[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53997-53998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27622]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX27-1-5945; FRL-5910-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality State Implementation 
Plans (SIP); Texas; Disapproval of Texas Clean Fuel Fleet Program 
Revision to the State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed disapproval.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing disapproval of the Texas Clean Fuel Fleet 
(CFF) SIP revision submitted on August 9, 1996, by the State of Texas 
for the purpose of establishing a substitute CFF program. The EPA is 
disapproving the State's SIP revision due to changes in the State law 
that altered the current SIP revision submittal and because, in EPA's 
opinion, the State did not make a convincing and compelling equivalency 
determination with the Federal CFF program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 17, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733. Copies of the documents about this action are available for 
public inspection during normal business hours at the following 
locations. Persons interested in examining these documents should make 
an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24 hours before the 
visiting day.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas, 78711-3087.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, 12100 Park 35 Circle, 
Austin, Texas 78711-3087.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Paul Scoggins, Air Planning 
Section (6PD-L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733, telephone (214) 665-7354 or via e-mail at 
[email protected]. While information may be requested via 
e-mail, all comments must be submitted in writing to the EPA Region 6 
address above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On November 15, 1990, Congress enacted amendments to the 1997 Clean 
Air Act (the Act); Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 
U.S.C. 7401-7671q. The CFF program is contained under part C, entitled, 
``Clean Fuel Vehicles,'' of Title II of the Act, as amended November 
15, 1990. Part C was added to the Act to establish two programs: a 
clean-fuel vehicle pilot program in the State of California (the 
California Pilot Test Program) and the Federal CFF program in certain 
ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment areas.
    Section 182(c)(4) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7511a (c)(4), allows states 
to opt-out of the Federal CFF program by submitting, for EPA approval, 
a SIP revision consisting of a substitute program resulting in as much 
or greater long term emissions reductions in ozone producing and toxic 
air emissions as the Federal CFF program. The EPA may approve such a 
revision only if it consists exclusively of provisions other than those 
required under this Act for the area.
    The State of Texas chose to opt-out of the Federal CFF program in a 
committal SIP revision submitted to EPA on November 15, 1992. In July 
1994, Texas submitted the State's opt-out program in a SIP revision to 
EPA and adopted rules to implement the Texas CFF Program. The Texas CFF 
SIP was revised based upon changes to State law and resubmitted to EPA 
on August 6, 1996. On June 20, 1997, the Governor of Texas signed into 
law Senate Bill 681 that modified the supporting legislation (Chapter 
382 of the Texas Health and Safety Code) for the current submitted 
revision.

II. EPA Analysis of State Submittal

    The EPA is proposing disapproval based on the finding that changes 
to the supporting legislation have altered the August 6, 1996, 
submitted SIP revision.

[[Page 53998]]

As a result, the specific legislative authority in the submission is no 
longer in effect. In addition to the above changes, Texas's technical 
and equivalency method has not identified and quantified accurately the 
covered fleets in the Federal and State covered areas. The Texas CFF 
program has excluded certain covered fleets from its total fleet 
aggregation in the El Paso and Houston/Galveston nonattainment areas. 
Without an adequate determined fleet baseline for comparison, the SIP 
revision's technical evaluation is not sufficiently comprehensive to 
determine equivalency with the Federal CFF program. These and 
additional concerns with the State CFF program and broad compliance 
exemptions lead EPA to conclude that the State has not made a 
convincing and compelling demonstration of equivalency with the Federal 
CFF program. A more detailed discussion of the Texas CFF program 
elements and control strategy can be found in the Technical Support 
Document available from the EPA Region VI office.

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing disapproval of the Texas CFF SIP revision 
submitted to EPA on August 6, 1996. The State's proposed substitute 
program is codified in 30 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 114, 
Sections 114.30, 114.32 through 114.34, and 114.36 through 114.40. The 
EPA is soliciting public comments on the proposed action discussed in 
this notice. These comments will be considered before taking final 
action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking 
procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional office 
listed in the Addresses section of this notice.
    The regional office, with EPA's Office of Mobile Sources has 
initiated efforts to help ensure that this action is consistent with 
the Act and will not interfere with any applicable requirement 
concerning attainment or any other applicable requirement of the Act.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP will be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.

IV. State Options

    The following are options available to Texas in the implementation 
of its CFF Program. The State may choose to; adopt the Federal CFF 
Program; or revise the current Texas CFF program and resubmit to EPA or 
substitute another State program or control strategy for the Texas CFF 
program. Such a substitution could be a stationary or mobile source 
control program, but only if it consists exclusively of provisions 
other than those required under the Act.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory 
action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. See 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant 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.
    The EPA's disapproval of the State request under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the Act does not affect any existing 
requirements applicable to small entities. Any preexisting Federal 
requirements remain in place after this disapproval. Federal 
disapproval of the State submittal does not affect its State 
enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal does not 
impose any new Federal requirements. Therefore, EPA certifies that this 
disapproval action does not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because it does not remove existing 
requirements and impose any new Federal requirements.

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 
signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a budgetary impact 
statement to accompany any proposed or final rule that includes a 
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments in the aggregate or to private sectors, of $100 
million or more. Under section 205, EPA must select the most cost-
effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives 
of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 
requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small 
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    The EPA has determined that the disapproval action proposed does 
not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of 
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action imposes no 
new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 8, 1997.
Jerry Clifford,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-27622 Filed 10-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P