[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 25, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20746-20751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10117]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX-101-1-7394a; FRL-6969-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Post 96 
Rate of Progress Plan, Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEB) and 
Contingency Measures for the Houston/Galveston (HGA) Ozone 
Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action on portions of the Texas 
Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
Governor of Texas on May 19, 1998, to meet the reasonable further 
progress requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act). We are 
approving the Post-1996 Rate-of-Progress (ROP) Plan, the Motor Vehicle 
Emissions Budgets (MVEB) established by the ROP Plan, revisions to the 
contingency measures, and revisions to the 1990 base year emissions 
inventory for the Houston/Galveston (HGA) 1-hour ozone nonattainment 
area.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective June 25, 2001 unless adverse 
or critical comments are received by May 25, 2001. If adverse comments 
are received, EPA will publish timely withdrawal of the rule in the 
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at the EPA Region 6 
Office listed below.
    Copies of the documents, including the Technical Support Document, 
relevant to this action are available for public inspection during 
normal business hours at the following locations. Interested persons 
wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the 
appropriate office at least two working days in advance.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, Dallas, 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Texas 75202-2733, telephone: (214) 665-7214.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Office of Air Quality, 
12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Guy R. Donaldson, Air Planning 
Section (6PD-L), Multimedia Planning and

[[Page 20747]]

Permitting Division, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 
Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone: (214) 665-7242.

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

I. What Action Are We Taking?

    We are approving portions of the revision to the Texas Ozone State 
Implementation Plan for the HGA ozone nonattainment area received May 
19, 1998, to meet the Reasonable Further Progress requirements of the 
Act. We are approving the Post 96 Rate of Progress (OP) plan that is 
designed to reduce ozone forming emissions by November 15, 1999 from 
the baseline emissions by an additional 9% in the HGA nonattainment 
area. In addition, we are approving the MVEBs associated with the 9% 
ROP Plan. We are also approving the revisions to the contingency plan, 
and the 1990 base year emissions inventory for the HGA area, which were 
included with the May 19, 1998, SIP revision. In this action, we are 
not acting on other portions of the May 19, 1998, SIP revision 
regarding the attainment demonstration. In a separate action, we 
proposed conditional approval, and alternatively, disapproval of the 
portions of the May 19, 1998, SIP revision that pertained to the 
attainment demonstration (64 FR 70548, December 16, 1999).

II. Why Is Texas Required To Develop a Post 96 Rate of Progress 
Plan for Houston?

    Section 182(c)(2) of the CAA requires each serious and above ozone 
nonattainment area to submit a SIP revision by November 15, 1994, which 
describes, in part, how the area will achieve an actual volatile 
organic compound (VOC) emission reduction from the baseline emissions 
of at least 3 percent of baseline emissions per year averaged over each 
consecutive 3-year period beginning 6 years after enactment (i.e., 
November 15, 1996) until the area's attainment date. Section 
182(c)(2)(C) explains the conditions under which reductions of oxides 
of nitrogen (NOX) may be substituted for reductions in VOC 
emissions. The HGA ozone nonattainment area is classified as severe-17, 
with an attainment date of 2007.
    Texas submitted a plan to achieve the 9% reductions in a letter 
dated November 9, 1994. This plan was revised in a letter dated August 
9, 1996. On March 9, 1998, we proposed to disapprove the 1994 Post '96 
ROP plan, as revised in 1996, primarily because the plan projected too 
much emission reductions from the Compliance Assurance Monitoring 
program. The May 19, 1998, SIP revision addresses the concerns 
expressed in our proposed disapproval.

III. When Will Texas Submit Plans for the Remaining Required Rate 
of Progress Reductions?

    Section 182(c)(2) requires that States provide a plan that includes 
emission reductions of at least 3% of baseline emissions per year from 
November 15, 1996, until the attainment date. It was anticipated that 
these emission reductions would be consistent with the attainment 
demonstration modeling that was due November 15, 1994. We, however, 
have acknowledged the difficulty States were having in meeting the 
November 15, 1994 deadline to develop attainment demonstrations. In a 
March 2, 1995 policy memorandum, we provided that States could submit 
their attainment demonstration and Rate-of-Progress plans in phases. 
Phase I was to insure that progress was maintained while a complete 
plan was developed. The Phase I plan was to include a set of specific 
control measures to obtain major reductions in ozone precursors. For 
Texas, these were to include:
     Rules to insure that Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) was implemented on major sources of volatile organic 
compounds,
     A demonstration that 3% of baseline emissions per year 
reduction in emissions would occur during the time period 1997-1999 
(Post 96 Rate of Progress),
     An enforceable commitment to submit an attainment 
demonstration by mid-1997, and
     A commitment to participate in a consultative process to 
address Regional transport of ozone and precursors.
    A December 29, 1997, guidance memorandum provided for submittal of 
an attainment demonstration from mid-1997 until April, 1998. The 
December 29, 1997, memorandum explained that additional time was 
warranted because the consultative process to address transport, which 
had become know as the ozone transport assessment group (OTAG), had 
been delayed by 9 months so it was appropriate to delay the submittal 
of the attainment demonstrations.
    The December 29, 1997, memorandum indicated EPA's view that by 
April, 1998, States should submit the following:
     An attainment demonstration for the one-hour ozone 
standard, modeling analysis and supporting documentation.
     Evidence that all measures and regulations required for 
the nonattainment area by subpart 2 of title I of the Act to control 
ozone and its precursors have been adopted and implemented or are on an 
expeditious schedule to be adopted and implemented.
     A list of measures and regulations and/or a strategy 
including technology forcing controls needed to meet ROP requirements 
and attain the 1-hour NAAQS.
     For severe and higher classified nonattainment areas, a 
SIP commitment to submit a plan on or before the end of 2000 which 
contains (a) target calculations for post-1999 ROP milestones up to the 
attainment date (unless already submitted to satisfy EPA's previous 
findings of failure to submit) and (b) adopted regulations needed to 
achieve the post-1999 ROP requirements up to the attainment date and to 
attain the 1-hour NAAQS.
     A SIP commitment and schedule to implement the control 
programs and regulations in a timely manner to meet ROP and achieve 
attainment.
     Evidence of a public hearing on the State submittal.
    The May 19, 1998 SIP revision contains a commitment to submit a 
plan by December 15, 2000, which contains target calculations for Post-
1999 ROP milestones up to the attainment date and adopted regulations 
to achieve the Post-99 ROP requirements up to the attainment date and 
to attain the 1-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). In 
a letter from the Governor dated December 20, 2000, Texas submitted a 
plan to achieve the Post 99 Rate of Progress requirements. EPA will be 
evaluating the December 20, 2000, SIP revision in a separate action.

IV. Why Control Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and 
NOX?

    VOCs participate in a chemical reaction with Oxides of Nitrogen 
(NOX) and oxygen in the atmosphere to form ozone, a key 
component of urban smog. Inhaling even low levels of ozone can trigger 
a variety of health problems including chest pains, coughing, nausea, 
throat irritation, and congestion. It can worsen bronchitis, asthma and 
reduce lung capacity.

V. How Much Reduction in Emission Is Needed?

    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

[[Page 20748]]

Final Base Year Inventory includes all area, point, and mobile sources 
emissions in the 8 county HGA 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. As part of the May 19, 1998, SIP 
revision, Texas again revised the 1990 base year inventory. We are 
approving these changes to the inventory. The new inventory is 
summarized in Table 1. The changes to the inventory are described 
later.

           Table 1.--1990 Rate-of-Progress Base Year Inventory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  VOC  Tons/  NOX  Tons/
                   Source type                        day         day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................      483.28      794.85
Area............................................      200.07       14.37
Mobile..........................................      251.52      337.03
Nonroad.........................................      129.98      198.08
                                                 -----------------------
  Total.........................................     1064.85     1344.33
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 
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.

Estimates of Growth

    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, Texas followed standard EPA guidelines in 
estimating the growth in emissions. For the projection of 
NOX emissions from industrial sources, Texas 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 see if changes were actual 
changes in emissions to the atmosphere or just 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 the Technical Support Document for this action.

Calculation of Target Level

    Table 2 shows how the emissions inventory, adjusted inventories and 
growth estimates are used to calculate the target levels of emissions 
and needed emission reductions.

               Table 2: Calculation of Required Reductions
                               [tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    VOC          NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Emission Inventory.......................      1064.85      1344.33
1990 Adjusted Relative to 1996................       976.72
1990 Adjusted Relative to 1999................       964.98      1269.53
RVP and Fleet Turnover........................        11.74        76.39
3% of adjusted VOC, 6% of adjusted NOX........        28.95        76.19
1996 Target level.............................       812.77         * NA
1999 Target level.............................       772.08      1191.77
1999 Projection...............................      1076.76      1306.21
Total Reductions required by 1999.............       304.68       114.44
Reductions required by 15%....................       213.27           NA
Additional Reductions Required................        91.41       114.44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The 1996 Target level comes from the 15% Rate of Progress plan. The
  15% plan could only rely on VOC reductions so there is no 1996 target
  level for NOX.

VI. How Are Those Emission Reductions Achieved?

    Tables 3 and 4 document how the VOC and NOX emission 
reductions for this 9% ROP plan are to be achieved. The following 
control measures and emission reductions were unchanged from the 
previous 1994, as revised in 1996, 9% SIP revision: Aircraft Engines, 
Recreational Marine, Utility Engines, Underground Storage Tank 
Remediation, Transportation Control Measures, Reformulated Gasoline in 
Storage Tanks, Reformulated Gasoline in Loading Racks and Rule 
Effectiveness in Floating Roof Storage Tanks. In our proposed 
disapproval (63 FR 11387, March 9, 1998), we explained why we could 
accept the projected emission reductions from the above-listed 
measures. Please refer to the proposed disapproval Federal Register 
notice and its Technical Support Document where we explained our basis 
for acceptance of the projected emission reductions from these 
measures.
    In the May 19, 1998, SIP revision, Texas did change its projected 
emission reductions from the Pulp and Paper MACT measure. The State had 
originally based their estimate of emission reductions on the proposed 
MACT standard. The final MACT rule did not achieve as much emission 
reduction as anticipated. The difference between the proposed and final 
MACT standard was 2.2 tons/day. The State, however, has documented 2.2 
tons/day estimated emission reductions due to its vent gas control rule 
and permits containing vent gas controls.
    The State also changed its estimates of on-road motor vehicle 
emissions based on revised Vehicle Miles Traveled estimates. We 
reviewed the revised estimates and find them acceptable. Refer to the 
TSD for further discussion.
    Finally, Texas is now projecting emission reductions due to the 
implementation of NOX Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) in the Houston/Galveston area. We approved the 
NOX RACT rules in a separate Federal Register (see 65 FR 
53172, September 1, 2000). We have reviewed the projected emission 
reductions from the NOX RACT rules and find them acceptable. 
Refer to the TSD for the NOX RACT action for the

[[Page 20749]]

discussion of the projected emission reductions from each approved rule 
for each source category.

     Table 3.--Summary of VOC Emission Reductions Houston/Galveston
                               [tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Reduction............................................     91.41
Creditable Reductions:
  HON.........................................................      0.47
  Aircraft Engines............................................      0.97
  Pulp and Paper MACT.........................................      2.20
  Recreational Marine.........................................      0.06
  Utility Engine 1997-1999....................................      6.31
  UST remediation.............................................      2.05
  TCMs........................................................      0.5
  Tier I, I/M, RFG............................................     18.59
  MSW landfills--NSPS.........................................      4.06
  RFG--Tanks..................................................      2.45
  RFG--Loading Racks..........................................      3.76
  RE--Floating Roof Tanks.....................................     26.86
  Excess emissions from the 15% plan..........................     23.37
                                                               ---------
Total.........................................................     92.03
------------------------------------------------------------------------


     Table 4.--Summary of NOX Emission Reductions Houston/Galveston
                               [tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Reduction............................................    101.61
Creditable Reductions:
  NOX RACT....................................................     95.00
  RFG, I/M, FMVCP Tier I......................................     36.49
                                                               ---------
    Total.....................................................    131.49
------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. How Has Texas Addressed EPA's Concerns Identified in Our 
Proposed Disapproval?

    In the March 9, 1998, proposed disapproval, we proposed to 
disapprove the emission reductions that Texas had projected for three 
control measures. These were the Federal Compliance Assurance 
Monitoring Program, Texas Alternative Fuel Fleets and surplus emissions 
from the 15% plan due to the gas cap check. In the May 19, 1998, 
submission, Texas has, in effect, replaced these three programs' 
projected emission reductions with the reductions projected from the 
NOX RACT rules.

VIII. 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 level of on-road emissions 
that can be produced in 1999, when considered with emissions from all 
other sources, that meets the RFP milestones. 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.

IX. What Are the MVEB's Established by This Plan and Approved by 
This Action?

    The MVEB's established by this plan and that the EPA is approving 
are contained in the following table.

          Table 5.--Houston 1999 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
                               [tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Pollutant                         VOC        NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget....................    132.68     283.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

X. What Is the Applicable MVEB To Use for Conformity Analysis After 
1999?

    When evaluating transportation plans, emissions in years after 1999 
must be less than the 1999 ROP progress MVEB being approved here. In 
November 1999, the State submitted the 2007 attainment year MVEBs for 
VOC and NOX. On May 31, 2000, EPA found these MVEB adequate 
for conformity purposes. This decision was effective June 29, 2000. The 
projected emissions in years after 2007 must be less than the 
appropriate MVEBs.
    On December 20, 2000, Texas submitted Rate of Progress MVEBs for 
2002, 2005 and 2007. They also submitted revised attainment level MVEBs 
for 2007 which were initially submitted in November 1999. If EPA finds 
these MVEBs adequate for conformity purposes, then they will be the 
applicable budgets that must be used for such later years in future 
conformity evaluations.

XI. What Are the Contingency Measures for Houston?

    Ozone areas classified as moderate or above must include in their 
submittals under section 172(b) of the CAA, contingency measures to be 
implemented if RFP is not achieved or if the standard is not attained 
by the applicable date. The General Preamble to Title I, (57 FR 13498) 
states that the contingency measures should at a minimum ensure that an 
appropriate level of emissions reduction progress continues to be made 
if attainment or RFP is not achieved and additional planning by the 
State is needed. Therefore, we interpret the Act to require States with 
moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas to include sufficient 
contingency measures so that upon implementation of such measures 
additional emissions reductions of up to 3 percent of the emissions in 
the adjusted base year inventory (or a lesser percentage that will cure 
the identified failure) would be achieved in the year following the 
year in which the failure has been identified. States must show that 
their contingency measures can be implemented with minimal further 
action on their part and with no additional rule making actions such as 
public hearings or legislative review.
    Texas has developed contingency measures to be implemented if they 
fail to achieve the required reductions, that were expected as part of 
the 9% plan. They have chosen to meet the 3% emission reductions 
contingency with 2% VOC emission reductions and 1% additional 
NOX reductions. These contingency measures are summarized in 
Tables 6 and 7. Consult the Technical Support Document for this action 
for more information.

     Table 6.--Summary of VOC Contingency Measures Houston/Galveston
                               [tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Contingency...........................................    19.33
Creditable Reductions:
  Tier I, RFG, Phase II........................................    15.07
  Recreation Marine (2000).....................................     0.31
  Offset Printing..............................................     2.34
  Naptha Dry Cleaning..........................................     1.97
  Utility Engine...............................................     1.51
  Surplus Emission Reductions from the 9% ROP Plan.............     0.41
                                                                --------
    Total......................................................    21.61
------------------------------------------------------------------------


     Table 7.--Summary of NOX Contingency Measures Houston/Galveston
                               [tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Contingency...........................................    12.70
Creditable Reductions:
  Excess Emission Reductions 9% ROP Plan.......................    17.05
  Tier I, RFG, Phase II........................................     7.42
                                                                --------
    Total......................................................    24.47
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments 
are received. This rule will be effective on June 25, 2001 without 
further notice unless we receive adverse comment by May 25, 2001. If 
EPA receives adverse comments, we

[[Page 20750]]

will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 
public that the rule will not take effect. We will address all public 
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will 
not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

III. Administrative Requirements.

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action 
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). This rule also does not 
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the 
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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 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. As required by section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this 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. 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 rule does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective June 25, 2001 unless EPA receives 
adverse written comments by May 25, 2001.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 25, 2001. 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, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: April 5, 2001.
Jerry Clifford,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.


    Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart SS--Texas

    2. In Sec. 52.2270, paragraph (e) in the table entitled ``EPA 
Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the 
Texas SIP'' two entries are added to the end of the table to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.2270  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

              EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
                                        Applicable         submittal
      Name of SIP provision            geographic or         date/       EPA approval date         Comments
                                    nonattainment area     effective
                                                             date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
Post 96 Rate of Progress Plan....  Houston, Texas......       5/19/98  4/25/01 66 FR 20750.  Originally
                                                                                              submitted 11/9/94
                                                                                              and revised 8/9/
                                                                                              96.

[[Page 20751]]

 
Contingency Measures.............  Houston, Texas......       5/19/98  4/25/01 66 FR 20751.  Originally
                                                                                              submitted 11/9/94
                                                                                              and revised 8/9/
                                                                                              96.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Section 52.2309 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.2309  Emissions inventories.

* * * * *
    (f) The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission submitted a 
revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) on May 19, 2000. This 
revision was submitted for the purpose of satisfying the 9 percent 
Rate-of-Progress requirements of the Clean Air Act, which will aid in 
ensuring the attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
for ozone. This submission also contained revisions to the 1990 base 
year emissions inventory for the Houston/Galveston areas.

[FR Doc. 01-10117 Filed 4-24-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P