1
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
52
[
EPA­
R06­
OAR­
2005­
TX­
0003;
FRL
­
]

Approval
and
Promulgation
of
State
Implementation
Plans;
Texas;
Revision
to
the
Rate
of
Progress
Plan
for
the
Beaumont/
Port
Arthur
Ozone
Nonattainment
Area
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).

ACTION:
Direct
final
rule.

SUMMARY:
The
EPA
is
approving
revisions
to
the
Texas
State
Implementation
Plan
(
SIP)

Post­
1996
Rate
of
Progress
(
ROP)
Plan,
the
1990
Base
Year
Inventory,
and
the
Motor
Vehicle
Emissions
Budgets
(
MVEB)
established
by
the
ROP
Plan,
for
the
Beaumont/
Port
Arthur
(
BPA)

ozone
nonattainment
area
submitted
November
16,
2004.
The
intended
effect
of
this
action
is
to
approve
revisions
submitted
by
the
State
of
Texas
to
satisfy
the
reasonable
further
progress
requirements
for
1­
hour
ozone
nonattainment
areas
classified
as
serious
and
demonstrate
further
progress
in
reducing
ozone
precursors.
We
are
approving
these
revisions
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
the
Federal
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA).

DATE:
This
rule
is
effective
on
[
FEDERAL
REGISTER
OFFICE:
insert
date
60
days
from
date
of
publication
in
the
Federal
Register]
without
further
notice,
unless
EPA
receives
relevant
adverse
comment
by
[
FEDERAL
REGISTER
OFFICE:
Insert
date
30
days
from
2
date
of
publication
in
the
Federal
Register].
If
EPA
receives
such
comment,
EPA
will
publish
a
timely
withdrawal
in
the
Federal
Register
informing
the
public
that
this
rule
will
not
take
effect.

ADDRESSES:
Submit
your
comments,
identified
by
Docket
No.
EPA­
R06­
OAR­
2005­
TX­

0003,
by
one
of
the
following
methods:

°
Federal
eRulemaking
Portal:
http://
www.
regulations.
gov.
Follow
the
on­
line
instructions
for
submitting
comments.

°
EPA
Region
6
"
Contact
Us"
web
site:
http://
epa.
gov/
region6/
r6coment.
htm.
Please
click
on
"
6PD"
(
Multimedia)
and
select
"
Air"
before
submitting
comments.

°
E­
mail:
Mr.
Thomas
Diggs
at
diggs.
thomas@
epa.
gov.
Please
also
send
a
copy
by
email
to
the
person
listed
in
the
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section
below.

°
Fax:
Mr.
Thomas
Diggs,
Chief,
Air
Planning
Section
(
6PD­
L),
at
fax
number
214­
665­

7263.

°
Mail:
Mr.
Thomas
Diggs,
Chief,
Air
Planning
Section
(
6PD­
L),
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1445
Ross
Avenue,
Suite
1200,
Dallas,
Texas
75202­
2733.

°
Hand
or
Courier
Delivery:
Mr.
Thomas
Diggs,
Chief,
Air
Planning
Section
(
6PD­
L),

Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1445
Ross
Avenue,
Suite
1200,
Dallas,
Texas
75202­
2733.

Such
deliveries
are
accepted
only
between
the
hours
of
8:
00am
and
4:
00pm
weekdays
except
for
legal
holidays.
Special
arrangements
should
be
made
for
deliveries
of
boxed
information.

Instructions:
Direct
your
comments
to
Docket
ID
No.
EPA­
R06­
OAR­
2005­
TX­
0003.
EPA's
policy
is
that
all
comments
received
will
be
included
in
the
public
docket
without
change
and
may
be
made
available
online
at
www.
regulations.
gov,
including
any
personal
information
provided,
3
unless
the
comment
includes
information
claimed
to
be
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)

or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
Do
not
submit
information
that
you
consider
to
be
CBI
or
otherwise
protected
through
www.
regulations.
gov
or
e­
mail.
The
www.
regulations.
gov
website
is
an
"
anonymous
access"
system,
which
means
EPA
will
not
know
your
identity
or
contact
information
unless
you
provide
it
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
If
you
send
an
e­
mail
comment
directly
to
EPA
without
going
through
www.
regulations.
gov
your
e­
mail
address
will
be
automatically
captured
and
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
public
docket
and
made
available
on
the
Internet.
If
you
submit
an
electronic
comment,
EPA
recommends
that
you
include
your
name
and
other
contact
information
in
the
body
of
your
comment
and
with
any
disk
or
CD­
ROM
you
submit.
If
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
and
cannot
contact
you
for
clarification,
EPA
may
not
be
able
to
consider
your
comment.
Electronic
files
should
avoid
the
use
of
special
characters,
any
form
of
encryption,

and
be
free
of
any
defects
or
viruses.

Docket:
All
documents
in
the
docket
are
listed
in
the
www.
regulations.
gov
index.
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,
will
be
publicly
available
only
in
hard
copy.
Publicly
available
docket
materials
are
available
either
electronically
in
www.
regulations.
gov
or
in
hard
copy
at
the
Air
Planning
Section
(
6PD­
L),

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:
30am
and
4:
30pm
weekdays
except
for
legal
holidays.
Contact
the
person
listed
in
the
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
paragraph
below
or
Mr.
4
Bill
Deese
at
214­
665­
7253
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
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.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Carl
Young,
Air
Planning
Section
(
6PD­
L),

EPA
Region
6,
1445
Ross
Avenue,
Dallas,
Texas
75202­
2733,
telephone
214­
665­
6645,

young.
carl@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

What
action
are
we
taking?

We
are
approving
revisions
to
the
BPA
area
post­
1996
ROP
Plan
for
the
1997­
1999,

2000­
2002
and
2003­
2005
time
periods
submitted
in
a
letter
dated
November
16,
2004.
The
post­
1996
ROP
plan
is
designed
to
achieve
an
additional
9
percent
reduction
in
emissions
between
1996
and
1999,
a
further
9
percent
reduction
between
1999
and
2002,
and
another
9
percent
reduction
between
2002
and
2005.
We
are
also
approving
revisions
to
the
1990
base
year
inventory
and
the
ROP
Plan=
s
associated
Motor
Vehicle
Emissions
Budgets
(
MVEB)
for
1999,

2002,
and
2005.
5
Why
are
these
Revisions
Necessary?

On
March
30,
2004,
EPA
issued
a
final
action
in
the
Federal
Register
reclassifying
BPA
from
moderate
one­
hour
ozone
nonattainment
to
serious
(
69
FR
16483).
With
this
new
classification
came
several
requirements
including
a
requirement
to
provide
a
revision
to
the
SIP
showing
the
CAA
section
182(
c)(
2)
rate
of
progress
requirements
would
be
met
for
1999,
2002,

and
2005.

We
released
a
new
MOBILE6
model
on
January
29,
2002.
(
See
67
FR
at
4254).
Using
MOBILE6
to
calculate
the
1999,
2002,
and
2005
ROP
target
levels
requires
a
revision
to
the
1990
base
year
inventory,
which
is
the
planning
base
line
from
which
the
ROP
targets
are
calculated.
Texas
updated
the
1990
base
year
inventory
for
the
BPA
area
to
reflect
the
use
of
MOBILE6.
This
affected
the
base
year
on­
road
mobile
source
inventory
as
well
as
the
projected
emission
reductions
from
mobile
source
control
programs.
Texas
also
made
a
number
of
other
changes
as
a
result
of
updated
information.

What
are
the
Clean
Air
Act's
Rate
of
Progress
Requirements?

Section
182(
c)(
2)
of
the
CAA
requires
each
State
to
submit
for
each
serious
and
above
ozone
nonattainment
area
a
SIP
revision,
which
describes
how
the
area
will
achieve
an
actual
volatile
organic
compound
(
VOC)
emission
reduction
from
the
baseline
emissions
of
at
least
3
percent
of
baseline
emissions
per
year
averaged
over
each
consecutive
3­
year
period
beginning
6
years
after
enactment
(
i.
e.,
November
15,
1996)
until
the
area=
s
attainment
date.
The
CAA
does
not
allow
States
to
take
credit
for
emission
reductions
due
to
Federal
Motor
Vehicle
Controls
adopted
prior
to
1990
or
corrections
to
reasonably
available
control
technology
or
vehicle
6
inspection
and
maintenance
programs.
Section
182(
c)(
2)(
C)
explains
the
conditions
under
which
reductions
of
oxides
of
nitrogen
(
NOx)
may
be
substituted
for
reductions
in
VOC
emissions
for
post
1996
ROP
plans.

Why
Control
Volatile
Organic
Compounds
and
Oxides
of
Nitrogen?

VOCs
participate
in
chemical
reactions
with
oxides
of
nitrogen
(
NOx)
and
oxygen
in
the
atmosphere
in
the
presence
of
sunlight
to
form
ozone,
a
key
component
of
urban
smog.
Inhaling
even
low
levels
of
ozone
can
trigger
a
variety
of
health
problems
including
chest
pains,
coughing,

nausea,
throat
irritation,
and
congestion.
It
can
also
worsen
bronchitis,
asthma
and
reduce
lung
capacity.

EPA
has
established
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
(
NAAQS)
for
ozone.
The
previously
adopted
standard
of
0.12
ppm
averaged
over
a
1
hour
period
has
been
phased
out
and
replaced
with
a
new
standard
of
0.08
ppm
averaged
over
a
8
hour
period.
The
1­
hour
standard
was
revoked
on
June
15,
2005.

Areas
that
do
not
meet
a
NAAQS
are
subject
to
nonattainment
requirements
of
the
CAA.

Air
quality
in
BPA
does
not
meet
either
the
1­
hour
or
the
8­
hour
NAAQS
for
ozone.
As
such,

the
area
is
subject
to
the
ROP
requirements
of
section
182
of
the
CAA.
The
revised
ROP
plan
approved
today
was
developed
in
response
to
a
1­
hour
ozone
requirement.
Under
the
antibacksliding
provisions
of
the
Phase
I
ozone
implementation
rule,
published
on
April
30,
2004
(
69
FR
69
FR
23951),
these
rate
of
progress
requirements
must
remain
in
effect.

How
has
Texas
Demonstrated
Compliance
with
Rate
of
Progress
Requirements?

Table
1
and
Table
2
show
the
target
levels
and
the
projected
controlled
VOC
and
NOx
7
emissions
for
each
of
the
milestone
years
in
the
SIP.

The
target
levels
are
calculated
by
subtracting
the
needed
percentage
reductions
for
each
ROP
milestone
year
and
any
non­
creditable
reductions
from
the
1990
base
year
levels.
Projected
future­
year
emissions
for
2005
were
developed
by
projecting
from
the
State=
s
2002
Emission
Inventory
­­
actual
emission
inventory
estimates
reported
for
2002.
Emissions
for
1999
and
2002
are
based
on
the
actual
reported
inventory
for
those
years.
The
projections
for
2005
were
determined
based
on
growth
estimates
using
EPA
approved
methodologies
and
imposition
of
Federal
and
SIP­
approved
state
enforceable
controls.
The
two
tables
demonstrate
that
estimated
emissions
in
1999
and
2002
and
projected
emissions
for
2005
are
well
below
the
target
levels
for
each
of
the
milestone
years.
In
other
words,
the
Texas
Commission
on
Environmental
Quality
(
TCEQ)
has
shown
that
there
will
be
more
emission
reductions
than
are
required
to
meet
each
milestone=
s
target
level.
For
a
complete
discussion
of
EPA=
s
evaluation
of
TCEQ=
s
calculation
of
target
levels
and
emission
projections,
see
the
technical
support
document
for
this
action.

Table
1:
Actual
and
Projected
NOx
Emissions
(
tons/
day)

Category\
Year
1990
1999
2002
2005
Projected
Emissions
313.13
225.21
193.65
177.1
Target
Level
NA
303.37
270.02
234.82
The
reductions
in
projected
emissions
shown
in
Table
1
result
from
a
variety
of
measures
including
post­
1990
federal
motor
vehicle
control
programs,
NOx
reasonably
available
control
technology,
and
controls
on
lean
burn
engines
and
additional
NOx
controls
shown
to
be
needed
to
8
achieve
attainment.

It
is
worth
noting
that
the
2005
projections
above
do
not
include
all
of
the
emission
reductions
expected
in
the
BPA
area
including
reductions
from
the
Texas
Emission
Reduction
Program
and
some
of
the
industrial
controls
required
to
be
implemented
after
2002.

Table
2:
Actual
and
projected
VOC
inventories
(
tons/
day)

Category\
Year
1990
1999
2002
2005
Total
320.56
150.02
126.22
119.55
Target
NA
230.40
228.57
227.02
As
can
be
seen
in
Table
2,
the
VOC
emission
reductions
were
largely
realized
between
1990
and
1999.
These
VOC
reductions
result
from
post­
1990
federal
motor
vehicle
emission
control
programs
and
a
variety
of
point
source
measures
implemented
as
part
of
the
area=
s
ROP
plan
for
the
1990­
1996
time
period
which
was
approved
February
10,
1998
(
63
FR
6659).
In
addition,
the
State
has
quantified
the
reductions
from
the
institution
of
Maximum
Available
Control
Technology
(
MACT)
standards
under
40
CFR
Part
63
such
as
the
Hazardous
Organic
National
Emission
Standard
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants.

What
are
the
revisions
to
the
1990
Base
Year
Inventory?

Table
3
summarizes
the
changes
to
the
approved
1990
base
year
inventory.
For
a
full
discussion
of
EPA=
s
evaluation,
see
the
technical
support
document
for
this
action.
9
Table
3:
1990
Rate­
of­
Progress
Base
Year
Emissions
Inventory
(
tons/
day)

Base
Year
Inventory
Source
Type
VOC
NOx
Old
New
Old
New
Point
245.35
245.54
221.01
221.01
Area
30.63
24.56
1.44
16.73
On­
road
Mobile
19.11
36.99
41.09
54.94
Non­
road
Mobile
18.44
13.47
60.72
20.63
Total
313.53
320.56
324.26
313.31
The
columns
denoted
as
old
were
the
1990
base
year
emission
inventories
approved
February
10,

1998
(
63
FR
6659).
The
changes
to
the
inventory
result
from
the
use
of
the
more
recent
version
of
EPA=
s
model
for
estimating
on­
road
mobile
source
emissions,
MOBILE6,
the
more
recent
emissions
model
for
emissions
from
off­
road
mobile
sources,
NONROAD,
and
several
areaspecific
studies
of
activity
levels.
Appendix
7
in
the
submitted
Plan
includes
various
studies
of
off­
road
emissions
categories.
In
particular,
TCEQ
has
included
area­
specific
studies
of
aircraft,

locomotive,
ship
and
construction
emissions.

What
are
the
Motor
Vehicle
Emissions
Budgets
Established
in
the
Plan?

Table
4
documents
the
motor
vehicle
emissions
budgets
that
have
been
established
by
this
post­
1996
ROP
Plan
revision.
A
motor
vehicle
emission
budget
is
that
portion
of
the
total
allowable
emissions
defined
in
the
SIP
revision
allocated
to
on­
road
mobile
sources
for
a
certain
date
for
meeting
the
purpose
of
the
SIP,
in
this
case
reasonable
further
progress
towards
attainment
of
the
NAAQS.
EPA=
s
conformity
rule
(
40
CFR
part
51,
subpart
T
and
part
93,
10
subpart
A)
requires
that
transportation
plans,
programs
and
projects
in
nonattainment
or
maintenance
areas
conform
to
the
SIP.
The
motor
vehicle
emissions
budget
is
one
mechanism
EPA
has
identified
for
demonstrating
conformity.
Upon
the
effective
date
of
this
SIP
approval,
all
future
transportation
improvement
programs
and
long
range
transportation
plans
for
the
Beaumont/
Port
Arthur
area
will
have
to
show
conformity
to
the
budgets
in
this
plan;
previous
budgets
approved
or
found
adequate
will
no
longer
be
applicable.

Table
4:
SIP
ROP
Motor
Vehicle
Emissions
Budgets
(
tons
per
day)

Year
NOx
VOC
1999
57.17
20.52
2002
49.56
17.21
2005
33.97
12.59
Final
Action
The
EPA
is
approving
the
aforementioned
changes
to
the
Texas
SIP
because
the
revisions
are
consistent
with
the
CAA
and
EPA
regulatory
requirements.
The
EPA
is
publishing
this
rule
without
prior
proposal
because
the
EPA
views
this
as
a
non­
controversial
submittal
and
anticipates
no
adverse
comments.
However,
in
the
proposed
rules
section
of
this
Federal
Register
publication,
EPA
is
publishing
a
separate
document
that
will
serve
as
the
proposal
to
approve
the
SIP
revision
should
adverse
comments
be
filed.
This
rule
will
be
effective
[
FEDERAL
REGISTER
OFFICE:
insert
date
60
days
from
date
of
publication
in
the
Federal
Register]
without
further
notice,
unless
EPA
receives
relevant
adverse
comment
by
[
FEDERAL
REGISTER
OFFICE:
Insert
date
30
days
from
date
of
publication
in
the
11
Federal
Register].

If
the
EPA
receives
such
comments,
then
EPA
will
publish
a
document
withdrawing
the
final
rule
and
informing
the
public
that
the
rule
will
not
take
effect.
All
public
comments
received
will
then
be
addressed
in
a
subsequent
final
rule
based
on
the
proposed
rule.
The
EPA
will
not
institute
a
second
comment
period.
Parties
interested
in
commenting
should
do
so
at
this
time.
If
no
such
comments
are
received,
the
public
is
advised
that
this
rule
will
be
effective
on
[
FEDERAL
REGISTER
OFFICE:
insert
date
60
days
from
date
of
publication
in
the
Federal
Register],
and
no
further
action
will
be
taken
on
the
proposed
rule.

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
(
Public
Law
104­
4).
12
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
AProtection
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
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.
section
801
et
seq.,
as
added
by
the
Small
13
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
Amajor
rule@
as
defined
by
5
U.
S.
C.

section
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
[
FEDERAL
REGISTER
OFFICE:
insert
date
60
days
from
date
of
publication
of
this
document
in
the
Federal
Register].
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).)
14
List
of
Subjects
40
CFR
Part
52
Environmental
protection,
Air
pollution
control,
Incorporation
by
reference,

Intergovernmental
relations,
Nitrogen
oxides,
Ozone,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,

Volatile
organic
compounds.

Dated:
February
6,
2006
Richard
E.
Greene,

Regional
Administrator,
Region
6.
15
40
CFR
Part
52
is
amended
as
follows:

PART
52­­[
AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart
SS
­­
Texas
2.
The
second
table
in
'
52.2270(
e)
entitled
AEPA
Approved
Nonregulatory
Provisions
and
Quasi­
Regulatory
Measures
in
the
Texas
SIP@
is
amended
by
adding
two
new
entries
to
the
end
of
the
table
for
APost
1996
Rate
of
Progress
Plan@
and
for
ARevisions
to
the
1990
Base
Year
Inventory@,
both
for
the
Beaumont/
Port
Arthur,
TX
area.
The
additions
read
as
follows:

'
52.2270
Identification
of
plan
*
*
*
*
*

(
e)
*
*
*

EPA
Approved
Nonregulatory
Provisions
and
Quasi­
Regulatory
Measures
in
the
Texas
SIP
Name
of
SIP
provision
Applicable
geographic
or
nonattainment
area
State
submittal
/
effective
date
EPA
approval
date
Comments
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

Post
1996
Rate
of
Progress
Plan
Beaumont/
Port
Arthur,
TX
11/
16/
04
[
Insert
date
of
FR
publication]
[
Insert
FR
page
number
where
document
begins]

Revisions
to
the
1990
Base
Year
Inventory
Beaumont/
Port
Arthur,
TX
11/
16/
04
[
Insert
date
of
FR
publication]
[
Insert
FR
page
number
where
document
begins]
16
