## TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY



# AGENDA ITEM REQUEST

for State Implementation Plan Revision Adoption

AGENDA REQUESTED: December 5 , 20 12

DATE OF REQUEST: November 16, 2012

INDIVIDUAL TO CONTACT REGARDING CHANGES TO THIS REQUEST, IF NEEDED: Joyce Spencer

- Nelson

, (512) 239

- 5017

CAPTION: Docket No. 20 12

- 1087

- SIP

. Consideration of the adoption
of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA)

, Section 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for
the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard s.

The adopted SIP revision outline s the requirements of FCAA, Section 110(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas provisions supporting the requirements. These requirements include basic program elements such as
enforceabl e emission limitations and control measures, air quality monitoring and modeling, a permitting program, adequate funding

, personnel

, and authority under state law to carry out the plan, emissions reporting, emergency powers, public participation, and fee c ollection . This
SIP revision also include s a technical demonstration to support that Texas meets the interstate transport requirements of FCAA, Section 110(a) (2)( D)(i)(I). ( Shelley Naik

, Amy Browning ) ( Non

- Rule Project No.

20 12

- 004

- SIP

- NR )

Jayme Sadlier for Steve Hagle, P.E. Deputy Director

Joyce Spencer

- Nelson Agenda Coordinator Kim Herndon for David Brymer

Division Director

Copy to CCC Secretary? NO

# Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Interoffice Memorandum

To:

Thru:

From:

Docket No.: Commissioners

Bridget C. Bohac , Chief Clerk
Zak Covar

, Executive Director

Steve Hagle, P.E. , Deputy Director
Office of Air

20 12

- 1087

- SIP Date: November 16, 2012

Subject: Commission Approval for Adoption of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

Infrastructure and Transport S IP Revision for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS

Non

- Rule Project No. 20 12

- 004

- SIP

- NR

Background and reason (s) for the SIP revision : On March 12, 2008, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
streng thened the NAAQS for ground level ozone. The new primary eight

- hour ozone standard, set at 0.075 parts per million (ppm), replaced the previous 1997 standard of 0.08 ppm. The EPA also decreased the secondary eight

- hour ozone standard to the level of

0.075 ppm making it identical to the revised primary standard. However, the EPA did not initially implement the 2008 eight

- hour ozone standard due to a subsequent NAAQS reconsideration. To date, the EPA has not published infrastructure or transport guidance
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

Section 110(a)(1) of the FCAA requires states to submit a SIP revision to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. States are required to submit the infrastructure portion of this SIP requirement to the EPA to demonstrate that basic program elements have been addressed within three years of the promulgation of any new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists the elements that the new SIP submissions

must contain.

On February 2, 2011, the TCEQ sent a letter to the EPA Region 6 to request formal clarification on several issues regarding the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the EPA’s reconsideration of the standards. Specifically, the TCEQ asked whether the EPA intended that Texas develop and submit infrastructure and transport SIP revisions under the 2008 ozone standards by the March 12, 2011, deadline. On April 21, 2011, the EPA responded to the TCEQ stating, “As we stated earlier, EPA has not implemented the 2008 ozone standards by the deadline specified in the F ederal Register (75 FR 2936). EPA has proposed that the 2008 ozone standards are insufficient to protect public health and welfare (75 FR 2938). EPA intends to take final action on the reconsideration by the end of July 2011 and at that time we will propos e requirements for implementation, including the requisite infrastructure and transport elements.” Based on this EPA direction, the TCEQ did not submit an infrastructure SIP revision by the March 12, 2011, deadline.

### Commissioners Page 2 November 16, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12

- 1087

- SIP

On September 22, 2011, the EPA issued a memorandum to inform states the 2008 ozone NAAQS would be implemented. Implementation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS requires that the infrastructure SIP be submitted, although the original deadline of March 12, 2011, has already passed. On October 17, 2012, the United States District Court, Northern District of California, issued an order requiring the EPA to issue f indings of f ailure to submit for states that had not already submitted infrastructure SIP revisions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (including Texas) by Ja nuary 4, 2013.

Submitting this SIP revision prior to a finding of failure to submit could avoid a possible federal implementation plan (FIP) by the EPA for any future transport rule associated with the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On April 25, 2005, the EPA issued Texas a finding o f failure to submit the required transport SIP for the 1997 ozone standard. The EPA then relied on this notice to justify the inclusion of Texas in the FIP for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) even though Texas had subsequently submitted a transp ort SIP revision for the 1997 ozone standard that addressed the finding of failure to submit. On August 21, 2012,
the U nited States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated CSAPR

.

Scope of the SIP revision :

A.) Summary of what the SIP revision will do: The SIP revision will document how the infrastructure elements listed in FCAA, §110(a)(2) are currently addressed in the Texas SIP. The SIP revision outlines the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas provisions supporting the requirements. These requirements include basic program elements such as enforceable emission limitations and control measures, interstate transport provisions, air quality monitoring and modeling, a permitting program, adequate funding

, per sonnel, and authority under state law to carry out the plan, emissions reporting, emergency powers, public participation, and fee collection.

The SIP revision will also include a technical demonstration to support that Texas meets the interstate transpor t requirements of §110(a)(2) of the FCAA. Pursuant to FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), this SIP revision must provide supporting information demonstrating that emissions from Texas are not contributing significantly to nonattainment and not interfering with main tenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in any other state.

B.) Scope required by federal regulations or state statutes:
The SIP revision will document how the infrastructure elements listed in FCAA, §110(a)(2) are currently addressed in the Texas SIP. The SIP revision outline s the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas provisions supporting the requirements.

C.) Additional staff recommendations that are not required by federal rule or

state statute:

### Commissioners Page 3 November 16, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12

- 1087

- SIP

None

Statutory authority: The EPA p ublished the final rule establishing the revised NAAQS for ozone in the Federal Register on March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436). The authority to propose and adopt the SIP revision is derived from FCAA, 42 United States Code, §7410, which requires states to
submi t SIP revisions that contain enforceable measures to attain the NAAQS and other general and specific authority in Texas Water Code, Chapters 5 and 7 and Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 382.

Effect on the:

A.) Regulated community:
This SIP revision contains no new control measures and will not affect the regulated community.

B.) Public:

None

C.) Agency programs:
This SIP revision will have no new effect on agency programs.

Stakeholder meetings: No stakeholder meetings were held.

Public comment: The commission held a public hearing for the proposed SIP revision in Austin on September 2 5 , 201 2 . A question and answer session was held 30 minutes prior to the meeting. The Alamo Area Council of Governments provided oral comments concerning the

SIP revision.

The public comment period opened on August 24, 2012 , and closed on September 28, 2012. Comments were received from the EPA, Public Citizen, and four individuals. A summary of the comments and the TCEQ response is provided as part of this SI P revision in the Response to Comments.

Significant changes from proposal : The discussion of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and CSAPR was updated to include that on August 21, 2012, the U nited States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia

Cir cuit vacated CSAPR. Under the court’s ruling, CAIR will remain in place until the EPA develops a valid replacement for CAIR. The background discussion was also updated to
include that on October 17, 2012, the United States District Court, Northern District of California, issued an order requiring the EPA to issue findings of failure to submit infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 ozone NAAQS by January 4, 2013.

### Commissioners Page 4 November 16, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12

- 1087

- SIP

In response to comment from EPA Region 6, t he list of relevant rules for meeting the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i) was expanded to include 30 T exas Administrative Code, Chapter s 115, 116

, and 117.

In response to comment from AACOG and Public Citizen, the discussion of how Texas meets the requirements of §110(a)( 2)(E), on page xii of the SIP revision narrative, was
revised.

Potential controversial concerns and legislative interest : EPA Disapproval Notices: The EPA has published various proposed disapproval notices for Texas’ air permitting programs, and these dis approvals have not yet been fully resolved. Texas has adopted new rules that address all of these notices and has committed to working closely with the EPA to ensure that these rulemaking efforts will result in rules that are approvable by the EPA.

Since t he EPA has not acted on the rules, the infrastructure submittal may or may not be fully approvable.

The EPA has also proposed limited approval/limited disapproval of the commission’s rules regarding public participation for air quality New Source Review ( NSR) permits. This proposed action has a potential direct impact on the infrastructure requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2). Texas has withdrawn from EPA consideration most of the rules that were the subject of the proposed limited approval/limited disapproval and has submitted new and revised adopted public participation rules to the EPA for the SIP. On October 28, 2010, the EPA signed a notice withdrawing its limited approval and limited disapproval of the SIP revisions relating to public participation becaus e those revisions are no longer before the
EPA for review. Although the EPA has disapproved various elements of Texas’ air permitting programs, those concerns are being addressed with newly adopted rules and a commitment to work closely with EPA staff to i ssue EPA

- approvable rules. Texas has a robust, SIP

- approved permitting program and therefore has met the infrastructure requirements of §110(a)(2).

Previous Transport Submittals: The TCEQ submitted a n FCAA

, § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP revision for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard in April 2008 with receipt acknowledged by the EPA as of May 5, 2008. Because Texas was not originally included in the CAIR program for the 1997 ozone standard, the state did not rely solely on CAIR modeling in meeting this SIP ob ligation and identified

state

- level controls adopted for major point sources, along with their associated emission reductions, and other Texas SIP revisions that would address Texas’ §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligations.

The revision was deemed by operation of law as of November 5, 2008, to meet minimum completeness requirements, in accordance with § 110(k)(1) of the FCAA. The EPA was therefore required to take action regarding full, partial, or conditional approval or disapproval for this revision within 12 mon ths of the completeness determination

.

### Commissioners Page 5 November 16, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12

- 1087

- SIP

However, the EPA relied on the 2005 notice of failure to submit to justify including Texas
in the FIP in the final CSAPR. While the EPA’s reliance on the 2005 notice of failure to submit is not appropriate, the EPA ma y use the same approach to include Texas in future

interstate transport programs if a finding of failure to submit is issued for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

In a September 22, 2011, memo regarding the implementation of the 2008 NAAQS, the
EPA stated that it doe s not intend to penalize states for the passage of time due to the delay in implementation. On October 17, 2012, however, the United States District Court, Northern District of California, issued an order requiring the EPA to issue f indings of
f

ailure to s ubmit by January 4, 2013.

Previous Infrastructure Submittals: Texas was issued a finding of failure to submit its infrastructure SIP revision for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS on March 27, 2008. On April 4, 2008, Texas submitted a letter and supporting documentation to address any potential infrastructure issues associated with the 1997 eight

- hour ozone and fine particulate matter ( PM 2.5 

### ) NAAQS that fulfilled its infrastructure SIP obligations. On September 14, 2010, Earthjustice sued the EPA on
behalf o f the Sierra Club seeki ng to compel promulgation of a FIP for Texas for the ozone standard and to take final approval or disapproval action on Texas' PM 2.5 

### submittal.

In the December 28, 2011, Federal Register , the EPA determined that the Texas SIP meets the infrastructure requirements for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and

2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS at FCAA, §110(a)(2(A), (B), (E), (F), (G), (H), (K), (L), (M), and portions of (C), (D)(ii)

, and (J). The EPA determined that the Texas SIP does not meet the infrastructure requirements for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006

PM 2.5 

### NAAQS at FCAA, §110(a)(2) for portions of (C), (D)(ii), and (J) because Texas has stated it cannot issue permits for and does not intend to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The EPA partially approved and partially disapproved the Texas SIP revisions to address the Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements at FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS again because Texas cannot issue permits for emissions of GHG. Texas is challenging the EPA’s partial disapproval of the previous infrastructure SIP revisions; however, because the basis for the EPA’s partial disapproval was the lack of a GHG permit ting program in Texas, the EPA will likely use the same criteria when determining if any future infrastructure SIP revisions may be approved.

Does this SIP revision affect any current policies or require development of new policies?

No

### Commissioners Page 6 November 16, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12

- 1087

- SIP

What are the conse quences if this SIP revision does not go forward ? A re there
alternatives to this SIP revision ? The infrastructure and transport SIP revision is required by §110(a) of the FCAA. If a SIP

revision is not submitted, the EPA may promulgate a FIP for Texas.

Ag ency contacts: Shelley Naik

, SIP Project Manager, 239

- 1536

, Air Quality Division Amy Browning, Staff Attorney, 239

- 0891

Attachment

cc: Chief Clerk, 2 copies
Executive Director ' s Office Susana M. Hildebrand, P.E.
Anne Idsal

Curtis Seaton Tucker Royall

O ffice of General Counsel Shelley NaikREVISIONS TO THE STATE OF TEXAS AIR QUALITY
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT

, SECTION 110(a)(1) AND (2) INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORT

INFRASTRUCTURE DEMONSTRATION AND TRANSPORT PLAN

FOR OZONE

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
P.O. BOX 13087 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

- 3087

FEDERAL CLEAN AIR AC T

, SECTION 110( a )(1) AND (2)

INFRASTRUCTURE AND T RANSPORT STATE
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION FOR THE 2008
OZONE NATIONAL AMBIE NT AIR QUAL ITY STANDARD S

Project Number 2012

- 004

- SIP

- NR

Adoption
December 5 , 201 2This page intentionally left blankES

- 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) for ozone infrastructure and transport is
intended to meet the infrastructure requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §110(a). States are required by §110(a)(1) of the FCAA to submit SIP revisions to meet the infrastructure requirements within three years of promulgation of new or revise d National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). On March 12, 2008, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) strengthened the NAAQS for ground level ozone. The new primary eight

- hour ozone standard, set at 0.075 parts per million (ppm) repl aced the previous 1997 standard of 0.08 ppm. The EPA also strengthened the secondary eight

- hour ozone standard to the level of 0.075 ppm making it identical to the revised primary standard. This SIP revision document s that the Texas
SIP at 40 Code of Feder al Regulations Part 52, Subpart SS contains all the infrastructure elements required by FCAA, §110(a)(2) for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Because the infrastructure demonstration explains how the existing

Texas statutes and rules will allow the state to meet its obligations under the FCAA, this SIP

revision has been developed as an expansion of the existing Section V: Legal Authority section of Texas’ SIP. This expanded section is unique to infrastructure SIP rev isions that are submitted to meet the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(1), and demonstrates that the state can provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS.

Th e infrastructure demonstration outlines the requirements of FCAA, §110( a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas statutes and rules that allow the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to meet those requirements. The requirements include basic program elements such as enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air qu ality monitoring and modeling, a permitting program, adequate funding and personnel, authority under state law to carry out the plan, emissions reporting, emergency powers, public participation, and fee collection.

This SIP revision also includes a more de tailed technical demonstration to meet the interstate transport requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Since this infrastructure element requires more than statutory authority, the requirement is discussed in the Section VI: Control Strategy portion of this SIP revision. The technical demonstration includes a n analysis of ozone trends and discussion of existing ozone control strategies to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do

not contribute significantly to non attainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in another state.ES

- 1 SECTION V: LEGAL AUT HORITY



### A. General (Revised)



### B. Infrastructure Demonstration for Lead (No change)



### 1. 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (No change)



### C. Infrastructure Demonstration for Nitrogen Dioxide (No change)



### 1. 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard (No change)



### D. Infrastructure Demonstration for Ozone ( New )



### 1. 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard s ( New )ii SECTION V

- A : LEGAL AUTHORITY



### A. General The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has the legal authority to implement, maintain, and enforce the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to control the quality of the state’s air, includin g maintaining adequate visibility.

The first air pollution control act, known as the Clean Air Act of Texas, was passed by the Texas Legislature in 1965. In 1967, the Clean Air Act of Texas was superseded by a more comprehensive statute, the Texas Clean Ai r Act (TCAA), found in Article 4477

- 5, Vernon’s Texas
Civil Statutes. The legislature amended the TCAA in 1969, 1971, 1973, 1979, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 , and 2011

. In 1989, the TCAA was codified as Chap ter 382 of the Texas Health and Safety Code.

Originally, the TCAA stated that the Texas Air Control Board (TACB) is the state air pollution control agency and is the principal authority in the state on matters relating to the quality of air

resources. In 1 991, the legislature abolished the TACB effective September 1, 1993, and its powers, duties, responsibilities, and functions were transferred to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC). With the creation of the TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found in both the Texas Water Code and the TCAA. Specifically, the authority of the TNRCC is found in Chapters 5 and 7. Chapter 5, Subchapters A

- F, H

- J, and L, include the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties o f the TNRCC, and the responsibilities and authority of the executive director. C hapter 5 also authorizes the TNRCC to implement action when emergency conditions arise and to conduct hearings. Chapter 7 gives the TNRCC enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77 th Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TNRCC until September 1, 2013, and changed the name of the TNRCC to the T CEQ. In 2009, the 81st Texas Legislature, during a special session, amended section 5.014 of the Texas Water Code, changing the exp iration date of the TCEQ to September 1, 2011, unless continued in existence by the Texas Sunset Act. In 2011, the 82nd Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TCEQ until 2023.

The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level of qu ality to be maintained in the state’s air and to control the quality of the state’s air by preparing and developing a general, comprehensive plan. The TCAA, Subchapters A

- D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect
information to enable the commission to devel op an inventory of emissions; to conduct research and investigations; to enter property and examine records; to prescribe monitoring requirements; to institute enforcement proceedings; to enter into contracts and execute instruments; to formulate rules; to issue orders taking into consideration factors bearing upon health, welfare, social and economic factors, and practicability and reasonableness; to conduct hearings; to establish air quality control regions; to encourage cooperation with citizens’ groups and other agencies and political subdivisions of the state as well as with industries and the federal government; and to establish and operate a system of permits for construction or
modification of facilities.

Local government authority is found in Subchapter E of the TCAA. Local governments have the same power as the TCEQ to enter property and make inspections. They also may make recommendations to the commission concerning any action of the TCEQ that affects their territorial jurisdiction, may brin g enforcement actions, and may execute cooperative agreements with the TCEQ or other local governments. In addition, a city or town may enact and enforce ordinances for the control and abatement of air pollution not inconsistent with the provisions of
the TCAA and the rules or orders of the commission.iii Subchapters G and H of the TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establish vehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas of the state, consistent with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act; coordi nate with federal, state, and local transportation planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS; establish gasoline volatility and low emission diesel standards; and fund
and aut horize participating counties to implement vehicle repair assistance, retrofit, and accelerated vehicle retirement programs.



### B. Applicable Law The following statutes and rules provide necessary authority to adopt and implement the state implementation plan (S IP). The rules listed below have previously been submitted as part of the

SIP.

Statutes All sections of each subchapter are included, unless otherwise noted. TEXAS HEALTH & SAFETY CODE, Chapter 382 September 1, 2011
TEXAS WATER CODE September 1, 2011

Chapter 5: T exas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter A: General Provisions Subchapter B: Organization of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter C: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter D: Gener al Powers and Duties of the Commission Subchapter E: Administrative Provisions for Commission Subchapter F: Executive Director (except §§5.225, 5.22 6, 5.227, 5.2275, 5.231, 5.232, and 5.236) Subchapter H: Delegation of Hearings Subchapter I: Judicial Re view Subchapter J: Consolidated Permit Processing Subchapter L: Emergency and Temporary Orders (§§5.514, 5.5145, and 5.515 only) Subchapter M: Environmental Permitting Procedures (§5.558 only)

Chapter 7: Enforcement Subchapter A: General Provisions (§ §7.001, 7.002, 7.0025, 7.004, and 7.005 only) Subchapter B: Corrective Action and Injunctive Relief (§7.032 only) Subchapter C: Administrative Penalties Subchapter D: Civil Penalties (except §7.109) Subchapter E: Criminal Offenses and Penalties: §§7.177, 7.179

- 7.183

Rules
All of the following rules are found in 30 Texas Administrative Code, as of the following latest
effective dates:

Chapter 7: Memoranda of Understanding, §§7.110 and 7.119 December 13, 1996 and May 2, 2002

Chapter 19: Electronic Reporting March 15, 2007

Chapter 35: Subchapters A

- C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions July 20, 2006iv Chapter 39: Public Notice, §§39.402(a)(1)

- (6), (8), and (10)

- (12), 39.405(f)(3) a nd (g), (h)(1)(A)

- ( 4), (6), (8)

- (11), (i) and (j), 39.407, 39.409,

39.411 (a), (e)(1)

- (4)(A)(i) and (iii), (4)(B), (5)(A) and (B), and (6)

- (10), (11)(A)(i) and (iii) and (iv), (11)(B )

- (F), (13) and (15), and (f)(1)

- (8), (g) and (h), 39.418(a), (b)(2)(A) , (b)(3), and (c), 39.419(e), 39.420 (c)(1)(A)

- (D)(i)(I) and (II), (D)(ii), (c)(2), (d)

- (e), and (h) , and 39.601

- 39.605 June 24, 2010

Chapter 55: Requests for Reconsideration and Contested Case Hearings; Public Comment, §§55.150, 55.152(a)(1 ), (2), (5), and (6) and (b), 55.154(a), (b), (c)(1)

- (3), and (5), and (d)

- (g), and 55.156(a), (b), (c)(1), (e), and (g) June 24, 2010

Chapter 101: General Air Quality Rules April 19, 2012

Chapter 106: Permits by Rule, Subchapter A May 1 5 , 20 11

Chapter 111: Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate

Matter February 16 , 20 12

Chapter 112: Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997

Chapter 113: Standards of Performance for Hazardous Air Pollutants and for Designated F acilities and Pollutants May 14, 2009

Chapter 114: Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles September 13 , 2012

Chapter 115: Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds December 29 , 2011

Chapter 116: Permits for New Construction or Modifica tion August 16, 2012

Chapter 117: Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds April 19, 2012

Chapter 118: Control of Air Pollution Episodes March 5, 2000

Chapter 122: §122.122: Potential to Emit December 11, 2002

Chapter 122: §122.215: Minor Permit Re visions June 3, 2001

Chapter 122: §122.216: Applications for Minor Permit Revisions June 3, 2001

Chapter 122: §122.217: Procedures for Minor Permit Revisions December 11, 2002

Chapter 122: §122.218 : Minor Permit Revision Procedures for Permit

Revisions Inv olving the Use of Economic Incentives, Marketable Permits, and Emissions Trading June 3, 2001v SECTION V

- D

- 1 : INFRASTRUCTURE DEM ONSTRATION FOR THE 2 008 OZONE
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD S



### A. Background Section 110(a)(1) of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) requires states to submit a state implementation plan ( SIP ) revision to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS ) . Sta tes are required to submit the infrastructure portion of this SIP requirement to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to demonstrate that basic program elements have been addressed within three years of the promulgation of any new or rev ised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists the
elements that these SIP submissions must contain.

On March 12, 2008, the EPA s trengthened the NAAQS for ground level ozone. The 2008 primary eight

- hour ozone standard, set at 0.075 parts per million (ppm) replaced th e previous 1997 standard of 0.08 ppm. The EPA also strengthened the secondary eight

- hour ozone standard to the level of 0.075 ppm making it identical to the revised primary standard. However, the EPA did not initially implement the 2008 eight

- hour ozone st andard due to a subsequent
reconsideration of the NAAQS.

On February 2, 2011, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) sent a letter to the EPA Region 6 to request formal clarification on several issues regarding the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the EP A’s reconsideration of the standards. Specifically, the TCEQ asked whether the EPA intended that Texas develop and submit infrastructure and transport SIP revisions under the 2008 ozone standards by the March 12, 2011, deadline. On April 21, 2011, the EPA responded to the TCEQ stating, “As we stated earlier, EPA has not implemented the 2008 ozone standards by the deadline specified in the Federal Register (75 FR 2936). EPA has proposed that the 2008 ozone standards are insufficient to protect public health and welfare (75 FR 2938). EPA intends to take final action on the reconsideration by the end of July 2011 and at that time we will propose requirements for implementation, including the requisite infrastructure and transport elements.” Based on this EPA di rection, the TCEQ did not submit an infrastructure SIP revision by the March 12, 2011, deadline.

On September 22, 2011, the EPA issued a memorandum to inform states that the 2008 ozone NAAQS would be implemented . Implementation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS req uires that the infrastructure SIP be submitted, although the original deadline of March 12, 2011, has already passed. On September 22, 2011, the EPA issued a memorandum entitled Implementation of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard in which the Assistant Administrator stated that
the EPA does not intend to penalize state s for late submittals of infrastructure SIPs and interstate transport SIPs. On October 17, 2012, however, the United States District Court, Northern District of California, issued an order requiring the EPA to issue findings of failure to submit for states that had not already submitted infrastructure SIP revisions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (including Texas) by January 4, 2013. To date, the EPA has not published infrastructure or transport guidance for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

This SIP revision is intende d to provide an update of the §110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS

. This chapter outlines FCAA, §110(a)(2)(A) through (M) and
includes various Texas pro visions that support the conclusion that Texas meets the requirements of each section . The federally enforceable SIP for Texas is documented at 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 52, Subpart SS.

The infrastructure demonstration is an expansion of the Lega l Authority section of Texas’ SIP that provides additional information about how the existing statutes and rules allow Texas tovi meet the §110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements of the FCAA. Therefore, this SIP revision contains an expanded infrastructure se ction under the SIP Legal Authority. This infrastructure section is intended to satisfy the §110(a)(1) requirement to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. This infrastructure section will be updated as part of the infr astructure SIP revisions that Texas is required to submit as new or revised NAAQS are promulgated

, but it will not otherwise be included in other Texas SIP revisions. Section A of the Legal Authority contains the basic listing of Texas’ legal framework for adopting SIP revisions and will be the default Legal Authority for Texas SIP revisions that are not specifically submitted to meet the FCAA, §110(a)(1) infrastructure demonstration requirement.

The October 2, 2007, EPA Guidance on SIP Elements Required Un der Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8

- hour ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards , and the September 25, 2009, Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
for the 2006 24

- Hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) National Am bient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) indicated that if a state determines that its existing SIP is adequate, the state can certify via a letter to the EPA that the existing SIP contains provisions that address the infrastructure requirements. The EPA's more recent 2011 Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) indicates that the state should provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing prior to
submission to the EPA. The EPA has not yet proposed infrastructure or transport guidance for the 2008 ozone NAAQS , but in order to meet statutory deadlines for submittal of infrastructure SIPs, states do not have the option of waiting for EPA to provide additional guidance before proceeding with infrastructure and transport SIP development, review, and submittal. The TCEQ proceed ed with this SIP revision to ensure that there were adequate opportunities for public notice and comment as required by state and federal statutes.

The TCEQ acknowledges that proposed changes to federal regulations may have future impacts on how the TCEQ meets the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2) ; however, this SIP revision reflects the methods and means by which Texas meets these requirements at the time of this SIP revision. Should future federal rule changes necessitate state rule changes, the TCEQ will act appropriate ly at that time.



### B. Texas Stat utory Authority The TCEQ has the legal authority to implement, maintain, and enforce the NAAQS. Texas’ legal authority has been submitted to the EPA as part of various SIP revisions that have been approved by the EPA.

The first air pollution control act, k nown as the Clean Air Act of Texas, was passed by the Texas Legislature in 1965. In 1967, the Clean Air Act of Texas was superseded by a more comprehensive statute, the Texas Clean Air Act ( TCAA ) , found in Article 4477

- 5, Vernon’s Texas
Civil Statutes. The Legislature amended the TCAA in 1969, 1971, 1973, 1979, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, and 2011. In 1989, the TCAA was codified as Chapter 382 of the Texas Health and Safety Code.

Originally, the TCAA stated that the Texas Air Control Board ( TACB ) was the state air pollution control agency and was the principal authority in the state on matters relating to the quality of air resources. In 1991, the legislature abolished the TACB effective September 1, 1993, an d its powers, duties, responsibilities, and functions were transferred to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission ( TNRCC ) . With the creation of the TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found in both the Texas Water Code and the TCAA. Specifi cally, the authority of thevii commission is found in Texas Water Code, Chapters 5 and 7. Chapter 5, Subchapters A

- F, H

- J,
and L , include the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties of the commission, and the responsibilities and a uthority of the executive director. Chapter 5 also authorizes the commission to implement action when emergency conditions arise and to conduct hearings. Chapter 7 gives the commission enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77th Texas Legislature continued th e existence of the commission until September 1, 2013, and changed the name of the TNRCC to the TCEQ. In 2009, the 81st Texas Legislature, during a special session, amended the Texas Water Code, §5.014, changing the expiration date of the TCEQ to September 1, 2011, unless continued in existence by the Texas Sunset Act. In 2011, the 82nd Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TCEQ until 2023.

The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level of quality to be maintained in
the state’s air and to control the quality of the state’s air by preparing and developing a general, comprehensive plan. The TCAA, Subchapters A through D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect information to enable the commission to develop an inventory of emissions; c onduct research and investigations; enter property and examine records; prescribe monitoring requirements; institute enforcement proceedings; enter into contracts and execute instruments; formulate rules; issue orders taking into consideration factors bear ing upon health, welfare, social and economic factors, and practicability and reasonableness; conduct hearings; establish air quality control regions; encourage cooperation with citizens’ groups and other agencies and political
subdivisions of the state as well as with industries and the federal government; and establish and operate a system of permits for construction or modification of facilities.

Local government authority concerning air quality matters is found in Subchapter E of the TCAA. Local governm ents have the same power as the TCEQ to enter property and make inspections. Local governments may also make recommendations to the commission concerning any action of the TCEQ that affects their territorial jurisdiction, may bring enforcement actions,
and may execute cooperative agreements with the TCEQ or other local governments. In addition, a city or town may enact and enforce ordinances for the control and abatement of air pollution not inconsistent with the provisions of the TCAA or the rules or order s of the

commission.

Subchapters G and H of the TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establish vehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas of the state, consistent with the requirements of the

FCAA ; coordinate with federal, state, and local transpor tation planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS; and fund and authorize participating counties to implement vehicle repair assistance,
retrofit and accelerated vehicle retire ment programs.

Statutory Authority The following statutory authority allows for the establishment and operation of the TCEQ and the adoption and implementation of all §110(a)(2) requirements.

Texas Clean Air Act, Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 382, except Subchapter I.

Texas Water Code:

§5.013(a)(11) & (13) GENERAL JURISDICTION OF COMMISSION §5.051. COMMISSION §5.052. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION; APPOINTMENT §5.053. ELIGIBILITY FOR MEMBERSHIP §5.054. REMOVAL OF COMMISSION MEMBERSviii §5.059. CONFLICT OF INTEREST §5.060. LOBBYIST PROHIBITION §5.101. SCOPE OF SUBCHAPTER §5.102. GENERAL POWERS §5.103. RULES §5.104. MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING §5.105. GENERAL POLICY §5.106. BUDGET APPROVAL §5.107. ADVISORY COMMITTEES, WORK GROUPS, AND TASK FORCES § 5.115. PERSONS AFFECTED IN COMMISSION HEARINGS; NOTICE OF
APPLICATION §5.117. MANDATORY ENFORCEMENT HEARING §5.120. CONSERVATION AND QUALITY OF ENVIRONMENT §5.133. ACTIONS IN MEXICO §5.1733. ELECTRONIC POSTING OF INFORMATION §5.223. ADMINISTRATIVE ORG ANIZATION OF COMMISSION §5.230. ENFORCEMENT §5.233. GIFTS AND GRANTS §5.234. APPLICATIONS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS §5.237. OPERATING FUND §5.501. EMERGENCY AND TEMPORARY ORDER OR PERMIT; TEMPORARY
SUSPENSION OR AMENDMENT OF PERMIT CONDITION §5.502. APPLIC ATION FOR EMERGENCY OR TEMPORARY ORDER §5.514. ORDER ISSUED UNDER AIR EMERGENCY §5.515. EMERGENCY ORDER BECAUSE OF CATASTROPHE §5.701(a) FEES §5.702. PAYMENT OF FEES REQUIRED WHEN DUE §5.703. FEE ADJUSTMENTS §5.704. NOTICE OF CHANGE IN PAYMENT PROCEDURE §5.705. NOTICE OF VIOLATION §7.002. ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY §7.032. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF §7.051. ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY §7.052. MAXIMUM PENALTY §7.053. FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINATION OF PENALTY
AMOUNT §7.061. PAYMENT OF PENALTY; PETI TION FOR REVIEW §7.066. REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL §7.067. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS §7.072. RECOVERY OF PENALTY §7.073. CORRECTIVE ACTION §7.101. VIOLATION §7.102. MAXIMUM PENALTY §7.103. CONTINUING VIOLATIONS §7.105. CIVIL SUIT §7.106

. RESOLUTION THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER §7.177. VIOLATIONS OF CLEAN AIR ACT §7.178. FAILURE TO PAY FEES UNDER CLEAN AIR ACT §7.179. FALSE REPRESENTATIONS UNDER CLEAN AIR ACT §7.180. FAILURE TO NOTIFY UNDER CLEAN AIR ACT §7.181. IMPROPER USE OF MONITORING DEVICEix §7.182. RECKLESS EMISSION OF AIR CONTAMINANT AND
ENDANGERMENT §7.183. INTENTIONAL OR KNOWING EMISSION OF AIR CONTAMINANT
AND KNOWING ENDANGERMENT §7.186. SEPARATE OFFENSES §7.187. PENALTIES §7.302. GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF PERMIT



### C. Texas Regulatory Authority The TCEQ has promulgated rules implementing statutory authority to meet the requirements of
both the FCAA and the TCAA . These rules were submitted to the EPA in various SIP revisions and have been approved in the Feder al Register (FR) or are pending EPA review. Rules that are relevant for each FCAA, §110(a)(2) requirement are noted below.

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(A) Federal Requirement (A) include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of this Act;

Texas Requirement
The T CEQ has promulgated rules to implement and enforce the NAAQS and other air quality standards. These rules include programs for banking and trading of emissions, as well as permits and fees. Periodic revisions to the SIP establish timetables and schedules f or improving the air quality in nonattainment areas.

The following chapters of Title 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 7 Memoranda of Understanding Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 106 Pe rmits by Rule, Subchapter A, General Requirements Chap. 111 Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter Chap. 112 Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Chap. 113 Standards of Performance for Hazardous Air Pollutants and for Designated
Facilities and Pollutants Chap. 114 Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles Chap. 115 Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Chap. 117 Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds Chap. 118 Control of Air Pollution Episodes

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(B) Federal Requirement (B) provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to (i) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) make such data available to the Administrator;x Texas Requirement The TCEQ maintains a network of air quality monitors to measure air quality data that is reported to the EPA on a regular basis. Te xas submits annual monitoring plans to the EPA that describe how the state has complied with monitoring requirements and explains any proposed changes.

The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 106 Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, General Requirements Chap. 111 Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter Chap. 112 Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Chap. 115 Control of Air Pollution fro m Volatile Organic Compounds Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Chap. 117 Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(C) Federal Requirement (C) include a program to provide for the enforcem ent of the measures described in subparagraph (A), and regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that national ambient air quality standards are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D;

Texas Requirement The TCEQ has established rules governing the enforcement of control measures, including attainment plans and permitting programs that regulate construction and modification of stationary sour ces. 1

The EPA has published various disapproval notices for Texas’ air permitting programs, and these disapprovals have not yet been fully resolved. Texas has adopted new rules that address these notices and has committed to working closely with the EPA to ensure that these rulemaking efforts will result in rules that are approvable by the EPA. The EPA has also proposed limited approval/limited disapproval of the commission’s rules regarding public participation for air quality New Source Review (NSR) permi ts. Texas has withdrawn from EPA consideration most of the rules that were the subject of the proposed limited approval/limited disapproval and has submitted new and revised adopted public participation rules to the EPA for the SIP. On October 28, 2010, th e EPA signed a notice withdrawing its limited approval and limited disapproval of the SIP revisions relating to public participation, because those revisions are no longer before the EPA for review. Although the EPA has disapproved various elements of Texas’ air permitting programs, those concerns are being addressed with newly adopted rules and a commitment to work closely with EPA staff to issue EPA

- approvabl e rules. Texas has a

1 Texas has permitting rules for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), as required by the FCAA. In May 2010, t he EPA promulgated regulations for the permitting of greenhouse gases under the PSD program. Although Texas has not amended or proposed am endments to its permitting program to include greenhouse gases, Texas is meeting its obligations under the FCAA to provide for permitting of facilities that emit criteria pollutants. Greenhouse gases are not criteria pollutants, with a NAAQS that must be

m

et, and therefore a lack of permitting requirements in Texas rules for greenhouse gas emissions does not constitute a lack in the required infrastructure elements of §110(a)(2).xi robust, SIP

- approved permitting program and therefore has met the infrastructure requirements of §110(a)(2).

The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 3 5 Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions; Subchapters A, B, C, K Chap. 39 Public Notice Chap. 55 Requests for Reconsideration and Contested Case Hearings; Public Notice Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 106 Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, General Requirements Chap. 112 Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Chap. 115 Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Chap. 11 7 Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D) Federal Requirement (D) contain adequate provisions (i) prohibiting, consistent with the provisions of this title, any source or other type of emissions activity from emitting any air pollu tant in amounts which will (I) contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other State with respect to any such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard, or (II) interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other State under part C to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility,(ii) insuring compliance with the applicable requirements of sections 126 and 115 (relating to i nterstate and international pollution abatement);

Texas Requirement This SIP revision includes an interstate transport technical analysis in Section VI: Control Strategy to address the requirements of §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).

Texas has a SIP

- approved PSD and n onattainment NSR permitting program that contains requirements for sources of air pollutants to obtain an approved permit before beginning construction of a facility and before modifying an existing facility (see requirements for §110(a)(2)(C) previously l isted). Texas submitted a Regional Haze SIP revision to the E PA on March 19, 2009. Regional h aze program requirements include progress reports due to the EPA in 2014 and every five years thereafter, to demonstrate progress toward the visibility goal.
Anoth er Regional Haze SIP is due in 2018 and every 10 years thereafter, through 2064.

The following chapter s of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 122 Subchapter E, Division 2, Clean Air Inters tate Rule Chap. 115 Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Chap. 117 Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compoundsxii FCAA, §110(a)(2)(E) Federal Require ment (E) provide (i) necessary assurances that the State (or, except where the Administrator deems inappropriate, the general purpose local government or governments, or a regional agency designated by the State or general purpose local governments for such pu rpose) will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under State (and, as appropriate, local) law to carry out such implementation plan (and is not prohibited by any provision of Federal or State law from carrying out such implementation plan or por tion thereof), (ii) requirements that the state comply with the requirements respecting State boards under section 128, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the State has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the im plementation of any plan provision, the State has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provision;

Texas Requirement The TCEQ has consistently included assurances in SIP revisions that the state has adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out the SIP. The TCEQ has various Memoranda of Understanding and Memoranda of Agreement with other state and local agencies. Local governments have their own responsibilities and privileges regarding the protection of air quality as established by the Texas legislature.

Part of the TCEQ’s role is to determine how to appropriately distribute resources. Like all agencies, the TCEQ prioritizes the allocation of resources to items that require the most
attention and that d oes not always align with the needs and requests of local areas. The TCEQ works with local governments and other stakeholders during the SIP development process to asses all measures to be included in the SIP that will be implemented at the local level. Af ter the SIP development process is completed, the TCEQ continues to provide support to local governments by participating in local air quality planning committees and through the general conformity and transportation conformity processes.

The TCEQ relies on the complete statutory and regulatory authority as referenced throughout
this document. This statutory authority ensures that Texas can meet the requirements of this section, including the requirements of §128 of the FCAA. The TCEQ also regularly submit s a legal authority with SIP revisions submitted to the EPA.

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(F) Federal Requirement (F) require, as may be prescribed by the Administrator: (i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature
and amounts of emissions and emissions

- related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the State agenc y with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to th is Act, which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection;

Texas Requirement The TCEQ requires monitoring for air pollutants as part of its NSR permit program. Certain emission sources are required to submit annual emission inventories and periodic reporting of emissions, which provides data that is used in air quality modeling to help Texas prepare SIPxiii revisions. Emissions data are available at reasonable times for public inspection, with some information also available on the agency Web site.

The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Cha p. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 106 Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, General Requirements Chap. 111 Control of Air Pollution from Visible E missions and Particulate Matter Chap. 112 Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Chap. 115 Control of A ir Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Chap. 117 Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(G) Federal Requirement (G) provide for authority compara ble to that in section 303 and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority;

Texas Requirement The TCEQ may issue emergency orders, or issue or suspend air permits as required by an air pollution emergency. In addition, the TCEQ also maintains ai r quality information in a form readily available to the public on the TCEQ’s Today's Texas Air Quality Forecast Web site (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/ airquality /m onops.html).

The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 35 Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions; Subchapters A, B, C, K Chap. 118 Control of Air Pollution Episodes

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(H) Federal Requirement (H) provide for revision of such plan: (i ) from time to time as may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) except as provided in p aragraph (3)(C), whenever the Administrator finds on the basis of information available to the Administrator that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain the national ambient air quality standard which it implements or to otherwise comply with any a dditional requirements established under this Act;

Texas Requirement The TCEQ regularly revises the Texas SIP in response to revisions in the NAAQS and the EPA rules. See §110(a)(2)(A) above.

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(I) Federal Requirement (I) in the case of a plan or plan revision for an area designated as a nonattainment area, meet the applicable requirements of part D (relating to nonattainment areas);xiv Texas Requirement SIP revisions that implement the control strategies necessary to bring a nonattainment area into attainment of the NAAQS are not required by the FCAA to be submitted within three years of the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Therefore, §110(a)(1) does not require this element to be demonstrated as part of an infrastructure SIP submittal (73 FR 16205, at 16206)

.

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(J) Federal Requirement (J) meet the applicable requirements of section 121 (relating to consultation), section 127 (relating to public notification), and part C (relating to prevention of significant deterioration and visibil ity protection);

Texas Requirement The TCEQ has an established public participation process for all SIP revisions and permitting programs. The EPA has proposed limited approval/limited disapproval of the rules regarding public participation for air quality NSR permits. 2 Texas has withdrawn from EPA consideration most of the rules that were the subject of the proposed limited approval/limited disapproval, and has submitted new and revised public participation rules to the EPA as a new SIP revision to
address the EPA’s published concerns regarding these requirements. 3 On October 28, 2010, the EPA signed a notice withdrawing its limited approval/limited disapproval of the SIP revisions relating to public participation because those revisions are no longer befor e the EPA for review (75 FR 68291). The TCEQ consults with other state agencies, local agencies, and non

governmental organizations, as well as with the environmental agencies of other states regarding air quality concerns. All major sources in attainment/ unclassifiable areas in Texas are subject to Texas’ SIP

- approved PSD program. Texas submitted a SIP revision to address Regional Haze, including a long

- term strategy to address visibility impairment for each Class I area that may be impacted by emissions f rom Texas facilities.

The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 7 Memoranda of Understanding Chap. 35 Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions; Subc hapters H and K Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution for New Construction or Modification

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(K) Federal Requirement (K) provide for (i) the performance of such air quality modeling as the Administrator may prescr ibe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which the Administrator has established a national ambient air quality standard, and (ii) the submission, upon request, of data related to such ai r quality modeling to the Administrator;

2 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Revisions to Chapt ers 39, 55, and 116 Which Relate to Public Participation on Permits for New and Modified Sources, 73 FR 72001 (November 26, 2008).

3 The TCEQ adopted this rulemaking on June 2, 2010, and the adopted rules were published in the Texas Register (TR) on June 18, 2010 (35 TR 5198). These rules became effective on June 24, 2010, were submitted to the EPA on July 2, 2010, but the EPA has not yet taken any action on these rules.xv Texas Requirement Air quality modeling is conducted during development of revisions to the Texas SIP, as appropriate for the state to demonstrate attainment with required NAAQS. Modeling is also a part of the NSR pe rmitting program.

The following chapter of 30 TAC contains rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution for New Construction or Modification

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(L) Federal Requirement (L) require the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under this Act, a fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or

op erator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action), until fee requirement is superse ded with respect to such sources by the Administrator’s approval of a fee program under title V;

Texas Requirement The TCEQ assesses fees for reviewing permit applications and for enforcing the terms and conditions of permits.

The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:

Chap. 12 Payment of Fees Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 106 Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, General Requirements Chap. 116 Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modif ication

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(M) Federal Requirement (M) provide for consultation and participation by local political subdivisions affected by the plan.

Texas Requirement The TCEQ has several cooperative agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with various
other state and local agencies and organizations. Consultation with a variety of different organizations is a regular part of the TCEQ’s process of developing SIP revisions.



### D. Conclusion The foregoing demonstrates that Texas has the necessary regulatory and statu tory authority to meet the infrastructure requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.xvi SECTION VI: CONTROL STRATEGY



### A. Introduction (No change)



### B. Ozone ( No change )



### C. Particulate Matter (No change)



### D. Carbon Monoxide (No change)



### E. L ead (No change)



### F. Oxides of Nitrogen (No change)



### G. Sulfur Dioxide (No change)



### H. Conformity with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (No change)



### I. Site Specific (No change)



### J. Mobile Sources Strategies (No change)



### K. Clean Air Interstate Rule (No change)



### L. Transport ( Revised )



### M. Regional Haze (No change)xvii TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary

Section V: Legal Authority

Section V

- A: Legal Authority

A. General

B. Applicable Law

Section V

- D

- 1: Infrastructure Demonstration for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality

Standards

A. Background

B. Texas Statutory Authority

C. Texas Regulatory Authority

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(A)

FCAA, §110(a)(2) (B)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(C)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(E)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(F)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(G)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(H)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(I)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(J)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(K)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(L)

FCAA, §110(a)(2)(M)

D. Conclusion

Section VI: Control Strategy

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms

List of Tables

List of Figures

Chapter 1: General

1.1 Backgroundxviii 1.2 Introduction

1.3 Health Effects

1.4 Public Hearing and Comment Information

1.5 Social and Economic Considerations

1.6 Fiscal and Manpow er Resources

1.7 Coordination with Local Agencies

1.8 Organizations Responsible for Development, Implementation and Enforcement

1.9 Data Availability

Chapter 2: Required Control Strategy Elements

2.1 Background

2.2 Control Strategy Overview

2.2.1 Significant Contribution to Nonattainment and Interference with Maintenance

Elements

2.2.1.1 Technical Analysis

2.2.1.2 Monitoring Sites

2.2.1.3 References

2.2.2 Emissions Reductions from EGUs

2.2.2.1 CAIR and Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR)

2.2.2.2 Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas

2.2.2.3 Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas

2.2.2.4 Senate Bill 7 (76th Texas Legislature)

2.2.3 Emission Reductions from Other Sources

2.2.3.1 HGB Area MECT Program

2.2.3.2 Cement Kilns

2.2.3.3 East Texas Engines

2.2.3.4 HGB Area Highly Reactive VOC (HRVOC) Rules and HRVOC Cap and Trade (HECT) Program

2.2.4 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone SIP Revisions Adopted Since 2008

2.2.4.1 HGB 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone SIP Revisions

2.2.4.2 DFW 1997 Eight Hour Ozone SIP Revisions

2.2.4.3 BPA 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Redesignation to Attainment and Maintenance

Plan

2.2.4.4 VIC 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Contingency Plan SIP Revisionxix 2.2.4.5 ARR 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Flex Plan

2.3 Control Strategy Conclusions

Chapter 3: Future Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
Response to Commentsxx LIST OF ACRONYMS

AD attainment demonstration

AQS Air Quality System

ARR Austin

- Round Rock

BPA Beaumont

- Port Arthur

CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule

CSAPR Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule

CTG control techniques guidelines

DERC Discrete Emission Reduction Credit

DFW Dallas

- Fort Worth

EAC Early Action Compact

EGU electric generating unit

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

FCAA Federal C lean Air Act

FR Federal Register

g/hp

- hr grams per horsepower

- hour

HECT Highly Reactive Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions Cap and Trade

HGB Houston

- Galveston

- Brazoria

hp horsepower

HRVOC highly reactive volatile organic compounds

hv sunlight

lb/MMBtu po und per million British thermal units

lb/ton of clinker pounds of NO X per ton of cement clinker produced

MECT Mass Emissions Cap and Trade

MVEB motor vehicle emissions budget

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard s

NETX Northeast Texas

NO nitrogen oxi de

NO 2 nitrogen dioxide

NO X n itrogen o xides

NSR New Source Review

O 2 oxygen

O 3 ozone

PM 2.5 fine particulate matterxxi ppm p arts p er m illion

PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration

PUCT Public Utility Commission of Texas

RACM r easonably a vailable c ontrol m easure s

RACT r easonably a vailable c ontrol t echnology

RFP reasonable further progress

SIP s tate i mplementation p lan

SO 2 sulfur dioxide

TAC Texas Administrative Code

TACB Texas Air Control Board

TCAA Texas Clean Air Act

TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission)

TNRCC Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission

tpy tons per year

TUC Texas Utilities Code

VIC Victoria

VOC v olatile o rganic compoundsxxii L I ST OF TABLES

Table 2

- 1: Percent Change in Eight

- Ho ur Ozone Design Values

Table 2

- 2: Areas in EPA Region 6 Designated Nonattainment for the 2008 Eight

- Hour Ozone NAAQS

Table 2

- 3: Monitor Sites and Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Values in EPA Region 6xxiii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2

- 1: Counties Designated Nonattainment for the 2008 Eight

- Hour Ozone NAAQS (EPA, 2012)

Figure 2

- 2: Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Value Trends in Texas and Closest Nonattainment Areas

Figure 2

- 3: 2010 Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Values at Monitors Located in T exas and Surrounding States

Figure 2

- 4: NO X Emission Trend for Texas EGUs from 1995 through 20111

- 1 CHAPTER 1: GENERAL

1.1 BACKGROUND “The History of the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP),” a comprehensive overview of the
SIP revisions submitted to th e United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by the State of Texas, is available on the Introduction to the SIP Web page (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/ sipintro.html#History) on the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's (TCEQ) Web site (http://www.tceq.texas.gov).

1.2 INTRODUCTION

This SIP revision for the transport of ozone under the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard s (NAAQS) describes how the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will meet the requirements of §110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA)

. S tates are required to submit a SIP revision within three years of prom ulgation of new or revised NAAQS that contains adequate provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity within the state from emitting any NAAQS pollutants in amounts that will :

• contribute significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS for areas in other states ; or

• interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS by any other state.

On March 12, 2008, the EPA strengthened the NAAQS for ground level ozone. The new primary eight

- hour ozone standard, set at 0.075 parts per million (ppm) replaced th e previous 1997 standard of 0.08 ppm. The EPA also decreased the secondary eight

- hour ozone standard to the level of 0.075 ppm making it identical to the revised primary standard. However, the EPA did not initially implement the 2008 eight

- hour ozone stand ard due to a subsequent
reconsideration of the NAAQS. To date, the EPA has not published infrastructure or transport guidance for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On August 21, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the Cross State Air Pollution Rule ( CSAPR )

.

Based on the control strategies already in place to reduce ozone precursor emission s in ozone nonattainment areas and an analysis of ozone trends in Texas, this SIP revision demonstrates
that Texas meets the transpo rt requirements of FCAA §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).

1.3 HEALTH EFFECTS

In 2008

, the EPA revised the primary ozone standard to 0.075 ppm. To support the 2008 eight

hour primary ozone standard, the EPA provided information indicating that health effects can
occur at le vels lower than the previous standard. Exposure to relatively high levels of ambient ozone can aggravate asthma in some people. Repeated exposures to high levels of ozone can make people more susceptible to respiratory infection and lung inflammation and c an aggravate preexisting respiratory diseases, such as bronchitis and emphysema.

Children are at a relatively higher risk from exposure to ozone when compared to adults, since they breathe more air per pound of body weight than adults and because children’s respiratory systems are still developing. Children also spend a considerable amount of time outdoors during summer and during the start of the school year (August through October) when high ozone levels are typically recorded. Adults most at ris k to ozone exposure are people working or exercising outdoors and individuals with preexisting respiratory diseases.1

- 2 1.4 PUBLIC HEARING AND C OMMENT INFORMATION

The commission held a public hearing for the proposed SIP revision in Austin on September 25,

2012. A question and answer session was held 30 minutes prior to the meeting. The Alamo Area Council of Governments provided oral comments concerning the SIP revision

.

The public comment period opened on August 24, 2012, and closed on September 28, 2012.

Written comments were accepted via mail, fax, and through the eComments (http://www5.tceq.texas.gov/rules/ecomments) system. Written c omments were received from the EPA, Public Citizen, and four individuals . A summary of the comments and the TCEQ response is provided as part of this SIP revision in the Response to Comments.

An electronic version of this SIP revision can be found at the TCEQ’s Air Pollution from Ozone Web page ( http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/criteria

- pollutants/sip

- ozone ).

1.5 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS Because rulemaking is not a part of this SIP revision, there are n o changes that would have an impact on society or the economy.

1.6 FISCAL AND MANPOWER RESOURCES The TCEQ has determined that its fiscal and manpower resources are adequate and will not be adversely affected through the implementation of this plan.

1.7 COORDINATIO N WITH LOCAL AGENCIE S The TCEQ has determined that there will be no assignment to local agencies. However, pre

existing assignments to local agencies regarding various enforcement activities remain in effect
and could be used if enforcement activities are delegated to the TCEQ from the EPA.

1.8 ORGANIZATIONS RESPON SIBLE FOR DEVELOPMEN T

, IMPLEMENTATION
AND ENFORCEMENT The TCEQ is the agency delegated authority by the Texas Legislature regarding the protection of air quality in the State of Texas. Other local gov ernment entities have limited authority regarding air quality matters in the State of Texas.

1.9 DATA AVAILABILITY The TCEQ affirms that it will retain all data used in the preparation of this SIP revision. All supporting documents and data are publicly availa ble via the TCEQ SIP Web page ( http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip / ) or are available from the TCEQ upon request.2

- 1 CHAPTER 2: REQUIRED CONTROL STR ATEGY EL EMENTS

2.1 BACKGROUND There are two nonattainment areas for the 2008 eight

- hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in Texas: the Houston

- Galveston

- Brazoria (HGB) marginal nonattainment
area and the Dallas

- Fort Worth (DFW) moderate nonattainment area. The rest of the counties in Texas are designated unclassifiable /attainment for the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS.

Texas has not yet put control measures in place to addr ess the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS,

as attainment demonstration ( AD ) state implementation plan ( SIP ) revisions are not due until 2015. However, Texas already has numerous control measures in place to address ozone precursor emissions under previous ozone standards. These measures have resulted in significant decreases in eight

- hour ozone design values from 1990 to 2010 , with much of the decreases occurring from 2000 to 2010 . With implementation of the 2008 ozone standard,
decreases in design values are exp ected to continue

.

Texas is not covered under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS, but is included for the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) NAAQS. In addition to the annual nitrogen oxides (NO X

) reductions from the CAIR program, in 1999 the state implemented a strategy in the eastern part of Texas to reduce NO X emissions from electric generating units (EGU). These EGU strategies, along with other NO X and volatile organic compound s (VOC) reducing programs from 1997 ei ght

- hour ozone SIP revisions, Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revisions, 1997 eight

- hour ozone maintenance plans, 1997 eight

- hour ozone flex plans, one

- hour ozone SIP revisions, a one

- hour ozone flexible attainment region SIP revision, and one

- hour ozone fl exible agreements are described in this chapter. The combination
of these NO X and VOC reduction programs fulfills the state’s obligation to address transport f or the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS.

2.2 CONTROL STRATEGY OVE RVIEW
Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA)

, §110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) requires states to submit a SIP revision that contains adequate provisions to prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity within the state from emitting any air pollutants in amounts that will contribute significantly to

no nattainment of the NAAQS for areas in other states or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state. The following section s evaluate eight

- hour ozone design value trends for nonattainment areas in Texas and in surrounding states and outline th e control measures implemented in Texas to achieve emission reductions to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do not contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in another state.

2.2.1 Significant Contributio n to Nonattainment and Interference with
Maintenance Elements

2.2.1.1 Technical Analysis
Ozone (O 3 ) is a secondary pollutant that is created through a photochemical reaction between oxygen (O 2 ), NO X , and VOC. NO X refers to the combination of nitrogen oxide (NO) an d nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ). The following reactions show how NO X , VOC, and O 2 react in the presence of sunlight (hv) to form O 3 :

O 2 + NO 2 h v

↔ O 3 + NO2

- 2 NO + VOC → NO 2

The amount of ozone formed depends on several factors. Meteorological conditions, such as wind direction and speed, temperature, mixing height, solar radiation

, and other parameters, affect the rates at which ozone formation occurs. The types and the concentration of precursor s present can affect net reactivity of precursor compounds found in a plume of emissions.

Precursor compounds, NO X and VOC, also exist under natural conditions. Ozone is created and destroyed on a natural cycle according to atmospheric conditions and chemical concentrations, even in the absence of additional anthropogenic precursor sources. This natural ozone formation is known as “natural background” ozone and is the starting point for measuring the contribution of ozone and precursors attributable to human activity. Within an urban area, not
all ozone formation is necessa rily caused by emissions produced locally because anthropogenic precursors, along with ozone formed by them, are often transported over long distances. Because the amount of ozone formed depends on so many other variables, it can be difficult to quantify t he exact contribution from specific sources.

The EPA revised the eight

- hour ozone NAAQS to 0.075 parts per million (ppm) in 2008. On April 30, 2012, the EPA finalized designations for the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS. Figure 2

- 1: Counties Designated Nonatta inment for the 2008 Eight

- Hour Ozone NAAQS (EPA, 2012) shows a map of the counties the EPA designated nonattainment. The map shows that two areas in Texas were designated nonattainment. The DFW area, which includes Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, K aufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant, and Wise Counties, and the HGB area, which includes Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery,
and Waller Counties.2

- 3 Figure 2

- 1 : Counties Design ated Nonattainment for the 2008 Eight

- Hour Ozone NAAQS (EPA, 2012)

Figure 2

- 2: Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Value Trends in Texas and Closest Nonattainment
Areas shows the eight

- hour ozone design value trends from the nonattainment areas in Texas
and nonattain ment areas in surrounding states

. The surrounding nonattainment areas evaluated below are those that are geographically closest to Texas. The design values in Texas

were over 6 ppb higher in 201 0 than the design values in other states; however, the overall design value trend was decreasing in all areas. Although all areas had a decrease in the eight

hour ozone design value, the majority of areas experienced most of those decrease s after 2000.
Table 2

- 1: Percent Change in Ei ght

- Hour Ozone Design Values shows the percent change in the eight

- hour ozone design values from Texas and the closest nonattainment areas in other

states (Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee, and Wis consin)

. T he minus sign indicates a percent decrease. The table shows that the percent change from 2000 through 2010 , which ranged from a 9% decrease to a 25%
decrease

, was much larger than the percent change from 1990 through 2000 , which ranged
from a 6% increase to an 18% decrease . The HGB area had the second largest decrease in eight

hour ozone design values from 1990 through 2010 , 29 % , the majority of that occurring after

2000.2

- 4 Figure 2

- 2 : Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Value Trends in Texas and Closest
Nonattainment Areas

Table 2

- 1 : Percent Change in Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Values

Nonattainment Area Percent Change

1990

- 2010 Percent Change

1990

- 2000 Percent Change

2000

- 2010
Chicago

- Naperville

- 35

- 18

- 20

Houston

- Galveston

- Brazoria

- 29

- 6

- 2 5

St. Louis

- St. Charles

- Farmington

- 25

- 8

- 18 Sheboygan

- 24

- 10

- 15
Baton Rouge

- 23

- 3

- 20 Memphis

- 20 2

- 22

Dallas

- Fort

- Worth

- 18

- 3

- 16

Denver

- Boulder

- Greeley

- Ft. Collins

- 9 0

- 9

Phoenix

- Mesa

- 6 6

- 11

EPA Region 6, the region where Texas is located, has two other nonattainment areas besides
those in Texas : the Baton Rouge area in Louisiana and the Memphis area in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee

. Table 2

- 2: Areas in EPA Region 6 Designated Nonattainment for the 2008 Eight

- Hour Ozone NAAQS lists the counties in each area that were designated

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010 ppb 

### Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Values

Dallas

- Fort

- Worth

Houston

- Galveston

- Brazoria Baton Rouge Sheboygan

Denver

- Boulder

- Greeley

- Ft. Collins

St. Louis

- St. Charles

- Farmington
Phoenix

- Mesa Memphis Chicago

- Naperville 2008 Eight

- Hour Ozone NAAQS: 75 ppb *Data from EPA's AQS.2

- 5 nonattainment and shows the approximate distance from each nonattainment area to the Texas

nonattainment area s. A lthough the Memphis nonattainment area spans three states (Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee) , only one of those states, Arkansas, is located within Region 6. These areas can be seen more clearly on the map displayed in Figure 2

- 3: 201 0 Eight

- Hour
O zone Design Values at Monitors Located in Texas and Surrounding States

.

Table 2

- 2 : Areas in EPA Region 6 Designated Nonattainment for the 2008 Eight

Hour Ozone NAAQS

Area State Counties Designated Nonattainment by the

EPA Approximate

Distance from HGB (miles) Approximate

Distance from DFW (miles)

Baton Rouge Louisiana Ascension 260 370
East Baton Rouge

Iberville
Livingston
West Baton Rouge Memphis Arkansas Crittenden 485 420
Mississippi DeSoto (partial county)

Tennessee Shelby

Figure 2

- 3 also shows the 2010 eight

- hour ozone design values from monitors in Texas and the surrounding Region 6 states

. Design values are from the EPA’s Air Quality System ( AQS ) . The pink and red dots represent monitors with a design value that is above the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS

, and the yellow and blue dots represent monitors with a design value below the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS. A ttainment status is based on 2010 design values

. Nonattainment areas are outlined on the map in light and dark brown. The map shows that there are several monitors located between Texas and the two closest nonattainment areas, Memphis and Baton Rouge. The monitors located between Texas and Baton Rouge sh ow attainment of the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS. This result suggests that local emissions
contribute to the se areas ’ nonattainment status. In addition, there are sources of ozone precursors located between Texas and the other nonattainment areas. The amo unt of ozone in other nonattainment areas from precursor sources outside of Texas and the amount of ozone coming from Texas into other nonattainment areas was not calculated. Because there are additional precursor sources located between Texas and other ar eas, it is difficult to determine how much ozone in other areas would be due to transport and how much ozone would be due to those sources of ozone precursors.

Ozone season wind patterns from the DFW and the HGB areas were extensively investigated in
the 2010 DFW Ozone Conceptual Model (TCEQ, 2011) and in the 2009 HGB Ozone Conceptual Model (TCEQ, 2010). Those analyses showed that in the DFW area ozone season winds are typically out of the south to the east. In the HGB area, winds in the early part of the ozone season, May through July, are typically from the south . T hen, in the later part of the ozone season, August and September, winds switch to a more east to northeast direction. In both areas, very few winds are observed from the west and northwest, the directions which would be anticipated to transport ozone to Memphis and Baton Rouge.2

- 6 Figure 2

- 3 : 2010 Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Values at Monitors Located in Texas and Surrounding States

2.2.1.2 Monitoring Sites

In 2010

, there were 167 ozone monitors located within EPA Region 6. The location of monitors
with valid 2010 eight

- hour ozone design values are displayed in the map in Figure 2

- 3 . A complete list of monitors, including those without valid design values

, is shown in Table 2

- 3: Monitor Sites and Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Values in EPA Region 6

. The data from these

monitors were reported to the EPA’s AQS. Texas has the most monitors, 78, in Region 6.
Oklahoma has 29 monitors

, New Mexico and Louisiana have 26 mon itors each , and Arkansas
has 8 monitors. Note that the monitor numbers include tribal monitors. Although there are several monitors located near the Texas border in Louisiana and New Mexico, there are no
monitors near the Texas border in Oklahoma and Arkansas.

Table 2

- 3 : Monitor Sites and Eight

- Hour Ozone Design Values in EPA Region 6

State County Name Airs Number

and POC

Number Site Name (If Applicable) 2010 Eight

Hour Ozone Design Value Nonattainment

Area (If Applicable)

Arkansas Crittenden 050350005

- 1 Marion 74 Memphis

Arkansas Newton 051010002

- 1 Deer 66

Arkansas Polk 051130003

- 1 Eagle Mountain 702

- 7 State County Name Airs Number

and POC

Number Site Name (If Applicable) 2010 Eight

Hour Ozone Design Value Nonattainment

Area (If Applicable)

Arkansas Pulaski 051190007

- 1 Parr 70

Arkansas Pulaski 051191002

- 1 Nlr Airport 70

Arkansas Pulaski 051191008

- 1 Doyle Springs Road 67

Arkansas Van Buren 051410001

- 1

Arkansas Washington 051430005

- 1 Springdale 64

Louisiana Ascension 220050004

- 1 75 Baton Rouge

Louisiana Bossier 220150008

- 2 74

Louisiana Caddo 220170001

- 2 72

Louisiana Calcasieu 220190002

- 1 74

Louisiana Calcasieu 220190008

- 1 63

Louisiana Calcasieu 220190009

- 1 74

Louisiana East Baton Rouge 220330003

- 1 78 Baton Rouge

Louisiana East Baton Rouge 220330009

- 1 Capitol 73 Baton Rouge

Louisiana East Baton Rouge 220330013

- 1 Locate At Pride /
Zachary 72 Baton Rouge

Louisiana East Baton Rouge 220331001

- 2 72 Baton Rouge

Louisiana Iberville 220470007

- 1 71

Louisiana Iberville 220470009

- 1 Off L A Hwy 75 Near

Water Treatment Facility 73 Baton Rouge

Louisiana Iberville 220470012

- 1 Replaced Site Id

220470002 73 Baton Rouge

Louisiana Jefferson 220511001

- 2 Kenner 75

Louisiana Lafayette 220550007

- 1 Replace Site Id

#220550001 72

Louisiana Lafourche 220570004

- 1 Nicholls State University

Farm 71

Louisiana Livingston 220630002

- 1 75 Baton Rouge

Louisiana Orleans 220710012

- 2 City Park 71

Louisiana Ouachita 220730004

- 1 Monroe Airport 64

Louisiana Pointe Coupee 220770001

- 1 75

Louisiana St. Bernard 220870009

- 1 Chalmette High School 69

Louisiana St. Charles 220890003

- 1 70

Louisiana St. James 220930002

- 1 68

Louisiana St. John the
Baptist 220950002

- 1 73

Louisiana St. Tammany 221030002

- 1

Louisiana West Baton
Rouge 221210001

- 1 71 Baton Rouge

New

Mexico Bernalillo 350010023

- 1 Del Norte High School 64

New

Mexico Bernalillo 350010024

- 1 South East Heights 662

- 8 State County Name Airs Number

and POC

Number Site Name (If Applicable) 2010 Eight

Hour Ozone Design Value Nonattainment

Area (If Applicable)

New

Mexico Bernalillo 350010027

- 1 Westside Taylor Ranch 67

New

Mexico Bernalillo 350010029

- 1 South Valley Mountain

View 66

New

Mexico Bernalillo 350010032

- 1 Westside

New

Mexico Bernalillo 350011012

- 1 Far North East Heights 68

New

Mexico Bernalillo 350011013

- 1 North Valley 67

New

Mexico Dona Ana 350130008

- 2 64

New

Mexico Dona Ana 350130017

- 1 64

New

Mexico Dona Ana 350130020

- 1 6Zk 3 Mi North Of El

Paso, T X On East Side Of

Franklin Mountains 66

New

Mexico Dona Ana 350130021

- 1 6Zm 2Mi From Mt Cristo Rey Where NM , T X , And Mexico Join Together 70

New

Mexico Dona Ana 350130022

- 1 6Zn U S

- Mexico Border Crossing. Both Sides

Uninhabited As Of 1996. 67

New

Mexico Dona Ana 350130023

- 1 6Zq In SE Corner Of NM Highway Dept. Yards In

Las Cruces 63

New

Mexico Eddy 350151005

- 1 5Zr On Blm Land Bordering Residential

Area Outside Carlsbad
City L 67

New

Mexico Eddy 350153001

- 1

New

Mexico Grant 350171003

- 1 7T Alongside Softball

Field And Near Chino Copper Smelter 63

New

Mexico Lea 350250008

- 1 Hobbs

- Jefferson 59

New

Mexico Luna 350290003

- 1 57

New

Mexico Sandoval 350431001

- 1 602

- 9 State County Name Airs Number

and POC

Number Site Name (If Applicable) 2010 Eight

Hour Ozone Design Value Nonattainment

Area (If Applicable)

New

Mexico Sandoval 350439004

- 1 Pueblo Of Jemez Tribal
Trust Lands, Department Of

Resource Protec tion

New

Mexico San Juan 350450009

- 1 S E Corner Of N M Highway Dept Yard 60

New

Mexico San Juan 350450018

- 1

New

Mexico San Juan 350451005

- 1 63

New

Mexico San Juan 350451233

- 1

New

Mexico Santa Fe 350490021

- 1 63

New

Mexico Valencia 350610008

- 1

Oklahoma Adair 400019009

- 1 Stilwell 67

Oklahoma Caddo 400159008

- 1 Anadarko Pm2.5

Oklahoma Canadian 400170101

- 1 OKC West

- (Yukon) 71

Oklahoma Cherokee 400219002

- 1 Tahlequah Shelter 68

Oklahoma Cleveland 400270049

- 1 Moore Water Tower 69

Oklahoma Comanche 400310649

- 1 Lawton South

Oklahoma Comanche 400310651

- 1 Lawton North 69

Oklahoma Creek 400370144

- 1 Mannford 70

Oklahoma Dewey 400430860

- 1 Seiling Municipal Airport 66

Oklahoma Jefferson 400670671

- 1 Located Behind Lake Waurika Corp. Of Eng.

Office

Oklahoma Kay 400719003

- 1 Ponca Tribe

Oklahoma Kay 400719010

- 1 Newkirk Improve 66

Oklahoma Lincoln 400819005

- 1 Sac and Fox Nation,

Stroud 60

Oklahoma Love 400850300

- 1 Weather Station

- Burnyeyville Mesonet

Site

Oklahoma McClain 400871073

- 1 Goldsby 68

Oklahoma McCurtain 400892001

- 1 Smithville Site

Oklahoma Mayes 400979014

- 1 Cherokee Heights 67

Oklahoma Oklahoma 401090033

- 1 OKC Central

- Osdh 72

Oklahoma Oklahoma 401090096

- 1 Choctaw 72

Oklahoma Oklahoma 401091037

- 1 OKC North 74

Oklahoma Osage 401139020

- 1

Oklahoma Ottawa 401159004

- 1 Quapaw Shelter 652

- 10 State County Name Airs Number

and POC

Number Site Name (If Applicable) 2010 Eight

Hour Ozone Design Value Nonattainment

Area (If Applicable)

Oklahoma Pittsburg 401210415

- 1 Mcalester Municipal
Airport 67

Oklahoma Sequoyah 401359015

- 1 Marble City Shelter

Oklahoma Sequoyah 401359021

- 1

Oklahoma Tulsa 401430137

- 1 Tulsa North (Skiatook) 75

Oklahoma Tulsa 401430174

- 1 Tulsa South 67

Oklahoma Tulsa 401430178

- 1 Tulsa East 70

Oklahoma Tulsa 401431127

- 1 North Tulsa

- Fire

Station#24 70

Texas Bell 480271047

- 1 Killeen Skylark Field

Texas Bexar 480290032

- 2 San Antonio Northwest 75

Texas Bexar 480290052

- 1 Camp Bullis 75

Texas Bexar 480290055

- 1 CPS Pecan Valley

Texas Bexar 480290059

- 1 Calaveras Lake 67

Texas Bexar 480290622

- 1 Heritage Middle School

Texas Brazoria 480391004

- 1 Manvel Croix Park 84 HGB

Texas Brazoria 480391016

- 1 Lake Jackson 74 HGB

Texas Brewster 480430101

- 1 Bravo Big Bend 64

Texas Cameron 480610006

- 1 Brownsville 65

Texas Collin 480850005

- 1 Frisco 77 DFW

Texas Dallas 481130069

- 3 Dallas Hinton DFW

Texas Dallas 481130075

- 1 Dallas North #2 78 DFW

Texas Dallas 481130087

- 1 Dallas Redbird Airport

Execut 78 DFW

Texas Denton 481210034

- 1 Denton Airport South 80 DFW

Texas Denton 481211032

- 1 Pilot Point 78 DFW

Texas Ellis 481390016

- 1 Midlothian Ofw 72 DFW

Texas Ellis 481391044

- 1 Italy 68 DFW

Texas El Paso 481410029

- 1 Ivanhoe 69

Texas El Paso 481410037

- 2 El Paso UTEP 71

Texas El Paso 481410044

- 1 El Paso Chamizal 70

Texas El Paso 481410055

- 1 Ascarate Park Se 69

Texas El Paso 481410057

- 1 Socorro 68

Texas El Paso 481410058

- 1 Skyline Park 71

Texas Galveston 481671034

- 1 Galveston 99Th Street HGB

Texas Gregg 481830001

- 2 Longview 74

Texas Harris 482010024

- 2 Houston Aldine 83 HGB

Texas Harris 482010026

- 3 Channelview 78 HGB

Texas Harris 482010029

- 2 Northwest Harris
County 81 HGB

Texas Harris 482010046

- 1 Houston North Wayside 71 HGB

Texas Harris 482010047

- 2 Lang 76 HGB

Texas Harris 482010051

- 2 Houston Croquet 77 HGB

Texas Harris 482010055

- 1 Houston Bayland Park 82 HGB2

- 11 State County Name Airs Number

and POC

Number Site Name (If Applicable) 2010 Eight

Hour Ozone Design Value Nonattainment

Area (If Applicable)

Texas Harris 482010062

- 1 Houston Monroe 72 HGB

Texas Harris 482010066

- 1 Houston Westhollow 75 HGB

Texas Harris 482010070

- 1 Houston Regional Office 73 HGB

Texas Harris 482010075

- 1 Houston Texas Avenue 74 HGB

Texas Harris 482010416

- 1 Park Place 77 HGB

Texas Harris 482011015

- 1 Lynchburg Ferry HGB

Texas Harris 482011034

- 2 Houston East 76 HGB

Texas Harris 482011035

- 3 Clinton 76 HGB

Texas Harris 482011039

- 1 Houston Deer Park #2 81 HGB

Texas Harris 482011050

- 1 Seabrook Friendship

Park 75 HGB

Texas Harrison 482030002

- 1 Karnack 70

Texas Hays 482090614

- 1 Dripping Springs School

Texas Hidalgo 482150042

- 1 Edinburg

Texas Hidalgo 482150043

- 1 Mission 61

Texas Hidalgo 482151048

- 1 Mercedes

Texas Hood 482210001

- 1 Granbury 75

Texas Hunt 482311006

- 1 Greenville 64

Texas Jefferson 482450009

- 2 Beaumont Downtown 72

Texas Jefferson 482450011

- 1 Port Arthur West 74

Texas Jefferson 482450022

- 1 Hamshire 70

Texas Jefferson 482450101

- 1 South East Texas Regional Planning

Commission (SETRPC) 40

Sabine Pass

Texas Jefferson 482450102

- 1 SETRPC 43 Jefferson Co
Airpor t 73

Texas Jefferson 482450628

- 1 SETRPC Port Arthur 68

Texas Jefferson 482451035

- 1 Nederland High School 70

Texas Johnson 482510003

- 1 Cleburne Airport 80 DFW

Texas Kaufman 482570005

- 1 Kaufman 67 DFW

Texas McLennan 483091037

- 1 Waco Mazanec 70

Texas Montgomery 483390078

- 1 Conroe Relocated 71 HGB

Texas Navarro 483491051

- 1 Corsicana Airport

Texas Nueces 483550025

- 2 Corpus Christi West 69

Texas Nueces 483550026

- 1 Corpus Christi Tuloso 71

Texas Orange 483611001

- 2 West Orange 71

Texas Orange 483611100

- 1 SETRPC 42 Mauriceville 68

Texas Parker 483670081

- 1 Parker County 75 DFW

Texas Rockwall 483970001

- 1 Rockwall Heath 74 DFW

Texas Smith 484230007

- 1 Tyler Airport Relocated 73

Texas Tarrant 484390075

- 1 Eagle Mountain Lake 85 DFW

Texas Tarrant 484391002

- 2 Fort Worth Northwest 79 DFW

Texas Tarrant 484392003

- 2 Keller 86 DFW2

- 12 State County Name Airs Number

and POC

Number Site Name (If Applicable) 2010 Eight

Hour Ozone Design Value Nonattainment

Area (If Applicable)

Texas Tarrant 484393009

- 1 Grapevine Fairway 82 DFW

Texas Tarrant 484393011

- 1 Arlington Municipal
Airport 79 DFW

Texas Travis 484530014

- 2 Austin Northwest 74

2.2.1.3 References

EPA

. “Final Nonattainment Areas for the 2008 Ozone Standards.” Last modified May 1, 2012. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/ozonepollution/designations/2008standards/final/final map.htm

.

TCEQ. HGB Attainment Demonstration SIP Revision for the 199 7 Eight

- Hour Ozone Standard. Appendix C: Photochemical Modeling for the HGB Attainment Demonstration SIP. March, 10, 2010. http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/HGB_eight_hour. html

.

TCEQ. Dallas

- Fort Worth Attainment Demonstration State Implementation Plan Revision for the 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Standard. Appendix D: Conceptual Modeling for the DFW Attainment Demonstration SIP Revisions for the 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Standard.

Dec ember 7, 2011. http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/dfw_revisions.html

.

2.2.2 Emission s Reductions from EGUs Texas is not covered under the CAIR for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS, but is included for
the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. In addition to the annual NO X reductions from the CAIR program, in

1999

, the state implemented a strategy in the eastern part of Texas to reduce NO X emissions
from EGUs. The control strategies specific to EGUs incl ude:

• u tility e lectric g eneration in o zone n onattainment a reas;

• u tility e lectric g eneration in e ast and c entral Texas; and

• Texas

- specific legislation from the 1999 76th session in Senate Bill 7 that requires NO X reductions through a regional cap and trade p rogram.

These strategies have resulted in significant NO X emissions from EGUs. Figure 2

- 4 : NO X Emission Trend for Texas EGUs from 1995 through 2011 shows the NO X emission reductions from EGUs from 1995 through 2011.2

- 13 Figure 2

- 4 : NO X Emission Trend for Texas EGUs from 1995 through 2011

2.2.2.1 CAIR and CSAPR

In March 2005

, the EPA issued CAIR to address EGU emissions that transport from one state to another. The rule incorporates the use of three cap and t rade programs to reduce sulfur dioxide ( SO 2 ) and NO X : the ozone

- season NO X trading program, the annual NO X trading program, and
the annual SO 2 trading program.

Texas was not included in the ozone season NO X program but was included for the annual NO X and SO 2 programs. As such, Texas must make necessary reductions in annual SO 2 and NO X emissions from new and existing EGUs to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do not
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the PM 2.5 NAAQS in anot her state

. CAIR consists of two phases for implementing necessary NO X and SO 2 reductions. Phase I addresses required reductions from 2009 through 2014. Phase II addresses reductions in 2015
and thereafter. In July 2006, the TCEQ adopted a SIP revision to address how the state would meet the emissions allowance allocation budgets for NO X and SO 2 established by the EPA to meet the federal obligations under CAIR. The TCEQ adopted a second CAIR

- related SIP revision in February 2010. This revision incorporated various federal rule revisions that the EPA had promulgated since the TCEQ’s initial submittal. It also incorporated revisions to 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Chapter 101 resulting from legislation during the 80th Texas Legislature.

A December 2008 court decision found flaws in CAIR, but kept CAIR requirements in place temporarily while directing the EPA to issue a replacement rule. In July 2011

, the EPA finalized CSAPR to meet FCAA requirements and respond to the court’s order to issue a replacement 

### 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000Emissions (Tons per Year) 

# Texas EGU NO X 

# Emission Trend2

- 14 program. Texas was included in CSAPR for ozone season NO X , annual NO X , and annual SO 2 due to the EPA’s determination that Texas significantly contributes to non attainment or interferes
with maintenance of the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS in
other states.

On August 21, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated CSAPR. Under the court’s ruling, CAIR will remain in place until the EPA develops a
vali d replacement for CAIR. Therefore, all the requirements in CAIR are federally enforceable and all sources that are covered by CAIR must continue to comply with the requirements of the

program.

2.2.2.2 Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas

The ru les in 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter C establish NO X emission specifications for utility electric generation for each ozone nonattainment area in Texas. These rules apply to each electric generating facility that generates electric energy for compensation , or are owned or operated by a municipality or Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) regulated utility or any of its successors, regardless of whether the successor is a municipality or is regulated by the

PUCT.

In the HGB area, the owner or operator of each affected utility boiler, auxiliary steam boiler, or stationary gas turbine must demonstrate compliance with the NO X emission specifications through a system cap and participation in the HGB area Mass Emissions Cap and Trade ( MECT ) Program. Affected sources were required to comply with the MECT Program rules beginning January 1, 2002, and comply with the system cap requirements by March 31, 2004. Additional information about the MECT Program is available in Section 2 .2. 3

. 1 : HGB Area MECT Program

.

In the DFW area, each utility boiler that is part of a large system must meet a NO X emission rate of 0.033 pound per million British thermal units (lb/MMBtu) heat input, and each utility boiler that is part of a small system must meet a NO X emission rate of 0 .06 lb/MMBtu heat input. Compliance with the NO X emission rates may be demonstrated on a daily average basis, a
system

- wide heat input weighted average basis for utility boilers that are part of a large system, or through the use of emission credits. Affected sources were required to comply with the rules by March 1, 2009.

In the Beaumont

- Port Arthur (BPA) 1997 eight

- hour ozone maintenance area, each utility boiler

must meet a NO X emission rate of 0.10 lb/MMBtu heat input. Compliance with the NO X emiss ion rates must be demonstrated on a daily average, through the use of a system cap, or through the use of emission credits. Affected sources were required to comply with the rules by May 1, 2005.

2.2.2.3 Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas

The ru les in 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter E, Division 1 limit NO X emissions from utility electric generation in Atascosa, Bastrop, Bexar, Brazos, Calhoun, Cherokee, Fannin, Fayette, Freestone, Goliad, Gregg, Grimes, Harrison, Henderson, Hood, Hunt, Lamar, Lime stone, Marion, McLennan, Milam, Morris, Nueces, Parker, Red River, Robertson, Rusk, Titus, Travis, Victoria, or Wharton Counties. The rules apply to each utility electric power boiler and stationary gas turbine (including duct burners used in turbine exhau st ducts) that generate electric energy for compensation; is owned by an electric cooperative, independent power producer, municipality, river authority, or public utility; and was placed into service before December 31, 1995. Utility electric power boiler s must meet a NO X emission rate of 0.142

- 15 lb/MMBtu for gas

- fired units and 0.165 lb/MMBtu for coal

- fired units. Stationary gas turbines (including duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts) must meet an annual average NO X emission rate of 0.14 lb/MMBtu for units subject to Texas Utilities Code (TUC), §39.264 (except §39.264(i)) or 0.15 lb/MMBtu for units not subject to TUC, §39.264 and units designated in accordance with TUC, §39.264(i). Compliance with the NO X emission rates is based on average heat input f or a calendar year. Affected sources were required to comply with the rules by May 1,

2005.

2.2.2.4 Senate Bill 7 (76 th Texas Legislature) Senate Bill 7, 76th Texas Legislature session, requires a cap and trade program for previously grandfathered or unpermitted, electric generating facilities and other electric generating facilities that choose to participate in the cap and trade program. The NO X allowances were determined using a NO X rate of 0.14 lb NO X /MM B tu for grandfathered facilities in the East Texas region and a NO X rate of 0.195 lb NO X /MM B tu for the grandfathered facilities in the West Texas and El Paso region s

.

The first control period for this program began on May 1, 2003. The last revision on this rule package, 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 2, was published in the Texas Register on September 10, 1999, and the public comment period ended on October 11, 1999. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Register on January 7, 2000. The effective date of the rule package was January 11, 2 000.

2.2.3 Emission Reductions from Other Sources
Texas has implemented numerous control measures to reduce ozone precursor emissions from a variety of sources. These measures have resulted in significant decreases in eight

- hour ozone design values from 1990 thr ough 201 0 . This section details some of the controls for major stationary sources and regional controls implemented as part of the state’s strategy to address
the one

- hour and 1997 eight

- hour ozone standards.

2.2.3.1 HGB Area MECT Program The MECT Program rules in 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 3 established a mandatory annual NO X emission cap on all existing stationary sources in the HGB area that emit at least 10 tons per year (tpy) of NO X and are subject to the NO X emission specifications in 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter B, Division 3 and Subchapter C, Division 3. Affected units include: utility boilers, auxiliary steam boilers, or stationary gas turbines; industrial, commercial, or institutional boilers and proces s heaters; stationary gas turbines; stationary internal combustion engines; fluid catalytic cracking units (including carbon monoxide boilers, carbon monoxide furnaces, and catalyst regenerator vents); boilers and industrial furnaces that were regulated as existing facilities by the EPA under 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 266, Subpart H (as in effect on June 9, 1993); duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts; pulping liquor recovery furnaces; lime kilns; lightweight aggregate kilns; heat treating fu rnaces and reheat furnaces; magnesium chloride fluidized bed dryers; and incin erators.

The MECT program cap is enforced by the allocation, trading, and banking of allowances. An allowance is the equivalent of one ton of NO X emissions. The MECT program cap was implemented on January 1, 2002, at historical emission levels, with mandatory NO X reductions increasing over time until achieving the final cap by April 1, 2007. All new or modified sources in
the HGB area must obtain unused allowances from other sourc es already participating in the MECT program to offset any increased NO X emissions.2

- 16 2.2.3.2 Cement Kilns
The rules in 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter E, Division 1 limit NO X emissions from cement kilns in Bexar, Comal, Ellis, Hays, and McLennan Counties. The rules require cement kilns in Bexar, Comal, Hays, and McLennan Counties to reduce NO X emissions 30% below 1996 levels or

to meet a NO X emissions cap of 6.0 pounds of NO X per ton of cement clinker produced ( lb/ton of
clinker ) for wet kilns; 5.1 lb/ton of clinker for dry kilns; 3.8 lb/ton of clinker for preheater kilns; and 2.8 lb/ton of clinker for preheater

- precalciner or precalciner kilns. Affected sources were required to comply with the rules by May 1, 2005.

These rules also require c ement kilns in Ellis Count y to meet a NO X emission ozone

- season cap based on kiln configuration and production during calendar years 2003 through 2005. The cap
limits NO X emissions from dry kilns to no more than 1.7 lb/ton of clinker and limits NO X emissions from wet kilns to no mo re than 3.4 lb/ton of clinker. E missions from any kilns
installed after 2005 must be offset with emission reductions at the site or through emission reduction credits. Affected sources were required to comply with the rules by March 1, 2009.
The Ellis Coun ty cement kiln cap is part of the May 2007 DFW AD SIP Revision and the TCEQ estimates that implementation of these rules results in approximately 9.69 tons per day NO X emission reductions.

2.2.3.3 East Texas Engines The rules in 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter E, D ivision 4 limit NO X emissions from certain engines located in Anderson, Brazos, Burleson, Camp, Cass, Cherokee, Franklin, Freestone, Gregg, Grimes, Harrison, Henderson, Hill, Hopkins, Hunt, Lee, Leon, Limestone, Madison, Marion, Morris, Nacogdoches, Navarr o, Panola, Rains, Robertson, Rusk, Shelby, Smith, Titus, Upshur, Van Zandt, and Wood Counties. The rules apply to stationary, gas

- fired, reciprocating internal combustion engines rated 240 horsepower (hp) and larger. Rich

- burn gas

- fired internal
combustion engines rated less than 500 hp must limit NO X emission s to 1.0 grams per horsepower

- hour (g/hp

- hr). Rich

- burn engines rated 500 hp or greater must limit NO X emission s to 0.60 g/hp

- hr for landfill gas

- fired engines or 0.05 g/hp

- hr for all other rich

- burn engines. Affected sources were required to comply with the rules by March 1, 2010.

The E ast Texas c ombustion rules reduce NO X emissions and ozone air pollution transport i nto the DFW area. While these rules are part of the May 2007 DFW AD SIP Revision for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS, the Northeast Texas Early Action Compact area in east Texas also
benefits from NO X reductions resulting from the rules. Using photochemica l modeling sensitivity studies, the TCEQ estimated that implementation of the rules results in an overall reduction of approximately 22.4 tons per day of NO X emissions in the 33 counties subject to the rules by March 1, 2010. The TCEQ estimated the rules b enefit the DFW area by reducing ozone by an average of 0.1 to 0.2 parts per billion.

2.2.3.4 HGB Area Highly Reactive VOC (HRVOC) Rules and HRVOC Cap and Trade (HECT) Program The HRVOC rules in 30 TAC Chapter 115, Subchapter H are performance

- based, emphasizing

mo nitoring, recordkeeping, reporting, and enforcement rather than establishing individual unit emission rates. The rules apply to HRVOC emissions from flares, process vents, cooling towers, and fugitive emission sources. In addition to the monitoring require ments, affected sources in Harris County must meet an annual HRVOC emission cap and a site

- wide short

- term HRVOC limit of 1,200 lb/hour from any flare, vent, pressure relief valve, cooling tower, or any combination. Affected sources in Harris County must d emonstrate compliance with these HRVOC emission limits through participation in the HECT Program.2

- 17 The HECT Program rules in 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 6 establish a mandatory annual HRVOC emission cap on all existing stationary sources in H arris County that emit at least 10 tpy of HRVOC emissions and are subject to the HRVOC rules in 30 TAC Chapter 115, Subchapter H, Divisions 1 and 2. Affected sources include vent gas streams, flares, and cooling tower heat exchange systems. The HECT progra m cap is enforced by the allocation, trading, and banking of allowances. An allowance is the equivalent of one ton of HRVOC emissions. The HECT program cap was implemented on January 1, 2007, at historical emission
levels. All new or modified sources in th e HGB area must obtain unused allowances from other sources already participating in the HECT program to offset any increased HRVOC emissions.

The HECT program was revised in 2009 to reduce the total HECT cap by 25% and revise the
HRVOC allocation methodol ogy to address inequities from the initial allocation. An initial 10% reduction of the existing available cap of 3,451.5 tons will occur with the 2014 calendar

- year control period. The available cap will then be reduced in 5% increments at the start of eac h
calendar

- year control period for 2015, 2016, and 2017. Photochemical modeling analysis demonstrates that a 25% reduction of the total HRVOC cap in Harris County will advance attainment of the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS by reducing the future 2018 ozone design
values at all HGB monitors by an average of 0.13 parts per billion.

2.2.4 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone SIP Revisions Adopted Since 2008 Texas has 1997 eight

- hour ozone SIP revisions in place for the HGB area and the DFW area, as well as maintenance plans for BPA , Victoria (VIC)

, and El Paso. EAC SIP revisions for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard were devel oped for the Austin

- Round Rock (ARR) area, the Northeast Texas (NETX) area, and the San Antonio area. In addition to these SIP revisions, a 1997 Eight

- Hour Oz one Flex Program is in place for ARR and Corpus Christi. One

- Hour Ozone SIP revisions were developed for HGB, DFW, BPA, NETX, and the Central and East Texas Region , as well as One

- Hour Ozone Flexible Agreements for Austin

- San Marcos and Corpus
Christi.

Tex as’ 1997 eight

- hour ozone SIP revisions and one

- hour ozone SIP revisions adopted prior to 2008 were described in detail in the previous ozone transport SIP revision to address the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard

, adopted on April 16, 2008. The 1997 eight

- ho ur ozone transport SIP

revision and all other Texas SIP revisions are available on the Texas SIP Revisions Web page (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/sipplans.html ).

Since 2008, Texas has adopted several additional SIP revisions to address the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard in HGB, DFW, BPA, and VIC . An Eight

- Hour Ozone Flex Plan was also developed for the ARR area. These latest SIP revisions and plans are detailed in this section.

2.2.4.1 HGB 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone SIP Revisions

On March 10, 2010, the commission adopted two revisions to the Texas SIP for the HGB severe
nonattainment area. The HGB AD SIP Revision for the 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Standard includes a photochemical mo deling analysis and a weight of evidence analysis to demonstrate attainment of the 1997 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS by the June 15, 2019, deadline. This SIP revision also includes a motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB), a VOC and NO X Reasonably
Available Contr ol Technology (RACT) analysis, a Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) analysis, and a contingency plan. In addition, the AD SIP revision incorporate d revisions to 30 TAC Chapters 101 and 115, also adopted on March 10, 2010, which include the

MECT P rogram Cap Integrity, the HECT Program Cap Reduction and Allowance Reallocation, and the VOC Control Technique s Guidelines (CTG) Update.2

- 18 The HGB Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) SIP Revision for the 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Standard, as required by the EPA, demonstrates that an 18% emissions reduction requirement will be met for the analysis period between 2002 through 2008 and an average of 3% per year emissions reduction between each of the milestone years 2008, 2011, 2014, 2017, and 2018. This

SIP revision establishes baseline emission levels, calculates reduction targets, identifies control strategies to meet emission target levels, and tracks actual emission reductions against established emissions growth. This revision also includes an MVEB for each mile stone year and a contingency plan.

On December 7, 2011, the commission adopted the HGB RACT Analysis Update SIP Revision for the 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Standard to include CTG documents that were not addressed in the
March 2010 HGB AD SIP Revision for the 1 997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Standard. This SIP revision also incorporated CTG

- related rulemaking for the HGB area.

2.2.4.2 DFW 1997 Eight Hour Ozone SIP Revisions On July 14, 2008, the EPA proposed conditional approval (73 FR 40203) of the May 2007 DFW

AD SIP Revision, p roviding that final conditional approval was contingent upon Texas adopting and submitting to the EPA an approvable contingency plan SIP revision for the DFW area. The Contingency Plan SIP Revision was adopted by the commission on November 5, 2008, and
sub mitted to the EPA on November 15, 2008. The Contingency Plan SIP revision identified measures to satisfy the EPA’s 3% reduction contingency requirement for 2010 for the DFW area, to apply in the event that the DFW area fail ed to meet the 1997 eight

- hour oz one standard by the attainment deadline. On January 14, 2009, the EPA published final conditional approval of th e DFW AD SIP revision (74 FR 1903)

.

A condition stipulated by the EPA for final approval of the May 2007 DFW AD SIP Revision was that the TCEQ a dopt and submit rule and SIP revisions to implement an enforceable mechanism to limit the use of Discrete Emissions Reduction Credits (DERC) in the DFW area by March 1, 2009. The DERC Program SIP Revision incorporated rulemaking that amend s 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 4, Discrete Emission Credit Banking and Trading

, to limit DERC

use in the DFW area.

On March 10, 2010, the commission adopted the DFW RACT Update, 30 TAC Chapter 117 Rule Revision Noninterference Demonstration, and Modified Fail ure

- to

- Attain Contingency Plan SIP Revision. The RACT Update SIP Revision incorporate d several actions adopted by the TCEQ, including 30 TAC Chapter 115 and Chapter 117 rule revisions, and supplement ed the 1997 eight

hour ozone AD by demonstrating that the revised Chapter 117 rule does not interfere with the
DFW AD SIP Revision.

On December 7, 2011, the commission adopted two revisions to the Texas SIP for the DFW
serious nonattainment area. The DFW AD SIP revision provides photochemical modeling and weight of evidence analyses to demonstrate that the DFW nine

- county serious nonattainment area will attain the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard by the June 15, 2013, attainment deadline.
The AD SIP revision i ncludes a RACT analysis, a RACM analysis, a MVEB for 2012, and a contingency plan. Concurrent with this SIP revision, the commission adopted revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 115 into the Texas SIP.

The DFW RFP SIP revision provides analyses of incremental reduc tions in ozone precursors,
NO X and VOC, from a 2002 base year out to attainment of the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard as well as updated emissions inventories and MVEBs for the 2011 and 2012 milestone years.2

- 19 2.2.4.3 BPA 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Redesignation to Attai nment and Maintenance Plan

On December 10, 2008, the commission adopted the BPA Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan SIP revision for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard. On October 20, 2010, the EPA published a final rule in the Federal Register (75 FR 64675), effective November 19, 2010, approving the redesignation request and maintenance plan and finalizing a determination
that the BPA area is in attainment of the revoked one

- hour ozone standard. With redesignation to attainment for the 1997 eight

- h our ozone standard and a determination of attainment for the

one

- hour ozone standard, no new ozone reduction strategies will have to be developed for either standard as long as the area continues to monitor ozone levels below the 1997 eight

- hour ozone

stan dard; however, current strategies to reduce ozone in the BPA area will remain in place.

2.2.4.4 VIC 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Contingency Plan SIP Revision In early 2009, EPA Region 6 staff informed the TCEQ that to approve the Victoria County 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Ma intenance Plan adopted in March 2007, the contingency plan had to be revised to contain an enforceable commitment to adopt and implement the contingency measures once they are triggered. On July 28, 2010, the commission adopted the Contingency
Plan SIP Rev ision for the VIC area.

2.2.4.5 ARR 1997 Eight

- Hour Ozone Flex Plan
On June 18, 2008, the commission approved the Austin

- Round Rock Eight

- Hour Ozone Flex Plan and Memorandum of Agreement. Stakeholders involved in this plan are Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties; the cities of Austin, Bastrop, Elgin, Lockhart, Luling,
Round Rock

, and San Marcos; the TCEQ; and the EPA. The Eight

- H our Ozone Flex program is

one in a series of regional initiatives and builds on the region’s previous plans: the One

- Hour Ozone Flex program and the EAC . These voluntary initiatives allow the region to address regional ozone problems proactively to maintain the 1997 eight

- hour ozone standard.

2.3 CONTROL STRATEGY CON CLUSIONS

Overall, monitoring data do not suggest that emiss ions from Texas contribute significantly to

nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS for areas in any other state. Additionally, Texas has numerous control measures in place to address ozone precursor emissions and all are federally enforceable through SIP revisions. These measures have resulted in significant decreases in eight

- hour ozone design values from 1990 through

201 0 , with much of the decreases occurring from 2000 through 201 0 . With implementation of
the 2008 ozone standard, decreases in design values are expected to continue.3

- 1 CHAPTER 3: FUTURE REVISIONS TO THE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NAAQS)

Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §110(a)(1) requires states to sub mit state implementation plans within three years after the promulgation of new or revised NAAQS to meet the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2), including FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) , relating to interstate transport. Therefore, if the NAAQS are revised in the future, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality will need to take the adequate steps relating to the interstate transport of air pollution.

### 1 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED REGARDING FEDERAL CLEAN AIR AC T (FCAA) , SECTION 110( a )(1) AND (2) INFRAST RUCTURE AND TRANSPOR T STATE

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) REVISION FOR THE 200 8 OZONE NATIONAL
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NAAQS)

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) held a public hearing for the proposed SIP revision on September 25, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. at the TCEQ Headquarters in Austin. The
Austin Area Council of Gove rnments (AACOG) provided oral comments concerning the SIP

revision.

The public comment period opened on August 24, 2012, and closed on September 28, 2012. The
commission received written comments from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) , Public Citizen, and four individuals

.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 1
General Comments

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 1
Power Plants

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 2 Greenhouse Gas ( GHG) Permitting

................................ ................................ ................................ 2 Adequacy of Controls as Required by FCAA, §110(a)(1) and (a)(2)(A)

................................ ........... 3 Compliance with The FCAA

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 4
Title 30 Texas Adm inistrative Code (TAC) Rules for Addressing FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)

......... 7 Funding and FCAA, §110(a)(2)(E)

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 8 Emissions Inventory Development

................................ ................................ ................................ . 9 Authority of the TCEQ to Revise the Texas SIP

................................ ................................ ............. 10 Interstate Transport and FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)

................................ ................................ ...... 11

GENERAL COMMENTS

Public Citizen commented that it s experience s working to develop local clean air plans that are subsequently dismissed and replaced by the TCEQ with far weaker, inadequate plans have been disappointing

.

This comment is beyond the scope of this SIP revision. The purpose of this SIP

revision is to demonstrate how Texas meets the infrastructure requirements of FCAA, §110(a) , including the interstate transport requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) , for the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS

. T he infrastruc ture and
transport demonstration explains how existing Texas statutes and rules will allow the state to meet its obligations under the FCAA

. This SIP revision is not an
attainment demonstration , but a demonstration that basic program elements have
been add ressed for the 2008 ozone NAAQS

.

One individual mentioned the availability of clean

- up systems for storm water runoff.

The issue of storm water runoff is beyond the scope of this SIP revision. This SIP

revision is an air quality plan intended to meet FCAA requirements for ozone infrastructure and transport.

### 2 POWER PLANTS

Public Citizen commented that it has participated or advised 16 groups that were fighting coal plants in Texas, and that the TCEQ permitted plants with emissions large enough to affect nonattainment areas. Public Citizen commented that these plants were permitted without adequate analysis and credible outside analysts were ignored, resulting in the deterioration of, or failure to improve, air quality. Public Citizen also commented that t he TCEQ rejected the EPA’s request for modeling for the White Stallion plant, and although it is next to the worst nonattainment area in the state, the TCEQ did not hesitate to permit a large source near an area with ozone problems. Additionally, one indiv idual requested a public meeting concerning the Las Brisas power plant and a contested case hearing in Corpus Christi, Texas. Another individual also requested a public meeting and contested case hearing in Corpus Christi, Texas. One individual
commented t hat coal burning is the subject of many lawsuits and they disagree that burning coal for power is safe.

These comment s are beyond the scope of this SIP revision. The purpose of this SIP

revision is to demonstrate how Texas meets the infrastructure require ments of FCAA, §110(a) , including the interstate transport requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) , for the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS

. T he infrastructure and
transport demonstration explains how existing Texas statutes and rules will allow
the state to meet its obligations under the FCAA

. Therefore, issues concerning the White Stallion plant and the proposed Las Brisas Energy Center are beyond the scope of this SIP revision. Because this SIP revision does not include any information on the proposed Las Brisas Energy Center, nor does it specifically address controls in Corpus Christi, a public meeting was not conducted in Corpus Christi, Texas. Rather, because this SIP revision is a statewide plan for Texas, a public hearing was held in Austin, Texas.

Pow er plants are discussed in this SIP revision with respect to electric generating units (EGU) in Section 2.2.2: Emissions Reductions from EGUs . The SIP revision discusses existing control strategies specific to EGUs including: annual nitrogen oxides ( NO X ) r eductions from the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), utility electric generation in ozone nonattainment areas (30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter C), utility electric generation in east and central Texas (30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter E, Division 1), and Texa s

- specific legislation from the 1999 76th legislative session in Senate Bill 7 that requires NO X reductions through a regional cap and trade program. This SIP revision does not include any information about the safety of coal

- burning power plants or any related lawsuits.

GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) PERMITTING The EPA commented that it recently promulgated regulations for GHG permitting under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program

. B ecause PSD under the FCAA applies to each newly regulated pollutant, including non

- NAAQS pollutants, a state's PSD SIP must also apply permitting requirement s for GHG emissions for the EPA to determine the PSD

- related infrastructure elements of §110(a)(2) are sufficient.

No changes were made in response to this comment. I nfrastructure SIP demonstrations are a requirement of §110(a)(1) , which specifically requi res each state to submit a plan demonstrating that it has all the required elements to ensure
that the NAAQS can be implemented, maintained, and enforced. The EPA has failed

### 3 to offer any rationale for why the implementation of GHG permitting is necessary

o r required for the implementation, maintenance, or enforcement of the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the commission disagrees that Texas is required to have an approved GHG PSD permitting program in place to have a n infrastructure SIP revision tha t is complete for the purposes of attaining and maintaining the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS. Furthermore, GHG PSD permitting in Texas is currently under the control of the EPA through a federal implementation plan (FIP) specifically imposed by the EPA to e nsure that GHG PSD permitting could occur in Texas. The imposition of the FIP fills any perceived hole in the Texas SIP, and therefore, the Texas infrastructure SIP should be considered complete and approvable. Lastly, Texas is currently litigating the EPA ’s position that implementation of GHG is necessary or required for the implementation, maintenance, or enforcement of the ozone and PM NAAQS. Therefore, the commission may consider this issue further based on the outcome of the litigation.

ADEQUACY OF CO NTROLS AS REQUIRED B Y FCAA, §110( a )(1) AND ( a )(2)(A)
The AACOG questioned whether adequate controls and emission limitations are in place as required by §110(a)(2)(A) for the San Antonio

- New Braunfels Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) . San Antonio, desig nated attainment in 2008, was “the largest city in the United States in full compliance with all federal air quality standards.” However, on August 21, 2012, the area experienced a series of ozone exceedances that resulted in a violation of the 2008 ozone standard, with a preliminary 2012 design value of 80 parts per billion (ppb). The AACOG commented that the population of the MSA is expected to grow by 41% from 2010 to 2040, and oil and gas extraction in the Eagle Ford Shale has continued to develop. The AACOG also commented that there are no regional limits on NO X permitted by the TCEQ for small sources such as oil and gas extraction. Public Citizen commented there are three areas monitoring above the 2008 ozone standard and that Texas is not meeting FCAA requirements due to lack of regional limits on NO X emissions, especially for small sources like oil and gas, and lack of photochemical modeling requirements for permitting of large sources, like coal plants close to

near

- nonattainment and nonattainment ar eas. Public Citizen also commented that there is no thorough analysis of whether the existing control measures are sufficient to meet the requirements of §110(a)(1). Finally, Public Citizen commented that the TCEQ has specific authority to create districts to protect air quality under Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.012, State Air Control Plan, and §382.013, Air Quality Control Regions.

The purpose of this SIP revi sion is to demonstrate how Texas meets the infrastructure requirements of FCAA, §110(a) , including the interstate transport requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)

, for the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS.

T he infrastructure demonstration explains how existi ng Texas statutes and rules will allow the state to meet its obligations under the FCAA

. This SIP revision is not
an attainment demonstration but a demonstration that basic program elements
have been addressed for the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS

. Attainmen t demonstration SIP revisions will be developed for any Texas areas designated as
moderate or above nonattainment of the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS. Those SIP revisions will be developed with appropriate stakeholder input and will undergo separate notice and comment rulemaking procedures. At that time

, the TCEQ will develop appropriate rules and control measures to bring those areas into attainment by the appropriate attainment deadlines. This infrastructure and
transport SIP revision simply demonstrates t hat Texas has the appropriate

### 4 statutory and regulatory authority to develop necessary rules and control measures
so that all areas of the state can either maintain the standard or meet and then
attain the standard in the future.

The TCEQ agrees with Public Citizen that it has authority under Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.012 to “prepare and develop a general, comprehensive plan for the proper control of the state’s air” and §382.013 to “designate air quality control regions based on jurisdictional boun daries, urban

- industrial concentrations, and other factors, including atmospheric areas, necessary to provide adequate implementation of air quality standards. ” The SIP revision references the Texas Clean Air Act, Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 382, except Subchapter 1, in
both Section V

- A: Legal Authority and Section V

- D

- 1: Infrastructure Demonstration for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

.

COMPLIANCE WITH THE FCAA

Public Citizen commented that the SIP revision does not meet the requirements of §110(a)(2)(C)
due to lack of enforcement and failure to assess adequate penalties. Public Citizen also commented that permitting protections for attainment areas are inadequate, and although the EPA has not issued required photochemical mod eling or region

- wide limits on permitting of NO X emission, the TCEQ has a responsibility to do this.

The TCEQ has the enforcement and permitting authority in place insofar as the agency has been given such jurisdiction from the state legislature. Whether or not Public Citizen agrees with the ways in which the TCEQ exercises such authority is a different issue that is beyond the scope of this SIP revision.

The EPA commented that §110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the FCAA requires compliance with §115 of the FCAA, relati ng to interstate and international pollution abatement. Section 115 addresses endangerment of public health or welfare in foreign countries from pollution emitted in the United States. The EPA requested more discussion on how Texas complies with §115 (c) of the

FCAA.

Pursuant to §115(a), the EPA has not made TCEQ aware of submissions indicating reports, surveys, or studies from any duly constituted international agency regarding air pollution emitted in Texas, which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public welfare or health in Mexico. Furthermore, under §115(a), based on information available to the TCEQ, the EPA has not been requested by the United States Secretary of State to issue formal notification to Texas that any emissions originating in the s tate are endangering public health or welfare in Mexico. In the absence of such a finding and notification, Texas has no obligations to address the endangerment of public health or welfare in Mexico under §115. Should Texas receive such a finding from the EPA in the future, the appropriate remedy would be a SIP revision to correct the endangerment, as specified in §115(b). As discussed in the infrastructure SIP, Texas has the proper authority and procedures in place to
make revisions to its SIP when necessa ry. No changes were made to the SIP revision in response to this comment.

The TCEQ is un clear about the EPA’s concern with how Texas complies with §115(c)

, given that this section only concerns applicab ility of foreign countries.

### 5 The EPA commented that §12 6(a) of the FCAA requires new or modified sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from such sources. Section 126(b) of the FCAA affects a state only if the EPA has been petitioned to make a finding of violation that is related to either

i nterstate transport or international transport of emissions from sources in the state. The EPA requested further discussion on how Texas complies with §126.

The Texas SIP requires that each major proposed new or modified source provide such notification (see 67 FR 58697). The state also has no pending obligations under §126 of the FCAA. The EPA has previously approved Texas’ infrastructure SIP for §110(a)(2)(D )(ii), except as regarding GHG (see 76 FR 81371). The EPA’s rationale for this approval can be found in the September 22, 2011, EPA Technical Support Document on the 1997 ozone and PM 2.5 and 2006 PM 2.5 infrastructure and transport SIP, Docket ID EPA

- R06

- OA R

- 2008

- 0638, page 16 . Quoting EPA analysis:

Section 126 of the Act addresses interstate pollution abatement and section 126(a) requires that each applicable implementation plan shall require each major proposed new or modified source to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from the source. The Texas SIP addresses section 126 of the Act under their PSD rules at 30 TAC 116, Division 3 (Public Notice). Specifically, 30 TAC 116.131 provides that public notice be provided “[...] for any permit subject to the FCAA, Title I, Part C or D, or to Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 51.165(b).” Furthermore, the rules at 30 TAC 116.134 provide that “[...] the permit applicant shall furnish a copy of such notices and date of publication to [...] the air pollution control agency of any nearby state in which air quality may be adversely affected by the emissions from the new or modified facility.” These rules were adopted into the Texas SIP on September 18, 2002 (67 FR 58709) and address section 126(a)(1)(A ) and (B) of the Act. Section 126(b) of the Act provides that any state or political subdivision may petition the Administrator for a finding that any major source or group of stationary sources emits or would emit any air pollutant in violation of the pro hibition of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of this title or this section. Within 60 days after receipt of any petition under this subsection and after public hearing, the Administrator shall make such a finding or deny the petition. We have not been made aware o f any such pending actions pursuant to CAA section 126(b), thus we are proposing that the Texas SIP meets this portion of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). We are proposing that the Texas SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii).

Texas agrees that it meets the requirements of §110(a)(2)(D)(ii) and disagrees with the EPA’s previous disapproval of this section for GHG. The EPA has failed to offer a rational explanation of why GHG PSD permitting is necessary for attaining or maintaining any NAAQS, includ ing ozone or PM 2.5 . As noted previously, Texas is currently litigating the EPA’s final partial disapproval regarding the implementation of GHG permitting in Texas as it relates to infrastructure requirements. No changes were made to the SIP revision in response to this

comment.

### 6 The EPA requested more discussion of how Texas' SIP complies with the conflict of interest provisions of §128 to satisfy the infrastructure SIP requirements of §110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the FCAA.

The infrastructure demonstration states for §110(a)(2)(E) that “The TCEQ relies on the complete statutory and regulatory authority as referenced throughout this document.” The statutory authority includes Texas Water Code, Chapter C: Texas Natural Resources Commission, which includes the statut ory requirements for the eligibility and selection of the commissioners of the TCEQ. These requirements ensure that Texas is in compliance with the FCAA, §128. The EPA has acknowledged this authority previously when it approved this portion of the Texas in frastructure
SIP demonstration for the 1997 ozone and PM 2.5 and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. Although infrastructure SIP revisions are NAAQS specific, the requirements of §110(a)(2)(E), specifically, are the same regardless of the criteria pollutant at issue. The EPA discussed its proposed approval of this section of the Texas ozone and PM 2.5 infrastructure SIP in the EPA’s September 22, 2011, Technical Support Document,
Docket ID EPA

- R06

- OAR

- 2008

- 0638, page 18. Quoting EPA analysis:

The TCEQ commissioners take final action on Texas state rules and their eligibility to serve as commissioner is subject to Section 128 of the FCAA. Section 128 requires that, (1) any board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders shall have at least a majority of members who re present the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subject to permits or enforcement orders under this chapter, and (2) any potential conflicts of interest by members of such board or body
or the head of an e xecutive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. The three commissioners of the TCEQ are appointed by the governor to represent the general public and their suitability and conduct are prescribed by the Texas Water Code (TWC). The state rules t hat address Section 128 of the FCAA are found in the TWC, Title 2 (Water Administration), Subtitle A (Executive Agencies), Chapter 5 (Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission), Subchapter C (Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission), Section 5. 053: Eligibility for Membership; Section 5.054: Removal of Commission Members; Section 5.059: Conflict of Interest; Section 5.060: Lobbyist Prohibition; and Subchapter D (General Powers and Duties of the Commission), Section 5.111: Standards of Conduct.

In 1981, the EPA approved into the SIP the Standards of Conduct of State Officers and Employees (Texas Revised Civil Statute Annotated, Article 6252

- 9b) (46 FR 61124). The current TWC rules retain the standards of conduct for state officers and employees app roved in 1981. We are proposing that the Texas SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E).

Texas agrees that it meets the requirements of §110(a)(2)(E)(ii). No changes were made to the SIP revision in response to this comment.

Public Citizen commen ted that the SIP does not meet the requirements of §110(a)(2)(M) due to a lack of a SIP advisory group and the TCEQ’s rebuffing of requests and plans from local jurisdictions and advisory groups to address these requirements. Public Citizen also commented it is insufficient to merely provide an opportunity for public comment that is routinely ignored.

### 7 Section V

- D

- 1: Infrastructure Demonstration for the 2008 Ozone Nation al Ambient Air Quality Standards of the SIP revision references Texas Water Code, §5.107, Advisory Committees, Work Groups, and Task Forces . Under §5.107, the TCEQ is authorized to create and consult with advisory committees, work groups, or task forces, and does so when appropriate and necessary. Regarding public participation, the legal requ irement is to provide a period for public comment ; however, there is not a requirement to implement all comments or suggestions

. The Texas Administrative Procedures Act (APA) governs rulemaking procedures in

Texas. 1 SIP revisions, and rules associated with them, must also comply with the

FCAA and federal regulations as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 2 Although the Texas APA requires an agency to fully consider all oral and written comments on a proposed rule, 3 it does not prescribe the man ner in which an agency shall respond to such comments. The TCEQ routinely responds in writing to
all substantive comments received on SIP revisions and associated rules. The response typically details why the commission did or did not make changes in

respo nse to such comments.

TITLE 30 TEXAS ADMINISTRAT IVE CODE (TAC) RULES FOR AD DRESSING FCAA, §110( a )(2)(D)( i )(II) The EPA commented that on page xi of the proposal addressing §110(a)(2)(D) of the FCAA the TCEQ cross

- references its discussion on §110(a)(2)(C) and relevant rules for meeting federal requirements. The EPA requested a more comprehensive listing of relevant rules in 30 TAC that address the federal requirements in §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). As written, the TCEQ states that Chapter 101, General Air Quality Rules and Chapter 122, Subchapter E, Division 2, Clean Air
Interstate Rule of 30 TAC are the only relevant rule s for meeting the requirements of §110(a)(2)(D)(i)

.

The commission confirms that 30 TAC Chapter 101, General Air Quality Rules and Chapter 122, Subchapter E, Division 2, Clean Air Interstate Rule are the relevant rules for meeting the infrastructure and transport requirements of §110(a)(2)(D)(i) including §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). FCAA

, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires that the SIP contain adequate provisions prohibiting any source or type of emissions activity within the state from emitting air pollutants in amounts that will interfere with another state’s SIP measures for preventing signi ficant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility

. Texas also has SIP

- approved rules for PSD, as required by the FCAA. 4 These rules are found in 30 TAC Chapter 116. Additionally

, Texas has SIP

- approved source

- specific rules in 30 TAC Chapters 11 5 and 11 7 that require NO X and volatile organic compounds ( VOC ) controls.

1 TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 2001.001 et seq.

2 See 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart F.

3 TEX. GOV’T . CODE ANN. § 2001.029.

4 The EPA has recently promulgated regulations for the permitting of greenhouse gases under the PSD program. Although Texas has not amended or proposed amendments to its permitting program to include greenhouse gases, Texas is meeting its obligat ions under the FCAA to provide for permitting of facilities that emit criteria pollutants. Greenhouse gases are not criteria pollutants, with a NAAQS that must be met, and therefore a lack of permitting requirements in Texas rules for greenhouse gas emissi ons does not constitute a lack in the required infrastructure elements of §110(a)(2).

### 8 In addition to the general air quality rules in 30 TAC Chapter 101 and the CAIR
rules in 30 TAC Chapter 122, Texas submitted a Regional Haze SIP revision to the EPA on March 19, 2009 . Regional haze program requirements include progress reports due to the EPA in 2014 and every five years thereafter, to demonstrate progress toward the visibility goal. Another Regional Haze SIP is due in 2018 and every 10 years thereafter, through 2064. Furthermore, the EPA has already approved Texas’ infrastructure and transport SIP for §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the

1997 eight

- hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, except as regards GHG PSD permitting requirements ( see 76 Federal Register 5 8748, at 58755 (September 22, 2011)). Texas agrees that it meets the requirements of § 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), and disagrees with EPA’s previous disapproval of this section for

GHGs. The EPA has failed to offer a rational explanation of why GHG PSD permitting is necessary for attaining or maintaining any NAAQS, including either the 1997 or the 2008 eight

- hour ozone standards

. In response to this comment, the commission has expanded the list of relevant rules to include 30 TAC Chapters 115, 116, and 117.

FUNDING AND FCAA, §110( a )(2)(E)
The AACOG commented that local efforts are underway to address recent ozone exceedances in
the San Antonio

- New Braunfels MSA but questioned whether the SIP revision meets the requirements of §110(a)(2)(E)(i) to provide “necessary as surances that the state will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out” the SIP. The AACOG mentioned TCEQ funding cuts as well as local air quality planning funding cuts in the AACOG region.

Public Citizen commented that the SIP may not meet the requirements of §110(a)(2)(E) because the TCEQ is spending half as much on air quality in the current fiscal year and biennium than the previous year. Public Citizen also commented that the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP),

on e of the largest emission reduction measures for several areas result ing in over 3 tons per day (tpd) of NO X reductions, is underfunded by $50 million . T he TCEQ has failed to request full funding and an exceptional item to recover some or all of the $601 m illion in sequestered TERP funding to meet early SIP commitments . Public Citizen also mentioned that TCEQ staff has routinely informed them that they “don’t have the resources” to assist with emissions inventory projects or other analysis to assist committ ees like the North Central Texas Clean Air Working Group.

Part of the TCEQ’s role is to determine how to appropriately distribute resources. Like all agencies, the TCEQ prioritizes the allocation of resources to items that require the most attention and th at does not always align with the needs and requests of local areas.

Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that the TCEQ ensure that it has adequate resources to carry out its responsibilities under the SIP and that any local jurisdiction upon which any portion of the SIP relies has adequate resources to carry out its responsibilities. The TCEQ works with local governments and other stakeholders during the SIP development process to assess all measures to be included in the SIP that will be implemented at the local level. After the SIP development process is completed, the TCEQ continues to provide support to local governments by participating in local air quality planning committees and through the general

### 9 conformity and transportation conformity processes. Further , through the Rider 8 program, the TCEQ administers grant funding and provides technical and planning

assistance to specified local governments that are attaining the 2008 eight

- hour
ozone standard to assist them in their efforts to maintain their attainme nt status.

The TERP appropriation was reduced by about $50 million per fiscal year from the last biennium. Funding decisions are made by the l egislature, which determine s the priority for TERP funding, not the TCEQ. However, the current TERP appropriations and associated emission reductions are still significant in addressing mobile source emissions. The TERP projects funded to date (from the beginning of the program in 2001 through August 31, 2012) are projected to result

in NO X reductions of around 60 tpd in the TERP

- eligible counties.

The commission disagrees that the Texas SIP may not meet the requirements of §110(a)(2)(E) or that specific equivalent funding is necessary every year. The EPA has not adopted rules that require a specific amount of funding to be spent on air quality programs. Instead, states are obligated to assess their programs and funding to assure that they have adequate resources to meet their FCAA obligations. Furthermore, the EPA has already approved Texas’ infrastructure and
transpor t SIP demonstration for §110(a)(2)(E) for the 1997 eight

- hour ozone and

PM 2.5 NAAQS and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

In response to this comment, discussion of how Texas meets the requirements of §110(a)(2)(E), on page xii of the SIP revision narrative, has been revised.

EMISSIONS INVENTORY DEVELOPMENT
The AACOG commented that it will continue with minimal resources in partnership with the TCEQ to create an Eagle Ford Shale ozone precursor emissions inventory. Based on recent ozone
violations in the San Antonio MSA, the AACOG requested that resources be devoted to the Eagle
Ford Shale emission s inventory on the scale devoted to the Barnett Shale emissions inventory
work. Public Citizen commented that the San Antonio area has become a nonattainment area, possibly resulting from air emissions that occurred because the TCEQ has failed to put forth even minimal effort in the Eagle Ford Shale.

The purpose of this SIP revision for ozone infrastructure and transport is to meet the infrastructure requirements of the FCAA, §110(a), including the emissions reporting requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(F). The infrastructure and transport demonstration explains how existing Texas statutes and rules will allow the state to meet those requirements. Specific issues concerning emiss ions inventory work in the Eagle Ford Shale are beyond the scope of this SIP revision.

The TCEQ will continue to partner with the AACOG through the Rider 8 grant
program to support its work on the Eagle Ford Shale emissions inventory. The TCEQ also continu es to monitor the Eagle Ford Shale by conducting flyovers of the area with infrared cameras, conducting investigations, and developing emissions inventories for all source categories including the oil and gas sector in these counties. The TCEQ has also mad e compliance information and tools available to the oil and gas industry at the Oil & Gas Facilities: Compliance Resources Web

page.

### 10 Public Citizen commented that the TCEQ has tried an d failed to complete detailed equipment and emissions inventory in the Barnett Shale relying instead on voluntary reporting and work from other governmental agencies that may not have been up to the standards necessary to make policy.

Although specific iss ues concerning the emissions inventory work in the Barnett Shale are beyond the scope of this infrastructure SIP revision, the TCEQ disagrees with this comment. The TCEQ conducted a special inventory that captured actual air emissions data and detailed equ ipment information from stationary oil and gas operations associated with the Barnett Shale formation.

The Barnett Shale Special Inventory represents one of the first large

- scale efforts nationally to directly survey area (nonpoint) oil and gas emissions s ources that generally would not report to the point source emissions inventory. The TCEQ received special inventory data from companies that account for more than 99% of the 2009 production in the Barnett Shale formation. Specifically, data for more
than 8 ,500 oil and gas sites were received. Due to the large volume of data received,
county

- level summary data for both phases of the Barnett Shale special inventory are available at: http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/point

- source

- ei/psei.html

.

AUTHORITY O F T HE TCEQ TO REVISE THE T EXAS SIP The EPA commented that regarding §110(a)(2)(H) the TCEQ explained that it regularly revises the Texas SIP in response to revisions in the NAAQS and EPA rules and cross

- references its discussion on §110(a)(2)(A). As §110(a )(2)(H) requires that a state have the authority to revise the SIP as necessary, the EPA recommended the TCEQ provide additional discussion of and reference to such authority that allowed the TCEQ to make the regular revisions as stated.

The TCEQ’s statuto ry and regulatory authority to revise its SIP as necessary is broadly contained within the statutes and rules referenced throughout this
infrastructure and transport SIP revision. Furthermore, the EPA has previously approved Texas’ infrastructure SIP for 1 997 ozone and PM 2.5 and 2006 PM 2.5 for §110(a)(2)(H) (see 76 FR 81371). Although infrastructure SIP revisions are NAAQS specific, the requirements of §110(a)(2)(H) are the same regardless of the criteria pollutant at issue . T he TCEQ’s authority to revise T exas’ SIP to address any future problems with the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS is consistent with its authority to revise its SIP for any other NAAQS. The EPA proposed approval of this section of
the Texas ozone and PM 2.5 infrastructure SIP in the EPA’s Sep tember 22, 2011, Technical Support Document, Docket ID EPA

- R06

- OAR

- 2008

- 0638, page 23. Quoting EPA analysis:

... the TCAA authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level of quality to be maintained in the state’s air and to control the quality of the state’s air by preparing and developing a SIP under §382.011 and 382.012. The TCAA under §382.011 further provides the TCEQ with “the powers necessary or convenient to carry out its responsibilities.” Section 382.017 authorizes the TCEQ to adopt rules and §382.036 req uires that the TCEQ “advise, consult, and cooperate with [...] the federal government.” Thus, Texas has the authority to revise its SIP as may be necessary to account for revisions of the NAAQS, adopt more effective methods of attaining the NAAQS, and respon d

### 11 to EPA SIP calls. We are proposing that the Texas SIP meets the requirements of §110(a)(2)(H).

Additionally, the EPA’s historical interpretation has been that SIPs are subject to revision as standards and the ability to meet those standards change. The E PA has stated that it is immaterial whether or not a state has acknowledged that its plan may change. The EPA first made this finding in the May 31, 1972, regulation titled

Part 52

– Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, 37 FR 10842, at
10846, stating, “In accordance with the Act and the Administrator's regulations (40 CFR 51.6), all State plans are subject to revision, as necessary, to take account of revisions of the national standards, availability of improved or more expeditious
methods of attaining the national standards, or a finding by the Administrator that a State plan is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain a national standard. Accordingly, whether a s tate has acknowledged that its implementation plan is subject to revision i s considered immaterial.” No changes were made to the SIP revision in response to this comment.

INTERSTATE TRANSPORT AND FCAA, §110( a )(2)(D)( i )(I)
The EPA commented that on August 21, 2012, the United States (U.S.) Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia (D.C.) Circuit issued a decision to vacate the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule ( CSAPR )

. The EPA is evaluating the court decision as it pertains to FCAA, §110(a) (1) and (2) infrastructure and transport SIP requir ements. Therefore, at this time the EPA did not comment on the TCEQ’s proposed SIP revision in Section VI: Control Strategy to address the requirements of §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for ozone transport under the 2008 eight

- hour ozone NAAQS.

The SIP revision has b een updated to include that on August 21, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated CSAPR. Under the court’s ruling, the Clean Air Interstate Rule ( CAIR ) will remain in place until the EPA develops a valid replacement for CAIR. These upd ates are included in Section VI: Control Strategy

, Section L: Transport

, Chapter 2: Required Control Strategy Elements , Section

2.2.2.1: CAIR and Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR)

.

Public Citizen commented that the SIP revision fails to analyze Texas impact on downwind states and fails to accurately account for ozone emissions entering Texas from other states.

The TCEQ disagrees with this comment. FCAA, § 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires states to submit a SIP revision that contains adequate provisions to pr ohibit any source or other type of emissions activity within the state from emitting any air pollutants in amounts that will contribute significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS for areas in other states or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state. First, this provision does not require the state to accurately account for ozone emissions entering Texas from other states. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) only requires the state to address its impact on downwind states. Further, the SIP

revision does address the potential impact on nearby states by including analysis of ozone design values, ozone design value trends in Texas as well as in other states located in Region 6, and the distance between the nonattainment areas in Texas compared to the o ther nonattainment areas in Region 6.

### 12 The TCEQ developed the transport technical analysis included in this SIP revision with available information and guidance. To date, the EPA has not yet proposed infrastructure or transport guidance for the 2008 ozone N AAQS.

Public Citizen co mmented that based on the TCEQ’s repeated permitting of large power plants and other emissions sources that evidence shows will impact the NAAQS, the TCEQ has no real intention of complying with the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)( D).

The TCEQ strongly disagrees with the comment that it has “no real intention of complying” with the requirements of §110(a)(2)(D). The TCEQ is committed to meeting the requirements of the FCAA and takes its duties to Texas citizens very seriously. As stated in the SIP revision, Texas has a SIP

- approved PSD and

nonattainment New Source Review permitting pro gram (for all pollutants exce pt for GHGs, for which EPA has issued a FIP and assumed responsibility) that contains requirements for sources of air pollutants to obtain an approved permit before beginning construction of a facility and before modifying an existing facility. All permitt ed sources in Texas are required to comply with all state and federal rules and regulations including the NAAQS.ORDER ADOPTING
REVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN



### Docket No. 2012

- 1087

- SIP Project No. 2012

- 004

- SIP

- NR

On December 5, 2012 , the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission), during a public meeting, considered adoption of revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) . The Commission adopts revision s to the SIP for Infrastructure and Transport of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Commission adopts the SIP revision demonstrating that Texas is not contributing significantly to nonattainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS for areas in other stat es; not interfering with the maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in any other state; not interfering with measures required to meet an implementation plan for any other state related to prevention of significant deterioration (PSD); and not interfering wit h measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other state related to regional haze and visibility. Under Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. §§ 382.011, 382.012, and 382.023 (Vernon 20 11 ), the Commission has the authority to control the quality o f the state’s air and to issue orders consistent with the policies and purposes of the Texas Clean Air Act, Chapter 382 of the Tex. Health & Safety Code. Notice of the proposed SIP revision s was published for comment in the September 7, 2012 issue of the Texas Register 

### ( 37 TexReg 7221 ).

Pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 51.102 and after proper notice, the

Commissi on conducted a public hearing to consider the revision to the SIP. Proper notice included prominent advertisement in the areas affe cted at least 30 days prior to the date of the hearing

. A public hearing was held in Austin on September 25 , 2012

.

The Commission circulated hearing notices of its intended action to the public, including interested persons, the Regional Administrator o f the EPA, and all applicable local air pollution control agencies. The public was invited to submit data, views, and recommendations on the proposed SIP revision, either orally or in writing, at the hearing or during the comment period. Prior to the sch eduled hearing, copies of the proposed SIP revision were available for public inspection at the Commission’s central office and on the
Commission’s Web site.

Data, views, and recommendations of interested persons regarding the proposed SIP

revision s were submitted to the Commission during the comment period, and were considered by the Commission as reflected in the analysis of testimony incorporated by reference to this Order. The Commission finds that the analysis of testimony includes the
names of all interested groups or associations offering comment on the proposed SIP

revision s and their position concerning the same.

### IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that the revision s to the SIP incorporated by reference to this Order are hereby adopted. The adopted revision s to the SIP

are incorporated by reference in this Order as if set forth at length verbatim in this Order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that on behalf of the Commission, the Chairman should transmit a copy of this Order, t ogether with the adopted revision s to the SIP, to the Regional Administrator of EPA as a proposed revision s to the Texas SIP pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act, codified at 42 U.S. Code Ann. §§ 74 01

- 7671q, as amended.

If any portion of this Order is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the invalidity of any portion shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions.

Date issued:

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman