[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 6, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52664-52670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7411]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0023; FRL-8216-4]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Texas; 
Revisions for the Mass Emissions Cap and Trade Program for the Houston/
Galveston/Brazoria Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Texas State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) concerning the Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program 
for emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the Houston/
Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) ozone nonattainment area. Additionally, EPA is 
approving several subsections of Chapter 116 of the Texas 
Administrative Code (TAC) (Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New 
Construction or Modification) that provide cross-references to the MECT 
program. EPA is approving these revisions in accordance with the 
requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This rule is effective on October 6, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0023. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically through 
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Permitting 
Section (6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made available by 
appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room 
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal 
holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT paragraph below to make an appointment. If possible, please 
make the appointment at least two working days in advance of your 
visit. There will be a 15-cent per page fee for making photocopies of 
documents. On the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA Region 6 
reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
    The State submittal related to this SIP revision, and which is part 
of the EPA docket, is also available for public inspection at the State 
Air Agency listed below during official business hours by appointment:
    Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Office of Air Quality, 
12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.

[[Page 52665]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adina Wiley, Air Permitting Section 
(6PD-R), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, 
telephone 214-665-2115, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Outline

I. What action is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. What are EPA's responses to comments received on the proposed 
action?
IV. What does Federal approval of a State regulation mean to me?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving as part of the SIP revisions to the MECT program 
for NOX emissions in the HGB ozone nonattainment area 
(consisting of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, 
Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller counties) published at Texas 
Administrative Code (TAC) Title 30, Chapter 101 General Air Quality 
Rules, Subchapter H Emissions Banking and Trading, Division 3. EPA is 
approving revisions to sections 101.350-101.354, and 101.360 submitted 
on January 31, 2003, and revisions to sections 101.356 and 101.359, 
submitted on December 6, 2004. EPA is also approving revisions to 30 
TAC Chapter 116, Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New 
Construction or Modification that provide cross-references to the MECT 
program. The revisions to Chapter 116 we are approving are subsections 
116.111(a)(2)(L), 116.115(b)(2)(C)(iii), 116.176, 116.610(a)(6), and 
116.615(5)(C), which were submitted as a SIP revision on April 12, 
2001.
    As discussed in our proposed action at 70 FR 58117, we conclude 
that these revisions to the MECT program are consistent with section 
110(l) of the Clean Air Act.

II. What is the Background for this action?

    The MECT program was adopted as a State regulation on December 6, 
2000. The program is mandatory for most NOX-emitting 
stationary facilities in the HGB area. The program sets a declining cap 
on NOX emissions beginning January 1, 2002, with the final 
cap level set in 2007. Each year, covered facilities receive 
NOX allowances in an amount determined by a formula, which 
uses emission rates established in 30 TAC Chapter 117. An allowance is 
the authorization to emit one ton of NOX during a control 
period; a control period is the calendar year. By March 1 each year, 
covered facilities must hold enough NOX allowances to cover 
their emissions during the previous control period. Facilities may 
purchase, bank or sell their allowances. The MECT program has a 
provision to allow a facility to use emission reduction credits (ERCs) 
generated through the TCEQ Emission Credit Banking and Trading program 
to permanently increase its MECT allowances, but only if the credits 
were generated for NOX in the HGB area before December 1, 
2000. The MECT also has a provision to allow a facility to use discrete 
emission reduction credits (DERCs) and mobile discrete emission 
reduction credits (MDERCs) generated through the TCEQ Discrete Emission 
Credit Banking and Trading program in lieu of allowances if they are 
generated in the HGB area. EPA published a final rule approving the 
MECT program (except for the use of DERCs and MDERCs in the MECT, which 
we deferred acting on until our action on the DERC program) on November 
14, 2001 (66 FR 57252). Texas has subsequently revised the MECT program 
in SIP submittals dated July 15, 2002, January 31, 2003, and December 
6, 2004.
    The MECT allowance allocations and resulting emission reductions 
were relied on in the HGB attainment demonstration submitted in 2000. 
As of 2000, the MECT rules were designed to reduce overall industrial 
NOX emissions in the HGB area by approximately 90 percent.
    Today's action approves several revisions to the MECT that TCEQ 
submitted to EPA on January 31, 2003, and December 6, 2004. These 
revisions made changes to support a shift from 90 percent control of 
industrial sources to 80 percent control in the HGB ozone nonattainment 
area, expanded the applicability of the MECT, updated and revised the 
provision of the MECT allowing for the use of DERCs and MDERCs in lieu 
of MECT allowances, and included a variety of non-substantive changes 
to correct grammar and reorganize the rule text for readability.
    In our proposed approval of the MECT revisions (70 FR 58112), we 
stated that final action on the MECT would not occur until we published 
final approval of the attainment demonstration, which is being 
processed concurrently with this approval. For a further discussion of 
the attainment demonstration and EPA's responses to comments on this 
action, please see our action on the attainment demonstration (EPA-R06-
OAR-2005-TX-0018).
    Also in our proposed approval of the MECT revisions, we stated that 
the use of DERCs and MDERCs in the MECT program would not be federally 
approved until we published approvals of both section 101.356, which 
specifically provides for these uses and which we are acting on here, 
and the DERC program generally. EPA is publishing a final conditional 
approval of the DERC program concurrently with our action on the MECT. 
Therefore, the use of DERCs and MDERCs in the MECT is federally 
approved as of the effective date of these two rules, but all such uses 
must be consistent with the conditions of the DERC conditional 
approval. The TCEQ will not approve the use of any DERCs that were 
generated from shutdowns since September 30, 2002, and the use of 
banked shutdown DERCs generated before September 30, 2002, must occur 
within five years from the date of the commitment letter. In addition, 
with respect to all DERCs and MDERCs that are to be used in the MECT 
program, both generators and users of such credits must certify to a 
waiver of the Federal statute of limitations. EPA approval is also 
required when DERCs or MDERCs generated in another state or nation, and 
in either attainment or nonattainment areas (other than the HGB 
nonattainment areas) are requested for use in the MECT program. Please 
see the administrative record for our action on the DERC program for 
further information (EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0029).

III. What are EPA's responses to comments received on the proposed 
action?

    EPA's responses to comments submitted by Galveston-Houston 
Association for Smog Prevention (GHASP), Environmental Defense (Texas 
Office), the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, and Public Citizen 
(Texas Office) on November 4, 2005, are as follows. EPA has summarized 
the comments below; the complete comments can be found in the 
administrative record for this action (EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0023).
    Comment 1: EPA should not approve revisions to the SIP that 
increase the approved industrial NOX cap level. Further, 
GHASP questions the technical basis for the alternative Emission 
Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations (ESADs) used by the TCEQ 
to establish the proposed NOX MECT allocations.
    Response to Comment 1: EPA disagrees with this comment. First, 
although the revisions to the allocation scheme represent a reduced 
level of

[[Page 52666]]

control as compared to the previous federally approved SIP, these 
revisions will nonetheless result in industrial NOX emission 
reductions of approximately 80 percent as compared to year 2000 levels. 
Additionally, the reduction in NOX emission controls from 90 
percent to 80 percent will be countered by reductions in highly-
reactive volatile organic compounds (HRVOCs) to achieve an equivalent 
level of air quality improvement.
    Second, the reduction of the stringency of industrial 
NOX controls (from approximately 90 percent to 80 percent) 
is not a component of the MECT revisions evaluated in this rule. The 
reduction from 90 percent to 80 percent control is actually the result 
of changes to the emission specifications for attainment demonstrations 
(ESADs) in 30 TAC Chapter 117. These Chapter 117 ESADs are then used in 
the MECT allowance allocation formulas in section 101.353. Our full 
response to this comment, which includes consideration of the changes 
to the Chapter 117 ESADs therefore appears in our action on the 
attainment demonstration for HGB (EPA-R06-OAR-2005-0018). This approach 
is logical because the change to 80 percent industrial NOX 
controls is a part of the overall HGB attainment strategy, and should 
be evaluated in conjunction with other new features of that strategy, 
principally the addition of new controls for HRVOCs.
    The MECT establishes a declining cap for NOX emissions 
that is implemented in stages. Both the 90 percent NOX 
control strategy and the 80 percent NOX control strategy 
that replaced it allocate allowances based on emission goals that are a 
percentage of the baseline emission level. Allowances under the MECT 
were originally assigned based on 1997, 1998, and 1999 historical 
emissions or permit allowables. Section 101.353(a)(3) of the MECT 
controls the pace of implementation of the declining cap, while the 
revisions to Chapter 117 (which we are approving in our separate and 
simultaneous action on the attainment demonstration) reduce the 
stringency from a nominal 90 percent control to a nominal 80 percent 
control.
    The effect of the change to a nominal 80 percent control strategy 
on the MECT will be to authorize a total number of MECT allowances in 
2007 (the year the cap reaches its ultimate level) that is greater than 
it would have been under a nominal 90 percent strategy. As discussed in 
the attainment demonstration rule, however, the 80 percent strategy is 
consistent with attainment when combined with the other measures 
described in the attainment demonstration. Further, the final MECT 
allowance total under the 80 percent strategy will result in a reduced 
level of NOX emissions when compared to the present. 
Therefore, the 80 percent control level, which will be fully 
implemented after the 2007 control period, still results in an actual 
emissions decrease from 2000 levels, and not an increase in emissions 
as suggested by the commenters.
    Comment 2: The MECT lacks a formal oversight mechanism sufficient 
to address potential environmental justice concerns. The audit 
provisions in section 101.311 do not specifically provide for an 
evaluation of the geographic distribution of NOX allowances, 
and even if a provision were included in the audit, this would not 
address concerns that environmental justice issues be resolved in a 
timely manner. Specifically, GHASP is concerned about the scenario in 
which large amounts of NOX MECT allowances could be traded 
into Harris County and combine with the large amounts of reactive VOC 
emissions in the same area. This could result in higher ozone levels 
than predicted by current modeling. EPA should also consider requiring 
TCEQ to establish a separate trading zone for Harris County to address 
environmental justice concerns.
    Response to Comment 2: EPA disagrees that an additional formal 
oversight mechanism for Harris County NOX levels is needed 
to protect the region from environmental justice concerns. The MECT is 
a trading program involving primarily emissions of NOX, 
although section 101.356(h) does provide that VOC DERCs or MDERCs can 
be used in lieu of NOX allowances if a demonstration has 
been made and approved by the TCEQ Executive Director and EPA. 
Environmental justice concerns can arise when a final EPA rule, such as 
a trading program, could result in disproportionate burdens on 
particular communities, including minority or low income communities. 
Using this definition, environmental justice concerns can only arise 
when there is a potential for particular communities to be affected 
differently from the surrounding areas. This can occur for VOC programs 
because some VOC emissions have toxic components that can affect 
discrete areas.
    While EPA has acknowledged, at section 4.2(b) of ``Improving Air 
Quality with Economic Incentive Programs'' (EPA-452/R-01-001, January 
2001) (EIP Guidance), that programs that allow trading of VOCs can 
result in localized increases of VOCs, the MECT program is designed to 
avoid such increases. In particular, as discussed in our July 23, 2001, 
MECT proposal (66 FR 38240), the use of VOC reductions in place of 
NOX allowances under the MECT can only drive VOC emissions 
lower. That is, because the only involvement of VOCs in the MECT 
program is the substitution of VOC decreases for NOX 
increases, there is no scenario under which this program could allow 
higher VOC emissions than would otherwise occur. Moreover, 
NOX (the focus of the MECT program) is an area-wide 
pollutant present throughout the HGB area, and therefore the trades of 
NOX emissions pursuant to the MECT would not 
disproportionately impact a local community. Therefore, the HGB MECT 
does not have the potential to cause environmental justice concerns.
    Further, the use of VOC DERCs or MDERCs in the MECT is subject to 
the stringent retirement ratios of section 101.356(h), which may result 
in more DERCs being retired than allowances used. Users of VOC DERCs 
and MDERCs must also obtain prior approval from the TCEQ according to 
section 101.376. The TCEQ will consider potential environmental justice 
concerns during this approval process.
    For the above reasons, EPA concludes that the use of VOC DERCs and 
MDERCs in the MECT will not lead to a disproportionate impact on 
communities of concern.
    Although we disagree that the MECT raises environmental justice 
concerns, GHASP's comment about the potential for high levels of ozone 
forming in Harris County is relevant to the future control strategy in 
the HGB area. The future MECT and HECT audits should closely analyze 
the interaction of the two programs and their combined impact on the 
HGB area.
    Because of our conclusion that a NOX trading program 
does not raise particular environmental justice issues, we also 
disagree that the MECT program requires additional oversight in order 
to address potential environmental justice concerns in a timely manner. 
As approved by EPA on November 14, 2001 (66 FR 57252), the MECT does 
have a formal audit provision that provides sufficient oversight to 
identify and address potential areas of concern. This audit provision 
is in section 101.363(a) of the MECT rules and requires TCEQ to conduct 
an audit every three years, beginning in 2004. The audit will evaluate 
the impact of the program on the State's ozone attainment 
demonstration, the availability and cost of allowances, compliance by 
the participants, and any other elements the TCEQ Executive Director 
may choose to include. The TCEQ Executive Director

[[Page 52667]]

will recommend measures to remedy any problems identified during the 
audit, including discontinuing allowance trading and use of discrete 
emission reduction credits and mobile discrete emission reduction 
credits. The audit data and results must be completed and submitted to 
EPA and made available for public inspection within 6 months from the 
beginning of the audit. TCEQ's first MECT audit, finalized in May 2006, 
is included in the administrative record for this rulemaking action.
    The MECT audit provisions described above are consistent with EPA's 
expectations for evaluating the results of an economic incentive 
program (EIP), as outlined in section 5.3(b) of the EIP Guidance. 
Section 5.3(b) explains that an appropriate schedule for program 
evaluations is at least every three years, which coincides with other 
periodic reporting requirements such as those applicable to emission 
inventory requirements required by the CAA. EPA believes that the 
triennial MECT audit schedule and the required annual report (section 
101.363(b)) that summarizes all MECT trades completed in the most 
recent control period will be sufficient to ensure the MECT does not 
jeopardize the HGB area's attainment strategy. Also, we note that the 
MECT audit may in any case consider environmental justice, because 
section 101.363(a)(1) provides that the audit may address ``any other 
elements the executive director may choose to include.''
    As noted, we disagree with the commenters that the MECT program 
raises any environmental justice concerns. In addition, we disagree 
with their assertion that an increase in ozone formation resulting from 
large amounts of NOX and HRVOC emissions is an issue of 
significant concern. We have reviewed the audit results for the 2002 
and 2003 control periods, which show that MECT-subject facilities in 
all counties except Liberty County significantly reduced their total 
NOX emissions from the historical baseline. Actual emissions 
in Harris County were reduced by 47.1 percent from the historical 
baseline in 2002 and 62.2 percent from the historical baseline in 2003. 
Actual emissions in 2003 for the entire HGB area were approximately 
86,693 tons; which is already lower than the total amount of 2005 
allocations of approximately 87,159 tons. TCEQ expects this trend to 
continue in future control periods as further reductions are 
implemented. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that under the 
MECT program Harris County will not have an increase in NOX 
emissions that could result in increased ozone formation. Additionally, 
EPA continues to support TCEQ's attainment strategy for HGB where the 
MECT and HECT are integral to reducing levels of ozone. The 
administrative record for our final action on the HGB attainment 
demonstration may be found at docket number EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0018.
    Finally, EPA also disagrees that a separate trading zone should be 
established for Harris County to address environmental justice 
concerns. First, as mentioned above, if and when VOC DERCs and MDERCs 
are requested for use in lieu of NOX allowances the TCEQ 
will consider potential environmental justice concerns during the 
approval process for such uses. (And in any case, as discussed 
previously, such use of VOC reductions in lieu of NOX 
allowances can only drive VOC emissions lower.) Second, EPA has 
determined that NOX emissions are a concern for the entire 
HGB ozone nonattainment area. Therefore, it is reasonable and 
appropriate to establish a cap-and-trade program for the entire 
nonattainment area.
    EPA's response to BCCA Appeal Group (BCCAAG) and Texas Industry 
Project (TIP) comments made on November 4, 2005 is as follows:
    Comment: BCCA Appeal Group and TIP support EPA's proposed approval 
of the revisions to the MECT program and urge EPA to finalize its 
approval as soon as practicable.
    Response: EPA acknowledges the support of BCCAAG and TIP for our 
approval of revisions to the MECT.

IV. What does Federal approval of a State regulation mean To me?

    Enforcement of the State regulation before and after it is 
incorporated into the federally approved SIP is primarily a State 
function. However, once the regulation is federally approved, the EPA 
and the public may take enforcement action against violators of these 
regulations. In addition, only regulations that have been federally 
approved can be credited toward an area's attainment or rate of 
progress plan. EPA is approving the revisions to the 1-hour ozone 
attainment plan for the HGB area to shift the control strategy from 
approximately 90 percent control of industrial NOX emissions 
to 80 percent control (please see EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0018). The 
revisions to the MECT enable the shift in the control strategy, and 
therefore must be approved with the attainment demonstration.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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. 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 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 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
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). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does 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). This action 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 CAA. 
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of 
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (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 CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

[[Page 52668]]

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 CAA. 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. 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).
    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 November 6, 2006. 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 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 24, 2006.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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. The table in Sec.  52.2270(c) entitled ``EPA Approved Regulations in 
the Texas SIP'' is amended:
0
a. Under Chapter 101--General Air Quality Rules, Subchapter H--
Emissions Banking and Trading, Division 3--Mass Emissions Cap and Trade 
Program, by revising the entries for sections 101.350, 101.351, 
101.352, 101.353, 101.354, 101.356, 101.358, 101.359, 101.360 and 
101.363;
0
b. Under Chapter 116 (Reg 6)--Control of Air Pollution by Permits for 
New Construction or Modification, Subchapter B--New Source Review 
Permits, Division 1--Permit Applications, by revising the entries for 
sections 116.111 and 116.115;
0
c. Under Chapter 116 (Reg 6)--Control of Air Pollution by Permits for 
New Construction or Modification, Subchapter B--New Source Review 
Permits, Division 7--Emission Reductions: Offsets, by revising the 
entry for section 116.170 and by adding a new entry for section 
116.176;
0
d. Under Chapter 116 (Reg 6)--Control of Air Pollution by Permits for 
New Construction or Modification, Subchapter F--Standard Permits, by 
revising the entries for sections 116.610 and 116.615.
    The addition and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  52.2270  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                        EPA-Approved Regulations in the Texas SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   State  approval/
           State citation                   Title/subject           submittal date           EPA approval date                     Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Chapter 101--General Air Quality Rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Subchapter H--Emissions Banking and Trading
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Division 3--Mass Emissions Cap and Trade Program
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 101.350....................  Definitions................           12/13/02  [Insert date of FR publication]
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
Section 101.351....................  Applicability..............           12/13/02  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
Section 101.352....................  General Provisions.........           12/13/02  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].

[[Page 52669]]

 
Section 101.353....................  Allocation of Allowances...           12/13/02  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number
                                                                                      wheredocument begins].
Section 101.354....................  Allowance Deductions.......           12/13/02  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
Section 101.356....................  Allowance Banking and                 11/10/04  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                      Trading.                                        [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
Section 101.358....................  Emission Monitoring and               12/06/00  11/14/01, 66 FR 57252............  ................................
                                      Compliance Demonstration.
Section 101.359....................  Reporting..................           11/10/04  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
Section 101.360....................  Level of Activity                     12/13/02  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                      Certification.                                  [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
Section 101.363....................  Program Audits and Reports.           09/26/01  11/14/01, 66 FR 57252............  ................................
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Chapter 116 (Reg 6)--Control of Air Pollution by
                                                      Permits for New Construction or Modification
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Subchapter B--New Source Review Permits
                                                             Division 1--Permit Application
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 116.111....................  General Application........           03/07/01  [Insert date of FR publication]    The SIP does not include
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where       subsections 116.111(a)(2)(K)
                                                                                      document begins].                  and 116.111(b).
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 116.115....................  General and Special                   11/20/02  [Insert date of FR publication]    The SIP does not include
                                      Conditions.                                     [Insert FR page number where       subsection
                                                                                      document begins].                  116.115(c)(2)(B)(ii)(I).
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Division 7--Emission Reductions: Offsets
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 116.170....................  Applicability of Reduction            06/17/98  09/18/02, 67 FR 58697............  The SIP does not include section
                                      Credits.                                                                           116.170(2).
Section 116.176....................  Use of Mass Cap Allowances            03/07/01  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                      for Offsets.                                    [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
 

[[Page 52670]]

 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Subchapter F: Standard Permits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 116.610....................  Applicability..............           03/07/01  [Insert date of FR publication]    The SIP does not include
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where       subsection 116.610(d).
                                                                                      document begins].
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 116.615....................  General Conditions.........           03/07/01  [Insert date of FR publication]    ................................
                                                                                      [Insert FR page number where
                                                                                      document begins].
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 06-7411 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P