas was required to submit a SIP
revision addressing the CAA section 185
requirement. The HGB area
subsequently failed to attain the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS by the applicable
attainment deadline of November 15,
2007 (77 FR 36400, June 19, 2012).
Since 2010,4 the EPA has taken the
position that the Agency can approve
SIPs that include an equivalent
alternative program to the section 185
fee program specified in the CAA when
addressing anti-backsliding for a
revoked ozone standard under the
principles of section 172(e). Section
172(e) requires EPA to develop
regulations to ensure that controls in a
nonattainment area are ‘‘not less
stringent’’ than those that applied to the
area before EPA revised a NAAQS to
make it less stringent. Although section
172(e) does not directly apply where
EPA has strengthened the NAAQS, as it
did in 1997, 2008, and 2015, EPA has
applied the principles in section 172(e)
when revoking less stringent ozone
standards.5 EPA allows a State to adopt
an alternative to CAA section 185 if the
State demonstrates that the proposed
alternative program is ‘‘not less
stringent’’ than the direct application of
CAA section 185. EPA has previously
stated that one way to demonstrate this
is to show that the alternative program
provides equivalent or greater fees and/
or emissions reductions than those
directly attributable to the application of
CAA section 185. EPA has approved
equivalent alternative 185 fee equivalent
programs in addition to the Final Rule.
See 84 FR 12511 (April 2, 2019)
(approving an equivalent alternative 185
fee program in New York), 77 FR 74372
(Dec. 14, 2012) (approving an equivalent
4 See ‘‘Guidance on Developing Fee Programs
Required by Clean Air Act Section 185 for the 1hour Ozone NAAQS.’’ https://www.epa.gov/sites/
production/files/2015-09/documents/1hour_ozone_
nonattainment_guidance.pdf. Although the 2010
guidance was vacated and remanded by the D.C.
Circuit on procedural grounds, the court did not
prohibit alternative programs, stating ‘‘neither the
statute nor our case law obviously precludes that
alternative.’’ NRDC v. EPA, 643 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir.
2011).
5 In 2008, we revised the primary and secondary
ozone NAAQS to 0.075 parts per million (ppm),
averaged over an 8-hour period (73 FR 16436,
March 27, 2008). In 2015, we again revised the
primary and secondary ozone NAAQS to 0.070
ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period (80 FR 65292,
October 26, 2015). However, EPA has not revoked
the 2008 standard, so section 172(e) would not
apply to requirements under this standard. On
November 7, 2022, the HGB area and the Dallas-Fort
Worth (DFW) area were reclassified from Serious to
Severe–15 nonattainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS (87 FR 60926). As such, Texas is subject
to a requirement to provide a new CAA section 185
failure to attain fee program for both the DFW and
HGB areas.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:21 Dec 18, 2024
Jkt 265001
alternative program for South Coast Air
Quality Management District).
The TCEQ adopted the Severe Ozone
Nonattainment Area Failure to Attain
Fee program for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS (alternative section 185 fee
equivalent program) on May 22, 2013
(38 Tex. Reg. 3610, June 7, 2013).
However, the program was not
submitted to EPA as a SIP revision until
November 27, 2018. EPA’s May 16, 2019
Proposed Rule evaluated the State’s
alternative section 185 fee equivalent
program against the language of CAA
sections 172(e) and 185 to determine
whether the State had demonstrated that
the proposed alternative program was
‘‘not less stringent’’ than the direct
application of CAA section 185. EPA’s
February 14, 2020 Final Rule approved
sufficient provisions of the SIP
submission to determine that the State
had met applicable requirements to
have a section 185 fee program, or
equivalent.
2. Summary of the State’s Submission
The November 27, 2018 alternative
section 185 fee equivalent program SIP
revision for the 1-hour ozone standard
included Subchapter B (Failure to
Attain Fee) in Chapter 101 (General Air
Quality Rule) of 30 TAC. The two
remaining provisions that EPA has not
yet acted on in this submission are 30
TAC sections 101.118(a)(2) and
101.118(b). Under 30 TAC section
101.118 (Cessation of Program), the
State’s 185 fee equivalent program
would be terminated following EPA
action to: redesignate the area to
attainment (101.118(a)(1)); make a
finding of attainment (101.118(a)(2)); or
otherwise end the Failure to Attain fee
(101.118(a)(3)). 30 TAC section
101.118(b) provides that fees would be
calculated but not invoiced, and fee
collection may be placed in abeyance by
the TCEQ, pending EPA action on
quality-assured data showing the area’s
design value meets the 1-hour ozone
standard, or a demonstration indicating
that the area would have attained by the
attainment date but for emissions
emanating from outside the United
States.
3. The EPA’s Review of the State’s
Submission
EPA’s February 14, 2020 Final Rule
approved sufficient provisions of the
SIP submittal to determine that there
was an operative alternative section 185
fee equivalent program for the HGB
area. This prior approval included 30
TAC sections 101.118(a)(1) and
101.118(a)(3). EPA determined these
provisions provided mechanisms for
terminating the program, through either
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
103735
EPA action to redesignate the area to
attainment or other EPA action to
terminate the anti-backsliding
requirements, that are consistent with
section 185 equivalent programs as
allowed through the anti-backsliding
principles of CAA section 172(e).
30 TAC section 101.118(a)(2),
however, allows for the alternative
section 185 fee equivalent program to be
terminated upon an EPA finding of
attainment. The language of CAA
section 185(a) clearly specifies
redesignation as an attainment area as
the only means by which an area’s fee
program obligation may be terminated.
Allowing for cessation of the fee
program through a finding of attainment
by EPA is therefore contrary to the
statutory requirement. While the 1-hour
ozone standard has been revoked, as
explained earlier EPA can only approve
alternative 185 programs that are
equivalent to a statutory 185 program.
Texas has provided no explanation as to
how 185 program termination upon a
finding of attainment could be
equivalent to the statutory language in
section 185, and EPA has not identified
any such explanation either. Here, the
equivalent mechanism is a functional
redesignation, which terminates an
area’s anti-backsliding requirements for
a revoked standard. As explained
earlier, the Final Rule approved a
mechanism to terminate the HGB
equivalent alternative program upon
EPA terminating the area’s antibacksliding requirements. EPA has
identified no basis to propose approval
of the remaining SIP provisions. EPA
accordingly proposes to disapprove 30
TAC section 101.118(a)(2).
30 section TAC 101.118(b) allows for
placing fee payment into abeyance if the
State submits to EPA three consecutive
years of quality-assured data resulting in
a design value that does not exceed the
1-hour ozone standard, or a
demonstration indicating that the area
would have attained by the attainment
date but for emissions emanating from
outside the United States. Under CAA
section 185(a), the relevant sources shall
‘‘pay a fee to the state . . . for each
calendar year beginning after the
attainment date, until the area is
redesignated as an attainment area for
ozone’’ by EPA. As noted previously,
the language of CAA section 185(a)
clearly specifies redesignation as an
attainment area as the only means by
which an area’s fee program obligation
may be terminated. Thus, provisions
that allow the fee obligation to be
terminated prior to an EPA
redesignation of the area as attainment
are inconsistent with the relevant
statutory language, and EPA has not
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
103736
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
identified any basis to say that such
provisions are equivalent to the
statutory language. EPA accordingly
proposes to disapprove 30 section TAC
101.118(b).
EPA is proposing to disapprove 30
sections TAC 101.118(a)(2) and
101.118(b), as discussed. However, EPA
notes that our February 14, 2020 Final
Rule terminated anti-backsliding
requirements with respect to the 1-hour
standard ozone standard for the HGB
area. While that action was challenged,
the case was ultimately dismissed,6 and
the termination of those anti-backsliding
requirements was effective. As such, the
State is no longer required to have a
section 185 fee program in place for the
HGB area with respect to the 1-hour
ozone standard. Therefore, while we are
proposing to disapprove the relevant
provisions of the State’s alternative
section 185 fee equivalent program for
the reasons discussed in this notice,
EPA is also proposing to find that these
provisions are part of a SIP submission
that is no longer required. Accordingly,
we are proposing to find that the State
does not have an obligation to correct
the deficiencies identified in this
proposed disapproval, and that this
disapproval, if finalized, would not
trigger mandatory sanctions under CAA
section 179(b), or the EPA’s obligation
to promulgate a Federal Implementation
Plan under CAA section 110(c).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
III. Proposed Action
We are proposing to disapprove the
30 TAC sections 101.118(a)(2) and
101.118(b) of Texas’s alternative section
185 fee equivalent program with respect
to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the HGB
area as submitted in the State’s
November 27, 2018 SIP revision. EPA
proposes this disapproval with respect
to the failure to attain fee program
requirements under CAA sections 182
and 185 for the reasons discussed above.
The effect of this proposal, if finalized,
is that 30 sections TAC 101.118(a)(2)
and 101.118(b) will not become part of
Texas’s State Implementation Plan. As
our February 14, 2020 Final Rule
terminated the anti-backsliding
requirements with respect to the 1-hour
standard for the HGB area, Texas has no
obligation to have this alternative
section 185 fee program in place.
Accordingly, we are proposing to find
that Texas does not have an obligation
to correct these deficiencies in its rules,
and that this proposed disapproval, if
finalized, would not trigger mandatory
6 The United States Court of Appeals for the 5th
Circuit dismissed the case on December 1, 2022 (see
Sierra Club v. EPA, 5th Circuit docket no. 20–
60303).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:21 Dec 18, 2024
Jkt 265001
sanctions under CAA section 179(b). As
previously noted, Texas is required to
provide a CAA section 185 failure to
attain fee program for both the DFW and
HGB areas with respect to the 2008
ozone standard, and this proposed
action does not impact that requirement.
IV. Environmental Justice
Considerations
Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on communities with
environmental justice (EJ) concerns to
the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. Executive Order
14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s
Commitment to Environmental Justice
for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023)
builds on and supplements E.O. 12898
and defines EJ as, among other things,
‘‘the just treatment and meaningful
involvement of all people, regardless of
income, race, color, national origin, or
Tribal affiliation, or disability in agency
decision-making and other Federal
activities that affect human health and
the environment.’’
The air agency did not evaluate EJ
considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and
did not consider EJ in this action. Due
to the nature of the action being taken
here, this action is expected to have a
neutral to positive impact on the air
quality of the affected area.
Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent
with the stated goal of E.O. 12898/14096
of achieving EJ for communities with EJ
concerns.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA 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 review State choices,
and approve those choices if they meet
the minimum criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this proposed action to
disapprove the remaining provisions of
Texas’ 185 fee program for 1-hour ozone
NAAQS for the HGB area submitted to
EPA on November 27, 2018,
disapproves State law as not meeting
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by State law.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), as amended by E.O.
14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023),
and was therefore not submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it
does not contain any information
collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
This action will not impose any
requirements on small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. This action imposes no
enforceable duty on any State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have Federalism
implications as specified in E.O. 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will
not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed action has no Tribal
implications as specified in E.O. 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action will neither impose substantial
direct compliance costs on Federally
recognized Tribal governments, nor
preempt Tribal law. This action will not
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Federally recognized Tribal
governments because no actions will be
required of Tribal governments. This
action will also not preempt Tribal law
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
as it does not have applicable or related
Tribal laws.
G. Executive Order: 13045 Protection of
Children From Environmental Health &
Safety Risks
The EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that the EPA has
reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. Therefore, this action
is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it merely proposes to
disapprove SIP revisions. Furthermore,
the EPA’s Policy on Children’s Health
does not apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to E.O.
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001),
because it is not a significant regulatory
action under E.O. 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs
the EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. This action is not subject to
the requirements of section 12(d) of the
NTTAA (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on communities with
environmental justice (EJ) concerns to
the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. Executive Order
14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s
Commitment to Environmental Justice
for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023)
builds on and supplements E.O. 12898
and defines EJ as, among other things,
‘‘the just treatment and meaningful
involvement of all people, regardless of
income, race, color, national origin, or
Tribal affiliation, or disability in agency
decision-making and other Federal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:21 Dec 18, 2024
Jkt 265001
activities that affect human health and
the environment.’’
The air agency did not evaluate EJ
considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and
did not consider EJ in this action. Due
to the nature of the action being taken
here, this action is expected to have a
neutral to positive impact on the air
quality of the affected area.
Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent
with the stated goal of E.O. 12898/14096
of achieving EJ for communities with EJ
concerns.
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.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 12, 2024.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2024–29935 Filed 12–18–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0459; FRL–12287–
01–R9]
Partial Approval and Partial
Disapproval of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; California;
Regional Haze State Implementation
Plan for the Second Implementation
Period
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to partially
approve and partially disapprove the
regional haze state implementation plan
(SIP) revision submitted by California
on August 9, 2022 (hereinafter the
‘‘2022 California Regional Haze Plan’’ or
‘‘the Plan’’), under the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and the EPA’s Regional Haze
Rule for the program’s second
implementation period. California’s SIP
submission addresses the requirement
that states must periodically revise their
long-term strategies for making
reasonable progress towards the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
103737
national goal of preventing any future,
and remedying any existing,
anthropogenic impairment of visibility,
including regional haze, in mandatory
Class I Federal areas. The SIP
submission also addresses other
applicable requirements for the second
implementation period of the regional
haze program. The EPA is taking this
action pursuant to CAA sections 110
and 169A.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before February 3, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2024–0459 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.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 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. If you need
assistance in a language other than
English or if you are a person with a
disability who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Lawrence, Planning Section
(ARD–2–1), Planning & Analysis
Branch, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, 415–
972–3407, or by email at
lawrence.laura@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What action is the EPA proposing?
II. Background and Requirements for
Regional Haze Plans
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 103734-103737]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29935]
[[Page 103734]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2018-0715; FRL-12462-01-R6]
Air Plan Disapproval; Texas; Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Area
Section 185 Fee Program; Cessation of Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to disapprove
revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions
were submitted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ
or State) on November 27, 2018, to address CAA requirements for the
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area relevant to the 1979 1-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or standard). The EPA
approved most portions of this submission on February 14, 2020. In this
current action, we are proposing to disapprove the remaining portions
not addressed in the February 14, 2020 action. This submission, titled
``Severe Ozone Nonattainment Area Failure to Attain Fee,'' addresses
the CAA section 185 requirement for fee collection programs, which
applies to ozone nonattainment areas classified as Severe or Extreme
that fail to attain by the required attainment date.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 21, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2018-0715, at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
[email protected]. 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 Jeff Riley, 214-665-8542,
[email protected]. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may not be publicly
available due to docket file size restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Riley, EPA Region 6 Office,
Infrastructure & Ozone Section, 214-665-8542, [email protected]. We
encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov. 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 wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.
I. Background
The background for this proposed action is discussed in detail in
two preceding EPA rulemaking actions: our May 16, 2019 Proposed Rule
(84 FR 22093) and our February 14, 2020 Final Rule (85 FR 8411, ``Final
Rule'') to approve revisions to the Texas SIP pertaining to the HGB
area and the revoked 1979 1-hour and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ \2\ In
EPA's Final rule, we: (1) Approved the State's December 14, 2018
maintenance plan for maintaining both the 1-hour and 1997 ozone NAAQS
through the year 2032 in the HGB area; (2) Determined that the HGB area
continues to attain both the 1-hour and 1997 ozone NAAQS; (3)
Determined that the HGB area met the five criteria in CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation with respect to both the 1-hour and 1997
ozone NAAQS; (4) Terminated the anti-backsliding obligations for the
HGB area with respect to the revoked 1-hour and 1997 ozone NAAQS; and,
(5) Approved sufficient provisions of the State's November 27, 2018 SIP
submission titled ``Severe Ozone Nonattainment Area Failure to Attain
Fee'' such that there was as an equivalent alternative 185 fee program
to address CAA section 185 requirements for the HGB 1-hour ozone NAAQS
nonattainment area.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Throughout this document, we refer to the 1979 1-hour ozone
NAAQS as the ``1-hour ozone NAAQS'' and the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
as the ``1997 ozone NAAQS.''
\2\ The EPA revoked both the 1-hour and 1997 ozone NAAQS along
with associated designations and classifications (69 FR 23951, April
30, 2004; and 80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015).
\3\ The following elements of the November 27, 2018 submission
were approved as an equivalent alternative 185 fee program to
address CAA section 185: 30 TAC sections 101.100-101.102, 101.104,
101.106-101.110, 101.113, 101.116, 101.117, 101.118(a)(1),
101.118(a)(3), and 101.120-101.122. When this approval was
subsequently challenged, EPA took a voluntary remand without vacatur
of this approval. See Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Circuit Docket No.
20-1121 (January 11, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In our February 14, 2020 Final Rule, EPA did not act on two
provisions of the State's submitted 185 fee program for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS for the HGB area: Title 30 of the Texas Administrative Code
(30 TAC) sections 101.118(a)(2) and 101.118(b). The Final Rule stated
that the provisions that were approved at the time were sufficient to
fulfill the requirement to have an equivalent alternative section 185
fee program for the HGB nonattainment area with respect to the 1-hour
ozone standard. However, the two not acted-upon provisions have not
been withdrawn by Texas, and therefore remain pending before the Agency
for consideration as SIP submissions. These two outstanding 185 fee
program provisions are the focus of this proposed rule.
II. The EPA's Evaluation
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
CAA section 185 (Enforcement for Severe and Extreme ozone
nonattainment areas for failure to attain) requirements apply to ozone
nonattainment areas classified as Severe or Extreme that fail to attain
by the required attainment date. It requires each major stationary
source of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) located in an area that
fails to attain by its attainment date to pay a fee to the State for
each ton of VOC the source emits in excess of 80 percent of a baseline
amount. CAA section 182(f) extends the application of this provision to
major stationary sources of nitrogen oxides (NOX). States
with ozone nonattainment areas classified as Severe or Extreme must
submit a SIP revision that includes procedures for assessment and
collection of such fees should the area fail to attain the standard by
its attainment date. Under the 1-hour ozone standard, the HGB area,
consisting of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris,
Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties, was designated as
nonattainment and classified as Severe-17 with an attainment deadline
of November 15, 2007 (56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). Because the HGB
[[Page 103735]]
area was classified as a Severe area, Texas was required to submit a
SIP revision addressing the CAA section 185 requirement. The HGB area
subsequently failed to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable
attainment deadline of November 15, 2007 (77 FR 36400, June 19, 2012).
Since 2010,\4\ the EPA has taken the position that the Agency can
approve SIPs that include an equivalent alternative program to the
section 185 fee program specified in the CAA when addressing anti-
backsliding for a revoked ozone standard under the principles of
section 172(e). Section 172(e) requires EPA to develop regulations to
ensure that controls in a nonattainment area are ``not less stringent''
than those that applied to the area before EPA revised a NAAQS to make
it less stringent. Although section 172(e) does not directly apply
where EPA has strengthened the NAAQS, as it did in 1997, 2008, and
2015, EPA has applied the principles in section 172(e) when revoking
less stringent ozone standards.\5\ EPA allows a State to adopt an
alternative to CAA section 185 if the State demonstrates that the
proposed alternative program is ``not less stringent'' than the direct
application of CAA section 185. EPA has previously stated that one way
to demonstrate this is to show that the alternative program provides
equivalent or greater fees and/or emissions reductions than those
directly attributable to the application of CAA section 185. EPA has
approved equivalent alternative 185 fee equivalent programs in addition
to the Final Rule. See 84 FR 12511 (April 2, 2019) (approving an
equivalent alternative 185 fee program in New York), 77 FR 74372 (Dec.
14, 2012) (approving an equivalent alternative program for South Coast
Air Quality Management District).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See ``Guidance on Developing Fee Programs Required by Clean
Air Act Section 185 for the 1-hour Ozone NAAQS.'' https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/1hour_ozone_nonattainment_guidance.pdf. Although the 2010 guidance
was vacated and remanded by the D.C. Circuit on procedural grounds,
the court did not prohibit alternative programs, stating ``neither
the statute nor our case law obviously precludes that alternative.''
NRDC v. EPA, 643 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
\5\ In 2008, we revised the primary and secondary ozone NAAQS to
0.075 parts per million (ppm), averaged over an 8-hour period (73 FR
16436, March 27, 2008). In 2015, we again revised the primary and
secondary ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period
(80 FR 65292, October 26, 2015). However, EPA has not revoked the
2008 standard, so section 172(e) would not apply to requirements
under this standard. On November 7, 2022, the HGB area and the
Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) area were reclassified from Serious to
Severe-15 nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (87 FR 60926). As
such, Texas is subject to a requirement to provide a new CAA section
185 failure to attain fee program for both the DFW and HGB areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The TCEQ adopted the Severe Ozone Nonattainment Area Failure to
Attain Fee program for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (alternative section 185
fee equivalent program) on May 22, 2013 (38 Tex. Reg. 3610, June 7,
2013). However, the program was not submitted to EPA as a SIP revision
until November 27, 2018. EPA's May 16, 2019 Proposed Rule evaluated the
State's alternative section 185 fee equivalent program against the
language of CAA sections 172(e) and 185 to determine whether the State
had demonstrated that the proposed alternative program was ``not less
stringent'' than the direct application of CAA section 185. EPA's
February 14, 2020 Final Rule approved sufficient provisions of the SIP
submission to determine that the State had met applicable requirements
to have a section 185 fee program, or equivalent.
2. Summary of the State's Submission
The November 27, 2018 alternative section 185 fee equivalent
program SIP revision for the 1-hour ozone standard included Subchapter
B (Failure to Attain Fee) in Chapter 101 (General Air Quality Rule) of
30 TAC. The two remaining provisions that EPA has not yet acted on in
this submission are 30 TAC sections 101.118(a)(2) and 101.118(b). Under
30 TAC section 101.118 (Cessation of Program), the State's 185 fee
equivalent program would be terminated following EPA action to:
redesignate the area to attainment (101.118(a)(1)); make a finding of
attainment (101.118(a)(2)); or otherwise end the Failure to Attain fee
(101.118(a)(3)). 30 TAC section 101.118(b) provides that fees would be
calculated but not invoiced, and fee collection may be placed in
abeyance by the TCEQ, pending EPA action on quality-assured data
showing the area's design value meets the 1-hour ozone standard, or a
demonstration indicating that the area would have attained by the
attainment date but for emissions emanating from outside the United
States.
3. The EPA's Review of the State's Submission
EPA's February 14, 2020 Final Rule approved sufficient provisions
of the SIP submittal to determine that there was an operative
alternative section 185 fee equivalent program for the HGB area. This
prior approval included 30 TAC sections 101.118(a)(1) and
101.118(a)(3). EPA determined these provisions provided mechanisms for
terminating the program, through either EPA action to redesignate the
area to attainment or other EPA action to terminate the anti-
backsliding requirements, that are consistent with section 185
equivalent programs as allowed through the anti-backsliding principles
of CAA section 172(e).
30 TAC section 101.118(a)(2), however, allows for the alternative
section 185 fee equivalent program to be terminated upon an EPA finding
of attainment. The language of CAA section 185(a) clearly specifies
redesignation as an attainment area as the only means by which an
area's fee program obligation may be terminated. Allowing for cessation
of the fee program through a finding of attainment by EPA is therefore
contrary to the statutory requirement. While the 1-hour ozone standard
has been revoked, as explained earlier EPA can only approve alternative
185 programs that are equivalent to a statutory 185 program. Texas has
provided no explanation as to how 185 program termination upon a
finding of attainment could be equivalent to the statutory language in
section 185, and EPA has not identified any such explanation either.
Here, the equivalent mechanism is a functional redesignation, which
terminates an area's anti-backsliding requirements for a revoked
standard. As explained earlier, the Final Rule approved a mechanism to
terminate the HGB equivalent alternative program upon EPA terminating
the area's anti-backsliding requirements. EPA has identified no basis
to propose approval of the remaining SIP provisions. EPA accordingly
proposes to disapprove 30 TAC section 101.118(a)(2).
30 section TAC 101.118(b) allows for placing fee payment into
abeyance if the State submits to EPA three consecutive years of
quality-assured data resulting in a design value that does not exceed
the 1-hour ozone standard, or a demonstration indicating that the area
would have attained by the attainment date but for emissions emanating
from outside the United States. Under CAA section 185(a), the relevant
sources shall ``pay a fee to the state . . . for each calendar year
beginning after the attainment date, until the area is redesignated as
an attainment area for ozone'' by EPA. As noted previously, the
language of CAA section 185(a) clearly specifies redesignation as an
attainment area as the only means by which an area's fee program
obligation may be terminated. Thus, provisions that allow the fee
obligation to be terminated prior to an EPA redesignation of the area
as attainment are inconsistent with the relevant statutory language,
and EPA has not
[[Page 103736]]
identified any basis to say that such provisions are equivalent to the
statutory language. EPA accordingly proposes to disapprove 30 section
TAC 101.118(b).
EPA is proposing to disapprove 30 sections TAC 101.118(a)(2) and
101.118(b), as discussed. However, EPA notes that our February 14, 2020
Final Rule terminated anti-backsliding requirements with respect to the
1-hour standard ozone standard for the HGB area. While that action was
challenged, the case was ultimately dismissed,\6\ and the termination
of those anti-backsliding requirements was effective. As such, the
State is no longer required to have a section 185 fee program in place
for the HGB area with respect to the 1-hour ozone standard. Therefore,
while we are proposing to disapprove the relevant provisions of the
State's alternative section 185 fee equivalent program for the reasons
discussed in this notice, EPA is also proposing to find that these
provisions are part of a SIP submission that is no longer required.
Accordingly, we are proposing to find that the State does not have an
obligation to correct the deficiencies identified in this proposed
disapproval, and that this disapproval, if finalized, would not trigger
mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179(b), or the EPA's obligation
to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan under CAA section 110(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit
dismissed the case on December 1, 2022 (see Sierra Club v. EPA, 5th
Circuit docket no. 20-60303).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proposed Action
We are proposing to disapprove the 30 TAC sections 101.118(a)(2)
and 101.118(b) of Texas's alternative section 185 fee equivalent
program with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the HGB area as
submitted in the State's November 27, 2018 SIP revision. EPA proposes
this disapproval with respect to the failure to attain fee program
requirements under CAA sections 182 and 185 for the reasons discussed
above. The effect of this proposal, if finalized, is that 30 sections
TAC 101.118(a)(2) and 101.118(b) will not become part of Texas's State
Implementation Plan. As our February 14, 2020 Final Rule terminated the
anti-backsliding requirements with respect to the 1-hour standard for
the HGB area, Texas has no obligation to have this alternative section
185 fee program in place. Accordingly, we are proposing to find that
Texas does not have an obligation to correct these deficiencies in its
rules, and that this proposed disapproval, if finalized, would not
trigger mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179(b). As previously
noted, Texas is required to provide a CAA section 185 failure to attain
fee program for both the DFW and HGB areas with respect to the 2008
ozone standard, and this proposed action does not impact that
requirement.
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to
identify and address ``disproportionately high and adverse human health
or environmental effects'' of their actions on communities with
environmental justice (EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable
and permitted by law. Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's
Commitment to Environmental Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26,
2023) builds on and supplements E.O. 12898 and defines EJ as, among
other things, ``the just treatment and meaningful involvement of all
people, regardless of income, race, color, national origin, or Tribal
affiliation, or disability in agency decision-making and other Federal
activities that affect human health and the environment.''
The air agency did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its
SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. Due to the nature of
the action being taken here, this action is expected to have a neutral
to positive impact on the air quality of the affected area.
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of
E.O. 12898/14096 of achieving EJ for communities with EJ concerns.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 review State choices,
and approve those choices if they meet the minimum criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this proposed action to disapprove the remaining
provisions of Texas' 185 fee program for 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the HGB
area submitted to EPA on November 27, 2018, disapproves State law as
not meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as amended by
E.O. 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023), and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it does not contain any
information collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This action will not impose any requirements on
small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any
State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have Federalism implications as specified in
E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This proposed action has no Tribal implications as specified in
E.O. 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will neither
impose substantial direct compliance costs on Federally recognized
Tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law. This action will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on Federally recognized Tribal
governments because no actions will be required of Tribal governments.
This action will also not preempt Tribal law
[[Page 103737]]
as it does not have applicable or related Tribal laws.
G. Executive Order: 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & Safety Risks
The EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA
has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the
definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the
Executive Order. Therefore, this action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it merely proposes to disapprove SIP revisions.
Furthermore, the EPA's Policy on Children's Health does not apply to
this action.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to E.O. 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under E.O.
12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. This
action is not subject to the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTAA
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on communities with environmental justice
(EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) builds on
and supplements E.O. 12898 and defines EJ as, among other things, ``the
just treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of
income, race, color, national origin, or Tribal affiliation, or
disability in agency decision-making and other Federal activities that
affect human health and the environment.''
The air agency did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its
SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. Due to the nature of
the action being taken here, this action is expected to have a neutral
to positive impact on the air quality of the affected area.
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of
E.O. 12898/14096 of achieving EJ for communities with EJ concerns.
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.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 12, 2024.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2024-29935 Filed 12-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P