1612 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 6 / Thursday, January 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: December 20, 2013. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2013–31561 Filed 1–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0100; FRL–9904–97– 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Texas State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the 

Houston/Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) 1997 

8-Hour ozone nonattainment Area 

(Area). The HGB Area consists of 

Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, 

Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery 

and Waller counties. Specifically, we 

are proposing to approve portions of 

two revisions to the Texas SIP 

submitted by the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as 

meeting certain Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) 

requirements for Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) in the HGB Area. 

This action is in accordance with 

section 110 of the federal Clean Air Act 

(the Act, CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2012–0100, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Alan Shar at shar.alan@

epa.gov. 

• Mail or delivery: Air Planning 

Section Chief (6PD–L), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2012– 

0100. The 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, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information 

through www.regulations.gov or email 

that you consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected from disclosure. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site 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 email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

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 and any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

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). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment with the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Alan Shar (6PD–L), telephone (214) 

665–2164, email shar.alan@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Outline 

I. Background 

A. What actions are we proposing? 

1. The June 13, 2007 submittal 

2. The April 6, 2010 submittal 

B. What is RACT? 

II. Evaluation 

A. What is TCEQ’s approach and analysis 

to RACT? 

B. What CTG source categories are we 

addressing in this action? 

C. Are there any negative declarations 

associated with the VOC source 

categories in the HGB Area? 

D. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination based on the June 13, 

2007 and April 6, 2010 submittals 

acceptable? 

E. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for VOC sources based on 

the June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 

submittals acceptable? 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. What actions are we proposing? 

We are proposing to approve portions 

of revisions to the Texas SIP submitted 

to EPA with two separate letters dated 

June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 from 

TCEQ. These two separate submittals 

are described below. 

1. The June 13, 2007 Submittal 

The June 13, 2007 submittal concerns 

revisions to 30 TAC, Chapter 115 

Control of Air Pollution from Volatile 

Organic Compounds. In addition, the 

June 13, 2007 submittal included an 

analysis intended to demonstrate RACT 

was being implemented in the HGB 

Area as required by the CAA (Appendix 

D of the submittal). We approved 

selected revisions as meeting RACT 

under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 

some, but not all the submitted industry 

source categories in the HGB Area on 

April 2, 2013 at 78 FR 19599. In today’s 

action, we are addressing additional 

source categories covered in this SIP 

submittal. 

2. The April 6, 2010 Submittal 

In conjunction with the June 13, 2007 

submittal, we are also proposing to 

approve a part of the April 6, 2010 

revision to the Texas SIP for VOC RACT 

purposes. Specifically, we are proposing 

to find, based on the analysis in 

Appendix D of the April 6, 2010 

submittal that Texas has met certain 

RACT requirements under section 

182(b). Appendix D of the April 6, 2010 

submittal is titled ‘‘Reasonably 

Available Control Technology 

Analysis.’’ and includes source 


PMANGRUM on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 6 / Thursday, January 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 1613 

categories affected by the newly EPAissued CTGs. See section B for more 

information on RACT evaluation for the 

HGB Area. 

B. What is RACT? 

The EPA has defined RACT as the 

lowest emissions limitation that a 

particular source is capable of meeting 

by the application of control technology 

that is reasonably available, considering 

technological and economic feasibility. 

See 44 FR 53761, September 17, 1979. 

Section 172(c)(1) of the Act requires that 

SIPs for nonattainment areas ‘‘provide 

for the implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable (including 

such reductions in emissions from 

existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology) and shall provide 

for attainment of the primary National 

Ambient Air Quality (NAAQS) 

standards.’’ 

Section 182(b)(2) of the Act requires 

states to submit a SIP revision and 

implement RACT for moderate and 

above ozone nonattainment areas. For a 

Moderate, Serious, or Severe Area a 

major stationary source is one which 

emits, or has the potential to emit, 100, 

50, or 25 tons per year (tpy) or more of 

VOCs or NOX, respectively. See CAA 

sections 182(b), 182(c), and 182(d). The 

EPA provides states with guidance 

concerning what types of controls could 

constitute RACT for a given source 

category through the issuance of Control 

Techniques Guidelines (CTG) and 

Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) 

documents. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ 

naaqs/ozone/ctg_act/index.htm (URL 

dating May 23, 2012) for a listing of 

EPA-issued CTGs and ACTs for VOC. 

The HGB Area was designated as 

Severe for the 1997 8-Hour ozone 

NAAQS. See 73 FR 56983, October 1, 

2008. Thus, per section 182(d) of the 

CAA, a major stationary source in the 

HGB Area is one which emits, or has the 

potential to emit, 25 tpy or more of 

VOCs or NOX. Under sections 182(b), 

the SIP for the HGB Area must 

implement RACT for source categories 

covered by CTGs, and for major sources 

with a potential to emit of 25 tpy or 

more not covered by a CTG. The 

inventory of VOC and NOX sources 

listed in Appendix D of the April 6, 

2010 submittal demonstrates these 

requirements are fulfilled. 

Under section 183(b), EPA is required 

to periodically review and, as necessary, 

update CTGs. EPA issued a number of 

new CTGs in 2006, 2007, and 2008. 

Accordingly, Texas revised its Chapter 

115 regulations to address these VOC 

RACT control measures. 

II. Evaluation 

A. What is TCEQ’s approach and 

analysis to RACT? 

Under sections 182(b)(2)(A) and (B) 

states must insure RACT is in place for 

each source category for which EPA 

issued a CTG, and for any major source 

not covered by a CTG. As a part of its 

June 13, 2007 submittal, TCEQ 

conducted a RACT analysis to 

demonstrate that the RACT 

requirements for CTG sources in the 

HGB 8-Hour ozone nonattainment Area 

have been fulfilled. The TCEQ revised 

and supplemented this analysis in its 

April 6, 2010 submittal. The TCEQ 

conducted its analysis by: (1) 

Identifying all categories of CTG and 

major non-CTG sources of VOC 

emissions within the HGB Area; (2) 

Listing the state regulation that 

implements or exceeds RACT 

requirements for that CTG or non-CTG 

category; (3) Detailing the basis for 

concluding that these regulations fulfill 

RACT through comparison with 

established RACT requirements 

described in the CTG guidance 

documents and rules developed by 

other state and local agencies; and (4) 

Submitting negative declarations when 

there are no CTG or major Non-CTG 

sources of VOC emissions within the 

HGB Area. We are proposing that 

TCEQ’s submittal, for affected VOC 

sources in the HGB Area addressed in 

this notice, provide for the 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable and shall 

provide for attainment of the primary 

National Ambient Air Quality (NAAQS) 

standards. 

B. What CTG source categories are we 

addressing in this action? 

Table 1 below contains a list of VOC 

CTG source categories and their 

corresponding sections of 30 TAC 

Chapter 115 to fulfill the applicable 

RACT requirements under section 

182(b) of the Act. 

TABLE 1—CTG SOURCE CATEGORIES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING TEXAS VOC RACT RULES

Entry No. Source category in HGB area CTG Reference document Chapter 115, 

fulfilling RACT 

1 ........................ Aerospace .................................... Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations.§§ 115.420–429. 

2 ........................ Surface coating for insulation of 

magnets.

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 

Sources—Volume IV: Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet 

Wire.

§§ 115.420–429. 

3 ........................ Surface coating of coils ................ Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and 

Light-Duty Trucks.

§§ 115.420–429. 

4 ........................ Surface coating of fabrics ............ Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and 

Light-Duty Trucks.

§§ 115.420–429. 

5 ........................ Surface coating of cans ............... Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and 

Light-Duty Trucks.

§§ 115.420–429. 

6 ........................ Use of cutback asphalt ................ Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Use of Cutback Asphalt §§ 115.510–519. 

7 ........................ Wood furniture .............................. Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations.§§ 115.420–429. 

8 ........................ Large petroleum dry cleaners ...... Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners.§§ 115.552–559. 


PMANGRUM on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
1614 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 6 / Thursday, January 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

C. Are there any negative declarations 

associated with the VOC source 

categories in the HGB Area? 

Yes, Texas has declared that there are 

no Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing 

Materials Operations, Leather Tanning 

and Finishing Operations, Surface 

Coating for Flat Wood Paneling 

Operations, Automobile and Light-Duty 

Truck Assembly Coating Operations, 

and Vegetable Oil Manufacturing 

Operations that are major sources in the 

HGB Area. Previously, we have 

approved a negative declaration for the 

Rubber Tire Manufacturing Operations 

in the HGB Area. As such, TCEQ does 

not have to adopt VOC regulations 

relevant to these source categories at 

this time for the HGB Area. However, if 

a major source of these categories 

locates in the HGB Area in future, then 

TCEQ will need to take appropriate 

regulatory measures. 

D. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination based on the June 13, 

2007 and April 6, 2010 submittals 

acceptable? 

As a part of 1-Hour ozone attainment 

demonstration plan for the HGB Area at 

70 FR 58136, October 5, 2005; and 71 

FR 52676, September 6, 2006, we stated 

that Texas has met RACT for VOC and 

NOX sources. In the TSD developed for 

this action, we evaluated the 

corresponding sections of 30 TAC 

Chapter 115 for the source categories 

identified in Table 1 above in the HGB 

Area, and have reviewed these sections 

against our identified reference 

documents. In its April 6, 2010, 

submittal to EPA, TCEQ states that it 

has reviewed the HGB VOC rules and 

certifies that they satisfy RACT 

requirements for the 8-Hour ozone 

standard by the application of control 

technology that is reasonably available 

considering technological and economic 

feasibility. In section B (Certifications) 

of EPA’s May 18, 2006 RACT Q and A 

document, the framework described in 

the TSD (pages 3 and 4), and the 70 FR 

71612, November 29, 2005, regarding 

permissible approaches for determining 

whether a State’s level of control meets 

RACT, EPA provided guidance that a 

State’s certification of its VOC rules is 

sufficient or acceptable for a finding that 

the rules satisfy the RACT requirements. 

We are proposing a determination that 

Texas VOC rules meet the CAA’s RACT 

requirements. Consequently, by 

implementing these control 

requirements (Chapter 115) Texas is 

satisfying the RACT requirements for 

CTG source categories identified in 

Tables 1 of this document in the HGB 

Area under the 1997 8-Hour ozone 

standard. 

E. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for VOC sources based on 

the June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 

submittals acceptable? 

Yes. The purpose of 30 TAC Chapter 

115 rules for the HGB Area is to 

establish reasonable controls on the 

emissions of ozone precursors. Texas 

has reviewed its VOC rules and has 

certified that its rules satisfy RACT 

requirements. Based upon our 

evaluation, we are proposing to find that 

Texas has RACT-level controls in place 

for all required sources for the HGB 

Area under the 1997 8-Hour ozone 

standard. 

III. Proposed Action 

Today, we are proposing to find that 

for VOC, CTG categories identified in 

Table 1, Texas has RACT-level controls 

in place for the HGB Area under the 

1997 8-Hour ozone standard. We are 

also proposing to approve the negative 

declarations as explained in section 

II(B) of this action. The EPA had 

previously approved RACT for VOC and 

NOX into Texas’ SIP under the 1-Hour 

ozone standard. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. If a portion of the 

plan revision meets all the applicable 

requirements of this chapter and Federal 

regulations, the Administrator may 

approve the plan revision in part. 42 

U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, 

in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices that meet 

the criteria of the Act, and to disapprove 

state choices that do not meet the 

criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this 

proposed action approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 Clean Air Act; 

• 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); and 

• this rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved 

to apply in Indian country located in the 

state, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: December 18, 2013. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2014–00160 Filed 1–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


PMANGRUM on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1