November 23, 2009 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AUSTIN Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell Air Permits Section (6PD-R) Environmental Protection Agency 1445 Ross Avenue Suite 1200 Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 Re: Comments Supporting EPA's Proposed Disapprovals D ocket ID No: (1) EPA- R06-0AR - 2005- TX-0032,(2) EPA- R06-0AR-2005- TX-0025,and (3) EP A-R06·0AR -2006-0133 Dear Mr. Spruiell: We, members of the Texas legislature, support the EPA's proposed disapproval of the air permitting program submittals from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regarding: ( 1) Flexible Permits, (2) Qualified Facilities. and ( 3) Major and Minor New Source Review. While we support the inherent flexibility in the federal Clean Air Act allowing states to decide how best to reduce air pollution to safe levels, we recognize that this flexibility must be exercised within the context of a functioning. transparent, process that protects the public's right-to-know and ability to participate in air permitting decisions that can affect their health and welfare. We believe that the curr ent Texas procedures for issuing air permits fail to meet these standards for reasons including those identified below. We are particularly concerned with the Texas program's lack of transparency, which thwarts public participation and makes enforcement of legallimits very difficult. Air quality affects the health and safety of our constituents and we look forward to working with you and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to ensure that Texas has an air-permitting program that meets federal standards, values transparency and public input, and protects the health and safety of all Texans. 

### 1. Fle xible P e rmit Program We agree wi th EPA's determination that the Texas Flexible Permit program should be disapproved. The federal Clean Air Act does allow for flexibility and streamlining in air permitting. The Texas Flexible Permit program, how ever, goes too far in sacrificing transparency. monitoring and enforceability in the name offlexibility. Further, it allows\ Ir
.**S'anky** S"",O<I I

..... <mba B
. 2009

,.,. 2<>0 major s ourc es o f a ir pol lutio n to avoid compliance w ith i mporta nt regu latory lim its. In particu lar, we a re c once rned w ith :

• The lack**equ** mon itoring a nd reporting requ irements, i nd u d i ng th e rout ine u se o f em ission estimat es based o n ca lculati ons rath er th an a ctua l monit ori ng..
• Inadequat e public partic ipation
. The Flexib le Permit ru les 

### rail to provide adequ at e pub lic notice or participation fur draft perm its and c hanges to existing pe rmits , which keep s the s u r rounding commun ities uninformed about any changes in the pollu tion levels they are b reathing.

• Thefailure to require complian ce w ith, o r m onitoring or reporting pursuant t o, federal individuol unit pallutionli mits. While we do befteve that t he T CEQ can p rovide some flexibility In permitting. such a s pre -a p proving mo dificat ions, we do not believe t hat the flexible permi t approach in the c urren t Te xas rul es is viable
. We, theref ore , s upport disa pproval o f the rule s . 2
. Qualifi ed Filcllities While the Q ualified Facilities progra m was a legi s lative crea tion, w e r ecogni ze th at th e s ta tu tory lan guage an d associ ated regu lation s are incons is ten t wi th cu rre nt f ederal O ean A ir Act requ ireme nts regard ing mod ifications a nd pub lic parti cipat ion- In pa rticular , w e a re co ncern ed w ith :

• Ina dequate TC EQ oversig ht. Th e ru les authorize m any changes at fa cilities with out any pre-approva l by TCEQ o r proc edures f or d en ia l fur ca use . The se off ·permit th anges are d ifficult to track an d enforce and ma y threaten a mbient air qua lity
. • The l ack o f underswndoble and traceable pe rmits
. Texa s i nd ustry, regula tors, and the public should be able to o bta in a permit, r ead it, and know what quantity of wha t p olluta nts t he facili ty is a u thorized to emit
. The off -permit ch anges au thorized t hrough t he Qualified Fa cilities rule s prevent such transparency.
• Inadequate public participation
. The Q uali fi ed Fa clht ies rules allow indu str ial p lants to make change s that can aff ect ne ighboring re side nts wi th abs olu tely n o publi c notice o r opportunity f or participation
. We
. therefore , s u ppo rt final di sapproval of the Quali fi ed Faci lities ru les
. 3
. Major and Min or New Sourc e R eview Lastly, the EPA s hould fina lize d isappro val o f re vision s to th e Ma jor and Min or N ew So urce Review S IP beca use they are substan tively d ifferen t a nd less s t r ingent th an the federal New Sou rce Review ru les. Of particu lar concern is Texa s ' d efinition a nd a pplica tion o f Bes t Available Control Techno logy (BACT)
. Texa s is a pplying a de finition o f BACT
. and u sing a BACT de te rmi nat ion process , that is s ignificantly l ess stringen t tha n requ ired b y fede ral law. As a re sult, Texas i ndustrial facilities emi t mo re po U u t ion than similar faci litiesl.l. , S<oI'l k")' l.l, SpnIOdI ""_ 23. 2\ .", r . J <>f l 

### in o ther s tates. H owever, use of f ederal BACT al o ne will not be suffi cient f or the State to achieve and mainta in attainment of the NAAQS and pr otect th e hea lth of the c ommunities downwind of these new sources. We recommen d that the E PA al so ad opt the procedu res necessary to en sure that TCEQ ha s nplici t authority and d irection t o a nalyze individual and cu mulative effects of e miss ion s from proposed sign ificant po int so urces o n reg ional o zone levels when co nsidering a perm it appli ation
. Analysis o f ozo ne e ffects shoul d i nclude ph otochemical modeling o f i mpacts to downwiod area s un de r typical high caone co n ditions. B eca use the Texas New Source R eview revi sion ru les rail in nu merous ways to meet f ede ral requ ireme nts an d t o p rotect publ ic he alth, we suppo rt th eir d isapp rova L Co nd usio n We are pleased th at EP A is taking st eps to en sure th at t he Te xas a ir perm itting PI"O(:E'S S co mplies w ith federa l la w and is protecti ve of publ ic he alth
. We beli eve that a s tro n g,. e ffective, transparent a ir p rog ram is im portant f or 

### all Texan s and w ill u ltimately red lice perm itting umeun es . c ost a nd liligation
. S incerely. 

# n (£,f1f .; J/it 

# {/-t IU**~~ ....,**  Elliott Naishtat Garnet Coleman Lon Burnam 

# ?t2L**~~** Daril Ol ivo Edd ie R od riguez Donna H oward

V

illindil Bolton Ellen Cohen