52698 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE TEXAS SIP—Continued 

State citation Title/subject 

State 

approval/ 

submittal 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

Section 117.570 ............................... Use of Emissions Credits for Compliance.03/05/03 03/26/04, 69 FR 

15686.

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * (e) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision 

Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal/effective 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

* * * * * * * 

Attainment Demonstration for Houston/Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) One-hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area Adopting Strategy 

Based on NOX and Point Source HighlyReactive VOC Emission Reductions.

Houston/Galveston, 

TX.

12/01/04 09/06/06 [Insert FR page 

number where document 

begins].

[FR Doc. 06–7412 Filed 9–5–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0006; FRL–8216–

3] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Emission Credit Banking and Trading 

Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to 

the Texas State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) concerning the Emission Credit 

Banking and Trading Program. 

Additionally, EPA is approving a 

section of Chapter 115 of the Texas 

Administrative Code (TAC) on Control 

of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic 

Compounds that cross-references the 

Emission Credit Banking and Trading 

Program and the Discrete Emission 

Credit Banking and Trading Program. 

We are also approving a subsection of 

Chapter 116 of the TAC, Control of Air 

Pollution by Permits for New 

Construction or Modification, which 

provides a definition referred to in both 

the Emission Credit and the Discrete 

Emission Credit Banking and Trading 

Programs. 

DATE: This rule is effective on October 

6, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0006. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Permitting Section (6PD–R), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 

inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review 

Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal 

holidays. Contact the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below to make an 

appointment. If possible, please make 

the appointment at least two working 

days in advance of your visit. There will 

be a 15-cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

The State submittal related to this SIP 

revision, and which is part of the EPA 

docket, is also available for public 

inspection at the State Air Agency listed 

below during official business hours by 

appointment: 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, Office of Air Quality, 12124 

Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adina Wiley, Air Permitting Section 

(6PD–R), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone 214–665–2115, 

wiley.adina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

Outline 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background for this action? 

III. What are EPA’s responses to comments 

received on the proposed action? 

IV. What does Federal approval of a State 

regulation mean to me? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving the Emission Credit 

Banking and Trading program, also 

referred to as the Emission Reduction 

Credit (ERC) program, enacted at Texas 

Administrative Code (TAC) Title 30, 

Chapter 101 General Air Quality Rules, 

Subchapter H Emissions Banking and 

Trading, Division 1, sections 101.300–

101.304, 101.306, 101.309, and 101.311. 

These sections were submitted as SIP 

submittals dated December 20, 2000 

(state effective date January 18, 2001); 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 52699 

July 15, 2002 (state effective date April 

14, 2002); January 31, 2003 (state 

effective date January 17, 2003), and 

December 06, 2004 (state effective date 

December 2, 2004). Also in this 

document, EPA is approving section 

115.950 in 30 TAC Chapter 115, Control 

of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic 

Compounds, which cross-references the 

ERC program and the Discrete Emission 

Credit Banking and Trading program, 

referred to as the Discrete Emission 

Reduction Credit (DERC) program. This 

revision was provided in a SIP submittal 

dated December 20, 2000 (state effective 

date January 18, 2001). EPA is also 

approving the definition of ‘‘facility’’

published at 30 TAC Chapter 116, 

Control of Air Pollution by Permits for 

New Construction or Modification, 

Subchapter A, section 116.10, submitted 

as a SIP revision July 22, 1998 (state 

effective date December 23, 1997). 

As discussed in our proposed action 

at 70 FR 58151–58153, we conclude that 

the ERC program is consistent with 

section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act. 

The ERC program contains several 

features that EPA feels are important 

enough to discuss here. Section 101.302 

of the ERC program generally requires 

that an emission credit be used in the 

nonattainment area in which it was 

generated unless the user has obtained 

prior written approval of both the TCEQ 

Executive Director and EPA. This 

section also provides for the use of 

emission credits generated in another 

county, state, or nation. Although the 

threshold EPA approval requirement of 

section 101.302(f) ensures that EPA 

approval is necessary for any of the 

above transactions, TCEQ has agreed to 

clarify the rule language by December 1, 

2006, to more clearly require EPA 

approval for all transactions involving 

emission reductions generated in 

another state or nation, as well as those 

transactions from one nonattainment 

area to another, or from attainment 

counties into nonattainment counties. 

EPA has addressed the possibility of 

cross-jurisdictional trades, such as those 

in section 101.302, in Appendix 16.16 

of ‘‘Improving Air Quality with 

Economic Incentive Programs’’ (EPA–

452/R–01–001, January 2001) (EIP 

Guidance). Satisfaction of the provisions 

of Appendix 16.16 will ensure that 

cross-jurisdictional trades are consistent 

with the fundamental integrity, equity, 

and environmental benefit principles 

described in the EIP Guidance. The EPA 

review and approval authority 

contained in section 101.302(f) will be 

the mechanism by which EPA ensures 

that inappropriate trades do not take 

place. In particular, EPA intends to 

require a further SIP revision (either a 

detailed trading program, such as an 

MOU, or a trade-specific submission) 

before approving any international 

trade, interstate trades, or intrastate 

trades that involve reductions from 

beyond the nonattainment area. 

Among these types of trades requiring 

a further SIP revision, international 

trades present an especially difficult 

case. For instance, currently there is no 

approvable mechanism for 

demonstrating that reductions made in 

another country are surplus or 

enforceable. Nonetheless, emission 

reductions in other countries could 

potentially offer substantial air quality 

benefits in the United States. In 

approving the ERC program, EPA is 

recognizing the concept of international 

trading and describing a framework (i.e., 

the submission of a SIP revision 

demonstrating, among other things, the 

validity and enforceability of foreign 

reductions) for such trading, in the 

event that a suitable and approvable 

mechanism is ever developed for 

resolving concerns including 

enforceability and surplus. Until such a 

mechanism is developed and approved 

by EPA, however, EPA will not approve 

international trades under the ERC rule. 

EPA is also approving a provision in 

section 101.302(d) that allows 

generators and users of ERCs to use an 

alternate quantification protocol that is 

different from one of the approved 

protocols in Chapter 115 or Chapter 117 

(Control of Air Pollution from Volatile 

Organic Compounds and Control of Air 

Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds) of 

the Texas rules. Generators/users 

wanting to use other quantification 

protocols must follow the quantification 

requirements at section 

101.302(d)(1)(C), which include a 

requirement for EPA adequacy review of 

such alternate protocols. TCEQ has 

agreed to clarify the provisions of 

section 101.302(d)(1)(C) by December 1, 

2006, to clarify that a proposed alternate 

quantification protocol may not be used 

if the TCEQ Executive Director receives 

a letter from EPA that objects to the use 

of the protocol during the 45-day 

adequacy review period or if EPA 

proposes disapproval of the protocol in 

the Federal Register. See also 70 FR 

58149 for a description of the approval 

process for alternate quantification 

protocols. 

Today’s action also approves the use 

of ERCs for compliance with the HighlyReactive Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions Cap and Trade (HECT) 

program in the HGB nonattainment area. 

Section 101.306(a)(7) provides that 

ERCs can be used for ‘‘compliance with 

other requirements as allowable within 

the guidelines of local, state, and federal 

laws.’’ Therefore, even though the ERC 

program does not specifically mention 

the use of ERCs within the HECT, it is 

authorized by the general provision. The 

TCEQ has agreed to revise the section 

101.306 language by December 1, 2006, 

to specify that ERCs may be used with 

the HECT as an annual allocation of 

allowances under section 101.399. 

II. What is the background for this 

action? 

The ERC rules establish a type of 

Economic Incentive Program (EIP). This 

program provides flexibility for sources 

in complying with certain State and 

Federal requirements. The ERC program 

was first adopted by the State at 30 TAC 

section 101.29 on December 23, 1997, 

for use with volatile organic compound 

(VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

requirements in ozone nonattainment 

areas. Effective January 18, 2001, section 

101.29 was repealed and Chapter 101, 

Subchapter H, Divisions 1, 3, and 4 

were created for the ERC, Mass 

Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) in the 

Houston/Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) 

ozone nonattainment area, and Discrete 

Emission Credit Banking and Trading 

(DERC) programs, respectively. As of 

April 14, 2002, TCEQ amended the 

geographic scope of the ERC program to 

include provisions for reductions 

generated outside the United States at 

section 101.302. Effective January 17, 

2003, TCEQ reorganized the ERC and 

DERC program rules into more 

standardized formats parallel to each 

other, with a rule structure that 

followed a process of recognizing, 

quantifying, and certifying reductions as 

credits while explaining the guidelines 

for trading and using creditable 

reductions. These revisions amended 

sections 101.300, 101.301, 101.302, 

101.303, 101.304, 101.306, 101.309, and 

101.311. The most recent submittal, of 

December 06, 2004, amended sections 

101.300, 101.302, 101.303, 101.304, and 

101.311, expanding the ERC program to 

cover reductions of criteria pollutants 

(excluding lead) or precursors of criteria 

pollutants for which an area is 

designated nonattainment. The ERC 

program adoption and the subsequent 

revisions were submitted to EPA as SIP 

revisions; today’s approval is the first 

time we have acted on this program. In 

doing so we are acting on the original 

submission of July 22, 1998, and all 

subsequent revisions through the 

December 6, 2004, submittal. 

III. What are EPA’s responses to 

comments received on the proposed 

action? 

EPA’s responses to comments 

submitted by Galveston-Houston 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
52700 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

1 During the comment period, EPA did not 

receive comments regarding environmental justice 

and the ERC program. However, during the 

finalization process we have reevaluated our 

interpretation of the definition of Environmental 

Justice as found in Executive Order 12898. In our 

proposed approval of the ERC program, we stated 

that ‘‘environmental justice concerns arise when a 

trading program could result in disproportionate 

impacts on communities populated by racial 

minorities, people with low incomes, or Tribes.’’

On further review, we believe the following 

description is more consistent with E.O. 12898: 

‘‘Environmental justice concerns can arise when a 

final rule, such as a trading program, could result 

in disproportionate burdens on particular 

communities, including minority or low income 

communities.’’ This revised language does not alter 

our determination that the ERC program does not 

raise environmental justice concerns. 

Association for Smog Prevention 

(GHASP), Environmental Defense 

(Texas Office), the Lone Star Chapter of 

the Sierra Club, and Public Citizen 

(Texas Office) on November 4, 2005, are 

as follows. EPA has summarized the 

comments below; the complete 

comments can be found in the ERC 

rulemaking docket (EPA–R06–OAR–

2005–TX–0006). In commenting on the 

ERC program, these commenters raise 

no concerns about pollutants other than 

VOCs (and highly reactive VOC, or 

HRVOC) emissions.1

Comment 1: There are problems with 

the inventory of VOC and HRVOC 

emissions in the HGB nonattainment 

area. 

Response to Comment 1: While EPA 

acknowledges that there have been past 

VOC emission inventory problems from 

sources associated with the 

petrochemical industry (see our 

proposed approval of the revisions to 

the HGB attainment demonstration, 70 

FR 58119), EPA believes that the 

emissions inventory developed by 

TCEQ for the HGB nonattainment area 

is an acceptable approach to 

characterizing the emissions in the HGB 

nonattainment area. In addition, we are 

incorporating by reference our 

responses to comments provided in our 

approval of the attainment 

demonstration for the HGB ozone 

nonattainment area (EPA–R06–OAR–

2005–TX–0018). Those responses more 

specifically address the commenters’

concerns regarding the development 

and use of the imputed inventory, 

characterization of other VOCs in the 

inventory, and appropriate emissions 

monitoring techniques for flares, 

fugitive emissions, and upsets. 

Comment 2: The VOC and HRVOC 

trading programs use unreliable data, 

which cannot be replicably measured. 

There are problems with current 

methods for measurement of HRVOC 

and VOC emissions; therefore, the VOC 

and HRVOC trading programs do not 

meet EPA’s EIP Guidance for 

quantification. 

Response to Comment 2: EPA 

disagrees. The proposed ERC rule, at 70 

FR 58149, describes the basis for EPA’s 

conclusion that the ERC rule satisfies 

the EIP Guidance criteria on 

quantifiability, which are found in 

Chapter 4 (‘‘Fundamental Principles of 

All EIPs’’). 

Emissions and emission reductions 

attributed to an EIP are quantifiable if 

they can be reliably and replicably 

measured: The source must be able to 

reliably calculate the amount of 

emissions and emission reductions from 

the EIP strategy, and must be able to 

replicate the calculations. Under the 

ERC program, sources address the 

element of quantification by using a 

quantification protocol that has been 

approved by TCEQ and EPA. Both 

agencies have important roles in 

ensuring these protocols provide 

reliable and replicable emission 

measurements. The approved 

quantification protocols for VOC ERC 

generation and use are contained in 30 

TAC Chapter 115, Control of Air 

Pollution from Volatile Organic 

Compounds. These methods are all 

reliable and replicable, either because 

EPA has promulgated regulations or 

published guidance listing them as 

appropriate methods for measuring VOC 

emissions, or because the American 

Society for Testing and Materials 

(ASTM) has determined that they are 

appropriate standard methods. EPA 

approval is required before an alternate 

quantification protocol can be used. See 

section 101.302(d)(1)(C). Examples of 

the approved quantification methods for 

VOC ERC generation and use include: 

• Test Methods 1–4 (40 CFR 60, 

Appendix A) for determining flow rates; 

• Test Method 18 (40 CFR 60, 

Appendix A) for determining gaseous 

organic compound emissions by gas 

chromatography; 

• EPA guidance in ‘‘Procedures for 

Certifying Quantity of Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) Emitted by Paint, 

Ink, and Other Coating,’’ EPA–450/3–

84–019; and 

• Determination of true vapor 

pressure using ASTM Methods D323–

89, D2879, D4953, D5190, or D5191 for 

the measurement of Reid Vapor 

pressure. 

Comment 3: TCEQ and EPA lack 

confidence in current methods for 

measuring emissions. This lack of 

confidence increases the risks 

associated with a market-based trading 

program, until the TCEQ is able to 

reconcile ambient monitoring with 

industry emission inventories. For 

example, trading could exacerbate the 

challenge of identifying the cause of any 

program failures because comparisons 

of ambient monitoring trend data to 

emission inventory data will require 

consideration of the timing and 

magnitude of trades. 

Response to Comment 3: EPA 

disagrees. We have discussed above in 

response to Comments 1 and 2 our 

conclusion that the methods used for 

measuring emissions under the ERC 

program are consistent with EPA policy 

and guidance, and that the emissions 

inventory developed by TCEQ is an 

acceptable approach to characterizing 

the emissions in the HGB nonattainment 

area. Sources that generate and use 

ERCs must notify the TCEQ. The TCEQ 

is then responsible for certifying that the 

generation or use strategy is appropriate. 

Through the certification process TCEQ 

is made aware of trades before they 

happen. This advance knowledge of 

trades could then be applied to the 

reconciliation process and actually 

provide additional data instead of being 

a hindrance. 

Comment 4: EPA should find that it 

is premature for TCEQ to allow trading 

of unquantifiable emissions of VOCs in 

the HGB nonattainment area. If either 

the source or the recipient incorrectly 

estimates the emissions involved in a 

trade, the region is at risk of a net 

increase in emissions as a result of the 

trade. Until refineries and chemical 

plants are able to routinely quantify 

their VOC emissions, EPA should not 

allow trading of these VOC emissions. 

Response to Comment 4: EPA 

disagrees that VOC emissions should be 

ineligible for trading in the HGB 

nonattainment area. EPA believes that 

allowing the petrochemical industry to 

trade VOC emissions under the ERC rule 

is appropriate notwithstanding the 

commenter’s concern about emissions 

estimates, because the ERC program 

satisfies the EIP Guidance criteria for 

quantification. For example, sources 

generating and banking VOC ERCs must 

either use the approved quantification 

protocols in Chapter 115 or obtain EPA 

approval for an alternate quantification 

method. These protocols will ensure 

that sources correctly calculate the 

emission reduction to be banked as an 

ERC. The source using the banked 

reduction also must calculate the 

amount of necessary VOC ERCs using 

the approved quantification protocols. 

The TCEQ Executive Director will 

review and approve each requested ERC 

use to ensure that sources using ERCs 

have enough credit to cover their use 

strategy. Therefore, EPA believes that 

sources using the approved 

quantification protocols will correctly 

estimate the amount of ERCs generated 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 52701 

and used, and we also believe that the 

program is designed to minimize 

incorrect emissions estimates. Further, 

users of VOC ERCs must purchase and 

retire an additional ten percent VOC 

ERCs as an environmental benefit. The 

ten percent environmental benefit will 

also help ensure that the trading 

program will not negatively impact the 

nonattainment area in which the ERC is 

generated and used. 

EPA’s response to Texas Industry 

Project (TIP) comments made on 

November 4, 2005, is as follows: 

Comment: TIP supports EPA’s 

proposed approval of the ERC program 

and urges EPA to finalize its approval as 

soon as practicable. 

Response: EPA appreciates the 

support of TIP for our approval of the 

ERC program. 

IV. What does federal approval of a 

State regulation mean to me? 

Enforcement of the State regulation 

before and after it is incorporated into 

the federally approved SIP is primarily 

a State function. However, once the 

regulation is federally approved, EPA 

and the public may take enforcement 

action against violators of these 

regulations. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

rule approves pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it 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). 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

approves a state rule implementing a 

Federal standard, and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

CAA. This rule also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. In this context, in the absence 

of a prior existing requirement for the 

State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the CAA. Thus, the requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not 

apply. This rule does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

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 rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by November 6, 2006. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: August 24, 2006. 

Richard E. Greene, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart SS—Texas 

■ 2. The table in § 52.2270(c) entitled 

‘‘EPA Approved Regulations in the 

Texas SIP’’ is amended: 

■ a. Under Chapter 101—General Air 

Quality Rules, under the centered 

heading Subchapter H—Emissions 

Banking and Trading, by adding a new 

centered heading ‘‘Division 1—Emission 

Credit Banking and Trading’’ followed 

by new entries for sections 101.300, 

101.301, 101.302, 101.303, 101.304, 

101.306, 101.309, and 101.311; 

■ b. Under Chapter 115 (Reg 5)—Control 

of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic 

Compounds, under the centered 

heading Subchapter J—Administrative 

Provisions, immediately before the entry 

for section 115.950, by adding a new 

centered heading ‘‘Division 4—

Emissions Trading’’ and by revising the 

entry for section 115.950; 

■ c. Under Chapter 116 (Reg 6)—Control 

of Air Pollution by Permits for New 

Construction or Modification, under the 

centered heading Subchapter A—

Definitions, by revising the entry for 

section 116.10. 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2270 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
52702 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE TEXAS SIP 

State citation Title/subject State approval/ 

submittal 

Explanation approval 

date Explanation 

Chapter 101—General Air Quality Rules 

* * * * * * * 

Subchapter H—Emissions Banking and Trading 

Division 1—Emission Credit Banking and Trading 

Section 101.300 ............................... Definitions ........................................ 11/10/04 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

Section 101.301 ............................... Purpose ........................................... 12/13/02 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

Section 101.302 ............................... General Provisions .......................... 11/10/04 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

Section 101.303 ............................... Emission Reduction Credit General 

and Certification.

11/10/04 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

Section 101.304 ............................... Mobile Emission Reduction Credit 

Generation and Certfication.

11/10/04 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

Section 101.306 ............................... Emission Credit Use ........................ 12/13/02 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

Section 101.309 ............................... Emission Credit Banking and Trading.12/13/02 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

Section 101.311 ............................... Program Audits and Reports ........... 11/10/04 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

* * * * * * * 

Chapter 115 (Reg 5)—Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds 

* * * * * * * 

Subchapter J—Administrative Provisions 

* * * * * * * 

Division 4—Emissions Trading 

Section 115.950 ............................... Use of Emissions Credits for Compliance.12/06/00 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 52703 

EPA APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE TEXAS SIP—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State approval/ 

submittal 

Explanation approval 

date Explanation 

Chapter 116 (Reg 6)—Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification 

Subchapter A—Definitions 

Section 116.10 ................................. General Definitions .......................... 06/17/98 [Insert date of FR 

publication] [Insert 

FR page number 

where document 

begins].

The SIP does not include subsections 

116.10(1), (2), (3), 

(6), (8), (9), (10), 

and (14). 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 06–7413 Filed 9–5–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0029; FRL–8216–

5] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans; Texas; Discrete 

Emission Credit Banking and Trading 

Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; conditional approval. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing our 

conditional approval of revisions to the 

Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

concerning the Discrete Emission Credit 

Banking and Trading Program. 

DATES: This rule is effective on October 

6, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0029. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Permitting Section (6PD–R), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 

inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review 

Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal 

holidays. Contact the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below to make an 

appointment. If possible, please make 

the appointment at least two working 

days in advance of your visit. There will 

be a 15-cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

The State submittal related to this SIP 

revision, and which is part of the EPA 

docket, is also available for public 

inspection at the State Air Agency listed 

below during official business hours by 

appointment: 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, Office of Air Quality, 12124 

Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adina Wiley, Air Permitting Section 

(6PD–R), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone 214–665–2115, 

wiley.adina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

Outline 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking? 

II. What is a conditional approval? 

III. What future actions are necessary for the 

DERC rule to fully meet EPA’s 

expectations? 

IV. What is the background for this action? 

V. What are EPA’s responses to comments 

received on the proposed action? 

VI. What does Federal approval of a State 

regulation mean to me? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is conditionally approving, as 

part of the Texas SIP, the Discrete 

Emission Credit Banking and Trading 

program, also referred to as the Discrete 

Emission Reduction Credit (DERC) 

program, enacted at Texas 

Administrative Code (TAC) Title 30, 

Chapter 101 General Air Quality Rules, 

Subchapter H, Division 4, sections 

101.370–101.374, 101.376, 101.378, and 

101.379. These revisions were provided 

in SIP revisions dated July 22, 1998 

(state effective date December 23, 1997); 

December 20, 2000 (state effective date 

January 18, 2001); July 15, 2002 (state 

effective date April 14, 2002); January 

31, 2003 (state effective date January 17, 

2003), and December 06, 2004 (state 

effective date December 2, 2004). 

As discussed in our proposed action 

at 70 FR 58164–58166, we conclude that 

the DERC program is consistent with 

section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act. 

The DERC program that we are 

conditionally approving today into the 

Texas SIP includes numerous crossreferences to different State rules. In 

order to be able to conditionally 

approve (or fully approve) a revision 

into a SIP, we also must conditionally 

approve (or fully approve) any crossreferenced rules that are integral to the 

establishment, implementation, and 

enforcement of the SIP revision. Our 

detailed evaluation of all the crossreferences in the State’s DERC rule 

language to other State rules not part of 

Subchapter H, Division 4, sections 

101.370–101.374, 101.376, 101.378, and 

101.379 can be found in the ‘‘Review of 

Cross-References in the DERC Program’’

discussion in Section IV of the 

Technical Support Document (available 

in the rulemaking docket EPA–R06–

OAR–2005–TX–0029). 

Today, EPA finds that the crossreferences in the following sections of 

the DERC program have already been 

approved into the Texas SIP: 

101.370(29) at 65 FR 70792; 

101.372(b)(3) at 63 FR 11835; 

101.372(d)(1)(A) at 66 FR 57244; 

101.372(d)(1)(B) at 60 FR 12438, 62 FR 

27964, 65 FR 18003, 66 FR 36917, and 

66 FR 54688; 101.372(f)(4) at 66 FR 

36917; 101.373(b)(1) at 67 FR 58697; 

and 101.376(d)(2)(A) at 66 FR 57244. 

Additionally, the cross-references in 

sections 101.370(28) and 101.376(c)(5) 

have been approved by the EPA into the 

Texas Federal Operating Permits 

Program on December 06, 2001, and 

March 31, 2005. The cross-reference in 

section 101.376(b)(3) is addressed in a 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES