83_FR_18044 83 FR 17964 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Reasonable Further Progress Plan for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Ozone Nonattainment Area

83 FR 17964 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Reasonable Further Progress Plan for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Ozone Nonattainment Area

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 80 (April 25, 2018)

Page Range17964-17968
FR Document2018-08660

Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) requirements for the Houston- Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) moderate 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (HGB area). Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the RFP demonstration, contingency measures, motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) and an updated 2011 base year emissions inventory.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 80 (Wednesday, April 25, 2018) 
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 25, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17964-17968]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08660]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0056; FRL-9976-75-Region 6]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; 
Reasonable Further Progress Plan for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 
Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 
revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the 
Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) requirements for the Houston-
Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) moderate 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area 
(HGB area). Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the RFP 
demonstration, contingency measures, motor vehicle emissions budgets 
(MVEBs) and an updated 2011 base year emissions inventory.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 25, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2017-0056, at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to 
[email protected]. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public 
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written 
comment is considered the official comment and should include 
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary 
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, please contact Ms. Wendy Jacques, (214) 
665-7395, [email protected]. For the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA 
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all 
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may 
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material), and some may not be publicly available at either location 
(e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Wendy Jacques, 214-665-7395, 
[email protected]. To inspect the hard copy materials, please 
schedule an appointment with Ms. Wendy Jacques or Mr. Bill Deese at 
214-665-7253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever

[[Page 17965]]

``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

I. Background

    In 2008, we revised the 8-hour ozone primary and secondary national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) to a level of 0.075 parts per 
million (ppm) to provide increased protection of public health and the 
environment (73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008). The HGB area was classified 
as a marginal ozone nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
and initially given an attainment date of no later than December 31, 
2015 (77 FR 30088 and 77 FR 30160, May 21, 2012). The HGB area consists 
of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, 
Montgomery and Waller counties.
    On December 23, 2014, the DC Circuit Court issued a decision 
rejecting, among other things, our attainment deadlines for the 2008 
ozone nonattainment areas, finding that we did not have statutory 
authority under the CAA to extend those deadlines to the end of the 
calendar year. NRDC v. EPA, 777 F.3d 456, 464-69 (DC Cir. 2014). 
Consistent with the court's decision we modified the attainment 
deadlines for all nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and set 
the attainment deadline for all 2008 ozone marginal nonattainment 
areas, including the HGB area as July 20, 2015 (80 FR 12264, March 6, 
2015). The HGB area qualified for a 1-year extension of the attainment 
deadline and we revised the attainment deadline to July 20, 2016 (81 FR 
26697, May 4, 2016). As the HGB area did not meet the revised 
attainment deadline of July 20, 2016, we reclassified the area to 
moderate and set a due date for a revised SIP of January 1, 2017 (81 FR 
90207, December 14, 2016). One moderate classification SIP requirement 
is reasonable further progress (RFP) reductions in volatile organic 
compound (VOC) and nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions (CAA 
sections 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1110). VOCs and 
NOX are ozone precursors.
    RFP plans must include contingency measures that will take effect 
without further action by the state or EPA, which includes additional 
controls that would be implemented if the area fails to reach the RFP 
milestones (CAA 172(c)(9)). While the CAA does not specify the type of 
measures or quantity of emissions reductions required, EPA provided 
guidance interpreting the CAA that implementation of these contingency 
measures would provide additional emissions reductions of up to 3% of 
the adjusted base year inventory (or a lesser percentage that will make 
up the identified shortfall) in the year following the RFP milestone 
year. For more information on contingency measures, please, see the 
April 16, 1992 General Preamble (57 FR 13498, 13510) and the November 
29, 2005 Phase 2 8-hour ozone standard implementation rule (70 FR 
71612, 71650). RFP plans must also include MVEBs, which are the 
allowable on-road mobile emissions an area can produce and continue to 
demonstrate RFP (40 CFR 93.101 and 93.118(b)(1)(i)).
    On December 29, 2016, Texas submitted a RFP SIP revision for the 
HGB moderate area. The SIP revision (1) updates the 2011 base year 
emissions inventory that was approved by EPA (80 FR 9204, February 20, 
2015), (2) demonstrates a 15% emissions reduction in ozone precursors 
from the 2011 base year through the 2017 attainment year, (3) 
demonstrates a 3% emissions reduction for contingency in 2018 if the 
reductions for 2017 are missed and (4) sets the NOX and VOC 
MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes, for a 2017 attainment 
year.

II. The EPA's Evaluation

    We reviewed the Texas SIP submittal for consistency with the 
requirements of the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA guidance. A summary 
of our analysis and findings are provided below. For a more detailed 
discussion of our evaluation, please see our Technical Support Document 
(TSD) found in regulations.gov (docket EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0056).

A. Update to the 2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory

    An emissions inventory is a comprehensive, accurate, and current 
inventory of actual emission from all sources. CAA sections 172(c)(3) 
and 182(b)(1) require that ozone nonattainment SIP revisions include an 
inventory of NOX and VOC emissions from all sources in the 
nonattainment area. As noted above we previously approved the 2011 base 
year. Since that submittal, Texas further refined the inventory to more 
accurately reflect actual 2011 emissions. We determined that the 
revised inventory was developed in accordance with EPA guidance and 
regulations and propose to approve the update. Table 1 summarizes the 
update to the inventory. For more information, please see the TSD and 
the Texas SIP submittal.

                         Table 1--HGB RFP Previous and Updated 2011 Base Year EIs (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Previous NOX     Updated NOX
                   Source type                                                     Previous VOC     Updated VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................          108.44          108.33           94.83           95.99
Area............................................           21.14           21.15          308.73          304.90
Non-road Mobile.................................          121.11          142.44           49.93           49.78
On-road Mobile..................................          196.21          188.02           82.62           80.73
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................          446.90          459.94          536.12          531.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration

    Texas developed emissions projections for 2017 to demonstrate that 
NOX and VOC emissions would be reduced by 15%. Table 2 shows 
the calculations and reductions required to achieve RFP. For more 
information, please see the TSD and the Texas SIP submittal.

    Table 2--Calculation of NOX and VOC Reductions through 2017 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Description                      NOX             VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. 2011 Emissions Inventory (from Table           459.94          531.40
 1 above)...............................
b. Percent of NOX and VOC to meet 15%              14.5%            0.5%
 reduction..............................
c. 15% NOX and VOC reduction, 2011-2017            66.69            2.66
 (row a multiplied by row b)............

[[Page 17966]]

 
d. 2017 Target Level of Emissions (a-c).          393.25          528.74
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Texas has provided sufficient control measures in their RFP plan to 
offset growth in emissions by estimating the amount of growth that will 
occur between 2011 and 2017. The control measures used to achieve the 
necessary emission reductions to meet the RFP requirements are listed 
in Table 3.

 Table 3--NOX and VOC Control Measures and Expected Emission Reductions
                    (tpd) for the HGB Area, 2011-2017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Control Strategy Description              NOX             VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Locomotive engine certification                    18.41            0.65
 standards and fuel programs............
Commercial marine vessel (CMV) engine               9.39            0.06
 certification standards and fuel
 programs...............................
Small non-road Spark Ignition (SI              \1\ -3.10           24.29
 engines) (Phase 1).....................
Heavy duty non-road engines.............           21.54           11.26
Tiers 2 and 3 non-road diesel engines...           27.33            3.95
Small non-road SI engines (Phase 2).....            2.17           22.48
Large non-road SI & recreational marine.           33.49           13.71
Non-road Texas Low Emission Diesel                  1.74            0.00
 (TxLED)................................
Non-road Reformulated Gasoline (RFG)....            0.03            0.08
Tier 4 non-road diesel engines..........           11.41            0.59
Diesel recreational marine..............            0.00            0.01
Small SI (Phase 3)......................            1.91           13.14
Drilling rig Tier2, 3 and 4 non-road                0.68            0.15
 diesel engines.........................
Drilling rig low emission diesel........            0.04            0.01
RFG with Tier 3 sulfur standard and                85.13           16.87
 federal ultralow sulfur diesel.........
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program             464.25          198.54
 (FMVCP)................................
Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)........            6.89            7.94
On-road TxLED \2\.......................            2.81            0.00
                                         -------------------------------
    Total Reductions Projected..........          684.12          313.73
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The increase in emissions is due to engine modifications to meet the
  standards for VOC and carbon monoxide.
\2\ The TxLED fuel rules apply to highway (on-road) and non-road
  vehicles and were approved into the Texas SIP on November 14, 2001 (66
  FR 57196). Subsequent revisions were approved April 6, 2005 (70 FR
  17321), October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58325), October 24, 2008 (73 FR 63378),
  and May 6, 2013 (78 FR 26255).

    The projections of growth are labeled as the ``Uncontrolled 
Emissions'' for 2017 under (a) in the table below. The State followed 
our standard guidelines in estimating the growth in emissions and are 
described in greater detail in the TSD.

    Table 4--Summary of RFP Demonstration for HGB Through 2017 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Description                   NOX                  VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 Uncontrolled Emissions...  1018.21............  829.50.
Projected Emission Reductions   684.12.............  313.73.
 between 2011 and 2017 (from
 Table 3 above).
Projected Emissions after       334.09.............  515.77.
 Reductions.
2017 RFP Targets (from Table 2  393.25.............  528.74.
 above).
Surplus or (shortfall)........  59.16..............  12.97.
RFP Met?......................  yes................  Yes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Contingency Measure Demonstration

    As noted earlier in this action, RFP plans for moderate and above 
nonattainment areas must include contingency measures to be implemented 
in the event an RFP milestone is missed.
    The Texas 3% attainment year RFP contingency measure demonstration 
is based on a 2% reduction in NOx and a 1% reduction in VOC, to be 
achieved between 2017 and 2018. Controlled emissions reductions not 
previously used in the 2017 RFP demonstration may also be used to 
satisfy contingency requirements, so the excess emissions reductions 
from the 2017 RFP demonstration are included in the contingency measure 
demonstration. The 2018 reductions from the federal motor vehicle 
control program, inspection and maintenance program, and the fuel 
requirements program were also used in the RFP contingency 
demonstration.
    Texas demonstrated that federal and State measures being 
implemented are sufficient to reduce emissions by more than 3% and meet 
the contingency measure requirement for the RFP SIP. We determined that 
Texas used acceptable methodology to demonstrate that the required 
emissions reductions are in excess of those needed for RFP and propose 
to approve the RFP demonstration. Table 4 summarizes the demonstration. 
For more information,

[[Page 17967]]

please see the TSD and the Texas SIP submittal.

      Table 5--HGB Area RFP Contingency Measure Demonstration (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Description                   NOX                  VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. 2011 Base Year EI (Table 2,  459.94.............  531.40.
 line a).
B. Percent of NOX and VOC to    2%.................  1%.
 meet 3% contingency.
C. Required reduction to        9.20...............  5.31.
 provide contingency (A x B).
D. Excess reduction to meet     59.16..............  12.97.
 RFP in 2017 (Table 4).
E. Subtract 2017 RFP            -23.66.............  -11.67.
 demonstration MVEB safety
 margin from excess reductions
 from 2018 RFP.
F. 2018 On-road FMVCP, I/M,     24.35..............  8.78.
 and RFG reductions (23.84-
 0.94 + 1.45 = 24.35) and
 (9.01-0.51 + 0.28 = 8.78).
G. Total RFP demonstration      59.85..............  10.08.
 contingency reductions (D + E
 + F) (59.16-23.66 + 24.35 =
 59.85) and (12.97-11.67 +
 8.78 = 10.08).
Total surplus or shortfall
Subtract line G from C for      50.65..............  4.77.
 surplus (59.85-9.20 = 50.65)
 and (10.08-5.31 = 4.77).
Is the contingency measure      Yes................  Yes.
 requirement met?.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

    An RFP plan must establish MVEBs for transportation conformity 
purposes (40 CFR 93.118(b)(1)(i)). The MVEB is the mechanism to ensure 
that future transportation activities will not produce new air quality 
violations, worsen existing violations, delay reaching RFP milestones, 
or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. A MVEB establishes the maximum 
amount of emissions allowed in the SIP for on-road motor vehicles. The 
MVEBs for 2017 provided by Texas in the SIP revision can be found in 
Table 6.

           Table 6--RFP Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for HGB
                               [Tons/Day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Year                             NOX      VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017..................................................   121.81    68.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, 
EPA's adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). The availability of 
these budgets was posted on our website on January 18, 2017, for the 
purpose of soliciting public comments on their adequacy. The comment 
period closed on February 17, 2017, and we received no comments. On 
March 6, 2017, we published the Notice of Adequacy Determination for 
these MVEBs (88 FR 26091). As a result of such adequacy determination, 
these MVEBs must be used by state and Federal agencies in determining 
whether proposed transportation projects conform to the SIP as required 
by section 176(c) of the CAA. The adequacy determination represents a 
preliminary finding by EPA of the acceptability of the MVEBs. We are 
proposing to finalize our finding that these MVEBs are fully consistent 
with RFP. As the MVEBs sets the allowable on-road mobile emissions the 
HGB area can produce and continue to demonstrate RFP, we are proposing 
to approve the MVEBs for the HGB area.

III. Proposed Action

    We are proposing to approve the HGB RFP SIP revision submitted on 
December 29, 2016. Specifically, we are proposing to approve the RFP 
demonstration, contingency measures, MVEBs and an updated 2011 base 
year emissions inventory.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will 
not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt 
tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 
9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

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


[[Page 17968]]


    Dated: April 19, 2018.
Anne Idsal,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2018-08660 Filed 4-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

17964 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Proposed Rules V. Public Participation and Request for 42° 52′04″ N, 078° 53′03″ W then South is proposing to approve a revision to the Comments to 42° 51′07″ N, 078° 52′09″ W (NAD Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) We view public participation as 83). The course will extend a minimum to meet the Reasonable Further Progress essential to effective rulemaking, and of 100 yards from the shore and the (RFP) requirements for the Houston- will consider all comments and material breakwall. Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) moderate received during the comment period. (b) Enforcement Period. This rule is 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area Your comment can help shape the effective from 9:45 a.m. until 4:15 p.m. (HGB area). Specifically, EPA is outcome of this rulemaking. If you on July 1, 2018. proposing to approve the RFP submit a comment, please include the (c) Regulations. demonstration, contingency measures, docket number for this rulemaking, (1) In accordance with the general motor vehicle emissions budgets indicate the specific section of this regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry (MVEBs) and an updated 2011 base year document to which each comment into, transiting, or anchoring within this emissions inventory. applies, and provide a reason for each safety zone is prohibited unless DATES: Written comments must be suggestion or recommendation. authorized by the Captain of the Port received on or before May 25, 2018. We encourage you to submit Buffalo or his designated on-scene ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, comments through the Federal representative. (2) This safety zone is closed to all identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– eRulemaking Portal at http:// OAR–2017–0056, at http:// www.regulations.gov. If your material vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port www.regulations.gov or via email to cannot be submitted using http:// jacques.wendy@epa.gov. Follow the www.regulations.gov, contact the person Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative. online instructions for submitting in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION comments. Once submitted, comments CONTACT section of this document for (3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any cannot be edited or removed from alternate instructions. Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish We accept anonymous comments. All Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated any comment received to its public comments received will be posted docket. Do not submit electronically any without change to http:// by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his behalf. information you consider to be www.regulations.gov and will include Confidential Business Information (CBI) any personal information you have (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must or other information whose disclosure is provided. For more about privacy and restricted by statute. Multimedia the docket, visit http:// contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene representative to obtain submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice. accompanied by a written comment. Documents mentioned in this NPRM permission to do so. The Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene The written comment is considered the as being available in the docket, and all representative may be contacted via official comment and should include public comments, will be in our online VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given discussion of all points you wish to docket at http://www.regulations.gov permission to enter or operate in the make. The EPA will generally not and can be viewed by following that safety zone must comply with all consider comments or comment website’s instructions. Additionally, if directions given to them by the Captain contents located outside of the primary you go to the online docket and sign up of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or for email alerts, you will be notified representative. other file sharing system). For when comments are posted or a final additional submission methods, please rule is published. Dated: March 21, 2018. contact Ms. Wendy Jacques, (214) 665– List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 J.S. DuFresne, 7395, jacques.wendy@epa.gov. For the Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the full EPA public comment policy, Port Buffalo. information about CBI or multimedia (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, [FR Doc. 2018–08626 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am] submissions, and general guidance on Waterways. BILLING CODE 9110–04–P making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ For the reasons discussed in the commenting-epa-dockets. preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Docket: The index to the docket for AGENCY this action is available electronically at PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION www.regulations.gov and in hard copy AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 40 CFR Part 52 at the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, [EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0056; FRL–9976–75- Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 Region 6] documents in the docket are listed in continues to read as follows: the index, some information may be Authority: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 Approval and Promulgation of publicly available only at the hard copy U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, Implementation Plans; Texas; location (e.g., copyrighted material), and and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Reasonable Further Progress Plan for some may not be publicly available at Delegation No. 0170.1. the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Ozone either location (e.g., CBI). ■ 2. Add § 165.T09–0078 to read as Nonattainment Area daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. follows: Wendy Jacques, 214–665–7395, AGENCY: Environmental Protection § 165.T09–0078 Safety Zone; Officer Agency (EPA). jacques.wendy@epa.gov. To inspect the Lehner Memorial Vintage Regatta; Buffalo hard copy materials, please schedule an ACTION: Proposed rule. Outer Harbor, Buffalo, NY. appointment with Ms. Wendy Jacques (a) Location. The safety zone will SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean or Mr. Bill Deese at 214–665–7253. encompass all waters inside of the Outer Air Act (CAA or the Act), the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Harbor, Buffalo, NY, starting at position Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Throughout this document wherever VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM 25APP1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Proposed Rules 17965 ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean revised SIP of January 1, 2017 (81 FR demonstrates a 15% emissions the EPA. 90207, December 14, 2016). One reduction in ozone precursors from the moderate classification SIP requirement 2011 base year through the 2017 I. Background is reasonable further progress (RFP) attainment year, (3) demonstrates a 3% In 2008, we revised the 8-hour ozone reductions in volatile organic emissions reduction for contingency in primary and secondary national ambient compound (VOC) and nitrogen oxide 2018 if the reductions for 2017 are air quality standards (NAAQS) to a level (NOX) emissions (CAA sections missed and (4) sets the NOX and VOC of 0.075 parts per million (ppm) to 172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1) and 40 CFR MVEBs for transportation conformity provide increased protection of public 51.1110). VOCs and NOX are ozone purposes, for a 2017 attainment year. health and the environment (73 FR precursors. 16436, March 27, 2008). The HGB area II. The EPA’s Evaluation RFP plans must include contingency was classified as a marginal ozone measures that will take effect without We reviewed the Texas SIP submittal nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour further action by the state or EPA, for consistency with the requirements of ozone NAAQS and initially given an which includes additional controls that the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA attainment date of no later than would be implemented if the area fails guidance. A summary of our analysis December 31, 2015 (77 FR 30088 and 77 to reach the RFP milestones (CAA and findings are provided below. For a FR 30160, May 21, 2012). The HGB area 172(c)(9)). While the CAA does not more detailed discussion of our consists of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort specify the type of measures or quantity evaluation, please see our Technical Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, of emissions reductions required, EPA Support Document (TSD) found in Montgomery and Waller counties. provided guidance interpreting the CAA regulations.gov (docket EPA–R06–OAR– On December 23, 2014, the DC Circuit that implementation of these 2017–0056). Court issued a decision rejecting, among contingency measures would provide A. Update to the 2011 Base Year other things, our attainment deadlines additional emissions reductions of up to Emissions Inventory for the 2008 ozone nonattainment areas, 3% of the adjusted base year inventory finding that we did not have statutory (or a lesser percentage that will make up An emissions inventory is a authority under the CAA to extend the identified shortfall) in the year comprehensive, accurate, and current those deadlines to the end of the following the RFP milestone year. For inventory of actual emission from all calendar year. NRDC v. EPA, 777 F.3d more information on contingency sources. CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 456, 464–69 (DC Cir. 2014). Consistent measures, please, see the April 16, 1992 182(b)(1) require that ozone with the court’s decision we modified General Preamble (57 FR 13498, 13510) nonattainment SIP revisions include an the attainment deadlines for all and the November 29, 2005 Phase 2 8- inventory of NOX and VOC emissions nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone hour ozone standard implementation from all sources in the nonattainment NAAQS, and set the attainment rule (70 FR 71612, 71650). RFP plans area. As noted above we previously deadline for all 2008 ozone marginal must also include MVEBs, which are the approved the 2011 base year. Since that nonattainment areas, including the HGB allowable on-road mobile emissions an submittal, Texas further refined the area as July 20, 2015 (80 FR 12264, area can produce and continue to inventory to more accurately reflect March 6, 2015). The HGB area qualified demonstrate RFP (40 CFR 93.101 and actual 2011 emissions. We determined for a 1-year extension of the attainment 93.118(b)(1)(i)). that the revised inventory was deadline and we revised the attainment On December 29, 2016, Texas developed in accordance with EPA deadline to July 20, 2016 (81 FR 26697, submitted a RFP SIP revision for the guidance and regulations and propose to May 4, 2016). As the HGB area did not HGB moderate area. The SIP revision (1) approve the update. Table 1 summarizes meet the revised attainment deadline of updates the 2011 base year emissions the update to the inventory. For more July 20, 2016, we reclassified the area to inventory that was approved by EPA (80 information, please see the TSD and the moderate and set a due date for a FR 9204, February 20, 2015), (2) Texas SIP submittal. TABLE 1—HGB RFP PREVIOUS AND UPDATED 2011 BASE YEAR EIS (TPD) Source type Previous NOX Updated NOX Previous VOC Updated VOC Point ................................................................................................................. 108.44 108.33 94.83 95.99 Area ................................................................................................................. 21.14 21.15 308.73 304.90 Non-road Mobile .............................................................................................. 121.11 142.44 49.93 49.78 On-road Mobile ................................................................................................ 196.21 188.02 82.62 80.73 Total .......................................................................................................... 446.90 459.94 536.12 531.40 B. Reasonable Further Progress NOX and VOC emissions would be please see the TSD and the Texas SIP Demonstration reduced by 15%. Table 2 shows the submittal. Texas developed emissions calculations and reductions required to projections for 2017 to demonstrate that achieve RFP. For more information, daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS TABLE 2—CALCULATION OF NOX AND VOC REDUCTIONS THROUGH 2017 (TPD) Description NOX VOC a. 2011 Emissions Inventory (from Table 1 above) ................................................................................................ 459.94 531.40 b. Percent of NOX and VOC to meet 15% reduction .............................................................................................. 14.5% 0.5% c. 15% NOX and VOC reduction, 2011–2017 (row a multiplied by row b) ............................................................. 66.69 2.66 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM 25APP1

17966 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Proposed Rules TABLE 2—CALCULATION OF NOX AND VOC REDUCTIONS THROUGH 2017 (TPD)—Continued Description NOX VOC d. 2017 Target Level of Emissions (a–c) ................................................................................................................ 393.25 528.74 Texas has provided sufficient control amount of growth that will occur emission reductions to meet the RFP measures in their RFP plan to offset between 2011 and 2017. The control requirements are listed in Table 3. growth in emissions by estimating the measures used to achieve the necessary TABLE 3—NOX AND VOC CONTROL MEASURES AND EXPECTED EMISSION REDUCTIONS (tpd) FOR THE HGB AREA, 2011–2017 Control Strategy Description NOX VOC Locomotive engine certification standards and fuel programs ................................................................................ 18.41 0.65 Commercial marine vessel (CMV) engine certification standards and fuel programs ............................................ 9.39 0.06 Small non-road Spark Ignition (SI engines) (Phase 1) ........................................................................................... 1 ¥3.10 24.29 Heavy duty non-road engines ................................................................................................................................. 21.54 11.26 Tiers 2 and 3 non-road diesel engines ................................................................................................................... 27.33 3.95 Small non-road SI engines (Phase 2) ..................................................................................................................... 2.17 22.48 Large non-road SI & recreational marine ................................................................................................................ 33.49 13.71 Non-road Texas Low Emission Diesel (TxLED) ...................................................................................................... 1.74 0.00 Non-road Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) ................................................................................................................. 0.03 0.08 Tier 4 non-road diesel engines ................................................................................................................................ 11.41 0.59 Diesel recreational marine ....................................................................................................................................... 0.00 0.01 Small SI (Phase 3) .................................................................................................................................................. 1.91 13.14 Drilling rig Tier2, 3 and 4 non-road diesel engines ................................................................................................. 0.68 0.15 Drilling rig low emission diesel ................................................................................................................................ 0.04 0.01 RFG with Tier 3 sulfur standard and federal ultralow sulfur diesel ........................................................................ 85.13 16.87 Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) ................................................................................................. 464.25 198.54 Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) ........................................................................................................................... 6.89 7.94 On-road TxLED 2 ..................................................................................................................................................... 2.81 0.00 Total Reductions Projected .............................................................................................................................. 684.12 313.73 1 Theincrease in emissions is due to engine modifications to meet the standards for VOC and carbon monoxide. 2 The TxLED fuel rules apply to highway (on-road) and non-road vehicles and were approved into the Texas SIP on November 14, 2001 (66 FR 57196). Subsequent revisions were approved April 6, 2005 (70 FR 17321), October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58325), October 24, 2008 (73 FR 63378), and May 6, 2013 (78 FR 26255). The projections of growth are labeled State followed our standard guidelines and are described in greater detail in the as the ‘‘Uncontrolled Emissions’’ for in estimating the growth in emissions TSD. 2017 under (a) in the table below. The TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF RFP DEMONSTRATION FOR HGB THROUGH 2017 (tpd) Description NOX VOC 2017 Uncontrolled Emissions ................................................................................................................................. 1018.21 .......... 829.50. Projected Emission Reductions between 2011 and 2017 (from Table 3 above) ................................................... 684.12 ............ 313.73. Projected Emissions after Reductions .................................................................................................................... 334.09 ............ 515.77. 2017 RFP Targets (from Table 2 above) ............................................................................................................... 393.25 ............ 528.74. Surplus or (shortfall) ................................................................................................................................................ 59.16 .............. 12.97. RFP Met? ................................................................................................................................................................ yes ................. Yes. C. Contingency Measure Demonstration used in the 2017 RFP demonstration Texas demonstrated that federal and may also be used to satisfy contingency State measures being implemented are As noted earlier in this action, RFP requirements, so the excess emissions sufficient to reduce emissions by more plans for moderate and above reductions from the 2017 RFP than 3% and meet the contingency nonattainment areas must include contingency measures to be demonstration are included in the measure requirement for the RFP SIP. contingency measure demonstration. We determined that Texas used daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS implemented in the event an RFP milestone is missed. The 2018 reductions from the federal acceptable methodology to demonstrate motor vehicle control program, that the required emissions reductions The Texas 3% attainment year RFP inspection and maintenance program, are in excess of those needed for RFP contingency measure demonstration is based on a 2% reduction in NOx and a and the fuel requirements program were and propose to approve the RFP 1% reduction in VOC, to be achieved also used in the RFP contingency demonstration. Table 4 summarizes the between 2017 and 2018. Controlled demonstration. demonstration. For more information, emissions reductions not previously VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM 25APP1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Proposed Rules 17967 please see the TSD and the Texas SIP submittal. TABLE 5—HGB AREA RFP CONTINGENCY MEASURE DEMONSTRATION (tpd) Description NOX VOC A. 2011 Base Year EI (Table 2, line a) .................................................................................................................. 459.94 ............ 531.40. B. Percent of NOX and VOC to meet 3% contingency .......................................................................................... 2% .................. 1%. C. Required reduction to provide contingency (A × B) ........................................................................................... 9.20 ................ 5.31. D. Excess reduction to meet RFP in 2017 (Table 4) ............................................................................................. 59.16 .............. 12.97. E. Subtract 2017 RFP demonstration MVEB safety margin from excess reductions from 2018 RFP .................. ¥23.66 .......... ¥11.67. F. 2018 On-road FMVCP, I/M, and RFG reductions (23.84–0.94 + 1.45 = 24.35) and (9.01–0.51 + 0.28 = 24.35 .............. 8.78. 8.78). G. Total RFP demonstration contingency reductions (D + E + F) (59.16–23.66 + 24.35 = 59.85) and (12.97– 59.85 .............. 10.08. 11.67 + 8.78 = 10.08). Total surplus or shortfall Subtract line G from C for surplus (59.85–9.20 = 50.65) and (10.08–5.31 = 4.77) .............................................. 50.65 .............. 4.77. Is the contingency measure requirement met? ...................................................................................................... Yes ................. Yes. D. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets on-road mobile emissions the HGB area • Does not contain any unfunded can produce and continue to mandate or significantly or uniquely An RFP plan must establish MVEBs demonstrate RFP, we are proposing to affect small governments, as described for transportation conformity purposes approve the MVEBs for the HGB area. in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (40 CFR 93.118(b)(1)(i)). The MVEB is of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); the mechanism to ensure that future III. Proposed Action transportation activities will not • Does not have Federalism We are proposing to approve the HGB implications as specified in Executive produce new air quality violations, RFP SIP revision submitted on worsen existing violations, delay Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, December 29, 2016. Specifically, we are 1999); reaching RFP milestones, or delay proposing to approve the RFP timely attainment of the NAAQS. A • Is not an economically significant demonstration, contingency measures, MVEB establishes the maximum amount regulatory action based on health or MVEBs and an updated 2011 base year of emissions allowed in the SIP for on- safety risks subject to Executive Order emissions inventory. road motor vehicles. The MVEBs for 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 2017 provided by Texas in the SIP IV. Statutory and Executive Order • Is not a significant regulatory action revision can be found in Table 6. Reviews subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Under the CAA, the Administrator is 28355, May 22, 2001); TABLE 6—RFP MOTOR VEHICLE required to approve a SIP submission • Is not subject to requirements of EMISSION BUDGETS FOR HGB that complies with the provisions of the section 12(d) of the National [Tons/Day] Act and applicable Federal regulations. Technology Transfer and Advancement 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Year NOX VOC Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the application of those requirements would EPA’s role is to approve state choices, be inconsistent with the CAA; and 2017 .................................. 121.81 68.04 provided that they meet the criteria of • Does not provide EPA with the the CAA. Accordingly, this action discretionary authority to address, as For the budgets to be approvable, they merely proposes to approve state law as appropriate, disproportionate human must meet, at a minimum, EPA’s meeting Federal requirements and does health or environmental effects, using adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). not impose additional requirements practicable and legally permissible The availability of these budgets was beyond those imposed by state law. For methods, under Executive Order 12898 posted on our website on January 18, that reason, this action: (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 2017, for the purpose of soliciting • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory public comments on their adequacy. In addition, the SIP is not approved action’’ subject to review by the Office The comment period closed on February to apply on any Indian reservation land of Management and Budget under 17, 2017, and we received no comments. or in any other area where EPA or an Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, On March 6, 2017, we published the Indian tribe has demonstrated that a October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Notice of Adequacy Determination for tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of January 21, 2011); Indian country, the proposed rule does these MVEBs (88 FR 26091). As a result • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 of such adequacy determination, these not have tribal implications and will not FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory MVEBs must be used by state and impose substantial direct costs on tribal action because SIP approvals are Federal agencies in determining governments or preempt tribal law as exempted under Executive Order 12866; whether proposed transportation • Does not impose an information specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS projects conform to the SIP as required collection burden under the provisions by section 176(c) of the CAA. The of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 adequacy determination represents a U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); preliminary finding by EPA of the • Is certified as not having a Environmental protection, Air acceptability of the MVEBs. We are significant economic impact on a pollution control, Incorporation by proposing to finalize our finding that substantial number of small entities reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, these MVEBs are fully consistent with under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Volatile organic compounds. RFP. As the MVEBs sets the allowable U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM 25APP1

17968 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2018 / Proposed Rules Dated: April 19, 2018. information on the rulemaking process, health care and telemedicine and Anne Idsal, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION promotes connectivity among family Regional Administrator, Region 6. section of this document. and communities. And as important as [FR Doc. 2018–08660 Filed 4–24–18; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: these benefits are in America’s cities, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Suzanne Yelen, Wireline Competition they can be even more important in Bureau, (202) 418–7400 or TTY: (202) America’s more remote small towns, 418–0484. rural, and insular areas. Rural FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a Americans deserve to reap the benefits COMMISSION summary of the Commission’s Notice of of the internet and participate in the Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in WC 21st century society—not run the risk of 47 CFR Part 54 Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58, 07–135, CC falling yet further behind. [WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58, 07–135, CC Docket No. 01–92; FCC 18–29, adopted 3. Today, the Commission takes the Docket No. 01–92; FCC 18–29] on March 14, 2018 and released on next step in closing the digital divide March 23, 2018. The full text of this through proposals designed to stimulate Connect America Fund, ETC Annual document is available for public broadband deployment in rural areas. Reports and Certifications, inspection during regular business To reach its objective, the Commission Establishing Just and Reasonable hours in the FCC Reference Center, must continue to reform its existing Rates for Local Exchange Carriers, Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street SW, high-cost universal support programs. Developing a Unified Intercarrier Washington, DC 20554 or at the Building on earlier efforts to modernize Compensation Regime following internet address: https:// high-cost universal service support, the transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_ Commission seeks to offer greater AGENCY: Federal Communications certainty and predictability to rate-of- Commission. Business/2018/db0323/FCC-18- 29A1.pdf. The Report and Order and return carriers and create incentives to ACTION: Proposed rule. bring broadband to the areas that need Third Order on Reconsideration that SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal was adopted concurrently with the it most. Communications Commission NPRM is published elsewhere in this 4. In the NPRM, the Commission (Commission) considers further reform issue of the Federal Register. considers further reforms to establish a to establish a budget that will allow for budget that will allow for robust I. Introduction broadband deployment in rate-of-return robust broadband deployment in rate-of- return areas while minimizing the 1. Universal service can—and must— areas while minimizing the burden that burden that contributions to the play a critical role in helping to bridge contributions to the Fund place on Universal Service Fund (the Fund) place the digital divide to ensure that rural ratepayers and to bring greater certainty on ratepayers and to bring greater America is not left behind as broadband and stability to rate-of-return high-cost certainty and stability to rate-of-return services are deployed. The directive funding, both in the near term and in high-cost funding, both in the near term articulated by the Commission in 2011 the future. The Commission also seeks and in the future. The Commission also remains as true today as it did then: comment on additional reforms to seeks comment on additional reforms to ‘‘The universal service challenge of our increase broadband deployment, while increase broadband deployment, while time is to ensure that all Americans are promoting the efficient use of limited promoting the efficient use of limited served by networks that support high- resources. For example, the Commission resources. speed internet access.’’ Though the seeks comment on whether to fully fund DATES: Comments are due on or before Commission has made progress for rural existing A–CAM support recipients, May 25, 2018 and reply comments are Americans living in areas served by our afford a new opportunity for legacy due on or before June 25, 2018. If you nation’s largest telecommunications providers to elect model-based support, anticipate that you will be submitting companies, the rules governing smaller, and establish a minimum threshold of comments, but find it difficult to do so community-based providers—rate-of- support for legacy providers that would within the period of time allowed by return carriers—appear to make it more not be subject to a budget cap. Lastly, this document, you should advise the difficult for these providers to serve the Commission seeks comment on contact listed below as soon as possible. rural America. As a result, other reforms, including, for example, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, approximately 11 percent of the housing exploring the need for caps on capital identified by WC Docket Nos. 10–90, units in areas served by rate-of-return and operating expenses, using an 14–58, 07–135, CC Docket No. 01–92, by carriers lack access to 10 Mbps auction process to address substantial any of the following methods: downstream/1 Mbps upstream (10/1 competitive overlaps, and other options • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Mbps) terrestrial fixed broadband for simplifying the legacy rate-of-return www.regulations.gov. Follow the service while 34 percent lack access to mechanism. instructions for submitting comments. 25 Mbps downstream/3 Mbps upstream II. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking • Federal Communications (25/3 Mbps). It is time to close this gap Commission’s Website: http:// and ensure that all of those living in 5. Discussion. The Commission seeks fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the rural America have the high-speed comment on revising the budget for rate- instructions for submitting comments. broadband they need to participate fully of-return carriers within the high-cost • People With Disabilities: Contact in the digital economy. program. The Commission has not daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS the FCC to request reasonable 2. By improving access to modern revised the budget since 2011, and as a accommodations (accessible format communications services, the result, has not accounted for the effects documents, sign language interpreters, Commission can help provide of inflation on the budget. Had the CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov individuals living in rural America with Commission accounted for inflation, the or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) the same opportunities that those in rate-of-return budget would have 418–0432. urban areas enjoy. Broadband access increased from $2 billion in the 2012 For detailed instructions for fosters employment and educational budget year to $2.193 billion in the 2018 submitting comments and additional opportunities, stimulates innovations in budget year. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Apr 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM 25APP1


Document Created: 2018-11-02 08:17:12
Document Modified: 2018-11-02 08:17:12
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionProposed Rules
ActionProposed rule.
DatesWritten comments must be received on or before May 25, 2018.
ContactMs. Wendy Jacques, 214-665-7395, [email protected] To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Ms. Wendy Jacques or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-665-7253.
FR Citation83 FR 17964 
CFR AssociatedEnvironmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone and Volatile Organic Compounds
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR