Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Reasonably Available Control Technology for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 21144-21146 [2014-08331]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
21144
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED LOUISIANA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES
Name of SIP provision
Applicable geographic
or nonattainment area
*
*
Interstate transport for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS (contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance).
*
Statewide .....................
[FR Doc. 2014–08484 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0100; FRL–9909–51–
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: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is finalizing its proposal
to approve revisions to the Texas State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the
Houston/Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) 1997
8-Hour ozone nonattainment Area
(Area). The HGB Area consists of
Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend,
Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery
and Waller counties. Specifically, we
are finalizing our proposed approval of
portions of two revisions to the Texas
SIP submitted by the Texas Commission
on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as
meeting certain Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT)
requirements for Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOC) in the HGB Area.
This action is in accordance with
section 110 of the federal Clean Air Act
(the Act, CAA).
DATES: This rule will be effective on
May 15, 2014.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0100. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
SUMMARY:
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
State submittal/effective date
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
*
5/16/2011
5/21/2013
EPA approval date
Explanation
*
4/15/2014 [Insert FR page
number where document
begins].
*
*
SIP submission dated 5/16/2011,
technical supplement dated 5/21/
2013.
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Planning Section (6PD–L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1445
Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas
75202–2733. The file will be made
available by appointment for public
inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review
Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal
holidays. Contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
paragraph below to make an
appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Alan Shar (6PD–L), telephone (214)
665–2164, 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 finalizing?
1. The June 13, 2007 Submittal
2. The April 6, 2010 Submittal
B. When did the public comment period
expire?
II. Evaluation
A. What are the public comments and
EPA’s response to them?
B. What is TCEQ’s approach and analysis
to RACT?
C. What source categories are we
addressing in this action?
D. Are there any negative declarations
associated with the VOC source
categories in the HGB Area?
E. Is Texas’ approach to RACT
determination for VOC sources based on
the June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010
submittals acceptable?
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. What actions are we finalizing?
We are finalizing our January 9, 2014
(79 FR 1612) proposal to approve
portions of revisions to the Texas SIP
submitted to EPA with two separate
letters dated June 13, 2007 and April 6,
2010 from TCEQ. These two separate
submittals are described below.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1. The June 13, 2007 Submittal
The June 13, 2007 submittal concerns
revisions to 30 TAC, Chapter 115
Control of Air Pollution from Volatile
Organic Compounds. In addition, 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
D of the submittal). We approved
selected revisions as meeting RACT
under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for
some, but not all of the submitted
industry source categories in the HGB
Area, on April 2, 2013 at 78 FR 19599.
In our January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612)
proposal, we addressed additional
source categories covered in this SIP
submittal.
2. The April 6, 2010 Submittal
In conjunction with the June 13, 2007
submittal, we are also finalizing our
proposal to approve a part of the April
6, 2010 revision to the Texas SIP for
VOC RACT purposes. Specifically, we
find that Texas has met certain RACT
requirements under section 182(b). For
more information on RACT evaluation
for the HGB Area see section B of the
January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal.
B. When did the public comment period
expire?
The public comment period for the
January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal
expired on February 10, 2014.
II. Evaluation
A. What are the public comments and
EPA’s response to them?
Comment: An individual commented
that pollution has to stop at the source,
there should be zero waste, and the
polluter has to pay.
Response: EPA is not aware of a
reasonably available and technologically
feasible method to achieve zero waste
for the source categories identified in
Table 1 of the January 9, 2014 (79 FR
1612) proposal. The commenter did not
provide any information to this effect,
and no contact information was made
available by the commenter in order for
EPA to pursue an inquiry regarding
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
21145
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
existence of such control technology.
Furthermore, section 113 of the CAA
provides for the enforcement and
compliance of applicable emission
requirements with which a source will
need to comply.
No change to the proposal is made as
a result of this comment.
B. What is TCEQ’s approach and
analysis to RACT?
As stated in the January 9, 2014 (79
FR 1612) proposal, under sections
182(b)(2)(A) and (B) states must ensure
RACT is in place for each source
category for which EPA issued a Control
Techniques Guidelines (CTG), and for
any major source not covered by a CTG.
As a part of its June 13, 2007 submittal,
TCEQ conducted a RACT analysis to
demonstrate that the RACT
requirements for CTG sources in the
HGB 8-Hour ozone nonattainment Area
have been fulfilled. The TCEQ revised
and supplemented this analysis in its
April 6, 2010 submittal. The TCEQ
conducted its analysis by: (1)
Identifying all categories of CTG and
major non-CTG sources of VOC
emissions within the HGB Area; (2)
Listing the state regulation that
implements or exceeds RACT
requirements for that CTG or non-CTG
category; (3) Detailing the basis for
concluding that these regulations fulfill
RACT through comparison with
established RACT requirements
described in the CTG guidance
documents and rules developed by
other state and local agencies; and (4)
Submitting negative declarations when
there are no CTG or major Non-CTG
sources of VOC emissions within the
HGB Area.
C. What source categories are we
addressing in this action?
Table 1 of the January 9, 2014 (79 FR
1612) proposal contained a list of VOC
source categories and their
corresponding sections of 30 TAC
Chapter 115 to fulfill the applicable
RACT requirements under section
182(b) of the Act.
TABLE 1—CTG SOURCE CATEGORIES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING TEXAS VOC RACT RULES
Chapter 115,
fulfilling RACT
Source category in HGB area
CTG reference document
Aerospace ......................................
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations.
Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume IV:
Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire.
Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks
Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks
Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks
Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Use of Cutback Asphalt .............................
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood Furniture Manufacturing
Operations.
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners
Surface coating for insulation of
magnets.
Surface coating of coils .................
Surface coating of fabrics ..............
Surface coating of cans .................
Use of cutback asphalt ..................
Wood furniture ...............................
Large petroleum dry cleaners ........
D. Are there any negative declarations
associated with the VOC source
categories in the HGB Area?
Yes, Texas has declared that there are
no Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing
Materials Operations, Leather Tanning
and Finishing Operations, Surface
Coating for Flat Wood Paneling
Operations, Letterpress Printing,
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Assembly Coating Operations, and
Vegetable Oil Manufacturing Operations
that are major sources in the HGB Area.
Previously, we have approved a
negative declaration for the Rubber Tire
Manufacturing Operations in the HGB
Area. As such, TCEQ does not have to
adopt VOC regulations relevant to these
source categories at this time for the
HGB Area.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. Is Texas’ approach to RACT
determination for VOC sources based on
the June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010
submittals acceptable?
Yes. The purpose of 30 TAC Chapter
115 rules for the HGB Area is to
establish reasonable controls on the
emissions of ozone precursors. Texas
has reviewed its VOC rules and has
certified that its rules satisfy RACT
requirements. We find the Texas RACT
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
determination to be acceptable. Based
upon our evaluation, we find that Texas
has RACT-level controls in place for all
required sources for the HGB Area
under the 1997 8-Hour ozone standard.
III. Final Action
Today, we are approving the proposal
to find that with respect to the VOC
source categories identified in Table 1 of
the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612)
proposal, Texas has RACT-level controls
in place for the HGB Area under the
1997 8-Hour ozone standard. We are
also approving the negative declarations
as explained in section II(D) of this
action. The EPA had previously
approved RACT for VOC and NOX 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§§ 115.420–429.
§§ 115.420–429.
§§ 115.420–429.
§§ 115.420–429.
§§ 115.420–429.
§§ 115.510–519.
§§ 115.420–429.
§§ 115.552–559.
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);
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
21146
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); and
• this rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP is not approved
to apply in Indian country located in the
state, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart SS—Texas
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: April 1, 2014.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
2. In Section 52.2270, the second table
in paragraph (e) entitled ‘‘EPAApproved Nonregulatory Provisions and
Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas
SIP’’ is amended by adding two entries
at the end to read as follows:
■
§ 52.2270
*
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment area
Name of SIP provision
*
VOC RACT negative declaration 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.
VOC RACT finding for the
1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, except for the
2006–2010 EPA-issued
CTG series.
*
*
*
Brazoria, Chambers, Fort
April 6, 2010.
Bend, Galveston, Harris,
Liberty, Montgomery
and Waller Counties, TX.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
[EPA–R07–OAR–2013–0692; FRL–9909–45–
Region 7]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Plans for Designated Facilities and
Pollutants; Air Emissions From
Existing Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills; State of Missouri
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Comments
*
*
April 15, 2014 [Insert FR
page number where
document begins].
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve a revision to the state
section 111 plan for Municipal Solid
Waste (MSW) Landfills submitted by the
State of Missouri Department of Natural
Resources. This plan contains state rules
‘‘Municipal Solid Waste Landfills’’ and
‘‘Restriction of Emissions from
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills’’ that
were updated as a result of amendments
to the Federal Emission Guidelines (EG)
published April 10, 2000; October 17,
2000; and September 21, 2006. The plan
also corrects typographical and
administrative changes in the Missouri
Rules. This approval means that EPA
finds the State Plan meets applicable
Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements.
SUMMARY:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
EPA Approval date
*
Brazoria, Chambers, Fort
April 6, 2010 .....................
Bend, Galveston, Harris,
Liberty, Montgomery
and Waller Counties, TX.
[FR Doc. 2014–08331 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
State submittal/effective
date
This direct final rule will be
effective June 16, 2014, without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
comments by May 15, 2014. If EPA
receives adverse comments, we will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
DATES:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2013–0692, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: Bernstein.craig@epa.gov.
3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Craig
Bernstein, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 72 (Tuesday, April 15, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21144-21146]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08331]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2012-0100; FRL-9909-51-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: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing its
proposal to approve revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan
(SIP) for the Houston/Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) 1997 8-Hour ozone
nonattainment Area (Area). The HGB Area consists of Brazoria, Chambers,
Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery and Waller counties.
Specifically, we are finalizing our proposed approval of portions of
two revisions to the Texas SIP submitted by the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as meeting certain Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) requirements for Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC) in the HGB Area. This action is in accordance with section 110 of
the federal Clean Air Act (the Act, CAA).
DATES: This rule will be effective on May 15, 2014.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2012-0100. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file
will be made available by appointment for public inspection in the
Region 6 FOIA Review Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
weekdays except for legal holidays. Contact the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below to make an appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Shar (6PD-L), telephone (214)
665-2164, 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 finalizing?
1. The June 13, 2007 Submittal
2. The April 6, 2010 Submittal
B. When did the public comment period expire?
II. Evaluation
A. What are the public comments and EPA's response to them?
B. What is TCEQ's approach and analysis to RACT?
C. What source categories are we addressing in this action?
D. Are there any negative declarations associated with the VOC
source categories in the HGB Area?
E. Is Texas' approach to RACT determination for VOC sources
based on the June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 submittals acceptable?
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. What actions are we finalizing?
We are finalizing our January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal to
approve portions of revisions to the Texas SIP submitted to EPA with
two separate letters dated June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 from TCEQ.
These two separate submittals are described below.
1. The June 13, 2007 Submittal
The June 13, 2007 submittal concerns revisions to 30 TAC, Chapter
115 Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds. In
addition, 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 D of the submittal). We approved selected revisions
as meeting RACT under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for some, but not all of
the submitted industry source categories in the HGB Area, on April 2,
2013 at 78 FR 19599. In our January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal, we
addressed additional source categories covered in this SIP submittal.
2. The April 6, 2010 Submittal
In conjunction with the June 13, 2007 submittal, we are also
finalizing our proposal to approve a part of the April 6, 2010 revision
to the Texas SIP for VOC RACT purposes. Specifically, we find that
Texas has met certain RACT requirements under section 182(b). For more
information on RACT evaluation for the HGB Area see section B of the
January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal.
B. When did the public comment period expire?
The public comment period for the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612)
proposal expired on February 10, 2014.
II. Evaluation
A. What are the public comments and EPA's response to them?
Comment: An individual commented that pollution has to stop at the
source, there should be zero waste, and the polluter has to pay.
Response: EPA is not aware of a reasonably available and
technologically feasible method to achieve zero waste for the source
categories identified in Table 1 of the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612)
proposal. The commenter did not provide any information to this effect,
and no contact information was made available by the commenter in order
for EPA to pursue an inquiry regarding
[[Page 21145]]
existence of such control technology. Furthermore, section 113 of the
CAA provides for the enforcement and compliance of applicable emission
requirements with which a source will need to comply.
No change to the proposal is made as a result of this comment.
B. What is TCEQ's approach and analysis to RACT?
As stated in the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal, under
sections 182(b)(2)(A) and (B) states must ensure RACT is in place for
each source category for which EPA issued a Control Techniques
Guidelines (CTG), and for any major source not covered by a CTG. As a
part of its June 13, 2007 submittal, TCEQ conducted a RACT analysis to
demonstrate that the RACT requirements for CTG sources in the HGB 8-
Hour ozone nonattainment Area have been fulfilled. The TCEQ revised and
supplemented this analysis in its April 6, 2010 submittal. The TCEQ
conducted its analysis by: (1) Identifying all categories of CTG and
major non-CTG sources of VOC emissions within the HGB Area; (2) Listing
the state regulation that implements or exceeds RACT requirements for
that CTG or non-CTG category; (3) Detailing the basis for concluding
that these regulations fulfill RACT through comparison with established
RACT requirements described in the CTG guidance documents and rules
developed by other state and local agencies; and (4) Submitting
negative declarations when there are no CTG or major Non-CTG sources of
VOC emissions within the HGB Area.
C. What source categories are we addressing in this action?
Table 1 of the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal contained a
list of VOC source categories and their corresponding sections of 30
TAC Chapter 115 to fulfill the applicable RACT requirements under
section 182(b) of the Act.
Table 1--CTG Source Categories and Their Corresponding Texas VOC RACT Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category in HGB area CTG reference document Chapter 115, fulfilling RACT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace.............................. Control of Volatile Organic Compound Sec. Sec. 115.420-429.
Emissions from Coating Operations
at Aerospace Manufacturing and
Rework Operations.
Surface coating for insulation of Control of Volatile Organic Sec. Sec. 115.420-429.
magnets. Emissions from Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume IV: Surface Coating
of Insulation of Magnet Wire.
Surface coating of coils............... Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Sec. Sec. 115.420-429.
Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and
Light-Duty Trucks.
Surface coating of fabrics............. Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Sec. Sec. 115.420-429.
Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and
Light-Duty Trucks.
Surface coating of cans................ Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Sec. Sec. 115.420-429.
Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and
Light-Duty Trucks.
Use of cutback asphalt................. Control of Volatile Organic Sec. Sec. 115.510-519.
Emissions from Use of Cutback
Asphalt.
Wood furniture......................... Control of Volatile Organic Compound Sec. Sec. 115.420-429.
Emissions from Wood Furniture
Manufacturing Operations.
Large petroleum dry cleaners........... Control of Volatile Organic Compound Sec. Sec. 115.552-559.
Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry
Cleaners.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Are there any negative declarations associated with the VOC source
categories in the HGB Area?
Yes, Texas has declared that there are no Fiberglass Boat
Manufacturing Materials Operations, Leather Tanning and Finishing
Operations, Surface Coating for Flat Wood Paneling Operations,
Letterpress Printing, Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coating
Operations, and Vegetable Oil Manufacturing Operations that are major
sources in the HGB Area. Previously, we have approved a negative
declaration for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing Operations in the HGB
Area. As such, TCEQ does not have to adopt VOC regulations relevant to
these source categories at this time for the HGB Area.
E. Is Texas' approach to RACT determination for VOC sources based on
the June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 submittals acceptable?
Yes. The purpose of 30 TAC Chapter 115 rules for the HGB Area is to
establish reasonable controls on the emissions of ozone precursors.
Texas has reviewed its VOC rules and has certified that its rules
satisfy RACT requirements. We find the Texas RACT determination to be
acceptable. Based upon our evaluation, we find that Texas has RACT-
level controls in place for all required sources for the HGB Area under
the 1997 8-Hour ozone standard.
III. Final Action
Today, we are approving the proposal to find that with respect to
the VOC source categories identified in Table 1 of the January 9, 2014
(79 FR 1612) proposal, Texas has RACT-level controls in place for the
HGB Area under the 1997 8-Hour ozone standard. We are also approving
the negative declarations as explained in section II(D) of this action.
The EPA had previously approved RACT for VOC and NOX 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);
[[Page 21146]]
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act;
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); and
this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: April 1, 2014.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart SS--Texas
0
2. In Section 52.2270, the second table in paragraph (e) entitled
``EPA-Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
in the Texas SIP'' is amended by adding two entries at the end to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2270 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of SIP provision geographic or State submittal/ EPA Approval date Comments
nonattainment area effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
VOC RACT negative declaration Brazoria, April 6, 2010.
for Fiberglass Boat Chambers, Fort
Manufacturing Materials, Bend, Galveston,
Leather Tanning and Finishing, Harris, Liberty,
Surface Coating for Flat Wood Montgomery and
Paneling, Letterpress Printing, Waller Counties,
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck TX.
Assembly Coating, Rubber Tire
Manufacturing, and Vegetable
Oil Manufacturing Operations.
VOC RACT finding for the 1997 8- Brazoria, April 6, 2010..... April 15, 2014
hour ozone NAAQS, except for Chambers, Fort [Insert FR page
the 2006-2010 EPA-issued CTG Bend, Galveston, number where
series. Harris, Liberty, document begins].
Montgomery and
Waller Counties,
TX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2014-08331 Filed 4-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
