UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REG IO N6 1 445 ROSS AV ENUE , SUI TE 1200 DALLAS TX 752 02-2733 

# J UN 0 7 

# 2010 Ms. Dev on R yan Office of Lega l S ervices (MC 2 05) T exas Co m mi ss io n on E nvironmenta l Quali ty P .O. Bo x 1 3 0 87 Au stin, Te x a s 787 11- 3087 RE : EPA C o mments o n Rule Project Numb er 20 10-00 6-116 -P R Ms. Ryan : Tha nk you fo r providing u s the o pportunity t o revi ew an d c omment on the p roposed revisions to th e Qualified Fa cility Pro gram a t Texa s Admi nistrative Co de (T AC) Titl e 30 , C hapter 1 1 6, Co ntrol o f Air Polluti o n by Permit s for New C on struction o r Modific ati on, s ections 11 6 .10, 1 16
. 17 , 116.111, 116 .116, 116 .1 17, and 1 1 6.118, and the proposed ass ociated r evisions t o th e T exas S tate Imp l ementa tion Plan (SI P). T his prop osed ru l emaking r evises th e exi sting Qualified Faci lity Program t o a ddress th e con cerns id e nt i fied in o ur Apri l 14, 2010 , di sapproval o ft he Program (7 5 FR 1 9468)
. W e wou ld a l s o like t o thank y ou for ex tending the co mment p eriod for thi s rul emakin g t o en sure a de qu a te n o tice and c omment w as provided for th e propo sed a ssociated revisions to th e T e x a s S IP, Pl e a se n ote that these co mments do not con sti tute fina l determination s concerning approvabilit y o f the revi sions to the Tex as S IP. We are providing th ese c omment s to ass ist TCE Q in the devel opment of regulatory langua ge. Add itionally, comment s 4, 5 , 7 , 1 1 , 1 2, 14, 15 ,1 6, 17, 1 9, 2 4, 25 , 2 6, and 27 mu st b e addr essed t o OUT sa tisfaction b efore E PA can p r oc eed with a proposed action o n the se p o tent ial revisions t o the Texa s SIP , We lo ok forward t o w orking with the T CEQ a s y ou mov e forward in re spondin g t o th ese c o mment s and fin alizing th e revisions t o the Te xas S IP, If y ou have any qu estions, p l ease call M s . Adi na Wile y o f my s taff a t (214 ) 6 65-2 11 5. Sincerely y ours,

# ~'"1J.~~ Th omas 

### H. Di ggs A ssociate Dir ector for Air Pro grams Mul timedia P lanning and

P erm itti ng Divi sion Encl osures

I nterne t Address ( URL)

_ hl tp :llwww ,epa ,govlregio n6 R ecycled/Re cy clab le

_ P rint ed w i th Vegetab le O i l Based I nks on 100 % Recyc led Pape r, Process C hlor ine Free1


### Enclosure 1
. Th e " Bac kground and reason ( s) f o r th e rul cmaking" s ec tio n of the Exec utive S umm ary sta t es th at th e Q ualified Fa cility Program a uthori ze s increase s i n a ctua l em i s si ons at faciliti es . Thi s s t a tem e nt i s incon s i s tent w ith o ur under st anding th a t the Q ualified F acili ty Pr ogram i s de s igned to o n ly a llow incre ases in all owabl e e m i s sio n s t o n et out agai n st decrease s in a ll owab le e mis sio n s. Pl e as e r ev ise thi s s t a t emen t t o accura t e ly re flect the intent o f the Qua lified Fac ili ty Program. 2. EP A a grees w ith th e s tat e m ent in t he 30 T AC Ch apte r 11 6 pr eamble th at the re vis ions t o 3 0 TAC sectio n s 116 .1O(5 ) (F), 116 .1 11 (a) (2)(K), 11 6 .\ 1 6 (b )(3), and 11 6 .11 7(a ) ( 4) (8 ) will n o t be s ubmitted as S IP re vis ions. Th e s e s ect io ns all refer to s e cti o n 112(g ) of the CAA , which i s n ot imp l emented thr ough th e SIP
. 3. The 3 0 TA C Chap ter 11 6 p re amb le at p age 

### to , N o tifica tion of C hange s a t Qualified F aci l it ies, s tat es th at th e s ubmi ss ion of PI- E f orm s h as r e s ulted i n s ign i ficant denia l s for change s u nder t he Q ualified Faci lity Prog ram . T he ru le i s uncl ear h ow TCEQ ha s th e authority t o de n y Qu alifie d Fac ility c han ges w hen the re i s n o a pprov a l p roce ss re quired f or th e P I- E f orm. D oe s TCE Q h ave a s et am oun t of time t o review an d re spond to the P I- E f orm ? I f TC E Q doe s not re spo nd within th e app ropria te ti me . d oes the faci lity ha ve a de fa ult a pprova l? W h ere d o the rul e s c o nt ain s uc h pro visions? A l so, the preamble s tatemen t re ferenced a bove i s in consi s tent w ith the rule lan g ua g e requiremen t s at 30 T AC s ec t ions 11 6
. I 1 6(e)(2) and It 6 .117 (b)
. N ew 3 0 T A C s ect i on 1 1 6 .116 { e) { 2 ) r equire s o wn ers o r o perators t o s ubmit Form PI · E pri or t o making any change s t o qual ified fac ilitie s. H owever, 30 TA C s ecti o n 116
. I 1 7(b ) requi re s the s ubmi tt a l of Fo rm PI- E a s part of th e ann ual repo rt . Fu rthe r , the 3 0 TAC C h apte r 11 6 p reamble a t page 8, Nettin g an d D ou ble Coun ting, im plies t hat pr e-change n otification i s only required wh en th e intr aplant t rad e mo ves e miss io ns f rom the interior o f a s ite t o a poi nt clo se r t o t he p r ope rty li ne . P le as e exp lain how th e PI -E f orm i s u s ed ; i s thi s f orm s u bm itt ed pre-change o r p o st-chan ge ? T CEQ s ho u ld r evi se the regulatory lan guage to b e co n s i s tent wit h th e i nt e nt e xpre s sed i n t he p ream b le , by clearly ident i fying the req uiremen ts for s ubmittal of the PI·E form , requi rin g p re-chan ge no tification for a ll qua lified f

acil itie s c hanges, and in cludin g an exp re ss proced ure fo r T CEQ review an d res p ond
. 4
. TC EQ mu st prov id e ex p licit re g ulatory la n gu a ge to de fine th e te rm "facili ty " a s i t a pp li e s t o th e Qua lified Facilit y P rogram . We rec ogni ze that TCEQ in t erp ret s " fa cilit y ." as it app li es t o the Q ualified F acility Pr ogram , t o p reclude inclus ion o f mo re than o n e s tatio n ary so urce . Howe ver, the lack of rule langua ge cl arif yi ng th e me a ning of the term "f acility ," as it app lie s t o th i s P rogram , m ake s thi s defi nit i o n overly vague ; an d th er efore, u nenfo r ceab l e. A s we s t ated in our fina l d is a pp rova l o f th e Qua lified F ac ility P rogram , Texa s's rul e s apply the term
" facil it y " in d i fferent way s w ithout provid ing clar ifica tio n i n t he rul e lang u age .

### 2
75 F R 1 9468, at 19489 ( Ap ri l 14 ,2 0 10). Te xas 's P SD no n-PAL rul es ex plicitly 

### lim it the de fini tion o f " facility" 

### t o " emissions u nit," but t he Q ualified F acility rul e s fai l t o mak e su ch a li mitation. Co mpare 30 T AC 1 16.10(6) t o 3 0 TAC 11 6
. 1 60 ( c)(3). T he Sta t e cl e arl y tho ught the pru dent le gal co urse wa s t o l imit 

### "fac i li ty" e xplicitly to "emiss ions u ni

t" in it s PSD SIP n on-P ALs r evision. H

o

w ever, TCEQ did not in clude su fficient in formation 

### in i ts prop osed r evisions t o dem onstrate t hat th e l ack of th is 

### exp licit limi tatio n in t he su bmitte d Q u

alified Facility r evisi on s i s at least as stringent a s the r e vi sed definiti on i n t he PSD 0 00- 

### P

AL s defin ition. W e r ecommend th at TCEQ r eso l ve t his d eficiency by a dding a s pe c i fic d e fi niti on o f th e t cnm "f ac i lity" t o the Q ualified Facilit y D efiniti ons at 30 TA e 1 1 6. 17 

### or provide in its rev ised Qua lified F acility Rul e a descr ipti on of wh at a "f acility " is under t he Qual ified Faci lity Pro gram. 5
. Th e 3 0 TAC C hapter 11 6 p re amble a t p age 6 cl earl y i ndicates that the T CEQ u ses 

### th

e t e rm "a ccoun t'ts ynonymo usly 

### with E PA's use o f "source
. " 

### Wh ile this pr eamble statement is a st ep towar ds a ddressing o ur c oncerns identified i n t he fi nal disapproval of t he Q u ali fied Fac ility Pro gram, th e TCE Q must also re vise th

e Qualified Faci lity rul e language t o includeth is statement to imp rove clar ity an d t ransp a ren cy of th e 

### ru le an d to e ntirely add ress our concerns. S ee 75 FR 1 94 6 8, at 1 9489- 19490
. 6. Th e portion of the de finition o f " allowable emiss ions" at 3 0 T AC 11 6 .1O (2)(C) 

### r ela tin g t o "qualified gr andfathered 

### fa c ilit y " i s p roposed f or d eletion und er 30 TA C sectio n 116.1 0. H owever, we n ote t hat there continue t o be re ferences to ac tua l emissions th rou ghout the Q ualified Faci lity r ule l anguage, see 30 TA C se c t ions 11 6.116(e)(4)(C), 1 16. 1 1 6(e)(9)(A) , 116. 11 6(e)(9)(C), 11 6.116(e)(9)(D). It 

### i s our unde rs

tandi ng o f the Qualifie d Fa cility Pr ogram that ac tua l emissions w e re on ly use d for qualifi ed g ra ndfat here d facilities. Please co nfirm that t his inte rp retat i on i s corr ect. I f our und erst and ing is co rrec t and a ctual emissions w ere onl y used f or qual ified gran dfathe red facilities, pl ease r emove all r e fer ences to a

ct

ua l e missions from th e p rop osed la nguage. However, if our u n

der st and ing i s i nco rrec t please explain how actu al emissions areto be used in a program that i s de s igned f or netting of allowab le emissions. 7
. Th e propose d d efinit ion of "Best Av ailable Con trol T echnology (B ACT)" at 30 

### TA e se ction 11 6 . 1 0 (1) mu st be revi sed t o more cl e arly indicate thi s definition i s f or an y air contam inan t or f acility not subject t o federa l perm itting r equirements, as i ndi cate d by th e rul e pream ble on page 12 . We r ecommend th at TCEQ use t he f oll o wing l angua g e t o pr o m ote ru le cla rity : State ( or alt ernately, T exas) Best ava ilable con tro l t echnology (BACT ) - An 

### a irpollution c o nt rol m e tho d for a new or modi fied faci lity tha t t hroug h exper ie nce an d researc h, h as proven to be o perat ional, obtain able, a nd c apable of re d ucing 

### or eliminating emissions fro m the f acility, a nd is c onsid ered technica lly pract i cal an d e conomically reaso nab le for t he facil ity. The emission r eduction c an be ac hieved thro ugh technology such

### 3

a s th e u s e of ad d-on c ontrol equ ipment or by en forceab le change s i n p roducti on p rocesses, sys tems , met hods , or wor k pr actice . Thi s definiti on a pplies to any a ir con tam i nant or f aci lity no t sub ject t o f edera l permitting requirements u nde r Ti tl e I, p art C , of the C lean A i r Act (C AAl. For ai r co n tami nants or faci li ties su b j ect t o th e Ti tle I, p art C. 

# eM requireme nts, the defini tio n o f BA CT at s ec tio n 116 .111 ( a){2)(C), w hich re quires BA CT a s defined i n 40 CF R 52 ,2 I( b)(1 2), 

### \\ ; 11 ap ply. 8. Ple a se exp la in why th e defi nition of " qualified f acility" h as been re tained in 3 0 T A C s ection 1 1 6, I 0 rathe rt han r ecodified int o the new 30 T AC s ection 1 16,17, Qu a lified F aci lity De finitions. 

### 9. New 3 0 T AC se ction 1 1 6. 17( 2) provides t hat the allowab le e missions fo r a p ermitted f acility a t new 3 0 T AC s ection 1 1 6, 17(2){ A) wo uld include th e e miss ion li mit es tablished i n the permit or m ax imum all owable e missions rate t able (MAERT) and any e missio n lim it c ontained i n representations in the permit app licat ion t hat wa s reli ed upo n in iss uing the p ermit. T his s ection m ay pro vide an op portunity for d oub l e - counting and ove r inflation of the allowable emi ssions for a permitt ed fa cility. P lease v er if y that emi ssions lim it s are only cumulat iv e if the e mission limi t s in the p ermi t , M AERT, a nd pe rmit app lication are se parate, en t irely unre lated l imits in ord er t o pr event double

- countin g. 10
. Pl ease e xplain what i s mean t by a " Special E xemption Facility" at 3 0 T AC s ect io n 116 .17(2)(D). Is a s pecial e xemption fa cility e xempt from the re quirements t o h ave an underl ying 3 0 T A C C hapter 1 16 p ermit or authorization un d er30 T AC C hapter 1 06 at 30 TA C s ect i on I 1 6 .116 ( e)(1)(A )? If so , wh at is the b as i s f or the exem ption? II . New 3 0 TA C sec tion 1 16.116(e)(1)(B) cross -references th e maj or N SR nettin g r eq u irements at 30 TAC se ction 11 6.12(20). The S IP -ap proved m ajor N SR n etting pr ov i sions are l ocated a t 3 0 T AC s ection 1 1 6.12( 1 3). E PA i s eva luating p ending r evisions to 30 T AC se ction 1 1 6
. 12 that s ubstantively r evise and ren umbe r this se ction. 30 T AC sec tion 1 16 .12(20) m ust be approved be fore EPA c ou ld proce ed with a p roposed ac tion o n the revised Qual ified Faci l ity Pr ogram. O ur co mments on th e pr oposed r evisio ns to 30 TA C s ect io n 11 6.116(e) d o not refl ect a ny i ntent or future a c ti on by th e E PA to gran t S IP approval to t he re v i sions t o 3 0 T AC sec tion 11 6.12. 12 . Ne w 3 0 TA C s ection 1 1 6 .11 6 (e)( 2 )( A) requires own ers or o pe rators to s ubmit an applica tion for a perm it alterati on f or each p ermit iss ued un der 30 T AC s ection 1 1 6
. 111 in volved i n the qualified fa cility tran saction. T he S I P-approved a lteration provisions at 30 TAC s ection 1 16 , 1 16( c )(B)(i ii) state th at a permit alt e ration is "any c hange fro m a repres entation in a n applica tion, g eneral con d ition, or sp ecia l c ondition in a p ermit that do es no t cau se an i ncrease in t he e mi ss ion rate o f any air contamin ant." T herefore, the SIP -app roved a lteration process c annot b e u sed to re vi s e the p ermit f or the f acilities involved in th e4
qua lified facility transa ction t hat h as the increa se in a llowables. T o use penni t alt erations fo r t he faci lities wi th emi ssion inc reases, th e TC EQ must p ropose a r evi si on t o the permi t a lte rations p rovision s. 

### 1 3
. Ther e appears t o b e a t yp ographical error i n new 30 TA C section 11 6
. 1 16 ( e)(2 )( D ). W e be lieve the s e n tence sho u ld read : N o a llow ab le em i ssion ra te ffi as d efi n ed i n 

### § 11 6.1 7 o f t his t itle (re lating t o Qu a li fie d Fac ili ties Defini tions ) sha ll be e xc ee ded. 1 4
. OU f fi na l d i sa pprova l o f t h e Qua lified Facilit y Program de term ined that the p ro gram was de ficient as a mino r NS R p rogram beca use it d id no t requ ire p art ic ipating f acilities to have an un derlyi ng permit an d an ai r qua lity impact ana ly sis. See 75 FR 1 9468 , at 1 948 6-1 9487. Ne w 30 TAC s ectio n 1 16
. 11 6(e)(2)(E ) i ncludes th e fo llowing langu age: "
... regar dless of wh ethe r the fac ility h as r eceived a preco nstruction pe rmit o r pe rmi t a mendme nt. . .. " T his sec tion mu st b e rev ised t o a ccura te ly ad dress this concern a nd to be co ns is tent w it h the s ta t ed inten t o f the TC EQ, w hich i s that a faci lity mu st h ave an au thor i za tion u nder 30 T AC Chapte r 106 or 1 1 6 and a ir qua lity impac t ana lysis in ord er t o be "qua lified" u n d er the Pr ogram. S ee ne w 30 T AC sec tion 1 1 6 .116(e)(1)(A). 15
. Th e in ter change m ethodo logy at 30 T AC s ec tion 11 6 .1 16(e)(5) is un approvable for th e s ulfur d ioxides a nd PM NAAQS. The t erm " sul fur co mpo unds" use d in th e in t e rc h ange m ethodology i s b road eno ugh to i nclude hyd rogen s ulfide, w hich i s a regu la t ed N SR po lluta nt (sec 4 0 C FR 52 .2 1(b)(23 )( i) and 5 2.2 1(i)(5)(i»), a nd requ ires a separate ne tting a nalysis f rom su lfur oxides. T he interc hange me thodo logy also al lows PM 2 . 5 to b e interchanged wi th P M IO , wh ich are t wo sep arate p ollutants. For a dditiona l inf ormation s ee our fi nal di sapproval of th e Qu alifie d F a c i l ity P rogra m at 75 FR 1 9468 , a t 19474
. 16. 3 0 T AC s ection 11 6.116(e)(5)(E) requ ires an o wn e r or operator t o d emonstrate th a t the change wi ll n ot adve rsely affec t am b ien t a ir q uality, bu t 30 T AC section 1 1 6
. 1 17(a)( 4) on ly re quire s a n own er o r o perator to mai ntain sufficient in f o rmation to s how that the p roject is no t e xpecte d to a d v ers el y a ffect am bient a ir q uality . We i n t e rp re t 3 0 T AC sectio n 11 6 .11 7( a )(4) as requi ring a l e s ser d eg re e o f stri ngency i n t h e an alysis. Th er ef ore, th e TCEQ m ust revise 30 T AC sec ti o n 11 6.117(a)(4) t o requ ire a demonst ra tio n co nsis te nt w ith 30 T AC se ction I 1 6
. 11 6(e)(5)(E). Ple ase a lso ex plain the re pli cable p rocedure that TCEQ w ill em ploy t o d ete rmin e th e ch ang e will no t adversely i mpact am bient a ir qu ality. 17 . 30 TA C sectio n 11 6.116( e) (8)(A) p rovides that a fac ility m ay u tilize con trol me thods that a re as effe c tive as BA CT req uired at th e time th e c ontrol m et hods are i mp l emented. It is our un derstanding of th e T exas C lean A ir Ac t th at o nly S ta t e B ACT can app ly to a m inor NS R pr ogram, i n cluding the Quali fied F acility P rogram . Plea se c onflrm this un derstanding. A lso , 30 T AC s ec tion5
1 1 6
. 1) 6(e)(8 )(A) m u st b e r evi s e d t o e xp lic it ly p rovide th at Sta te BAC T a t 3 0 T A e se c tion 1 1 6. 10 (1 ) applie s . Ple ase e xpla in the re plic able p rocedure th a t T CEQ w ill emp loy to de term i ne th e c o ntr o l m et ho d is a s e ffective a s S tate B A C T
. 

### 1 8
. Th e Chapter 1 1 6 p reamble a t p age s 8

- 9 states that new 3 0 T Ae 

### sectio n I 1 6. 1 1 6( e)(I 0 ) co nt a ins an ti-bac k sl iding p r ovis ion s s u c h th a t the exi s ti ng le vel o f con tr o l may no t be le s s ened fo r a Q ua li fied Fac ility . The pre ambl e f urthe r ex p lain s that thi s an ti-ba c k sli ding p rovi s ion w ill 

### be impl em ent ed f o r i ntraplant tra d e s throu g h re v isio n s to the m aximum all owab le emi s si on rate t able ( M AERT) fo r the p art icip at ing fac ilities
. Th e rul e lan guage at 30 TA C s ec tio n 11 6 .1 1 6(e)(1 0 ) doe s n ot r equire a c h ang e t o th e MA ER T , n or c a n w e find t h is p rovi sion el s ewhere in the pr opo s ed rule s. T he T CEQ s h o uld revi se the rul e l an gu a g e t o req uire M AERT revi sio n s a s exp lain ed i n th e pr eamb l e . 1 9
. Th e ann u a l re p o rt u nder 30 TA C s e cti o n 1 1 6 .11 7 (b) (I ) mu s t b e re v i s ed t o addre s s ou r c onc e rn s a bout th e t ime la g be twe e n when the ch an g e i s m a d e a nd the T CEQ i s n otifie d
. A s n ot ed in o ur fin al di s approval o f th e Q ual i fied Faci lit y Program, a s ix m o nth rep ort wi ll better en a b le th e TC EQ t o m onitor co mp l ia nc e w ith NAA QS, RFP o r o the r co ntro l s tra t eg ie s . S ee 7 5 FR ) 9 468 , a t 1 94 8 2. 20
. 3 0 T A C s e cti o n 1 ) 6
. 117(b) (1) s ho uld be revised t o re quire re port ing for c han ge s to Qua lified Fac i l i ti es wi th intraplant tra ding
. 2 1
. T C E Q has dele ted the provi s ion f o r po s t
-change n otific ati on { fo rmer 30 T AC s ectio n 11 6 .11 7 (b )( 2» , but th e revi se d reg ulatio n s d o n ot e xpre s s ly req u ire prech an g e n otification in all in st ance s . A s d i s cu ss ed abo v e in Co mme nt 3
. w e find th at th e pr oposed r e gul ation s g ove rning n o tific a tion requir em en t s a re v a gue . W e s trongly enc ourage T C EQ t o ex pre s s ly s t ate that pr e- chan g e n o tifica ti o n i s req u ired f or a ll qua lified c h an ges. I f TC EQ d ocs n ot inte nd t o requ ir e pre-change noti fication f or a ll q ualified c hange s, th en we r e que st that T CEQ furth er clari fy timi n g and re quir ements f or notifi cati on f o r a ll qual ified ch an ges c o ntemp l ated un der the Pro gram . 22
. New 3 0 TA C s e c tio n 11 6 .11 7 ( b )( 2) r equires p re-chan g e n otific ation i f a p hy s ica l or o pe ratio na l c hang e a t a Q ualified F ac ility wi ll a ffect c o mp liance w ith a permit s pec ia l c o nditi on . Pl e as e ex pla in w hat co n s titutes a p enn it s pec i a l c ond ition
. D oe s thi s mean that a f a ci lit y can chan ge an d/or rem ove f ederall y re q uir ed m o ni to ri n g , reporting , and re cordkee p ing require me nt s w ith o ut pu bli c no tice ? Is it po ssible th a t a f acility could m o d i fy s pec i al co n d ition s e st abli s h ed unde r f e deral C on s ent D ec re es o r e nforc eme nt a ct io ns ? We rec o mm en d th a t TCE Q re vise thi s p rovi s i on to clari fy i t s ap pli cabilit y . 2 3
. W e interpret 30 T AC s ec tio n 11 6 .11 8. Pre- chan ge Qu alificati on . a s a pply ing o nly to f a c i l i tie s th at do not ha ve an e xi s tin g pe rmit , i
. e . , qu alified g randfathe r ed f

a c ilitie s . Pl e a s e e x plain th e type s o f fac il itie s th at are c ove red u nder 3 0 T AC s ec ti o n 1 16 .1 18
. I f th e se faci litie s are i nd ee d qual ified g r andf athe re d fa c iliti es6
p le a s e co n si der removing 30 TA C sec tion 11 6 .11 8
. I ft hese fac i litie s are n ot qua l ified g randfathe red f acilitie s, w e rec o mmend cl arifyi n g 30 

### T Ae s ec tions 1 16
. 1 18(a ) (I ) and ( a ) ( 2) to im prove clarity of th e ru le lan guage . 2

4. Th e p r o posed s up p le ment to th e S IP t it led "Co nce rning the Qua lified Fac i lity Pro g ra m as A uthorized by Senate B ill 1 126" id e ntifies a ll o f th e Q ual ified Fa c il i tie s i n Texa s. Th e T CEQ h as c reated thi s s u p plem en ta l d oc um ent i n an e ff o rt to s ho w t h at the se f aci lit ies will n o t a dve rse ly im pac t a tta i nm ent o r m a i ntenanc e o f the NAA QS. RF P
. o r a ny o the r app lic ab le r eq u i rem ent o f th e Ac t. T C E Q m ake s t he arg ument t hat Q u ali fied Fa ci lities net a ll owable e missions f r om exi s ting p enn it s t hat we re iss u ed u nd er S lf'< ap pr ove d permi t p rogra m s con sistent w ith s e cti o n 1 10(1) o f th e CAA
. Theref o re, t he Qua lified Fa cility Pr o gram by exte nsion must demo nstrate co ns i s tency wit h s ect ion 110(1 ) o f the 

### e AA. H o wev e r , th i s ana ly sis d o e s n ot a ddre s s th e Qua lified G randfathered Fa cilities , wh ich did 

### not h ave u n derlyin g S I P-approved C hap te r 1 16 pe rmits o r C hapte r 1 06 au th o r ization s . Th e prop ose d S I P s upp le m e nt m u s t be re vi s ed t o i dent if y w hich of t h e s e fac ilit ie s w ere Qua lifie d G rand fa thered Fac ilitie s s o th a t we c an asses s t he i mp ac t of so urc es w ithout pe rm it s o n thi s P ro g ram . T he TCEQ must a l s o pro vid e verification th a t e ach Qua lifie d G randfathered Faci li ty i s n ow cove red und er a S IP

- approved Chapte r 1 16 pe rmit o r C hapter 106 a u thoriza tion . 2 5
. Th e " Pro g ram Summary " po rti on o f the pr oposed s up p lement t o the S IP titl ed
" C o n c e rn i n g the Qua lifie d Fac i lity Pr ogram as A u th orized by Se nate Bi ll 11 26" mu s t be rev i s ed t o accura tely r eflect th e re quirem e nt s o f new 3 0 T A C s ec tio n I 1 6.1 1 6(e){1) (A) , that a fa ci lity mu st h ave an authori zatio n u nder 30 T AC Ch ap ter 1 06 o r 11 6 be f o re it can be co me a qu alified fac ility. 2 6
. Th e " T C E Q Ad m in istra tion of th e Q uali fied Facilitie s P ro gram" portio n o f th e p ro p os ed s u pp l em e nt to th e S I P ti tl ed " Concern ing the Q uali fi ed F ac ility P ro g ram a s Au thorized by Se n at e Bill 11 2 6" mu st b e re vi s ed to cl e arly in dica te that the re ferences to BA C T are t o S t a te B ACT
. See co mment s n umbe r s 7 an d 17 ab ov e fo r a ddit i ona l i nforma t io n. 2 7
. A p pen dix 4

- Se n a te Bill 1 1 26 G uidance

- of th e pr opo sed s up p le m e nt to th e S IP titl ed " C o nce rnin g the Q ualified Fac ility P r ogr am as A ut horize d b y Se na te Bi ll 1 ) 2 6 ". m u st 

### be revie wed an d updated co n s i s tent with e ach o f the c o ncerns i de nti fi e d in o ur Q ua lifi ed Facilit y d is approval n o tic e an d the p ropo s ed re vi s io n s t o 30 TA C C ha p ter 1 16
. E PA i s un ab le t o d etermine whe ther th e revi s ed Q u alified Fa ci l ity Pr o gram comp lie s with s ecti on 1 10 (1 ) of the C AA u ntil T C E Q upd a tes thi s gu idance to co rrel ate w i th the re vise d ru l e s an d s ubm i ts the updat ed g ui d a nce to E PA
.