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
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13967 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 4, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2013–0542, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Ms. Stephanie Kordzi at 

kordzi.stephanie@epa.gov. 

• Mail or delivery: Ms. Stephanie 

Kordzi, Air Permits Section (6PD–R), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2013– 

0542. 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. 

Stephanie Kordzi (6PD–R), Air Permits 

Section, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave (6PD– 

R), Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202–2733. 

Telephone (214) 665–7520, email at 

kordzi.stephanie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. On February 12, 2014, we 

published in the Federal Register a 

proposed rule on the flexible permit 

program in Texas. In the proposal, we 

requested comment by March 14, 2014. 

We received a request from the 

Environmental Integrity Project on 

February 27, 2014, to extend the 

comment period to a total of 90 days 

from the original 30 day public 

comment period. After careful analysis, 

we decided to extend the comment 

period out an additional 21 days. The 

extension length was based on 

providing commenters an additional 17 

days following the Texas Commission 

on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 

public hearing scheduled for March 18, 

2014. This extension will provide an 

opportunity for submission of rebuttal 

and supplementary information until 

April 4, 2014. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds and incorporation 

by reference. 

Dated: March 5, 2014. 

Wren Stenger, 

Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division 

Director Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05382 Filed 3–11–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9907– 

65–Region 1] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the O’Connor Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 1 is issuing a 

Notice of Intent to Delete the O’Connor 

Superfund Site (Site) located in 

Augusta, Maine, from the National 

Priorities List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Maine, through the Maine 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

April 11, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1983–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: connelly.terry@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 617 918–0373. 

• Mail: Terrence Connelly, US EPA 

Region 1, Mailcode OSRR07–1, 5 Post 

Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 

02109–3919. 

• Hand delivery: US EPA Region 1, 5 

Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, 

MA 02109–3912. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983– 

0002. 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS