Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13963 

must be physically present at the 

hearing location to provide oral 

testimony; virtual testimony via 

telephone or webcast is not available. 

Based on the requests received, an 

agenda of scheduled speakers will be 

sent to those speaking and posted on the 

Office’s Internet Web site at http://

www.uspto.gov. The number of speakers 

and time allotted to each speaker may 

be limited to ensure that all persons 

speaking will have a meaningful chance 

to do so. 

Members of the public who wish to 

attend solely to observe need not submit 

a request to attend. In addition, the 

public is welcome to submit written 

comments in response to the proposed 

changes in addition to, or lieu of, 

presenting oral testimony at these 

public hearings. 

The Office also plans to make the 

public hearings available via Web cast. 

Web cast information will be available 

on the Office’s Internet Web site closer 

to the public hearing dates. A transcript 

of the public hearings will be available 

for viewing via the Office’s Internet Web 

site at http://www.uspto.gov, and will be 

available for public inspection at the 

Office of the Commissioner for Patents, 

currently located in Madison East, 

Tenth Floor, 600 Dulany Street, 

Alexandria, Virginia 22314, upon 

request. 

Dated: March 6, 2014. 

Michelle K. Lee, 

Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of 

the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05281 Filed 3–11–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2010–0332; FRL–9907–74– 

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 

rule revisions to the Texas State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the 

Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) 

Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) 

category for Offset Lithographic 

Printing, including the Reasonably 

Available Control Technologies (RACT) 

requirements for this CTG category for 

the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) 

and the Dallas-Fort-Worth (DFW) 1997 

8-hour ozone nonattainment areas. This 

rulemaking addresses the 2006 CTG 

entitled, ‘‘Lithographic Printing 

Materials and Letterpress Printing 

Materials,’’ as well as the corresponding 

RACT analysis for both the HGB and 

DFW 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

areas. This action is in accordance with 

sections 110, 172(c) and 182 of the 

federal Clean Air Act (the Act, CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 11, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. [EPA–R06– 

OAR–2010–0332], by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

• Email: Mr. Guy Donaldson at 

donaldson.guy@epa.gov. Please also 

send a copy by email to the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section below. 

• Mail or delivery: Mr. Guy 

Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section 

(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–2010– 

0332]. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http://

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 http://www.regulations.gov or 

email, if you believe that it is CBI or 

otherwise protected from disclosure. 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means that 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 http://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 along with any disk or CD– 

ROM submitted. 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 should 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 or Mr. Bill Deese at 

214–665–7253. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Ellen Belk, Air Planning Section (6PD– 

L), Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 

1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone (214) 665–2164, fax (214) 

665–6762, email address belk.ellen@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Outline 

I. Background 

A. What actions are we proposing? 

B. What is RACT? 

II. Evaluation 

A. Which CTG source category is 

addressed in this action, and how do 

Texas’ Rule Revisions compare to the 

CTG? 

B. What is Texas’ approach and analysis 

for RACT for HGB and DFW for this CTG 

source category, and do the Revisions 

meet RACT Requirements? 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. What actions are we proposing? 

The three submittals sent to the EPA 

from the TCEQ which are addressed in 

this action are: (a) VOC CTG Update: 

CTG Category Offset Lithographic 

Rulemaking, submitted April 5, 2010, 

(b) the 2010 HGB Attainment 

Demonstration SIP Revision for the 1997 

8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area, 

RACT Analysis for this CTG Category, 

submitted April 6, 2010, and (c) the 

2010 DFW RACT, Rule, and 

Contingency SIP Revision for the 1997 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
13964 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1On April 30, 2012, the EPA promulgated 

designations under the 2008 ozone standard (see 77 

FR 30088, published May 21, 2012). In that action, 

the EPA designated Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, 

Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant and 

Wise counties as a moderate ozone nonattainment 

area. This action does not address the 

nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone standard. 

8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area, 

RACT Analysis for this CTG Category, 

submitted April 6, 2010. 

The April 5, 2010 rulemaking 

submittal provides revisions to 30 TAC, 

Chapter 115 Control of Air Pollution 

from Volatile Organic Compounds, 

Subchapter E, Division 4, ‘‘Offset 

Lithographic Printing.’’ In this action, 

we are proposing to approve Texas’ 

2010 rule revisions for Offset 

Lithographic Printing. These rules apply 

to the HGB area (Brazoria, Chambers, 

Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, 

Montgomery and Waller counties) and 

DFW area (Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, 

Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, 

and Tarrant counties). 

In addition, we are proposing to 

approve the portions of two separate 

submittals that contain Texas’ RACT 

assessment for the Offset Lithographic 

Printing source category for the HGB 

and DFW 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

areas. These two submittals are: The 

2010 HGB Attainment Demonstration 

SIP Revision, and the 2010 DFW RACT, 

Rule, and Contingency SIP Revision, 

each dated April 6, 2010. Based on our 

review and evaluation of Texas’ 

assessment in the HGB AD SIP Revision, 

including Appendix D ‘‘Reasonably 

Available Control Technology Analysis’’ 

containing a RACT assessment for Offset 

Lithographic Printing for the HGB area, 

we are proposing to find that Texas has 

met the RACT requirements for Offset 

Lithographic Printing for the HGB 8- 

hour ozone nonattainment area under 

section 182(b). Also, based on our 

review and evaluation of Texas’ 

assessment in the DFW RACT, Rule, and 

Contingency SIP Revision, including 

Section 4 and Appendix A containing a 

RACT assessment for Offset 

Lithographic Printing for the DFW area, 

we are proposing to find that Texas has 

met the RACT requirements for Offset 

Lithographic Printing for the DFW 1997 

8-hour ozone nonattainment area under 

section 182(b). 

B. What is RACT? 

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 172(c)(1) 

provides that SIPs for nonattainment 

areas must include reasonably available 

control measures including RACT for 

sources of emissions. 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 Standards 

(NAAQS).’’ 

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 nitrogen oxides (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 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. 

Under CAA section 183(b), EPA is 

required to periodically review and, as 

necessary, update CTGs. For the offset 

lithographic printing source category, 

on November 8, 1993, EPA published a 

draft CTG for offset lithographic 

printing (58 FR 59261). After reviewing 

comments on the draft CTG and 

soliciting additional information to help 

clarify those comments, EPA published 

an ACT document in June 1994 that 

provided supplemental information for 

states to use in developing rules based 

on RACT for offset lithographic 

printing. In 2006, 2007 and 2008, EPA 

issued a number of CTGs, including one 

for Offset Lithographic Printing and 

Letterpress Printing which provided 

recommendations for RACT for these 

sources. 

In accordance with the 2006, 2007 

and 2008 CTGs, Texas revised its 

Chapter 115 regulations to address these 

VOC RACT control measures. The 

revisions to Chapter 115 regulations that 

correspond to the 2006 EPA-issued CTG 

for Offset Lithographic Printing and the 

related RACT analysis for both HGB and 

DFW are the subject of this rulemaking 

action. In this action, we consider that 

consistency with the CTG represents 

RACT. See the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) for further discussion 

of CTGs and RACT. 

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. 

On April 30, 2004, the EPA 

designated the DFW area as a moderate 

nonattainment area under the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard, with an 

attainment date of June 15, 2010 (see 69 

FR 23858). However, the DFW area 

failed to attain the 1997 ozone standard 

by June 15, 2010, and was therefore 

reclassified as a serious ozone 

nonattainment area (see 75 FR 79302, 

December 20, 2010).1 Thus, per section 

182(d) of the CAA, a major stationary 

source in the DFW Area is one which 

emits, or has the potential to emit, 50 

tpy or more of VOCs or NOX. 

II. Evaluation 

A. Which CTG source category is 

addressed in this action, and how do 

Texas’ Rule Revisions compare to the 

CTG? 

Table 1 below shows the VOC CTG 

source category and the corresponding 

sections of 30 TAC Chapter 115 which 

fulfill the applicable RACT 

requirements under section 182(b) of the 

Clean Air Act. 

TABLE 1—CTG SOURCE CATEGORY AND CORRESPONDING TEXAS VOC RACT RULES

Source category in 

HGB Area CTG reference document Chapter 115, fulfilling RACT 

Offset Lithographic 

Printing.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, 

EPA–453/R–06–002—September 2006.

§§ 115.440–449. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13965 

This action addresses changes to 

Texas’ VOC rules affecting offset 

lithographic printing sources in the 

DFW and Houston Galveston Brazoria 

HGB 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

areas. These rule revisions reduce the 

VOC content limits on fountain 

solutions used by sources that were 

subject to the previous Chapter 115 

rules. These rules also limit the VOC 

content of fountain and cleaning 

solutions used by certain sources that 

were exempt from the previous Chapter 

115 rules. 

In general, these rule revisions require 

the owner or operator of an affected 

offset lithographic printing line to 

reduce the VOC content of the fountain 

solution and the cleaning solution used 

in the printing process. For reducing the 

VOC content of the fountain solution, 

these rule revisions provide several 

compliance options including: Reducing 

the alcohol content of the refrigerated 

solution; further reducing the alcohol 

content of the unrefrigerated solution; or 

using reformulated materials to 

eliminate alcohol in the solution. For 

reducing the VOC content of the 

cleaning solution, these rule revisions 

also provide several options, including 

using low-VOC cleaning solutions; 

using low-VOC cleaning solution in 

conjunction with work practice 

standards; or using low vapor pressure 

cleaning solutions in conjunction with 

work practice standards. 

Letterpresses. The 2006 CTG 

recommends controlling VOC emissions 

from letterpress printing. This SIP 

revision does not include rule changes 

for letterpress printing sources because 

review of the point source emissions 

inventory, Title V Permits and central 

registry databases did not identify any 

letterpresses that would be subject to 

the CTG recommended controls. 

Heatset Offset Lithographic Presses. 

The 2006 CTG recommends requiring an 

add-on air pollution control device on 

each individual heatset web offsetlithographic press with the uncontrolled 

potential to emit at least 25 tpy from ink 

oils volatilized in the dryer. In addition, 

the CTG recommends increasing the 

control efficiency requirement from 

90% to 95% for control devices 

installed after the rule effective date. 

This SIP revision does not include new 

rule changes for heatset presses because 

the State found that the existing rules 

are at least as effective or more effective 

than the 2006 CTG recommendations. 

For control devices installed before the 

effective date of the rule, in the HGB 

area, the existing Chapter 115 rules 

either meet or exceed EPA’s 

recommendations for control devices 

installed before the effective date of the 

rule. In the DFW area, the existing level 

of control on heatset presses identified 

in the area either meets or exceeds the 

CTG recommendation for control 

devices. For control devices installed 

after the effective date of the rule, the 

2006 CTG recommendation to require a 

95% control efficiency was determined 

by the State to be no more stringent than 

the existing rules which require control 

devices with an efficiency of at least 

90% to be installed on all heatset offset 

lithographic presses located on a 

property with combined VOC emissions 

(when uncontrolled) of at least 50 tpy in 

the DFW area and at least 25 tpy in the 

HGB area. The State found that the 

existing rule ‘‘is effectively more 

stringent than the CTG recommended 

threshold for installation of control 

devices based on 25 tpy of VOC from 

the dryer because the majority of 

emissions (approximately 75%) come 

from sources other than the dryer.’’ 

Additionally, the 2006 CTG 

recommends setting the control 

efficiency requirement of the control 

equipment based on the first installation 

date of the equipment, regardless of the 

location. The State intentionally did not 

revise its SIP to incorporate this 

recommendation due to a concern that 

‘‘such a policy may encourage the 

installation of older less efficient 

equipment and could also create 

significant practical enforceability 

issues for commission investigators with 

regard to verifying the first installation 

date of the control equipment.’’ Based 

upon our review, we agree with the 

State’s determination for this source 

category. 

Fountain Solution. The 2006 CTG 

recommends limiting the fountain 

solution content to 5.0% alcohol 

substitutes or less by weight and no 

alcohol in the fountain solution. Prior to 

these revisions, for major sources, the 

previous Chapter 115 rules contained an 

option limiting the fountain solution 

content to 3.0% alcohol substitutes or 

less by weight and no alcohol in the 

fountain solution for printing operations 

located on a property in the DFW area 

with combined VOC emissions of at 

least 50 tpy when uncontrolled and in 

the HGB area with combined VOC 

emissions of at least 25 tpy when 

uncontrolled. For these major printing 

sources that were previously subject to 

this more stringent limit, these revisions 

retain a limit of 3.0% alcohol substitutes 

or less by weight and no alcohol in the 

fountain solution to avoid backsliding. 

Small businesses were not previously 

subject to these rules. However, in this 

action, small businesses are now 

included, and this SIP revision offers 

several options which are as stringent as 

the 2006 CTG to help mitigate the 

financial impact of these regulations. 

These options for smaller sources 

include the 2006 CTG recommendation 

to limit the fountain solution content to 

5% alcohol substitutes or less by weight 

and no alcohol in the fountain solution. 

Additionally, the compliance date for 

smaller sources was extended to March 

1, 2012 to provide additional time for 

these facilities to determine the most 

cost-effective compliance strategies and 

to implement any necessary changes. 

Cleaning Solution. The 2006 CTG 

recommends limiting the VOC content 

of cleaning solutions used in offset 

lithographic printing operations to 

70.0% VOC by weight in conjunction 

with work practice standards. The Texas 

rule revisions require the owner or 

operator of an affected offset 

lithographic printing line to reduce the 

VOC content of the cleaning solutions 

used in the printing process and provide 

several options for complying, including 

the following: Using low-VOC cleaning 

solutions; using low-VOC cleaning 

solution in conjunction with work 

practice standards; or using low vapor 

pressure cleaning solutions in 

conjunction with work practice 

standards. These revisions retain the 

existing Chapter 115 rule requiring a 

cleaning solution content limit of 70% 

by volume in conjunction with work 

practice standards as an option. Also, 

these revisions retain the previously 

existing Chapter 115 option to limit the 

cleaning solution content to 50% VOC 

by volume. Because the existing rules 

were determined by TCEQ to be at least 

as stringent as the 2006 CTG 

recommendations, TCEQ included these 

options to retain the flexibility afforded 

to owners and operators subject to the 

previous rules. The 2006 CTG also 

recommends specific work practices for 

cleaning solutions used by offset 

lithographic printing lines with 

uncontrolled potential to emit at least 

3.0 tpy of VOC. These rule revisions 

include the CTG’s recommended work 

practice standards for cleaning 

solutions. 

Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and 

Testing Requirements. All affected 

sources are required to comply with 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and testing 

requirements to demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the content limits in 

these rule revisions. 

Non-Substantive Revisions. In 

addition to the revisions described 

above to implement RACT for offset 

lithographic printing, these revisions 

include approvable grammatical, 

stylistic, and various other nonsubstantive changes to update the rule 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
13966 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

in accordance with current 

requirements, to improve readability, to 

establish consistency in the rules, and to 

conform to standards in the ‘‘Texas 

Legislative Council Drafting Manual,’’ 

dated September 2008. 

B. What is Texas’ approach and 

analysis for RACT for HGB and DFW for 

this CTG source category, and do the 

revisions meet RACT requirements? 

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

(B), states must insure RACT is in place 

for each source category for which EPA 

issued a CTG. As a part of a 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 

conducted its analyses by: (1) 

Identifying all categories of CTG and 

major non-CTG sources of VOC and 

NOX 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. The TCEQ revised its rules 

for Offset lithographic printers and 

supplemented its 2007 analysis in its 

April 6, 2010 submittals in response, in 

part, to EPA’s issuance of the CTG for 

Offset Lithographic printing. 

We have reviewed these revisions to 

Chapter 115 for Offset Lithographic 

Printing and have determined that they 

are in are in agreement with EPA’s CTG 

documents listed in Table 1 above. See 

our TSD prepared in conjunction with 

this document. Because these revisions 

are in agreement with our CTG, we are 

proposing that they satisfy RACT 

requirements, and by implementing 

these measures Texas is meeting the 

VOC RACT requirements for this source 

category in the HGB and DFW 1997 8- 

hour ozone nonattainment Areas. In 

addition, in its April 6, 2010, submittals 

to EPA for HGB and DFW, TCEQ states 

that it has reviewed the HGB and DFW 

VOC rules for Offset Lithographic 

Printing and certifies that they satisfy 

RACT requirements for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard by the application of 

control technology that is reasonably 

available considering technological and 

economic feasibility. We are proposing 

to approve these determinations that 

Texas VOC rules for Offset Lithographic 

Printing sources are in agreement with 

the CAA’s RACT requirements and as a 

result the Texas SIP satisfies the RACT 

requirements for this CTG source 

category in the HGB and DFW Areas 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. 

III. Proposed Action 

We are proposing to approve Texas’ 

2010 rule revisions for the VOC CTG 

source category identified in Table 1, 

Offset Lithographic Printing. In 

addition, we are proposing to find that 

for this CTG category Texas has RACTlevel controls in place for the HGB and 

DFW Areas under the 1997 8-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: February 25, 2014. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05384 Filed 3–11–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0542; FRL–9907–86– 

Region 6] 

Extension of Public Comment Period 

for Proposed Action; Texas; Revisions 

to the New Source Review State 

Implementation Plan; Flexible Permit 

Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: On February 12, 2014, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

published in the Federal Register a 

proposed rule to conditionally approve 

the Texas New Source Review (NSR) 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 

establishing the Flexible Permit Program 

and requested comments by March 14, 

2014. EPA is extending the original 

public comment period of 30 days for 

the proposed rule until April 4, 2014. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS