UNITED STATES E:NVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 6 

Mr. Michael Teague 

1445 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 1200 

DALLAS, TEXAS 75202- 2733 

March 13,2014 

Oklahoma Secretary Energy and Environment 

100 North Broadway, Suite 2350 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73 102 

Dear Secretary Teague: 

Office of the Regional Administrator 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recommends withdrawing a proposed revision to the 

Oklahoma State Implementation Plan, which was submitted to the EPA on July 16, 2010. The proposed 

SIP revision concerns Oklahoma's Excess Emissions Reporting Requirements rules (also known as 

Subchapter 9). These rules adopt an. affirmative defense approach for excess erPJssions during periods of 

startup, shutdown and malfunctions. 

The EPA believes the July 16, 2010, submission was consistent with our policy regarding affirmative 

defenses at that time. But due to court de:cisions related to the treatment of excess emissions during 

planned activities, the EPA has since revised its policy and no longer believes the revision can be 

approved. Both of our resources would be better utilized by delaying action on the proposed SIP 

revision until the Clean Air Act's requirements for excess emissions during SSM events are more 

assured. 

Withdrawal ofthis SIP revision would ensure Oklahoma's provisions for excess emissions during SSM 

are treated in a consistent manner and tirneframe as other states in the country. A state is not required to 

provide an affirmative defense in its SIP:, and withdrawing the proposed SIP revision from the EPA's 

consideration should not impact the applicability of the Subchapter 9 rules under state law. To assist you 

in your decision, I am enclosing additional background material. 

We appreciate your consideration of this revision to Oklahoma's Excess Emissions Reporting 

Requirements rule. If you have any questions, please contact me at (214) 665-2100, or your staff may 

contact Mr. Guy Donaldson, Air Planning Section Chief, at (214) 665-7242. 

Sincerely, 

Enclosures 

cc: Please see page 2 

This paper is printed with vegetable-oil-based inks and is 100-percent postconsumer recycled material, 

chlcorine-free-processed and recyclable 
cc: Mr. Scott Thompson 

Executive Director, Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 

Mr. Eddie Terrill 

Air Quality Division Director, Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 
Background Information- Oklahoma's July 16, 2010 SIP Submittal 

On February 22, 2013, the EPA proposed a national SIP call to address inadequacies in 36 SIPs 

(including the federally approved Oklahoma SIP) related to the treatment of excess emissions during 

SSM events. The EPA is currently requir ed to take final action on that proposal by June 12,2014. Public 

comments on the proposed national SSM SIP call included significant issues related to the appropriate 

use of aft1rmative defenses for excess emissions during SSM events. 

Issues related to the use of affirmative defenses for excess emissions resulting from SSM events are the 

subject of a challenge to the EPA's Portland Cement air toxics rule, and we are currently awaiting a 

decision from the District of Columbia (DC) Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court's decision may have 

an impact on how the EPA proceeds witlh the proposed national SSM SIP call, including the Oklahoma 

SIP. 

While the February 22, 2013 proposed national SIP call did not address Oklahoma's July 16, 2010 SIP 

submittal, the EPA separately proposed a limited approval and limited disapproval of that submittal on 

September 6, 2013, consistent with the EPA's position on the national SSM SIP call. The July 16,2010 

SIP submittal was consistent with the EPA's 1999 policy on excess emissions, and represents a 

significant improvement in how excess <::missions would be addressed in the Oklahoma SIP, but the 

September 6, 2013 proposed action also included a SIP call to address remaining inadequacies which 

prevent full approval of the Subchapter 9 rules. 

The EPA is required by the terms of a Consent Decree with Sierra Club to take final action on 

Oklahoma's submittal by April15, 2014. Not surprisingly, issues related to the appropriate use of 

affirmative defenses for excess emissions during SSM events raised in both the national proposed SSM 

SIP call and the Portland Cement air toxics rule challenge have also been raised in comments to our 

proposed action on your July 16, 2010 SIP revision submittal. 

The EPA would like to take a timely andl consistent approach to the treatment of excess emissions 

during SSM events, aided by the benefit of the upcoming DC Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the 

Portland Cement air toxics case. In addition, we believe it unfair and unwise to take final action on the 

proposed Oklahoma SIP revision before taking final action on the national proposed SSM SIP call, as it 

could potentially require Oklahoma to w1dergo additional rulemaking before the rest of the 35 States and 

local authorities currently subject to the :national proposed SSM SIP call. In addition, should the EPA's 

position on the national proposed SSM SIP call change after the effective date of the Oklahoma SSM 

SIP action, then additional rulemaking by the EPA and Oklahoma may be required. 

We believe the more logical and least burdensome approach would be for Oklahoma to withdraw the 

July 16, 2010 SIP revision submittal, at lleast until the national proposed SSM SIP call is finalized and 

after the EPA has taken a position in resjponse to the pending DC Circuit Court of Appeals decision on 

the affirmative defense provisions in the Portland Cement air toxics rule. Such a withdrawal should have 

no impact on the application of the Subchapter 9 rules under State law, and it would avoid forcing 

Oklahoma to proceed before the rest of the nation on matters containing unresolved issues. 
J.D. STRONG 

SECBEI'ARY OF E.NVID.ONMEI'<i'l' 

July 16, 2010 

STATE OF OKLAHOMA 

OFFICE OF THE 

SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENT 

Dr. Alfredo Armendariz, Regional Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 (6 RAJ 

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 

Dallas, TX 75202-2733 

RE: Oklahoma State Implementation Plan, Subchapter 9, Excess 

Requirements 

Dear Dr. Armendariz: 

BRAD HENRY 

GOVERNOR 

5 " ti --

c:::; m 

Emissions ep orting ·- V) W 

g; c... 

In his letter dated April 8, 2009, Governor Brad Henry appointed me as his designee for the purpose 

of submitting documents to the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval and 

incorporation into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Oklahoma. 

The State of Oklahoma submits OAC 252:100-9, Excess Emissions Reporting Requirements, for your 

review and approval under Section 110 of the federal Clean Air Act, and the associated evidence as 

required by 40 C.F.R. Part 51, Appendix V, 2.1. The State wishes to withdraw the previous submittal 

of OAC 252:100-9, Excess Emissions Reporting Requirements, originally submitted on February 14, 

2002. 

The proposed amendments were adopted to ensure that Oklahoma's program is consistent with 

current EPA guidelines. The most significant change in the rule is the establishment of affirmative 

defense provisions that may relieve industry of monetary penalties associated with excess 

emissions during periods of sta rtup, shutdown, or malfunction. As required by 40 C.F.R. 51.103{a), 

we have included five hard copies of the submittal. 

If you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact Eddie Terrill, Director of the Department of 

Environmental Quality's Air Quality Division, at (405) 702-4154. 

Sincerely, 

J.D. Stro 

Secretary of Environment 

Enclosures 

cc: The Honorable Brad Henry) Governor of Oklahoma 

Steve Thompson, Executive Director, Department of Environmental Quality 

Eddi.e Terrill, Director, DEQ Air Quality Division 

3800 North Classen Boulevard Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73118 

(405) 530-8995 fax (405) 530-8999