Document ID: EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0550-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: TX186.01 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approval and Promulgation: Texas; El Paso Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan, Direct final rule, 5 pages.
Posted Date: 2017-03-21T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 21, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14442-14446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05379]

[[Page 14442]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0550; FRL-9957-56-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso 
Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to 
approve the required second carbon monoxide (CO) maintenance plan as a 
revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). The El Paso, 
Texas CO maintenance area (El Paso Area) has been demonstrating 
consistent air quality monitoring at or below 85% of the CO National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard). Because of this, the 
State of Texas, through its designee, submitted the required second 
maintenance plan for the El Paso Area as a Limited Maintenance Plan 
(LMP).

DATES: This rule is effective on May 22, 2017 without further notice, 
unless the EPA receives relevant adverse comment by April 20, 2017. If 
the EPA receives such comment, the 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 Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2016-0550, at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to 
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public 
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written 
comment is considered the official comment and should include 
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary 
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, please contact Jeffrey Riley, 214-665-
8542, riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. For the full EPA public comment policy, 
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance 
on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6, 
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the 
docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly 
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), 
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Riley, 214-665-8542, 
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. To inspect the hard copy materials, please 
schedule an appointment with Jeffrey Riley or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-
665-7253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and 
``our'' means the EPA.

I. Background

    Under the 1990 CAA Amendments, a portion of the City of El Paso, 
Texas was designated and classified as a moderate nonattainment area 
for CO because it did not meet the NAAQS for this criteria pollutant 56 
FR 56694 (November 1, 1991). The former El Paso CO nonattainment area 
is restricted to a narrow strip along the Rio Grande, adjacent to 
Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. El Paso's former classification as a moderate 
nonattainment area under sections 107(d)(4)(A) and 186(a) of the CAA 
imposed a schedule for attainment of the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1995.
    EPA approved the El Paso Area's CAA section 179 attainment 
demonstration that showed attainment but for emissions from Mexico, the 
motor vehicle emissions budget, and the contingency plan 68 FR 39457 
(July 2, 2003).
    EPA approved the redesignation of the El Paso CO nonattainment area 
to attainment for the CO NAAQS, the associated CAA section 175A(a) 
maintenance plan, and the included motor vehicle emissions budgets at 
73 FR 45162 (August 4, 2008). The maintenance plan ensures continued 
attainment of the CO standard until 2020.
    On September 21, 2016, the Texas Commission on Environmental 
Quality (TCEQ) submitted a revision to the El Paso SIP, providing the 
second 10-year update to the CO maintenance plan for the area, as 
required eight years after redesignation by section 175A(b) of the Act 
and also submitted a request for approval of the maintenance plan as a 
LMP. The purpose of the LMP is to ensure continued maintenance of CO 
NAAQS in the El Paso Area for the duration of the second 10-year 
maintenance period of 2018-2028 by demonstrating that future emissions 
of this criteria pollutant are expected to remain at or below emission 
levels necessary for continued attainment of the current CO NAAQS.

II. The EPA's Evaluation

    Since there are few specific content requirements defined in 
section 175A of the Act for subsequent (or second) maintenance plan 
revisions, EPA has exercised its discretion in determining the 
recommended content of such plans.\1\ If an area meets the criteria, 
the State (area) may submit a maintenance plan that is more streamlined 
than a full Maintenance Plan.\2\ Such a streamlined plan is called a 
Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP), and the criteria of a LMP is detailed 
more below. EPA's interpretation of section 175A of the CAA, as it 
pertains to LMP's for CO, is contained in the October 6, 1995, national 
guidance memorandum titled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for 
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, Office of 
Air Quality Planning and Standards.\3\ The LMP guidance allows for 
areas that can demonstrate consistent air quality monitoring data at or 
below 85% of the NAAQS for carbon monoxide to elect for a LMP. Other 
criteria for the LMP option are detailed in the 1995 guidance as well. 
The TCEQ has opted to develop a LMP for the El Paso Area to fulfill the 
second 10-year CO maintenance period required by the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See generally EPA memorandum ``Procedures for Processing 
Requests for to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' from John 
Calgani, Director Air Quality Management Division to Regional Air 
Division Directors (September 4, 1992); and EPA memorandum ``Limited 
Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone Nonattainment 
Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Director Air Quality Strategies & 
Standards Division to Regional Air Division Directors (November 16, 
1994). Copies of both memorandums are included in the docket for 
this rulemaking.
    \2\ A limited maintenance plan generally includes all the 
elements of a full CAA section 175A maintenance plan except that a 
limited maintenance plan is not required to include motor vehicle 
emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes.
    \3\ A copy of the October 6, 1995 Guidance Memorandum is 
included in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the above guidance, EPA will consider the 
maintenance demonstration satisfied if the monitoring data show the 8-
hour CO design value is at or below 7.65 parts per million (ppm), or 
85% of the 8-hour

[[Page 14443]]

CO NAAQS of 9 ppm. The EPA believes that if the area begins the 
maintenance period at or below 85% of the applicable NAAQS, the 
continuing applicability of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
Program (PSD) and other Federal measures along with the existing 
control measures already adopted should provide adequate assurance of 
maintenance of the NAAQS over the 10-year period.
    The EPA has reviewed the State's SIP submittal for the El Paso 
Area. Per our 1995 guidance above, a LMP consists of several core 
provisions: An attainment inventory, a demonstration of maintenance of 
the applicable NAAQS, operation of a monitoring network, a provision 
for contingency measures, and a discussion of the approach necessary to 
meet conformity requirements. The following is a summary of the 
criteria for a LMP and the EPA's evaluation of how each provision has 
been met by the SIP submittal.

A. Base Year Emissions Inventory

    Under the LMP option, a cap on total emissions is not needed during 
the first or second 10-year maintenance period, and there is no 
requirement to project emissions over the maintenance period because an 
area's monitoring data satisfy the air quality criteria of the LMP by 
beginning the maintenance period at or below 85% of the CO NAAQS. 
However, the maintenance plan should contain an attainment year 
emission inventory to identify a level of CO emissions in the area that 
is sufficient to attain the CO NAAQS. Emission inventories contain 
estimates of how much CO is produced by all categories in the 
maintenance area on an annual basis: Point sources, area sources, on-
road mobile sources, and non-road mobile sources. The September 21, 
2016 SIP submittal contains a summary of the CO emissions inventory for 
the El Paso Area for the base year 2014. The methods used to determine 
the El Paso CO emission inventory are consistent with the EPA's most 
recent guidance on developing emission inventories, and the inventory 
incorporates the latest information and planning assumptions available 
at the time of its development.\4\ Because violations of the CO NAAQS 
are most likely to occur on winter weekdays, the inventory prepared is 
for a ``typical winter day''.\5\ The table below shows the estimated 
tons of CO emitted per winter day by source category for the 2014 base 
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories 
for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone. Volume I: General 
Guidance for Stationary Sources, EPA-450/4-91-016, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, May 1991; and Air 
Emissions Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) Technical Report 
Series--Volumes 1-10.
    \5\ See the above-referenced October 1995 CO LMP guidance under 
``3.a.--Attainment Inventory'' and EPA's EI guidance titled 
``Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories for Carbon 
Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone: Volume I,'' also cited in the 
October 1995 CO LMP guidance.

             Table I--CO Emissions by Source Category, 2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Tons per
                     Source category                          winter
                                                              weekday
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................            5.12
Area....................................................            8.76
Non-road mobile.........................................           33.02
On-road mobile..........................................          112.26
                                                         ---------------
    Total...............................................          159.16
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This LMP demonstrates continued attainment of the CO standard for 
El Paso County in 2014 through monitoring data. The 2014 emissions 
inventory shows that emissions decreased during the initial 10-year 
maintenance period even with growth in vehicle miles traveled, economic 
activity, and population.

B. Demonstration of Maintenance

    The State has chosen to demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by 
continued monitoring of the air quality in the El Paso Area. To qualify 
for the LMP option, the design value for each monitor should be at or 
below 85% of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. The value corresponding to this 85% 
threshold is 7.65 ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS. The last monitored 
violation of the CO NAAQS in the El Paso Area occurred in 1993 and 
monitored CO levels have been steadily in decline ever since. For this 
submission, the State provided data showing monitored CO values from 
2006-2015, reflecting a 2015 8-hour CO design value of 2.8 ppm. Thus, 
the design value for the 8-hour standard is less than 31% of the CO 
NAAQS. The EPA believes that if an area begins the maintenance period 
at or below the 85% threshold, it is unreasonable to expect that so 
much growth will occur during the 10-year maintenance period to cause a 
violation of the NAAQS.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Section IV.b of the above referenced 11/16/1994 ozone 
LMP guidance (November 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CO control program for El Paso Area is comprised of both 
Federal and local measures. The current maintenance plan 73 FR 45162 
(August 4, 2008) for the area includes several control strategies that 
will remain in place for the duration of the second 10-year maintenance 
period of 2018-2028. The Federal strategies are continued 
implementation of the Tier 2 motor vehicle emission standards along 
with the requirement for reduced sulfur in gasoline, which became 
effective on February 10, 2000. 65 FR 6697 (February 10, 2000). 
Additionally, EPA's newly approved Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and 
Fuel Standards at 79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014) will reduce CO emissions 
from new, light-duty motor vehicles, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty 
passenger vehicles beginning model year 2017 and will be fully phased 
in by model year 2025. The Tier 3 fuel standards will lower the sulfur 
content of gasoline and make emission control systems more effective 
for both existing and new vehicles. As newer vehicles gradually replace 
older ones in the fleet, these control programs will result in lowered 
CO emissions in the El Paso County Area and elsewhere.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Tier 2 final rule Regulatory Impact Analysis notes 
reductions in NO, VOC, particulate, SOX, CO, and 
hazardous air pollutant emissions from cars and light trucks by 
mandating lower VOC, NOX, and PM emission standards for 
these vehicles' emissions control systems, as well as requiring 
gasoline sulfur levels be reduced. Sulfur interferes with the 
operation of advanced exhaust treatment systems; reduced gasoline 
sulfur content improves the efficiency of these systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Local control strategies remaining in place for the duration of the 
second 10-year LMP include a vehicle emissions Inspection and 
Maintenance (I&M) Program, an Oxygenated Fuels Program, and the PSD 
Program. 73 FR 45162 (August 4, 2008). The I&M program has been in 
effect in the El Paso Area since January 1, 1987, and initially 
consisted of two-speed idle (TSI) testing for all vehicles. On January 
1, 2007, an enhanced vehicle I&M program began On-Board Diagnostics 
testing for all model year 1996 and newer vehicles and continued to use 
TSI testing for all model year 1995 and older vehicles. All vehicle 
emissions inspection stations in the El Paso I&M program area are 
required to offer both tests. The program addresses CO emissions as 
well as ozone precursor emissions. The original program as described 
above will remain in place for the duration of the second 10-year 
maintenance period (2018-2028).
    The El Paso Oxygenated Fuel Program aims to reduce vehicle 
emissions by providing for the use of oxygenated fuels. Various forms 
of this program have been in place during the winter months (October 1 
through March 31) since October 1, 1992. The minimum oxygenate content 
of winter fuels in El Paso County is 2.7% by weight, and this 
requirement will remain in effect for the

[[Page 14444]]

duration of the second 10-year (2018-2028) maintenance period. This 
requirement controls CO emissions by creating more complete combustion 
of fuel.
    Although not a direct local control measure, the State's PSD 
Program is a preconstruction permitting program that has been approved 
as part of the Texas SIP and applies to El Paso County. This program 
has been in effect for CO since the El Paso Area was redesignated to 
attainment in 2008. Under this program, new stationary sources of CO 
are evaluated and are required to use the Best Available Control 
Technology (BACT) to control emissions. This program will continue as a 
control strategy during the second maintenance period of 2018-2028. 
Therefore, we find that the State demonstrates continued maintenance of 
the standard.

C. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment

    The Plan includes a commitment to maintain operation of the 
existing EPA-approved air quality monitoring network in accordance with 
40 CFR part 58. The TCEQ will continue to monitor CO through the end of 
the second 10-year maintenance period to ensure the CO level remains 
below 85% of the NAAQS. This data will be reported to EPA annually.
    To comply with national ambient air monitoring requirements, and to 
better understand El Paso's air quality problems, the State has 
operated a CO monitoring network in the El Paso Area since the 1970's. 
In 2000, the El Paso monitoring network consisted of seven sites, 
including the Ascarate Park site at the Texas/Mexico border, which 
recorded the highest concentrations of CO that year. In recognition of 
significantly declining CO concentrations in the El Paso Area since 
2000, Texas has gradually reduced and consolidated the El Paso CO 
monitoring network to three sites in 2015 with approval from the EPA. 
To verify the attainment status of the area over the maintenance 
period, the LMP should contain provisions for continued operation of an 
appropriate, EPA-approved monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 58. The State has an approved monitoring network that includes CO 
monitoring in the El Paso Area that was most recently approved by the 
EPA on October 27, 2016. In the El Paso CO LMP, the State commits to 
maintaining a CO monitoring network to verify continued attainment of 
the NAAQS.

D. Contingency Plan

    Contingency measures are specific control strategies that will be 
activated if they are triggered by a predefined event. Section 175A(d) 
of the Act requires that a maintenance plan include contingency 
provisions to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs 
after redesignation of the area to attainment. To meet this 
requirement, the State has identified appropriate contingency measures 
along with a schedule for the development and implementation of such 
measures. In the September 21, 2016 submittal, the State specifies the 
contingency trigger as a violation of the CO standard based upon air 
quality monitoring data from the El Paso monitoring network. In the 
event that a monitored violation of the CO standard occurs in any 
portion of the maintenance area, the State will first analyze the data 
to determine if the violation was caused by actions outside TCEQ's 
jurisdiction (e.g., emissions from Mexico or another state) or within 
its jurisdiction. If the violation was caused by actions outside TCEQ's 
jurisdiction, TCEQ will notify the EPA. If TCEQ determines the 
violation was caused by actions within TCEQ's jurisdiction, TCEQ 
commits to adopt and implement the identified contingency measures as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 18 months.
    The State specifically identifies the following contingency 
measures to re-attain the standard:
     Vehicle idling restrictions.
     Improved vehicle I/M.
    The LMP indicates that the State may evaluate other potential 
strategies to address any future violations in the most appropriate and 
effective manner possible. Based on the above, we find that the 
contingency measures provided in the State's El Paso CO LMP are 
sufficient and meet the requirements of section 175A(d) of the CAA.

E. Transportation and General Conformity

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA. 
The EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs, 
and projects that are funded under 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act 
conform to SIPs. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation 
activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS.
    The transportation conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) and the 
general conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) apply to nonattainment 
areas and maintenance areas covered by an approved maintenance plan. 
Under either conformity rule, an acceptable method of demonstrating 
that a Federal action conforms to the applicable SIP is to demonstrate 
that expected emissions from the planned action are consistent with the 
emissions budget for the area.
    While the EPA's LMP Option does not exempt an area from the need to 
affirm conformity, it explains that the area may demonstrate conformity 
without submitting an emissions budget. Under the LMP Option, emissions 
budgets are treated as essentially not constraining for the length of 
the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to expect that the 
qualifying areas would experience so much growth in that period that a 
violation of the CO NAAQS would result.\8\ Similarly, Federal actions 
subject to the general conformity rule could be considered to satisfy 
the ``budget test'' specified in section 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) for the 
same reasons that the budgets are essentially considered to be 
unlimited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 78 FR 48611, 48613 (August 9, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While areas with maintenance plans approved under the LMP Option 
are not subject to the budget test, the areas remain subject to other 
transportation conformity requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. 
Thus, the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in the area or the 
State must document and ensure that:
    a. Transportation plans and projects provide for timely 
implementation of SIP transportation control measures in accordance 
with 40 CFR 93.113;
    b. Transportation plans and projects comply with the fiscal 
constraint element per 40 CFR 93.108;
    c. The MPO's interagency consultation procedures meet applicable 
requirements of 40 CFR 93.105;
    d. Conformity of transportation plans is determined no less 
frequently than every four years, and conformity of plan amendments and 
transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance with the timing 
requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104;
    e. The latest planning assumptions and emissions model are used as 
set forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111;
    f. Projects do not cause or contribute to any new localized carbon 
monoxide or particulate matter violations, in accordance with 
procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; and
    g. Project sponsors and/or operators provide written commitments as 
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
    The EPA confers regularly with the El Paso Area MPO and 
Transportation

[[Page 14445]]

Policy Board, TCEQ, the Texas Department of Transportation, the Federal 
Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration to 
review the Transportation Improvement Program for the El Paso Area to 
determine if the area is meeting the transportation conformity 
requirements under 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. The El Paso Area is 
currently meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.
    Based on the evaluation outlined above, the LMP satisfies the 
requirements of the Act for the second 10-year update to the El Paso CO 
maintenance area.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving the CO LMP for the El Paso Area submitted by 
the TCEQ on September 21, 2016 as a revision to the Texas SIP because 
the State adequately demonstrates that the El Paso Area will maintain 
the CO NAAQS and meet all the criteria of a LMP through the second 10-
year maintenance period. The EPA is publishing this rule without prior 
proposal because we view this as a non-controversial 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 
relevant adverse comments are received. This rule will be effective on 
May 22, 2017 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse 
comment by April 20, 2017. If we receive relevant 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 now. Please note that if we receive 
relevant 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.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by May 22, 2017. 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, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.
    Samuel Coleman was designated the Acting Regional Administrator on 
March 13, 2017, through the order of succession outlined in Regional 
Order R6-1110.1, a copy of which is included in the docket for this 
action.

    Dated: March 13, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart SS--Texas

0
2. In Sec.  52.2270 (e), the second table entitled ``EPA Approved 
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas 
SIP'' is amended by adding an entry to the end of the table to read 
follows:

Sec.  52.2270   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 14446]]

              EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              State
                                    Applicable geographic   submittal/
      Name of SIP  provision        or nonattainment area   effective    EPA approval date         Comments
                                                               date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Second 10-year Carbon Monoxide     El Paso, TX...........    9/21/2016  3/21/2017 [Insert    ...................
 maintenance plan (limited                                               Federal Register
 maintenance plan) for the El                                            citation].
 Paso CO area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-05379 Filed 3-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P