32450 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 112 / Thursday, June 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

general rating formula and did not 

represent any substantive change. 

Administrative Procedure Act 

The change that this final rule makes 

merely corrects the omission of two 

notes (‘‘Note (1)’’ and ‘‘Note (2)’’) from 

the Spine Table. Accordingly, there is 

good cause for dispensing with the 

notice and comment and delayed 

effective date provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552 

and 553.

■ For the reasons set out in the preamble, 

38 CFR part 4, subpart B, is amended as 

set forth below:

Subpart B—[Amended]

■ 1. The authority citation for part 4 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1155, unless 

otherwise noted.

■ 2. In § 4.71a, the table titled ‘‘The 

Spine’’ is amended by adding Notes 1 

and 2 at the end of the entries under the 

heading ‘‘Formula for Rating 

Intervertebral Disc Syndrome Based on 

Incapacitating Episodes’’ to read as 

follows:

§ 4.71a Schedule of ratings—

musculoskeletal system.

* * * * *

Note (1): For purposes of evaluations under 

diagnostic code 5243, an incapacitating 

episode is a period of acute signs and 

symptoms due to intervertebral disc 

syndrome that requires bed rest prescribed by 

a physician and treatment by a physician.

Note (2): If intervertebral disc syndrome is 

present in more than one spinal segment, 

provided that the effects in each spinal 

segment are clearly distinct, evaluate each 

segment on the basis of incapacitating 

episodes or under the General Rating 

Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the 

Spine, whichever method results in a higher 

evaluation for that segment.

Dated: May 27, 2004. 

Robert C. McFetridge, 

Director, Regulations Management.

[FR Doc. 04–12723 Filed 6–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[TX–70–2–7347a; FRL–7672–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans for Texas; 

Approval of Section 179B 

Demonstration of Attainment, Volatile 

Organic Compounds and Nitrogen 

Oxides Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets for Conformity for the El Paso 

Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final approval.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving, 

through direct final action, a revision to 

the Texas State Implementation Plan 

(SIP), submitted to show attainment of 

the one-hour ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) in the El 

Paso ozone nonattainment area, but for 

emissions emanating from outside of the 

United States. The EPA is also 

approving the El Paso area’s Volatile 

Organic Compounds (VOCs) and 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) emissions 

budgets. The State submitted the 

revisions to satisfy sections 179B and 

other Part D requirements of the Federal 

Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This rule is effective on August 

9, 2004, without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comment by July 

12, 2004. If EPA receives such comment, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in 

the Federal Register informing the 

public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by File ID No. TX–70–2–7347, 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• U.S. EPA Region 6 ‘‘Contact Us’’

Web site: http://epa.gov/region6/

r6coment.htm. Please click on ‘‘6PD’’

(Multimedia) and select ‘‘Air’’ before 

submitting comments. 

• E-mail: Mr Thomas Diggs at 

diggs.thomas@epa.gov. Please also cc 

the person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section below. 

• Fax: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), at 214–665–

7263. 

• Mail: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. 

• Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. 

Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning 

Section (6PD–L), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. 

Such deliveries are accepted only 

between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. 

weekdays except for legal holidays. 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Please include the text 

‘‘Public comment on File ID No. TX–70–

2–7347’’ in the subject line of the first 

page of your comments. EPA’s policy is 

that all comments received will be 

included in the public file without 

change, including any personal 

information provided, unless the 

comment includes information claimed 

to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through regulations.gov, or email. The federal regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public file and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Official File: Copies of the documents 

relevant to this action are in the official 

file which is available at the Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), 

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 or Mr. Bill Deese at 

214–665–7253 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 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 112 / Thursday, June 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 32451

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

Copies of any State submittals and 

EPA’s technical support document are 

also available for public inspection at 

the State Air Agency listed below 

during official business hours by 

appointment: Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quailty, Office of Air 

Quality, 12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, 

Texas 78753.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe 

Kordzi, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone 

(214) 665–7186; fax number 214–665–

7263; E-Mail address 

kordzi.joe@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’

and ‘‘our’’ means EPA.

Outline 

I. What is the background for this action? 

II. What did the state submit and how did we 

evaluate it? 

A. Modeling. 

B. Additional basin-wide modeling. 

C. How close is El Paso to attainment of the 

ozone standard? 

D. Motor vehicle emissions budget. 

E. Has the EPA approved other parts of the 

SIP before now? 

III. What is our final action? 

IV. Why is this a ‘‘final action?’’

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

El Paso, Texas, was designated 

nonattainment for ozone and classified 

as serious under sections 107(d)(4)(A) 

and 181(a) of the CAA. The El Paso 

nonattainment area consists of El Paso 

County. Under section 181(a), serious 

areas must attain the ozone NAAQS by 

November 15, 1999. 

The CAA requires that ozone 

nonattainment areas designated 

moderate and above demonstrate 

attainment through air quality modeling 

or any other analytical method 

determined by the Administrator to be 

at least as effective. Section 179B of the 

CAA contains special provisions for 

nonattainment areas that are affected by 

emissions emanating from outside the 

United States. Under section 179B, the 

EPA will approve a SIP if the area meets 

all other CAA requirements, and 

establishes that implementation of the 

plan would achieve attainment of the 

ozone standard by the CAA statutory 

deadline ‘‘but for emissions emanating 

from outside the United States.’’ This is 

the type of demonstration made by the 

State of Texas. 

II. What Did the State Submit and How 

Did We Evaluate It? 

A. Modeling 

The Governor of the State of Texas 

submitted a revision to the Texas SIP for 

the El Paso ozone nonattainment area 

via a letter dated October 3, 1994. This 

included air quality modeling, under 

section 179B of the CAA, that 

demonstrates that El Paso would attain 

the ozone NAAQS, but for emissions 

emanating from outside of the United 

States. The State of Texas submitted a 

revision via a letter dated August 9, 

1996, showing that the revised 

inspection and maintenance program, 

and delay in implementation, would 

have no significant effect on the validity 

of the attainment demonstration 

submitted in 1994. 

El Paso and Juarez, Mexico, share a 

common airshed. However, emission 

inventory data was not available for 

Juarez, so modeling of the entire airshed 

was not possible. In such an instance, 

section 179B allows an area such as El 

Paso to perform modeling using only 

U.S. pollutant emission data in 

performing the attainment 

demonstration. 

In its demonstration, the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ) used the Urban Airshed Model 

(UAM) version IV, an EPA-approved 

photochemical grid model, to develop 

the attainment demonstration for the El 

Paso area. Texas performed its ozone 

modeling analyses for El Paso, 

according to EPA guidance. For further 

details, see the Technical Support 

Document. 

The State had previously submitted to 

the EPA the 15 percent VOC Reasonable 

Further Progress (RFP) SIP for the El 

Paso area (63 FR 62943, November 10, 

1998), as required by section 182(b)(1) 

of the CAA. The 15 percent RFP SIPs 

contain regulations that are estimated to 

reduce VOC emissions in each area by 

15 percent from 1990 baseline levels. 

The modeling results indicate that with 

the 15 percent RFP reductions, the area 

would attain the 1-hour ozone standard, 

but for emissions emanating from 

outside the United States, by November 

15, 1996, which is before the area’s 

applicable attainment deadline of 

November 15, 1999. The predicted 

domain-wide maximum ozone 

concentration for 1996 was significantly 

below the NAAQS of 120 ppb. 

B. Additional Basin-Wide Modeling 

Section 182(c)(2) of the CAA requires 

each serious and above ozone 

nonattainment area to submit a SIP 

revision by November 15, 1994, which 

describes, in part, how the area will 

achieve an actual VOC emission 

reduction from the baseline emissions of 

at least 3 percent of baseline emissions 

per year averaged over each consecutive 

3-year period beginning 6 years after 

enactment (i.e., November 15, 1996), 

until the area’s attainment date.

Via a letter from A. Stanley Meiburg 

of EPA Region 6 to Ms. Beverly Hartsock 

of the then Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission, dated 

August 9, 1994, EPA stated its position 

that if the section 179B attainment 

demonstration SIP showed the El Paso 

area would attain by November 15, 

1996, the attainment deadline for 

moderate areas, the additional 9 percent 

in emission reductions required in the 

post-96 Rate of Progress (ROP) would be 

deferred. This deferral was effective 

until Juarez monitoring data and 

emission inventory data became 

available to perform basin-wide 

modeling of the El Paso/Jurez airshed. 

Annex V of the 1983 La Paz 

Agreement between the United States 

and Mexico, which addressed 

environmental concerns along the 

border, calls for basin-wide modeling to 

be accomplished for the El Paso/Juarez 

airshed. This modeling was performed 

during the 1998–2000 period, but was 

not deemed to be valid to ascertain the 

types of controls necessary throughout 

the airshed in order to meet ozone air 

quality standards on both the U.S. and 

the Mexico side of the border. The main 

problem with model performance was 

believed to be an inadequate VOC 

emission inventory for Juarez. 

However, subsequent to the 

submission of this attainment 

demonstration, the El Paso area has now 

attained the 1-hour ozone standard by 

the accumulation of three consecutive 

years of quality-assured ambient air data 

that show no violations of the standard. 

The most recent data provided by the 

State of Texas, available through the 

EPA Aerometric Information and 

Retrieval Service, demonstrate the area 

continues to attain the 1-hour standard. 

Therefore, EPA does not anticipate a 

need to trigger the commitment for 

basin-wide modeling. 

Based on EPA’s ‘‘Clean Data Policy’’, 

if EPA made an attainment finding, we 

would no longer require the 9 percent 

ROP plan. Therefore, since the El Paso 

area has data showing attainment of the 

ozone standard without the 9 percent 

ROP plan, we believe that it is 

reasonable to defer that ROP 

requirement. Complete details of EPA’s 

rationale are included in the Clean Data 

Policy. If the area violates the 1-hour 

ozone standard before a future 

redesignation, EPA will review the 

32452 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 112 / Thursday, June 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

conclusion to defer the 9 percent ROP 

requirement. 

C. How Close Is El Paso to Attainment 

of the Ozone Standard? 

Data from the El Paso monitoring 

network from 1999 to the end of 2002 

indicate that the area is in attainment of 

the ozone standard. The State has 

informed EPA that it may request 

redesignation in the near future. 

D. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 

The Governor of Texas submitted the 

1996 motor vehicle emissions budgets of 

36.23 tons/day for VOCs and 39.76 tons/

day for NOX on December 11, 1997. 

These budgets were found to be 

adequate for transportation conformity 

purposes on January 12, 1998 (see 64 FR 

31217, June 10, 1999). It is EPA’s 

conclusion that the SIP demonstrates 

attainment with these budgets and 

contains the measures necessary to 

support them. Today, we are approving 

these budgets, under section 176(c) of 

the CAA. 

E. Has the EPA Approved Other Parts of 

the SIP Before Now?

Below is a table describing the 

elements that the El Paso ozone SIP 

must have, and the references to their 

EPA approvals.

Description Section of CAA Codified at 40 CFR part 52, subpart SS 

An inventory of all actual emissions of VOC and NOX

sources in the area.

172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) ...... 52.2309(a). 

A revised inventory every three years .............................. 182(a)(3)(A) ........................ Most recent submitted 1996. 

A permit program for the construction and operation of 

new and modified major stationary sources of VOC 

and NOX ozone in nonattainment areas.

172(c)(5) and 182(a)(2)(C); 

182(c)(6); 182(c)(7); 

182(c)(8).

52.2270(c)(88). 

A regulation that requires sources to legally certify their 

emissions each year.

182(a)(3)(B) ........................ 52.2270(c)(88). 

A regulation requiring reductions in current emissions to 

offset new emissions from new and modified sources.

182(c)(10) ........................... 52.2270(c)(97). 

Reasonably available control technology on major 

sources of VOC’s.

182(b)(2) ............................. 52.2270(c)(88). 

A fuels program to reduce evaporative emissions from 

vehicle fuel tanks.

211(h) ................................. 52.2270(c)(88). 

Contingency measures to be implemented if the area 

fails to attain the standard by the deadline.

182(c)(9); 172(c)(9) ............ 63 FR 62943, Nov. 10, 1998. 

A vehicle inspection and maintenance program .............. 182(c)(3) ............................. 52.2270(c)(87). 

Vapor recovery systems on fuel pumps ........................... 182(b)(3) ............................. 52.2270(c)(81). 

A clean fuel fleet program ................................................ 182(c)(4) ............................. 52.2270(c). 

Enhanced monitoring of ozone, NOX, VOC’s, and NOX

and VOC emissions.

182(c)(1) ............................. 52.2270(c)(90). 

Transportation control measures ...................................... 182(c)(5) ............................. 52.2308(b) (waiver of NOX provisions, and 63 FR 

62943, Nov. 10, 1998). 

A SIP revision to achieve 15 percent reductions in overall VOC emissions.182(b)(1) ............................. 63 FR 62943, Nov. 10, 1998. 

A SIP revision to achieve 3 percent reductions per year 

in 1997, 1998, and 1999 [9 percent ROP].

182(c)(2)(B) ........................ Deferred, based on EPA’s Clean Data Policy and monitored attainment. 

III. What Is Our Final Action? 

The EPA is approving a revision to 

the Texas SIP, which was submitted to 

show attainment of the one-hour ozone 

standard in the El Paso ozone 

nonattainment area by the applicable 

attainment date, but for emissions from 

Mexico. The revision satisfies section 

179B of the CAA. The EPA is electing 

to defer the post-1996 RFP requirement. 

In so doing, the EPA is finding that, 

based on the States’s section 179B 

attainment demonstration the El Paso 

area would attain by November 15, 

1996, the State’s enforceable 

commitment to perform basin-wide 

modeling when the necessary Juarez 

information becomes available, and 

monitoring data now showing 

attainment, a post-1996 plan with an 

additional 9 percent of reductions from 

November 1996 through November 

1999, is not necessary for attainment in 

the El Paso area.

The EPA believes that all section 

179B approvals should be on a 

contingency basis. Therefore, this 

section 179B modeling-based approval 

is valid only as long as the area’s 

modeling data continue to show that the 

El Paso ozone area would be in 

attainment, but for emissions from 

outside the United States. If El Paso 

again experiences one-hour ozone 

violations, or if future successful basinwide modeling demonstrates the El Paso 

area could achieve attainment of the 

one-hour standard through reduction 

measures typically employed by serious 

nonattainment areas, the EPA will 

review the decision to defer the 9 

percent ROP requirement, and Texas 

may be required to submit a new post1996 ROP plan for El Paso. 

The EPA is also approving El Paso’s 

VOC and NOX motor vehicle emissions 

budgets, under section 176(c) of the 

CAA. 

IV. Why Is This a ‘‘Final Action?’’ 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if adverse comments are 

received. This rule will be effective on 

August 9, 2004, without further notice 

unless we receive adverse comment by 

July 12, 2004. If we receive adverse 

comments, we will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. We will address all 

public comments in a subsequent final 

rule based on the proposed rule. We 

will not institute a second comment 

period on this action. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. Please note that if we receive 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this rule and if 

that provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, we may adopt as 

final those provisions of the rule that are 

not the subject of an adverse comment. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 112 / Thursday, June 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 32453

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 

(Public Law 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 

Clean Air Act. 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 Clean Air Act. 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 Clean Air Act. 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 Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by August 9, 2004. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: May 27, 2004. 

Richard E. Greene, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6.

■ Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7402 et seq.

Subchapter SS—Texas

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

‘‘EPA approved nonregulatory 

provisions and quasi-regulatory 

measures in the Texas SIP’’ is amended 

by adding two entries to the end of the 

table to read as follows:

§ 52.2270 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(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 

* * * * * * * 

Section 179B Attainment Demonstration Report.El Paso ozone nonattainment area .... 10/03/94 6/10/04 Approval includes a revision submitted 08/09/96. 

Deferral of the post 1996 RFP ............. El Paso ozone nonattainment area .... .................... 6/10/04 

Enforceable commitment to conduct 

additional modeling for the area as 

new data become available. This 

modeling effort will be conducted 

under the auspices of the 1983 La 

Paz Agreement between the United 

States and Mexico.

El Paso ozone nonattainment area .... 10/03/94 6/10/04 

32454 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 112 / Thursday, June 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

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

Name of SIP Provision Applicable geographic

or nonattainment area 

State

submittal/

effective

date 

EPA 

approval 

date 

Comments 

VOC and NOX Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget for Conformity.El Paso ozone nonattainment area .... 12/11/97 6/10/04 

[FR Doc. 04–13175 Filed 6–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[R07–OAR–2004–IA–0001; FRL–7672–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of Iowa

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the state of Iowa. This 

revision pertains to orders and permits 

issued by the state to control particulate 

matter (PM10) emissions from 

Blackhawk Foundry and Machine 

Company in Davenport (Scott County), 

Iowa. This approval will make the order 

and permits Federally enforceable.

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective August 9, 2004, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by July 12, 

2004. If adverse comments are received, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the direct final rule in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Regional Material in 

EDocket (RME) ID Number R07–OAR–

2004–IA–0001, by one of the following 

methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:/

/www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Agency Web site: http://

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. RME, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Once in the 

system, select ‘‘quick search;’’ then key 

in the appropriate RME Docket 

identification number. Follow the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

3. E-mail: Jones.Harriett@epa.gov. 

4. Mail: Harriett Jones, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Permitting and 

Compliance Branch, 901 North 5th 

Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to Harriett Jones, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Permitting and Compliance Branch, 901 

North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 

66101. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

RME ID No. R07–OAR–2004–IA–0001. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http://

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through RME, regulations.gov, 

or e-mail. The EPA RME website and 

the Federal regulations.gov website are 

‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through RME or 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the public docket and made 

available on the Internet. If you submit 

an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the RME 

index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., 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 in RME or 

in hard copy at the Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Permitting and 

Compliance Branch, 901 North 5th 

Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 8 

to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays. 

Interested persons wanting to examine 

these documents should make an 

appointment with the office at least 24 

hours in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harriett Jones at (913) 551–7730, or at 

jones.harriett@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This section provides additional 

information by addressing the following 

questions:

What Is a SIP? 

What Is the Federal Approval Process for a 

SIP? 

What Does Federal Approval of a State 

Regulation Mean to Me? 

What Is Being Addressed in this Document? 

Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP 

Revision been Met?

What Is a SIP? 

Section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requires states to develop air 

pollution regulations and control 

strategies to ensure that state air quality 

meets the national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) established by EPA. 

These ambient standards are established 

under section 109 of the CAA, and they 

currently address six criteria pollutants. 

These pollutants are: carbon monoxide, 

nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, 

particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. 

Each state must submit these 

regulations and control strategies to us 

for approval and incorporation into the 

Federally-enforceable SIP. 

Each Federally-approved SIP protects 

air quality primarily by addressing air 

pollution at its point of origin. These 

SIPs can be extensive, containing state 

regulations or other enforceable 

documents and supporting information 

such as emission inventories, 

monitoring networks, and modeling 

demonstrations.