-**-----------~---** 

### --. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 6

Ms. PatriciaDuron 1445 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 1200 DALLAS, TX 75202-2733 

### J!s1820f0
Office ofLegal Services (MC 205) Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality P.O. Box 13087 Austin, TX 78711-3087 RE: EPA Comments onRule ProjectNumber 2010-004-039-LS DearMs. Duron: Thank youfor providing us the opportunityto reviewand comment onthe proposedrevisions tothe Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Title 30, Chapter 39, Public Notice, and the associated revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). This proposedrulemakingrevises thepublicnotice procedures for air qualitypermit applications to address EPA'sNovember 26,2008, proposedLimited Approval/Limited Disapproval rulemaking action (see 73 FR 72001). In general, we are supportive ofthisproposedrulemaking butwouldlike to providethe enclosed comments for yourconsideration. Please note thatcomments 1, 6-8, 10, and 13 mustbe addressed to our satisfactionbefore EPA canproceedwith a proposed approval ofthe revisions to the Texas SIP. Additionally, wenote that comment 14 is of high importance to EPARegion 6 and shouldbe carefully consideredbefore TCEQ proceeds with fmal adoption_ Please note that these comments do not constitute final determinations concerning approvability oftherevisions tothe Texas SIP. We are providing these comments to assist TCEQ in the development ofregulatory language. We look forward to working withthe TCEQ as youmove forward inrespondingtothese comments andfinalizing the revisions tothe Texas SIP. Ifyouhave anyquestions, please call Ms. AdinaWiley ofmy staffat (214) 665-2115.

Enclosures
cc: See nextpage Carl E. Edlund, P.E. Director MultimediaPlanning & 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 onEnvironmental Quality Ms. Stephanie Bergeron Perdue (MC 218) Texas Commission on Environmental QualityI Enclosure I. The intent ofthe proposed new provision at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(D) mustbe clarified. The proposal at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(D) can be interpreted to exempt allminorNew 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). Ifthe intent ofproposed 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 meetthis intent, the TCEQ mustrevise the rule so that it is clear that only PBRs and SPs are exempt from the publicparticipationrequirements. All other minor NSR, i.e., case-by-case, permits must be subject to the public participation requirements. Ifhowever, the proposed rules at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(D) establish de minimis thresholds below which public notice is notrequired for permitting actions outside ofthe scope ofSIP-approved PBRs and SPs, TCEQ must make further demonstrations to EPA (discussed below) onthe validity ofthis approach before EPA canconsiderthe approvability ofthe newprovision. The intent ofthe proposed revision at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(2)(E) must also be clarified. Itappears that the proposed rules establish a de minimis threshold below which public notice is not required for permitting actions oncertaintypes ofagricultural permits. The proposal could be interpreted as exempting from public notice all minorNSR permits for an "agricultural products handling" facility at which grain, seed, legrrmes, or vegetable fibers are handled, loaded, unloaded, dried, manufactured, orprocessed (as defined in section 382.020 ofthe Texas Clean Air Act). As proposed, this provision is not acceptable for approval by EPA as a SIP revision. Further demonstration, as discussed below, mustbe made to EPA onthe validity ofthis approach before EPA can contemplate approvability ofthis new provision. While EPA agrees in principle that the public notice requirements at 40 CFR 51.161 provide for tailoring ofthe public participation process for less enviromnentally significant sources and modifications (see 60 FR45530, 45548- 49, August 31, 1995), TCEQ has not provided an analysis that demonstrates how these de minimis thresholds were established orthat demonstrates how emissions below these levels will not cause or contribute to a violation ofthe applicable National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) orPrevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD) increment. TCEQ must provide a demonstration as discussed belowbefore EPA canconsider approving an exemption from public notice requirements as described inthe proposed rules.2

In the August 31, 1995, proposed Federal Register Notice (FRN) cited above, EPAhas described an acceptable tiering method for a minor NSRprogram. One important elementis thatthe State rules include specific, objective, and replicable criteria for determining when a minorNSRpermit is exempt from, or subjectto less than, the full publicparticipationrequirements at40 CFR 51.161. Limitations onthe full public participationrequirements for minorNSRpermits should be categorized and consistent with the principles articulated by EPA inthe August 31, 1995 proposed FRN. Therefore, the categorization ofthe types of minorNSRpermits that a State can exempt from or subjectto less than full public participation depends onthe potential for environmental and publichealth concerns. The public participationrequirements at 40 CFR 51.161 must be interpreted in concert with the requirements at 40 CFR 51.160(e), whichrequires that each SIP must identifY the types ofsources subject to minorNSR. Therefore, in addition to identifYing emission thresholds, the TCEQ must identifY the types ofminor sources and minor modifications that will be coveredbythese thresholds. Additionally, the State must also identifY the source types covered, the anticipated source population and estimates offuture growth, demonstrate that the identified sources and or changes are not environmentally significant, and demonstrate that the current emission levels and predicted future emissionlevels will not cause or contribute to a violation oftheNAAQS or PSD increments in the applicable areas. The State's minorNSRpublic notice exemption process orpublic notice tiering process mustbe reasonable and adequate for the statutory and regulatory purposes ofthe minorNSRprogram and be consistent withthe de minimis exemption criteria set forth inAlabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323 (D.C. Cir. 1979). For a full discussion ofEPA's interpretation oftiering based on environmental significance, see 60 FR45530, 45537-39. The State must also submit an analysis that demonstrates howthese exemptions from, and categories of, public notice requirements were established. The analysis must demonstrate howthe exemptions and the types ofpublic participation categories will not cause or contribute to a violation ofthe applicable NAAQS orPSD increments. EPA will not approve any public notice exemption thresholds without an extensive demonstration "thatthe situation is genuinely de minimis or one ofadministrative necessity." Ala. Power Co., 636 F.2d at 361 (D.C. Cir. 1979). Ifthe TCEQ chooses to pursue the development ofpermitting andpublic notice exemptions ortiering levels, we strongly encourage the TCEQ to work closely with the EPA. We also believe thatthe TCEQ shouldprovide the opportunity for public review and comment onthis analysis before itis submitted as a SIP revision.

### 3

· 2. We note that the definitions of'new facility' and 'modification ofan existing facility' referenced at proposed 30 TAC 39.402 have notbeen approved by EPA into the Texas SIP. Similarly, references to FutureGenpermits at 30 TAC 39.402 have notbeen 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 orthe FutureGen permitprogram. 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 permitprogram at 30 TAC Chapter 116, Subchapter J. We have no record ofreceiving the multiple plantpermit program as a SIP revision. Please clarifY whether the multiple plantpermitprogram 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 ofa public works at 30 TAC 39.402(a)(8) and howthis exclusion is consistent withthe requirements of40 CFR 51.161. Any exemption from public notice mustbe addressed through a demonstration ofenvironmental significance as outlined in Comment 1 above. Additionally, these types oftemporary facilities must go throughthe public participationprocess 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 shouldrefer to the lastpublication ofthe Notice ofReceipt ofApplication and Intent to Obtain Permit instead ofthe last publication ofthe Notice ofApplication and Intent to Obtain Permit. 6. We note that several ofthe proposed rule provisions address items contained in the Texas PSD Supplement(see attachment titled "Revisionto the Texas State Implementation Plan for Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration ofAir Quality), namely: • the inclusion ofthe anticipated degree ofincrement consumption inthe public notice, as required under 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iii); and • a copy ofthe 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). Ifthe TCEQ adopts the rules as proposed and revised per EPA's comments and submits these rules to EPA for approval as part ofthe Texas SIP, EPAbelieves that the State's SIP submittal request should ask EPAto remove the PSD Supplement from the Texas SIP for the duplicative items identified above. The remainder ofthe Texas PSD Supplement would remain in effect and enforceable in the Texas SIP.4 

### 7. To be approvable as a Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD) Public Participation SIP revision, the proposed rules for the Notice ofApplication and Preliminary Decision at 30 TAC 39.411(f)(3) must be revised to require that a copy or summary ofall 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 ofthe comment period is never less than 30 days from the initial publication ofthe Notice ofApplication and Preliminary Decision, butthis interpretation is not supported in the proposedregulatory text From our own experiences commenting onpermits, and from citizen complaints we have received, EPA is seriously concerned that TCEQ's proposed rules for providing notice ofthe commentperiod hinder public involvement TCEQ has delegated the authority to publish notice to the applicant Underthe proposed revisions at 30 TAC 39.405G), the applicant has up to 10 days from the date ofthe last newspaper publicationto 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 ifyou are unable to ascertain when the public commentperiod starts or ends. EPA recommends that TCEQ shorten the amount oftime an applicant has to provide evidence ofpublic notice from 1 0 days to 3 days. We also recommend thatthe published notices (both Notice ofReceipt ofApplication and Intent to Obtain Permit and Notice ofApplication and Preliminary Decision) include a date specific to identify the end ofthe commentperiod. Further, we encourage TCEQ to maintain an up-to-date listing via the agency's website ofall 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 thatbytaking these actions TCEQ will greatly improve the transparency ofthe permitting program and encourage greater public involvement inthe permitting process. 9. We believe that the proposedrevision 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 ofthe 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 thatthe Executive Director's decision and response to public comments will be posted onthe

### 5 TCEQ's website. Electronic posting ofthe 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 subjectto PSD. Additionally, electronic postirig ofthe 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 subjectto 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 postthe RTC as a substitute for posting all connnents received only ifthe RTC includes each submitted connnent in its entirety without any summarization or editing. Ifthe TCEQ wishes to publish a RTC in place ofmaking each individual connnent available the proposedregulations must be revised to reflect that the RTC will include the exact submitted connnent. b. Both40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi) and (viii) require materials (all submitted connnents and the final permit determination, respectively) to be made available atthe 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 onthe TCEQ website could possibly satisfy the requirementto post materials at the same location where preconstruction materials were made available ifthe TCEQ: I) revises the regulations for Notice ofReceipt ofApplication and Intent to Obtain Permit and Notice ofApplication 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 ofthe 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 ofair permitting information as the primary or sole means ofmaking 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 thatwill satisfy the requirements of40 CFR 51.166(q)(2). We believe it is possible that the creation ofan 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 bypermit number and easily searchable by the public could satisfy the intent ofthe federal regulations. We note6 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 of51.166(q)(2). Ifthe TCEQ is unable to provide all the materials required in 51.166(q)(2) in anelectronic format thenelectronicposting ofthe RTC and final determination can onlybe considered a supplement to the federal requirements. Inthis event, theproposed rules mustbe 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 nothave a subsection (c)(3) or (c)(4). 12. Please verify thatthe citation at 30 TAC 39.420(h) to subsection (a)(4) is correct. Ifso, please explain why Future Genpermits would not need instructions for requesting a contested case hearing. 13. The proposedrules for notice ofaffected agencies at 30 TAC 39.605 do not provide notice to any comprehensive regional landuse planning agency or State Land Manager as required in40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iv) for projects that are subject to PSD review. While the Texas rules do not needto provide notice ifno such entity exists, the TCEQ mustreview the intent ofthis provision and determine if another entity could be provided notice. EPA interprets this provision ofthe PSD regulations as requiring notice to be given to persons or entities fulfilling the responsibilities ofa regional land use planning agency or a State Land Manager, regardless ofthe respective title. Texas has a Texas General Land Office that has the responsibilities for managing state lands; therefore, the Texas General Land Office mustbe provided the requisite notice for a State LandManager. Additionally, the TCEQ must consider whether under Texas lawthe Texas Parks and Wildlife Departmentfunctions as a regional landuse planning agency or State Land Manager. Ifthe TCEQ determines that either the Texas General Land Office orTexas Parks and Wildlife Departmentdoes not function inthe capacity ofa State Land Manager or a regional land use planning agency, the TCEQ must submitto EPA a legal analysis to that effect. Otherwise, the proposedrules must be revised to provide notice to the appropriate affected agencies. 14. EPA is concerned about the July 1, 2010, compliance timefrarne established inthe
·proposedrevisions. As written, the proposedrules would apply to air quality

permit applications submitted onor after July 1, 2010. Assuming the full90 days allowed under Chapter 116, section 116.114 are used to determine application completeness, permits couldbe issuedthrough October 2011, without providing publicnotice 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 currentproblems with Texas's air permitting public notice process for anunacceptable 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 affectpositive 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 ofgood faith, TCEQ should implement and actively promote a voluntary program under which permit applicants cancomply withthe proposed public notice provisions effective immediately. IS. Also, in an effort to improve the transparency and public accessibility ofthe air permitting program, EPA recommends that TCEQ revise their provisions for establishing and maintaining public notice mailing lists. Currently the TCEQ chiefclerk maintains lists for each specificpermit action and a list for all permitting activities ofall media within a specific county. We believe that expanding the mailing lists to include the option to sign-up for a mailing list ona specific company in a given county wouldbetter 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 "nonattairunent.. ''
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 pennit 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 01CK 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)

..**:.-~** .· . "<··············:.:.·