Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 62003 

concerning the processes established in 

the DoD ELAP or the DoD QSM. The 

DoD EDQW will document and resolve 

complaints promptly through the 

appropriate channels, consistently and 

objectively, and identify and implement 

any necessary corrective action arising 

from complaints. Complaints generally 

fall into one of four categories: 

(i) Complaints by any party against an 

accredited laboratory. 

(ii) Complaints by any party against 

an AB. 

(iii) Complaints by any party 

concerning any assessor acting on behalf 

of the AB. 

(iv) Complaints by any party against 

the DoD ELAP itself. 

(2) Limitations. The procedures in this 

paragraph: 

(i) Do not address appeals by 

laboratories regarding accreditation 

decisions by ABs. Appeals to decisions 

made by ABs regarding the accreditation 

status of any laboratory must be filed 

directly with the AB in accordance with 

agreements in place between the 

laboratory and the AB. 

(ii) Are not designed to handle 

allegations of unethical or illegal actions 

as described in paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of 

this section. 

(iii) Do not address complaints 

involving contractual requirements 

between a laboratory and its client. All 

contracting issues must be resolved with 

the contracting officer. 

(3) Procedures. (i) All complaints 

must be filed in writing to the EDQW 

chair. All complaints must provide the 

basis for the complaint (i.e., the specific 

process or requirement in the DoD ELAP 

or the DoD QSM that has not been 

satisfied or is believed to need 

changing) and supporting 

documentation, including descriptions 

of attempts to resolve the complaint by 

the laboratory or the AB. 

(ii) Upon receipt of the complaint, the 

DoD EDQW chair will assign a unique 

identifier to the complaint, send a 

notice of acknowledgement to the 

complainant, and forward a copy of the 

complaint to the EDQW component 

principals. 

(iii) In consultation with the EDQW 

component principals, the DoD EDQW 

chair will make a preliminary 

determination of the validity of the 

complaint. Following preliminary 

review, the actions available to the DoD 

EDQW chair include: 

(A) If the DoD EDQW chair 

determines the complaint should be 

handled directly between the 

complainant and the subject of the 

complaint, the DoD EDQW will refer the 

complaint to the laboratory, or AB, as 

appropriate. The DoD EDQW will notify 

the complainant of the referral, but will 

take no further action with respect to 

investigation of the compliant. The 

subject of the complaint will be 

expected to respond to the complainant 

in accordance with their established 

procedures and timelines. A copy of the 

response will be provided to the DoD 

EDQW. 

(B) If insufficient information has 

been provided to determine whether the 

complaint has merit, the DoD EDQW 

will return the complaint to the 

complainant with a request for 

additional supporting documentation. 

(C) If the complaint appears to have 

merit and the parties to the complaint 

have been unable to resolve it, the DoD 

EDQW will investigate the complaint 

and recommend actions for its 

resolution. 

(D) If available information does not 

support the complaint, the DoD EDQW 

may reject the complaint. 

(E) If the complaint alleges 

inappropriate laboratory practices or 

other misconduct, the DoD EDQW chair 

will consult legal counsel to determine 

the recommended course of action. 

(iv) In all cases, the DoD EDQW will 

notify the complainant and any other 

entity involved in the complaint and 

explain the response of the EDQW to the 

complaint. 

(4) Continual Improvement. The DoD 

EDQW will look into root causes and 

trends in complaints to help identify 

actions that should be taken by the DoD 

EDQW, or any parties involved with 

DoD ELAP, to prevent recurrence of 

problems that led to the complaints. 

(5) Data and Records Management. 

Through NAVSEASYSCOM, the DoD 

EDQW will maintain copies of all 

complaint documentation in accordance 

with Secretary of the Navy Manual M– 

5210.1. 

Dated: October 7, 2015. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2015–25999 Filed 10–14–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0864; FRL–9935–67- 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Infrastructure and Interstate Transport 

for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the Federal Clean Air 

Act (CAA) the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submission from the State of Texas for 

the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The 

submittal addresses how the existing 

SIP provides for implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of the 

2008 Pb NAAQS (infrastructure SIP or 

i-SIP). This i-SIP ensures that the State’s 

SIP is adequate to meet the state’s 

responsibilities under the CAA, 

including the four CAA requirements 

for interstate transport of Pb emissions. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before November 16, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R06–OAR–2011–0864, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions. 

• Email: Tracie Donaldson at 

Donaldson.tracie@epa.gov. 

• Mail or delivery: Mary Stanton, 

Chief, Air Grants Section (6PD–S), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. Deliveries are accepted 

only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 

p.m. weekdays, and not on legal 

holidays. Special arrangements should 

be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2011– 

0864. 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 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information that you consider to be CBI 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
62004 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1 ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean 

Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 

Pb NAAQS,’’ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, 

October 14, 2011, http://epa.gov/air/urbanair/

sipstatus/docs/Guidance_on_Infrastructure_SIP_

Elements_Multipollutant_FINAL_Sept_2013.pdf. 

2Additional information on: The history of Pb, its 

levels, forms and, determination of compliance; 

EPA’s approach for reviewing i-SIPs; the details of 

the SIP submittal and EPA’s evaluation; the effect 

of recent court decisions on i-SIPs; the statute and 

regulatory citations in the Texas SIP specific to this 

review; the specific i-SIP applicable CAA and EPA 

regulatory citations; Federal Register Notice 

citations for Texas SIP approvals; Texas’ minor New 

Source Review program and EPA approval 

activities; and Texas’ Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) program can be found in the 

Technical Support Document (TSD). 

3The specific nonattainment area plan 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(I) are subject to 

the timing requirements of section 172, not the 

timing requirement of section 110(a)(1). Thus, 

section 110(a)(2)(A) does not require that states 

submit regulations or emissions limits specifically 

for attaining the 2008 Pb NAAQS. Those SIP 

provisions are due as part of each state’s attainment 

plan, and will be addressed separately from the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A). In the context 

of an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating the 

existing SIP provisions for this purpose. Instead, 

EPA is only evaluating whether the state’s SIP has 

basic structural provisions for the implementation 

of the NAAQS. 

4http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=

64943a7422504656d8d72e

9d6f87f177&mc=true&node=sp40.5.52.ss&rgn=div6. 

5See the TSD page 4 for additional information. 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 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, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 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 information on submitting 

comments, please visit http://

www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-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: 

Tracie Donaldson, telephone 214–665– 

6633, Donaldson.tracie@epa.gov. To 

inspect the hard copy materials, please 

schedule an appointment with her or 

Bill Deese at 214–665–7253. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

the EPA. 

I. Background 

On October 5, 1978, we published the 

first NAAQS for lead (Pb) (43 FR 46246). 

Both the primary and secondary 

standards were set at 1.5 micrograms 

per cubic meter (mg/m3). In 2008, 

following a periodic review of the 

NAAQS for lead, we revised the 

NAAQS to 0.15 mg/m3 for both the 

primary and secondary standards (73 FR 

66964, November 13, 2008). For more 

information on these standards, please 

see the Technical Support Document 

(TSD) and EPA Web site http://epa.gov/ 

airquality/lead. 

Each state must submit an i-SIP 

within three years after the 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA 

includes a list of specific elements the 

i-SIP must meet. On October 14, 2011, 

the EPA issued guidance addressing the 

i-SIP elements for NAAQS.1 The 

Chairman of the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 

submitted an i-SIP revision on October 

14, 2011 to address this revised NAAQS 

for Pb and a separate September 14, 

2011 SIP submission that addresses the 

interstate transport of Pb emissions. 

EPA is proposing approval of the 

Texas i-SIP submittals for the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS 2 as meeting the requirements 

for an i-SIP, including the requirements 

for interstate transport of Pb emissions. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation of the Texas’ i-SIP 

and Interstate Transport Submittals 

The TCEQ submittals on September 

14, 2011 and October 14, 2011 provided 

a demonstration of how the existing 

Texas SIP met all the requirements of 

the 2008 Pb NAAQS. These SIP 

submittals became complete by 

operation of law on March 14, 2012, and 

April 14, 2012, respectively pursuant to 

CAA section 110(k)(1)(B). Below is a 

summary of EPA’s evaluation of the 

Texas i-SIP for each applicable element 

of CAA 110(a)(2) A–M. 

(A) Emission limits and other control 

measures: The SIP must include 

enforceable emission limits and other 

control measures, means or techniques, 

schedules for compliance and other 

related matters as needed to implement, 

maintain and enforce each of the 

NAAQS.3

The Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA) 

provides the TCEQ, its Chairman, and 

its Executive Director with broad legal 

authority. They can adopt emission 

standards and compliance schedules 

applicable to regulated entities; 

emission standards and limitations and 

any other measures necessary for 

attainment and maintenance of national 

standards; enforce applicable laws, 

regulations, standards and compliance 

schedules; and seek injunctive relief. 

This authority has been employed in the 

past to adopt and submit multiple 

revisions to the Texas State 

Implementation Plan. The approved SIP 

for Texas is documented at 40 CFR part 

52.1620, Subpart SS.4 TCEQ’s air 

quality rules and standards are codified 

at Title 30, Part 1 of the Texas 

Administrative Code (TAC). Numerous 

parts of the regulations codified into 30 

TAC necessary for implementing and 

enforcing the NAAQS have been 

adopted into the SIP.5

(B) Ambient air quality monitoring/

data system: The SIP must provide for 

establishment and implementation of 

ambient air quality monitors, collection 

and analysis of monitoring data, and 

providing such data to EPA upon 

request. 

The TCAA provides the authority 

allowing the TCEQ to collect air 

monitoring data, quality-assure the 

results, and report the data. TCEQ 

maintains and operates a Pb-monitoring 

network to measure ambient levels of Pb 

in accordance with EPA regulations 

which specify siting and monitoring 

requirements. All monitoring data is 

measured using EPA approved methods 

and subject to the EPA quality assurance 

requirements. TCEQ submits all 

required data to EPA, following the EPA 

regulations. The Texas statewide 

monitoring network was initially 

approved into the SIP (37 FR 10842, 

10895), was revised on March 7, 1978 

(43 FR 9275), and it undergoes annual 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 62005 

6A copy of the 2014 Annual Air Monitoring 

Network Plan and EPA’s approval letter are 

included in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. 

7A copy of TCEQ’s 2010 5-year ambient 

monitoring network assessment and EPA’s approval 

letter are included in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. 

8 see http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/

monops/sites/mon_sites.html and http://

www17.tceq.texas.gov/tamis/

index.cfm?fuseaction=home.welcome 

9As discussed in further detail in the TSD 

beginning on page 6. 

10EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove 

the existing Texas minor NSR program to the extent 

that it may be inconsistent with EPA’s regulations 

governing this program. EPA has maintained that 

the CAA does not require that new infrastructure 

SIP submissions correct any defects in existing 

EPA-approved provisions of minor NSR programs 

in order for EPA to approve the infrastructure SIP 

for element C (e.g., 76 FR 41076–41079). EPA 

believes that a number of states may have minor 

NSR provisions that are contrary to the existing 

EPA regulations for this program. The statutory 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) provide for 

considerable flexibility in designing minor NSR 

programs. 

11As discussed further in the TSD 

12http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/2011/. 

13http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/2011/report/

fullreport.pdf. 

14See the TSD and the docket for this rulemaking 

for more detailed information on Pb-emitting 

sources in Texas and the Pb emissions reported in 

calendar year 2011. 

review by EPA.6 In addition, TCEQ 

conducts a recurrent assessment of its 

monitoring network every five years, 

which includes an evaluation of the 

need to conduct ambient monitoring for 

Pb, as required by EPA rules. The most 

recent of these 5-year monitoring 

network assessments was approved by 

EPA in December 2010.7 The TCEQ Web 

site provides the monitor locations and 

posts past and current concentrations of 

criteria pollutants measured in the 

State’s network of monitors.8

(C) Program for enforcement: The SIP 

must include the following three 

elements: (1) A program providing for 

enforcement of the measures in 

paragraph A above; (2) a program for the 

regulation of the modification and 

construction of stationary sources as 

necessary to protect the applicable 

NAAQS (i.e., state-wide permitting of 

minor sources); and (3) a permit 

program to meet the major source 

permitting requirements of the CAA (for 

areas designated as attainment or 

unclassifiable for the NAAQS).9

(1) Enforcement of SIP Measures. As 

noted in (A), the TCAA provides 

authority for the TCEQ, its Chairman, 

and its Executive Director to enforce the 

requirements of the TCAA, and any 

regulations, permits, or final compliance 

orders. These statutes also provide the 

TCEQ, its Chairman, and its Executive 

Director with general enforcement 

powers. Among other things, they can 

file lawsuits to compel compliance with 

the statutes and regulations; commence 

civil actions; issue field citations; 

conduct investigations of regulated 

entities; collect criminal and civil 

penalties; develop and enforce rules and 

standards related to protection of air 

quality; issue compliance orders; pursue 

criminal prosecutions; investigate, enter 

into remediation agreements; and issue 

emergency cease and desist orders. The 

TCAA also provides additional 

enforcement authorities and funding 

mechanisms. 

(2) Minor New Source Review (NSR). 

The SIP is required to include measures 

to regulate construction and 

modification of stationary sources to 

protect the NAAQS. The Texas minor 

NSR permitting requirements are 

approved as part of the SIP.10

(3) Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) permit program. 

The Texas PSD portion of the SIP covers 

all NSR regulated pollutants as well as 

the requirements for the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS and has been approved by EPA 

(79 FR 66626, November 10, 2014).11

(D) Interstate and international 

transport: The statue requires that the 

SIP contain adequate provisions 

prohibiting Pb emissions to other states 

which will (1) contribute significantly to 

nonattainment of the NAAQS, (2) 

interfere with maintenance of the 

NAAQS, (3) interfere with measures 

required to prevent significant 

deterioration or (4) interfere with 

measures to protect visibility (CAA 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)). 

With respect to significant 

contribution to nonattainment or 

interference with maintenance of the Pb 

NAAQS, the physical properties of Pb, 

which is a metal and very dense, 

prevent Pb emissions from experiencing 

a significant degree of travel in the 

ambient air. No complex chemistry is 

needed to form Pb or Pb compounds in 

the ambient air; therefore, ambient 

concentrations of Pb are typically 

highest near Pb sources. More 

specifically, there is a sharp decrease in 

ambient Pb concentrations as the 

distance from the source increases. 

According to EPA’s report entitled Our 

Nation’s Air: Status and Trends 

Through 2010,12 Pb concentrations that 

are not near a source of Pb are 

approximately 8 times less than the 

typical concentrations near the source.13

For these reasons, EPA believes that the 

interstate transport requirements 

pertaining to significant contribution to 

nonattainment or interference with 

maintenance of the Pb NAAQS can be 

satisfied through a state’s assessment as 

to whether a lead source located within 

its state in close proximity to a state 

border has emissions that contribute 

significantly to the nonattainment in or 

interfere with maintenance of the 

NAAQS in the neighboring state. 

Texas submitted a separate SIP 

submission addressing the interstate 

transport provisions of subsection 

(2)(D)(i)(I), in which air dispersion 

modeling was conducted for seven 

operational sources in the state of Texas 

with the highest reported emissions of 

Pb in calendar year 2008: Fort Hood 

near Killeen; Oxbow Carbon in Port 

Arthur; ASARCO Refining near 

Amarillo; ECS Refining in Terrell; Exide 

Technologies in Frisco; Coleto Creek 

Power Station near Fannin; and the San 

Miguel Electric Cooperative near 

Christine. Two of these sources, Coleto 

Creek and San Miguel, reported 

emissions of Pb between 0.5 and 1.0 

tons in 2008, and the remaining five 

sources reported emissions equal to or 

exceeding 1.0 ton. The modeled lead 

emissions from Coleto Creek and San 

Miguel each result in ambient 

concentrations of less than 1% of the 

level of the 2008 Pb NAAQS and 

indicate that there will be no impact on 

surrounding states. The Fort Hood and 

Oxbow model results predict levels of 

less than 15% of the NAAQS. For Exide 

Technologies, ECS Refining, and 

ASARCO Refining, the predicted 

concentrations dropped to below half 

the level of the NAAQS within 2 

kilometers of the property line. For 

more detailed information on these 

modeling results, see the TSD and the 

Interstate Transport SIP submission in 

the docket for this rulemaking. 

The Frisco Texas area is the one area 

within the state of Texas that is 

designated as nonattainment with 

respect to the 2008 Pb NAAQS. Exide 

Technologies battery recycling center 

was the sole contributing source 

responsible for the ambient Pb 

concentrations that led to the 

nonattainment designation. However, 

the source has been permanently shut 

down. During calendar year 2011 there 

were eight significant sources of Pb 

emissions within Texas that reported Pb 

emissions in amounts approximately 

equal to or exceeding 0.5 tons per year, 

including the aforementioned Exide 

Technologies in Frisco; however, none 

of these sources of Pb emissions are 

located within two miles of a 

neighboring state line. Total reported Pb 

emissions within Texas in 2011 were 

31.2 tons,14 and most of the Pb-emitting 

sources within the state are general 

aviation airports where aviation 

gasoline containing tetra-ethyl lead is 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
62006 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

15Analysis by Mark Schmidt, OAQPS, ‘‘Ambient 

Pb’s Contribution to Class I Area Visibility 

Impairment,’’ June 17, 2011. 

still in use by propeller-driven aircraft. 

Therefore, EPA finds that Texas has 

presumptively satisfied the 

requirements of subsection (2)(D)(i)(I). 

The necessary provisions under 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) are contained 

in the PSD portion of the SIP, as 

discussed with respect to element (C) 

above. With regard to the applicable 

requirements for visibility protection of 

visibility under subsection (2)(D)(i)(II), 

significant impacts from Pb emissions 

from stationary sources are expected to 

be limited to short distances from 

emitting sources and most, if not all, 

stationary sources of Pb emissions are 

located at sufficient distances from 

Class I areas such that visibility impacts 

would be negligible. Although Pb can be 

a component of coarse and fine 

particles, Pb generally comprises only a 

small fraction these particles. A recent 

EPA study conducted to evaluate the 

extent that Pb could impact visibility 

concluded that Pb-related visibility 

impacts at Class I areas were found to 

be insignificant (e.g., less than 0.10% 

contribution).15

The Texas SIP includes provisions 

that satisfy the CAA interstate pollution 

abatement requirements of 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). There are no findings 

by EPA that air emissions originating in 

Texas affect other countries. Therefore, 

we propose to approve the portion of 

the Texas SO2 i-SIP pertaining to CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). 

(E) Adequate authority, resources, 

implementation, and oversight: The SIP 

must provide for the following: (1) 

Necessary assurances that the state (and 

other entities within the state 

responsible for implementing the SIP) 

will have adequate personnel, funding, 

and authority under state or local law to 

implement the SIP, and that there are no 

legal impediments to such 

implementation; (2) requirements 

relating to state boards; and (3) 

necessary assurances that the state has 

responsibility for ensuring adequate 

implementation of any plan provision 

for which it relies on local governments 

or other entities to carry out that portion 

of the plan. 

Both elements A and E address the 

requirement that there is adequate 

authority to implement and enforce the 

SIP and that there are no legal 

impediments. 

This i-SIP submission for the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS describes the SIP regulations 

governing the various functions of 

personnel within the TCEQ, including 

the administrative, technical support, 

planning, enforcement, and permitting 

functions of the program. 

With respect to funding, the TCAA 

requires TCEQ to establish an emissions 

fee schedule for sources in order to fund 

the reasonable costs of administering 

various air pollution control programs 

and authorizes TCEQ to collect 

additional fees necessary to cover 

reasonable costs associated with 

processing of air permit applications. 

EPA conducts periodic program reviews 

to ensure that the state has adequate 

resources and funding to, among other 

things, implement and enforce the SIP. 

As required by the CAA, the Texas 

statutes and the SIP stipulate that any 

board or body, which approves permits 

or enforcement orders, must have at 

least a majority of members who 

represent the public interest and do not 

derive any ‘‘significant portion’’ of their 

income from persons subject to permits 

and enforcement orders or who appear 

before the board on issues related to the 

Federal CAA or the TCAA. The 

members of the board or body, or the 

head of an agency with similar powers, 

are required to adequately disclose any 

potential conflicts of interest. 

With respect to assurances that the 

State has responsibility to implement 

the SIP adequately when it authorizes 

local or other agencies to carry out 

portions of the plan, the Texas statutes 

and the SIP designate the TCEQ as the 

primary air pollution control agency 

and TCEQ maintains authority to ensure 

implementation of any applicable plan 

portion. 

(F) Stationary source monitoring 

system: The SIP must provide for the 

establishment of a system to monitor 

emissions from stationary sources and 

to submit periodic emission reports. It 

must require the installation, 

maintenance, and replacement of 

equipment, and the implementation of 

other necessary steps, by owners or 

operators of stationary sources, to 

monitor emissions from sources. The 

SIP shall also require periodic reports 

on the nature and amounts of emissions 

and emissions-related data from 

sources, and require that the state 

correlate the source reports with 

emission limitations or standards 

established under the CAA. These 

reports must be made available for 

public inspection at reasonable times. 

The TCAA authorizes the TCEQ to 

require persons engaged in operations 

which result in air pollution to monitor 

or test emissions and to file reports 

containing information relating to the 

nature and amount of emissions. There 

also are SIP-approved state regulations 

pertaining to sampling and testing and 

requirements for reporting of emissions 

inventories. In addition, SIP-approved 

rules establish general requirements for 

maintaining records and reporting 

emissions. 

The TCEQ uses this information, in 

addition to information obtained from 

other sources, to track progress towards 

maintaining the NAAQS, developing 

control and maintenance strategies, 

identifying sources and general 

emission levels, and determining 

compliance with SIP-approved 

regulations and additional EPA 

requirements. The SIP requires this 

information be made available to the 

public. Provisions concerning the 

handling of confidential data and 

proprietary business information are 

included in the SIP-approved 

regulations. These rules specifically 

exclude from confidential treatment any 

records concerning the nature and 

amount of emissions reported by 

sources. 

(G) Emergency authority: The SIP 

must provide for authority to address 

activities causing imminent and 

substantial endangerment to public 

health or welfare or the environment 

and to include contingency plans to 

implement such authorities as 

necessary. 

The TCAA provides TCEQ with 

authority to address environmental 

emergencies, and TCEQ has contingency 

plans to implement emergency episode 

provisions. Upon a finding that any 

owner/operator is unreasonably 

affecting the public health, safety or 

welfare, or the health of animal or plant 

life, or property, the TCAA and 30 TAC 

chapters 35 and 118 authorize TCEQ to, 

after a reasonable attempt to give notice, 

declare a state of emergency and issue 

without hearing an emergency special 

order directing the owner/operator to 

cease such pollution immediately. 

The ‘‘Texas Air Quality Control 

Contingency Plan for Prevention of Air 

Pollution Episodes’’ is part of the Texas 

SIP. However, because of the low levels 

of Pb emissions emitted and monitored 

statewide, Texas is not required to have 

contingency plans for the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS. However, to provide additional 

protection, the State has general 

emergency powers to address any 

possible dangerous Pb-related air 

pollution episode if necessary to protect 

the environment and public health. 

(H) Future SIP revisions: States must 

have the authority to revise their SIPs in 

response to changes in the NAAQS, 

availability of improved methods for 

attaining the NAAQS, or in response to 

an EPA finding that the SIP is 

substantially inadequate to attain the 

NAAQS. 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 62007 

The TCAA authorizes the TCEQ to 

revise the Texas SIP, as necessary, to 

account for revisions of an existing 

NAAQS, establishment of a new 

NAAQS, to attain and maintain a 

NAAQS, to abate air pollution, to adopt 

more effective methods of attaining a 

NAAQS, and to respond to EPA SIP 

calls concerning NAAQS adoption or 

implementation. 

(I) Nonattainment areas: The CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(I) requires that in the 

case of a plan or plan revision for areas 

designated as nonattainment areas, 

states must meet applicable 

requirements of part D of the CAA, 

relating to SIP requirements for 

designated nonattainment areas. 

Texas currently has one 

nonattainment area for the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS, located in the city of Frisco in 

Collin County. For more information on 

the Frisco nonattainment area and past 

nonattainment areas under the 1978 Pb 

NAAQS, please refer to the TSD for this 

rulemaking. 

As noted earlier, EPA does not expect 

infrastructure SIP submissions to 

address subsection (I). The specific SIP 

submissions for designated 

nonattainment areas, as required under 

CAA title I, part D, are subject to 

different submission schedules than 

those for section 110 infrastructure 

elements. Instead, EPA will take action 

on part D attainment plan SIP 

submissions, including the attainment 

plan submission for the Frisco 

nonattainment area, through a separate 

rulemaking process governed by the 

requirements for nonattainment areas, 

as described in part D. 

(J) Consultation with government 

officials, public notification, PSD and 

visibility protection: The SIP must meet 

the following three CAA requirements: 

(1) Section 121, relating to interagency 

consultation; (2) section 127 relating to 

public notification of NAAQS 

exceedances and related issues; and, (3) 

prevention of significant deterioration of 

air quality and visibility protection. 

(1) Interagency consultation: As 

required by the TCAA, there must be a 

public hearing before the adoption of 

any regulations or emission control 

requirements, and all interested persons 

must be given a reasonable opportunity 

to review the action that is being 

proposed and to submit data or 

arguments, either orally or in writing, 

and to examine the testimony of 

witnesses from the hearing. In addition, 

the TCAA provides the TCEQ the power 

and duty to establish cooperative 

agreements with local authorities, and 

consult with other states, the federal 

government and other interested 

persons or groups in regard to matters 

of common interest in the field of air 

quality control. Furthermore, the Texas 

PSD SIP rules mandate that the TCEQ 

shall provide for public participation 

and notification regarding permitting 

applications to any other state or local 

air pollution control agencies, local 

government officials of the city or 

county where the source will be located, 

tribal authorities, and Federal Land 

Managers (FLMs) whose lands may be 

affected by emissions from the source or 

modification. Additionally, the State’s 

PSD SIP rules require the TCEQ to 

consult with FLMs regarding permit 

applications for sources with the 

potential to impact Class I Federal 

Areas. The SIP also includes a 

commitment to consult continually with 

the FLMs on the review and 

implementation of the visibility 

program, and the State recognizes the 

expertise of the FLMs in monitoring and 

new source review applicability 

analyses for visibility and has agreed to 

notify the FLMs of any advance 

notification or early consultation with a 

major new or modifying source prior to 

the submission of a permit application. 

Likewise, the State’s Transportation 

Conformity SIP rules provide 

procedures for interagency consultation, 

resolution of conflicts, and public 

notification. 

(2) Public Notification: The i-SIP 

submission from Texas provides the SIP 

regulatory citations requiring the TCEQ 

to regularly notify the public of 

instances or areas in which any NAAQS 

are exceeded. Included in the SIP are 

the rules for TCEQ to advise the public 

of the health hazard associated with 

such exceedances; and enhance public 

awareness of measures that can prevent 

such exceedances and of ways in which 

the public can participate in the 

regulatory and other efforts to improve 

air quality. In addition, as discussed for 

infrastructure element B above, the 

TCEQ air monitoring Web site provides 

quality data for each of the monitoring 

stations in Texas; this data is provided 

instantaneously for certain pollutants, 

such as ozone. The Web site also 

provides information on the health 

effects of lead, ozone, particulate matter, 

and other criteria pollutants. 

(3) PSD and Visibility Protection: The 

PSD requirements for this element are 

the same as those addressed under 

element (C) above. The Texas SIP 

requirements relating to visibility and 

regional haze are not affected when EPA 

establishes or revises a NAAQS. 

Therefore, EPA believes that there are 

no new visibility protection 

requirements due to the revision of the 

Pb NAAQS in 2008, and consequently 

there are no newly applicable visibility 

protection obligations pursuant to 

infrastructure element (J). 

(K) Air quality and modeling/data: 

The SIP must provide for performing air 

quality modeling, as prescribed by EPA, 

to predict the effects on ambient air 

quality of any emissions of any NAAQS 

pollutant, and for submission of such 

data to EPA upon request. 

The TCEQ has the authority and duty 

under the TCAA to investigate and 

develop facts providing for the 

functions of environmental air quality 

assessments. Past modeling and 

emissions reductions measures have 

been submitted by the State and 

approved into the SIP. Additionally, 

TCEQ has the ability to perform 

modeling for the primary and secondary 

Pb standards and other criteria pollutant 

NAAQS on a case-by-case permit basis 

consistent with their SIP-approved PSD 

rules and EPA guidance. As discussed 

with regard to element (D) above, TCEQ 

has conducted air quality dispersion 

modeling on the emissions of Pb from 

numerous stationary sources to 

determine the impact of such emissions 

on air quality in neighboring states. 

TCEQ has also conducted extensive 

modeling on the emissions of Pb from 

the former Exide Technologies facility 

located in the Frisco nonattainment area 

and has prepared and submitted an 

attainment demonstration with a control 

strategy based on the results of this 

modeling to the EPA. 

The TCAA authorizes and requires 

TCEQ to cooperate with the federal 

government and local authorities 

concerning matters of common interest 

in the field of air quality control, 

thereby allowing the agency to make 

such submissions to the EPA. 

(L) Permitting Fees: The SIP must 

require each major stationary source to 

pay permitting fees to the permitting 

authority as a condition of any permit 

required under the CAA. The fees cover 

the cost of reviewing and acting upon 

any application for such a permit, and, 

if the permit is issued, the costs of 

implementing and enforcing the terms 

of the permit. The fee requirement 

applies until such a time when a fee 

program is established by the state 

pursuant to Title V of the CAA, and is 

submitted to and is approved by EPA. 

See the discussion for element (E) 

above for the description of the 

mandatory collection of permitting fees 

outlined in the SIP. 

(M) Consultation/participation by 

affected local entities: The SIP must 

provide for consultation and 

participation by local political 

subdivisions affected by the SIP. 

See the discussion for element (J)(1) 

and (2) above for a description of the 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
62008 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

SIP’s public participation process, the 

authority to advise and consult, and the 

PSD SIP’s public participation 

requirements. Additionally, the TCAA 

also requires initiation of cooperative 

action between local authorities and the 

TCEQ, between one local authority and 

another, or among any combination of 

local authorities and the TCEQ for 

control of air pollution in areas having 

related air pollution problems that 

overlap the boundaries of political 

subdivisions, and entering into 

agreements and compacts with 

adjoining states and Indian tribes, where 

appropriate. The transportation 

conformity component of the Texas SIP 

requires that interagency consultation 

and opportunity for public involvement 

be provided before making 

transportation conformity 

determinations and before adopting 

applicable SIP revisions on 

transportation-related issues. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

October 14, 2011 infrastructure SIP and 

the September 14, 2011 interstate 

transport submissions from Texas, 

which address the requirements of CAA 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as applicable 

to the 2008 Pb NAAQS. Specifically, 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

following infrastructure elements: 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), 

(H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). EPA is not 

acting on the submittal pertaining to 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(I)— 

Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan 

Revisions because EPA believes these 

need not be addressed in the i-SIP. 

Based upon review of the state’s 

infrastructure and interstate transport 

SIP submissions, in light of the relevant 

statutory and regulatory authorities and 

provisions referenced in these 

submissions or referenced in the Texas 

SIP, EPA believes that Texas has the 

infrastructure in place to address all 

applicable required elements of sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) (except otherwise 

noted) to ensure that the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS are implemented in the state. 

We also are proposing to approve the 

State’s demonstration that it meets the 

four statutory requirements for interstate 

transport of Pb emissions. 

V. 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. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 

this action merely proposes to approve 

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). 

EPA is not proposing to approve this 

infrastructure SIP certification 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, this proposed approval of an 

infrastructure SIP certification does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead (Pb), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: September 30, 2015. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2015–26122 Filed 10–14–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 224 

RIN 0648–XD314 

Finding for a Petition To Exclude 

Federally-Maintained Dredged Port 

Channels From New York to 

Jacksonville From Vessel Speed 

Restrictions Designed To Reduce 

Vessel Collisions With North Atlantic 

Right Whales 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Petition finding. 

SUMMARY: NMFS received a petition to 

exclude federally-maintained dredged 

channels and pilot boarding areas (and 

the immediately adjacent waters) for 

ports from New York to Jacksonville 

from the vessel speed restrictions that 

were established to reduce the threat of 

vessel collisions with North Atlantic 

right whales. After reviewing the 

information in the petition and public 

comments thereon, NMFS finds that the 

petition does not present substantial 

information indicating that that 

exclusion of these areas is necessary to 

address the concerns, and denies the 

petition. NMFS will review and revise 

our existing compliance guide to 

provide clarifying information about the 

navigational safety exception (i.e., the 

October 10, 2008, final rule’s deviation 

provision) for the speed restrictions. 

DATES: October 15, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Notice of receipt of the 

petition, information related to the 

previous request for public comment, 

and related information is available at: 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/

shipstrike/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregory Silber, Office of Protected 

Resources, Silver Spring, MD (301) 427– 

8402. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS