[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 240 (Thursday, December 15, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-30872]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 15, 1994]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX-49-1-6678; FRL-5122-8]

 

Approval and Promulgation of Temporary Section 182(f) Exemption 
to the Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Control Requirements for the Houston 
and Beaumont Ozone Nonattainment Areas; TX

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve a petition from the State of Texas 
requesting that the Houston and Beaumont ozone nonattainment areas be 
temporarily exempted from NOX control requirements of section 
182(f) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended in 1990. The State of 
Texas bases its request upon preliminary photochemical grid modeling 
which shows that reductions in NOX would be detrimental to 
attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone 
in these areas. This temporary exemption is being requested under 
section 182(f) of the CAA.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing on 
or before February 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Guy Donaldson, Acting Chief, Planning Section, at the EPA Regional 
Office listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this proposed 
action are available for public inspection during normal business hours 
at the following locations. The interested persons wanting to examine 
these documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office 
at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Programs Branch 
(6T-A), 1445 Ross Avenue, suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), P.O. Box 13087, 
Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Leila Yim Surratt or Mr. Quang 
Nguyen, Planning Section (6T-AP), Air Programs Branch, EPA Region 6, 
1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7214.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    NOX are precursors to ground level (tropospheric) ozone, or 
urban ``smog.'' When released into the atmosphere, NOX will react 
with volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the presence of sunlight to 
form ozone. Tropospheric ozone is an important contributor to the 
nation's urban air pollution problem.
    The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) made significant changes 
to the air quality planning requirements for areas that do not meet the 
ozone NAAQS. Subparts 1 and 2 of part D, title I of the CAA as amended 
in 1990 contain the air quality planning requirements for ozone 
nonattainment areas. Title I includes new requirements to control 
NOX emissions in certain ozone nonattainment areas and ozone 
transport regions. Section 182(f) requires States to apply the same 
requirements to major stationary sources of NOX as are applied to 
major stationary sources of VOC. The new NOX requirements are 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) and new source review 
(NSR). These provisions are explained more fully in the EPA's NOX 
Supplement to the General Preamble published in the Federal Register 
(FR) on November 25, 1992 (see 57 FR 55620). In addition, the general 
and transportation conformity rules (conformity) required by section 
176(c) contain new NOX control requirements (see 58 FR 63214 and 
58 FR 62188), and the vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) rules 
required by section 182(c)(3) also contain new NOX requirements 
(see 57 FR 52989).
    Houston, Texas was designated nonattainment for ozone and 
classified as severe pursuant to sections 107(d)(4) and 181(a) of the 
CAA, and has an attainment deadline of 2007. The Houston nonattainment 
area includes the cities of Houston and Galveston, and consists of the 
following eight counties: Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, 
Harris, Liberty, Montgomery and Waller. Beaumont, Texas was classified 
as a serious nonattainment area and has an attainment deadline of 1999. 
The Beaumont nonattainment area includes the cities of Beaumont and 
Port Arthur, and consists of the following three counties: Hardin, 
Jefferson, and Orange. Please reference 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991, 
codified for Texas at title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations in 
Sec. 81.344).

II. Applicable EPA Guidance

    The CAA specifies in section 182(f) that if one of the conditions 
listed below is met, the new NOX requirements would not apply:
    1. In any area, the net air quality benefits are greater without 
NOX reductions from the sources concerned;
    2. In a nontransport region, additional NOX reductions would 
not contribute to ozone attainment in the nonattainment area; or
    3. In a transport region, additional NOX reductions would not 
produce net ozone benefits in the transport region.
    In addition, section 182(f)(2) states that the application of the 
new NOX requirements may be limited to the extent that any portion 
of those reductions are demonstrated to result in ``excess reductions'' 
of NOX. The NOX requirements of the conformity rules would 
also not apply in an area that is granted a section 182(f) exemption 
(see 58 FR 62188, 58 FR 63214, and 59 FR 31238). In addition, certain 
NOX provisions of the I/M requirements would not apply in an area 
that is granted a section 182(f) exemption (57 FR 52989).
    The EPA's Guideline for Determining the Applicability of Nitrogen 
Oxides Requirements under Section 182(f) (December 1993) describes how 
the EPA intends to interpret the NOX exemption provisions of 
section 182(f). In addition, a memorandum signed by John S. Seitz, 
Director of the EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, dated 
May 27, 1994, describes certain revisions to the process the EPA 
currently intends to follow for granting exemptions from NOX 
control requirements.
    As described more fully in the Seitz memorandum, petitions 
submitted under section 182(f)(3) are not required to be submitted as 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions. Consequently, the State is 
not required under the CAA to hold a public hearing in order to 
petition for an areawide NOX exemption determination. Similarly, 
it is not necessary to have the Governor submit the petition.

III. State Submittal

    On August 17, 1994, the TNRCC submitted to the EPA a petition 
pursuant to section 182(f) which requests that the Houston and Beaumont 
nonattainment areas be temporarily exempted by the EPA from the 
NOX control requirements of section 182(f) of the CAA. The State 
bases its petition on test (2) listed above, through the use of an 
Urban Airshed Modeling (UAM) demonstration showing that NOX 
reductions would not contribute to attainment in either area because 
the decrease in ozone concentrations resulting from VOC reductions 
alone is equal to or greater than the decrease obtained from NOX 
reductions or a combination of VOC and NOX reductions.
    The State's initial petition included: (1) A letter from John Hall, 
Chairman of the TNRCC, to Jane N. Saginaw, Regional Administrator of 
the EPA Region 6, transmitting the NOX exemption petition; and (2) 
a summary of the State's UAM modeling results. The State of Texas 
supplemented its initial submission on August 31, 1994, and September 
9, 1994, by forwarding to the EPA four technical reports on the 
modeling demonstration, which contained the following: base case model 
inputs, base case performance evaluation, 1999 emissions report, and 
1999 progress towards attainment modeling report. These additional 
technical reports provided supplemental detail and documentation on the 
modeling information already provided to the EPA in the State's initial 
submission.
    As described in the State's petition, the TNRCC plans to complete 
additional UAM modeling between November 1995 and May 1996 using the 
results of an intensive 1993 field study, the Coastal Oxidant 
Assessment for Southeast Texas (COAST). The data collected through the 
COAST study consist of hourly point source emissions, gridded typical 
summer day on-road mobile source emissions, hourly air quality data, 
and detailed meteorological data for specific ozone exceedance episodes 
in the Houston-Beaumont domain. Because it is the most comprehensive 
data set available, it should result in greater accuracy in the 
modeling and therefore in the attainment control strategy. Since the 
modeling is expected to be completed by May 1996, the TNRCC is 
requesting only a temporary NOX exemption until May 31, 1997.
    The TNRCC had previously adopted and submitted to the EPA complete 
NOX RACT rules for the Houston and Beaumont areas. The NOX 
RACT rules were adopted by the State on May 11, 1993, with additional 
revisions adopted on August 30, 1993, May 25, 1994, and August 31, 
1994. The TNRCC has also adopted and submitted to the EPA NOX NSR 
and I/M rules. The State has recently adopted its conformity 
regulations, and submitted them to the EPA in November 1994. The EPA 
intends to act on these SIP revisions in separate rulemaking actions.
    Once the results of the supplementary UAM modeling based on the 
COAST data set are available, the State will re-evaluate whether 
NOX reductions achieved through implementation of NOX RACT 
will or will not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard in the 
Houston and Beaumont areas. The EPA intends to defer action on the 
State's NOX RACT rules until this re-evaluation is completed. If 
the COAST modeling results continue to indicate that NOX RACT 
reductions would not contribute or are detrimental to attainment of the 
ozone standard in each of these areas, then the State would submit to 
the EPA a section 182(f) petition requesting a permanent NOX 
exemption, and would initiate rulemaking to rescind the NOX RACT 
rules pending at EPA; however, if the modeling shows that NOX 
reductions would contribute to attainment of the ozone standard in each 
of these areas, the EPA would initiate rulemaking on the State's 
NOX RACT rules which have been submitted to the EPA.
    Because the State of Texas has decided, prompted by the initial 
modeling results, to request that the EPA act at this time on the 
NOX exemption petition rather than the previously submitted 
NOX RACT rules, certain circumstances regarding the timing of 
requirements under the CAA are necessarily affected. Section 182(b)(2) 
of the CAA requires affected sources to implement the RACT measures 
contained in applicable State rules by May 31, 1995. While Texas has 
adopted NOX RACT rules, as noted previously, the EPA rulemaking to 
approve those rules has been superseded by the NOX exemption 
submission, proposing to temporarily exempt Texas from the requirement 
to impose NOX RACT in the Houston and Beaumont nonattainment 
areas. Based on the schedule for completion of the COAST study, from 
which it will be determined whether NOX RACT reductions are needed 
for these areas to attain, any action that will ultimately result in 
sources being subject to NOX RACT rules will necessarily occur 
only after the statutorily-prescribed deadline has passed. Since, as a 
practical matter, it will be impossible for sources in these areas to 
meet a deadline that has passed, the EPA believes it would have the 
discretion in that event to establish a new, reasonable deadline by 
which such sources must comply.
    It is the EPA's determination, after consultation with the TNRCC, 
that requiring subject sources to implement NOX control measures 
as expeditiously as practicable but no later than May 31, 1997, is 
appropriate for several reasons. First, through the State's NOX 
RACT rule adoption process, affected sources have been made aware of 
the requirement to implement NOX RACT, and in fact, the latest 
revision to those rules specifically included the May 31, 1997, 
compliance date. Moreover, the fact that the State has petitioned the 
EPA for only a temporary NOX waiver has generally been made clear 
to the public and affected sources. Finally, through this notice 
setting forth how the EPA and the State of Texas intend to proceed with 
regard to finalizing and applying the submitted NOX RACT rules in 
the event a need for such reductions is established, sources have again 
been made aware of the potential necessity (and the deadline that would 
be applicable) to install and implement NOX RACT. Since the 
information regarding whether NOX RACT will ultimately be required 
is scheduled to become available by May 1996, sources will effectively 
be provided with a year to implement the NOX RACT controls.

IV. Analysis of State Submittal

    The following items are the basis for the EPA's action proposing to 
approve the State of Texas' section 182(f) NOX petition for a 
temporary NOX exemption for the Houston and Beaumont ozone 
nonattainment areas. Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support 
Document and the State's submittal for more detailed information.
    Chapter 4 of the EPA's December 1993 section 182(f) guidance states 
that photochemical grid modeling may be used to simulate conditions 
resulting from three emission reduction scenarios: (1) substantial VOC 
reductions; (2) substantial NOX reductions; and (3) both VOC and 
NOX reductions. To demonstrate that NOX reductions are not 
beneficial to attainment, the areawide predicted maximum 1-hour ozone 
concentration for each day modeled under scenario (1) must be less than 
or equal to that from scenarios (2) and (3) for the same day. Chapter 7 
specifies that application of UAM should be consistent with the 
techniques specified in the EPA ``Guideline on Air Quality Models 
(Revised),'' and ``Guideline for Regulatory Application of the UAM,'' 
(July 1991). As discussed below, the State has met these conditions by 
using the UAM consistent with the EPA's guidance.

A. Photochemical Grid Model

    The TNRCC used UAM version IV, an EPA-approved photochemical grid 
model, to develop the modeling demonstration for the Houston and 
Beaumont areas. The State's modeling activities were performed as 
outlined in the UAM modeling protocols, according to the EPA's 
``Guideline for Regulatory Application of the Urban Airshed Model.'' A 
specific modeling protocol was developed by the State for its modeling 
activities. The State's modeling protocol was reviewed and approved by 
the EPA. The discussion below summarizes the EPA's analysis on how the 
State's modeling demonstrations complied with the EPA's guidance. 
Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document for more detailed 
information.

B. Episode Selection

    The Houston and Beaumont areas are situated in the Upper Texas 
Coastal Region which has a unique land-sea breeze regime in which 
morning land breezes typically transition into afternoon sea breezes. 
The EPA recommended method did not adequately address the source-
receptor relationships associated with the land-sea breeze regime in 
the coastal area. Therefore, consistent with the intent of the EPA 
guidance, Texas used a slightly modified approach to select episodes. 
The TNRCC considered both morning and afternoon winds, and 
meteorological regimes identified in a fashion similar to the EPA-
suggested procedure to account for the presence of the coastal land and 
sea breezes. Data from 1987 through 1991 were examined for episodes 
which cover at least 48 consecutive hours and the worst-case 
meteorological conditions. Consistent with EPA guidance, three episodes 
were selected for the UAM analysis.

C. Model Domain and Meteorological Input

    The TNRCC selected a large modeling domain to ensure that the 
movement of ozone and ozone precursors emitted from the surface sources 
are well represented during the modeled episodes. In addition, since 
Houston and Beaumont are adjacent to each other, the State combined 
both areas into one modeling domain to avoid having overlapping wind 
fields. This assisted the State in properly utilizing the prognostic 
model, which requires the use of a large domain to capture all the 
important horizontal and vertical circulation patterns. This domain 
encompasses all emission sources and all surface meteorological/air 
quality monitors in both areas.
    Meteorological data was collected from numerous monitoring stations 
in both areas. The TNRCC followed the methods described in the UAM 
User's Guides to develop model inputs for wind field data, mixing 
heights, temperature, and meteorological scalars for both areas. To 
estimate the different boundary conditions and the initial conditions, 
the TNRCC used several methods including monitored air quality data, 
EPA-recommended background concentration levels, and Regional Oxidant 
Model values.

D. Emissions Inventory

    The Houston and Beaumont modeling exercises were conducted using 
VOC and NOX emission inventories compiled by survey and direct 
measurement by the TNRCC. The modeling emissions inventories are 
composed of point source, area, on-road mobile, off-road mobile, and 
biogenic emissions. The EPA procedures for developing episode-specific 
emission inventories were followed.
    The TNRCC developed the modeling inventories for the base case 
model runs for all three episodes from the EPA-approved 1990 base year 
SIP emission inventories for both areas. These inventories were used to 
evaluate the model's performance for each episode.
    For the section 182(f) demonstration, the EPA's guidance explains 
that in general, the purpose of the section 182(f) requirements for 
NOX is related to attainment of the ozone standard, which suggests 
that an analysis is needed that is focussed on the time that attainment 
of that standard is required. Therefore, the analysis should, at a 
minimum, reflect conditions expected at the time the area is required 
to attain the ozone standard.
    The Beaumont area has an attainment deadline of 1999 and the 
Houston area has an attainment deadline of 2007. Because the two areas 
have different attainment deadlines, and because, for reasons explained 
above, the TNRCC modeled both areas as one modeling domain, the State 
conducted two section 182(f) analyses. First, the State modeled 
generalized emissions inventory conditions that would be expected to 
occur in the attainment year for Houston, by estimating 50 percent 
reductions in VOC, in NOX, and in both, from the 1990 base year 
emissions inventory.
    Second, the State conducted a section 182(f) analysis using an 
emissions inventory that reflects the conditions from 1996-1999. A 
projected 1999 inventory was developed from the 1990 base year emission 
inventory and adjusted to reflect conditions in 1999. Demographic and 
econometric forecasting methods were employed to project activity 
levels to the summer of 1999, which were in turn used to develop a 
projected emissions inventory for 1999. The TNRCC then applied the VOC 
emission reductions that will be achieved by implementation of controls 
through 1996 from the 15 percent Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) SIP. 
The TNRCC did not include any emission reductions that are required to 
be implemented from 1996 through 1999 as part of the three percent per 
year RFP requirements. In addition, the 1999 modeling inventory does 
not incorporate any NOX emission reductions that would have been 
achieved through implementation of NOX RACT, NSR, or 
transportation conformity provisions.
    The EPA believes that the two inventories used by the State for the 
section 182(f) demonstration adequately simulate the conditions that 
would be expected at the time the Beaumont area is required to attain 
and at the time the Houston area is required to attain.

E. Model Performance

    In the Houston and Beaumont model performance evaluation, both 
graphical and statistical performance measures were implemented for all 
meteorological episodes and monitoring networks. A sensitivity analysis 
was also conducted. In the Houston and Beaumont base case simulations, 
the model performed adequately for the May 16-19, 1988, and July 27-
August 1, 1990, episodes, but did not have satisfactory performance for 
the October 10-15, 1991, episode which was therefore dropped from 
further analysis.
    The EPA's UAM guidance recommends that a minimum of three days from 
among all meteorological regimes should be modeled (e.g., three 
meteorological regimes each containing one primary episode day, or two 
meteorological regimes with at least two primary days from one of those 
regimes). The TNRCC's analyses are consistent with the EPA's guidance 
in that the two episodes that exhibited satisfactory performance cover 
more than three days of ozone exceedances and represent several of the 
predominant meteorological regimes for ozone exceedances in the Gulf 
Coast.

F. Section 182(f) Demonstration

    Under the EPA's section 182(f) guidance, the State should model 
three emission reduction scenarios to evaluate the benefits of NOX 
reductions: (1) substantial VOC reductions; (2) substantial NOX 
reductions; and (3) both VOC and NOX reductions.
    The TNRCC first modeled the above across the board reduction 
scenarios using the 1990 base year emissions inventory. The TNRCC 
conducted three levels of emission reduction analyses: (1) 50 percent 
VOC reductions, 50 percent NOX reductions, and 50 percent 
reduction of both, (2) 35 percent VOC reduction, 20 percent NOX 
reduction, and a mixed reduction of 25 percent VOC and 10 percent 
NOX, and (3) 25 percent VOC reduction, 10 percent NOX 
reduction, and a mixed reduction of 20 percent VOC and 5 percent 
NOX.
    As explained in the EPA's 182(f) guidance, the EPA believes it is 
appropriate to focus this analysis on the areawide maximum 1-hour 
predicted ozone concentration, since this value is critical to the 
attainment demonstration. For the two episodes with adequate 
performance, i.e., the May 1988 and July 1990 episodes, in all the 
emission reduction scenarios conducted above, the controlling day shows 
that the domain-wide predicted maximum ozone concentration is lowest 
when only VOC reductions are modeled.
    The TNRCC conducted a second analysis on the episode that exhibited 
the best performance, i.e., the July 1990 episode. The TNRCC ran the 
above across-the-board emission reduction scenarios with the July 1990 
episode, using the projected 1999 inventory which incorporates VOC 
control measures through 1996 (i.e., from the 15 percent RFP SIP). The 
results of these scenarios show that for the controlling day, the 
domain-wide predicted maximum ozone concentrations are lowest when only 
VOC reductions are modeled. The State limited this second analysis to 
the July 1990 episode because it exhibited significantly better 
performance than the May 1988 episode. Furthermore, the maximum domain-
wide ozone concentration was larger in the July 1990 episode than in 
May 1988. Thus, the level of controls necessary to reach attainment 
with the July 1990 episode would likely be larger than for the May 1988 
episode.

G. Evaluation Summary

    The EPA believes that the TNRCC's modeling demonstration for the 
Houston and Beaumont ozone nonattainment areas supports the State's 
petition for a temporary exemption from the NOX requirements of 
section 182(f) of the CAA. The State has followed the EPA's guidance on 
the application of the UAM appropriately, and has demonstrated that 
NOX reductions would not contribute to attainment.
    Because the State's petition clearly indicates that the attainment 
modeling should be completed between November 1995 and May 1996 (which 
will determine whether a VOC, NOX, or combination thereof, 
strategy is most beneficial for attainment), the EPA believes that the 
petition supports granting the State's request for a temporary 
exemption only until the end of 1996. The EPA believes that allowing 
the temporary exemption only until this time is needed to provide 
adequate insurance that if the subsequent COAST attainment modeling 
indicates that NOX reductions would be effective in reducing 
ozone, the NOX control requirements of section 182(f) would be 
implemented without undue delay.
    Through the granting of a temporary NOX exemption, in addition 
to NOX RACT, the NOX NSR, conformity, and certain portions of 
the I/M requirements of the CAA would no longer be applicable for the 
Houston and Beaumont areas. If the State does not receive a permanent 
exemption, then the NOX RACT, NSR, conformity, and I/M 
requirements of the CAA would become applicable again upon the 
expiration of the temporary exemption. As explained previously for 
RACT, if the NOX requirements re-apply, then the EPA must 
establish new compliance deadlines for those requirements.
    If the State has not received a permanent exemption prior to the 
expiration of the temporary exemption, based on the compliance deadline 
in the previously submitted NOX RACT rules, the EPA would expect 
affected sources in the State to implement NOX RACT controls as 
expeditiously as practicable but no later than May 31, 1997. Finally, 
the TNRCC's petition states that the COAST attainment modeling will be 
completed between November 1995 and May 1996. Therefore, by May 1996, 
the State will be able to determine whether NOX reductions will 
contribute to attainment and thus whether the NOX RACT rules will 
need to be implemented in the Houston and Beaumont areas. The EPA 
therefore believes that affected sources will have adequate prior 
notice to meet the NOX RACT compliance deadline indicated above in 
the event that a permanent exemption is not granted. The NOX NSR, 
conformity, and I/M provisions would become applicable immediately upon 
the expiration of the temporary exemption.

V. Proposed Rulemaking Action

    In this action, the EPA proposes to approve the section 182(f) 
petition submitted by the State of Texas requesting a temporary 
NOX exemption for the Houston and Beaumont ozone nonattainment 
areas. The temporary exemption, if granted, would expire on December 
31, 1996, without further notice from the EPA.
    The State had previously adopted and submitted to the EPA complete 
NOX RACT and NSR rules, and recently submitted conformity rules to 
the EPA. During the temporary exemption period, the EPA will not act 
upon the State's NOX RACT rules. The EPA plans to act upon the 
State's NOX NSR and conformity provisions in separate rulemaking 
actions because those provisions are contained in broader rules that 
also control VOC emissions.
    Upon the expiration of the temporary exemption on December 31, 
1996, the State is required to either, (1) have received a permanent 
NOX exemption from the EPA prior to that time, or (2) begin 
implementing the State's NOX RACT, NSR, conformity and I/M 
requirements, with NOX RACT compliance required as expeditiously 
as practicable but no later than May 31, 1997. The EPA will begin 
rulemaking action on the State's NOX RACT SIP upon the expiration 
of the temporary exemption if the State has not received a permanent 
NOX exemption by that time.

Request for Public Comments

    The EPA requests comments on all aspects of this proposal. The EPA 
has received an advance request from an environmental group to extend 
the comment period from the normal 30-day period to a 60-day period 
because of the complex technical issues involved in the petition. The 
EPA is granting the group's request for a 60-day comment period. 
Therefore, as indicated at the outset of this action, the EPA will 
consider any comments received by February 13, 1995.

Regulatory Process

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). 
Alternatively, the EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit 
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations 
of less than 50,000.
    Approvals of NOX exemption petitions under section 182(f) of 
the CAA do not create any new requirements. Therefore, because the 
Federal approval of the petition does not impose any new requirements, 
the EPA certifies that it does not have a significant impact on 
affected small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-
State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory 
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of State action. The CAA forbids the EPA to base its 
actions concerning SIPs on such grounds (Union Electric Co. v. U.S. 
E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2)).

Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the 
EPA must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'', 
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
and the requirements of the Executive Order. It has been determined 
that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866, and is therefore not subject to OMB 
review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic 
compounds.

    Dated: December 9, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    40 CFR part 52 is proposed to be amended as follows:
    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart SS--Texas

    2. Section 52.2308 is proposed to be amended by reserving paragraph 
(c) and adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.2308  Area-wide nitrogen oxides (NOX) exemptions.

* * * * *
    (c) [Reserved]
    (d) The TNRCC submitted to the EPA on August 17, 1994, with 
supplemental information submitted on August 31, 1994, and September 9, 
1994, a petition requesting that the Houston and Beaumont ozone 
nonattainment areas be temporarily exempted from the NOX control 
requirements of section 182(f) of the CAA. The Houston nonattainment 
area consists of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, 
Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller counties. The Beaumont nonattainment 
area consists of Hardin, Jefferson, and Orange counties. The exemption 
request was based on photochemical grid modeling which shows that 
reductions in NOX would be detrimental to attaining the ozone 
NAAQS. On (insert date), the EPA approved the State's request for a 
temporary exemption. The temporary exemption automatically expires on 
December 31 1996, without further notice from the EPA. Upon the 
expiration of the temporary exemption, the State is required to either, 
(1) have received a permanent NOX exemption from the EPA prior to 
that time, or (2) begin implementing the State's NOX requirements, 
with NOX Reasonably Available Control Technology compliance 
required as expeditiously as practicable but no later than May 31, 
1997.

[FR Doc. 94-30872 Filed 12-14-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P