Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman
Carlos Rubinstein, Commissioner Toby Baker, Commissioner Zak Covar, Executl've Director 

### RECEIVED- 6POL AIR PLANNING SEC.


## 12 DEC I 0 PH 5: 07

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Protectl"ng Texas by Reducing and Preventl'ng Pollution 

### December 7, 2012



### Ron Curry Regional Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency- Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2733

Dear Mr. Curry: Docket No. 2012-0862-SIP Project No. 2012-016-SIP-NR



### On November 14, 2012, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission) adopted revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Infrastructure and Transport for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (N02) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

The Commission adopted a SIP revision demonstrating how the infrastructure elements listed in Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §no(a)(2) are currently addressed in the Texas SIP for the 2010 N02 NAAQS. The SIP revision outlines the requirements ofFCAA, §no(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas statutes and rules that allow the TCEQ to meet those requirements. These requirements include basic program elements such as enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air quality 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. Additionally, the SIP revisions demonstrate that Texas is not contributing significantly to nonattainment of the N02 NAAQS for areas in other states; not interfering with the maintenance of the N02 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; and not interfering with measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other state related to regional haze and visibility.

Enclosed are the proposed revision to the SIP, a public hearing certification, a complete record of the public hearing, and the accompanymg order. I look forward to your expeditious approval of this SIP revision. Sincerely,

# ~~pt- Chairman

BWS/alb

Enclosures

cc: The Honorable Rick Perry, Governor of Texas Ms. Kelly Kennedy, Office of Budget, Planning and Policy, Office of the Governor Mr. Zak Covar, Executive Director, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512-239-1000 • tceq.texas.gov

How is our customer service? tceq.texas.gov/customersurvey

### TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Docket No. 

### 2012-0862-SIP



### THE STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF TRAVIS

This is to certify that the attached electronic file is included and that the electronic file

is a true and correct copy of documents for a revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan,
adopted on November 14, 2012, 

### pursuant to 40 

### Code of Federal Regulations§ 51.104. 

### I am

the records administrator for the Air Quality Division of the Texas Commission on

Environmental Quality (Commission).Texas Com mission on Environmental Quality Public Hearing August 1, 2012
Concerning Revisions to Federal Clean Air Act, §11 O(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard

Project No. 2012-016-SIP-NRINTRODUCTION

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) scheduled a public hearing in

Austin on August 1, 2012, to receive testimony regarding the proposed Federal Clean Air Act
(FCAA}, Section 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP}

Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (N0 2 } National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

The SIP revision documents how the infrastructure and transport elements listed in FCAA,

Section 11 O(a) are currently addressed in the Texas SIP. The SIP revision outlines the

requirements of the FCAA, Section 11 O(a)(2)(A)- (M) and the Texas provisions supporting the

requirements. These infrastructure requirements include basic program elements such as

enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air quality 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. The

interstate transport requirements include a discussion of N0 2 transport and a demonstration

showing that Texas does not contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with

maintenance of the 2010 N0 2 NAAQS in another state.

The comment period closed on August 6, 2012. All testimony and comments have been

reviewed and seriously considered. This hearing record contains a complete record of the

public hearing and is divided into the following four sections:

o Public Notification and Proposal

o Written and Oral Testimony

o Evaluation of Testimony

o Staff Recommendations/OrderAdditional copies of this hearing record are maintained in the TCEQ central office at 12100 Park

35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. For further information, please contact Margaret Earnest at
(512) 239-4581.

# PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND PROPOSALPUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Notification to the public of the proposed revisions was conducted by the following procedures:

1. Publication of notice of public hearings in the following newspapers on the date listed:

Austin American-Statesman; June 29, 2012
Fort Worth Star-Telegram; June 29, 2012
Houston Chronicle: June 29, 2012

2. Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing in the July 13, 2012, issue of the Texas Register (37
TexReg 5367).

3. Correspondence forwarding the notice of public hearings to the following officials and agencies:
Speaker of the House

Lieutenant Governor

Alamo Area Council of Governments
Capital Area Planning Council

City of Austin, Mayor's Office
City of Dallas, Department of Environmental Quality
City of Dallas, Department of Aviation
City of El Paso, Environmental Services
City of Fort Worth, Environmental Management Department

East Texas Council of Governments

El Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization

Federal Highway Administration

Galveston County Health District

Harris County Public Health and Environmental ServicesHouston-Galveston Area Council

North Central Texas Council of Governments

South East Texas Regional Planning Commission

Texas Department of Transportation

Travis County Judge

Victoria Metropolitan Planning Organization

Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality

New Mexico Environmental Department

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality

United States Environmental Protection AgencyExample of Newspaper Classified Ad

Austin American-Statesman, June 29, 2012

NOTICE OF PUBUCHEARING BYlHE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ,· ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ON A PROPOSED REVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will conduct a publiC hearing to receive testimony regarding the P.roposed Federal Clean Air Act {FCAA), Section 1 1 O(a){l l and (2) Infrastructure and Transport St(!te Implementation Plan (SIP) Revislon·f« the 2010 Nitrogen Oirudde (N02) Natioj1al**Ambi~ entAirQual!tyStandard"(NAAQS~**  .>·:·

_ :, The proposed SIP revision documents how the Infrastructure and transport**elel'!'l~IJtSi** ·: listed In FCAA. Section 110(a) are currently addressed in the Texas SIP. The**SIP.~siOn** would outline the requirements ofFCAA, Sec.- tion 110(a)(2)(AJ through (M) and the Texas

. provisions supporting the requirements. These infrastructure requirements indud$ ba-**si_~** pr.ogrllfn4!)ements

__ such_ as enforc_eable

, emission-urn ltittlons.and cohtrolltleasutes, air quality**~i'ilti;»rliig** and 'modellng,a-pelrrilt- tlng program, adequate funding and person-: nel, authority under state law to carry oUt the plan, emissions reporting. emergency·poM!ts, _public participation, and fee collectlon..The

- Interstate transport requirements Include a discussion of N02 transport and a ClemonstratloO**~howing** that Texas does not coFltrlbute significantly to nonattalnr:nent or inter@re with maintenance ohhEi 201 0 N01 NAAas !n another state. (NaiHU(e Project Number 2012..016-SIP-NR}
, · -. · .,, ·: A public hearing on**t~ls** proposal Will be held in Austin (m**~ustJ.,** 2012, at lO:OOaJri: The pUblic**~Qnrig·** W!JI 9t"**h~ld** In the 1CEQ Austin headquarters at 12100 Park 35 Orcle, .'· Building E. Room 2015. The hearing will.be.-. structured for the receipt of oral or written comments b)' interested persons. Registra·. tlon will begin 30 minutes prior to**~-h~ar•** lng.lndlviduals may**pre~ent** oral**st!lt~s** when called upon in order of regist'ratloi'l.-

.. , There will be no open discussion during the hearing; however, TCEQstaff members.wm be av•llable to discuss the proposal30 mlliuteS before the hearing. Persons planning to attend the hearing who have special communication or other**ac~** .- COf!'\mOdatlon needs should contact Marga- ret Earnest, Air Quality Diviskm, at (S_t-2) ··,, : 239-4581. Requests should be**mad~_a~** far in: advance as poss_lble. ,:. · -. .. ; Comm4jnts may be submitted to**Ml!rg~ret.** Eamest, MC206, SIPTeam,ChiefEriglneer'5

. Office, Texas Commission on Envirpn{rieiltal Quality, P.O. Box 13081, Austin, Texas·
, .. , 78711-3087 _Or faxed tq (512)239--6188. flee-· tronlc comments may be submitted lit

. · http:!**Jwwwft,tceq~~-t¥.-us!rulesf«Om­** ments

.. Aie'sli:e restrictions may af)_riJY·to '
, comrl-tel)ts beinQ sul:lmltl:Eid**electrof\i~;al!)i:AI.I** comment:S:ihould remenceth•**~plOw::·** Federal 0.1n Air Ad Section 11Q(Ii. J ilnd (2)1nfrastn.KtuNandTr•nsport:_SI · · .. · lmplernenbltlon Plan Revision fO_t the 2010 Nitropn Dloxkh NMional Arnllleiri Air, QUIIIlty Stand•td'" and Pro,tect**N~Mn,bet** 201 2..016-SIP·NR. The commentperi(ld.:

... · clos_es August 6, 2012. Copies**of~** P:ro-:: -.. posed SIP_ revision can be. obtained frOm _the_" raQ's Web site- at . . - < http:/ {Www.tceq.texas.gov/alrqualitY/slp/cJ'I.- -terla-poUutant$1sip-no2,**fo~aQditl_onai infor~­** **~ll'llit(o.i'i..i'eg.** ard_lr.ag the**Pr'o~.sM'SIP·reviSion.** ' :ptea-se Contllci:-Matgiret'Eafnesf. Alf duality'

. DMS\i)n;at(512)**239~SB1'i** "'· · .tend. cr opera::.e an On..Site Sewag adlity; exemp1 subdivisions when

one tract is divided inlo two fiv or larger tracts from subniliting planning ma1eriab; allow the repai or alteration of ex.tsf:intl: cluster sys**tems~** updare tank: &.zing require update fon::1ulas fur leeching ciuun,bers; add lM:guage relating new or repl.acement dislnfection deviees; OOd equalization tank re < entsj tlarlfy what constitutes

an etn.etgeney repairj and update gures and tables.
The**oomm~ion** is seeking ootnm nts related to the efficiency ofNSF certi:fied disinfect1on devices and M impacts ofttansitioning to the mandatory use of SU<h devices b requiring the ""' of NSF certified dl..l!infectioo devices in on"''Site e facilities after a speci'lied date. The commission spec!..1caUy req m oommenbi on the efficiency of cllii:nfectioo devices,. the cost of d sinfectioo devices to the coi13Untor, and an appropriate t:ffective date.
The commission will hold a puhli hearing on this**propose.~** in Austin

on August 6, 2012-at 2:00p.m. in uildlng E, Room 101S. at the comn::.ission's central offi·ce t0¢ated at 12100 Parle**3~** Circle. The hearing is structu..red for the .receipt of o or wtitten cornmenrs b-y intemted persons. Individuals may present rat statements when called upon in Qrder of registration. Open discu ion will not be permitted during the hearing; however, commission members will be available to discu.!la the pmpo.sa130 mlm..ttea pri to 1he hearing,
Persons who have special co unication or o'l:bct accommodation**n~ds** who are p[anning to atkm tl>.e hearing should contact Sandy Wong, Office ofL<gnJ Services, t (512) 239·1801, Requeots ohould be made as far ;n advance as po 'ble. Written comments trulY be sub itted to Charlotte Horn, MC 205, Office of Legal Services, 1'e Coltttllission on Environmen· tal Quality, P.O. Box 13087, 'o, Texas 78711·3087 or faxed to (512) 239-4308, Electron! comments may be submitted at; http:l!wwwS.fwl.ltaM,govlrule c01111}'Utms/, File size restric

.. tions may opply to co-mments 1ng submitted via the eComments system. All comments shoul reference Rule Proj¢¢t Number 2012.()23-285-CE. The oomme t perio<l closes. August 13, 2012. Copies of the**pro~** rul king con be obtained from the**~ornm.i3.sion s**  Web .site at ht llwww.tceq.:exas.gov/navlrulfls/pro· pc:te

_ adopt,tJml. For further ormation, pleare contact Candy**Garret~** Progrmn Support Se<tio (512) 239-!457. TRD-20120\1438 Robert Marline.t Director, E"lWonrnenbli law DM Texas**Co~** 011 f'11'Viron F!led: June 29, 2.012 

# • • •

Notice of Public Hearing on uposo<l Revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 288
The T<:xw; Comrnlst!ion on!lnvi nmcntal Quamy(TCEQor Commi>- ston) will conduct a publi<: hear to receive 1est.ir::lony regarding proposed revisions to 30 Texas Ad! • ' mlive Code (!'A C) Chaprer 288, Water CollSeiVationPians, Dtou Contingency Plans,**Guldcli~s** and Requlrem.ru., !§288.1-288.5, rthe requirement>ofT.,.,.Gov· ernment Code, Chaprer 200 l, S haptor B.
The proiJO'ed rulem•li:lng woul imp!ement Selllllc llill (SB) 181 ond SB 660, 32nd Leglsi111't!.re, 2011 to require entities that submit wn1er conservation plRnS to the "1bxas ater Development noard (fWDB} and the TCEQ to implement seot r-based tepQrtingtneasures for water u,.,, The p<Op<lsed rulemaking uld olso require the TWDB and the TCBQ, in consultation w!th th<: arer ('_.onscrvationAdvisory Council, to develop a un.ifurm methodo!o and guidance for calculating water
use M.d conservation.
The commission wlllholdapubli hearing Oil thiSP"'!""'alinAustin on August 7, 2012, ot 10:00 a.m., in Building E, Room 20lS, at the com· mission's contra! office located 12100 Pa.-1< 3S Circle. The hooting 1s structured for**th~** reoeipt of o I or written ooro.tn<!nts by interesred porsons. Individuals may presen oral statemeobwben called upon in order of reglstration. Open discu sion will not be petmittl!d dudug the hearing; howeYer, oommi.ssion 8 ff members \lriU be available to**dis~** cw:s the propoaal30 minutes pr" r to the he<tting.
Persons who have special co :t.Wieation Ot' other accommodation needs wbo are planning to atte the bearing should contact Sandy Wong, Office of Legal SO!"ik<s, t (512) 239--1802. Requests should be made as fat in**~** as**:PO~** ibie.**Writte:~.** comments may be su itted to Bruce McAnally, MC 205. Office of Legal Services Texas Co!Dillis.sion on Environ· mental Quallty, P.O. Box llO 7, AtlS!in, Texos 78711·3087 or faxed to (Sl2) 239--4E08. Ele nio comments may be submitted at: http;/!www5.tc<q.texa:;,gov!. Weccm•umW. File size rostric· tions may ftWl)' to coaunerrt:SI submitted via the eCommmi.r system. AU comments shoul reference**Rul~** Ptoject Number 20ll-Q58·2ll8-0W. The oomme t pe.rio<l closes Aogust 13, 2012. Copies of the proposed rule ·ng can be obtained fr-om the c<>mmiMion's Web site at http 'lwww.tceq.te=.gov!nav!ru/qs/pr<r pose _trdopt.hlml. For further infurmatiuo, pl.,.,. contact Soo!t Swanson, Woter Rlght.Permittia Availnbility**Unl~** (512) 239.{)703. 1RD-20t 203428 Robert MariVlez Director, ErMronmentaf Law Di-As n Taxas Cornrrmtoo 011 Envitol1 I auarrty Flied: June 29, 2012 

## + 

# • •

Notice of Public Heoring on a Proposo<l Revision to the Stale Jmplernentatlon Plan
The Texas Commisslo:l on Enviro.'ltnental Quality (TCEQ) will conduct • public heru-ing to receive testimony regarding the propose<! Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), Seo<ion llO(a)(!) M<l (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Jmplement.tion Plan (SIP) Revision fur :he 2010 Nitrogen D!oxidc (NO,) National Ambient Air Quality Stnndatd (NAAQS).
Tho proposed SIP revision documents how the I-obstructu."'"e and trOJlSoo port elements JiJlted in FCAA, Section llO(a) are cummlly B<!dressed in the TexB.$ SJP. The SIP revision wou[d outline the n;quitemer.ts of FCAA, Section llO(a)(2)(A) • (M) sod the T"""' prov!.iollS supporting the reqv:rentents, 'These infrastntcrure requfrom{:nts include basic program**~letnen1s** such as enforceabJe emissionllrnitotioos and oontrol meusuroo, u.ir quality roonltoriug and modeling, a pen:nltting program, adequate funding aod perm**nne~** authority under stare law to carry out the plan, emlssJ008 reporting, emergency {'O'Wetx. public participation, and fee oo11ectlon. The interstate transport requirements inck:tde a**dis~** cussion of NO"- transport and a demonstration showing that Texas does not cootribute :Ugnfficantly to nocettaintoent or i.nterfere with maiote·

na.nce of the 2010 

### Nq, NAAQS in another statt, (Non-rule Project Number 2012.{)16-SlP-NR)
A public hearing on this proposal W:if be held in Austin on August 1 1 2012, at 10;00 s.m. The puhlicheari:Jg will be bcldintheTCEQ Alllltin headquarters at !2!00 Park 35**C~clo,** Building E, IUlom lOIS. The hearing will be struct:nreJ for the recei;_;t of' oml or written**~** by interested persons. Regist:ation wilJ begin 30 minutes prior to the



### LJV' ADDITION July 13, 2012 37 Ti!:<Reg 5367 j 

### ' 'hearing. lndividWils may**~t** oral statetnents when ¢filled upon in order of registt•tlon. There will be no open dlscussian during the nearing; howover, TCJ!Q staff membern will bo sva!lable to diseuss lbe proposal 30 minutes betlme tho hearing,
Persons pl.w.tnill3 to attend the hce.rjng who hnvu spooial communica

.. tion or other aeeommodalion needs should contact Margaret Earnest, Air Quulity Dlv:i!rion, Ill (512) 239-4581. R"luesta should be made as fat fn adYallC:' tU possible.
Comments: may be submitted to Margaret**~** MC 206, SIP Tham. Chief Engineers Office. Texas- Commission on Epvironmental Quality, P.O. I\ox 11087, Austin, 1- 78711-3087 or &xed tD (512) 239><61&8. l'.Jeetronic comments may be submitted at !Jttp;//www,,tceq,rexas.govlru/esltcommMf'l. Flle size reotrlarinns
way apply to comments being submitted electronicaliy, AU**oom~** tnents should re!Onmce the "l'ropenod Fedora! Clenn Air Act Section IW(a)(l) and (2) Infnstruclun; nnd 1'ramport Stale lmplerncnt.tion Plan Revi>ion fur 1bo 1010 Nitrogon Dioxide Nalioaal Ambient Air Quality StiUI<iru'd" and Project Number 2012-j) 16·SIP·NR. The comment period (<loses August**6~** 2011. Copies of tbe proposed SII" revl>ion can be obtained from the TCBQ's \¥:b si"' at hlip;llwww.tceq./exas,govfaltf/ualil)llsip/CI'iterla..po/iulanl.fl•ip-m2. For additional information regarding the proposed SIP revision, p.lease contnct Margaret Earnest, Air Quality Division, at (512) 23"-4581.

TR0-201203453 Robert Martinez Diredor,**~tal** Law OMsion Texas Commlselor. on En'.fronmemal Quality Fied: July 2, 2012 

# • 

# • + Notice of PubUc Hearing o a Propooed Revision to tile Stato Implementation Plan
Tile Texos Corum!'l81on**~•** En ironme1\1111 Qnality (corom!'l8ion) will oonduct a public hoaring to re ive testimony regarding the proposed Beaumont-Port Al'.hur (lll'A A!tainmont Area On-Road Mobile Source Ern.l.ssions Inventory Motor 'khiote Emlssiolli! Budget (MVEB) Updole State Imp! nfl11ion Plan (SIP) Revision.

The propo5ed EPA SIP revlsi would update the Elght-Hour Ozono Rode.o!gnelion Request and ainlorulnce Plan lOr the Bl'A Ozone Nonattninment Area that was pted by the commission on December 10,2008, aodapproved by the oitedStatesBnvirorunenla! Protection Agency (EPA) et!e<tiw Nov r 19, lOIO, Oo-rood mobile aource emissions inventories .and • s**w<~uld** be updated based on the EPA's latest mobile source em ions estimation model, Motor Vohkle EmiBslon Sinmlaror, which «:10ll5e<l on M""il 2, lOIO. (SIP Project Nwnher 2012-005· NR)
A public bearing on this pro will be liold in Beaumont on August I, 20!2, at 6:00 p.m. The pub e ll<oring will be bold in the Homer E. Nogel Conferonce Room of South !lost Texas Regional PI....Ung Commission at 2210 &ste< F eway, The bearing will be stmetured fur the receipt of oml or writte comments by interested persons. Registration will begin 30 mit:wte prior to: t.'te hearing. Indivi&!ala may present oral statements wlten ed upon in order of registt>tion. There wilt be no open discussion • ng the hearing; b(IWC'V(lf, comllliuion staff members will be availab to discuss the proposal30 tninutu be

.. fom lbe bearing.
Fersoos plnnning to attend the henrlng who 

### n.,.. spe<ial oommun!e

.. tion or other acoornmodat.ton ds should contat.t Jamie Zecit, Air Quality Division, at (512) 23**393~.** Requests s!tonld be mnde llll for in advance tiS possible.

37 TexReg 5368 July 13, 2012 Texas Register Comments may be I!Ubmit«:d Jamie Zecb, MC 206, State Jmple· mentation Plan Team. Chief :nects: OflicC 1 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. x 13087, Austin. Texns 78711·3037

or faJred to (Sl2) 239-6138. le<tronic comment> ll!llY be oubmitted at http://www5.tceq.tuos.go**leslecomm<~nts,** File si•e reslrietiona may**~pply** to OOIJlliiOnls be' oubmiUed elocitronieally. All com· ments should reference the ont-l'ort Arthur Attainment Areo On-1\oOO Mobile Sou= E · s Invorumy ami Motor Vehicle F.Jnissioll9 Budget Updo!l: to lmplomenta!lon Plan Re•isioo" ami Ptojeot Number 2012-j)O -siP-NR. The eommeot period closes August 3, 2012. Copies of proposed SIP revision

.. d ......,.[. ated appendix can be obta from the commission's Web site at hltp:llwww.tc"'l.lexas.gov/alrq liy/slpll;pa/bpa-iat<sl-ozont For additional information ro tho proposed SIP revision, please colltnct Jamie Z.ch, Air Qaal' Divillion, at (512) 239-3935. 11<0-201203454 Robert MarUnaz Dimctor, Envlmlll'tlOOial Law D sion**Te~as** Corr!rnaJ&km on Environ ental Quality Filed: July 2, 2ll12 

## + 

# • •
Notice of Public Meeting d Proposed Amendment and Reissuance General Permit umber WDWGO I 0000 The Tew Commis:OOn on lmlltnOillal Quality (TCI!Q) 

## p_.., tv omend ll!ld reissue tl!e Cia ( Undorgt'Olmd Injection Control (UIC) GooeraiPermi!NumberWD JOOOOautltorlzlngtbeuseofaC!ussl illje<tion well to dispose ofl!Oill>azar<doll8 brhse from a dosnlinlltion
..,._ eration or non.bazardous.dr' wfl.te.r treatment rooiduala (DW"IR)

. Tho proposed genend permft P) applies to the entire lltote ofTexos. This GP is autlwized by Tc Water Code, §27.0Z$.
PROPOSED AM!lNDED G AL PERMIT. The elreoutivo director hilS pn:Jll!"'d a dn!ft nme GP that authorize< the..., of • Class! injection well to d.i:!pose of ll!dous btine from a desalination operation or nonhazordous D "'11D amendments of this existing OP would incorpol111estandords disposal ofnonha2ardous DWTR that contain naturally oe<utring lol!<ltive material (NORM) 1aro • suit

cavern Ut horizonlally bedded r non-dornn1 salt. These stanrlacds re· quire the-owner or operator to a perfoltnance st:a.ndittd to prevent the 

## ""'""""'nt of fluids tho! old l'<>Uit in the pollution of an WlOOr• ground sowu of drinking

. The executive director proposes to require reg\.Jiated Wilities to bmit a Noticeoflntentto obh.lin a'Jtti&. rization for injection. A Radi tive MateriaLs License is requited for disposal ofDWTR eontairdog ORM tho! d.., not meet"' exempted level for its ,.diologicol oo The proposed cllange>s to lbe GP '"' Included In the proposed GP doscrlbed in lhe fact sheet The executive director has iliis action for consisumc:y with th.t: goals Md policies of the Te Coastal Mall!lg"'TTenl Progrom (CM!') iwcording**to~~** Coord' ion Council (CCC) regulatiollS IUld hns <lotermhsed the! the '"'tion is c 118istenl with appllcablo CMI' goals and policies.
A copy of the proposed ame d GP and fact ·sheet are available fol' view.ing and oopying ot the Q Office of the Chief Clerk localed at the TCBQ's Aus!lo office, at I 100 Park 35 C'u<le, Building F. These documents"" ai>n nvo!lshlo tho TCilQ's 16 rogtonal Of!iC<s a,nd on tile TC.'EQ Web site at bttp:/1 .t<:eq.texas.govl....tslpuhlloipermit· tiog/WIISte/uio/Amended_UIC 01\pdf
PUBUC COMMENT AND UBL!C MBBTING. You may submit pqbUe comment! about this G in writiog or orally -at the public meet-- ing held by the TCEQ. The p ose of a publie meeting iB to provl<le

an opportlulity to submit com nt:t and to w;l: queztions .about the GP.Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman Carlos Rubinstein, Commisswner Toby Baker, Commissioner Zak Covar, Executive Director 

### TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution



### NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ON A PROPOSED REVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN



### The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will conduct a public hearing

to receive testimony regarding the proposed Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), Section no(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO,) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

The proposed SIP revision documents how the infrastructure and transport elements
listed in FCAA, Section no( a) are currently addressed in the Texas SIP. The SIP revision
would outline the requirements of FCAA, Section no(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the
Texas provisions supporting the requirements. These infrastructure requirements
include basic program elements such as enforceable emission limitations and control

measures, air quality 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. The interstate transport requirements include a discussion of N02 transport and a demonstration showing that Texas does not contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2010 NO, 

### NAAQS in another state. 

### (Non-rule Project Number
2012-016-SIP- NR)



### A public hearing on this proposal will be held in Austin on August 1, 

### 2012, at 10:00 a.m. The public hearing will be 

### held in the TCEQ Austin headquarters at 12100 Park 35 Circle, Building E, Room 2018. The hearing -will be structured for the receipt of oral or -wTitten comments by 

### interested persons. Registration will begin 30 minutes prior to the hearing. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order of

P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512·239-1000 • Internet address: www.tceq.texas.gov

### registration. There will be no open discussion during the hearing; however, TCEQ staff
members will be 

### available to discuss the proposal30 minutes before the hearing.

Persons planning to attend the hearing who have special communication or other
accommodation needs should contact Margaret Earnest, Air Quality Division, at (512)
239-4581. Requests should be 

### made as far in advance as possible.

Comments may be submitted to Margaret Earnest, MC 206, SIP Team, Chief Engineer's Office, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas
78711-3087 or faxed to (512) 239-6188. Electronic comments may be 

### submitted at 

### http:jjwwws.tceq.state.tx.us/rulesjecomments. File size restrictions may apply to

comments being submitted electronically. All comments should reference the "Proposed Federal Clean Air Act Section uo(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure
and Transport State Implementation Plan Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen
Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard" and Project Number 2012·
016-SIP-NR The comment period closes August 6, 2012. Copies of the proposed SIP
revision can be obtained from the TCEQ's Web site at 

### http: 

## I jwww.tceq .texas.govj airquality/ sipjcriteria-pollutantsjsip-no2. For additional
information regarding the proposed SIP revision, please contact Margaret Earnest, Air Quality Division, at (512) 239-4581.REVISIONS TO THE STATE OF TEXAS AIR QUALIIT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT SECTIONS no(a)(1) AND (2) INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORT

INFRASTRUCTURE DEMONSTRATION AND TRANSPORT PLAt'< FOR NITROGEN DIOXIDE

TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY P.O. BOX 13087 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087

FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT SECTIONS uo(A)(1) AND (2) INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORT STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION FOR THE 2010 NITROGEN DIOXIDE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD

PROJECT NUMBER 2012-016-SIP-NR



### Proposal June 27, 2012

### This page intentionally left blank

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This proposed revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) for nitrogen dioxide (NO.) infrastructure and transport is intended to meet the infrastructure requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §no(a)(2). States are required 

### by §no(a)(l) of the FCAA to submit SIP revisions to meet the infrastructure requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). On February 9, 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) strengthened the NO, NAAQS. The new primary one-hour NO. standard was set at 100 parts per billion (ppb). The EPA retained the annual NO, standard of 53 ppb. This proposed SIP revision documents that the Texas SIP at 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 52, Subpart SS contains all the infrastructure elements required by FCAA, §no(a)(2) for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 2010 NO, NAAQS. Because the infrastructure demonstration explains bow the existing Texas statutes and rules will allow the state to meet its obligations under the FCAA, the infrastructure SIP bas been developed as an expansion of the existing Section V: 

### Legal Authority section of Texas' SIP. This expanded section is unique to infrastructure SIP revisions that are submitted to meet the requirements of FCAA, §no(a)(t), and demonstrates that the state can provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS.

The infrastructure demonstration outlines the requirements ofFCAA, §Ho(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas statutes and rules that allow the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to meet those requirements. These requirements include basic program elements such

as enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air quality 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 detailed technical demonstration to meet the interstate transport requirements ofFCAA, §no{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 an analysis of back trajectories from monitor sites in neighboring states to show where the air parcels come from. A discussion of NO, transport is included to show that Texas does not contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2010 NO, NAAQS in another state.

ES..1

### SECTION V: LEGAL AUTHORI1Y



### 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 (New)

1. 2010 

### Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard (New)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, including 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 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) 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 1991, 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 of the TNRCC, and the responsibilities and authority of the executive director. Chapter 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 77th Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TNRCC until September 1, 2013, and changed the name of the TNRCC to the TCEQ. In 2009, the 8tst Texas Legislature, during a special session, amended section 5.014 of the Texas Water Code, 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- D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect information to enable the commission to develop 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 tbat affects their territorial jurisdiction, may bring enforcement actions, and may execute cooperative agreements witb 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 "ith the provisions of the TCAA and the rules or orders of the commission.

ii

### 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; coordinate 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 

### authorize 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 (SIP). 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 & 

### SAFE'IY CODE, Chapter 382 

### TEXAS WATER CODE
Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter A: General Provisions September 1, 2011 

### September 1, 2011



### Subchapter B: 

### Organization of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter C: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Subchapter D: General Powers and Duties of the Commission Subchapter E: Administrative Provisions for Commission Subchapter F: Executive Director (except §§5.225, 5.226, 5.227, 5.2275,5.231, 5.232, 

### and 5·236) 

### Subchapter H: Delegation of Hearings Subchapter I: Judicial Review Subcilapter J: Consolidated Permit Processing Subchapter L: 

### Emergency and Temporary Orders (§§5.514, 5·5145, 

### and 5.515 

### only) Subchapter M: Environmental Permitting Procedures 

## (§s.sss 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) Subcilapter 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 

### T Memoranda of Understanding, §§7.110 

### and 7.119 

### December 13, 1996 

### and May 2, 2002


### Chapter 19: 

### Electronic Reporting
Chapter 35: 

### Subchapters A·C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions

iii 

### March 15, 2007



### July 20, 2006

### Chapter 39: Public Notice, §§39·402(a)(1)-(6), (8), and (1o)-(12), 39-405(f)(3) and (g), (h)(1)(A)-(4), (6), (8)-(u), 

### (i) and G), 

### 39.407, 39409, 39·4H(a), (e)(1)-(4)(A)(i) and (iii), 

### (4)(B), (S)(A) and (B), and (6)-(10), (n)(A)(i) and (iii) 

### and (iv), (H)(B )-(F), (13) and (15), and (f)(t)-(8), (g) and (h), 39·418(a), (b)(2)(A), (b)(3), and (c), 39.419(e), 39-420 (c)(t)(A)-(D)(i)(I) and (II), 

### (D)(ii), (c)(2), (d)-( e), and (h), and 39.601-39.605 June 24,2010
Chapter 

## ss: 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)(l), (e), and (g) June 24, 2010
Chapter 101: General Air Quality Rules October 27, 2011
Chapter 106: Permits by Rule, Subchapter A May 15, 2011
Chapter 111: Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter February 16, 2012
Chapter 112: Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997
Chapter 113: Standards of Performance for Hazardous Air Pollutants and for Designated Facilities and Pollutants May 14, 2009
Chapter 114: Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles August 11, 2011
Chapter 115: Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds
Chapter 116: Permits for New Construction or Modification
Chapter 117: Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds
Chapter 118: Control of Air Pollution Episodes December 29, 2011

March 1, 2012
April19, 2012

March 

## s. 2000
Chapter 122: §122.122: Potential to Emit December 11, 2002
Chapter 122: §122.215: Minor Permit Revisions June3,2001

June 3, 2001 Chapter 122: §122.216: Applications for Minor Permit Revisions
Chapter 122: §122.217: Procedures for Minor Permit Revisions December 11, 2002
Chapter 122: §122.218: Minor Permit Revision Procedures for Permit Revisions Involving the Use of Economic Incentives, Marketable Permits, and Emissions Trading

iv 

### June 3, 2001

### SECflONV-C-t: INFRASTRUCTURE DEMONSTRATION FOR THE 201o 

### NITROGEN DIOXIDE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD

A. Background Section no(a)(l) 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 Standard (NAAQS). States 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 revised NAAQS. Section no(a)(2) lists the elements that these SIP submissions must contain.

On February 9, 2010, the EPA strengthened the nitrogen dioxide (NO,) NAAQS. The new primary one· hour NO, standard was set at 100 parts per billion (ppb). The EPA retained the annual NO, standard of 53 ppb. This proposed SIP revision is intended to provide an update of the §no(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 2010 NO, NAAQS within three years after the promulgation of the revised NAAQS, or by January 22, 2013. This chapter outlines FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(A) through (M) and includes various Texas provisions 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 Legal Authority section of Texas' SIP that provides additional information about how the existing statutes and rules allow Texas to meet the §no(a)(2) infrastructure requirements of the FCAA. Therefore, this SIP revision contains an expanded infrastructure section under the SIP Legal Authority. This infrastructure section is intended to satisfy the §uo(a)(l) requirement to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NA.A..QS. This infrastructure section will be updated as part of the infrastructure SIP revisions that Texas is required to submit as new or revised NAAQS are promulgated but 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, §no(a)(l) infrastructure demonstration requirement. The EPA has not yet proposed infrastructure or transport guidance for the 2010 NO, 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 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is proceeding with publication of this proposed SIP revision to ensure that there

are 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 ofFCAA, §11o(a)(2); however, this proposed SIP revision reflects the methods and means by whicll Texas meets these requirements at the time of this SIP revision. Should future federal rule changes necessitate state rnle changes, the TCEQ will act appropriately at that time.

B. Texas Statutory Authoritv 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.

v

### 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 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, 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 commission is found in Texas Water Code, Chapters 5 and 7· Chapter 5, Subchapters A through F, H through 

### J, and L, include· the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties of the commission, and the responsibilities and authority of the executive director. Chapter 5 also authorizes the commission to implement action when emergency conditions arise and to conduct bearings. Chapter 7 gives the commission enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77th Texas Legislature continued the existence of the commission until September 1, 2013, and changed the name of the TNRCC to the TCEQ. In 2009, the 8Jst 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 he 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; conduct 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 bearing 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 governments 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 orders 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 transportation 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 retirement programs.

viStatutory Authority The following statutory authority allows for the establishment and operation of the TCEQ and the adoption and implementation of all §no(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) §5.051. §5.052. §5.053. §5.054. §5.059. §5.o6o. §5.101. §5.102. §5.103. §5.104. §5.105. §5.106. §5.107. §5.115.

§5.117. §5.120. §5.133· §5.1733· §5.223. §5.230. §5.233· §5.234· §5.237· §5.501.

§5.502. §5.514. §5.515. §5.701(a) §5.702. §5.703. §5.704. §5.705. §7.002. §7.032. §7.051. §7.052. §7.053·

§7.061. §7.066. GENERAL JURISDICTION OF COMMISSION COMMISSION MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION; APPOINTMENT ELIGIBILI1Y FOR MEMBERSHIP REMOVAL OF COMMISSION MEMBERS CONFLICT OF INTEREST LOBBYIST PROHIBITION SCOPE OF SUBCHAPTER GENERAL POWERS RULES MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING GENERAL POLICY BUDGET APPROVAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES, WORK GROUPS, AND TASK FORCES PERSONS AFFECTED IN COMMISSION HEARINGS; NOTICE OF APPLICATION MANDATORY ENFORCEMENT HEARING CONSERVATION AND QUALI1Y OF ENVIRONMENT ACTIONS IN MEXICO ELECTRONIC POSTING OF INFORMATION ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT GIFTS AND GRANTS APPLICATIONS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS OPERATING FUND EMERGENCY AND TEMPORARY ORDER OR PERMIT; TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OR AMENDMENT OF PERMIT CONDITION APPLICATION FOR EMERGENCY OR TEMPORARY ORDER ORDER ISSUED UNDER AIR EMERGENCY EMERGENCY ORDER BECAUSE OF CATASTROPHE FEES PAYMENT OF FEES REQUIRED WHEN DUE FEE ADJUSTMENTS NOTICE OF CHANGE IN PAYMENT PROCEDURE NOTICE OF VIOLATION ENFORCEMENT AUTHORI1Y INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ADMINISTRATIVE PENALlY MAXIMUM PENALlY FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINATION OF PENALlY AMOUNT PAYMENT OF PENALlY; PETITION FOR REVIEW REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL

vii§7.067. §7.072. §7.073. §7.101. §7.102. §7.103. §7.105. §7.106. §7.177- §7.178. §7.179· §7.180. §7.181. §7.182.

§7.183.

§7.186. §7.187. §7.302. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS RECOVERY OF PENALTY CORRECTIVE ACTION VIOLATION MAXIMUM PENALTY COJ\'TINUING VIOLATIONS CMLSUIT RESOLUTION THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER VIOLATIONS OF CLEAN AIR ACT FAILURE TO PAY FEES UNDER CLEAN AIR ACT FALSE REPRESENTATIONS UNDER CLEAN AIR ACT FAILURE TO NOTIFY UNDER CLEAN AIR ACr IMPROPER USE OF MONITORING DEVICE RECKLESS EMISSION OF AIR CONTAMINANT AND ENDANGERMENT INTENTIONAL OR KNOWING EMISSION OF AIR CONTA..VIINANT AND KNOWING ENDANGERMENT SEPARATE OFFENSES PENALTIES GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF PERMIT

C. Texas Regulatozy 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 

### Federal Register (FR) or are pending EPA review. Rules that are relevant for each FCAA, §no(a)(2) requirement are noted below.


### FCAA, §uo(a)(a)(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 TCEQ 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 for 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 Chap. 101 Chap.106 Chap.111 Chap.112 Cbap.113 Memoranda of Understanding General Air Quality Rules Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, General Requirements Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Standards of Performance for Hazardous Air Pollutants and for Designated Facilities and Pollutants

viii

### Chap.114 Chap.115 Chap.116 Chap.117 Chap. uS Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds Control of Air Pollution Episodes

FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(B) 

### Federal Requirem!l!l! (B) provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to (i) 

### monitor, compile, and analy-ze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) 

### make such data available to the Administrator;

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. Texas 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 Chap.106 Chap.lll Chap.112 Chap. 

## us Chap.n6 Chap.117 General Air Quality Rules Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, 

### General Requirements Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds

FCAA, §11o(a)(2)(C) 

### Federal Requirement (C) include a program to provide for the enforcement 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 sources. 1

1 Texas has permitting rules for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), as required by the FCAA. The EPA has recently promulgated regulations for the permitting of greenhouse gases under the PSD program. Although Texas bas not amended or proposed amendments 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 met. Therefore, a lack of pennitting requirements in Texas rules for greenhouse gas emissions does not constitute a lack in the required infrastructure elements of §no(a)(2).

ix

### 'The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:
Chap.35
Chap.39 Chap. 55 Chap.1o1 Chap.106 Chap.112 Chap.115 Chap.u6 Chap.117 Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions; Subchapters A, 

### B, C, K Public Notice Requests for Reconsideration and Contested Case Hearings; Public Notice General Air Quality Rules Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, 

### General Requirements Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds
FCAA, §uo(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 pollutant in amounts which will 

# en 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 ll.S 

### (relating to interstate 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 §uo(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).

Texas has a SIP-approved PSD and nonattainment new source review (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 §no(a)(2)(C) previously listed). 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.

'The following chapter of 30 TAC contains rules relevant for this federal requirement:
Chap.lOl General Air Quality Rules

FCAA. §uo(a)(2)(E) 

### Federal Requirement (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 purpose) 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

X

# - implementation plan or portion thereoO, (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 implementation 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.

The TCEQ relies on the complete statutory and regulatory authority as referenced throughout this document. The TCEQ also regularly submits a legal authority with SIP revisions submitted to the EPA.

FCAA. §no(a)(2)(F) 

### Federal Requirement (F) require, as may he 

### 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 agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to 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, whicil provides data that is used in air quality modeling to help Texas prepare SIP 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:
Chap.lol Chap.106 Chap.u1 Chap.n2 Chap. us Chap. 116 Chap.117 General Air Quality Rules Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, 

### General Requirements Control of Air Pollution from Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds

FCAA. §11o(a)(2)(G) 

### Federal Requirement (G) provide for authority comparable to that in section 303 and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority;

xi

### 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 air quality information in a form readily available to the public on the TCEQ's Ioday's Texas Air Oualitv Forecast Web site (http:/ /www.tceq.texas.gov 

## I compliance/ monitoring/ air /monops/forecast_today.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.n8 Control of Air Pollution Episodes
FCAA, §uo(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 qaality standard or the availability of improved or
more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) 

### except as provided in 

### paragraph (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 additional requirements Established under this Act;

Texas Reguirement The TCEQ regularly revises the Texas SIP in response to re>isions in the NAAQS and EPA rules. See §no(a)(2)(A) above.

FCAA, §11o(a)(2)(1) 

### 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);

Texas Reguirement SIP revisions that implement the control strategies necessary to bring a nonattainment area into attainment of the NA4cQS are not required by the FCAA to 

### be submitted within three years of the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Therefore, §no( a)( I) 

### does not require this element to 

### be demonstrated as part of an infrastructure SIP submittal (73 FR 16205, at 16206).
FCAA,§llO(a)(2){J) 

### Federal Reguirement (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 visibility 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

xii 

# -

### 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.' On October 28, 2010, the EPA signed a notice withdrawing its limited approval/limited disapproval ofthe SIP revisions relating to public participation because those revisions are no longer before the EPA for review (75 FR 68291). The TCEQ consults with other state agencies, local agencies, and nongovernmental organizations, as well as with the environmental agencies of other states regarding air quality concerns. All major sources 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 from Texas facilities.

The following chapters of 30 TAC contain rules relevant for this federal requirement:
Chap.7 Chap.35 Memoranda of Understanding Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permit Conditions; Subchapters H and K General Air Quality Rules Chap.101 Chap.u6 Control of Air Pollution for New Construction or Modification
FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(K) 

### Federal Requirement (K) 

### provide for (i) the performance of such air quality modeling as the Administrator may prescribe 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 air quality modeling to the Administrator;

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 permitting program.

The following chapter of 30 TAC contains rules relevant for this federal requirement:
Chap.u6 Control of Air Pollution for New Construction or Modification
FCAA, §uo(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

1 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Revisions to Chapters 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.

xiii

### acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) 

### if the owner or operator 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 superseded 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:
Payment of Fees General Air Quality Rules Chap.12 Chap. 101 Chap.1o6 Chap.u6 Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, 

### General Requirements Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification
FCAA, §uo(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 statutory authority to meet the infrastructure requirements of FCAA, §Ho(a)(l) and (2) for the 2010 N0 2 

### NAAQS.

xiv _ 

# ..SECTION VI: CONTROL STRATEGY



### A. Introduction (No change)
B. Ozone (No change) C. Particulate Matter (No change) D. Carbon Monoxide (No change) E. Lead (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)

){\/Executive Summary
Section V: Legal Authority
Section V-A: Legal Authority

A. General

B. Applicable Law 

### TABLE OF CONfENfS

Section V-C-1: Infrastructure Demonstration for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard

A. Background

B. Texas Statutory Authority
C. Texas Regulatory Authority FCAA, §uo(a){2){A) FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(B) FCAA, §uo(a){2)(C)
FCAA, §uo(a){2)(D) FCAA, §uo(a){2)(E) FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(F)
FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(G) FCAA, §uo(a){2)(H)
FCAA, §no(a){2){1) FCAA, §uo(a){2)(J) FCAA, §no(a)(2)(K) FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(L) FCAA, §no(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 Background

xvi

# - 1.2 

### Introduction

1.3 

### Health Effects

1.4 

### Public Hearing and Comment Information

1.5 

### Social and Economic Considerations

1.6 

### Fiscal and Manpower 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 

### Modeling

2.2.1.2 

### Review and Analysis of Monitoring Data

2.2.2 

### NO, Controls Chapter 3: Future Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

xvii

### CFR
EPA
EDMS
FCAA
FIP
FR NAAQS
NO.
NOx


### NSR ppb

ppm PSD
SIP
TAC
TACB
TCAA TCEQ
TNRCC
TR LIST OF ACRONYMS



### Code of Federal Regulations
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System
Federal Clean Air Act
Federal Implementation Plan
Federal Register
National Ambient Air Quality Standard Nitrogen dioxide Nitrogen oxides
New Source Review parts per billion parts per million
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
State Implementation Plan
Texas Administrative Code
Texas Air Control Board
Texas Clean Air Act
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission)
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
Texas Register

xviiiLIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1: EPA Region 6 NO. Monitor Sites in 2010



### xixLIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1: 2008 through 2010 One-Hour N02 Design Values in EPA Region 6 Figure 2-2: 2008 through 2010 Annual N02 Design Values in EPA Region 6 Figure 2-3: One-Hour N02Design Values by County in Texas or Three-Year Averages Figure 2-4: Annual N02 Design Values by County in Texas or Three-Year Averages Figure 2-5: Samples of Seasonal Cycle of N02 Concentrations in States Neighboring Texas Figure 2-6: Back Trajectory Analysis Showing Predominant Wind Patterns from 2008 through

2010

XX

### CHAPTERt: GENERAL

1.1 

### BACKGROUND "The History of the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP)," a comprehensive overview of the SIP revisions submitted to the 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 {TCEQ1 Web site (http://www.tceq.texas.gov).

1.2 

### INTRODUCTION This proposed SIP revision for the transport of nitrogen dioxide (NO,) under the 2010 NO, National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) describes how the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) meets the requirements of §no(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA). States are required to submit a SIP revision within three years of promulgation of a 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 February 9, 2010, the EPA published the final rule to strengthen the primary NAAQS for NO,. The rule established a new one-hour NO, standard at 100 ppb. The EPA also retained the current annual average NO, standard of 53 ppb. On February 17, 2012, the EPA published in the 

### Federal Register (FR) the initial designations for the 2010 NO, NAAQS, and identified all areas in the United States as unclassifiable(attainment. According to data from 2008 through 2010,

no area in Texas monitors above the 100 ppb standard or the annual standard of 53 ppb.

In the latest NO, Risk and Exposure Assessment created during the NAAQS revision process, and as reiterated in the preamble of the final rulemaking (75 FR 6474) on the primary NAAQS for NO,, the EPA recognized "that roadway-associated exposures account for a majority of ambient exposures to peak NO, concentrations» (EPA, 2011).

For the 2010 NO, NAAQS, the EPA changed the monitoring network requirements to capture both peak NO, concentrations that occur near roadways and community-wide NO, concentrations. In Texas, two near-road NO, monitors in Dallas-Fort Worth and HoustonGalveston-Brawria must begin operating no later than January 1, 

### 2013. Two near-road NO, monitors in San Antonio and Austin-Round Rock must begin operating no later than January 1, 2014. In 2016 or 2017, once the expanded network of NO, monitors is fully deployed and three years of air quality data have been collected, the EPA intends to redesignate areas if necessary based on data from the new monitoring network.

Based on the lack of NO, nonattainment or maintenance areas in the four states surrounding Texas and EPA studies showing lack of long distance transport of roadway NO, emissions, this SIP revision demonstrates that Texas has adequately addressed the transport requirements of FCAA §no(a)(2)(D)(i).

1-1

### 1.3 HEALTH EFFECTS In 2010, the EPA established a one-hour NAAQS for NO,. To support the 2010 one-hour N0 2 

### standard, the EPA provided information indicating the annual NAAQS was not sufficient to protect individuals from health effects after a shorter exposure duration. Current scientific evidence links short-term NO, exposures, ranging from 30 minutes to 24 hours, with adverse respiratory effects including airway inflammation in healthy people and increased respiratory symptoms in people with asthma. Also, studies show a connection between breathing elevated short-term NO. concentrations and increased visits to emergency departments and hospital admissions for respiratory issues, especially asthma.

Short-term exposure to elevated NO. concentrations is of particular concern for susceptible individuals, including people with asthma, children, and the elderly.



### 1.4 PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMENT INFORMATION The commission will hold a public hearing for this proposed SIP revision at the following time and location: August 1, 2012, at 10:00 a.m., Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, 12100 Park 35 Circle, Building E, Room 201S, Austin, Texas.

Written comments will be 

### accepted via mail, fax, or through the eComments (http://www5.tceq.texas.gov /rules/ ecomments/) system. All comments should reference the "Infrastructure Demonstration and Transport Plan for the 2010 NO, National Ambient Air Quality Standard" and Project Number 2012-016-SJP-NR. Comments may be submitted to Margaret Earnest, MC 206, State Implementation Plan Team, Chief Engineer's Office, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 or faxed to (512) 239-6188. Electronic comments may be submitted through the eComments system. File size restrictions may apply to 

### comments being submitted via the eComments system. Comments must be received by August 6, 2012.

An 

### electronic version of 

### this proposed SIP revision and appendices can be found at the TCEQ's SIP Hot Topics Web page (http:/ jwww.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/Hottop.html).



### 1.5 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS Because rulemaking is not a part of this SIP revision, there are no 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 

### COORDINATION WITH LOCAL AGENCIES The TCEQ has determined that there will be no assignment to local agencies. However, preexisting 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 RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT, IMPLFMENTATION, AND ENFORCEMENI' The TCEQ is the agency delegated authority by the Texas Legislature regarding the protection of air quality in the State of Texas. Other local government entities have limited authority regarding air quality matters in the State of Texas.

1-21.9 DATAAVAILABILI'IY 

### The TCEQ affirms that it will retain all data used in the preparation of this SIP revision. All supporting documents and data are publicly available via the TCEQ's SIP Web site (http:/ jwww.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip) or are available from the TCEQ upon request.

References EPA, 2011. Near-Road NO, Monitoring Technical Assistance Document DRAFT, December 21. Accessed March 2012: http:/ jwww.epa.gov/ttnamtil/files/nearroad/2011122ltad.pdf.

1-3

### CHAPTER 2: 

### REQUIRED CONTROL STRATEGY ELEMENfS

2.1 

### BACKGROUND
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first set the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for nitrogen dioxide (N0 2 ) in 1971. The EPA chose to retain the NO. NAAQS after review in both 1985 and 1996. In 2010 EPA decided to retain theannualN0 2 NAAQS and add a new, one-hour standard at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb) (75 FR 6474). 

### All areas in the United States presently meet the annual N0 2 NAAQS of 0.053 parts per million (ppm) (53 ppb), with average annual NO. concentrations ranging from 10 ppb to 20 ppb (EPA 2012). In 2012, the EPA designated all areas in the United States as "unclassifiablejattainment" for the one-hour NO. NAAQS ( 77 FR 9532).

NO. is a highly reactive gas. Because NO. reacts to form other species, its concentrations are greater when closer to its emission source (75 FR 6474). N0 2 is primarily formed by fossil fuel combustion, lightning, biomass burning, and nitrification of soil by microorganisms. Examples of common anthropogenic NO, emission sources are internal-combustion engines; residential water heaters; industrial heaters and flares; and industrial and commercial boilers. Mobile, residential, and commercial NO, sources are usually numerous, smaller sources distributed over
a large geographic area, while industrial sources are usually large point sources, or numerous 

### small sources, clustered in a small geographic area. The EPA's 2002 National Emission Inventory reported 58% of anthropogenic NO. is emitted by mobile sources, 22% is emitted by utilities, 12% is emitted by industrial-commercial-residential combustion, and 8% is emitted by other sources.

2.2 

### CONTROL STRATEGY OVERVIEW Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) §no(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires states to submit a state implementation plan (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 nonattainment of the NAAQS for areas in other states; or
• interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state.

2.2.1 

### Significant Contribution to Nonattainment and Interference with 

### Maintenance Elements 2,2.1.1 Modeling Since no area of the United States is designated nonattainment according to the EPA action of January 20, 2012, the TCEQ will not 

### be conducting any modeling or modeling analysis for this SIP revision.

2.2.1.2 Review and Analysis of Monitoring Data In 2010, there were 42 regulatory NO. monitors 

### in Texas, 10 in New Mexico, four in Oklaltoma, two in Arkansas, and 12 in Louisiana. A list of these monitors is found in Table 2-1: 

### EPA Region 6 NO, 

### Monitor Sites in 2010. These monitors are located primarily in urban areas and along highways as seen in Fignre 2-1: 2008 

### through 2010 

### One-Hour NO, 

### Design Values in EPA 

### Region6.

2-1Table 2-1: EPA Region 6 NO. Monitor Sites in 2010 One-Hour Annual Design Value Design Value

2008-2010 2008-2010 AIRS State County Site Name (ppb) (ppb}
050350005 Arkansas Crittenden Marion 47 10 051190007 Arkansas Pulaski Parr 44 10 220050004 Louisiana Ascension Dutchtown 42 8 220190008 Louisiana Calcasieu Westlake 35 7 220330003 Louisiana East Baton Rouge l5U 53 11 220330009 Louisiana East Baton Rouge Capitol 54 13 220330013 Louisiana East Baton Rouge Pride 17 3 220331001 Louisiana East Baton Rouge Baker 36 6 220470007 louisiana lberville Grosse Tete 27 4 220470009 louisiana lberville Bayou Plaquemine 28 4 220470012 louisiana lberville Carville 37 7 220511001 louisiana Jefferson Kenner 48 8 220630002 Louisiana livingston French Settlement 19 3 221210001 louisiana west Baton Rouge Port Allen 53 11 350010023 New Mexico Bernalillo Del Norte High School 55 12 350130021 New Mexico Dona Ana Sunland Park 53 9 350130022 New Mexico Dona Ana Santa Teresa International Blvd 43 5 350151005 New Mexico Eddy Carlsbad 22 2 350250008 New Mexico Lea Hobbs-Jefferson 41 6 350290003 New Mexico luna luna 30 5 350450009 New Mexico San Juan Deming 12 350450018 New Mexico San Juan Navajo lake 38 10 350451005 New Mexico SanJuan San Juan Substation 37 9 350451233 New Mexico San Juan Dine College, GIS lab 7 400019009 Oklahoma Adair Stilwell 3 401090033 Oklahoma Oklahoma OKC Central 49 9 401091037 Oklahoma Oklahoma OKC North 39 7 401431127 Oklahoma Tulsa North Tulsa 8 480290052 Texas Bexar Camp Bullis CAMS 58 26 4 480290059 Texas Bexar Calaveras lake CAMS 59 34 4 480391004 Texas Brazoria Manvel Croix Park 36 5 480391016 Texas Brazoria lake Jackson 22 3 481130069 Texas Dallas Dallas Hinton 55 13 481130075 Texas Dallas Dallas North #2 45 10 481130087 Texas Dallas Dallas Redbird Airport Executive 9 481210034 Texas Denton Denton Airport SOuth 35 6 481390016 Texas Ellis Midlothian OFW 44 7 481391044 Texas Ellis Italy CAMS 1044 30 4 481410037 Texas El Paso El Paso UTEP 60 14 481410044 Texas El Paso El Paso Chamizal 60 14 481410055 Texas EIPaso Ascarate Park 63 17 481671034 Texas Galveston Galveston 99th Street 33 4 481830001 Texas Gregg Longview 36 7 482010024 Texas Harris Houston Aldine 44 9 482010026 Texas Harris Channelview 59 10 482010029 Texas Harris NW Harris County 31 5

2-2One-Hour Annual Design Value Design Value

2008-2010 2008-2010 AIRS State Coun!X Site Name (ppb) (ppb)
482010047 Texas Harris Lang Rd 56 13 482010055 Texas Harris Bayland Park 45 9 482010075 Texas Harris Texas Ave 56 15 482010416 Texas Harris Park Place 55 12 482011015 Texas Harris Lynchburg Ferry 9 482011034 Texas Harris Houston East 54 14 482011035 Texas Harris Clinton Drive 50 14 482011039 Texas Harris Deer Park #2 42 7 482011050 Texas Harris Seabrook Friendship Park 35 5 482030002 Texas Harrison Karnack 21 4 482311006 Texas Hunt Greenville 30 5 482450009 Texas Jefferson Beaumont Downtown 40 8 482450022 Texas Jefferson Hamshire 28 4 482451035 Texas Jefferson Nederland HS 33 5 482570005 Texas Kaufman Kaufman 30 4 483091037 Texas Mclennan Waco Mazanec 29 3 483390078 Texas Montgomery Conroe Relocated 35 5 483491051 Texas Navarro Corsicana Airport 4 483611001 Texas Orange West Orange 33 5 484230007 Texas Smith Tyler Airport Relocated 21 4 484391002 Texas Tarrant Fort Worth Northwest 54 10 484393009 Texas Tarrant Grapevine Fairway 40 8 484393011 Texas Tarrant Arlington Municipal Airport 40 9 484530020 Texas Travis Austin Audubon Society CAMS 38 22 3

2-3

### The current monitor network is designed to monitor air representative of neighborhood or area scale in accordance with historical40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D requirements rather than to capture peak N02 concentrations emitted by mobile sources. The TCEQ expects to add nearroad monitors in the Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, San Antonio, and AustinRound Rock areas, as mandated by the new federal monitoring requirements. As 

### mentioned in the 2010 N02 NAAQS
, concentrations fall quickly with distance from roadways and rapidly reach the same concentration shown by current area monitors
, suggesting that little to no transport of N02 occurs

. According to EPA studies, peak N02 concentrations are located on or immediately adjacent to high traffic roads. The EPA studies examined N02 concentrations at less than 20 meters , between 20 and 100 meters , and greater than 100 meters (EPA, 2008). Using the studies
, the EPA determined the greatest risk was closer to the roadways. The new near-road monitoring · network places monitors within 50 meters of the roadway

. Figure 2-1 also indicates that all monitor sites in EPA Region 6 are below the one-hour N02 NAAQS. The highest concentrations measured are located near urban and/or industrial areas. Monitors in less urban areas measured lower concentrations. Monitoring sites located near the northern and eastern Texas border have lower concentrations than those in city 

### centers

.



# . ..

r

. ;....



## •

H02 OHign V.luo 2010 Ono 110

.. DV I PPI> I

I.M• W\MI II 0
a**ID·~O** • ao-•ro

•**48D·~D**
• ,.0·1!' c e MD....si!Oov• 

### Figure 2-1: 2008 

### through 2010 

### One-Hour N02 

### Design Values in EPA Region 6

2-4

### Figure 2-2:2008 

### through 2010AnnualN02Design Values in EPA Region 6 shows that all 

### N02 monitors in Texas and neighboring states are below the 2010 

### annual 

### N02 NAAQS, which is 53 ppb. Monitors near urban areas have higher annual design values than monitors in less urban

areas and along the borders of Texas

. The highest annual 

### N02 design value measured in EPA Region 6 was 17 ppb at Ascarate Park CAMS 37 in El Paso.



### •• •



## •

• •

• 

# . - -

• • 

## •

LAgend N02 Dooign V.h10 2010**An"""IDV~ I**  :...W t \!\11")1

!I • 10



### Figure 2-2: 2008 

### through 2010 

### Annual N02 

### Design Values in EPA Region 6

2-5Figure 2-3: One-Hour N02 Design Values by County in Texas or Three- Year Averages shows trends in one-hour N02 design values for all counties in Texas monitoring N02 concentrations. All counties are below the 2010 N02 NAAQS. All areas also show slight downward trends or flat trends. No area exhibits an increase in monitored N02 concentrations. Large fluctuations in the B exa r county trend are due to data availability from the San Antonio Downtown C27 monitor. The monitor did not have valid one-hour design values in 2003 through 2005. In 2002 and 2006 through 2009
, this monitor had the highest design value in Bexar County.

110 ppb

100

90

80

70 

# -

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 2000 One-Ho u r N0 2 Design Values by County in Texas

2010 One

- Hour N0 2 NAAQS**Bexar**

-.. Ellis

_._ Hunt Orange ...,. Brazoria

-+- Galve s ton
Jefferson
Smith Dallas

- Gregg

K aufman

Tarrant



# ....**--------"""w--- ---~-** **~ ~**  /
,.....___ •**---__;; ~**  

### .... ;:::::: *

..

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006**Denton** -- EI Pa s o
Harris**Harrison** Mclennan Montgomery

Travis

' I(



## ------ *

* Design Value s are fr o m EPA's AQS

.

2007 2008 2009 2010 Figure 2-3: One-Hour N02 Design Values by County in Texas or Three-Year Averages

2-6.... 

# , Figure 

### 2-4: 

### Annual 

### N02 Design Values by County in Texas or Three- 

### Year Averages shows annual design value trends for all counties in Texas monitoring N02. 

### Annual design values also have slight downward or flat trends for all areas in the state. The highest design values in 2010


### were in El Paso, Harris, and Dallas counties. These counties tend to be impacted primarily by N02 

### emitted by on-road mobile sources. Monitors located in more rural areas tend to show lower N02 

### concentrations. The impact low N02 

### concentrations measured throughout Texas would have on other states would be insignificant.

Annual N0 2 Design Values by County in Texas
55 ppb

50 2010 Annual N0 2 NAAQS = 53ppb

45 -.. s exa r _. Brazoria +- Dallas**~Denton** ....., EIPaso

..... Ellis

40

- Galveston

- Gregg Harris
-..Harrison -e-Hunt Jefferson
35 Kaufman Marion Mclennan Montgomery Navarro Orange
30 Smith Tarrant Travis

25

•oesian Values are from EPA's AQS. 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010


### Figure 2-4: Annual N02 

### Design Values by County in Texas or Three-Year Averages

N0 2 

### monthly trends follow a similar pattern for most monitors in all of EPA Region 6. Trends in general show higher values in cooler months and lower values in warmer months. This is true for all calculated statistics, except the global maximum, or maximum over all monitors, which

can vary greatly.

The most likely reason for this pattern is that in cooler months the mixing layer, or layer of wellmixed ambient air near the surface, is shallow, which traps the N02 

### in a smaller volume of air

near the surface. In contrast, the mixing layer is deep during warmer months, diluting N02 

### concentrations in a larger volume of air. Another important reason for this pattern, at least for states or regions near the Gulf of Mexico, is that in summer months, winds are predominantly out of the Gulf of Mexico.

2-7Examination of NO, patterns by month shows that typically December and January record the highest concentrations and June and July the lowest concentrations. Monitors where concentrations are low to begin with do not show a trend, while monitors with higher concentrations exhibit a well defined pattern. Representative examples of higher concentrations based on averages from 2008 through 2010 are shown in Figure 2-5: 

### Samples of Seasonal Cycle of NO, Concentrations in States Neighboring Texas.

OK (4010910371 NM (31100100231

lQ i"l

D !'l D**~ ~** **~ ~**  

# "' !!! 

# "' 1\l 0 0 z z: 2 !!!

Jan Mar May Jul Sep**~""** Jan M., May Jul Sop N""

Month MO!>Ih

LA (2212100011 AR 1061190007)

D l'l D fl**~ ~** **~ ~**  

# "' fl 

# "' !£ 0 0 z z
\!1 :;!

Jan Mar May Jul Sop NOY Jan Mar May Jul Sop N<W

Month Month 

### Figure 2-5: Samples of Seasonal Cycle of NOz Concentrations in States Neighboring 

### Texas (Note: concentrations shown are monthly median of one-hour NO, standard)

To assess possible impacta of transported NO, on a neighboring state, back trajectory analysis

was conducted to identify the most likely paths (mean-trajectory-path), if any, of possible NO, transport. There are some assumptions associated with this procedure. For example, there is no link between a mean-trajectory-path and an NO, concentration. A mean-trajectory-path only provides an indication; much more analysis is needed to confirm an impact.

To construct back trajectories, the Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPUT) 

### (http: //ready.arl.noaa.gov /HYSPLIT.php) model version 4, developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, was employed. Representative monitors

were chosen from states adjacent to Texas. For each of these monitors, cluster analysis was performed to find the mean-trajectory-path. This mean-trajectory-path represents the "average" of a group of trajectories from which air currents traveled from other places to a representative monitor. This method quantifies the directions and frequency of air traveling to the monitor, but cannot identify precise routes of travel of airborne particles.

Details of HYSPLIT parameters are as follows: trajectories were created at the receptor site for the approximate hour of peak NO, for 

### all trajectories, which is defined as 7:00 a.m. 

### Local Standard Time. Trajectory height was set to Soo meters to ensure transport within the mixing layer. Each trajectory was 12 hours 

### in duration and the Emissions and Dispersion Modeling

2-8

### System, or EDAS-4KM, meteorological data sets were used. Trajectories were created for days at

or above the goth percentile of NO, at the receptor site. Results suggest that Oklahoma would be most likely to be affected by air from Texas, however, very little if any directly emitted NO, would be expected to travel from the closest major urban source in Texas to the nearest Oklahoma metropolitan area due to its high reactivity. Two likely transport paths were identified by the clustering procedure, which accounted for 22% 

### of the 224 

### trajectories ending in Oklahoma. Louisiana is next likely to be affected by Texas, though to a much lesser degree, accounting for 14% 

### of 216 

### total trajectories ending in Louisiana. New Mexico and Arkansas do not show transport paths from Texas.

Of particular interest due to its close proximity to Texas, the New Mexico cluster shows air being drawn from Mexico (see path 2 

### in panel3 of Figure 2-6: 

### Back Trajectory Analysis Showing Predominant Wind Patterns from 2008 

### through 2010). 

### However, since this path represents the "average path," there are some trajectories grouped into this cluster that emanate from Texas, though the majority are from Mexico. Although the clusters show possible evidence of transport, this analysis does not confirm any link between NO, generated beyond the monitor and the measured NO, at the monitor.

Based on this analysis, there are some days where air is transported from Texas to areas in neighboring states that have monitors. However, it is unlikely that significant amounts of NO,

are being transported in the air masses that pass from Texas into neighboring states. The reactivity of NO, coupled with the distance from major Texas areas of NO, emissions make it highly unlikely that Texas NO, emissions significantly impact other states. In fact, the EPA has found that peak NO, concentrations are found on roadways. The concentrations decrease rapidly with distance from roads. Finally, states surrounding Texas are measuring attainment of the NO, NAAQS; therefore, Texas sources are not contributing to an exceedance of the NAAQS in neighboring states.

2-91/C

2
, ...



## Oklahoma Louisiana

l 41

) 21 

## New Mexico 

# j.__l

__ A

_ r

_ ka

_

ns

_

as

.___
Figure 2-6: 

### Back**Tr~ectory** 

### Analysis Showing Predominant Wind Patterns from
2008 

### through 2010

2.2.2 NOz 

### Controls Since Texas is attaining the N02 NAAQS, no rules specific to N02 have been promulgated.



### References EPA, 2008. Risk and Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of the N02 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard. EPA-4S2/R-o8-oo8a. November. Accessed March 2012: http: 

## I I epa.gov /ttn/naaqs/ standards/ nox/ data/ 20081121_N02_REA_final. pdf.

EPA, 2010. 40 CFR Parts so and 

### sB. Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule. 

### Federal Register, Vol. 7S, No. 26, February 9. Accessed March 2012: http:/ /www.epa

. gov /ttn/naaqs/ standards/nox/fr /20100209. pdf.

EPA, 2012. Nitrogen Dioxide: Basic Information. Accessed March 2012: http:/ /www.epa.gov 

## I airquality /nitrogenoxidesjbasic.html.



### Federal Register, 2012. 40 CFR Parts so and 

### sB. Air Quality Designations for the 2010 Primary Nitrogen Dioxide (N02) National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Vol. 77, No. 33, February 17.

2-10

### Accessed March 2012: http:/ jwww.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-02-17/pdf/2012- 3150.pdf#page=l.

2-11

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

Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §no(a)(l) requires states to submit state implementation plans within three years after the promulgation of new or revised NAAQS to meet the requirements of FCAA, §no(a)(2), including FCAA, §no(a)(2)(D)(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.

3-1

# WRITTEN AND ORAL TESTIMONYReference Number

W-1 INDEX OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY

Submitted by

Guy Donaldson, United States Environmental Protection Agency

### UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION6

Ms, Margaret Earnest MC 206, State Implementation Plan Team Chief Engineer's Office Texas Commission on Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087 Austin, TX 78711-3087

Re: Project Number 2012-016-SIP-NR

Dear Ms. Earnest: 1,l45 HQSS**,~VENUE** SUITE 12:;n DALLAS, TX 75202·2733


### AUG

- 6 21JI1 

# W-1

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on proposed State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision "Infrastructure Demonstration and Transport Plan for the 20 l 0**~0 2**  National Ambient Air Quality Standard," Project Number 2012-016-SIP-NR dated June 27, 2012. The EPA appreciates the efforts of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to meet this important Clean Air Act requirement. The EPA Region 6 offers the following comments on the proposed SIP revision:

Comment 1:

Footnote I on Page IX in Section V-C-1: Infrastructure Demonstration for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Qoality Standard of the proposal, states the following:

"Texas has permitting rules for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), as required by the FCAA. 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 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 mel. Therefore, a Jack of permitting requirements in Texas rules for greenhouse gas emissions does not constitute a lack in the required infrastructure elements of §IIO(a)(2)".

As TCEQ notes, the EPA has recently promulgated regulations for the permitting of greenhouse gases under the PSD program, Because PSD under the Act applies to each newly regulated pollutant, including non-NAAQS pollutants, a state's PSD SIP must also apply permitting requirements tor greenhouse gas emissions tor the EPA to determine the PSD related infrastructure elements of llO(a)(2)

as sufficient.

Comment 2:

As shown on Pages 2-2 and 2-3 of the proposal, the EPA appreciates the TCEQ providing the one-hour and annual design values for years 2008 through 20 I 0 for all NOl monitoring sites in the EPA Region 6. None of the monitors show nonattainment and none are greater than approximately 70 percent of the standard. As a result, the EPA believes it is unlikely that emissions from Texas are contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the standard in other States 

### based on the available monitoring data. The conclusion on Page 2-9 that states "Texas sources are not contributing to an lnt.:n1€1 Aad;ess \URLJ**[l.t_!Q_·Jw.,..~;' qo·;~•.?:..:t!l!~**  Hecydsd'8•iK.-';.u·!ai;h;'! P·intt-d 'Nl!h**V~e':tbk·** ()J! Bilsed l'"'k" ')f! R.90ycled Pape; t_f,.-ilmlNJtn**30~, P:_J,.,,,-rru:>_,n~nn** exceedance of the NAAQS in neighboring states," however, is not completely sufficient. Section II 0(a)(2)(D}(i) of the Clean Air Act provides for infrastructure SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment, 

### or inlerfering wilh 

### mairuenance, of the NAAQS in another state. Therefore, based upon the design value data presented, we suggest that you also add "or interfering with maintenance" to that conclusion.

Comment 3:

We also appreciate the TCEQ's efforts to provide a back trajectory technical analysis in the proposal. The EPA is still finalizing guidance for the N02 infrastructure SIP, so we did not conduct a detailed technical review, but we do note a few concerns with the Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) back trajectory and cluster analysis.

• TCEQ indicated the highest N02 concentrations occur in colder periods with low mix layers, but used an 800 m start point for the back trajectories which is likely near or above the mix/boundary layer at the 7 a.m. start times for many of the back trajectories. General back trajectory guidance is to use a start height between the ground and the mid-point of the mix/boundary layer, especially when assessing transport to ground based monitor locations. Winds near and/or above the boundary layer are stronger and likely blowing in different directions than winds nearer the surface, thus starting the back trajectory in this regime would likely lead to errors. Therefore, a much lower start height is needed if back trajectories are included.

• Clustering analysis can be very sensitive to the set-up/start parameters and can lead to misleading results without comparison to the original back trajectories. For a complete clustering analysis, output plots from all the back trajectories and more documentation on how the clustering analysis was conducted is needed.

Again, we did not conduct a detailed review of the back trajectory and cluster analysis and our concerns with the back trajectory and cluster analysis do not change our overall conclusion, as discussed above, that it is unlikely that emissions from Texas are contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the standard.

Comment4:

Section 110(a}(2)(D)(ii) of the Clean Air Act (Act) requires compliance with Sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating 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. Please discuss how the state complies with Section 115 of tbe Act.

Section 126(a) of the Act requires new or modified sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from such sources. Section 126(b) of the Act affects a state only if the Administrator has been petitioned to make a finding of violation that is related lo either interstate transport or international transport of emissions from sources in the state. Please discuss how the state complies with Section 126 of the Act.

### Comment 5:

We appreciate the TCEQ's discussion of Section IIO(a){2)(E) requirements on pages 10-11 

### of this proposal. However, we 

### note while the TCEQ addresses subsections (i) 

### and (iii) of this section, the TCEQ's proposal does not specifically address subsection (ii). 

### l!O{a)(2)(E)(ii) requires a state to comply with the requirements of Section 128 of the Act with respect to State boards. Section 128 in tum explicitly requires that a SIP contain particular requirements pertaining to conflict of interests for State boards. Please provide a discussion of bow Texas's SIP complies with the conflict of interest provisions of Section 128 to therefore satisfy the infrastructure SIP requirements of Section 11 O(a)(2)(E)(ii).

Comment6:

On Page 

### X of the proposal addressing Section IIO(a)(2)(0) ofthe Act, we note that the TCEQ 

### cross references their discussion on Section 11 O(a )(2)( C) and relevant rules for meeting federal requirements. Please provide a more comprehensive listing of relevant rules in Chapter 30 ofT AC that address the federal requirements in Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(ll). As written, the TCEQ states that Chapter 10 I 

### General Air Quality Rules of 30 TAC is the only relevant rule for meeting the requirements of Section II 

### 0(a)(2)(D)(i).

Comment 7


### Regarding Section 11 O(a){2)(H), TCEQ explains it regularly revises the Texas SIP in response to revisions in the N AAQS and the EPA rules, and proceeds to cross reference its discussion on Section 110(a)(2)(A). As 

### IIO(a)(2}(H) requires that a state have the authority to revise the SIP as necessary, we recommend the TCEQ additionally provide discussion of and reference to such authority that allows the TCEQ to make the regular revisions as stated.

Thank you for your efforts to meet this important Clean Air Act requirement We offer our assistance during the SIP revision process. If 

### you have any questions or need additional clarification, please contact 

### Mr. John Walser of my staff at 214-665-7128. Please let us know how we may be of further assistance.
Sincerely yours,

Guy Donaldson Chief Air Planning SectionINDEX OF ORAL TESTIMONY

NO ORAL TESTIMONY WAS RECEIVED PERTAINING TO THIS SIP REVISION.

### Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Public Hearing Registration August 1, 2012 10:00 AM

Proposed Federal Clean Air Act §110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard (Project No. 2012-016-SIP-NR)

Name (Please Print)

I Representing

J 

## v 

# := t T 

## v · ,.

## ~[ i/ i 

## c 7 f) 

## J/;J'! I

Page 3 of4 Presenting Oral Testimony? {Circle One)

Yes

# ~**~**

Yes r(No

### ~

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

## Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Public Hearing Registration August 1, 2012 10:00 AM

Proposed Federal Clean Air Act §110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard (Project No. 2012-016-SlP-NR)

Name Presenting Oral
(Please Print) Representing Testimony? (Circle One)

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

.

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Page 4of4

### TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

HEARING OFFICER REPORT



### I am the hearing officer assigned to conduct the public hearing regarding proposed Federal Clean Air Act, Section IIO(a)(l) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard. These infrastructure requirements include basic program elements such as enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air quality 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. The interstate transport requirements include a discussion of nitrogen dioxide transport and a demonstration showing that Texas does
not contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 20 I 0 nitrogen dioxide national ambient air quality standard in another state (Non-rule Project Number 2012-016-SIP-NR).

A public hearing was scheduled for August I, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. and was held at the TCEQ Austin headquarters at 12100 Park 35 Circle, Building E, Room 201 S.

At I 0:00 a.m., the room was open, TCEQ staff and a court reporter were present and ready to open the hearing for public comment. After waiting for 15 minutes, no one had arrived to make comments on the record. Therefore, the public hearing was not formally opened for comment and no transcript was prepared.

· Margaret(B

_August 1, 2012

_______**~** 

### Date signed

# EVALUATION OF TESTIMONY

# 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- 0862

- SIP Date : October 26, 2012

Subject: Commission Approval for Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA)

, §110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure and Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2 

### ) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
Infrastructure and Transport SIP Revision for 2010 NO 2 

### NAAQS Non

- rule Project No. 2012

- 016

- SIP

- NR Background and reason(s) for the SIP revision : On February 9, 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tightened the NAAQS for NO 2


### . The new primary one

- hour NO 2 

### standard was set at 100 parts per billion (ppb) ; there was no previous one

- hour NO 2 

### standard. The EPA retained the annual NO 2 

### standard of 0.053 parts per million (ppm) (53 ppb ); the annual NO 2 

### standard has been o.053 ppm since 1971

. According to data from 2008 through 2010, no area in Texas monitors above the 100 ppb standard or the annual standard of 0.053 ppm. 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 promulga tion of any new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists the elements that the new SIP submissions must contain including the requirement to ensure that emissions within a state will not contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other state for the NAAQS.
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 for NO 2 

### . The SIP revision will outline 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, air quality monitoring and modeling, a permitting program, adequate fun ding and personnel, authority under state law to carry out the plan, emissions reporting, emergency powers, public participation, and fee collection.

### Commissioners Page 2 October 26, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12- 0862

- SIP

The SIP revision will also include a technical demonstration to support that Texas meets the interstate transport requirements of § 110(a)(2) of the FCAA. Pursuant to FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), this SIP revision must contain several elements that provide supporting information d emonstrating that Texas is:

• not contributing significantly to nonattainment of the 2010 NO 2 

### NAAQS for areas in other states; and

• not interfering with the maintenance of the 2010 NO 2 

### 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 for NO 2 

### . The SIP revision will outline the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas prov isions supporting the requirements.
C.) Additional staff recommendations that are not required by federal rule or state statute: None
Statutory authority: The authority to adopt this SIP revision is derived from Texas Health and Safety Code, Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), §382.002, which provides that the policy and purpose of the TCAA is to safeguard the state’s air resources from pollution; TCAA, §382.011, which authorizes the commission to control the quality of the state’s air; TCAA, §382.012, which

au thorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive plan for the control of the state’s air; and Texas Water Code

, §5.02, General Powers, and §5.013, General Jurisdiction of the Commission.

The FCAA, 42 USC §§7401, et seq ., requires states to submit SIP revisions that specify the manner in which the NAAQS will be achieved and maintained within each air quality control region of the state. Additionally, the specific requirements for the 2010 NO 2 

### NAAQS were published in the February 9, 2010 , issue of the Federal Register ( 75 FR 6474 ).

Effect on the:
A.) Regulated community: The SIP revision will have no effect on the regulated community.
B.) Public: None
C.) Agency programs: This SIP revision will have no new effect on agency programs.

### Commissioners Page 3 October 26, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12- 0862

- SIP

Stakeholder meetings: The SIP revision went through a public review and comment period. The public comment period was from June 29, 2012 through August 6, 2012. The commission offered a public hearing for the proposed SIP revision on August 1, 2012

, at the TCEQ headquarters in Austin. A question and answer session was held 30 minutes prior to the meeting. The hearing was not officially opened because no party indicated a desire to give comment.

Public comment: The EPA was the only commenter and a brief summary follows

.
• The EPA agreed that Texas did not interfere with NAAQS attainment or maintenance in another state.

• The EPA requested a height change on the Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) model back trajectories.

• The EPA requested clarification on how Texas met the FCAA , § 126 ( consultation with adjacent states) and § 128 (conflict of interest)

.
• The EPA requested more statutory detail on the state’s authority to make regular SIP revisions

.
• The EPA disagreed with Texas’ position on greenhouse gases (GHG) under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. Significant changes from proposal : Several changes were made i n response to the EPA’s comments: the HYSPLIT back trajectory height was lowered and rerun per the EPA ’s recommendation , and HYSPLIT results for each adjacent state w ere added as A ppendix A so the EPA and the public could review

. Potential controversial c oncerns and legislative interest : EPA Disapproval Notices: The EPA has published various proposed disapproval notices for Texas’ air permitting programs, and these disapprovals have not yet been fully resolved. Texas has adopted new rules that address most of these notices

. Since the EPA has not acted on the rules, it is unclear whether the infrastructure submittal w ill be fully approvable or not.
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 because those revisions are no longer before the EPA for review. Despite outstanding issues with aspects of Texas’ minor NSR permitting program, Texas has a robust, SIP

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

### Commissioners Page 4 October 26, 2012

Re: Docket No. 20 12- 0862

- SIP

EPA Action on Previous Texas Infrastructure Submittals: 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 199 7 and 2006 fine particulate matter (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

- ho ur 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 GHG emissions. The EPA partially approved and partially disapproved the Texas SIP revisions to address PSD 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 permitting 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
What are the consequences if this SIP revision does not go forward ? A re there alternatives to this SIP revision ? The NO 2 

### infrastructure and transport SIP revision is required by §110(a) of the FCAA. If a SIP revision is not submitted, the EPA would have an obligation to promulgate a federal implementation plan for Texas.
Key points in the adoption SIP revision schedule: Due date to EPA : January 22, 2013
Agency contacts: Margaret Earnest, SIP Project Manager, 239

- 4581, Air Quality Division Amy Browning, Environmental Law Division, 239

- 0891 Terry Salem, Environmental Law Division, 239

- 0469

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 Margaret Earnest

### Page 1 of 6 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED CONCERNING T HE INFRASTRUCTURE AND T RANSPORT STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) REVISION FOR THE 2010 NITROGEN DIOXID E (NO 2 ) NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD (NAAQS)

PROPOSED JUNE 27 , 201 2 ADOPTED N OVEMBER 14 , 2012

The TCEQ offered a public hearing

, which no one attended

, for the proposed Infrastructure and Transport SIP Revision for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS in Austin , Texas, on August 1 , 201 2, at 10 :0 0

a.m. During the comment period, which closed on August 6 , 201 2, the commission received written comments from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

.
Comments related to the proposed Infrastructure and Transport SIP Revision for the 2010 NO 2 NA AQS (Project No. 201 2-0 16

- SIP

- NR) are incorporated in the following Response to Comments.

TEXAS NOT INTERFERING WITH NAAQS IN OTHER STATE S The EPA appreciated that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) provided the

one

- hour and annual design values for years 2008 through 2010 for all NO 2 monitoring sites in the EPA Region 6, which includes Texas and four perimeter states. The EPA agreed with the TCEQ’s assessment that none of the monitors show nonattainment and none are greater than approximately 70% of the standard. The EPA also agreed that it is unlikely that emissions from Texas are contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the standard in other states based on the available monitoring data but suggested additional language to clarify that the TCEQ’s analysis shows that Texas does not interfere with maintenance in any other state.
The TCEQ agrees with EPA that Texas is not contributing significantly to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state. The TCEQ has incorporated the EPA’s s uggested language.

BACK TRAJECTORY TECH NICAL ANALYSIS The EPA appreciated the TCEQ's efforts to provide a back trajectory technical analysis in the proposal but commented it had a few concerns with the Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) back trajectory and cluster analysis.
The EPA suggested a much lower start height than 800 meters is needed if back trajectories are included.
The TCEQ appreciates the comment and reran the trajectories at 300 meters so the trajectory was closer to the center of the mixing layer as recommended and still came up with similar results. Details on the results of the revised HYSPLIT analysis can be found in Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1.2: Review and Analysis of Monitoring Data and Appendix A: Back Traje ctory Clusters ).

### Page 2 of 6 The EPA commented that clustering analysis can be very sensitive to the set

- up/start parameters, which can cause misleading results without comparison to the original back trajectories. For a complete clustering analysis, the EPA suggested output plots from all the back trajectories and more documentation on how the clustering analysis was conducted.
The TCEQ included the EPA’s suggested output plots from all t he back trajectories in Appendix A.
GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) PERMITTING The EPA com mented that it recently promulgated regulations for GHG permitting under the PSD program, and that because PSD under the Federal Clean Air Act ( FCAA ) applies to each newly regulated pollutant, including non

- NAAQS pollutants, a state's PSD SIP must also apply permitting requirements for GHG emissions for the EPA to determine the PSD related infrastructure elements of § 110(a)(2) as sufficient.
The infrastructure SIP demonstrations are a requirement of §110(a)(1) that specifically requires a state to submit a plan demonstrating that a state has all the required elements to ensure that a NAAQS can be implemented, maintained, and enforced. The EPA has failed to offer any rationale for why the implementation of GHG permitting is necessary or required for the imple mentation, maintenance, or enforcement of the NO 2 NAAQS. In the absence of such a requirement, a GHG PSD permitting program is not an applicable requirement that is required under §110. Therefore, the commission disagrees that Texas is required to have an approved GHG PSD permitting program in place to have a SIP revision that is complete for the purposes of attaining and maintaining the NO 2 NAAQS. Furthermore, GHG PSD permitting in Texas is currently under the control of the EPA through a federal implement ation plan (FIP) specifically imposed by the EPA to ensure 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 SIP should be considered complete and approvable. Lastly , Texas is currently litigating 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 litigation. No changes were made to the SIP revision in response to this comment.

COMPLIANCE WITH FCAA The EPA commented that §110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the FCAA requires compliance with §115 of the FCAA , relating 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 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 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 state are endangering public health or welfare in Mex ico. In the

### Page 3 of 6 absence of such a finding and notification, Texas has no obligations under §115. Should Texas receive such a finding from 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 necessary. No changes were made to the SIP revision in response to this comment.
The EPA commented that §126(a) of the FCAA requi res 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 interstate 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 s tate 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 ozone and PM 2.5 infrastructure and transport SIP, Docket ID EPA

- R06 -OAR- 2008

- 0638, page 16:
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 Titl e 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 prohibition of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of thi s 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 of 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

### Page 4 of 6 maintaining any NAAQS, including ozone, PM 2.5 , or NO 2
. As noted previous ly

, Texas is currently litigating 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.
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 statutory requirements for the eligibility and sel ection 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 infrastructure 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 eligi bility to serve as commissioner is subject to S ection 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 represent 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 executive agency with similar powers be adeq uately 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 that address Section 128 of the FCAA are fou nd 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 St andards 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 approved in 1981. We are proposing that the Te xas SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E).
No changes were made to the SIP revision in response to this comment.

### Page 5 of 6 CHAPTER 30 TEXAS ADM INISTRATIVE CODE (TA C) RULES FOR AD DRESSING FCAA, §110( a )(2)(D)( i) The EPA commented that on page x of the pro posal 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 re quirements in §110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). As written, the TCEQ states that Chapter 101

, General Air Quality Rules of 30 TAC is the only relevant rule for meeting the requirements.
The commission confirms that the General Air Quality Rules in 30 TAC Chapter 101

a re the relevant rules for meeting the FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirement that the SIP include adequate provisions to prohibit emissions from Texas from contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the standard in other states. No rules specific to NO 2 have been promulgated because Texas is attaining the NO 2 NAAQS and, as the EPA noted in its comments on this SIP revision, available monitoring indicates that emissions from Texas are not contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the standard in other states. As discussed elsewhere in this SIP revision, the commission has the statutory and regulatory authority to implement and enforce the NAAQS. Therefore, no changes were made in response to this comment.
AUTHORITY OF TCEQ TO REVISE THE T EXAS SIP The EPA commented that regarding §110(a)(2)(H), the TCEQ explained 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 statutory and regulatory authority to revise its SIP as necessary is broadly contained within the statutes and rules referenced throughout this infrastructure SIP revision. Furthermore, the EPA has previously approved Texas’ infrastructure SIP for 1997 ozone and PM 2.5 and 2006 PM 2.5 for section 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, and the TCEQ’s authority to revise Texas’ SIP to address any future problems with NO 2 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 September 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 requires that the TCEQ “advise, cons ult, 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 respond

### Page 6 of 6 to EPA SIP calls. We are propos ing 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 EPA 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 State has acknowledged that its implementation plan is subject to revision is considered immaterial.” No chan ges were made to the SIP revision in response to this comment.

# STAFF RECOMMENDATIONSREVISIONS 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 NITROGEN DIOXIDE

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

- 3087

FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT SECTIO N 110( a )(1) AND (2) INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORT STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION FOR THE 20 10 NITROGEN DIOXIDE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD

PROJECT NUMBER 2012

- 016

- SIP

- NR

Adoption November 1 4

, 2012This page intentionally left blankES -1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) for nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) infrastructure and transport is intended to meet the infrastructure requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §110(a)(2). 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 a new or revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). On February 9, 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stren gthened the NO 2 NAAQS. The new primary one

hour NO 2 standard was set at 100 parts per billion (ppb); there was no previous one

- hour NO 2 standard. The EPA retained the annual NO 2 standard of 0.053 parts per million (ppm) (53 ppb); the annual NO 2 standard has been o.053 ppm since 1971 . This SIP revision documents that the Texas SIP at 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 52, Subpart SS contains all the infrastructure elements required by FCAA, §110(a)(2) for the implementation, maintenance, and enf orcement of the 20 10 NO 2 NAAQS. Because the infrastructure demonstration explains how the existing Texas statutes and rules will allow the state to meet its obligations under the FCAA, the infrastructure SIP has been developed as an expansion of the existi ng Section V: Legal Authority section of Texas’ SIP. This expanded section is unique to infrastructure SIP revisions 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.

The 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 req uirements include basic program elements such as enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air quality monitoring and modeling, a permitting program, adequate funding and personnel, authority under state law to carry out the plan, emissions re porting, emergency powers, public participation, and fee collection.

This SIP revision also includes a detailed 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 an analysis of back trajectories from monitor sites in neighboring states to show the origin and journey of the air parcels . A discussion of NO 2 transport is included to show that Texas does not contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS in another state.i 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 D emonstration for Nitrogen Dioxide ( New ) 

### 1. 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard ( 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, including maintaining adequate visibility.
The first air pollution contr ol act, known as the Clean Air Act of Texas, was passed by the Texas Legislatu re 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 Stat utes. The legislature amended the TCAA in 1969, 1971, 1973, 1979, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 200 1, 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) 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 1991, the legislature abolished the TACB effective September 1 , 1993, and its powers, duties, responsibilities, and functions were transferred to the Texas Natural Resource Co nservation Commission (TNRCC). With the creation of the TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found in both the Texas Water Code and the TCA A. 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 of the TNRCC, and the responsibilities and authority of the ex ecutive director. C hapter 5 also authorizes the TNRCC to implement action when emergency conditions arise and to conduct hearings. Chapter 7 gives th e TNRCC enforcement authority. In 2001, the 77th Texas Legislature continued the existence of the TNRCC 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 section 5.014 of the Texas Water Code, 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 - D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect information to enable the commission to develop an inventory of emissions; to conduct research and investi gations; 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 bring enforcement actions, and may execute cooperative agreements with the TC EQ 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; coordinate with federal, state, and local transportation planning agencie s 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 authorize 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 (SIP). 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: Texas 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: General Powers and Duties of the Commission Subchapter E: Administrative Provisions for Commission Subchapter F: Executive Director (except §§5.225, 5.226, 5.227, 5.2275, 5.231, 5.232, and 5.236) Subchapter H: Delegation of Hearings Subchapter I: Judicial Review Subchapter J: Consolidated Permit Processing Subchapter L: Eme rgency 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) and (g), (h)(1)(A) -( 4), (6), (8)

- (11), (i) and (j), 39.407, 39.409, 39.4 11 (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 55.15 6(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, 2012
Chapter 112: Control of Air Pollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997
Chapter 113: Standards of Performance for Hazardous Air Pollutants and for Designated Facilities 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 Modification August 16 , 2012
Chapter 117: Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds April19

, 201 2
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 Revisions 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 Involving the Use of Economic Incentives, Marketable Permits, and Emissions Trading June 3, 2001v SECTION V -C-1 : INFRASTRUCTURE DEM ONSTRATION FOR THE 2 0 10 N ITROGEN DIOXIDE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD



### 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 ) . States 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 revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists the elements that these SIP submissions must contain.
On February 9, 2010, the EPA strengthened the nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) NAAQS. The new primary one

- hour NO 2 standard was set at 100 parts per billion (ppb); there was no previous

one

- hour NO 2 standard. The EPA retained the annual NO 2 standard of 0.053 parts per millio n (ppm) (53 ppb); t he annual NO 2 standard has been o.053 ppm since 1971

. This SIP revision is intended to provide an update of the §110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS within three years after the promulgation of the revised NAAQS, or by January 22, 2013 . This chapter outlines FCAA, §110(a)(2)(A) through (M) and includes various Texas provisions 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 Legal Authority section of Texas’ SIP that provides additional information about how the existing statutes and rules allow Texas to meet the §110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements of the FCAA. Therefore, this SIP revision contains an expanded infrastructure section 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 infrastructure SIP revisions that Texas is required to submit as new or revised NAAQS are promulgated but will not otherwise be included in other Texas SIP revisions. Section A of the Legal Authority contains the basic listing of Texas’ legal frame work 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 EPA has not yet proposed infrastructure or transport guidance for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS , but in order to meet statutory deadlines for submittal of infrastructure SIPs, states do not have the option of waiting fo r EPA to provide additional guidance before proceeding with infrastructure and transport SIP development, review

, and submittal. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ( TCEQ ) is proceeding with this SIP revision to ensure that there are adequate opp ortunities 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 rev ision reflects the methods and means by which Texas meets these requirements at the time of this SIP revision.



### B. Texas Statutory 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.vi 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 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 mat ters relating to the quality of air resources. In 1991, 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 commission is found in Texas Water Code, Chapters 5 and 7. Chapter 5, Subchapters A through F, H through J , and L, include the general provisions, organization, and general powers and duties of the commission, and the responsibilities and authority 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 the existence of the commission until September 1, 2013, and changed the name of the TNRCC to the TCEQ. In 2009, the 81st Te xas 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; conduct 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 bearing 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 mod ification of facilities.
Local government authority concerning air quality matters is found in Subchapter E of the TCAA. Local governments 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 orders of the commission.
Subchapters G and H of the TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establish vehicle inspection and maintenance pr ograms in certain areas of the state, consistent with the requirements of the FCAA ; coordinate with federal, state, and local transportation planning agencies to develop and implement transportation programs and measures necessary to attain and maintain th e NAAQS; and fund and authorize participating counties to implement vehicle repair assistance, retrofit

, and accelerated vehicle retirement programs.vii 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 §5.0 52. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION; APPOINTMENT §5.053. ELIGIBILITY FOR MEMBERSHIP §5.054. REMOVAL OF COMMISSION MEMBERS §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. C ONSERVATION AND QUALITY OF ENVIRONMENT §5.133. ACTIONS IN MEXICO §5.1733. ELECTRONIC POSTING OF INFORMATION §5.223. ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION 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. APPLICATION FOR EMERGENCY OR TEMPORARY ORDER §5.514. ORDER ISSUED UNDER AIR EMERGENCY §5.515. EMERGENCY ORDER BECAUSE OF CA TASTROPHE §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; PETITION FOR REVIEW §7.066. REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERALviii §7.067. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS §7.072. RECOVERY OF PE NALTY §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 A IR ACT §7.179. FALSE REPRESENTATIONS UNDER CLEAN AIR ACT §7.180. FAILURE TO NOTIFY UNDER CLEAN AIR ACT §7.181. IMPROPER USE OF MONITORING DEVICE §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 Federal 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, marke table 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 TCEQ has promulgated rules to implement and enfo rce 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 for improving the air quality in nonattainment a reas. 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 Permits by Rule, Subchapter A, General Requiremen ts 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 Pollutantsix 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 Compound s 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;
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. Texas 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 Rul e, 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 from Volatile Organic Compounds Chap. 116 Con trol 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 enforcement of the measures described in subparagr aph (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 an d 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 sources. 1

1 Texas has permitting rules for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), as required by the FCAA. 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 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 met . 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).x 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. 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. 117 Control of Air Pollution from Nitrogen Compounds
FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D) Federal Requirement (D) contain adequate provisions (i) prohibiting, consistent with the provision s of this title, any source or other type of emissions activity from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will (I) contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other State with respect to any such national prim ary 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 interstate 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 nonattainment new source review ( NSR ) permitting program that contains requirements for sources of air pollutants to obtain an approved permit before beginning co nstruction of a facility and before modifying an existing facility (see requirements for §110(a)(2)(C) previously listed). Texas submitted a Regional Haze SIP revision to the EPA on March 19, 2009. The EPA published a limited disapprov al of the Texas R egio nal H aze SIP revision addressing the requirements of 40 CFR § 51.308(d)(3) and § 51.308(e) with respect to emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide from electric generating units in the June 7, 2012

, Federal Register

. Other portions of the R egional Ha ze SIP are not anticipated to be evaluated by the EPA until mid 2013

. The EPA’s limited disapproval was based on the fact that Texas relied on the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in its R egional H aze SIP, as allowed by the EPA at the time the SIP was subm itted. The EPA’s disapproval was based on the replacement of CAIR by the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). On August 21, 2012

, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated CSAPR and directed the EPA to continue to administer CAIR while it works on a replacement rule for interstate transport. 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.

The followin g chapter of 30 TAC contains rules relevant for this federal requirement:
Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rules Chap. 122 Subchapter E, Division 2, Clean Air Interstate Rulexi FCAA, §110(a)(2)(E) Federal Requirement (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 purpose) 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 portion thereof), (ii) requirements that the state

c

omply 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 implementation 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. The TCEQ relies on the complete statutory and regulatory authority as referenced throughout this document. The TCEQ also regularly submits a legal authority with SIP revisions submitted to the EPA.
FCAA, §110(a)(2)(F) Federal Requirement (F) require, as ma y 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 agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to is Act, which reports shall be available at rea sonable 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 SIP 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:
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 from Volatile Organic Compoundsxii 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 comparable 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 pollu tion emergency. In addition, the TCEQ also maintains air 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/compliance/monitoring/air/monops/forecast_today.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 paragraph (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 additional requirements Established under this Act;
Texas Requirement The TCEQ regularly revises the Texas SIP in response to revisions in the NAAQS and 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 applicabl e requirements of part D (relating to nonattainment areas);
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)

.xiii 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 visibility protection);
Texas Requirement The TCEQ has an established public particip ation 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 before 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 Texas are subject to Texa s’ 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 from Texas facilities.
The following chapters of 3 0 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; Subchapters H and K Chap. 101 General Air Quality Rul es 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 prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on

a

mbient 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 air quality modeling to the Administrator;

Texas Re quirement 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 permitting program.

2 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Revisions to Chapters 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 5 198). 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.xiv The following chapter of 30 TAC contains rules relevant for this federal requirement:
Chap. 116 Control of Air Pol lution for New Construction or M odification
FCAA, §110(a)(2)(L) Federal Requirement (L) require the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting a uthority, 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 operator receives a permit for such source, the reas onable 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 superseded 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 requir ement: 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 Modification
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. Con sultation 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 statutory authority to meet the infrastructure requir ements of FCAA, §110(a)(1) and (2) for the 20 10 NO 2 NAAQS.xv SECTION VI: CONTROL STRATEGY



### A. Introduction (No change) 

### B. Ozone ( No change ) 

### C. Particulate Matter (No change) 

### D. Carbon Monoxide (No change) 

### E. Lead (No change) 

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

### G. Sul fur 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)xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary Section V: Legal Authority
Section V

- A: Legal Authority
A. General

B. Applicable Law
Section V -C- 1: Infrastructure Demonstration for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard
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 List of Appendices Chapter 1: Generalxvii 1.1 Background
1.2 Introduction
1.3 Health Effects 1.4 Public Hearing and Comment Information
1.5 Social and Economic Considerations 1.6 Fiscal and Manpower 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 Modeling 2.2.1.2 Review and Analysis of Monitoring Data

2.2.2 NO 2 Controls Chapter 3: Future Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)xviii LIST OF ACRON YMS

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
EDMS Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System
FCAA Federal Clean Air Act
FIP Federal Implementation Plan
FR Federal Register
HYSPLIT Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NO 2 Nitrogen dioxide
NO X Nitrogen o xides
NSR New Source Review ppb p arts p er billion

ppm p arts p er m illion
PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration
SIP State Implementation Plan
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
TR Texas Registerxix LI ST OF TABLES

Table 2

- 1: EPA Region 6 NO 2 Monitor Sites in 2010xx LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2

- 1: 2008 through 2010 One

- Hour NO 2 Design Values in EPA Region 6 Figure 2

- 2: 2008 through 2010 Annual NO 2 Design Values in EPA Region 6 Figure 2

- 3: One

- Hour NO 2 Design Values by County in Texas
Fi gure 2

- 4: Annual NO 2 Design Values by County in Texas Figure 2

- 5: Samples of Seasonal Cycle of NO 2 Concentrations in States Neighboring Texas Figure 2

- 6: Back Trajectory Analysis Showing Predominant Wind Patterns from 2008 through 2010xxi LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Back Trajectory Clusters1-1 CHAPTER 1: GENERAL

1.1 BACKGROUND “The History of the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) ,” a comprehensive overview of the SIP revisions submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by the State of Texas, is available on the Introduction to the SIP Web pag e (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 nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) under the 20 10 NO 2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) describes how the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) meet s 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 promulgation of a 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 February 9, 2010, the EPA published the final rule to strengthen the primary NAAQS for NO 2 . The rule establishe d a new one

- hour NO 2 standard at 100 parts per billion ( ppb ); there was no previous one

- hour NO 2 standard. The EPA retained the annual NO 2 standard of 0.053 parts per million (ppm) (53 ppb); the annual NO 2 standard has been o.053 ppm since 1 971. On February 17, 2012, the EPA published in the Federal Register (FR) the initial designations for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and identified all areas in the United States as unclassifiable/attainment. According to data from 2008 through 2010 , no area in Texas monitors above the 100 ppb standard or the annual standard of o.053 ppm

. In the latest NO 2 Risk and Exposure Assessment created during the NAAQS revision process, and as reiterated in the preamble of the final rulemaking (75 FR 6474) on the primary N AAQS for NO 2 , the EPA recognized “that roadway

- associated exposures account for a majority of ambient exposures to peak NO 2 concentrations ” ( EPA

, 2011).

For the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the EPA changed the monitoring network requirements to capture both peak NO 2 co ncentrations that occur near roadways and community

- wide NO 2 concentrations. In Texas, t wo near

- road NO 2 monitors in Dallas

- Fort Worth and Houston

Galveston

- Brazoria must begin operating no later than January 1, 2013. Two near

- road NO 2 monitors in San Anto nio and Austin

- Round Rock must begin operating no later than January 1, 2014. In 2016 or 2017, once the expanded network of NO 2 monitors is fully deployed and three years of air quality data have been collected, the EPA intends to redesignate areas if necessary based on data from the new monitoring network.

Based on the lack of NO 2 nonattainment or maintenance areas in the four states surrounding Texa s and EPA studies showing lack of long distance transport of roadway NO 2 emissions , this SIP revision de monstrates that Texas has adequately addressed the transport requirements of FCAA §110(a)(2)(D)(i).1-2 1.3 HEALTH EFFECTS In 2010, the EPA established a one

- hour NAAQS for NO 2 . To support the 2010 one

- hour NO 2 standard, the EPA provided information indicating the annual NO 2 NAAQS was not sufficient to protect individuals from health effects after a shorter exposure duration. Current scientific evidence links short

- term NO 2 exposures, ranging from 30 minutes to 24 hours, with adverse respiratory effects including a irway inflammation in healthy people and increased respiratory symptoms in people with asthma. Also, studies show a connection between breathing elevated short

- term NO 2 concentrations and increased visits to emergency departments and hospital admissions for respiratory issues, especially asthma.

Short

- term exposure to elevated NO 2 concentrations is of particular concern for susceptible individuals, including people with asthma, children, and the elderly.

1.4 PUBLIC HEARING AND C OMMENT INFORMATION The commission offered a public hearing for this SIP revision on August 1, 2012

, at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality headquarters in Austin. The hearing was not officially opened because no party indicated a desire to give comment. Comments were received from June 29 through August 6, 201 2. An electronic version of this SIP revision and appendix can be found at the TCEQ’s Web page ( http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip/criteria

pollutants/sip

- no2 ).

1.5 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIO NS Because rulemaking is not a part of this SIP revision, there are no changes that will 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 adv ersely affected through the implementation of this plan.

1.7 COORDINATION WITH LO CAL AGENCIES 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 government 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 available via the TCEQ ’s SIP Web site (http://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/sip) or are available from the TCEQ upon request.

References EPA, 2011. Near

- Road NO 2 Monitoring Technical Assistance Document DRAFT, December 21. Accessed March 2012: http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/nearroad/20111221tad.pdf

.2-1 CHAPTER 2: REQUIRED CONTROL STRATEGY ELEMENTS

2.1 BACKGROUND The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first set the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) in 1971. The EPA chose to retain the NO 2 NAAQS after review in both 1985 and 1996. In 2010 , the EPA de cided to retain the annual NO 2 NAAQ S of 0.053 parts per million (ppm) (53 ppb) and add a new one

- hour standard at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb) (75 FR 6474). All areas in the United States presently meet the annual NO 2 NAAQS, with average annual N O 2 concentrations ranging from 10 ppb to 20 ppb (EPA 2012). In 2012

, the EPA designated all areas in the United States as “unclassifiable/attainment” for the one

- hour NO 2 NAAQS (77 FR 9532).

NO 2 is a highly reactive gas. Because NO 2 reacts to form other species, its concentrations are greater when closer to its emission source (75 FR 6474). NO 2 is primarily formed by fossil fuel combustion, lightning, biomass burning, and nitrification of soil by microorganisms . Examples of common an thropogenic NO 2 emission sources are internal

- combustion engines ; residential water heaters; industrial heaters and flares; and industrial and commercial boilers. Mobile, residential, and commercial NO 2 sources are usually numerous, smaller sources distributed over a large geographic area, while industrial sources are usually large point sources, or numerous small sources, clustered in a small geographic area.

2.2 CONTROL STRATEGY OVE RVIEW Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) §110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) requires states to sub mit a state implementation plan (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 nonattainment of the NAAQS for areas in other states; or

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

2.2.1 Significant Contribution to Nonattainment and Interference with Maintenance Elements 2.2.1.1 Modeling Since no area of the United States is designated nonattainmen t according to the EPA action of January 20, 2012, the TCEQ will not be conducting any modeling or modeling analysis for this SIP revision

.
2.2.1.2 Review and Analysis of Monitoring Data In 2010

, there were 42 regulatory NO 2 monitors in Texas, 10 in New Mexico, four in Oklahoma, two in Arkansas, and 12 in Louisiana. A list of these monitors is found in Table 2

- 1: EPA Region 6 NO 2 Monitor Sites in 2010

. These monitors are located primarily in urban areas and along highways as seen in Figure 2

- 1: 2008 through 2010 One

- Hour NO2 Design Values in EPA Region 6

.2-2 Table 2-1: EPA Region 6 NO 2Monitor Sites in 2010

AIRS State County Site Name One

- Hour Design Value

2008-2010

(ppb) Annual Design Value

2008-2010

(ppb)
050350005 Arkansas Crittenden Marion 47 10
051190007 Arkansas Pulaski Parr 44 10
220050004 Louisiana Ascension Dutchtown 42 8
220190008 Louisiana Calcasieu Westlake 35 7
220330003 Louisiana East Baton Rouge LSU 53 11
220330009 Louisiana East Baton Rouge Capitol 54 13
220330013 Louisiana East Baton Rouge Pride 17 3
220331001 Louisiana East Baton Rouge Baker 36 6
220470007 Louisiana Iberville Grosse Tete 27 4
220470009 Louisiana Iberville Bayou Plaquemine 28 4
220470012 Louisiana Iberville Carville 37 7
220511001 Louisiana Jefferson Kenner 48 8
220630002 Louisiana Livingston French Settlement 19 3
221210001 Louisiana West Baton Rouge Port Allen 53 11
350010023 New Mexico Bernalillo Del Norte High School 55 12
350130021 New Mexico Dona Ana Sunland Park 53 9
350130022 New Mexico Dona Ana Santa Teresa International Blvd 43 5
350151005 New Mexico Eddy Carlsbad 22 2
350250008 New Mexico Lea Hobbs

- Jefferson 41 6
350290003 New Mexico Luna Luna 30 5
350450009 New Mexico San Juan Deming † 12
350450018 New Mexico San Juan Navajo Lake 38 10
350451005 New Mexico San Juan San Juan Substation 37 9
350451233 New Mexico San Juan Dine College, GIS Lab † 7
400019009 Oklahoma Adair Stilwell † 3
401090033 Oklahoma Oklahoma OKC Central 49 9
401091037 Oklahoma Oklahoma OKC North 39 7
401431127 Oklahoma Tulsa North Tulsa † 8
480290052 Texas Bexar Camp Bullis CAMS 58 26 4
480290059 Texas Bexar Calaveras Lake CAMS 59 34 4
480391004 Texas Brazoria Manvel Croix Park 36 5
480391016 Texas Brazoria Lake Jackson 22 3
481130069 Texas Dallas Dallas Hinton 55 13
481130075 Texas Dallas Dallas North #2 45 10
481130087 Texas Dallas Dallas Redbird Airport Executive † 9
481210034 Texas Denton Denton Airport South 35 6
481390016 Texas Ellis Midlothian OFW 44 7
481391044 Texas Ellis Italy CAMS 1044 30 4
481410037 Texas El Paso El Paso UTEP 60 14
481410044 Texas El Paso El Paso Chamizal 60 14
481410055 Texas El Paso Ascarate Park 63 17
481671034 Texas Galveston Galveston 99th Street 33 4
481830001 Texas Gregg Longview 36 7
482010024 Texas Harris Houston Aldine 44 9
482010026 Texas Harris Channelview 59 10
482010029 Texas Harris NW Harris County 31 52-3 AIRS State County Site Name One

- Hour Design Value

2008-2010

(ppb) Annual Design Value

2008-2010

(ppb)
482010047 Texas Harris Lang Rd 56 13
482010055 Texas Harris Bayland Park 45 9
482010075 Texas Harris Texas Ave 56 15
482010416 Texas Harris Park Place 55 12
482011015 Texas Harris Lynchburg Ferry † 9
482011034 Texas Harris Houston East 54 14
482011035 Texas Harris Clinton Drive 60 14
482011039 Texas Harris Deer Park #2 42 7
482011050 Texas Harris Seabrook Friendship Park 35 5
482030002 Texas Harrison Karnack 21 4
482311006 Texas Hunt Greenville 30 5
482450009 Texas Jefferson Beaumont Downtown 40 8
482450022 Texas Jefferson Hamshire 28 4
482451035 Texas Jefferson Nederland HS 33 5
482570005 Texas Kaufman Kaufman 30 4
483091037 Texas McLennan Waco Mazanec 29 3
483390078 Texas Montgomery Conroe Relocated 35 5
483491051 Texas Navarro Corsicana Airport † 4
483611001 Texas Orange West Orange 33 5
484230007 Texas Smith Tyler Airport Relocated 21 4
484391002 Texas Tarrant Fort Worth Northwest 54 10
484393009 Texas Tarrant Grapevine Fairway 40 8
484393011 Texas Tarrant Arlington Municipal Airport 40 9
484530020 Texas Travis Austin Audubon Society CAMS 38 22 3 Note: † indicates an incomplete or unavailable design value.2-4 The current monitor network is designed to monitor air representative of neighborhood or area scale in accordance with historical 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D requirements rather than to capture peak NO 2 concentrations emitted by mobile sources. The TCEQ exp ects to add near

road monitors in the Dallas

- Fort Worth, Houston

- Galveston

- Brazoria, San Antonio, and Austin

Round Rock areas , as mandated by the new federal monitoring requirements

. As mentioned in the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, concentrations fall quickly with dist ance from roadways and rapidly reach the same concentration shown by current area monitors, suggesting that little to no transport of NO 2 occurs. According to EPA studies, peak NO 2 concentrations are located on or immediately adjacent to high traffic roads. The EPA studie s examined NO 2 concentrations at less than 20 meters, between 20 and 100 meters, and greater than 100 meters (EPA, 2008) . Using the studies, the EPA determined the greatest risk was closer to the roadways. The new near

- road monitoring network places monitors within 50 meters of the roadway.
Figure 2- 1 also indicates that all monitor sites in EPA Region 6 have design values below the

one

- hour NO 2 NAAQS of 100 ppb . The highest concentrations measured are located near urban and/or industrial areas . Monitors in less urban areas measured lower concentrations. Monitoring s ites located near the northern and eastern Texas border have lower concentrations than those in city centers.

Figure 2-1 : 2008 through 2010 One

- Hour NO 2 Design Values in EPA Region 62-5 Figure 2

- 2: 2008 through 2010 Annual NO2 Design Values in EPA Region 6 shows that all NO 2 monitors in Texas and neighboring states have design values below the 2010 annual NO 2 NAAQS, which is o.o53 ppm or 53 ppb. Monitors near urban areas have higher annual design values than monitors in less urban areas and along the borders of Texas. The highest annual NO 2 design value measured in EPA Region 6 was 17 ppb at Ascarate Park CAMS 37 in El Paso.

Figure 2-2 : 2008 through 2010 Annual NO 2 Design Values in EPA Region 62-6 Figure 2

- 3: One

- Hour NO2 Design V alues by County in Texas shows trends in one

- hour NO 2 design values for all counties in Texas monitoring NO 2 concentrations. All counties have design values

, or three

- year averages, below the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS. All areas also show slight downward trends or flat trends. No area exhibits an increase in monitored NO 2 concentrations. Large fluctuations in the Bexar C ounty trend are due to data availability from the San Antonio Downtown C27 monitor. The monitor did not have valid one

- hour design values in 2003 through 2005. In 2002 and 2006 through 2009, this monitor had the highest design value in Bexar Co unty.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Bexar Brazoria Dallas Denton El Paso
Ellis Galveston Gregg Harris Harrison
Hunt Jefferson Kaufman McLennan Montgomery Orange Smith Tarrant Travis

*Design Values are from EPA's AQS. One

- Hour NO 2 Design Values by County in Texas ppb

2010 One

- Hour NO 2 NAAQS

Figure 2-3 : One

- Hour NO 2 Design Values by County in Texas2-7 Figure 2 -4: Annual NO2 Design V alues by County in Texas shows annual design value trends for all counties in Texas monitoring NO 2 . Annual design values

, or three

- year averages, also have slight downward or flat trends for all areas in the state. The highest design values in 2010 were in El Paso, Harris, and Dallas C ounties . These counties tend to be impacted primarily by NO 2 emitted by on

- road mobile sources. Monitors located in more rural areas tend to show lower NO 2 concentrations. The low NO 2 concentrations measured throughout Texas would have insignificant impact on other states

.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Bexar Brazoria Dallas

Denton El Paso Ellis
Galveston Gregg Harris
Harrison Hunt Jefferson
Kaufman Marion McLennan Montgomery Navarro Orange
Smith Tarrant Travis

*Design Values are from EPA's AQS. Annual NO 2 Design Values by County in Texas ppb

2010 Annual NO 2 NAAQS = 53ppb

Figure 2-4 : Annual NO 2 Design Values by County in Texas

NO 2 monthly trends follow a similar pattern for most monitors in all of EPA Region 6. Trends in general show higher values in cooler months and lower values in warmer months. This is true for all calculated statistics, except the global maximum, or maximum over all monitors, which can vary greatly.
The most likely reason for this pattern is that in cooler months the mixing layer, or layer of well

mixed ambient air near the surface, is shallow, which traps the NO 2 in a smaller volume of air near the surface. In contrast, the mixing layer is deep during warmer months, diluting NO 2 concentrations in a larger volume of air. Another important reason for this pattern, at least for states or regions near the Gulf of Mexico, is that in summer months, winds are predominantly out of the Gulf of Mexico

.2-8 Examination of NO 2 patterns by month shows that typically December and January record the highest concentrations and June and July the lowest concentrations. Monitors wher e concentrations are low to begin with do not show a trend, while monitors with higher concentrations exhibit a well defined pattern. Representative examples of higher concentrations based on averages from 2008 through 2010 are shown in Figure 2

- 5: Samples of Seasonal Cycle of NO 2 Concentrations in States Neighboring Texas

.

(Note: concentrations shown are monthly median of one

- hour NO 2 standard ) Figure 2-5 : Samples of Seasonal Cycle of NO 2 Concentrations in States Neighboring Texas
To assess possible impacts of transported NO 2 o

n a neighboring state, back trajectory analysis was conducted to identify the most likely paths (mean

- trajectory

- path), if any, of possible NO 2 transport. There are some assumptions associated with this procedure. For example, there is no link between a mean

- trajectory

- path and an NO 2 concentration. A mean

- trajectory

- path only provides an indication; much more analysis is needed to confirm an impact.

To construct bac k trajectories, the Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory ( HYSPLIT ) (http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT.php) model version 4, developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

, was employed. Representative monitors were chosen from states adjacent to Texas , which are New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana . For each of these monitors, cluster analysis was performed to find the mean

trajectory

- path. This mean

- trajectory

- path represents the “average” of a group of trajectories from which air currents traveled from other places to a representative monitor. This method quantifies the directions and frequency of air traveling to the monitor, but cannot identify precise routes of travel of airborne particles.
Details of HYSPLIT parameters are as follows: trajectories were created at the receptor site for the approximate hour of peak NO 2 for all trajectories, which is defined as 7:00 a.m. Local Standard Time . Trajectory height w as set to 300 meters to ensure transport within the mixing2-9 layer. Each trajectory was 12 hours in duration and the Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System, or EDAS -4KM, meteorological data sets were used. Trajectories were created for days at or above the 90th percentile of NO 2 at the receptor site

. Results suggest that Oklahoma would be most likely to be affected by air from Texas, however, very little if any directly e mitted NO 2 would be expected to travel from the closest major urban so urc e in Texas t o the nearest O kl ahom a metropolitan area due to its high reactivity. One likely transport path w as identified by the clustering procedure, which accounted for 14 % of the 2 17 trajectories ending in Oklahoma. New Mexico is the next state likely to be affected by Texas, though to a much lesser degree, accounting for 1 0 % of 124 total trajectories ending in New Mexico

. Some of these trajectories originate in New Mexico before pa ssing through west Texas and returning to the Las Cruces, New Mexico area. Louisiana and Arkansas do not show large numbers of transport paths from Texas (see Appendix A : Back Trajectory Clusters ).
Of particular interest due to its close proximity to Texas, the New Mexico cluster shows air being drawn from Mexico as see n in path s 2 and 3 in panel 3 of Figure 2

- 6: Back Trajectory Analysis Showing Predominant Wind Patterns from 2008 through 2010

. Howev er, since this path represents the “average path,” there are some trajectories grouped into this cluster that emanate from Texas, though the majority are from Mexico. Although the clusters show possible evidence of transport, this analysis does not confirm any link between NO 2 generated beyond the monitor and the measured NO 2 at the monitor. Individual trajectories in the cluster that emanate from Texas originated in portions of west Texas with few NO 2 sources. In addition, NO 2 reacts quickly, therefore it is unlikely any NO 2 generated in the Texas portions of those trajectories would be transported to the receptor site.
Based on this analysis, there are some days where air is transported from Texas to areas in neighboring states that have monitors

. However, t he reactivity of NO 2 coupled with the distance from major Texas areas of NO 2 emissions make it highly unlikely that Texas NO 2 emissions significantly impact other states. In fact, the EPA has found that peak NO 2 concentrations are found on roadways. The concentrations decrease rapidly with distance from roads. Finally, states surrounding Texas are measuring attainment of the NO 2 NAAQS ; therefore, Texas sources are not contributing to an exceedance or interfering w ith maintenance of the NAAQS in neighboring states.2- 10 Figure 2-6 : Back Trajectory Analysis Showing Predominant Wind Patterns from 2008 through 2010

2.2.2 NO 2 Controls Since Texas is attaining the NO 2 NAAQS, no rules specific to NO 2 have been promulgated.

References EPA, 2008. Risk and Exposure Assessment to Support the Review of the NO 2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard. EPA

- 452/R

- 08

- 008a. November. Accessed March 2012: http://epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/data/20081121_NO2_REA_final.pdf

. EPA, 2010. 40 CFR Parts 50 and 58. Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide; Final Rule. F ederal Register , Vol. 75, No. 26, February 9. Accessed March 2012: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/fr/20100209.pdf

.
EPA

, 2012. Nitrogen Dioxide : Basic Information. Accessed March 2012 : http://www.epa.gov/airquality/nitrogenoxides/basic.html

.2- 11 Federal Register , 2012. 40 CFR Parts 50 and 58. Air Quality Designations for the 2010 Primary Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Vol. 77, No. 33, February 17. Accessed March 2012: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR

- 2012

- 02

- 17/pdf/2012

- 3150.pdf#page=1

.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 submit 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), relating to interstate transport. Therefore, if the NAAQS are revised in the future, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality will need to take the ad equate steps relating to the interstate transport of air pollution.APPENDIX A

BACK TRAJECTORY CLUS TERSA-1 O VERVIEW This appendix expands upon the clustered back trajectories described in Chapter 2, S ection 2.2.1.2 : Review and Analysis of Monitoring Data

. In S ection 2.2.1.2, only the mean trajecto ry for each cluster was shown. The individual trajectories grouped in each cluster are shown in the following figures. Each trajectory was started at 7 :00 a.m. Local Standard Ti me ( LST ) at 300 meters, which was close to the center of the mix ing layer at that time of day. The trajectories show ed the path of an air parcel for the 12 hours proceeding the 7 :00 a.m. LST starting time.
Trajectories Using the Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory ( HYSPLIT ) model version 4

, back trajectories for days when the nitrogen dioxide ( NO 2 ) concentrations exceeded the 90 th percentile concentration level s were calculated for a receptor site in Oklahoma. These trajectories were then grouped into six separate clusters based on wind speeds and directions. The clusters are shown in Figure 1 : Individual Back Trajectories by Cluster for Oklahoma

. Cluster 5 was the largest of the six , containing 27% of the back trajectories on high NO 2 days. These trajectories were typically slow, with the trajectories extending from southeast Oklahoma to the receptor site. Cluster 2 was the second most common path. This cluster contained 19% of the total trajectories. These trajectories were also slow and typically out of the east

- northeast including northwestern Arkansas and southwestern Missouri. The same procedure was done with the back trajectories from the receptor site in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The starting parameters for the trajectories were the same as for the trajectories in Oklahoma. The most frequently occurring trajectories were those found in cluster 2 as seen in Figure 2 : I ndividual Back Trajectories by Cluster for Louisiana ; 26% of all trajectories were included in this cluster. These trajectories typically came from the southwest before arriving at the monitor. Some trajectories in this cluster originated near east Texas and off the coast of southeast Texas. Cluster 3 contained the second most frequent trajectory paths. These air parcels typically came in from the northeast after passing over portions of southe rn and central Mississippi. Cluster 1, the least frequent for Louisiana

, contained air parcels coming from the north

- northwest, typically originating over northern Louisiana and far northeast Texas.
Figure 3 : Indivi dual Back Trajectories by Cluster for New Mexico showed the clustering of back trajectories starting in Las Cruces, New Mexico . Once again, the start height was 300 meters and the start time w as 7 :00 a.m. LST. In this case there were only four clusters. Cluster 3 contain ed the majority of the trajectories or 63% of the total. This cluster represented air with slow wind speeds coming out of the south. The majority of these trajectories originate d in northern Mexico, though some originate d in west Texas before passing into Mexico. The second most frequent cluster was number two
, which contained 16% of all trajectories. These trajectories typically indicated a source area in western New Mexico. Cluster 4 accounted for 10% of the total, with these trajectories passing from western Texas and southeastern New Mexico before reaching the receptor site.

Arkansas was the final state border ing Texas that was examined. Back trajectories from the site in Arkansas were divided into five clusters. C luster 2, containing 34% of all trajectories , was the largest cluster. The routes for these were typically short and indicated a slow wind speed. They also generally came from the south with some clockwise rotation over eastern Arkansas. Trajectories in cluster 4 were the closest to Texas, however very few endpoints were located in Texas for this anal ysis. Typically these parcels move d from northern Louisiana up the Mississippi river as shown in Figure 4: Individual Back Trajectories by Cluster for Arkansas

.A-2 Figure 1: Individual Back Trajectories b y Cluster for OklahomaA-3 Figure 2 : Individual B ack T raj ectories by Cluster for LouisianaA-4 Figure 3 : Individual Back Trajectories by Cluster for New Mexico

# "'! ' 

# " (

.\ 

## '\ 'L

...**·~a** ><l

# ,\:~~~ io 

# 7**~** 

### '

# ~~~~**·~~** 

### ""'L. {

..

. ! 

### I" '
.:

. 

# c**,~** 

# ..... z 

# f



# '1·\ \

A-5

### Docket No. 2012-0862-SIP

On November 14, 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 a revision to the SIP for Infrastructure and Transport of the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (N02) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Commission adopts this SIP revision demonstrating how the infrastructure elements listed in Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §uo(a)(2) are currently addressed in the Texas SIP for the 2010 N02 National Ambient Air Quality Standard. The SIP revision outlines the requirements of FCAA, §uo(a)(2)(A) through (M) and the Texas statutes and rules that allow the TCEQ to meet those requirements. These requirements include basic program elements such as enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air quality 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. Additionally, the SIP revision demonstrates that Texas is not contributing significantly to nonattainment of the N02 NAAQS for areas in other states; not interfering with the maintenance of the N02 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 with 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 2011), the Commission has the authority to control the quality of 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 revisions was published for comment in the July 13, 2012 issue of the Texas Register 

### (37 TexReg 5367).

Pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 51.102 and after proper notice, the Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the revision to the SIP. Proper notice included prominent advertisement in the areas affected at least 30 days prior to the date of the hearing. A public hearing was scheduled in Austin on August 1, 2012.

The Commission circulated hearing notices of its intended action to the public, including interested persons, the Regional Administrator of 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 scheduled 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 revisions 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 revisions and their position concerning the same.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that the revisions to the SIP incorporated by reference to this Order are hereby adopted. The adopted revisions 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, together with the adopted revisions to the SIP, to the Regional Administrator of EPA as a proposed revisions to the Texas SIP pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act, codified at 42 U.S. Code Ann. §§ 

### 7401- 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: 

# NOV 1 9 2012 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY