Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Reasonably Available Control Technology for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 2846-2850 [2015-00866]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jan 20, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\21JAP1.SGM
21JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Docket Center homepage at https://
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
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jan 20, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 8Hour 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
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2847
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 https://
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.
E:\FR\FM\21JAP1.SGM
21JAP1
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).
Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing, (EPA–
453/R–06–003–2006/09).
Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents,
(EPA–453/R–06–001–2006/09).
Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and
Letterpress Printing, (EPA–453/R–06–002–2006/09).
Negative Declarations in DFW and
HGB.
Sections 115.430–115.439.
Flexible Packaging Printing Materials.
Industrial Cleaning Solvents ...........
Offset Lithographic and Letterpress
Printing.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Large Appliance Coatings ...............
Metal Furniture Coatings .................
Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings .......
Auto and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings.
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials.
Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jan 20, 2015
Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings, (EPA
453/R–07–004–2007/09).
Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coatings, (EPA
453/R–07–005–2007/09).
Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings,
(EPA 453/R–07–003–2007/09).
Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Assembly Coatings, (EPA 453/R–08–006–2008/09).
Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing
Materials, (EPA 453/R–08–004–2008/09).
Group IV Issued by EPA in 2008, Control Techniques Guidelines for
Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives, (EPA 453/R–08–005–2008/09).
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\21JAP1.SGM
Sections 115.460–115.469.
Sections 115.440–115.449 for Offset Lithographic Printing; Negative Declarations for Letterpress
Printing in HGB and DFW.
Sections 115.450–115.459.
Sections 115.450–115.459.
Sections 115.420–115.429; and
115.450–115.459.
Negative Declaration in HGB; Sections 115.450–115.459 in DFW.
Negative Declarations in DFW and
HGB.
Sections 115.470–115.479.
21JAP1
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
30 TAC Chapter 115 fulfilling
RACT
CTG Category
EPA Reference documents
Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic
Parts Coatings.
Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic
Parts Coatings, (EPA 453/R–08–003–2008/09).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jan 20, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 8hour 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’ 8Hour ozone RACT SIP submittals are
based on the determination that RACT
has been met either through a
certification that previously required
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Sections 115.450–115.459.
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
E:\FR\FM\21JAP1.SGM
21JAP1
2850
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 1Hour 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Jan 20, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
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:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21JAP1.SGM
21JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 21, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2846-2850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00866]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 2847]]
Docket Center homepage at https://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 https://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.
[[Page 2848]]
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 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 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
Non-CTG 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 EPA-
issued 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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 TAC Chapter
CTG Category EPA Reference 115 fulfilling
documents RACT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flat Wood Paneling Coatings... Control Techniques Negative
Guidelines for Flat Declarations in
Wood Paneling DFW and HGB.
Coatings, (EPA-453/R-
06-004-2006/09).
Flexible Packaging Printing Control Techniques Sections 115.430-
Materials. Guidelines for 115.439.
Flexible Package
Printing, (EPA-453/R-
06-003-2006/09).
Industrial Cleaning Solvents.. Control Techniques Sections 115.460-
Guidelines for 115.469.
Industrial Cleaning
Solvents, (EPA-453/R-
06-001-2006/09).
Offset Lithographic and Control Techniques Sections 115.440-
Letterpress Printing. Guidelines for Offset 115.449 for
Lithographic Printing Offset
and Letterpress Lithographic
Printing, (EPA-453/R- Printing;
06-002-2006/09). Negative
Declarations
for Letterpress
Printing in HGB
and DFW.
Large Appliance Coatings...... Control Techniques Sections 115.450-
Guidelines for Large 115.459.
Appliance Coatings,
(EPA 453/R-07-004-
2007/09).
Metal Furniture Coatings...... Control Techniques Sections 115.450-
Guidelines for Metal 115.459.
Furniture Coatings,
(EPA 453/R-07-005-
2007/09).
Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings Control Techniques Sections 115.420-
Guidelines for Paper, 115.429; and
Film, and Foil 115.450-115.459
Coatings, (EPA 453/R- .
07-003-2007/09).
Auto and Light-Duty Truck Control Techniques Negative
Assembly Coatings. Guidelines for Declaration in
Automobile and Light- HGB; Sections
Duty Truck Assembly 115.450-115.459
Coatings, (EPA 453/R- in DFW.
08-006-2008/09).
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Control Techniques Negative
Materials. Guidelines for Declarations in
Fiberglass Boat DFW and HGB.
Manufacturing
Materials, (EPA 453/R-
08-004-2008/09).
Miscellaneous Industrial Group IV Issued by EPA Sections 115.470-
Adhesives. in 2008, Control 115.479.
Techniques Guidelines
for Miscellaneous
Industrial Adhesives,
(EPA 453/R-08-005-
2008/09).
[[Page 2849]]
Miscellaneous Metal and Control Techniques Sections 115.450-
Plastic Parts Coatings. Guidelines for 115.459.
Miscellaneous Metal
and Plastic Parts
Coatings, (EPA 453/R-
08-003-2008/09).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 RACT-level controls in place for all
affected
[[Page 2850]]
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
