[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 12 (Thursday, January 18, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4756-4768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1346]



[[Page 4756]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX-126-1-7477; FRL-6933-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; the 
Dallas/Fort Worth Nonattainment Area; Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve the 1-hour ozone Attainment 
Demonstration State Implementation Plan (SIP), the Post 96 Rate-of-
Progress (ROP) plan SIP, and the 15% ROP plan SIP for the Dallas/Fort 
Worth (DFW) serious ozone nonattainment area. The EPA is also proposing 
to extend the attainment date for the DFW area to November 15, 2007, 
from November 15, 1999, based on transport from the Houston/Galveston/
Brazoria (HGA) ozone nonattainment area; approve the Motor Vehicle 
Emissions Budgets contained in the Attainment Demonstration SIP and the 
Post 1996 ROP plan SIP; approve the State's enforceable commitment to 
perform a mid-course review and submit a SIP revision to the EPA by May 
2004; approve the State's enforceable commitment to revise the SIP 
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets using the MOBILE6 on-road emissions 
model; approve revisions to the 1990 base year inventory; and find that 
the DFW area meets the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) 
requirements for major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) 
emissions. The EPA is also proposing to convert the conditional, 
interim approval of the DFW 15% plan (63 FR 62943) to a full approval 
because the requirements for full approval appear to have been met. 
This proposed action is based on the requirements of the Federal Clean 
Air Act (the Act) related to ozone demonstrations.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 19, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at the EPA Region 
6 Office listed below. Copies of documents relevant to this action, 
including the Technical Support Document (TSD) are available for public 
inspection during normal business hours at the following location.
    Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section 
(6PD-L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Office of Air 
Quality, 12124 Park Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.
    Anyone wanting to examine these documents should make an 
appointment with the appropriate office at least two working days in 
advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Herbert R. Sherrow, Jr., Air Planning 
Section (6PD-L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Telephone 
Number (214) 665-7237, e-Mail Address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#03706b6671716c742d6b667161436673622d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ea99828f9898859dc4828f9888aa8f9a8bc48d859c">[email protected]</span></a>.

Table of Contents

I. Attainment Demonstration and Attainment Date
    A. Proposed Action
    B. Attainment Demonstration Contents
    C. Photochemical Modeling
    D. Photochemical Modeling Results
    E. Weight-Of-Evidence
    F. Emission Control Strategy
    G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
    H. EPA's Analysis
II. Post 1996 Rate of Progress Plan
    A. Proposed Action
    B. Calculation of Requirements
    C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
III. 15% Rate of Progress Plan
    Proposed Action
IV. Background
    A. The Relevant Clean Air Act Requirements
    B. Dates of State's SIP Submissions
    C. General Requirements for an Attainment Demonstration and its 
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
    D. Ozone Transport Policy and Attainment Date Extensions
V. Administrative Requirements

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refers to EPA.

I. Attainment Demonstration and Attainment Date

A. Proposed Action

What Action Are we Taking?
    We are proposing to approve the transport demonstration and 
attainment demonstration SIP developed for the DFW ozone nonattainment 
area because they meet the Clean Air Act. We believe that the State has 
adequately followed our 1998 Transport Guidance for demonstrating 
transport, and that the State's transport demonstration analyses 
indicate that there are impacts of ozone and ozone precursor transports 
from the upwind HGA area affecting the DFW area. In addition, we 
believe that the modeling, the provided weight-of-evidence analyses, 
and the analysis of transport of ozone and ozone precursor compounds 
from the HGA area, demonstrate that the control strategy chosen by the 
State will provide for attainment of the ozone standard. It is our 
technical position that the control strategy will provide for 
attainment of the ozone standard by November 15, 2007.
    We are proposing to approve the DFW 1-hour ozone nonattainment area 
attainment demonstration SIP; the State's request for an extension of 
the attainment date to November 15, 2007, while retaining the area's 
current classification as serious; the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets; 
the State's enforceable commitment to conduct a mid-course review 
(including evaluation of all modeling, inventory data, and other tools 
and assumptions used to develop this attainment demonstration) and to 
submit a mid-course review SIP revision, with recommended mid-course 
corrective actions, to us by May 1, 2004; the Speed Limit Reductions in 
nine counties (including the DFW 4-county area; Dallas, Tarrant, 
Collin, and Denton Counties); a Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program in 
nine counties (including the DFW 4-county area); Transportation Control 
Measures in the DFW area; the 15% ROP Plan, the Post-1996 ROP Plan; 
revisions to the 1990 base year inventory; and the State's enforceable 
commitment to performing new mobile source modeling for the DFW area, 
using MOBILE6, our on-road mobile emissions factor computer model, 
within 24 months of the model's release; and, if transportation 
conformity analysis is to be performed between 12 months and 24 months 
after the MOBILE6 release, transportation conformity will not be 
determined until Texas submits a motor vehicle emissions budget which 
is developed using MOBILE6 and which we find adequate. We are also 
proposing to find that the DFW area meets all remaining outstanding VOC 
RACT requirements for major sources.
    If the subsequent analyses conducted by the State as part of the 
mid-course review indicate additional reductions are needed for the DFW 
area to attain the ozone standard, we will require the State to 
implement additional controls as soon as possible which demonstrate 
attainment through photochemical grid modeling. We cannot finalize the 
proposed action upon the Attainment Demonstration SIP, the State's 
request for an extension of the attainment date, and the MVEB contained 
in the Attainment Demonstration SIP unless and until we have fully 
approved all of the control measures relied upon in the State's 
Attainment Demonstration SIP for the DFW area and the control measures 
required by the Act for a serious area such as the DFW area. See

[[Page 4757]]

section F., Action needed on Control Measures for a complete list of 
the rulemaking actions which must be completed before we can finalize 
action on the DFW Attainment Demonstration SIP, the attainment date 
extension, and the Attainment Demonstration SIP's MVEB. Furthermore, we 
cannot finalize action on these three items unless and until the 
Governor submits the finally adopted enforceable commitment regarding 
MOBILE6. The State has begun its public comment process on an 
enforceable commitment and has committed to performing new mobile 
source modeling for the DFW area, using MOBILE6, within 24 months of 
the model's release. The public hearing is scheduled for January 4, 
2001.
Was the Submittal Addressed in Public Hearings and Adopted by the 
State?
    Four Public hearings were held in the DFW area on January 26 and 
27, 2000. The State formally adopted the submittal on April 19, 2000. 
In addition, the State held six other public hearings in other cities 
on the submittal. The Governor of Texas submitted the Attainment 
Demonstration SIP, a request for extension of the attainment date for 
the DFW ozone nonattainment area, adopted rules, orders and 
initiatives, and the mid-course commitment on April 25, 2000. The State 
has gone forward with its public participation requirements on a 
commitment to performing new mobile source modeling for the DFW area, 
using MOBILE6. The public hearing on this commitment is scheduled for 
January 4, 2001. We anticipate that the Governor of Texas will submit 
this adopted enforceable commitment in the Spring of 2001. The Governor 
also submitted after public notice and hearing, the Post 1996 ROP Plan 
and revisions to the 1990 base year inventory on October 25, 1999.

B. Attainment Demonstration Contents

What Are the Contents of the Attainment Demonstration Submittal?
    The April 25, 2000 submittal, concerning the ozone attainment 
demonstration and an extension of the attainment date for the DFW ozone 
nonattainment area, contains:
    1. A photochemical modeling demonstration and additional weight-of-
evidence analyses supporting the photochemical modeling demonstration,
    2. An accompanying control strategy, comprised of:
    a. Regulations and initiatives in the DFW area (and their 
documentation);
    b. Regulations and initiatives in certain counties surrounding the 
DFW area (and their documentation); and
    c. Additional regional rules and orders (and their documentation), 
relied upon for demonstrating attainment in the DFW area.
    3. A 2007 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) for transportation 
conformity;
    4. A demonstration of transport from the HGA area supporting an 
attainment date extension to 2007;
    5. Emissions growth estimates, and a 2007 forecast emissions 
inventory; and,
    6. A commitment to perform a mid-course review with submittal to us 
by May 1, 2004.
    The attainment control strategy; i.e., regulations, initiatives, 
and orders, are primarily designed to control Nitrogen Oxides 
(NO<INF>X</INF>) emissions from various sources, since the modeling 
shows ozone reduction is more sensitive to NO<INF>X</INF> controls.
    For purposes of this action, we are reviewing the modeling, weight-
of-evidence support, the transport analysis, the MVEB, forecasted 
emissions inventory, the mid-course enforceable commitment, and the 
Transportation Control Measures, the Speed limit reductions and the 
Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program local initiatives. We are also 
reviewing the enforceable commitment to perform new mobile source 
modeling for the DFW area, using MOBILE6, within 24 months of the 
model's release, including a provision stating that if transportation 
conformity analysis is to be performed between 12 months and 24 months 
after the MOBILE6 release, transportation conformity will not be 
determined until Texas submits a motor vehicle emissions budget which 
is developed using MOBILE6 and which we find adequate.

C. Photochemical Modeling

What Model Approach Was Used for the Analysis?
    The state used the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions 
(CAMx) version 2.01 photochemical grid model to conduct both the SIP 
attainment demonstration modeling and the downwind transport modeling 
for the DFW ozone nonattainment area. The State demonstrated that CAMx 
performed better than UAM version IV, the regulatory model, in the HGA 
nonattainment area and petitioned us to approve its use in the DFW 
nonattainment area. We approved the use of CAMx for the DFW ozone 
nonattainment area based upon the model's better performance in the HGA 
nonattainment area. This was considered to be valid for the DFW area. 
The State's modeling activities were performed as outlined in a series 
of the modeling protocols, according to our ``Guideline for Regulatory 
Application of the Urban Airshed Model'' (July, 1991) (Guideline). The 
final modeling protocol developed by the State was submitted in August 
1999. This protocol was reviewed and approved by us. The State used a 
relatively large modeling domain with nested grids to capture the 
influence of regional and long-range transport. The modeling domain 
covers the DFW ozone nonattainment area which is comprised of Dallas, 
Tarrant, Collin, and Denton Counties. The modeling domain also covers 
most counties in central and east Texas, including the ozone 
nonattainment counties of Harris, Jefferson, Orange, Chambers, Hardin, 
Liberty, Montgomery, Waller, Brazoria, Galveston, and Fort Bend 
counties. It also covers a number of other States; e.g., Louisiana and 
Mississippi in the southeastern portion of the country.
How Were Exceedance Days Evaluated and What Days Were Modeled?
    Our 1991 Guideline sets forth a recommended procedure for selecting 
ozone exceedance days appropriate for conducting a modeling 
demonstration. This procedure, in part, considers wind rose analyses 
based upon the four morning hours of 0700 to 1000 local standard time. 
These wind rose analyses are used to define the meteorological patterns 
for source-receptor relationships associated with high ozone events. 
The State used this method for defining meteorological patterns. The 
number of ozone exceedance days for the period, 1990-1996, associated 
with each meteorological pattern was identified. The most prominent 
meteorological pattern for ozone exceedance days (i.e., 70%) was calm 
winds; i.e., wind speeds  3mph. The meteorological pattern with 
southerly winds was the second most prominent pattern with 25% of the 
ozone exceedance days.
    A total of eleven ozone exceedance days were identified as 
candidates for modeling. From these, the State chose the candidate 
episodes in 1995 (calm winds) and 1996 (southerly winds), in part, 
since they are more applicable to the most currently available 
emissions inventory (the 1996 Periodic) and since more ambient data is 
generally available for these episodes.
    The State selected June 21 and 22, 1995, which form a multi-day 
episode, as two of the three primary episode days to model from the 
calm meteorological regime. These two days also had 1-hour exceedances 
fairly close to the current ozone design value (i.e., 139 ppb). For

[[Page 4758]]

the third primary episode day, the State selected July 3, 1996. 
Although the meteorological pattern on July 3rd had neither calm nor 
southerly winds, since the two days prior exhibited southerly winds, 
the rationale for this selection is that July 3rd is associated with 
southerly winds. It also occurred during the period of enhanced 
aerometric monitoring. The high ozone episode days the State selected 
and modeled meet with the requisite three primary episode days and 
cover the two predominate types of meteorological patterns associated 
with high ozone in the DFW area. A more complete description of the 
episode selections and technical rationales can be found in the TSD.
How Was Potential Transport From the HGA Area Addressed?
    The State demonstrated the potential transport of ozone and ozone 
precursors from the upwind HGA nonattainment area upon the DFW area for 
both the 1995 and the 1996 episodes. This demonstration was primarily 
based upon two modeling analyses. The first used the same set of air 
quality and meteorological inputs as used in the base case simulation, 
but with an emissions data set in which anthropogenic (man-made) 
emissions from the 8-county HGA area were eliminated. The second was an 
ozone source apportionment analysis. The CAMx model has an optional 
feature which tracks the sources of precursors that contribute to the 
ozone formed at a given location. This feature was used to assess the 
culpability of sources in the 8-county HGA nonattainment area to the 
DFW four-county nonattainment area. These analyses show that for July 
3, 1996, 2-4 ppb of ozone in portions of the DFW area comes from HGA 
sources.
    The State also submitted a back trajectory analysis of ozone 
exceedance days in the DFW area for the six year period, 1993 to 1998. 
During this period there were 160 exceedance days in the DFW area and 
approximately ten percent had trajectories going back to the HGA area.
    Thus, emissions from the HGA area have the potential to influence 
DFW's ability to attain the 1-hour ozone standard. It is EPA's proposed 
technical position that for some ozone exceedance days, the DFW area is 
affected by transport from the HGA area. On other exceedance days, the 
DFW area is affected only by ozone precursor emissions generated within 
the DFW area itself.
    Based on this transport demonstration, we propose to grant the 
State's request for an extension of the attainment date to November 15, 
2007. A detailed discussion of the acceptability of the demonstration 
is in the section on EPA's Analysis in this notice. A discussion of the 
Transport Policy is in the BACKGROUND section of this notice.

D. Photochemical Modeling Results

What Were the Modeling Results for the Primary Episode Days and for the 
Future Attainment Date?
    The model simulated ozone concentrations on selected primary 
episode days for the 1995 and 1996 episodes using emissions specific 
for those days, and emissions forecast to a 2007 future year. The 
resulting DFW area summary of the performance statistics and ozone 
peaks for 1995, 1996, and 2007 are shown in Table 1. The normalized 
bias and gross error performance statistics shown in Table 1 are well 
below our recommended maximum levels. This indicates that the model 
adequately replicated the spacial and temporal ozone formation that 
occurred on these ozone exceedance days. This provides an assurance 
that the model is useful in testing future control measures. These 
modeled ozone peaks reflect the results of the 2007 forecast emissions 
and control strategy for the 1995 and 1996 episode days.

Table 1--Summary of Performance Statistics and Peak Observed and Modeled
     Ozone Concentrations (ppb) in the DFW Ozone Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Period                            Episode days
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary Episode Day..............      6/21/95      6/22/95       7/3/96
Peak Observed....................          144          135          144
Peak Modeled Base Case...........        132.8        137.6        159.2
Peak Modeled 2007 Future Case....        121.1        126.1        144.2
Peak Modeled 2007 Post-Control           110.3        113.1        131.5
 Case............................
Normalized Bias Greater Than 60         -10.1%        -8.8%        -3.4%
 ppb.............................
Normalized Gross Error Greater           12.2%        12.5%        15.0%
 Than 60 ppb.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do the Modeling Results Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone Standard?
    The Guidance on Use of Modeled Results to Demonstrate Attainment of 
the Ozone NAAQS, (June, 1996) recommends the use of either a 
statistical or deterministic approach to demonstrate attainment. Both 
of these approaches allow for the use of Weight-of-Evidence (WOE) to 
supplement the modeling results. The State elected to use the 
deterministic approach with WOE. As noted in Table 1, the 1-hour 
maximum predicted ozone concentration for the 2007 post-control 
modeling in the DFW area on the controlling day (July 3, 1996) (131.5 
ppb) is above the standard; whereas, the other two episode days modeled 
are well below the standard.
    The 2007 post-control modeling by itself does not conclusively 
demonstrate attainment of the standard; (i.e., the deterministic test), 
but its results are so close to attainment to warrant the consideration 
of WOE analyses that support the demonstration of attainment. The State 
conducted several WOE analyses (see next section for further details) 
to provide additional confirmation that the demonstration shows that 
DFW will attain the standard by 2007 with the planned emission 
controls.

E. Weight-Of-Evidence

What WOE Analyses and Determinations Are Used To Support the Modeled 
Attainment Demonstration?
    As presented in section D, our 1996 guidance document provides for 
the use of WOE to complement the control strategy modeling in 
demonstrating attainment. The key concept behind our June 1996 guidance 
is that determination of attainment, based on monitored ozone 
concentrations, allows for some exceedances of the 1-hour standard. 
Thus, even though the model may show some areas with peak 
concentrations slightly above the NAAQS, such modeled exceedances do

[[Page 4759]]

not necessarily imply that monitored attainment will not be achieved.
    Since the 2007 post-control modeling for the July 3, 1996, episode 
day is the only day exceeding the standard, most of the WOE analyses 
address this day. The State submitted the following WOE analyses:
    1. Notable higher peak modeled than monitored ozone concentrations: 
The monitored peak in the DFW area on July 3, 1996, was 144 ppb versus 
a modeled peak of 159 ppb. Thus, there is some uncertainty regarding 
the modeled peak, even though the episode satisfied all of our criteria 
for model performance.
    2. Meteorology: As previously indicated, the specific meteorology 
on July 3, 1996, was not of the types most associated with ozone 
exceedances in the DFW area. In addition, although the model 
performance for July 3, 1996, was acceptable, there was an indication 
that the meteorological features were not fully replicated for this 
day. There were scattered rain showers in the area which may have 
presented some meteorological effects which could not be modeled.
    3. Additional ozone reduction metrics: The State presented 
additional metrics, aside from the modeled peak. The metrics presented 
are Area of exceedance, Area-hours of exceedance, and a measure of 
potential exposure. These metrics measure the geographic extent and 
temporal duration and duration of the ozone exceedance for various 
control strategies. The results show that the modeled control strategy 
produces a significant reduction in each of these additional metrics. 
This indicates that the selected control strategy should reduce the 
geographical and temporal aspects of the ozone exceedance, as well as 
the peak concentration.
    4. Estimated future design value: The estimated future design 
value, as recommended in our draft guidance for assessing attainment of 
the 8-hour standard, is determined by proportioning the change in the 
modeled ozone results to a change in the design value.
    To estimate the future design value, the State developed a ratio of 
the 2007 post-control modeling results to that of the original Base 
modeling results. Since episodes chosen for the DFW attainment 
demonstration occurred during 1995 and 1996, the State used monitoring 
data collected from 1995 to 1997 in the DFW area to establish the base 
design values. Then the ratio of the modeling results is multiplied by 
the 1995-1997 base design value to obtain an estimated future design 
value. Using this procedure the estimated future design value for July 
3rd is 115.3 ppb, which is less than the standard. This result suggests 
that it is likely that the area will attain the standard by 2007.
    5. Design value trends: The State analyzed historic monitored air 
quality data in the DFW area for the period of 1981 to 1999. The 
measure of air quality which determines the nonattainment 
classification is the design value. The design value is the highest of 
the fourth-highest daily peak ozone concentration over a three year 
period at any monitoring site in the area. There had been a general 
downtrend in the design value; however, it has remained constant in 
recent years. The constant trend has occurred despite dramatic 
increases in the level of construction and economic activity and 
substantial growth in the mobile fleet. Existing regulations appear to 
be adequate to keep the design value constant and new regulations 
included in the SIP should provide a significant decline in the design 
value.
    6. New technologies: The State plans to continue reviewing and 
implementing new technologies as appropriate for the DFW area. The area 
will also benefit from our requirements for cleaner vehicles and fuels 
in the future.
    In summary, the State's WOE analyses provide adequate support for 
the State's attainment demonstration. Maintaining air quality through 
recent periods is demonstrated and future progress in air quality 
improvement is shown to be likely. Our decision on the adequacy of the 
WOE is based on the composite of the analyses, and not on any single 
element. The WOE complements the modeled control strategy and indicates 
attainment should be reached by November 15, 2007.
    The 1996 guidance recognizes a need to perform a mid-course review 
as a means for addressing uncertainty in the modeling results. Because 
of the uncertainty in long term projections, we believe that a viable 
attainment demonstration that relies on weight of evidence should 
contain provisions for periodic review of monitoring, emissions, and 
modeling data to assess the extent to which refinements to emission 
control measures are needed. The State submitted an enforceable 
commitment to perform such a mid-course review and to submit a SIP 
revision by May 2004.

F. Emission Control Strategy

What Emission Control Strategies Were Included in the Attainment 
Demonstration?
    The DFW attainment demonstration SIP is directed at reductions of 
NO<INF>X</INF> since the modeling shows reductions of NO<INF>X</INF> 
will be most effective in bringing the area into attainment of the 
Standard.
    The attainment demonstration SIP relies on a combination of Federal 
measures, State measures, CAA statutory requirements, local initiatives 
applied to different groups of counties in, and adjacent to, the DFW 
area, and projections of the level of control in the HGA area based on 
enforceable commitments in the November 1999 SIP for the HGA area. The 
attainment demonstration SIP also relies on Regional measures applied 
in east and central Texas. Please refer to the TSD for more details 
regarding these measures, initiatives, growth rates and emission 
reductions.
    Federal Measures: The State included the following Federal Measures 
in the Future Year Base Case.
    1. On-road mobile sources:

--Tier 2 vehicle emission standards and federal low sulfur gasoline in 
DFW and HGA.
--National Low Emitting Vehicles standards.
--Heavy-duty diesel standards.

    We believe that the projected growth rates and emissions reductions 
from the sources subject to the above federal measures were calculated 
correctly by the State.
    2. Off-road mobile sources:

--Lawn and garden equipment standards.
--Tier III heavy-duty diesel standards.
--Locomotive standards.
--Compression ignition standards for vehicles and equipment.
--Spark ignition standards for vehicles and equipment.
--Recreational marine standards.

    We believe that the State correctly projected the growth rates and 
emissions reductions subject to these federal measures.
    CAA Statutory Requirements: The State included the following CAA 
Statutory Requirements in the Future Year Base Case.

--Phase II reformulated gasoline (RFG) in the DFW four-county 
nonattainment area and HGA eight-county nonattainment area.
--Texas motorists' choice inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in 
Harris, Dallas and Tarrant Counties.

    We believe that the State correctly projected the growth rates and

[[Page 4760]]

emissions reductions from sources subject to these CAA Statutory 
Requirements.
    State Measures: The State included the following State Measures as 
local (DFW) area controls in the Future Year Base Case.

--Electric generating and industrial point sources--four county area.
--An expanded vehicle Inspection/Maintenance program--nine county area.
--Low emission diesel fuel--nine county area.
--Heavy-duty diesel operating restrictions--four county area.
--Accelerated purchase of Tier 2/3 non-road compression ignition 
equipment--four county area.
--Airport ground support equipment electrification--airports of a 
certain size in the four county area.
--Gasoline heavy equipment engines--nine county area.
--Gas-fired water heaters, small boilers, and process heaters--State-
wide.

    We have already published actions on some of the above control 
measures in the Federal Register as discussed below. We believe that 
the State correctly projected the growth rates for and the emissions 
reductions from these affected sources.
    Local Measures:
    1. Speed limit reductions--nine county area.
    2. Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program--nine county area.
    3. Transportation Control Measures--four county area.
    Our proposed action on these three local measures is discussed in 
more detail later in this section.
    Regional Measures:
    1. Agreed orders with Alcoa, Inc. (formerly Aluminum Company of 
America) for their Milam Facility, and the Eastman Chemical Company, 
Texas operations, for their facility near Longview, Texas.
    2. Electric generating facilities and cement plants in central and 
eastern Texas.
    3. Low Reid Vapor Pressure Gasoline in eastern and central Texas.
    4. Stage I gasoline vapor recovery at gas stations in central and 
eastern Texas.
    We have already published actions on the above control measures in 
the Federal Register, as discussed below.

Action Needed on Control Measures

    We cannot finalize an action upon the Attainment Demonstration SIP, 
its MVEB, and the State's Request for an Extension of the Attainment 
Date until we have finalized action on the following:
    1. The revised emission specifications in the DFW area for Electric 
Utility Boilers, Industrial, Commercial or Institutional Boilers and 
certain Process Heaters (30 TAC sections 117.104, 117.106, 117.108, 
117.116, 117.206 as they relate to the DFW area, and the repeal of 
sections 117.109 and 117.601 as they relate to the DFW area): Proposed 
approval October 31, 2000. See 65 FR 64914.
    2. Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance program (30 TAC 114.2, 114.50--
114.53).
    3. Low emission diesel fuel (30 TAC 114.6, 114.312-114.317, 
114.319).
    4. Non-Road Large Spark-Ignition (LSI) Engines (30 TAC 114.420, 
114.421, 114.422, 114.427, and 114.429). Accelerated Purchase of Tier2/
Tier3 Non-Road Compression-Ignition Equipment (30 TAC 114.410, 114.412, 
114.416, 114.417, and 114.419). Non-Road Construction Equipment 
Restriction (30 TAC 114.432, 114.436, 114.437, and 114.439). 
Electrification of Airport Ground Support Equipment (GSE) (30 TAC 
114.400, 114.402, 114.406, and 114.409.
    5. The State-wide NO<INF>X</INF> rules for Water Heaters, Small 
Boilers, and Process Heaters (30 TAC sections 117.460, 117.461, 
117.463, 117.465, 117.467, 117.469): Direct final approval effective 
December 25, 2000. See 65 FR 64148.
    6. The agreed orders with Alcoa, Inc. (formerly Aluminum Company of 
America) for their Milam Facility, and the Eastman Chemical Company, 
Texas operations, for their facility near Longview, Texas: Direct final 
approval effective December 25, 2000. See 65 FR 64148.
    7. The NO<INF>X</INF> rules for Electric Generating Facilities and 
cement plants in East and Central Texas (30 TAC sections 117.131, 
117.133, 117.134, 117.135, 117.138, 117.141, 117.143, 117.145, 117.147, 
117.149, 117.512, 117.260, 117.261, 117.265, 117.273, 117.279, 117.283, 
117.524): Proposed approval October 31, 2000. See 65 FR 64914.
    8. Lower Reid Vapor Pressure Gasoline in eastern and central Texas 
(30 TAC sections 114.1, 114.301, 114.304-114.307, and 114.309). 
Proposed approval November 20, 2000. See 65 FR 69720.
    9. Stage I vapor recovery in eastern and central Texas (30 TAC 
sections 115.222-114.229): Proposed approval December 20, 2000. See 65 
FR 79745.
    10. VOC rules as RACT for batch processing (30 TAC sections 
115.160-115.169) and wastewater (30 TAC sections 115.140-115.149): 
Proposed approval December 20, 2000. See 65 FR 79745.
    11. The administrative revisions to the existing Texas 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP (30 TAC sections 117.101--117.121, 117.201-117.223, 
117.510, 117.520, and 117.570): Proposed approval October 31, 2000. See 
65 FR 64914.
    12. Texas Clean Fleet Program (30 TAC 114.1, 114.3, 114.150, 
114.151, 114.153-114.157, 114.201, 114.202, 114.152).
    13. The 15% ROP Plan.
    14. The Post 1996 ROP Plan.
    15. The revisions to the 1990 base year inventory.
    16. The speed limit reductions, the VMEP and the TCMs.
    17. The finding that major sources of VOCs in the DFW area are 
meeting RACT.
    It should be noted that several of these measures are the subject 
of ongoing litigation. Should the State lose, and as a result imperil 
any reductions needed for attainment, and there are no measures which 
make up the lost reductions, we may have to disapprove the attainment 
demonstration SIP.
What Are the Local Initiatives and Are They Approvable?
    The State submitted three local initiatives: Speed limit reductions 
in the nine county area (Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Ellis, 
Johnson, Parker, Rockwall, and Kaufman Counties), a Voluntary Mobile 
Emissions Program in the nine county area, and Transportation Control 
Measures in the four county area.

Speed Limit Reductions

    The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) revised regulations 
relating to speed limits to allow TNRCC to submit a request to change 
speed limits for environmental reasons when justified. Please see 
adopted rules, 25 TexReg 5686, June 9, 2000; and proposed rules, 25 
TexReg 2018, March 10, 2000). TxDOT, using this authority, will lower 
all 70 mile per hour (mph) speed limits to 65 mph, and all 65 mph speed 
limits to 60 mph in the four county area. These slower speeds are 
anticipated to reduce the emissions of NO<INF>X</INF> and improve air 
quality. We propose approval of the speed limit reductions control 
measure.

Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program (VMEP) Reductions

What Is EPA's VMEP?
    Voluntary mobile source strategies that attempt to complement 
existing regulatory programs through voluntary, non-regulatory changes 
in local transportation activities or changes in in-use vehicle and 
engine composition

[[Page 4761]]

constitute the VMEP. The Clean Air Act allows SIP credit for new 
approaches to reducing mobile source emissions. This flexible approach 
is set forth in section 110. Economic incentive provisions are in 
sections 182 and 108 of the Act. Credits generated through VMEP can be 
counted toward attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. Up to 3% of the 
total future year emissions reductions required to attain the 
appropriate NAAQS may be claimed under the VMEP policy.
What Qualifies for SIP Credit?
    The basic framework for ensuring SIP credit for VMEPs is spelled 
out in guidance that came out under a memorandum from Richard D. 
Wilson, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated 
October 24, 1997, entitled ``Guidance on Incorporating Voluntary Mobile 
Source Emission Reduction Programs in State Implementation Plans 
(SIPs).'' Generally, to obtain credit for a VMEP, a State submits a SIP 
that:
    (1) Identifies and describes a VMEP;
    (2) Contains projections of emission reductions attributable to the 
program, along with any relevant technical support documentation;
    (3) Commits to evaluation and reporting on program implementation 
and results; and
    (4) Commits to the timely remedy of any credit shortfall should the 
VMEP not achieve the anticipated emission reductions.
    More specifically, the guidance suggests the following key points 
be considered for approval of credits. The credits should be 
quantifiable, surplus, enforceable, permanent, and adequately 
supported.
    In addition, VMEPs must be consistent with attainment of the 
standard and with the Rate of Progress requirements and not interfere 
with other Clean Air Act requirements.
What Did the State Submit?
    The State submitted program descriptions that projected emission 
reductions attributable to each specific program as part of the DFW 
attainment demonstration submitted April 25, 2000. The State commits to 
evaluating each program to validate estimated credits. Table 2 lists 
the programs and projected credits. Programs submitted with no credit 
assigned are listed in Table 3.

   Table 2.--Voluntary Mobile Emission Reduction Programs and Credits
                                 Claimed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               VOC benefits (tons    NO<INF>X</INF> benefits (tons
        Program type                per day)              per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Fuel Program....  0.18................  0.18
Employee Trip Reduction.....  0.29................  0.53
Public Education Campaign/    0.08................  0.15
 Ozone Season Fare Reduction.
Tier II Locomotive Engines..  0 to 0.6............  0 to 3.0
Vehicle Retirement Program/   0.56................  0.77
 Vehicle Maintenance*.
Total Benefits (tpd)........  1.11 to 1.71........  1.63 to 4.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emission benefits quantified for the Vehicle Retirement Program only.
  Emission benefits for Vehicle Maintenance are credited in the Vehicle
  Inspection and Maintenance Program.


 Table 3.--Voluntary Emission Reduction Programs With No Credit Assigned
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sustainable Development
Non-Road Ozone Season Reductions
Off-Road Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Retrofits
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State's goal is 5.0 tons per day of NO<INF>X</INF> benefit from 
the VMEP program. This is within the 3% criteria in our guidance. The 
State has committed to evaluating and reporting on the program 
implementation and results and to timely remedy of any credit 
shortfall.
    The State also committed to additional Transportation Control 
Measures that can be substituted for any shortfall in credit from the 
estimated credits for VMEP. These include Signal Improvements and 
Freeway Corridor Management.
Do the VMEPs Meet the Requirements for Approval?
    A detailed analysis of all the VMEP measures can be found in the 
TSD for this document. For each creditable VMEP, the measure was found 
to be quantifiable. The reductions are surplus by not being substitutes 
for mandatory, required emission reductions. The measures will be 
enforced by the State. The reductions will continue at least for as 
long as the time period in which they are used by this SIP 
demonstration, so they are considered permanent. Each measure is 
adequately supported by personnel and program resources for 
implementation.
What Action is EPA Taking on the VMEP?
    The DFW Attainment SIP VMEP meets the criteria for credit in the 
SIP. The State has shown that the credits are quantifiable, surplus, 
enforceable, permanent, adequately supported, and consistent with the 
SIP and the Act. We propose to approve the VMEP portion of the Texas 
SIP.

Transportation Control Measures (TCMs)

    The State has included a variety of TCMs in the SIP as a control 
strategy for attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The specific TCMs have been 
described in detail in Appendix G of the SIP and will be incorporated 
by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations in the final approval 
action. Detailed information is necessary for those TCMs used as 
emissions reduction measures in the SIP to ensure that they are 
specific and enforceable as required by the Act and reflected in our 
policy. The TCMs' description in the SIP includes identification of 
each project, location, length of each project (if applicable), a brief 
project description, implementation date, and emissions reductions for 
both VOC and NO<INF>X</INF>.
    The TCMs identified through this process and included in the SIP 
are contained and funded in the metropolitan transportation plan (MTP) 
and transportation improvement program (TIP) to ensure funding for 
implementation. We propose approval of the transportation control 
measures.
What Are the Projected NO<INF>X</INF> reductions From the Federal and 
State Control Measures and Local Initiatives?
    Table 4 provides the projected NO<INF>X</INF> reductions for the 
2007 attainment year resulting from the Federal and State rules, and 
the local initiatives.

                    Table 4.--NO<INF>X</INF> Reduction Estimates
                             (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Measures...........................................    Reduction
    On-road mobile.........................................        93.00
    Off-road mobile........................................        48.00
        Total Federal Measures.............................       141.00
State Measures.............................................  ...........
    Major point sources....................................       129.00
    Inspection/Maintenance.................................        54.45

[[Page 4762]]

 
    Low emission diesel fuel...............................         3.48
    HD diesel oper. restrictn (est)........................         2.50
    Acc purchase Tier II/III spark.........................        13.80
    Airport GSE............................................         9.54
    Heavy equipment gas engines............................         1.80
    Gas-fired water heaters, etc...........................         0.50
        Total State measures...............................       215.07
Local Initiatives
    Speed limit reduction..................................         5.42
    VMEP (2.4 tpd--5.4 tpd)................................         5.00
    TCMs...................................................         4.73
        Total Local Initiatives............................        15.15
TOTAL NO<INF>X</INF> REDUCTIONS.......................................       371.22
------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget

What Is a Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) and Why Is it 
Important?
    The MVEB is the level of total allowable on-road emissions 
established by a control strategy implementation plan or maintenance 
plan. In this case, the MVEB establishes the maximum level of on-road 
emissions that can be produced in 2007, when considered with emissions 
from all other sources, which demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS. It 
is important because the MVEB is used to determine the conformity of 
transportation plans and programs to the SIP, as described by section 
176(c)(2)(A) of the Act.
    What Are the MVEBs Established by This Plan and Proposed for 
Approval by This Action?
    The MVEBs established by this plan and that the EPA is proposing to 
approve are contained in Table 5.

     Table 5.--2007 Attainment Year Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
                             (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Pollutant                               2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC........................................................       107.60
NO<INF>X</INF>........................................................       164.30
------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is the State's Commitment to Revise the Motor Vehicle Emissions 
Budgets With MOBILE6?
    All States whose attainment demonstration includes the effects of 
the Tier 2/sulfur program have committed to revise and resubmit their 
motor vehicle emissions budgets after we release MOBILE6. The State has 
begun its public comment process on an enforceable commitment and has 
committed to performing new mobile source modeling for the DFW area, 
using MOBILE6, within 24 months of the model's release. The public 
hearing is scheduled for January 4, 2001. In addition, the enforceable 
commitment includes a provision stating that if a transportation 
conformity analysis is to be performed between 12 months and 24 months 
after the release of MOBILE6, transportation conformity will not be 
determined until the State submits an MVEB which is developed using 
MOBILE6 and which we find adequate. The North Central Texas Council of 
Governments and the Department of Transportation have been informed of 
the commitment.
    After adoption by the Commissioners, the Governor of Texas must 
submit the enforceable commitment to us. If the State fails to meet its 
commitment to submit revised budgets using MOBILE6, we could make a 
finding of failure to implement the SIP, which would start a sanctions 
clock under section 179 of the Act.
What Is the Applicable Budget To Use for Conformity Analysis?
    The proposed approval of the MVEB in Table 5 would be effective for 
conformity purposes only until revised motor vehicle emissions budgets 
are submitted and we have found them adequate. In other words, the 
budgets that are part of this attainment demonstration will apply for 
conformity purposes only until there are new, adequate budgets 
consistent with the State's commitments to revise the budgets. The 
revised budgets will apply for conformity purposes as soon as we find 
them adequate.
    We are proposing to limit the duration of our approval in this 
manner because we are only proposing to approve the attainment 
demonstrations and their budgets because the States have committed to 
revise them after we release MOBILE6 and after the State conducts its 
mid-course review. Therefore, once we have confirmed that the revised 
budgets are adequate, they will be more appropriate than the budgets we 
are proposing to approve for conformity purposes now.
    If the budgets we propose to approve raise issues about the 
sufficiency of the attainment demonstration, we will work with the 
State. If the revised budgets show that motor vehicle emissions are 
lower than the budgets we approve, a reassessment of the attainment 
demonstration's analysis will be necessary.
    This action does not propose any change to the existing 
transportation conformity rule or to the way it is normally implemented 
with respect to other submitted and approved SIPs, which do not contain 
commitments to revise the budget.

H. EPA's Analysis

Did the State Adequately Document the Techniques and Data Used To 
Derive the Modeling Input Data and Modeling Results?
    Yes, the submittal from the State thoroughly documented the 
techniques and data used to derive the modeling input data. The 
submittal adequately summarized the modeling outputs and the 
conclusions drawn from these model outputs. The submittal adequately 
documented the State's weight-of-evidence determinations and the bases 
for concluding that these determinations support the attainment 
demonstration.
Did the Modeling Procedures and Input Data Used Comply With the 
Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines and Clean Air Act 
Requirements?
    Yes, the modeling procedures and input data (including the 
emissions inventory inputs and procedures) meet the requirements of the 
Act and are consistent with our July 1991 and June 1996 ozone modeling 
guidelines.
Does the Emission Control Strategy Meet the Requirements of the Clean 
Air Act?
    Yes, the selected emission control strategy, based upon modeling 
and the WOE techniques, plus additional information regarding the 
effect of HGA upon DFW, demonstrates attainment of the 1-hour ozone 
standard in DFW.
Does the Weight-of-Evidence Support the Attainment Demonstration?
    Yes, the submittal adequately documented the State's WOE 
determinations and the bases for concluding that these determinations 
adequately complement the attainment demonstration.
    The WOE, when viewed in aggregate with the modeling, shows 
attainment of the standard and thus we are proposing approval.
Has the State Adopted the Selected Emission Control Strategy and Has 
the State Adopted the Emission Control Regulations Needed to Implement 
the Emission Control Strategies?
    Yes, the State has adopted and submitted the emission control 
strategies and all associated emission control regulations, orders, and 
the TCMS, Speed Limit Reductions, and the VMEP initiatives.

[[Page 4763]]

Has the State Adopted all Local Measures Required by the Clean Air Act 
for the Area's Current Ozone Classification?
    Yes, the State has adopted all VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emission 
control requirements required under the Clean Air Act (Act) for a 
serious ozone nonattainment area. Please see the TSD for a listing of 
requirements and the dates they were satisfied.
    It is our position that the State of Texas has met the 1998 
Transport Policy's criteria for adoption and submittal to EPA for 
approval of all measures required under the Act for an area classified 
as serious.
Has the State Implemented all Reasonably Available Control Measures?
    Yes. Section 172(c)(1) of the Act requires SIPs to provide for the 
implementation of all reasonably available control measures (RACM) as 
expeditiously as practicable and for attainment of the standard. We 
have previously provided guidance interpreting the RACM requirements of 
172(c)(1) in the General Preamble. See 57 FR 13498, 13560 (April 16, 
1992). In the General Preamble, we indicated our interpretation of 
section 172(c)(1), under the 1990 amendments, as imposing a duty on 
States to consider all available control measures and to adopt and 
implement such measures as are reasonably available for implementation 
in the particular nonattainment area. We also retained our pre-1990 
interpretation of the RACM provisions that where measures that might in 
fact be available for implementation in the nonattainment area could 
not be implemented on a schedule that would advance the date for 
attainment in the area, we would not consider it reasonable to require 
implementation of such measures. We indicated that States could reject 
certain RACM measures as not reasonably available for various reasons 
related to local conditions. A State could include area-specific 
reasons for rejecting a measure as RACM, such as the rejected measure 
would not advance the attainment date, or technological and economic 
feasibility in the area.
    We also issued a recent memorandum reaffirming our position on this 
topic, ``Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) 
Requirement and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for Ozone 
Nonattainment Areas.'' John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, dated November 30, 1999. A copy can be obtained 
from www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html. In this memorandum, we state 
that in order to determine whether a state has adopted all RACM 
necessary for attainment and as expeditiously as practicable, the state 
will need to provide a justification as to why measures within the 
arena of potential reasonable measures have not been adopted. The 
justification would need to support that a measure was not reasonably 
available for that area and could be based on technological or economic 
grounds.
    We reviewed additional potential available measures, as documented 
in the RACM analysis in the TSD (Appendix C) for this proposed 
rulemaking. Our analysis showed that the State is already controlling 
the significant major point sources and area sources to RACM levels and 
the SIP contains the transportation control measures reviewed 
nationally, as well as a motor vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 
program. Based on this analysis, we propose to conclude that any 
remaining evaluated measures are not reasonably available for the 
specific DFW area, because (a) some would require an intensive and 
costly effort for numerous small area sources or transportation control 
measures, and (b) since the DFW area relies in part on reductions from 
the upwind HGA area which are substantial, and the reductions projected 
to be achieved by the evaluated additional set of measures are 
relatively small, they would not produce emission reductions sufficient 
to advance the attainment date in the DFW area and, therefore, should 
not be considered RACM.
    Although we encourage areas to implement available RACM measures as 
potentially cost effective methods to achieve emissions reductions in 
the short term, we do not believe that section 172(c)(1) requires 
implementation of potential RACM measures that either require costly 
implementation efforts or produce relatively small emissions reductions 
that will not be sufficient to allow the DFW area to achieve attainment 
in advance of full implementation of all other required measures.
Has the State Established an Acceptable MVEB?
    The MVEB budget submitted by the State for the DFW area is adequate 
and is consistent with all pertinent SIP requirements, and the MVEB is 
proposed for approval.
Does the DFW Area Meet the RACT Requirements for Major Source VOC 
Emissions?
    On March 7, 1995, as part of our action approving VOC requirements, 
we found that the State had implemented RACT on all major sources in 
the DFW area except those that were to be covered by post-enactment 
Control Technique Guidelines (CTG's) (44 FR 12438). Since that time 
many expected CTGs were issued as Alternative Control Technique 
documents--ACTs. Of the expected CTGs and ACT's, DFW had major sources 
in the following categories; batch processing, reactors and 
distillation, wood furniture and aerospace coating. We have approved 
measures for all of these categories as meeting RACT. (See the TSD for 
this action for dates.)
    With regard to Aerospace coatings, we have approved Alternate RACT 
determinations for the major sources in the DFW area: Lockheed-Martin, 
Bell Helicopter Textron, and Raytheon Texas Instruments Systems, Inc. 
January 20, 1994 (See 59 FR 02532), May 30,1997 (See 62 FR 29297), and 
February 9, 1998 (See 63 FR 6491), respectively. With these Alternative 
RACT determinations, we concluded that RACT was in place for these 
Aerospace coating sources. On March 27, 1998, we published the National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) final rule and 
the Control Technique Guideline for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 
facilities. (See 63 FR 15006). The State submitted revisions to its 
coating rules on July 13, 2000 to ensure the control requirements for 
Aerospace companies remained consistent with the NESHAP rule. At the 
same time, the State requested that these replace the Alternative-RACT 
plans as a part of the Texas SIP. The revised 2000 aerospace rules 
provide provisions that are more consistent with the new MACT standards 
and we anticipate that we will propose approval of these provisions. In 
the mean time, we believe the previously approved alternative RACT 
plans continue to meet the RACT requirements for these three sources.
    Also, with the reclassification of the DFW area to serious, the 
major source size was decreased to 50 tons per year. This necessitated 
that the State revise its rules for bakeries and adopt rules for the 
large offset lithographers category. We have approved the rule 
revisions for bakeries and the new rules for offset lithographers as 
meeting the RACT requirements. (See TSD for dates and cites).
    Thus, it is our position that RACT is in place for all major 
sources of VOCs in the DFW area.

[[Page 4764]]

Was the Demonstration of Transport From the HGA Area Acceptable To 
Support the Request for Extension of the Attainment Date?
    The policy for the extension of an ozone attainment date is 
discussed in the Background section of this notice. The State's 
compliance with these requirements is discussed here.

a. Identification of the area as a downwind area affected by ozone 
transport.

    We have reviewed the photochemical modeling demonstrations, and are 
proposing to agree with the State that the July 3, 1996, episode 
adequately demonstrates transport of pollutants from the HGA area. We 
are proposing that this transported pollution affects DFW's ability to 
attain by the current attainment date. Thus, the DFW and HGA areas are 
inextricably linked. Without controls in the HGA area, the DFW area's 
ability to attain is jeopardized. We, therefore, propose to find that 
the State's demonstration of ozone transport meets the criteria in our 
attainment date extension policy.

b. Submittal of an approvable attainment demonstration.

    EPA's review of the attainment demonstration SIP shows that it 
should be approved. The State has modeled and adopted an acceptable 
control strategy that demonstrates attainment. We are proposing to 
approve the attainment demonstration SIP, and to agree that it meets 
the criteria in the July 1998 transport policy and all other EPA 
guidance and the regulatory and statutory requirements.

c. Adoption of all applicable local measures required under the area's 
current ozone classification.

    Texas has adopted all VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> related emission 
control requirements required by the Act for a serious ozone 
nonattainment area. A listing of applicable CAA serious classification-
related VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> related regulations and their state-
adopted dates for the DFW area, is provided in the TSD to this 
rulemaking.
    It is our position that the State of Texas has met the 1998 
Transport Policy's criteria for adoption and submittal of all measures 
required under the Act for an area classified as serious. We must 
finalize approval actions upon the remaining serious area 
requirements--the 15% ROP Plan, the Post-96 ROP Plan, the I/M SIP, and 
the Clean-fuel Vehicle SIP, before we can make a final finding that the 
DFW area is meeting all of its classification's statutory requirements, 
however.

d. Implementation of all adopted measures by the time upwind controls 
are expected.

    All of the NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC rules will be implemented as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 2005, two years before 
the HGA attainment date of November 15, 2007.
    We are proposing to find that this transport policy criteria has 
been met by the State. We are of the opinion that the phase-in 
compliance dates are as expeditious as practicable compared with the 
compliance dates of similar sources in serious ozone nonattainment 
areas of the country.

II. Post 1996 Rate of Progress Plan

A. Proposed Action

What Action Are We Taking?

    We are proposing approval of the Post 1996 Rate of Progress (ROP) 
plan (9% plan), submitted by the Governor on October 25, 1999, which is 
designed to reduce ozone forming emissions from the baseline emissions 
by 9% in the DFW nonattainment area for the years 1997-1999. This plan 
meets the Reasonable Further Progress requirements of the Act (section 
182(c)(2)). In addition, we are proposing to approve the MVEBs 
associated with the 9% plan. We are also proposing to approve the 
changes to the 1990 base year emissions inventory for the DFW area. The 
SIP was submitted October 25, 1999, and found complete January 6, 2000.

B. Calculation of Requirements

How Do we Calculate the Needed VOC Emissions Reductions?
    Calculating the needed emission reductions is a multi-step process 
as described below.
    Emissions Inventory: The 1990 Final Base Year Inventory is the 
starting point for calculating the reductions necessary to meet the 
requirements of the 1990 Act. The 1990 Final Base Year Inventory 
includes all area, point, non-road mobile, and on-road mobile source 
emissions in the four county DFW ozone nonattainment area. The 1990 
base year inventory was originally approved November 8, 1994 (59 FR 
55586). The State revised the VOC inventory on August 8, 1996. These 
changes were approved November 10, 1998 (63 FR 62943). The state 
revised the 1990 base year VOC inventory again with the October 25, 
1999, SIP revision. The October 25, 1999, SIP revision also contained 
the State's first revisions to the 1990 base year NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions inventory. The changes resulted from data gathered for the 
1993 and 1996 periodic inventories. Analysis of the changes in the 
periodic inventories was backcast to the 1990 inventory for consistency 
since the 1990 inventory remains the ROP beginning point. We have 
reviewed the inventory revisions and they have been developed in 
accordance with our guidance on emission inventory preparation. Thus, 
we are proposing approval of the October 25, 1999, revisions to the 
1990 base year inventory. The revised 1990 base year inventory is 
summarized in Table 6. For more detail on how emissions inventories 
were estimated, see Appendix H in the TSD for this action.

      Table 6.--1990 Rate-of-Progress Base Year Emissions Inventory
                             (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Base year inventory
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Source type                       VOC         NO<INF>X</INF>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................      63.98        71.76
Area............................................     174.02        19.99
On-road Mobile..................................     306.60       293.03
Non-road Mobile.................................     105.19       166.05
                                                 -----------------------
      Total.....................................     649.79       550.83
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Adjusted Base Year Inventory: Section 182(b)(2)(C) explains that 
the baseline from which emission reductions are calculated should be 
determined as outlined in section 182(b)(1)(B) for 15% ROP plans. This 
requires that the baseline exclude emission reductions due to Federal 
Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP) promulgated by the Administrator 
by January 1, 1990, and emission reductions due to the regulation of 
Reid Vapor Pressure promulgated by the Administrator prior to the 
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. These measures are 
not creditable to the Rate of Progress Plans.
    Growth Estimates: States need to provide sufficient control 
measures in their ROP plans to offset any emissions growth. To do this 
the State must estimate the amount of growth that will occur. The State 
uses population and economic forecasts to estimate how emissions will 
change in the future. Generally, the State followed our standard 
guidelines in estimating the growth in emissions. For the projection of 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from industrial sources, the State used data 
collected during the development of the 1996 periodic emissions 
inventory. With the 1996 periodic inventory, Texas surveyed industry to 
determine why emissions were changing, to determine if changes were 
actual changes in emissions to the atmosphere, or just

[[Page 4765]]

changes in the emission estimation methodology. For example, many 
sources installed continuous emission monitors between 1990 and 1996, 
and actual measurements replaced engineering estimates. For more detail 
on how emissions growth was estimated, see Appendix H in the TSD for 
this action.
    Calculation of Target Level: Table 7 shows how the emissions 
inventory, adjusted inventories and growth estimates are used to 
calculate the target levels of emissions and needed emission 
reductions.

            Table 7.--Calculation of Required VOC Reductions
                             (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Emission Inventory.......................................    649.79
1990 Adjusted Relative to 1996................................    547.54
1990 Adjusted Relative to 1999................................    535.78
RVP and Fleet Turnover........................................     11.76
9% of 1990 Adjusted Relative to 1999..........................     48.22
1996 Target level.............................................    465.52
1999 Target level.............................................    405.54
1999 Projection...............................................    575.28
Total Reductions required by 1999.............................    169.74
Reductions required by 15%....................................    139.98
Additional Reductions Required................................     29.76
------------------------------------------------------------------------

How Are Those Emission Reductions Achieved?
    Table 8 documents how the VOC emission reductions for this 9% plan 
are to be achieved. The following control measures are used: Aircraft 
Engines, Transportation Control Measures (TCMs), Windshield washer 
fluid, Utility Engines 1997--1999, Underground Storage Tank 
Remediation, vehicle Tier 1, vehicle Inspection/Maintenance, and RFG.
    The State also revised its estimates of on-road motor vehicle 
emissions based on vehicle registration data updated to 1998. We are 
proposing to find them acceptable.
    The State included a variety of TCMs in the SIP as a control 
strategy for attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The specific TCMs are 
described in detail in Appendix G of the SIP and will be incorporated 
by reference in Code of Federal Regulations in the final approval 
action. Please refer to the detailed discussion of TCM requirements 
under Transportation Control Measures in the Emission Control Strategy 
sub-section (sub-section I.E) of this action.
    The TCMs identified through this process and included in the SIP 
are contained and funded in the metropolitan transportation plan (MTP) 
and transportation improvement program (TIP) to ensure funding for 
implementation.
    Please refer to the TSD for details of our analysis of the control 
measures and our basis for proposing to find the projected emission 
reductions from these measures acceptable.

              Table 8.--Summary of VOC Emission Reductions
                             (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Reduction.............................................    29.76
Creditable Reductions..........................................
    Aircraft Engines...........................................     1.52
    TCMs.......................................................     3.74
    Windshield washer fluid....................................     0.29
    1998 vehicle registration..................................     3.57
    Utility Engine 1997-1999...................................     2.37
    UST remediation............................................     1.81
    Tier 1, I/M, RFG...........................................    16.82
                                                                --------
        Total..................................................    30.12
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does the Plan Achieve the Goal of a 9% Reduction in VOCs From the 
Baseline for 1997 to 1999?
    Yes. Since the required reductions are 29.76 tons per day and the 
creditable reductions are 30.12 tons per day, the plan has excess 
reductions of 0.36 tons per day and achieves the goal; therefore, we 
are proposing approval of the Post 1996 ROP Plan.
Did the State Submit Additional Reductions?
    Yes. The State also submitted NO<INF>X</INF> reductions. The 
State's basic NO<INF>X</INF> RACT rules were approved September 1, 
2000. See 65 FR 53172. We are accepting the State's NO<INF>X</INF> 
reductions as creditable reductions.

              Table 9.--Summary of NO<INF>X</INF> Emission Reductions
                             (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Reduction.............................................     0.00
Creditable Reductions..........................................
    NO<INF>X</INF> RACT...................................................    10.45
    RFG, I/M, FMVCP Tier I.....................................    56.25
    Off-road heavy duty diesel.................................    11.98
                                                                --------
        Total..................................................    78.68
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget

What Are the MVEBs Established by This Plan and Approved by This 
Action?
    The MVEBs established by this plan and that we are proposing to 
approve are contained in Table 10. The MVEBs have been found to meet 
the adequacy criteria and upon further review of the SIP for 
approvability continue to be consistent with ROP.

       Table 10.--1999 9% ROP SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
                             (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Pollutant                               1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC............................................................   147.22
NO<INF>X</INF>............................................................   284.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. 15% Rate of Progress Plan

Proposed Action

What Action Are We Taking?
    We are proposing full approval of the 15% plan submitted on August 
8, 1996, contingent upon us finalizing approval of the State's I/M 
program for the DFW area. The 15% plan was given conditional, interim 
approval on November 10, 1998, pending corrections to the DFW I/M 
program. It was given conditional, interim approval because it relied 
on emissions reductions from the I/M program that received conditional, 
interim approval. For further information on the I/M conditional, 
interim approval, see 62 FR 37138, published on July 11, 1997. We found 
that the State had met the conditions of the conditional approval. On 
April 23, 1999, we removed the conditions and granted Texas a final 
interim approval. See 64 FR 19910. The interim approval expired on 
February 11, 1999. Texas has submitted significant revisions to the I/M 
program for the DFW area. The revisions expand the program from the 2 
core nonattainment counties to the 4 counties in the nonattainment area 
plus 5 additional counties. We are taking a separate action on these I/
M revisions. Because the revisions appear to have eliminated the last 
impediment to full approval of the I/M program for the DFW area, we are 
proposing full approval of the DFW 15% plan. This proposed full 
approval of the DFW 15% plan will not be finalized until action on the 
I/M program is complete. If the I/M program is disapproved, a different 
action on the 15% plan will have to be taken. See 63 FR 62943 and the 
15% plan TSD for additional information on the DFW 15% plan.
How Did the Inspection/Maintenance Program Submitted With the 
Attainment Demonstration Purport To Cure the Previous Deficiencies?
    As stated previously, an interim conditional approval for the 
Motorist Choice Program was proposed on October 3, 1996 (61 FR 51651). 
An interim final conditional approval was published on July 11, 1997 
(62 FR 37138). The conditions were removed from the interim approval on 
April 23, 1999 (64 FR 19910). The interim

[[Page 4766]]

approval status of this program lapsed on February 11, 1999.
    The State submitted an approvable 18-month demonstration on 
February 8, 1999, as required by the National Highway System 
Designation Act of 1995, Public Law 104-59, section 348(c)(1). The 
program was not fully approved at that time because one provision of 
the interim approval remained: that the State provide evidence that the 
remote sensing program was effective in identifying the shortfall in 
number of vehicles needed to make up for the lack of a tailpipe testing 
program in all the nonattainment counties. This evidence has yet to be 
submitted.
    Modeling has since shown that NO<INF>X</INF> reductions are 
essential to reaching attainment in the DFW area. As a result, the 
Texas Motorist Choice I/M program has been revised to include 
measurement for NO<INF>X</INF> emissions and to provide additional 
NO<INF>X</INF> emission reductions by expanding coverage of the program 
to all four counties within the DFW nonattainment area (Dallas, 
Tarrant, Collin and Denton) and selected attainment counties in the DFW 
consolidated metropolitan statistical area (Ellis, Johnson, Parker, 
Rockwall, and Kaufman). By revising the program to expand area coverage 
for NO<INF>X</INF> SIP credits, the deficiency that prohibited full 
approval in DFW appears to be cured. All DFW nonattainment counties 
will be participating in the full program. As indicated above, we have 
not taken a final action on the I/M submittal. We will be seeking 
comment on the I/M program in a separate action.

IV. Background

A. The Relevant Clean Air Act Requirements

    The Act requires us to establish National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS) for certain widespread pollutants that cause or 
contribute to air pollution that is reasonably anticipated to endanger 
public health or welfare (Clean Air Act sections 108 and 109). In 1979, 
we promulgated the 1-hour ground-level ozone standard of 0.12 parts per 
million (ppm) (120 parts per billion (ppb)). 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 
1979).
    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>), 
emitted by a wide variety of sources, react in the presence of sunlight 
to form ground-level ozone. NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC are referred to as 
precursors of ozone.
    Ozone formation is accelerated or enhanced under certain 
meteorological conditions, such as high temperatures and low wind 
speeds. Higher ozone concentrations occur downwind of areas with 
relatively high VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> concentrations or in areas 
subject to relatively high background ozone and ozone precursor 
concentrations (ozone and ozone precursors entering an area as the 
result of transport from upwind source areas).
    VOC emissions are produced by a wide variety of sources, including 
stationary and mobile sources. Significant stationary sources of VOC 
include industrial solvent usage, various coating operations, 
industrial and utility combustion units, petroleum and oil storage and 
marketing operations, chemical manufacturing operations, personal 
solvent usage, etc. Significant mobile sources of VOC include on-road 
vehicle usage and off-road vehicle and engine usage, such as farm 
machinery, aircraft, locomotives, and motorized lawn care and garden 
implements.
    NO<INF>X</INF> emissions are produced primarily through combustion 
processes, including industrial and utility boiler use, process heaters 
and furnaces, and on-road and off-road mobile sources.
    An area exceeds the 1-hour ozone standard each time an ambient air 
quality monitor records a 1-hour average ozone concentration above 124 
ppb in any given day (only the highest 1-hour ozone concentration at 
the monitor during any 24 hour day is considered when determining the 
number of exceedance days at the monitor). An area violates the ozone 
standard if, over a consecutive 3-year period, more than 3 days of 
exceedances are expected to occur at any monitor in the area. 40 CFR 
Part 50, App. H.
    The highest of the fourth-highest daily peak ozone concentrations 
over the 3 year period at any monitoring site in the area is called the 
ozone design value for the area. The Act, as amended in 1990, required 
EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that was violating the 1-
hour ozone standard, generally based on air quality monitoring data 
from the 1987 through 1989 period. Clean Air Act section 107(d)(4); 56 
FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). The Act further classified these areas, 
based on the areas' ozone design values, as marginal, moderate, 
serious, severe, or extreme.
    The control requirements and date by which attainment is to be 
achieved vary with an area's classification. Marginal areas were 
subject to the fewest mandated control requirements and had the 
earliest attainment date, November 15, 1993. Severe and extreme areas 
are subject to more stringent planning requirements but are provided 
more time to attain the standard. Moderate areas were required to 
attain the 1-hour standard by November 15, 1996. Serious areas were 
required to attain by November 15, 1999, and severe areas are required 
to attain by November 15, 2005 or November 15, 2007, depending on the 
areas' ozone design values for 1987 through 1989. The DFW ozone 
nonattainment area was initially classified as ``moderate'' (56 FR 
56694) with an attainment date of November 15, 1996. Since the area did 
not attain the standard by November 15, 1996, we reclassified the area 
to ``serious'' on March 20, 1998 (63 FR 8128). The statutory attainment 
date for a serious area is November 15, 1999. The DFW ozone 
nonattainment area contains Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, and Denton 
Counties (40 CFR 81.314 and 81.326).
    The specific requirements of the Act for serious ozone 
nonattainment areas are found in part D, section 182(c) of the Act. 
Section 172 in part D provides the general requirements for 
nonattainment plans. Section 172(c)(6) and section 110 require SIPs to 
include enforceable emission limitations, and such other control 
measures, means or techniques as well as schedules and timetables for 
compliance, as may be necessary to provide for attainment by the 
applicable attainment date. Section 172(c)(1) requires the 
implementation of all reasonably available control measures as 
expeditiously as practicable and requires the SIP to provide for 
attainment of the NAAQS. Section 182(b)(1)(A) requires the SIP to 
provide for a 15% Rate of Progress Plan and also provide for specific 
annual reductions in emissions of VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> ``as necessary 
to attain'' the ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. Our 
``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990'' (57 FR 13498 dated April 16, 1992) provides 
the interpretive basis for EPA's rulemakings under the nonattainment 
plan provisions of the Act (General Preamble). Section 182(c)(2)(A) 
requires that a serious area use photochemical grid modeling or any 
other methods judged by us to be at least as effective, to demonstrate 
attainment of the ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. In the 
General Preamble, we provide that this requirement for demonstrating 
attainment may be met by the use of EPA-approved modeling techniques.
    Section 182(c)(2)(B) of the Act 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

[[Page 4767]]

achieve an actual volatile organic compound (VOC) (and NO<INF>X</INF> 
if required) 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. The plan providing for the 
reduction between November 1996 and November 1999 is referred to as the 
9% Plan, the Post-1996 ROP Plan. As part of today's proposal, we are 
proposing action on the 15% ROP Plan, the 9% ROP Plan, and the 
attainment demonstration SIP revision submitted by the State of Texas 
for the DFW serious ozone nonattainment area.

B. Dates of State's SIP Submissions

    As a result of the reclassification to serious, the State was 
required to submit both an attainment demonstration SIP with an 
attainment date of November 15, 1999; and a Rate of Progress SIP 
covering the years from November 15, 1996 to November 15, 1999. The 
State submitted those SIPs on March 19, 1999. The State had previously 
submitted the moderate area 15% ROP plan on August 8, 1996, before the 
area was reclassified to serious. The 15% plan was given conditional, 
interim approval.
    Our review showed that the attainment demonstration SIP submitted 
in 1999 did not contain a control strategy or adopted measures to 
implement the strategy and the 1999 Post-1996 ROP SIP did not achieve 
the required 9% reduction in emissions for the time period. Therefore, 
we found both SIPs incomplete and started sanctions and Federal 
Implementation plan (FIP) clocks effective May 13, 1999.
    A new Post-1996 ROP SIP was submitted October 25, 1999, and was 
found complete on December 16, 1999, since the new plan contained 
additional VOC reductions to meet the 9% requirement. The new 
attainment demonstration SIP was submitted April 25, 2000, and was 
found complete on June 23, 2000, because it contained a modeled control 
strategy and adopted regulations to implement the strategy. These two 
completeness findings stopped the sanctions clocks. The FIP clock 
continues to run unless and until we approve the 9% ROP Plan and the 
Attainment Demonstration SIP. Section 110(c)(1)(A) requires EPA to 
promulgate a FIP for the DFW nonattainment area by May 14, 2001 if we 
have not approved the SIPs by that time.

C. General Requirements for an Attainment Demonstration and its Motor 
Vehicle Emissions Budgets

    In general, an attainment demonstration SIP includes a modeling 
analysis showing how an area will achieve the standard by its 
attainment date and the emission control measures necessary to achieve 
attainment. The attainment demonstration SIP must include MVEBs for 
transportation conformity purposes. Transportation conformity is a 
process required by Section 176(c) of the Act for ensuring that the 
effects of emissions from all on-road sources are consistent with 
attainment of the standard. Ozone attainment demonstrations must 
include the estimates of motor vehicle VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions 
that are consistent with attainment, which then act as a budget or 
ceiling for the purposes of determining whether transportation plans, 
programs, and projects conform to the attainment SIP.

D. Ozone Transport Policy and Attainment Date Extensions

    The DFW area is classified as serious and, therefore, was required 
to attain the 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 1999. The State of 
Texas, in submitting the April 2000 attainment demonstration SIP, 
requests an extension of the attainment date to November 15, 2007, 
based on our July 1998 transport policy.
    In developing the attainment demonstration for DFW, the State makes 
the case that the 1998 Transport Policy is particularly relevant to 
DFW, which is downwind of the HGA area, and that the DFW area is 
affected by transport from HGA. If we approve of such a determination 
for DFW, the area would have until no later than November 15, 2007, the 
attainment date for HGA, to attain the 1-hour ozone standard.
    In the DFW ozone attainment demonstration SIP reviewed here, the 
State also relies, in part, on regional and statewide NO<INF>X</INF> 
emission reductions in Texas, including the upwind HGA area and eastern 
and central Texas. The SIP also relies on NO<INF>X</INF> reductions 
from the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call States where appropriate.
    Attainment Demonstration SIPs were originally due November 1994. 
However, through a series of policy memoranda, we recognized that 
States had not submitted these attainment demonstrations and were 
constrained to do so until ozone transport had been further analyzed. 
One of the policy memoranda addressing the issue of ozone transport is 
the transport policy issued by us July 16, 1998, entitled ``Extension 
of Attainment Dates for Downwind Transport Areas''. That memorandum 
included our interpretation of the Act regarding the extension of 
attainment dates for ozone nonattainment areas that have been 
classified as moderate or serious for the 1-hour ozone standard and 
which are downwind of areas that have interfered with their ability to 
demonstrate attainment of the ozone standard by dates prescribed in the 
Act. That memorandum stated that we will consider extending the 
attainment date for an area or a State that:
    (1) Has been identified as a downwind area affected by transport 
from either an upwind area in the same State with a later attainment 
date or an upwind area in another State that significantly contributes 
to downwind ozone nonattainment;
    (2) Has submitted an approvable attainment demonstration with any 
necessary, adopted local measures and with an attainment date that 
shows it will attain the 1-hour standard no later than the date that 
the emission reductions are expected from upwind areas under the final 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP call and/or the statutory attainment date for upwind 
nonattainment areas, i.e., assuming the boundary conditions reflecting 
those upwind emission reductions;
    (3) Has adopted all applicable local measures required under the 
area's current ozone classification and any additional emission control 
measures demonstrated to be necessary to achieve attainment, assuming 
the emission reductions occur as required in the upwind areas; and
    (4) Has provided that it will implement all adopted measures as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the date by which the 
upwind reductions needed for attainment will be achieved.
    Once an area receives an extension of its attainment date based on 
ozone/precursor transport impacts, the area would no longer be subject 
to reclassification to a higher ozone nonattainment classification 
based on its original attainment date. If the DFW area is granted an 
attainment date extension, it would no longer be subject to a 
reclassification to severe nonattainment for ozone and no longer 
subject to the additional emission control requirements that would 
result from the reclassification to severe nonattainment based on a 
failure to attain by its original attainment date.
    Texas has requested an extension of the attainment date for the DFW 
nonattainment area in conjunction with the ozone attainment 
demonstration submittals. The ozone attainment

[[Page 4768]]

demonstration SIP uses November 15, 2007 as the ozone attainment date. 
The chosen 2007 attainment date reflects the statutory attainment date 
for the HGA area, as the DFW area is downwind of the HGA area and is 
affected by transport from HGA.

V. Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. This proposed 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 proposed 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 proposes to approve 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). For the same reason, this proposed rule also does 
not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal 
governments, as specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 
10, 1998). This proposed rule 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it 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 proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 
13045 (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. The proposed rule does 
not involve special consideration of environmental justice related 
issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 
1994). As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, 
February 7, 1996), in issuing this proposed rule, EPA has taken the 
necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize 
potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected 
conduct. The EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, 
March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in 
accordance with the ``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for 
the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued 
under the executive order. This proposed 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.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Attainment, 
Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

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

    Dated: January 4, 2001.
Gregg A. Cooke,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 01-1346 Filed 1-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>