- -----------~--- --. 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 6 

Ms. Patricia Duron 

1445 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 1200 

DALLAS, TX 75202-2733 

J!s1820f0 

Office of Legal Services (MC 205) 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, TX 78711-3087 

RE: EPA Comments on Rule Project Number 2010-004-039-LS 

Dear Ms. Duron: 

Thank you for providing us the opportunity to review and comment on the 

proposed revisions to the Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Title 30, Chapter 39, Public 

Notice, and the associated revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

proposed rulemaking revises the public notice procedures for air quality permit 

applications to address EPA's November 26,2008, proposed Limited Approval/Limited 

Disapproval rulemaking action (see 73 FR 72001). 

In general, we are supportive of this proposed rulemaking but would like to 

provide the enclosed comments for your consideration. Please note that comments 1, 6-8, 

10, and 13 must be addressed to our satisfaction before EPA can proceed with a proposed 

approval of the revisions to the Texas SIP. Additionally, we note that comment 14 is of 

high importance to EPA Region 6 and should be carefully considered before TCEQ 

proceeds with fmal adoption_ 

Please note that these comments do not constitute final determinations concerning 

approvability of the revisions to the Texas SIP. We are providing these comments to 

assist TCEQ in the development of regulatory language. We look forward to working 

with the TCEQ as you move forward in responding to these comments and finalizing the 

revisions to the Texas SIP. If you have any questions, please call Ms. Adina Wiley of my 

staff at (214) 665-2115. 

Enclosures 

cc: See next page 

Carl E. Edlund, P.E. 

Director 

Multimedia Planning & Permitting 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable 011 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer) 

/ 
2 

cc: Ms. Janis Hudson (MC 173) 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Ms. Stephanie Bergeron Perdue (MC 218) 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 
I 

Enclosure 

I. The intent of the proposed new provision at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(D) must be 

clarified. The proposal at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(D) can be interpreted to exempt 

all minor New Source Review (NSR) permits from the public participation 

requirements. This is not acceptable for approval by EPA as a SIP revision. 

Alternately, the proposal could be interpreted as requiring public notice for any 

permit that does not qualifY as a SIP-approved Permit by Rule (PBR) or Standard 

Permit (SP). 

If the intent of proposed 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(D) is to require notice for all 

permits except for SIP-approved PBRs and SPs, then this intent is acceptable 

under the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) and the SIP-approved PBR and SPrules. 

To meet this intent, the TCEQ must revise the rule so that it is clear that only 

PBRs and SPs are exempt from the public participation requirements. All other 

minor NSR, i.e., case-by-case, permits must be subject to the public participation 

requirements. 

If however, the proposed rules at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(D) establish de minimis 

thresholds below which public notice is not required for permitting actions 

outside of the scope of SIP-approved PBRs and SPs, TCEQ must make further 

demonstrations to EPA (discussed below) on the validity of this approach before 

EPA can consider the approvability of the new provision. 

The intent of the proposed revision at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(E) must also be 

clarified. It appears that the proposed rules establish a de minimis threshold 

below which public notice is not required for permitting actions on certain types 

of agricultural permits. The proposal could be interpreted as exempting from 

public notice all minor NSR permits for an "agricultural products handling" 

facility at which grain, seed, legrrmes, or vegetable fibers are handled, loaded, 

unloaded, dried, manufactured, or processed (as defined in section 382.020 of the 

Texas Clean Air Act). As proposed, this provision is not acceptable for approval 

by EPA as a SIP revision. Further demonstration, as discussed below, must be 

made to EPA on the validity of this approach before EPA can contemplate 

approvability of this new provision. 

While EPA agrees in principle that the public notice requirements at 40 CFR 

51.161 provide for tailoring of the public participation process for less 

enviromnentally significant sources and modifications (see 60 FR 45530, 45548-

49, August 31, 1995), TCEQ has not provided an analysis that demonstrates how 

these de minimis thresholds were established or that demonstrates how emissions 

below these levels will not cause or contribute to a violation of the applicable 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) increment. TCEQ must provide a demonstration as 

discussed below before EPA can consider approving an exemption from public 

notice requirements as described in the proposed rules. 
2 

In the August 31, 1995, proposed Federal Register Notice (FRN) cited above, 

EPA has described an acceptable tiering method for a minor NSR program. One 

important element is thatthe State rules include specific, objective, and replicable 

criteria for determining when a minor NSR permit is exempt from, or subject to 

less than, the full public participation requirements at 40 CFR 51.161. 

Limitations on the full public participation requirements for minor NSR permits 

should be categorized and consistent with the principles articulated by EPA in the 

August 31, 1995 proposed FRN. Therefore, the categorization of the types of 

minor NSR permits that a State can exempt from or subject to less than full public 

participation depends on the potential for environmental and public health 

concerns. 

The public participation requirements at 40 CFR 51.161 must be interpreted in 

concert with the requirements at 40 CFR 51.160( e), which requires that each SIP 

must identifY the types of sources subject to minor NSR. Therefore, in addition to 

identifYing emission thresholds, the TCEQ must identifY the types of minor 

sources and minor modifications that will be covered by these thresholds. 

Additionally, the State must also identifY the source types covered, the anticipated 

source population and estimates of future growth, demonstrate that the identified 

sources and or changes are not environmentally significant, and demonstrate that 

the current emission levels and predicted future emission levels will not cause or 

contribute to a violation ofthe NAAQS or PSD increments in the applicable 

areas. The State's minor NSR public notice exemption process or public notice 

tiering process must be reasonable and adequate for the statutory and regulatory 

purposes of the minor NSR program and be consistent with the de minimis 

exemption criteria set forth in Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323 (D.C. 

Cir. 1979). For a full discussion of EPA's interpretation of tiering based on 

environmental significance, see 60 FR 45530, 45537-39. 

The State must also submit an analysis that demonstrates how these exemptions 

from, and categories of, public notice requirements were established. The 

analysis must demonstrate how the exemptions and the types of public 

participation categories will not cause or contribute to a violation of the applicable 

NAAQS or PSD increments. EPA will not approve any public notice exemption 

thresholds without an extensive demonstration "that the situation is genuinely de 

minimis or one of administrative necessity." Ala. Power Co., 636 F.2d at 361 

(D.C. Cir. 1979). 

If the TCEQ chooses to pursue the development of permitting and public notice 

exemptions or tiering levels, we strongly encourage the TCEQ to work closely 

with the EPA. We also believe that the TCEQ should provide the opportunity for 

public review and comment on this analysis before it is submitted as a SIP 

revision. 
3 

· 2. We note that the definitions of 'new facility' and 'modification of an existing 

facility' referenced at proposed 30 TAC 39.402 have not been approved by EPA 

into the Texas SIP. Similarly, references to FutureGen permits at 30 TAC 39.402 

have not been approved into the Texas SIP. Our comments on the proposed 

revisions to Chapter 39 do not reflect any intent or future action by the EPA to 

grant SIP approval to these definitions or the FutureGen permit program. These 

definitions and permit program will be evaluated for consistency with federal 

requirements separately from our action on the Chapter 39 proposal. 

3. We also note that the proposed revisions to 30 TAC 39.402 include references to 

the multiple plant permit program at 30 TAC Chapter 116, Subchapter J. We 

have no record of receiving the multiple plant permit program as a SIP revision. 

Please clarifY whether the multiple plant permit program has been submitted, or 

will be submitted, for EPA review. 

4. Please explain the basis for excluding from public notice concrete batch plants 

without enhanced controls temporarily located in or contiguous to the right-ofway of a public works at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(8) and how this exclusion is 

consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.161. Any exemption from public 

notice must be addressed through a demonstration of environmental significance 

as outlined in Comment 1 above. Additionally, these types of temporary facilities 

must go through the public participation process for initial construction. 

5. We believe there is a typographical error in the last sentence at 30 TAC 

39.4ll(e)(ll)(A)(iii). This sentence should refer to the last publication of the 

Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit instead of the last 

publication of the Notice of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit. 

6. We note that several of the proposed rule provisions address items contained in 

the Texas PSD Supplement (see attachment titled "Revision to the Texas State 

Implementation Plan for Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality), 

namely: 

• the inclusion of the anticipated degree of increment consumption in the public 

notice, as required under 40 CFR 51.166( q)(2)(iii); and 

• a copy of the public notice will be sent to any comprehensive regional land 

planning agency and to any other affected agencies, as required under 40 CFR 

51.166( q)(2)(iv). 

If the TCEQ adopts the rules as proposed and revised per EPA's comments and 

submits these rules to EPA for approval as part of the Texas SIP, EPA believes 

that the State's SIP submittal request should ask EPA to remove the PSD 

Supplement from the Texas SIP for the duplicative items identified above. The 

remainder of the Texas PSD Supplement would remain in effect and enforceable 

in the Texas SIP. 
4 

7. To be approvable as a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Public 

Participation SIP revision, the proposed rules for the Notice of Application and 

Preliminary Decision at 30 TAC 39.411(f)(3) must be revised to require that a 

copy or summary of all other materials considered in the preliminary 

determination be made available to the public consistent with the requirements of 

40 CFR 51.166( q)(2)(ii). 

8. To be approvable as a SIP revision, the proposed rules for the Notice of 

Application and Preliminary Decision at 30 TAC 39.411(f)(5) must be revised to 

require a minimum 30-day comment period, consistent with the requirements of 

40 CFR 51.161(b)(2). Currently, the proposed preamble on page 26 states that the 

close of the comment period is never less than 30 days from the initial publication 

of the Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision, but this interpretation is 

not supported in the proposed regulatory text 

From our own experiences commenting on permits, and from citizen complaints 

we have received, EPA is seriously concerned that TCEQ's proposed rules for 

providing notice of the comment period hinder public involvement TCEQ has 

delegated the authority to publish notice to the applicant Under the proposed 

revisions at 30 TAC 39.405G), the applicant has up to 10 days from the date of the 

last newspaper publication to notifY TCEQ that the public comment period has 

started. The public notice as proposed at 30 TAC 39.411(f)(5) also does not 

include a date specific to easily identifY when the comment period closes. We 

believe it is impossible to adequately review and comment on a permit if you are 

unable to ascertain when the public comment period starts or ends. 

EPA recommends that TCEQ shorten the amount of time an applicant has to 

provide evidence of public notice from 1 0 days to 3 days. We also recommend 

that the published notices (both Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to 

Obtain Permit and Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision) include a date 

specific to identify the end of the comment period. Further, we encourage TCEQ 

to maintain an up-to-date listing via the agency's website of all permits available 

for comment and the associated comment deadlines (start date, end date, 

deadlines for requesting meetings and/or contested case hearings, etc). EPA feels 

that by taking these actions TCEQ will greatly improve the transparency of the 

permitting program and encourage greater public involvement in the permitting 

process. 

9. We believe that the proposed revision at 30 TAC 39.411(g)(1) should require that 

the additional material specified at 39.411(e)(15) should also be included in the 

text of the public notice. IfTCEQ does not revise 30 TAC 39.411(g)(l) to add 

the reference to 39.411(e)(15), the TCEQ must submit a reply to EPA explaining 

why this information should not be included. 

10. The proposed revisions at 30 TAC section 39.420(c)(2) provide that the Executive 

Director's decision and response to public comments will be posted on the 
5 

TCEQ's website. Electronic posting of the response to connnents (RTC) does not 

clearly satisfy the requirement at 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi) that the permitting 

authority make available all comments for public inspection at the same location 

where the preconstruction materials were posted for projects subject to PSD. 

Additionally, electronic postirig of the Executive Director's decision does not 

clearly satisfy the requirement at 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(viii) that the final 

determination be made available for public inspection at the same location where 

the preconstruction information and public connnents were posted for projects 

subject to PSD. 

a. 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi) requires that all connnents be made available for 

public inspection. The proposed rules do not satisfy these requirements 

and therefore are not approvable as a PSD public participation SIP 

revision. The permitting authority may post the RTC as a substitute for 

posting all connnents received only if the RTC includes each submitted 

connnent in its entirety without any summarization or editing. If the 

TCEQ wishes to publish a RTC in place of making each individual 

connnent available the proposed regulations must be revised to reflect that 

the RTC will include the exact submitted connnent. 

b. Both 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi) and (viii) require materials (all submitted 

connnents and the final permit determination, respectively) to be made 

available at the same location where the preconstruction information was 

provided. Currently, the proposed rules do not satisfy these requirements; 

and therefore, are not approvable as a PSD public participation SIP 

revision. Electronic posting on the TCEQ website could possibly satisfy 

the requirement to post materials at the same location where 

preconstruction materials were made available if the TCEQ: I) revises the 

regulations for Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain 

Permit and Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision to state that all 

materials related to the permit are available at the same electronic 

location; and 2) verifies that at least one public location in the county 

where the source is proposed to locate has a public internet connection, 

i.e., the public library. Additionally, the TCEQ should maintain an 

accurate listing of the public locations in each county where public 

internet access is provided so that the public can easily find a location to 

access the electronic permitting information. 

Because electronic posting of air permitting information as the primary or 

sole means of making information available to the public is still a novel 

concept, we encourage the TCEQ to work closely with EPA to ensure that 

a system is developed that will satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 

51.166( q)(2). We believe it is possible that the creation of an on-line 

database similar to the Federal Docket Management System used by EPA 

where all materials associated with a specific permit (preconstruction, 

supplemental informational, air quality analysis, RTC, Executive Director 

decision, etc.) would be grouped by permit number and easily searchable 

by the public could satisfy the intent of the federal regulations. We note 
6 

thatit is imperative that all materials associated with a specific permit be 

available electronically for electronic posting to be a viable substitute for 

the hard-copy posting requirements of 51.166( q)(2). 

Ifthe TCEQ is unable to provide all the materials required in 51.166(q)(2) 

in an electronic format then electronic posting of the RTC and final 

determination can only be considered a supplement to the federal 

requirements. In this event, the proposed rules must be revised to require 

the RTC and final determination be posted at the same location where the 

preconstruction information was made available. 

11. Please verify that the citation at 30 TAC 39.420(e) to subsection (c)(3) and (4) of 

39.420 is correct. We note that as proposed, 30 TAC 39.420 does not have a 

subsection (c)(3) or (c)(4). 

12. Please verify that the citation at 30 TAC 39.420(h) to subsection (a)(4) is correct. 

If so, please explain why Future Gen permits would not need instructions for 

requesting a contested case hearing. 

13. The proposed rules for notice of affected agencies at 30 TAC 39.605 do not 

provide notice to any comprehensive regional land use planning agency or State 

Land Manager as required in 40 CFR 51.166( q)(2)(iv) for projects that are subject 

to PSD review. While the Texas rules do not need to provide notice if no such 

entity exists, the TCEQ must review the intent of this provision and determine if 

another entity could be provided notice. EPA interprets this provision of the PSD 

regulations as requiring notice to be given to persons or entities fulfilling the 

responsibilities of a regional land use planning agency or a State Land Manager, 

regardless of the respective title. 

Texas has a Texas General Land Office that has the responsibilities for managing 

state lands; therefore, the Texas General Land Office must be provided the 

requisite notice for a State Land Manager. Additionally, the TCEQ must consider 

whether under Texas law the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department functions as a 

regional land use planning agency or State Land Manager. Ifthe TCEQ 

determines that either the Texas General Land Office or Texas Parks and Wildlife 

Department does not function in the capacity ofa State Land Manager or a 

regional land use planning agency, the TCEQ must submit to EPA a legal analysis 

to that effect. Otherwise, the proposed rules must be revised to provide notice to 

the appropriate affected agencies. 

14. EPA is concerned about the July 1, 2010, compliance timefrarne established in the 

· proposed revisions. As written, the proposed rules would apply to air quality 

permit applications submitted on or after July 1, 2010. Assuming the full90 days 

allowed under Chapter 116, section 116.114 are used to determine application 

completeness, permits could be issued through October 2011, without providing 

public notice consistent with federal requirements. 
7 

While EPA recognizes the need to provide adequate lead-time for the regulated 

community to comply with a proposed rule revision, we feel that the proposed 

compliance timeframe perpetuates the current problems with Texas's air 

permitting public notice process for an unacceptable amount oftime. The TCEQ 

should revise the rule to apply to applications submitted on or after April I, 2010. 

Revising the timeframe to apply to applications submitted on or after April I, 

20!0, will demonstrate to the EPA, the public, and the regulated community that 

the TCEQ is aggressively working to affect positive change in the air permitting 

program as requested by EPA at the October 2009 stakeholder meetings to 

improve transparency and encourage public involvement. As a further 

demonstration of good faith, TCEQ should implement and actively promote a 

voluntary program under which permit applicants can comply with the proposed 

public notice provisions effective immediately. 

IS. Also, in an effort to improve the transparency and public accessibility of the air 

permitting program, EPA recommends that TCEQ revise their provisions for 

establishing and maintaining public notice mailing lists. Currently the TCEQ 

chief clerk maintains lists for each specific permit action and a list for all 

permitting activities of all media within a specific county. We believe that 

expanding the mailing lists to include the option to sign-up for a mailing list on a 

specific company in a given county would better allow interested parties the 

ability to track and comment on upcoming permit actions. 
,. 

····i 

l 

, I 

-j 

--\ 

I I - . 

j 

i 

Ci 

1-

J 

1 

1 

I 

! 

J 

1 .... -·· 

-; 

I 

_:._ 

, .. . .,- ;. 

. ' . 

REVISION. TO THE TEXAS -STATE IMPLEMENTATION 'PLAN. 

FOR- PREVENTION OF SIGNIFIC.!\NT DETERIORATION· . . . OF AIR QUALITY 

'The Texas Air Contr;ol BOa~d {'!'ACB) will implement and enforce 

-the federal requirements for Prevention of Significant Deteri-:-

oration of Air Quality (PSD) as specified in.40 CFR 51.1E;6(a) 

by requiring all new major stationary sources- and major modi-· · - -~ 

' ' 

fications to obtain air· quality permits as· provided .i-n TACB . 

Regulation v:i:, Control of Air Pollution -bi Penuits for New 

Construction and Modification. In addition, the TACB will 

adhere to- the following· conditions in the implementq.tion of 

the PSD program: · 

1. Enforcement of permits issued by the Environmental . . . . . . - . . . 

Protection Agency (EPA). 

The TACB wiil be respodsible- for:the enforcement of 

.· .· .. ·· . '· . ._. ,_._ . ... =' - . . conditions of PSD permits issued for sources in· 

;;.~1}i,t\F.-:;:;.~ :j.·:·>'-·V:~?,,~:E!X:~!l -~ E:fA,;pr f~~"'F~-:ft;!CE!!.pt _of • full delegation or · __ .• _ .•. • · ·.· • 

--2. · Initial classification-of areas in Texas • . --... 

: · ... \ : 

:-:·: . .. -. ·-·:_.:._., . .. · . .,_ .. __ : 

The TAC13 will recognize the following desisnations of · 
.3J. 

.... 

; _i 

. -; 

.. , 

-.-1 

··j' 

.. 

:I 

i 

I 'I 

:I 

·.Class I Areas · 

a) Guadalupe Mountains National Park 

·. b) Big Bend National Park 

. Class II Areas 

All other areas in Texas wh_ich are not currently · 

designated "nonattai runent .. '' 

Class . III Areas 

None. 

3. · .. Redesignation procedures. 

· · · The TACB will follow the. procedures specified in 

·· .. 40 CFR 51.166(g) in th~ redesigml.tion of .any area to . . . 

:a new classifieat.ion. · · ' . 

. : .,_. : .:-·· .. -·~ ..... 

'%~~!:ff~#~z~;j~'iC:'::; >i.\l~f ••.. 

"' .. ·· •··• . 4: '.Plan assessment. 

---:· ·.:; :_ ·_.. 

:I 

l 

j 

:l:..~---~- ' 

The. TACB will review the adequacy of the Texas PSD. 

plan on '!lri annual basis and within 60 days of· the time 

information becomes available that an applicable in--

crE!IIlent may .be violated._; J:f_t~-~ _TACB 'aeterinines 

· · · · .· .. an i~crement . is bei~~~ ~jf~~~~d. .. ·. 

.. ·::_- .. 

. : ., .. : 
'1 

. ; :·· 

--

.r-

·;j 

I 

• 

. ~--: . 

. . 

of a permit condition, appropriate enforcement action 

will. be taken.to ·stop the violation. If an increment. 

is being exceeded due to a deficiency in the state 

· PSD plan, the. plan will ·be revised and the revisions· 

will be subject to pUblic hearing.· 

5. Ambient mOnitoring requirements. 

The TACB Will follow the procedures of the federal 

. cmibie~t monitoring guidelines for PSD in the establishment of state-ambient monitoring requirements and 

procedures, . All ainbient liiOnitori;ng data used to ful-. 

fill the requirements of.the PSD plan will meet the 

SpE!cifications of· 40 CFR 58, Appendix B • 

6. ·Innovative control. Technology. 

-.·.:-·:·. 

···''•"· ·· ... · ... · ·· · .•. ·• · The T~CB will. approve the ilse of 'innovative control 

t"j#i'Qifz;ti~;~:~:,,;,;;,;;;~;t;,:.:: .'·t_~~hnology. by a ·Texas sour~ only with· the consent of 

! ~~~;~~~.~~~,;-~i&~::~~i:-::~ : ::.~::::=te thOt -y. 

·v.0•.. ~ .. • · ' · · 

I ! 

''[ 

i 

I 

·! 

-· ·i 

.! 

7. Notification, 

. The TACB will ensure· that· -additional notification pro-

_cedures assoclate_d with the. i>SD permitting 

.-. :·-. 

· Texas 

·,·: :·., ~-. 
,., 

--~i 

.:: i 

.j 

.1 

.~ I 

~ ' . <~.) The c!egree of expectei increment consumption from . . .· 

the: so~ce or modi:fication will be inc.luded in 

the public notice, as .required under 40 CFR 

.. 51.166(q) ( 2) (iii). .,., . ,:.. :: - _\ 

b) . A copy of the public notice will be sent. to any 

>c) 

· comprehensive regional • land planning. agency and 

to any ·other affected agencies, as required under 

40 CFR 51.166(q)"(2) (iv). 

The permit applicant will be notified within 120 

. days of receipt of the application of the com- . · 

·· pleteness of or deficien.cy in the· application, as 

required under 40 CFR 51.166tq) (1) •. 

d) A copy of each PSD pennit application and all¥ pub- . . . 

I .lie notices relating to new c:ir modified sources 

+ 

1 l <1•;.;; .. . • • ... . 

. l--~~;;~~1;{~·,;":- ..-- :_:_--~<:··_ . ~ .................. . 

i . i:J~~~,;~j~~::··.. . .':/ic\y;·.~j:>·?::·•<.J .. 

i 

"i 

i 

•j .-

; 

·! 

will .be· forwarded to the EPA Administrator. When a 

Class I area is impacted, as required under 40 CFR 

5Ll66(p) (1). 

' ..... 

. : ~-.-_ . 

. .· 

·.: .-. :- . . -· 

. . ·• -:. __ : :-.·- ·_ . 

:. .. 
:-f - : - i-

•. ! 

-./ 

·, 

-_I 

'I 

j 

'J ., 

1 

i 

i 

;, 

. 

i 

·I 

' _, 

.\ 

:\ 

-.. 

' . . . _____ ,_:_ 

·:-\L ___ _ 

'1'ElWl AIR cam10L BO!Um 

6330 III(HiAy 290 EASr 

AISTIN, TEXAS 

WHEREIIS, pursuant to sections_. 3.09 and 3.10 of the Texas Clean Air 

Act, Section 5 of the Administrative Procedure and Texas Register Act, . 

and Section 51.4 of Title 40 .of the Code of Federal Ri!gulations, the 

Texas Air Control Board, after proper notice, conducted a pUblic hearing 

· on Al)ril 16, 1987 for the purpose of considerirq proposed amendnents to 

Texas Air Control Board Regulation VI and the State Implenentation Plan 

for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) of Air Qualicy; and 

. WIEREAS, .the Texas Air Control _ Board duly circulated to interested 

persbns, -the Administrator. of the Environrrental Protection Agency, and 

all applicable local. air pollution control agencies hearing notices of 

its inter\ded action; and 

NIRREAS, interested persons were invited ·to submit data, v.iews, _and 

recatlllendations on the prOposed ~ndllents, either orally or in writing, 

at .the· hearing; and 

· 'liiiEREAS, ccpies ·of . the prcposed anendnents were available for public 

. inspection at the Board'sCentral Office and all of the Board's regional 

· offices ;Prior to the_ scheduled hearing; ·and 

· 'liiiEREAS, data, views, and reconrterrlations of interested persons 110ere 

submitted to the Board at the hearing and were considered by the Board as 

reflected in. the attached·· Summary -arrl EValuationS, which are hereby 

incorporated and made a, part. of this Order; and 
-_-i 

··d 

·j 

.. 

-~li ., -·1 -

l ·I ·:I 

;1i 

. 

! 

--~ 

;>, 

- .... 

.t, . -~-:-· . . 

l'l:lMD ORDER l!D •. 87-{)9 

PAGE 'n«> 

VtiERE.'<S, the Board fin:ls that said Summary is a sunrna:ry of 'canrrentS 

received frau parties interested in the arrendrrents and includes the names 

of all interested grrups or asgjciations offerlnj cannent · on the 

amen:lrrents and their position concerning the proposed anend!lents; and 

mEREAS, Section 3.09(a) of the TeXas Clean A:ir Act gives the Board 

authoricy to make rules. and regulations consistent with the· general 

intent and pUrposes of the Act and to anerrl arw. rule or regulation it 

makes; and 

'I'BERWIS,. a:lcpt.ion of these anen:lnents will further the intent and 

purposes of the Texas Clean Air Act l:Jy establishing tine Limits fur 

Lrtt.erested persons to request a pdblic hearing on an application fur a 

pennit, special permit, or pennit continuance; and 

liJERE!IS, adoption of these anen:lnents will reduce the a:;Jency processing t:i..1re required fur nost penni t applirntions and w:Ul emance federal 

apprwab:i..lity of the Texas State IlllJ?lenentation Plan fur PSD and stack · 

heights; and 

mEREAS. the Board fin:ls that these considerations authorize adoption 

of the aroon:lments appended to this Order; and 

\'IIEREi\8, the Board f:i..n:ls that the reasoned justification ani factual 

bases for the arren:lrrients and the reasons wcy the Agency disagrees with 

party sul::ntissions and proposals are fully set rut in the sections titled 

Evaluations in the attached Summary ani ~uations; arrl-

"WBERFAS, the Board hereby certifies that . the amerrlaeni:s as a'lopte:l . 

have been reviewed l:Jy legal camsel and foilni to be .a .valid exercise- of 

the BOard's legal auth:Jricy; 

.-.... :· __ -,_: ... ··- < . '-~_.;/~-~~ 

._._.··.:\•-;i ..• ·_-.·•·;C: .. ,:.,~,,,.:;,:~L};i~i;~~ik~~~~1~~~~i~- ,._\"-} ----~-------·· .... -----·-~-----------
:_-v. 

·._ i 

I 

:-_j 

I 

j 

l 

l 

l 

I 

-I 

~I 

l 

-._\ 

-. -

1. The anendnents to Regulation VI and the PSD State Implenentation 

Plan appended to this Order are hereby adopted and pranulgated: and 

_- 2. The Executive Director is instructed to file a certified copy of 

this Order, together with the i.tdopted amendnents, with the Secretary of 

State pursuant to Article 6252-l3a, V.T.C.S;,: and 

3. The ExeQJtive Director is instructed to transnit a certified copy 

of this Order together with such arrendrrents to the Governor of Texas for 

submittal to the Administrator of the .Envirormental Protection Agency as 

proposed revisions to the State ImJ?lerrentation Plan pursuant to Section' 

110 of the Federal Clean·Air Act, as amended. 

PASSED AND APl'ROIIED at the regular neeti~ of the Texas Air Control 

BOard in Austin, Texas on this 17th day of JUly , 1987. 

BY: .ABSENT. 

.. -~ -.• .-<,.,..:.:.~---~-,-." •... 

-~---

- -· 
·I 

1 

i 

j 

1 

,... . ... · 

TEXAS AIR CONTROL BOARD 

JOHN L BLAIR 

Chairman 

BOB G. BAilEY· 

Vice Chairman :. 

ALLEN ELl BELL . 

EJtecutive Director· 

THE STATE OF TEXAS I 

COUNTY OF TRAVIS I 

6330 HWY. 290 EAST 

AUSTIN. TEXAS l8723 

. 512/451·5711 FRED HARTMAN 

0. JACK KILIAN, M.D. 

OTTO It KUNZE, Ph.D., P.E. 

R. HAL MOORMAN 

HUBERT OXFORD, Ill 

WILliAM H. DUORTRUP 

01 CK WHITTINGTON, P.E •. 

Pursuant to Section 2..14 of ·the Texas Clean Air Act, 

Article 4477-5, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes,.thrs is to 

certify that the .attached are true and correct cop·ies of 

revisions to Texas Air Control Board Regulation VI adopted on: 

July 17, 1987, pursuant to 40 CFR, Section 51.104. Prior to 

the adoption of these revisions, a public hearing was held 

pursuant t6 40 CFR, Section 51.102(a) and notice of this 

hearing was given which confo~ed to the requirements of 

40 CFR, section 51.102{d). I am the custodian of the records 

of the Board. 

To certify.which; witness my hand and ·the seal of the 

Texas Air Control ~oard! this the day· of 

1987 •. 

(SEAL) 

.. :.-~ .· . 

"<··············:.:.·