9456 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 35 / Monday, February 23, 2015 / Notices 

project-level conformity analyses, and 

decreased EPA adequacy findings. 

Dated: February 12, 2015. 

Karl Simon, 

Director, Transportation and Climate 

Division, Office of Transportation and Air 

Quality. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03577 Filed 2–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9923–16–Region 6] 

Clean Air Act Operating Permit 

Program; Petitions for Objection to 

State Operating Permits for Luminant 

Generating Company, LLC Steam 

Electric Generating Stations Martin 

Lake, Monticello, and Big Brown in 

Texas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of final action. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act 

(CAA) Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR 

70.8(d), the EPA Administrator signed 

an Order, dated January 23, 2015, 

denying in part three petitions asking 

the EPA to object to operating permits 

issued by the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to 

Luminant Generating Company, LLC 

(Luminant) relating to three coal fired 

steam electric generating stations (SES) 

located in East and Northeast Texas. 

Title V operating permit number O53 

was issued by the TCEQ to Luminant for 

the Martin Lake SES located in Rusk 

County, Texas. Title V operating permit 

number O64 was issued to Luminant for 

the Monticello SES located in Titus 

County, Texas, while title V operating 

permit number O65 was issued to 

Luminant for the Big Brown SES located 

in Freestone County, Texas. The EPA’s 

January 23, 2015 Order responds to the 

three petitions submitted by the 

Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) 

representing themselves and on behalf 

of Sierra Club (collectively, the 

Petitioners): the petition addressing the 

Martin Lake permit was received on 

February 26, 2014, while the petitions 

addressing the Monticello permit and 

Big Brown permit were both received on 

March 4, 2014. Sections 307(b) and 

505(b)(2) of the Act provide that a 

petitioner may ask for judicial review of 

those portions of the Orders that deny 

objections raised in the petitions by the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit. Any petition for 

review shall be filed within 60 days 

from the date this notice appears in the 

Federal Register, pursuant to section 

307(b) of the Act. 

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of 

the final Orders, the petitions, and other 

supporting information at EPA Region 6, 

1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202– 

2733. 

For Information: Please contact Brad 

Toups at (214) 665–7258, email address: 

toups.brad@epa.gov or the above EPA, 

Region 6 address, to view copies of the 

final Orders, petitions, and other 

supporting information. You may view 

the hard copies Monday through Friday, 

from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. If you wish to 

examine these documents, you should 

make an appointment at least 24 hours 

before the visiting day. Additionally, the 

final January 23, 2015 Order is available 

electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/

region07/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/

luminant_response2014.pdf. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA 

affords the EPA a 45-day period to 

review, and object, as appropriate, to a 

title V operating permit proposed by a 

state permitting authority. Section 

505(b)(2) of the CAA authorizes any 

person to petition the EPA 

Administrator, within 60 days after the 

expiration of this review period, to 

object to a title V operating permit if the 

EPA has not done so. Petitions must be 

based only on objections to the permit 

that were raised with reasonable 

specificity during the public comment 

period provided by the state, unless the 

petitioner demonstrates that it was 

impracticable to raise these issues 

during the comment period or unless 

the grounds for the issue arose after this 

period. 

The EPA received three petitions from 

the Petitioners, one dated February 26, 

2014 for the Martin Lake permit, and 

one each dated March 3, 2014 for the 

Monticello and Big Brown permits, to 

object to operating permits issued to 

Luminant Generating Company, LLC 

relating respectively to facilities located 

in Rusk, Titus, and Freestone counties, 

Texas. 

The Order issued on January 23, 2015 

responds to claim V.A of the Martin 

Lake Petition (pp. 5–9), the Monticello 

Petition (pp. 5–11) and the Big Brown 

Petition (pp. 7–14) raised by EIP, the 

Sierra Club having withdrawn all of 

their objections prior to the issuance of 

the order. The EIP requested that the 

Administrator object to the proposed 

operating permits issued by the TCEQ to 

Luminant on several bases. The three 

petitions did not raise identical claims; 

however, three common claims are 

addressed in the issued order. The 

remaining issues are to be withdrawn by 

the petitioner in accordance with a 

settlement agreement reached on 

January 22, 2015 between the Petitioner 

and the EPA. 

The claims are described in detail in 

Section IV of the Order. In summary, the 

issues raised are that: (1) the 

Compliance Assurance Monitoring 

(CAM) provisions in the Martin Lake, 

Monticello and Big Brown permits do 

not assure compliance with the 

applicable particulate matter (PM) 

emission limit during periods of startup, 

shutdown, maintenance and 

malfunction; (2) the record supporting 

the CAM opacity indicator ranges for 

PM for Monticello Units 1, 2 and 3 is 

deficient and not based on reliable data; 

and (3) the Big Brown permit must be 

revised to ensure that any credible 

evidence may be used to demonstrate 

noncompliance with applicable 

requirements. 

Due to significant overlap in the 

issues raised in the Petitions and the 

similarity of the relevant permit 

conditions in each of the three permits, 

the EPA is responding to the identified 

portion of all three Petitions in this 

Order on January 23, 2015. The EPA’s 

rationale for denying the addressed 

claims is described in the Order. 

Dated: February 9, 2015. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03583 Filed 2–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9923–31–Region 2] 

Clean Water Act Section 303(d): 

Availability of List Decisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA’s 

decision to identify certain water 

quality limited waters and the 

associated pollutant to be listed 

pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 

303(d)(2) on New York’s list of impaired 

waters, and requests public comment. 

Section 303(d)(2) requires that States 

submit, and EPA approve or disapprove, 

lists of waters for which existing 

technology-based pollution controls are 

not stringent enough to attain or 

maintain State water quality standards 

and for which total maximum daily 

loads (TMDLs) must be prepared. 

On January 13, 2015, EPA 

disapproved New York’s decision to 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES