2846 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

emission limitations for EGUs in 

Pennsylvania which includes Cheswick, 

no further action by EPA would be 

required to address the limited 

disapproval if finalized. This conclusion 

is based on our review of the March 25, 

2014 SIP revision as well as 

Pennsylvania’s December 20, 2010 

regional haze SIP submission including 

technical data and supporting analysis. 

Upon final action on this SIP revision, 

CSAPR for SO2 and NOX BART will 

supercede the previous SO2 and NOX

BART determinations for Cheswick 

included in Pennsylvania’s regional 

haze SIP as EPA will implement CSAPR 

beginning January 1, 2015. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA 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 proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this 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 CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule 

revising Pennsylvania’s regional haze 

SIP pertaining to BART requirements for 

Cheswick 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: December 23, 2014. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00742 Filed 1–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0804; FRL–9921–84– 

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), and 

Dallas Fort Worth (DFW) 1997 8-Hour 

ozone nonattainment areas. The HGB 

area consists of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort 

Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, 

Montgomery and Waller counties. The 

DFW area consists of Collin, Dallas, 

Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, 

Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant counties. 

Specifically, we are proposing to 

approve portions of multiple revisions 

to the Texas SIP submitted by the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ) as meeting Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

requirements. The RACT requirements 

apply to sources of Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) and Oxides of 

Nitrogen (NOX) in these areas. This 

action is in accordance with the federal 

Clean Air Act (the Act, CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 20, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2013–0804, 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–2013– 

0804. 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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules 2847 

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 75202–2733. 

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) 

665–6691, 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? 

B. What is RACT? 

II. Evaluation 

A. What is TCEQ’s approach and analysis 

to RACT? 

B. What Control Techniques Guidelines 

(CTG) source categories are we 

addressing in this action? 

C. Are there negative declarations for 

sources of emissions within these 

nonattainment areas? 

D. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for VOC sources based on 

their submittals acceptable? 

E. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for NOX sources based on 

their submittals acceptable? 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. What actions are we proposing? 

We are proposing to approve multiple 

revisions, in whole or in part, to the 

Texas SIP submitted to EPA as follows: 

The RACT-related rule revisions dated 

December 6, 2013, January 17, 2012, and 

June 13, 2007, as well as the RACT 

analysis portions of attainment 

demonstration plans of January 17, 

2012, April 6, 2010, and June 13, 2007 

for the DFW and HGB areas. 

The December 6, 2013 submittal 

concerns rule revisions to 30 TAC, 

Chapter 115 Control of Air Pollution 

from Volatile Organic Compounds for 

solvent using processes and surface 

coating application systems. We are 

proposing to approve all of this 

submittal. 

The January 17, 2012 submittal 

concerns rule revisions to 30 TAC, 

Chapter 115 Control of Air Pollution 

from Volatile Organic Compounds 

intended to implement RACT for both 

HGB and DFW areas. The submittal will 

limit VOC content of coatings and 

solvents used in Flexible Package 

Printing, Industrial Cleaning Solvents, 

Large Appliance Coatings, Metal 

Furniture Coatings, Paper, Film, and 

Foil Coatings, Miscellaneous Industrial 

Adhesives, Automobile and Light-Duty 

Truck Assembly Coatings, and 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings operations. We are proposing 

to approve all of this submittal. 

Another submittal also dated January 

17, 2012 contains a corresponding 

analysis to demonstrate RACT is in 

place for multiple source categories in 

the HGB area. We are proposing to 

approve that RACT is in place for the 

source categories listed in the paragraph 

above, and we are proposing to approve 

the Flexographic and Rotogravure 

Printing sector for the HGB area of the 

RACT-related rule revisions which had 

not been previously approved. 

A third SIP submittal dated January 

17, 2012 contains RACT analysis for the 

DFW area. As a result of this submittal, 

and consistent with section 182(c) of the 

Act, the VOC or NOX major source 

threshold in the DFW area is lowered to 

50 Tons Per Year (TPY) from 100 TPY 

for RACT purposes under the 1997 8- 

Hour ozone standard. See EPA–R06– 

OAR–2012–0098 (TCEQ Rule Project 

No. 2010–022–SIP–NR) at 

www.regulations.gov. We are proposing 

to approve the RACT analysis portion of 

this submittal. 

The April 6, 2010 attainment 

demonstration submittal, among other 

things, concerns revisions to 30 TAC, 

Chapter 115 Control of Air Pollution 

from Volatile Organic Compounds for 

control of ozone pollution in the HGB 

area. Appendix D of this attainment 

demonstration plan is titled 

‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology Analysis,’’ and includes 

source categories affected by the newly 

EPA-issued Control Techniques 

Guidelines (CTGs), and NOX emissions 

sources. We are proposing to approve 

the RACT analysis portion of this 

submittal. 

The June 13, 2007 attainment 

demonstration submittal concerns 

revisions to 30 TAC, Chapter 115 

Control of Air Pollution from Volatile 

Organic Compounds. 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 B of the 

submittal). We are proposing to approve 

the RACT analysis portion of this 

submittal. 

We are proposing to approve the 

above-mentioned revisions, as well as 

confirm the RACT finding for revisions 

previously approved for Texas, into the 

Texas SIP. 

In consideration of the above 

proposed actions and RACT rule 

revisions previously approved for 

Texas, taken together, we are proposing 

to approve Texas’ RACT analysis as 

meeting the RACT requirements for all 

affected VOC and NOX sources for the 

DFW and HGB areas for the 1997 8-Hour 

ozone standard. 

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 September 17, 1979 (44 FR 53761). 

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 CTG 

and Alternative Control Techniques 

(ACT) documents. See http://

www.epa.gov/airquality/ozonepollution/

SIPToolkit/ctgs.html (URL dating May 

13, 2014) for a listing of EPA-issued 

CTGs and ACTs. 

The HGB area was designated as 

Severe for the 1997 8-Hour ozone 

NAAQS. See October 1, 2008 (73 FR 

56983). 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 section 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. See the two January 

17, 2012 submittals, and the December 

6, 2013 submittal. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2848 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Effective June 15, 2004, Collin, Dallas, 

Denton, Tarrant, Ellis, Johnson, 

Kaufman, Parker, and Rockwall counties 

were designated nonattainment for the 

1997 8-Hour ozone standard. The area 

was classified as Moderate 

nonattainment for the standard, with an 

attainment deadline of June 15, 2010. 

See January 14, 2009 (74 FR 1903). The 

area was reclassified to Serious on 

December 20, 2010 (75 FR 79302) 

because it failed to attain the standard 

by its attainment deadline of June 15, 

2010. Thus, per section 182(c) 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. 

Under section 183(b), EPA is required 

to periodically review and, as necessary, 

update CTGs. The EPA issued a number 

of new CTGs in 2006, 2007, and 2008. 

See section II(B) of this document. 

Accordingly, Texas revised its Chapter 

115 regulations to address these VOC 

RACT control measures. See the 

December 6, 2013, and January 17, 2012 

submittals. Also, see Appendix A of the 

Technical Support Document (TSD) 

prepared in conjunction with this 

rulemaking action for more information. 

II. Evaluation 

A. What is TCEQ’s approach and 

analysis to RACT? 

Texas revised its rules because 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 January 17, 2012 

submittals TCEQ conducted RACT 

analyses to demonstrate that the RACT 

requirements for CTG sources in the 

HGB and DFW 1997 8-Hour ozone 

nonattainment areas have been fulfilled; 

the TCEQ revised and supplemented 

these analyses for the HGB and DFW 

areas in its December 6, 2013 submittal. 

The TCEQ conducted its RACT analysis 

for VOC and NOX by: 1) Identifying all 

categories of CTG and major non-CTG 

sources of VOC emissions within the 

HGB and DFW areas; 2) Listing the state 

regulation that implements or exceeds 

RACT requirements for that CTG or nonCTG 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 or DFW areas. Accordingly, we are 

proposing that TCEQ’s submittals for all 

affected VOC sources in the HGB and 

DFW areas provide for the 

implementation of RACT. 

On October 5, 2005 (70 FR 58136), 

and September 6, 2006 (71 FR 52676) 

we approved RACT for all affected VOC 

and NOX sources for the HGB area for 

the 1-Hour ozone NAAQS. 

B. What Control Techniques Guidelines 

(CTG) source categories are we 

addressing in this action? 

In prior actions for both the HGB and 

DFW areas for the 1997 8-Hour ozone 

NAAQS, we approved several SIP 

revisions as meeting RACT. 

Under the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, for the HGB area, we approved 

SIP revisions as meeting RACT for all 

CTG source categories, and major NonCTG VOC sources, except for the 2006– 

2008 EPA-issued CTG series, in the HGB 

area (designated as Severe) on April 2, 

2013 (78 FR 19599), and April 15, 2014 

(79 FR 21144). Furthermore, we 

approved revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 

117 as meeting RACT for emissions 

sources of NOX in the HGB area 

(designated as Severe). See April 2, 2013 

(78 FR 19599). 

As a part of DFW ozone attainment 

demonstration plan we approved VOC 

RACT for the DFW designated as 

Moderate area. See January 14, 2009 (74 

FR 1903). 

In this action, we are addressing 

additional source categories affected by 

the newly EPA-issued CTGs for HGB 

(designated as Severe) and DFW 

(designated as Serious) areas for the 

1997 8-Hour ozone NAAQS, as well as 

proposing to approve Texas’ updated 

RACT analysis for the remaining source 

categories in the DFW area. 

Table 1 below contains a list of CTG 

source categories, EPA reference 

documents, and the corresponding 

sections of 30 TAC Chapter 115 that 

fulfill the applicable RACT 

requirements for these newly EPAissued CTGs. 

TABLE 1—CTG SOURCE CATEGORIES ISSUED BY EPA IN 2006–2008, EPA REFERENCE DOCUMENTS, AND

CORRESPONDING SECTION OF 30 TAC CHAPTER 115 FULFILLING RACT 

CTG Category EPA Reference documents 30 TAC Chapter 115 fulfilling 

RACT 

Flat Wood Paneling Coatings ......... Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, 

(EPA–453/R–06–004–2006/09).

Negative Declarations in DFW and 

HGB. 

Flexible Packaging Printing Materials.Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing, (EPA– 

453/R–06–003–2006/09).

Sections 115.430–115.439. 

Industrial Cleaning Solvents ........... Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents, 

(EPA–453/R–06–001–2006/09).

Sections 115.460–115.469. 

Offset Lithographic and Letterpress 

Printing.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and 

Letterpress Printing, (EPA–453/R–06–002–2006/09).

Sections 115.440–115.449 for Offset Lithographic Printing; Negative Declarations for Letterpress 

Printing in HGB and DFW. 

Large Appliance Coatings ............... Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings, (EPA 

453/R–07–004–2007/09).

Sections 115.450–115.459. 

Metal Furniture Coatings ................. Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coatings, (EPA 

453/R–07–005–2007/09).

Sections 115.450–115.459. 

Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings ....... Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings, 

(EPA 453/R–07–003–2007/09).

Sections 115.420–115.429; and 

115.450–115.459. 

Auto and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings.Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings, (EPA 453/R–08–006–2008/09).

Negative Declaration in HGB; Sections 115.450–115.459 in DFW. 

Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials.Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing 

Materials, (EPA 453/R–08–004–2008/09).

Negative Declarations in DFW and 

HGB. 

Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives Group IV Issued by EPA in 2008, Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives, (EPA 453/R–08–005–2008/09).

Sections 115.470–115.479. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules 2849 

TABLE 1—CTG SOURCE CATEGORIES ISSUED BY EPA IN 2006–2008, EPA REFERENCE DOCUMENTS, AND

CORRESPONDING SECTION OF 30 TAC CHAPTER 115 FULFILLING RACT—Continued 

CTG Category EPA Reference documents 30 TAC Chapter 115 fulfilling 

RACT 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic 

Parts Coatings.

Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic 

Parts Coatings, (EPA 453/R–08–003–2008/09).

Sections 115.450–115.459. 

The Flexographic and Rotogravure 

Printing sector was not specifically 

identified in the April 15, 2014 (79 FR 

21144) rulemaking action for the HGB 

area. The 30 TAC Chapter 115 sections 

430 through 439 fulfill the VOC control 

requirements for this particular sector. 

For a section-by-section evaluation of 

this sector see part 1 of the TSD. We are 

proposing to approve the VOC RACT for 

the Flexographic and Rotogravure 

Printing operations in the HGB area. 

On August 4, 2014 (79 FR 45105) we 

approved RACT for the Offset 

Lithographic Printing Operations in the 

DFW (Serious) and HGB (Severe) areas. 

Also, see docket No. EPA–R06–OAR– 

2010–0332 at www.regulations.gov. 

On September 9, 2014 (79 FR 53299) 

we approved revisions to 30 TAC 

Chapter 115 for control of VOC 

emissions for storage tanks in the DFW 

and HGB areas. In that rulemaking 

action, we also found that VOC control 

requirements for the VOC storage tanks 

source category in the DFW (Serious) 

and HGB (Severe) areas represent RACT. 

See docket No. EPA–R06–OAR–2012– 

0096 at www.regulations.gov. 

C. Are there negative declarations for 

sources of emissions within these 

nonattainment areas? 

Yes, there are negative declarations 

associated with the VOC source 

categories in the DFW and HGB areas. 

For the DFW area, Texas has declared 

that there are no fiberglass boat 

manufacturing materials, ship building 

and ship repair coating, leather tanning 

and finishing, surface coating for flat 

wood paneling, vegetable oil 

manufacturing, plywood veneer dryers, 

rubber tire manufacturing, and batch 

processes operations. We are proposing 

to approve the VOC RACT negative 

declaration for these operations in the 

DFW area. As such, TCEQ does not have 

to adopt VOC regulations relevant to 

these source categories at this time for 

the DFW area. However, if a major 

source of these categories locates in the 

DFW area in future, then TCEQ will 

need to take appropriate regulatory 

measures. 

For the HGB area, on April 15, 2014 

(79 FR 21144), we approved the VOC 

RACT negative declarations for 

fiberglass boat manufacturing materials, 

leather tanning and finishing, surface 

coating for flat wood paneling, 

letterpress printing, automobile and 

light-duty truck assembly coating, 

rubber tire manufacturing, and vegetable 

oil manufacturing operations. Also, see 

40 CFR 52.2270(e). 

D. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for VOC sources based on 

their submittals acceptable? 

Yes, Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for VOC sources based on 

their submittals is acceptable. In the 

TSD developed for this rulemaking 

action, we evaluated the corresponding 

sections of 30 TAC Chapter 115 for the 

source categories identified in Table 1 

above in the HGB and DFW areas, and 

have reviewed these sections against our 

identified reference documents. In their 

submittals to EPA, TCEQ states that it 

has reviewed the HGB and DFW VOC 

rules 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. With their 

submittals TCEQ revised sections 

115.422, 115.427, 115.429, 115.430, 

115.432, 115.433, 115.435, 115.436, and 

115.439; repealed section 115.437; and 

adopted new sections 115.431, 115.450, 

115.451, 115.453–115.455, 115.458– 

115.461, 115.463–115.465, 115.468– 

115.471, 115.473–115.475, 115.478, and 

115.479. For a section-by-section review 

of the RACT-related provisions see parts 

1 and 3 of the TSD. 

Under the RACT requirements for the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS States must 

assure that RACT is met, either through 

a certification that previously required 

RACT controls represent RACT for 8- 

hour implementation purposes, or 

through a new RACT determination. 

States may use existing EPA guidance in 

making RACT determinations. See 70 

FR 71617 (November 29, 2005). Texas 

submitted a RACT assessment with its 

SIP revisions, and evaluated its existing 

RACT regulations to ascertain whether 

these regulations constitute RACT for 

the new 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Texas’ 8- 

Hour ozone RACT SIP submittals are 

based on the determination that RACT 

has been met either through a 

certification that previously required 

RACT controls for the 1-hour ozone 

standard represent RACT for 8-hour 

ozone implementation purposes or, 

where necessary, through a new RACT 

evaluation for certain regulations or 

sources. Therefore, we are proposing a 

determination that Texas rules meet the 

CAA’s RACT requirements for the 1997 

8-Hour ozone NAAQS for both the HGB 

and DFW areas. This determination is 

based on the November 29, 2005 (70 FR 

71612) rulemaking, regarding 

permissible approaches for determining 

whether a State’s level of control meets 

RACT, in which EPA provided guidance 

that a State’s certification of its rules is 

sufficient or acceptable for a finding that 

the rules satisfy the RACT requirements 

for the 8-hour implementation purposes; 

the framework described in our TSD; 

and section B (Certifications) of EPA’s 

May 18, 2006 RACT Q and A document 

that provides additional clarifications 

for the RACT SIPs. See pages 4–5 of the 

May 18, 2006 guidance document. 

Consequently, by implementing these 

control requirements (Chapter 115) 

Texas is satisfying the RACT 

requirements for all affected VOC 

sources, including the CTG source 

categories identified in Tables 1 of this 

document, in the HGB and DFW areas 

under the 1997 8-Hour ozone standard. 

E. Is Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for NOX sources based on 

their submittals acceptable? 

Yes, Texas’ approach to RACT 

determination for NOX sources based on 

their submittals is acceptable. The 

purpose of 30 TAC Chapter 117 rules for 

the DFW area is to establish reasonable 

controls on the emissions of ozone 

precursors. Texas has one of the most 

stringent NOX control requirements 

designed for ozone attainment reasons 

in the country. Texas has reviewed its 

NOX rules and has certified that its rules 

satisfy RACT requirements. According 

to the framework, certification, and the 

approach described in section D above 

we are proposing to find that Texas has 

RACT-level controls in place for all 

affected NOX sources in the DFW area 

(Moderate and Serious) under the 1997 

8-Hour ozone standard. See part 4 of the 

TSD for more information. 

We approved that Texas has RACTlevel controls in place for all affected 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2850 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

NOX sources in the HGB area on April 

2, 2013 (78 FR 19599). Also, see 40 CFR 

52. 2270(e). 

Taken together, we are proposing to 

find Texas has RACT-level controls in 

place for all affected VOC and NOX

sources in the HGB and DFW areas 

under the 1997 8-Hour ozone standard. 

III. Proposed Action 

We are proposing to approve rule 

revisions to sections 30 TAC chapter 

115.422, 115.427, 115.429, 115.430, 

115.432, 115.433, 115.435, 115.436, and 

115.439 implementing controls on the 

source categories of Table 1 of this 

action. 

We are proposing to approve new 

sections 30 TAC chapter 115.431, 

115.450, 115.451, 115.453–115.455, 

115.458–115.461, 115.463–115.465, 

115.468–115.471, 115.473–115.475, 

115.478, and 115.479 implementing 

controls on the source categories of 

Table 1 of this action. 

We are proposing to approve repeal of 

section 30 TAC chapter 115.437. 

We are proposing to find that for VOC 

CTG categories identified in Table 1 

Texas has RACT-level controls in place 

for the HGB and DFW areas under the 

1997 8-Hour ozone standard. 

We are proposing to find that Texas 

has RACT-level controls in place for the 

Flexographic and Rotogravure Printing 

operations for the HGB area. 

We are proposing to approve the 

negative declarations as explained in 

section II(C) of this action. 

We are proposing to approve NOX

RACT for the DFW area under the 1997 

8-Hour ozone standard. 

In consideration of the rule revisions 

proposed for approval in this action, as 

well as the rule revisions previously 

approved, taken together, we are 

proposing that with its rules in 30 TAC 

Chapters 115, and 117 Texas is 

implementing RACT for all affected 

VOC and NOX sources in the HGB and 

DFW areas under the 1997 8-Hour ozone 

standard. 

We are proposing to approve these 

revisions in accordance with sections 

110, 182, and 183 of the federal CAA. 

The EPA had previously approved 

RACT for all affected NOX sources for 

the HGB area under the 1997 8-Hour 

ozone standard. 

The EPA had previously approved 

RACT for all affected VOC and NOX

sources 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 

• is not approved to apply on any 

Indian reservation land or in any other 

area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 

demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications 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. 

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: January 9, 2015. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00866 Filed 1–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2013–0814; FRL–9921–53– 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plan; State of 

Colorado; Second Ten-Year PM10

Maintenance Plan for Steamboat 

Springs 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of 

Colorado. On May 11, 2012, the 

designee of the Governor of Colorado 

submitted to EPA a revised maintenance 

plan for the Steamboat Springs area for 

the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) for particulate 

matter with an aerodynamic diameter 

less than or equal to 10 microns (PM10). 

The SIP was adopted by the State on 

December 15, 2011. As required by 

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 175A, this 

revised maintenance plan addresses 

maintenance of the PM10 standard for a 

second 10-year period beyond the area’s 

original redesignation to attainment for 

the PM10 NAAQS. In addition, EPA is 

proposing approval of the revised 

maintenance plan’s 2024 transportation 

conformity motor vehicle emissions 

budget for PM10. This action is being 

taken under sections 110 and 175A of 

the CAA. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 20, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket number EPA–R08– 

OAR–2013–0814, by one of the 

following methods: 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS