[Federal Register: January 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 3)]
[Notices]
[Page 922-923]
[DOCID:fr04ja08-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket ID PHMSA-2007-28505]

 Pipeline Safety: Requests for Special Permits

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal pipeline safety laws allow a pipeline operator to
request PHMSA to waive compliance with any part of the Federal pipeline
safety regulations. We are publishing this notice to provide a list of
requests we have received from pipeline operators seeking relief from
compliance with certain pipeline safety regulations. This notice seeks
public comment on these requests, including comments on any
environmental impacts. In addition, this notice reminds the public that
we have changed what we call a decision granting such a request to a
special permit. At the conclusion of the comment period, PHMSA will
evaluate each request individually to determine whether to grant a
special permit or deny the request.

DATES: Submit any comments regarding any of these requests for special
permit by February 4, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference the docket number for the request
and may be submitted in the following ways:
     E-Gov Web Site: http://www.Regulations.gov. This site

allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: DOT Docket Management System; U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: You should identify the docket ID for the request you
are commenting on at the beginning of your comments. If you submit your
comments by mail, submit two copies. To receive confirmation that PHMSA
received your comments, include a self-addressed stamped postcard.
Internet users may submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Note: Comments are posted without changes or edits to http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information provided.

There is a privacy statement published on http://www.regulations.gov
.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lemoi by telephone at (404) 832-
1160; or, e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Change in Nomenclature

    PHMSA changed the name of a decision we made granting a request for
waiver of compliance from ``decision granting waiver'' to ``special
permit'' to reflect that granting the request will not reduce safety.
We commonly add safety conditions to decisions granting waivers to
ensure that waiving compliance with an existing pipeline safety
standard is consistent with pipeline safety. The change was simply a
name change for a decision granting waiver under 49 U.S.C. 60118(c)(1).

Comments Invited on Requests for Waiver

    PHMSA has filed in the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS)
requests for waivers we have received from pipeline operators seeking
relief from compliance with certain pipeline safety regulations. Each
request has been assigned a separate docket ID in the FDMS. We invite
interested persons to participate by reviewing these requests and by
submitting written comments, data or other views. Please include any
comments on the environmental impacts that granting the requests may
have.
    Before acting on any request, PHMSA will evaluate all comments
received on or before the comment closing date. We will consider
comments received after this date if it is possible to do so without
incurring additional expense or delay. We may grant or deny these
requests based on the comments we receive.
    PHMSA has received the following requests for waivers of compliance
with pipeline safety regulations.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Docket ID                     Requester                   Regulation(s)            Nature of waiver
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA-2007-29033............  ExxonMobil Pipeline Company.  49 CFR 195.452(h)...........  To allow certain
                                                                                anomalies discovered
                                                                                on the New Iberia to
                                                                                Sunset Pipeline in
                                                                                Louisiana to remain
                                                                                ``as-is'' by
                                                                                permanently
                                                                                maintaining an
                                                                                operating pressure
                                                                                reduction taken on
                                                                                January 3, 2007. The
                                                                                anomalies were
                                                                                discovered using In-
                                                                                Line Inspection (ILI)
                                                                                tools during
                                                                                Integrity Management
                                                                                Program (IMP)
                                                                                assessments.
PHMSA-2007-29034............  ConocoPhillips Pipe Line      49 CFR 195.452(h)...........  To waive repair
                               Company.                                                    requirements for one
                                                                                dent located on the
                                                                                top of the BL-01
                                                                                pipeline from
                                                                                Hardtner, KS to
                                                                                Wichita, KS and for
                                                                                one dent located on
                                                                                the top of the CM-01
                                                                                pipeline from
                                                                                Kingfisher, OK to
                                                                                Medford, OK. The
                                                                                dents were discovered
                                                                                using ILI tools
                                                                                during IMP
                                                                                assessments.
PHMSA-2007-0038.............  ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc.   49 CFR 195.583..............  To waive atmospheric
                               (CPAI).                                                     corrosion inspection
                                                                                requirements for
                                                                                certain non-piggable
                                                                                sections of CPAI's
                                                                                above ground
                                                                                pipelines on the
                                                                                North Slope of
                                                                                Alaska.
PHMSA-2007-28994............  Gulf South Pipeline Company,  49 CFR 192.111..............  To authorize operation
                               L.P.                         49 CFR 192.201..............   of the Southeast
                                                            49 CFR 192.619..............   Expansion Project, a
                                                                                110.8-mile gas
                                                                                transmission
                                                                                pipeline, from
                                                                                Harrisville, MS to
                                                                                Choctaw County, AL at
                                                                                a maximum allowable
                                                                                operating pressure
                                                                                (MAOP) of 80% of the
                                                                                specified minimum
                                                                                yield strength
                                                                                (SMYS).
PHMSA-2007-29078............  Kern River Gas Transmission   49 CFR 192.111..............  To authorize operation
                               Company.                     49 CFR 192.201..............   of approximately
                                                            49 CFR 192.505..............   1,380 miles of the
                                                            49 CFR 192.619..............   Kern River pipeline
                                                                                system and 300 miles
                                                                                of Common Facilities
                                                                                running from Lincoln
                                                                                County, WY through
                                                                                Utah and into San
                                                                                Bernardino County, CA
                                                                                at an MAOP of 80%
                                                                                SMYS in Class 1
                                                                                locations, 67% SMYS
                                                                                in Class 2 locations,
                                                                                and 56% SMYS in Class
                                                                                3 locations and
                                                                                compressor stations.

PHMSA-2007-29032............  Texas Eastern Transmission,   49 CFR 192.611..............  To authorize operation
                               L.P. (a Spectra Energy                                      of 19 pipeline
                               Company).                                                   segments at 6 sites
                                                                                along Lines 14, 18,
                                                                                and 31 downstream of
                                                                                the Union Church and
                                                                                Clinton compressor
                                                                                stations in
                                                                                Mississippi without
                                                                                reducing operating
                                                                                pressure as a result
                                                                                of a change from
                                                                                Class 1 to Class 2
                                                                                locations.
PHMSA-2007-0039.............  Gulf South Pipeline Company,  49 CFR 192.611..............  To authorize operation
                               L.P.                                                        of 3 pipeline
                                                                                segments on the TPL
                                                                                880 pipeline in
                                                                                Marion County, AL
                                                                                without reducing
                                                                                operating pressure as
                                                                                a result of a change
                                                                                from Class 1 to Class
                                                                                3 locations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60118(c)(1) and 49 CFR 1.53.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 27, 2007.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
 [FR Doc. E7-25634 Filed 1-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 21, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20625-20627]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07353]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 415, 417, 431, and 435

Statement of Policy on Waiving Ground Safety Regulations at Cape
Canaveral Air Force Station, Vandenberg Air Force Base, Wallops Flight
Facility, and Kennedy Space Center

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Policy statement.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes the FAA's policy applicable to waivers
of FAA ground safety requirements for licensed commercial launch and
reentry activities at certain Federal ranges. The Federal ranges that
currently meet the criteria for application of this policy are: Cape
Canaveral Air Force Station, Vandenberg Air Force Base, Wallops Flight
Facility, and Kennedy Space Center.

DATES: The policy described herein was effective November 3, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information concerning
this action, contact Randy Repcheck, Acting Executive Director, Office
of Operational Safety, via letter: 800 Independence Ave. SW,
Washington, DC 20591; via email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>via phone:
202-267-7793.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, as
amended and codified at 51 U.S.C. 50901-50923, authorizes the
Department of Transportation, and the FAA through delegation, to
oversee, license, and regulate commercial launch and reentry
activities, and the operation of launch and reentry sites as carried
out by U.S. citizens or within the United States. Section 50905(b)(3)
allows the Secretary to waive a requirement, including the requirement
to obtain a license, for an individual applicant if the Secretary
decides that the waiver is in the public interest and will not
jeopardize the public health and safety, safety of property, and
national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.\1\
This policy statement provides public notice of the FAA's approach to
evaluating waiver applications under 51 U.S.C. 50905(b)(3) with respect
to ground safety requirements at Federal launch ranges. It does not
have the force and effect of law and is not meant to bind the public in
any way. It is intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding
existing requirements under the law and agency policies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Secretary may not grant a waiver under this section that
would permit the launch or reentry of a launch vehicle or a reentry
vehicle without a license or permit if a human being will be on
board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    The FAA has worked in partnership for launch safety with the U.S.
Air Force (AF) since 2001 and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) since 2007. An objective of these interagency
partnerships has been to maintain common safety standards and practices
for launch across the Federal Government. These agencies formed the
Common Standards Working Group (CSWG), which is tri-chaired by FAA, AF,
and NASA. The CSWG is a forum to maintain common safety standards and
practices between the agencies for both commercial and Government
launch activities. The CSWG is comprised of range safety personnel from
Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Vandenberg Air Force Base
(VAFB), Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), and Kennedy Space Center (KSC).
    In 2006, the FAA issued a final rule that established the launch
site safety assessment (LSSA) process.\2\ The LSSA is an FAA assessment
of a Federal launch range to determine if the range requirements and
practices satisfy FAA safety regulations. Subpart C of 14 CFR part 415
describes how the FAA reviews the safety of licensed launches from
Federal launch ranges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 71 FR 50508 (Aug. 25, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subpart C recognizes that a launch operator may use an LSSA to
demonstrate compliance with FAA safety requirements.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 14 CFR 415.31(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has completed LSSAs for CCAFS, VAFB, WFF, and it is in the
process of finalizing an LSSA for KSC. In the initial assessments for
CCAFS, VAFB, and WFF, the FAA did not find any substantial differences
between the requirements and practices of these Federal ranges and FAA
regulations because 14 CFR part 417 was derived largely from existing
Federal launch range safety requirements. Similarly, in developing the
LSSA for KSC, the FAA likewise concluded that KSC's requirements and
practices were not substantially different from FAA ground safety
regulations. The FAA has maintained and updated the initial assessments
for CCAFS, VAFB, and WFF to account for changes in processes at these
Federal ranges and in FAA regulations. Where the range's requirement or
practice did not meet FAA regulations, the FAA either made a
determination that the range's requirement provides for an equivalent
level of safety to the FAA's requirement, waived the FAA requirement,
or required the operator to comply with the FAA requirement. In
addition to the LSSA process, the FAA, through its participation in the
CSWG, has gained significant insight into the ground safety
requirements and practices for CCAFS, VAFB, WFF, and KSC.
    The 2015 Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act directed the
Secretary of Transportation to consult with the Secretary of Defense,
Administrator of NASA, and other agencies, as appropriate, to identify
and evaluate requirements imposed on commercial space launch and
reentry operators to protect the public health and safety, safety of
property, national security interests, and foreign policy interests of
the United States.\4\ It also directed the Secretary of Transportation
to resolve any inconsistencies and remove any outmoded or duplicative

Federal requirements or approvals applicable to any commercial launch
of a launch vehicle or commercial reentry of a reentry vehicle. The FAA
has been working with AF and NASA to fulfill this mandate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, Public Law
114-90, sec. 113(c)(1), 129 Stat. 704, 714 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232, Sec. 1606, 132 Stat. 2107), Congress
directed that the Secretary of Defense may not impose any requirement
on a licensee or transferee that is duplicative of, or overlaps in
intent with, any requirement imposed by the Secretary of Transportation
under Title 51.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Secretary of the Air Force may waive this limitation
when necessary to avoid negative consequences for the national
security space program after notifying the Secretary of
Transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion of the Policy

A. Ground Safety Under Part 417 for Expendable Launch Vehicles

    Section 415.31(a) states, in relevant part, that the FAA will issue
a safety approval to a license applicant proposing to launch from a
Federal launch range if the applicant has contracted with the Federal
launch range for the provision of safety-related launch services and
property, provided the LSSA shows that the range's launch services and
launch property satisfy part 417.
    Subpart E of part 417 contains the FAA's public safety requirements
that apply to ground safety at launch sites in the United States,
including Federal launch ranges. Under Sec.  417.402(b), the FAA will
accept a launch operator's proposed ground safety process for an
expendable launch vehicle from a Federal launch range without further
demonstration of compliance to the FAA if:
    (1) A launch operator has contracted with a Federal launch range
for the provision of ground safety process; and
    (2) the FAA has assessed the Federal launch range through its
launch site safety assessment and found that the Federal launch range's
ground safety process satisfies the requirements of subpart E.
    In such cases, the FAA treats the Federal launch range's process as
that of a launch operator.
    Generally, under subpart E, the FAA requires an operator to conduct
a ground safety analysis for launch vehicle hardware, ground hardware
including launch site and ground support equipment, launch processing,
and post-launch operations. This analysis must identify each potential
hazard, associated cause, and hazard control that a launch operator
must establish and maintain to keep each identified hazard from
affecting the public. An operator must identify and control hazards
that extend beyond the launch location under the control of a launch
operator, including hazards arising from associated payloads. These
hazards include, but are not limited to, blast overpressure and
fragmentation resulting from an explosion, fire and deflagration,
sudden release of a hazardous material, and inadvertent ignition of a
propulsive launch vehicle payload, stage, or motor. The FAA requires an
operator to institute hazard controls, which may include safety clear
zones, designated hazard areas, or other means of protecting the public
from hazardous operations. In addition, an operator also has to
identify and control launch location hazards, which are hazards that
stay within the confines of the location under the control of a launch
operator.
    It is against these subpart E requirements that the FAA assesses a
Federal range's process to determine if the range's process satisfies
FAA requirements. If it does not, the FAA addresses the difference by
issuing equivalent level of safety determinations or waivers, or--if
necessary--requiring compliance with the FAA's requirements.

B. Ground Safety Under Part 431 for Reusable Launch Vehicles

    Section 431.35(c) requires, in part, that an applicant demonstrate
that the launch of a reusable launch vehicle complies with acceptable
risk criteria by employing a system safety process to identify the
hazards and assess the risks to public health and safety and the safety
of property associated with the mission. The FAA requires this system
safety process to identify and assess hazards associated with both
licensed ground and flight activities. This system safety process must
identify the same types of ground safety hazards and related ground
safety hazard controls as detailed above with regard to part 417,
subpart E; however, there is no formally prescribed LSSA process under
part 431. Therefore, operators must meet all of the safety requirements
in part 431, regardless of whether the FAA has completed an LSSA for
the relevant Federal launch range or not.

C. Waiver

    As noted, Congress has directed Federal agencies involved in
commercial launches to eliminate duplicative requirements. Accordingly,
it is the FAA's policy to use its authority in 51 U.S.C. 50905(b)(3),
as delegated by the Secretary, to waive ground safety requirements for
launches conducted from certain Federal ranges, when appropriate, if an
operator has contracted with the Federal range for the provision of the
ground safety process. Specifically, the FAA generally will, upon the
applicant's showing, waive the requirements in Sec. Sec.  415.31(a) and
417.402(b) to the extent that those provisions require an LSSA to
verify that a Federal range's ground safety process satisfies the
requirements of subpart E of part 417. Additionally, the FAA generally
will, upon the applicant's showing, grant a partial waiver of Sec.
431.35(c) to the extent that section requires a system safety process
for the ground portion of launch at these Federal ranges.\6\ Although
the FAA sets forth this general policy for evaluating and issuing
waivers, the FAA reserves its discretion to deny or withdraw a waiver
if, under the particular circumstances, the FAA finds that it is not in
the public interest or will jeopardize the public health and safety,
safety of property, or national security and foreign policy interests
of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This partial waiver of Sec.  431.35(c) also applies to
applications for a reentry vehicle other than a reusable launch
vehicle under part 435, consistent with Sec.  435.33. The section
covers both ground safety and flight safety requirements. This
waiver policy will extend only to the requirements for ground
safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA finds that this policy is in the public interest because it
reduces duplicative requirements imposed by Federal authorities on
commercial space operators. This policy responds to repeated
Congressional direction to remove overlapping requirements. Removing
duplicative Federal government requirements increases efficiency in
launch application processing and approval for both Government and
commercial stakeholders. Removing duplicative requirements will also
result in a clear delineation of responsibility between Federal actors
with regard to oversight over different portions of launch, which is
expected to reduce confusion and improve safety of the public.
    The FAA further finds that this policy would not jeopardize public
health and safety, safety of property, or the national security and
foreign policy interests of the United States. This policy will apply
only to Federal ranges: (1) With which the FAA has a long-term working
relationship through the CSWG, and (2) that have a cadence of both
commercial and government launches that facilitates highly-developed
and well-understood processes and requirements. To date, those ranges
include: CCAFS, VAFB,

WFF, and KSC. As mentioned previously, the FAA has been working with AF
and NASA launch personnel through the CSWG since 2001 and 2007,
respectively. The longevity of this working relationship has allowed
for insight into the requirements and practices at these ranges
sufficient to provide FAA confidence that these ranges will ensure
public safety during ground operations. The FAA has found that these
Federal ranges have processes, procedures, and requirements that
account for hazards to public safety associated with launch vehicle
hardware, ground hardware including launch site and ground support
equipment, launch processing, and post-launch operations. Constant
dialogue through the CSWG will keep the FAA updated on requirements and
practices at these ranges and will allow the FAA to intervene if
necessary. Furthermore, the cadence of launches has provided these
Federal ranges with unparalleled experience with both commercial and
government launches. This experience informs the requirements at these
ranges and provides the FAA further confidence that the requirements
and processes at these ranges satisfy the FAA's statutory mandate to
protect the public. In summary, the FAA has found that satisfaction of
the criteria above has established a level of confidence with regard to
the ranges' ground safety processes, procedures, and requirements that
it is an appropriate basis on which to waive these FAA requirements.
    Under this policy, the FAA will not continue to update LSSAs for
ground safety for these launch sites; rather, the FAA will continue to
work with AF and NASA through the CSWG to ensure consistency of
requirements for ground safety at Federal and non-Federal launch
ranges. The FAA retains its authority, however, to deny or withdraw any
waiver, or to withdraw this policy, if it determines that public health
and safety, safety of property, or national security and foreign policy
interests of the United States would be jeopardized.

III. Determination of Maximum Probable Loss

    The FAA determines the maximum probable loss (MPL) from covered
claims by a third party for bodily injury or property damage, and the
United States, its agencies, and its contractors and subcontractors for
covered property damage or loss, resulting from licensed activity. The
MPL determination forms the basis for financial responsibility
requirements issued in a license order. The FAA calculates the MPL
taking into account the hazards associated with the licensed activity.
The MPL amount for both the ground and flight portions of a licensed
activity is detailed in the license orders.
    The FAA's process for determining MPL will not change as a result
of this policy statement. The FAA will continue to calculate MPL for
both ground and flight portions of launch at CCAFS, VAFB, WFF, and KSC.
Furthermore, the FAA does not expect this policy to impact the MPL
amounts for licensed activities at these Federal ranges.

IV. Implementation

    The FAA currently requires an applicant seeking to conduct a launch
from a Federal range to show evidence of an agreement with the Federal
range in its license application. 14 CFR 417.13(a). This agreement must
provide for access to and use of property and services required to
support a licensed launch from that facility.
    An applicant seeking a waiver consistent with this policy statement
should include in its application the following:
    ``[INSERT COMPANY NAME] is seeking a waiver, consistent with the
policy statement published at [INSERT FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION], to
operate from [INSERT FEDERAL LAUNCH RANGE]. [INSERT COMPANY NAME] will
utilize the ground safety processes and services at this location, and
comply with any ground safety requirements imposed by the agreement
dated [INSERT DATE OF AGREEMENT WITH FEDERAL RANGE].''
    The applicant should also provide the FAA its agreement with the
Federal range in accordance with regulations.
    The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of
law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This document is
intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing
requirements under the law or clarify agency policies.

Wayne R. Monteith,
Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2021-07353 Filed 4-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 14, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27122-27125]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12210]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0833; FRL-9962-48-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Clean
Air Act Requirements for Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance and
Nonattainment New Source Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Texas for
the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
The SIP revision being approved pertains to CAA 2008 ozone NAAQS
requirements for vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) and
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) in the Dallas/Fort Worth ozone
nonattainment area (DFW area).

DATES: This rule is effective on September 12, 2017 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives relevant adverse comment by July 14,
2017. If the EPA receives such comment, the 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-
2015-0833, at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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 Carl Young,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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 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: Mr. Carl Young,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule
an

appointment with Mr. Young or Mr. Bill Deese at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' mean the EPA.

I. Background

    In 2008 we revised the 8-hour ozone primary and secondary 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 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS replaced the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
of 0.08 ppm. The DFW area was classified as a ``Moderate'' ozone
nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and initially given
an attainment date of no later than December 31, 2018 (77 FR 30088 and
77 FR 30160, May 21, 2012). The DFW area consists of Collin, Dallas,
Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant and Wise
counties.
    On December 23, 2014, the D.C. 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 (D.C. 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 Moderate ozone nonattainment
areas, including the DFW area as July 20, 2018 (80 FR 12264, March 6,
2015).
    On July 10, 2015, Texas submitted a SIP revision for the DFW area
based on an attainment date of December 31, 2018. Texas further revised
the SIP to address an attainment date of July 20, 2018 and submitted it
on August 5, 2016. Copies of the SIP revisions are available at
www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0833.
    As a moderate ozone nonattainment area and under the anti-
backsliding requirements of the previous standards, Texas is required
to implement I/M and NNSR programs. These were also requirements under
the previous ozone standards. In the August 5, 2016 SIP revision Texas
discusses these requirements and noted: (1) That the DFW area meets the
CAA requirements to implement an I/M program and (2) since the Dallas/
Fort Worth 1997 ozone nonattainment area was not redesignated to
attainment prior to the revocation of the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS and
the 1997 ozone NAAQS, anti-backsliding NNSR requirements for Serious
areas still apply. Texas also noted that a redesignation substitute
demonstration was submitted for the 1997 ozone NAAQS to satisfy anti-
backsliding requirements for the revoked NAAQS in the DFW area. Anti-
backsliding requirements ensure air quality in nonattainment areas does
not get worse after an air quality standard is revoked (81 FR 81276,
81288, November 17, 2016). The EPA approved Texas SIP (Texas SIP) that
incorporates by reference the state's regulations can be found at 40
CFR 52.2270(c).

II. EPA's Evaluation

A. CAA Requirements for I/M in the DFW Area

    I/M refers to the inspection and maintenance programs for in-use
vehicles required under the CAA. The applicable requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas that are required to adopt I/M programs are
described in CAA sections 182(a)(2)(B), 182(b)(4), 182(c)(3), and
184(b)(1)(A) and further defined in 40 CFR 51.350 (``Applicability'')
of the I/M rule (40 CFR part 51, subpart S). Under these cumulative
requirements, Moderate ozone nonattainment areas in urbanized areas
with 1990 Census populations of 200,000 or more are required to adopt
basic I/M programs, while Serious and higher classified ozone
nonattainment areas outside of the northeast Ozone Transport Region
with 1980 Census-defined urbanized populations of 200,000 or more are
required to adopt enhanced I/M programs (40 CFR 51.350(a)(2) and (4)).
    Previously, we revoked (1) the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS (69 FR
23951, April 30, 2004 and 70 FR 44470, August 3, 2005) and (2) the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015). Because the DFW area
was classified as Serious nonattainment for these revoked ozone NAAQS,
an enhanced I/M program is required in the DFW area for anti-
backsliding purposes (40 CFR 51.1100(o)). Ozone classifications can be
found in CAA section 181 and 40 CFR 51.1103. The Serious classification
is one classification higher than the Moderate classification.
    The Texas SIP includes 30 TAC Section 114.2 (Inspection and
Maintenance Definitions) and 30 TAC Section 114.50 (Vehicle Emissions
Inspection Requirements) except for 30 TAC Section 114.50(b)(2). In a
2001 final rule, we did not approve 30 TAC Section 114.50(b)(2) as part
of the Texas SIP as (1) it placed an additional reporting burden upon
commanders at Federal facilities regarding affected Federal vehicles
that is not imposed upon any other affected non-federal vehicle and (2)
additional reporting requirement is not an essential element for an
approvable I/M program, since affected Federal vehicles are also
subject to the same reporting requirements as other affected non-
federal vehicles (66 FR 57261, 57262, November 14, 2001).
    Under these provisions Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson,
Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall and Tarrant counties are included in an
enhanced I/M program. An enhanced program is required for anti-
backsliding purposes since these counties were classified as Serious
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (75 FR 79302, December
20, 2010). The program requires that gasoline powered light-duty
vehicles, and light and heavy-duty trucks between two and twenty-four
years old, that are registered or required to be registered in the I/M
program area, including fleets, are subject to annual inspection and
testing. Wise County is not required to be included in the I/M program
as it is not included in the urbanized area. See www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/reference/ua/1990uas.pdf and www.census.gov/population/metro/files/lists/historical/90mfips.txt. Therefore, since the provisions in
the Texas SIP already include the CAA I/M requirements for the DFW
area, we are approving this portion of the SIP revisions.

B. CAA Requirements for NNSR in the DFW Area

    The applicable NNSR requirements for the various ozone
nonattainment classifications are described in CAA section 182 and
further defined in 40 CFR part 51, subpart I (Review of New Sources and
Modifications). Under these requirements new major sources or major
modifications at existing sources in an ozone nonattainment area must
comply with the lowest achievable emission rate and obtain sufficient
emission offsets. The emission offset ratio required for Moderate ozone
nonattainment areas is 1.15 to 1 (CAA section 182(b)(5)).
    The Texas SIP includes 30 TAC Section 116.12 (Nonattainment and
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Review Definitions) and 30 TAC
Section 116.150 (New Major Source or Major Modification in Ozone
Nonattainment Area). These provisions require new major sources or
major modifications at existing sources in the DFW area to comply with
the lowest achievable emission rate and obtain emission offsets at the
Moderate classification ratio of 1.15 to 1. Therefore, since the
provisions in the Texas SIP already include the CAA NNSR requirements

for ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate, we are approving
this portion of the SIP revision.
    We note that at the time of the SIP revisions, except for Wise
County, the Serious area NNSR permitting requirements for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS applied for the DFW area to meet anti-backsliding
requirements. Moderate area NNSR permitting requirements applied to
Wise County. In November 2016, we approved a redesignation substitute
for the DFW area, which addressed both the 1-hour and 1997 ozone
standards. This action found that the area was meeting these standards
and was expected to continue to meet these standards. Based on this
finding, EPA, as part of the redesignation substitute, removed the
Serious area NNSR requirement so that only Moderate area NNSR
requirements apply to the DFW area (81 FR 78688, November 8, 2016).

III. Final Action

    We are approving revisions to the Texas SIP submitted on August 5,
2016, that pertain to 2008 ozone NAAQS requirements for vehicle I/M and
NNSR for the DFW area. As discussed above, the Texas SIP includes
provisions to implement these Moderate area ozone nonattainment
requirements.
    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we
view this as a non-controversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if relevant adverse
comments are received. This rule will be effective on September 12,
2017 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse comment
by July 14, 2017. If we receive relevant adverse comments, we will
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect. We will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will
not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so now. Please note that if we receive
relevant adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment.

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 approves 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);
     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
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).
    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. The 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 August 14, 2017. 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).)
    Samuel Coleman was designated the Acting Regional Administrator on
June 1, 2017 through the order of succession outlined in Regional Order
R6-1110.13, a copy of which is included in the docket for this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: June 1, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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. In Sec.  52.2270(e), the second table titled ``EPA Approved
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas is
amended by adding an entry at the end for ``Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance and Nonattainment New Source Review Requirements for the
2008 Ozone NAAQS'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2270  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

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

                                                  * * * * * * *
Vehicle Inspection and           Dallas-Fort           7/6/2016  6/14/2017,         ............................
 Maintenance and Nonattainment    Worth, TX.                      [Insert Federal
 New Source Review Requirements                                   Register
 for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS.                                        citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-12210 Filed 6-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P