[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 174 (Friday, September 7, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46754-46755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-22523]



[[Page 46754]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX-126-4-7530; FRL-7051-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality State Implementation 
Plans; Supplemental; Texas: Low Emission Diesel Fuel

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rulemaking supplements a previous proposal published 
April 23, 2001 (66 FR 20415), in which EPA proposed approving a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the State of Texas establishing 
a Low Emission Diesel (LED) fuel program for nine counties within the 
Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area 
(CMSA). Today's supplemental proposal revises the April 23 proposal to 
reflect recent changes to the LED rule proposed by the Texas Natural 
Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC). These proposed changes to the 
TNRCC LED rule include a change to the implementation date for this 
program to April 1, 2005, and possible alternate compliance methods. We 
previously proposed that the TNRCC LED fuel program requirements are 
necessary to achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 
for ozone in the DFW ozone nonattainment area, and therefore could be 
approved into the SIP in accordance with section 211(c)(4)(C) of the 
Clean Air Act (the Act).
    Because TNRCC has not yet finalized the changes to the LED rule, we 
are proposing to approval Texas' proposed SIP revision of the LED rule 
for DFW in parallel with TNRCC's rulemaking activities (``parallel 
processing''). If the final version of the LED rule adopted by TNRCC is 
significantly changed from the proposed version which is being 
``parallel processed'' today, EPA will propose a new rulemaking with 
the final LED rule adopted by TNRCC. If there are no significant 
changes to the ``parallel-processed'' version, EPA will proceed with 
final rulemaking on the version finally adopted by TNRCC and submitted 
to EPA.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before October 9, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section, at the EPA Regional 
Office listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this action 
are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
following locations. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air 
Planning Section (6PD-L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 
75202-2733. Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, 12100 Park 
35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. Persons interested in examining 
these documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office 
at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra Rennie, Air Planning Section 
(6PD-L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, 
telephone (214)665-7214.

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

Why Is the State Submitting This Revision?

    The LED fuel program was initially submitted as part of the DFW 
attainment demonstration. This LED rule was codified in Chapter 114 of 
the Texas Administrative Code (TAC) (Sections 114.6, 114.312-114.317 
and 114.319, December 6, 2000).
    Numerous changes to State air pollution control laws occurred 
during Texas' 77th legislative session. One of these changes relates to 
the LED program. House Bill 2912, which became law on June 17, 2001, 
limits the State's authority to regulate fuel content. The law bans the 
establishment of fuel control measures more stringent than EPA's 
between September 1, 2000 and January 1, 2004. The law specifically 
authorizes TNRCC's adoption of the LED fuel program, but mandates that 
implementation be delayed until February 1, 2005. Finally, this law 
allows TNRCC to consider other fuels to achieve equivalent emissions 
reductions as an alternative method of compliance, which is intended to 
allow refiners flexibility in complying with the LED requirements.
    In anticipation of this legislation, the TNRCC proposed amendments 
to the LED rule on May 10, 2001. The proposed amendments modify the LED 
rules to delay the implementation date from May 1, 2002, to April 1, 
2005, and provide additional flexibility to allow for alternative 
emission reduction plans.

What Did the State Submit?

    In a letter to EPA dated June 15, 2001, the Governor requested 
``parallel processing'' of the LED rule with the proposed amendments. 
See 30 TAC 114.314, 114.318, 114.319 (May 10, 2001).

What Is EPA's Evaluation of This SIP Revision?

    We consider the implementation date change to have no significant 
impact on the DFW attainment demonstration. The alternative method of 
compliance which is intended to provide additional flexibility for 
refiners to comply with LED requirements is acceptable, although we 
have requested clarification of certain aspects of this provision.

Why Are We ``Parallel Processing'' and How Does it Work?

    Because of the urgency associated with the October 15, 2001, 
approval deadline imposed by a consent decree order affecting, among 
others, the Houston Attainment SIP (Natural Resources Defense Council 
v. Browner, Civ No. 99-2976, November 30, 1999), Texas requested that 
EPA proceed with expedited review and approval of these revisions to 
the LED program, which is relied upon in the Houston (HGA) attainment 
demonstration SIP as well as the DFW attainment demonstration SIP. 
Therefore, because these revisions affect both the HGA and DFW 
attainment demonstrations and because the HGA attainment SIP is subject 
to a consent decree deadline, we have agreed to expedited review of 
these revisions for both the DFW and HGA SIP revisions.
    In order to expedite review, approval of this revision is being 
proposed under a procedure called ``parallel processing'' whereby EPA 
proposes rulemaking action concurrently with the State's procedures for 
amending its regulations (40 CFR part 51, Appendix V, section 2.3). If 
the State's proposed revision is substantially changed in areas other 
than those identified in this document, EPA will evaluate those 
subsequent changes and may publish another notice of proposed 
rulemaking. If no substantial changes are made, EPA will publish a 
final rulemaking on the revisions after responding to any submitted 
comments. Final rulemaking action by EPA will occur only after the SIP 
revision has been fully adopted by Texas and submitted formally to EPA 
for incorporation into the SIP. In addition, any action by the State 
resulting in undue delay in the adoption of the rules may result in a 
re-proposal, altering the approvability of the SIP.

What Is EPA Proposing?

    In today's action, we are proposing approval of the LED rule with 
the proposed amendments as they apply to the DFW nonattainment area 
counties plus five adjacent counties within the CMSA.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or

[[Page 46755]]

establishing a precedent for any future implementation plan. Each 
request for revision to the State Implementation Plan shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.

Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does 
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 (Public Law 104-4). For the same reason, this proposed rule also 
does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal 
governments, as specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 
10, 1998). This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects 
on the States, on the relationship between the national government and 
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule 
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The proposed rule does 
not involve special consideration of environmental justice related 
issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 
1994). As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, 
February 7, 1996), in issuing this proposed rule, EPA has taken the 
necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize 
potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected 
conduct. The EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, 
March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in 
accordance with the ``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for 
the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings.'' This 
proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: August 24, 2001.
Gregg A. Cooke,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 01-22523 Filed 9-6-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P