Buddy Garcia, Chairman Larry R. Soward, Commissioner Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Commissioner Glenn Shankle, Executive Director 

## ItECEIV£D
- 6PUL 

## AIR**PL.~HNIHG** 

## SEC 

## 08 HAY -6 PM 2: 12 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting Texas by Reducing andPreventing Pollution 

### May 1,2008 Docket No. 2007-1244-SIP ProjectNo. 2007-057-SIP-NR

Richard E. Greene, Regional Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

- Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 Dear Mayor Greene: On 

### April 16, 2008, the Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (Commission) adoptedrevisions to the State ImplementationPlan (SIP) for Ozone (03) 

### and Fine ParticulateMatter (PM2

### .5) 

### transport emissions. The Commission adopted this revision to the SIP documenting how the Commission has met the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), § 110(a)(1) requirement for states to submit SIPs after the promulgation ofnew or revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to meet the requirements ofFCAA, § 110(a)(2), including FCAA, § 110(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport of0 3 

### and/orPM2.5• 

### Enclosed are the proposed revisions to the SIP, a public hearing certification, a complete record ofthe public hearing, and the accompanying order. Ilookforward to yourexpeditious approval ofthese SIP revisions. Sincerely,

# ~~6YOO Chairman BG/ts Enclosures
cc: The Honorable RickPerry, GovernorofTexas Mr. Auburn Mitchell, Office ofBudget, Planning andPolicy, Office ofthe Governor Mr. Glenn Shankle, ExecutiveDirector, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512-239-1000 • Internet address: www.tceq.state.tx.us Ilrinltd on recvcleu J)i:ll1er usills:! !)l)v-bdSed ink

## TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS

This is to certify that the attached are true and correct copies ofdocuments for a revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan, adopted on April 16, 2008, pursuant to 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (C.P.R.) § 

### 51.104. I amthe records administrator for the Air QualityDivision ofthe Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (Commission). 

# JlNrtd2<a4z!-

usanaM. HilJebrand, P.E. Director, Air Quality Division Texas Commission on Environmental QualityTexas Commission on Environmental Quality Public Hearing December 11. 2007 Concerning the Interstate Transport of Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Project No. 2007-057-SIP-NR

### INTRODUCTION
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission) held a public hearing in Austin on December 11, 2007, to receive testimony regarding proposed revisionstothe state implementation plan (SIP) to meet requirements ofthe Federal Clean AirAct relating to the interstate transport of Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.

### s).



### The comment period closed on January7,2008. All testimonyand comments have been reviewed and seriouslyconsidered. This hearing record contains a complete record ofthe public hearing and is divided into the following four sections:

o Public Notification and Proposal

o 

### Written and Oral Testimony
o Evaluation ofTestimony
o Staff Recommendations/Order

Additional copies ofthis hearing record are maintained in the TCEQ central office at 12100 Park35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. For further information, 

### please contact Kim Herndon at (512) 239- 1421.

# PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND PROPOSAL

### PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Notification to the public ofthe 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, 

### November 9, 2007 Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 

### November 9, 2007 Houston Chronicle, 

### November 9, 2007

2. Publication ofthe Public Hearing Notice in the November 23, 2007, issue of the Texas Register 

### (32 TexReg 8603).

3. Correspondence forwarding the notice of public hearing to the following officials and agencies: Speaker ofthe House Lieutenant Governor Alamo Area Council of Governments Capital Area Planning Council City of Victoria Planning Department Dallas Department of Environmental and Health Services Dallas Department ofAviation East Texas Council of Governments EI Paso City-County Health and Environmental District EI Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization Federal Highway Administration Fort Worth Environmental Management Department Galveston County Health District Houston Department of Health and Human Services

### Harris County Public Health and Environmental Services North Central Texas Council of Governments Houston-Galveston Area Council South East Texas Regional Planning Commission Texas Department of Transportation Texas Transportation Institute Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality New Mexico Environmental Department Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality U. S. Environmental Protection AgencyExample of Newspaper Classified Ad Fort Worth Star-Telegram, November9, 2007Buddy Garcia, Chairman Larry R. Soward, Commissioner Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Commissioner Glenn Shankle, Executive Director 

### TEXAS COlVIMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting Texas byReducingandPreventingPollution



### NOTICE OFPUBLIC HEARING ONPROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATIONPLAN The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ) will conduct a public hearing to receive testimony regarding proposed revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) to meet the requirements ofthe Federal Clean AirAct (FCAA), §110(a)(2)(D)(i) relating to the interstate transport of Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter (PM25). 

### The proposed revisions reference existing nitrogen oxides control strategies to reduce the concentration ofeight-hour ozone in Texas, as well as reference the state's participation in the Federal Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to reduce transport of PM25· 

### The proposed revisions verifY that the Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review permitting programs and Visibility programs are being implemented in Texas. The proposed revisions, once adopted, would fulfill Texas' obligation regarding interstate transport ofeighthour ozone and PM25 

### under §II0(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Federal Clean Air Act. There is no associated rulemaking withthis SIP revision. A public hearing onthis proposal will be held in Austin, on December 11,2007, at 10:00 a.m., at TCEQ's Austin Headquarter Office, Building B, 12100 Park 35 Circle. The hearing will be structured for the receipt oforal or written comments by interested persons. Registration will begin 30 minutes priorto the hearing. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order ofregistration. There will be no open discussion during the hearing; however, TCEQ staffwill be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes priorto the hearing. Persons who have special communication or other accommodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact the Air Quality Division at (512) 239-4900. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. Comments may be submitted to Kim Herndon, MC 206, Air Quality Division, ChiefEngineer's Office, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, or faxed to (512) 239-5687. Electronic comments may be submitted at www5.tceq.state.tx.us/rules/ecomments/. 

### File size restrictions may apply to comments being submitted via the eComments system. All comments pertaining to the interstate transport ofeight-hour ozone and PM25 

### SIP revision proposal shouldreference Project Number 2007-057-SIP-NR. The comment period closes on January 7, 2008. Copies of the proposed revision may be viewed at the commission's web site at http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/transport/transportsip.html. 

### For further information, please contactKim Herndon, Air Quality Planning Section, (512) 239-1421. Issued inAustin, Texas on November 7, 2007.

P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512-239-1000 • Internet address: www.tceq.state.tx.us printed on recycled paperusing soy-based ink.

# • • Notice ofPublic Hearing on ProposedRevisions to the State Implementation Plan The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ) will conduct a public hearing to receive testimony regarding proposed revisions to the state implementationplan (SIP) to meetthe requirements ofthe Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), §110(a)(2)(D)(i) relating to the interstate transport of Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter (pM,..). The proposed revisions reference existing nitrogen oxides control strategies to reduce the concentration of eight-hourozone inTexas, as well as reference the state'sparticipation inthe Federal Clean AirInterstate Rule (CAIR) to reduce transport of 

### PM". The proposed revisions verify thatthe Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration andNonattainmentNew SourceReviewpermittingprograms andVisibilityprogramsarebeingimplementedinTexas. Theproposed revisions, once adopted, would fulfill Texas' obligation regarding interstatetransport ofeight-hourozone andPM" under §II0(a)(2)(D)(i) ofthe Federal Clean AirAct. There is no associatedrulemaking with this SIP revision. Apublic hearing on this proposalwill be held in Austin, onDecember 11,2007, at 10:00a.m., atTCEQ'sAustinHeadquarterOffice,Building B, 12100Park35 Circle. The hearing will be structured forthe receipt oforal or written comments by interested persons. Registration will begin 30 minutes prior to the hearing. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order ofregistration. There will be no open discussion during the hearing; however, TCEQ staffwill be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes priorto the hearing. Persons who have special communication or other accommodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact the Air Quality Division at (512) 239-4900. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. Comments may be submitted to Kim Herndon, MC 206, Air Quality Division, Chief Engineer's Office, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, or faxed to (512) 239-5687. Electronic comments may be submitted at www5.tceq.state.tx.us/rules/ecomments/. File size restrictions may apply to comments being submitted via the eComments system. All comments pertaining to the interstate transport ofeight-hour ozone and PM" SIP revision proposal should reference Project Number 2007-057-SIP-NR. The comment period closes on January 7, 2008. County, Texas; TYPE OF FACILI Y: convenience store with retail sales ofgasoline; RULES VIOLAT D: 30TAC §334.48(c), by failing to conducteffectivemanualorauto atic inventorycontrol procedures for all underground storage tanks USTs) at the facility used in the retail sale of petroleum substanc s used as a motor fuel; and 30 TAC §334.50(b)(l)(A) and (d)(4) )(ii)(II) and Texas Water Code, §26.3475(c)(I), by failing to moni r the USTs in a mannerto detect a release at a frequency ofat leas once every month, and failing to perform an automatic test for subs ance loss that can detect a release which equals or exceeds a rate of .2 gallons per hour from the UST system; PENALTY: $6,450; ST F ATTORNEY: Lena Roberts, Litigation Division, MC 175, (512 239-0019; REGIONAL OFFICE: Houston Regional Office, 5425 Po k Street, Suite H, Houston, Texas 77023, (713) 767-3500
. TRD-200705554 Mary R. Risner Director, Litigation Division Texas Commission on Environmen I Quality Filed: November 13, 2007 

# • 

# • failing to conductprocess control t sting and failing to conductproper flow measurement procedures; ENALTY: $41,170; Supplement Environmental Project offset amo t of$41,170 applied to Hamilton County; STAFF ATTORNEY: Le Roberts, Litigation Division, MC 175, (512) 239-0019; REGIONA OFFICE: Waco Regional Office, 6801 Sanger Avenue, Suite 2500 Waco, Texas 76710-7826, (254) 751-0335. TRD-200705552 Mary R. Risner Director. Litigation Division Texas Commission on Environmen Filed: November 13, 2007
Notice ofOpportunity to Com ent on ShutdownlDefault Orders ofAdministrative Enfo ementActions The Texas Commission on Enviro ental Quality (commission) staff is providing an opportunity for tten public comment on the listed Shutdown/DefaultOrder(SIDO). xasWaterCode (TWC), §26.3475 authorizes the commission to orde the shutdown ofany underground storage tank (UST) system found t be noncompliant with release detection, spill and overfill preventio , and/or, afterDecember 22, 1998, cathodic protection regulations of he commission, until such time as the owner/operatorbrings the UST systeminto compliance withthose regulations. The commission pro oses a Shutdown Order after the owneroroperatorofaUSTfacility fails toperformrequiredcorrective actions within 30 days afterrecei g notice ofthe release detection, spillandoverfillprevention, and/o afterDecember22, 1998, cathodic protection violations documented the facility. The commissionproposes a Default Order when the st ffhas sent an executive director's preliminary report and petition (E PRP) to an entity outlining the alleged violations; the proposedpen Ity; and theproposedtechnical requirements necessaryto bring the titybackintocompliance; and the entity fails to request a hearing on ematterwithin 20 days ofits receiptofthe EDPRP orrequests a h aring and fails to participate atthe hearing. In accordance with TWC, §7.075, this notice oftheproposed orderandtheopportunityto comm tispublishedinthe TexasRegister no laterthanthe 30thdaybeforeth date onwhichthepubliccomment period closes. The commission 11 consider any written comments received and the commissionmay ithdraw orwithholdapproval ofa SIDO ifacomment discloses fact or considerations thatindicate that consentto theproposed SIDO is i appropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirem ts ofthe statutes and rules within the commission'sjurisdiction, or e commission's orders and permits issued in accordance with the co ission's regulatory authority. Additional notice ofchanges to a pr posed SIDO is not required to be publishedifthose changes are ma einresponseto written comments. Acopy oftheproposed SIDO is a ilable forpublic inspection atboth thecommission'scentraloffice, 10 tedat 12100Park35 Circle, Building A, 3rd Floor, Austin, Texas 7 53, (512) 239-3400 and at the applicableregional office listed as fo lows. Written comments about the SIDO shall be sentto the attorney esignated for the SIDO atthe commission's central office at P.O. B x 13087, MC 175, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 and mustbe received y 5:00 p.m. on January 4, 2008. Written comments may also be s t by facsimile machine to the attorney at (512) 239-3434. The co ission attorneys are available to discuss the SIDO and/or the co ent procedure at the listed phone numbers; however, comments on e SIDO shall be submitted to the commission in writing. (I) COMPANY: Airtex Inves nts, Inc. dba Time Mart 10; DOCKET NUMBER: 2006-18 -PST-E; TCEQ ID NUMBER: RNI01849693; LOCATION: 852 Telephone Road, Houston, Harris


### INADDITION November23, 

### 2007 32 

### TexReg 8603Notice ofWater Quality Appli tions The following notices were issue during the period ofOctober 25, 2007 through November 13,2007. The following require the applic s to publish notice in anewspaper. Public comments, requests forpu ic meetings, orrequests for acontested case hearing may be submit dto the Office ofthe ChiefClerk,

Copies ofthe proposed revision may be viewed at the commission's web site at http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/transportltransportsip.html. For further information, please contact Kim Hemdon, Air Quality Planning Section, (512) 239-1421. TRD·200705485 Robert Martinez Director, Environmental Law Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Filed: November 9, 2007 Mail Code 105, P.O. Box 13087,Austfn, Texas 78711-3087, WITHIN 30DAYS OFTHEDATEOFNEWSP ERPUBLICATIONOFTHE NOTICE. INFORMATION SECTION AQUA TEXAS INC has applied for renewal ofTPDES Permit No. WQOOl2303001 which authorizes th discharge oftreated domestic wastewater at a daily average flow n t to exceed 15,000 gallons per day. The facility is located at 5818 aloma, approximately 300 feet west ofGoslin Road and approximat y 1,500 feet southofRoot Road in the community ofSpring in Harris County, Texas
. CITY OF DUMAS has applied to TCEQ for a new pennit, proposed TPDES PermitNo. WQOO101 1002, to authorize the discharge oftreateddomestic wastewaterat an ual averageflow notto exceed 1,940,000 gallons per day. The faci!' will be located approximately one mile east ofU.S. Highway 287 d south ofthe City ofDumas on East 19th Street in Moore County, T xas. CITY PUBLIC SERVICE OF SAN ANTONIO, which operates the O.w. Sommers/J.T. Deely/J.K. Spru SteamElectric Station, has applied for a major amendmentto TP ES PermitNo. WQ0001514000 to authorize an increase in the daily verage flow at Outfall 007 from 1,000,000,000 to 1,440,000,000 gal ns per day and maximum daily flow 1,380,000,000 to 1,800,000,00 gallons per day; to authorize an increase in the maximum pH from .0 to 10.0 standard units at Outfall 109; to authorize the discharge f low volume waste and quench water at Outfall 109; to authorize th discharge ofcar and equipment wash waterat Outfalls 104 and 112. he currentpermit authorizes the discharge ofonce-through cooling terandpreviously monitored effluents (PMEs)(low volume waste ndlor metal cleaning waste from internal Outfall 101, 102, 108 and 1 2, ash transport water, otherlow volume waste and/or metal cleanin waste from internal Outfall 103, coalpile runofffrom internal Outfa 104, discharge from apond containing storm water from material orage areas, flue gas desulphurization (FGD) scrubbersludge andl metalcleaningwaste from internal Outfall 109, treated domestic stewater at a daily average flow not to exceed 0.04 million gallons per day via internal Outfall 110, storm water at internal Outfall 113, 115, 116, 117, 118 and 014) from Sommers Units 1 & 2 and from De ly Units 1 & 2 at a daily average flow not to exceed 1,440,000,000 llons perday via Outfall 001; low volume waste and/ormetal cleanin waste and storm waterfrom construction activities on an intermitt t and flow variable basis via Outfall 002; storm water from diked s rage areas on an intermittent and flow variable basis via Outfall 00
. and once-through cooling water and previously monitored effluents (PMEs) (storm water, wastewater from fire boosterpumps, washdo water and storm waterfrom construction activities from internal tfall 712, apond containing storm water runoff(sludge/fly ash dispo I area and landfill area) from internal Outfall 713) from Spruce U it lat a daily average flow not to exceed 1,000,000,000 gallons per y. The facility is located adjacent to Calaveras Lake at9599 Gardner oad, andeast-southeastoftheCity ofSan Antonio, BexarCounty, Te as. HARRIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL ILITYDISTRICT NO. 250 has applied for a new permit, propose Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) PermitN . WQOOI4811 001, to authorize the discharge oftreateddomestic wast waterata daily averageflow notto exceed 100,000 gallons per day. e facility was previously permitted underTPDES PermitNo. W 0012685001 which expired May I, 2007. The facility is located at 6 90 Huffmeister Road, Houston, in Harris County, Texas. HARRIS COUNTY MUNlCIP UTILITYDISTRICTNO. 286 has applied for a renewal ofTPDES errnitNo. WQ0013020001, which authorizes thedischargeoftreated omesticwastewateratadailyaver- 

# •

• • 

# •

• Notice ofPublic Hearings on P oposed Revisions to 30 TAC Chapter213 The Texas Commission on Enviro ental Quality (commission) will conduct apublic hearingto receive estimonyconcerningproposedrevisions to 30 TAC Chapter 213,.E wards Aquifer, underthe requirements ofTexas Health and Safety ode, §382.017; Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001, SubchapterB ThisrulemakingimplementsHB 30 8, 80thLegislature, 2007,Regular Session, by revising the 30 TAC hapter 213 fee structure for water pollution abatementplans andcon 'buting zoneplans submittedto the TCEQ forreview by the Edwards quiferProtection Program. The commission will hold apublic hearing on this proposal in Austin onDecember 10, 2007 at 10:00a.m attheTexas CommissiononEnvironmental Quality Complex locate at 12100Park 35 Circle in BuildingE, Room20IS. Thehearing wi] be structuredforthereceiptoforal orwritten comments by interested ersons. Registration willbegin 30 minutes priorto the hearings. Indi iduals maypresent oral statements whencalleduponinorderof regis tion. Therewillbeno opendiscussionduring thehearing; however, c mmission staffwillbeavailableto informally discuss the proposal 30 inutes before the hearing. Persons who have special comm ication or other accommodation needs who are planning to attend he hearing should contact Lesley Williamson, Office ofLegal Servic s, at (512) 239-2461. Comments may be submitted t Lesley Williamson, MC 205, Office of Legal Services, Texa Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Aust , Texas 78711-3087, or faxed to (512) 239-4808. Electronic comments may be submitted at http://www5.tceq.state.tx.us/rulesl. omments. File size restrictions mayapplyto comments submittedtoughtheeComments system. All comments should reference Rule roject Number 2007-032-213-CE. The comment period closes Janu 7, 2008. Copies ofthe proposed rules can be obtained fro the commission's Web site at http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/rul/propose_adopt.htm!. For further information, please contact Tracy Miller, Field Operations Support Division, (512) 239-4127. TRD-200705483 Robert Martinez Director, Environmental Law Divisi Texas Commission on Environmen Filed: November 9, 2007



### 32 TexReg 8604 November23,2007 Texas Register

### REVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) CONCERNING OZONE (03) 

### AND FINE PARTICULATE MATTER (pM 1.S) 

### TRANSPORTEMISSIONS

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

PROJECTNO. 2007-057-SIP-NR
Proposed November7, 2007

### SECTIONVI. CONTROL STRATEGY A. 

### Introduction (No change.) B. Ozone (No change.) C. ParticulateMatter (No change.) D. CarbonMonoxide (No change.) E. Lead (No change.) F. Oxides ofNitrogen (No change.) G. SulfurDioxide (No change.) H. ConformitywiththeNational AmbientAir Quality Standards (No change.) I. Site Specific (No change.) J. Mobile Source Strategies (No change.) K. 

### Clean AirInterstate Rule (No change.) 

### L. Transport (New)

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone (03) 

### and fine particulate matter (PM2 .S

) 

### transport sets forth how the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will meet the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), section 11O(a)(I) requirement for states to submit SIPs within three years after the promulgation of new or revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to meet the requirements of FCAA, § 11O(a)(2), including FCAA, § 11O(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport of0 3 

### and/or PM2 .5. 

### On July 18, 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone and a revised NAAQS forparticulate matter (PM). For ozone, the EPAreplaced the one-hour standard withan eight-hour standard and for PM, the EPA added anew 24-hour standard and anew annual standard for particulate matter of2.5 microns and less (PM2 .S

). 

### The purpose ofthis SIP revision is to document that any emissions from Texas' sources that may contribute to nonattainment in another statehavebeenmitigatedthrough existing control strategies. 

### On April 25, 2005, the EPA published a finding of states' failure to submit in the 

### Federal Register (Volume 70, Number 78) thatrequired SIPs relating to interstate transport ofeight-hour ozone and PM2 .S, 

### which started a two-year clock for the promulgation of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). The finding offailure to submit identified Texas as a state that had notproperly addressed interstate transportpollution. Several areas inTexas arenonattainment for the eight-hour ozone NAAQS, but the entire state is currently designated attainment for the 1997 24-hourand annual standards for PM2 .S• 

### The EPA's 

### "SIP Guidance on Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) Findings ofFailure to Submit" dated August 11, 2006, notes that states participating in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) will satisfy the transport SIP requirements for ozone and PM2 .5 

### by submitting a CAIR SIP or by relying on the CAIR FIP to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do not interfere with attainment in another state. Texas is participating in the federal CAIR program for PM2 .S 

### and is considered as having addressed annual sulfur dioxide (S02) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) transport for PM2 .5. 

### Therefore, Texas' PM2 .S 

### transport SIP obligation has been partially fulfilled by the submission ofthe CAIR SIP to the EPA on August 3, 2006. This SIP revision also includes verification that the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) permitting programs and the Protection of Visibility requirements are being implementedinTexas. Texas is not covered under the CAIR program for eight-hour ozone contribution. However, in addition to the annual NOx reductions from the CAIR program Texas has a strategy in place for the eastern part ofthe state to reduce NOx emissions from electric utilities. This strategy, along with other NOx reducing programs in current ozone SIP revisions, is the basis ofTexas' EightHour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter (PM2 .S) 

### Transport SIP submittal. The control strategies that are comparable to the CAIR program include: Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations; Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission Specifications; Texas-specific legislation from the 2001 76tlJ. session in Senate Bill 7 (SB 7) thatrequires aregional NOxcap and trade program; and a Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECn program in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria nonattainment area. The combined electric generating unit (EGU) specific strategies listed above have reduced NOx by an estimated 598 tons per day from 2000 through 2005. This equates to an estimated 218,270 tons peryear. Modeling indicatesthat an additional two tons perday will bereducedby 2009, for a total of600 tons perday or 219,000 tons peryear. 

### In addition, the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria


### ES-l

### (HGB) MECT program for non-electric generating facilities has reduced NOx emissions an additional 105 tons per day or 38,325 tons peryear from 2000 through 2004, with an additional 76 tons per day or 27,740 tons per year reduction expected in 2009. In 

### addition to the listed reductions that are consistentwith CAIR., Texashas numerous other strategies through eight- and one-hour ozone initiatives that are described in Chapter 2. These strategies include, but are not limited to: programs to reduce NOx emissions from major industrial, commercial, and institutional sources; cement kiln 

### controls; transportation control measures (TCMs); local voluntary mobile source emission reduction programs (VMEP); Texas Low Emission Diesel (TxLED); andthe Texas EmissionReduction Program (TERP). In 

### additionto the control strategies that are already inplaceto reduce NOxemissions in Texas, an EPA document, 

### "Technical Support Documentfor the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule

- Air QualityModeling, March 2005," states that modeling predicts that all four ofthe nonattainment areas (Denver, Memphis-West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge) in states nearest to Texas (Colorado, Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri, and Louisiana) will be attaining the eight-hour ozone standard in 2010 afterCAIR. emissions reductions have been made. The EPA's analysis included Texas emissions east ofLaredo, including the Beaumont-PortArthur, Dallas-FortWorth, and the Houston-Galveston-Brazorianonattainmentareas. In 

### conclusion, the existing environmental and technical work contained in the EPA's document, 

### "Technical Support Documentfor the Final Clean AirInterstate Rule

- Air Quality Modeling, March 2005," conftrms that all nonattainment areas in adjacent states will be attaining the eighthour ozone standard. In 

### addition, the EPA's recognition that CAIR. is adequate to demonstrate compliance with the PM2.5 

### transport requirements shows Texas has adequately addressed any potential transport issues associated with eight-hour ozone and PM2.5 

### and fulftlled its eight-hour ozone andPM2.5

### transport SIP obligations.



### ES-2

### SECTIONV: LEGAL AUTHORITY A. General The TCEQ has the legal authority to implement, maintain and enforce the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The first airpollution control act, known as the Clean AirAct ofTexas, was passedby 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 and 2005. In 

### 1989, the TCAA was codified as Chapter382 ofthe Texas Health & 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 ofair 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 ofthe TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found in 

### boththe Texas Water Code and the TCAA. Specifically, the authority ofthe 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 ofthe Executive Director. This Chapter 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 ofthe TNRCC until September 1, 

### 2013, and changed the name ofthe TNRCC to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level ofquality to be maintained in the state's air and to control the quality ofthe 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 commissionto develop an inventory ofemissions; conductresearch 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 considerationfactors bearinguponhealth, 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 ofthe state as well as withindustries and the Federal Government; and establish and operate a systemof permits for construction ormodification offacilities. Local government authority is found in SubchapterE ofthe 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 territorialjurisdiction, 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 ofair pollution not inconsistent with the provisions of the TCAAortherules ororders ofthe commission. Subchapters F, G, and H ofthe TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establish low emission vehicle requirements for mass transit authorities, local government fleets, and private fleets; create a mobile emissions reduction credit program; establish vehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas ofthe state, consistent with the requirements ofthe federal Clean Air

1

### Act; establish gasoline volatility and low emission diesel standards; and fund and authorize participating counties to implement low-income vehicle repair assistance, retrofit and accelerated vehicleretirementprograms. B. Applicable Law The following statutes and rules provide necessary authority to adopt and implement the SIP. Therules listedbelowhavepreviouslybeen submittedas partofthe SIP. Statutes TEXAS HEALTH & 

### SAFETYCODE, Chapter 382 TEXAS WATER CODE All sections ofeach subchapterare included, unless otherwisenoted. September 1, 2005 September 1, 2005
Chapter5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission SubchapterA: General Provisions SubchapterB: Organization ofthe TexasNatural Resource Conservation Commission SubchapterC: Texas NaturalResource Conservation Commission SubchapterD: General Powers andDuties ofthe Commission SubchapterE: AdministrativeProvisions for Commission SubchapterF: Executive Director(except §§ 5.225,5.226,5.227,5.2275,5.232, and 5.236) SubchapterH: Delegation ofHearings SubchapterI: Judicial Review SubchapterJ: ConsolidatedPermitProcessing SubchapterL: Emergency andTemporary Orders (§§ 5.514,5.5145 and 5.515 only) Chapter7: Enforcement SubchapterA: General Provisions (§§ 7.001, 7.002, 7.0025, 7.004, 7.005 only) SubchapterB: CorrectiveAction and Injunctive Relief(§ 7.032 only) SubchapterC: AdministrativePenalties SubchapterE Criminal Offenses andPenalties: §§ 7.177, 7.179-7.181 Rules All ofthe following rules are found in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code, as ofthe following effective dates: Chapter7, MemorandaofUnderstanding, §§ 7.110 and 7.119 Chapter35, Subchapters A-C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders andPermits; Temporary Suspension orAmendment of PermitConditions Chapter39, Public Notice, §§ 39.201; 39.401; 39.403(a) and (b)(8)-(10); 39.405(f)(1) and (g);39.409; 39.411 (a), (b)(1)-(6) and (8)-(10) and (c)(1)-(6) and (d); 39.413(9), (11), (12) and (14); 39.418(a) and (b)(3) and (4); 39.419(a), (b),(d) and (e); 39.420(a), (b) and (c)(3) and (4); 39.423 (a) and (b); 39.601; 39.602; 39.603; 39.604; and 39.605 Chapter55, Requestfor Contested CaseHearings; Public

11 

### May 2,2002 December 10, 1998
August 15,2002

August29, 2002

### Comment, §§ 

### 55.1; 55.21(a)

- (d), (e)(2), (3) and (12), (f) 

### and (g); 55.101(a), (b), (c)(6)

- (8); 55.103; 55.150; 5.5.152(a)(1), (2) and (6) and (b); 

### 55.154; 55.156; 55.200; 55.201(a)

- (h); 

### 55.203; 55.205; 55.206; 55.209 and 55.211 Chapter 101: General Air Quality Rules June 23, 2005 Chapter 106: Permits by Rule, SubchapterA 

### June 30, 2004 Chapter 111: Control ofAirPollution from VisibleEmissions November 18, 2004 and Particulate Matter Chapter 112: Control ofAirPollution from SulfurCompounds July 16, 1997 Chapter 113: Standards ofPerformance for Hazardous AirPollutants June 15,2005 and for Designated Facilities andPollutants Chapter 114: Control ofAirPollution from MotorVehicles July 19,2007 Chapter 115: Control ofAirPollution from Volatile Organic Compounds March 15,2007 Chapter 116: Permits for New Construction orModification June 15,2005 Chapter 117: Control ofAirPollution from Nitrogen Compounds June 14, 2007 Chapter 118: Control of

### Air Pollution Episodes March 5, 2000 Chapter 122, § 122.122: Potential to Emit December 11,2002 Chapter 122, § 122.215: MinorPermitRevisions June 3, 2001 Chapter 122, § 122.216: Applications for MinorPermitRevisions June 3, 2001 Chapter 122, § 122.217: Procedures forMinorPermitRevisions December 11, 2002 Chapter 122, § 122.218: MinorPermitRevision Procedures for Pennit Revisions June 3, 2001 Involving the Use ofEconomic Incentives, Marketable Permits, and Emissions Trading

111

### LIST OF ACRONYMS - 

### BPA

- Beaumont-PortArthur CAIR

- Clean AirInterstate Rule CARE

- Clean AirResponsibility Enterprise CFR

- Code ofFederal Regulations CO

- CarbonMonoxide DFW

- Dallas-FortWorth EAC

- Early Action Compact EGF

- Electric Generating Facility EGU

- Electric GeneratingUnits EPA

- United States Environmental ProtectionAgency FAR

- Flexible AttainmentRegion FCAA

- Federal Clean AirAct FIP

- Federal Implementation Plan FR

- Federal Register HECT

- HRVOC Emission Cap andTrade HGB

- Houston-Galveston-Brazoria HRVOC

- Highly Reactive Volatile Organic Compound lOP

- Increment ofProgress Lb-Pound LDAR

- LeakDetection and Repair MECT

- Mass Emission Cap andTrade MMBtu

- Million BritishThermal Unit MVEB

- MotorVehicle Emissions Budget 

### MWe - MegawattElectrical 

### MWh
- MegawattHour MOA

- Memorandum ofAgreement NAAQS

- National AmbientAir Quality Standards NCTCOG

- North CentralTexas Council ofGovernments NEGU

- Non-Electric GeneratingFacilities NLEV

- National Low EmissionVehicle NO"

- Nitrogen Oxides orOxides ofNitrogen NSR

- New Source Review 

### 0 3 - 

### Ozone PAL

- Flexible Plant-wideApplicabilityLimitPermit PM

- ParticulateMatter PMIO - 

### ParticulateMatter 10 microns andless 

### PM

### z . 5 - 

### Particulate Matter2.5 microns andless PSD

- Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration PUC

- Public Utility Commission ofTexas RACM

- Reasonable Available Control Measure RACT

- Reasonable Available ControlTechnology ROP

- Rate ofProgress SB

- SenateBill SIP

- StateImplementationPlan SOz

- SulfurDioxide TAC -Texas Administrative Code TACB

- Texas Air Control Board TCAA

- Texas Clean AirAct TCEQ

- Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission)
iv

### TCM

- Transportation Control Measure TPD

- Tons perDay TPOD

- Tons per Ozone Day TERM

- Transportation Emission Reduction Measure TERP

- Texas Emission Reduction Plan TexAQS

- Texas Air Quality Study TNRCC

- Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission TPY

- Tons per Year TxLED

- Texas 

### Low Emission Diesel VMEP

- Voluntary Mobile SourceEmission Reduction Program VOC

- Volatile Organic Compound WoE

- Weight ofEvidence



### v

### REVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) CONCERNING OZONE (03) 

### AND FINE PARTICIUTLATE MATTER (PM 2.5) 

### TRANSPORTEMISSIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: GENERAL 1.1 Background 1.2 Introduction 1.3 Health Effects 1.4 Public Hearing Information 1.5 Social and Economic Considerations 1.6 Fiscal andManpowerResources 1.7 Coordination withLocal Agencies 1.8 OrganizationResponsible forDevelopment, Implementation, and Enforcement 1.9 DataAvailability Chapter2: REQUIRED CONTROL STRATEGYELEMENTS 2.1 Background 2.2 Control Strategy Overview 2.2.1 SignificantContribution and InterfereMaintenance Elements 2.2.1.1

- Utility Electric Generationin OzoneNonattainmentAreas Emission Specifications forAttainmentDemonstrations 2.2.1.2.

- Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission Specifications
. 2.2.1.3

- SenateBill7 (76th 

### Texas Legislature) 2.2.1.4

- Houston-Galveston-BrazoriaMass Emission Cap andTrade (MECT) 2.2.1.5

- Summary ofEmissionReductions Related to Electric GeneratingUnit Strategies 2.2.2. Eight-HourOzone State ImplementationPlan (SIP) Revisions 2.2.2.1

- Houston-Galveston-BrazoriaEight-HourOzone SIP Revision 2.2.2.2

- Dallas-FortWorth Eight-HourOzone SIP Revision 2.2.2.3

- Beaumont-PortArthurEight-Hour Ozone SIP Revisions 2.2.2.4

- Austin-RoundRockEight-HourOzone Early Action Compact SIPRevision 2.2.2.5

- NortheastTexas Eight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact SIP Revision

VI

### 2.2.2.6

- San Antonio AreaEight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact SIP Revision 2.2.2.7

- Corpus Christi Eight-HourOzone Flex Plan 2.2.2.8

- VictoriaEight-HourOzoneMaintenance Plan 2.2.2.9

- EI Paso Eight-HourOzoneMaintenance Plan 2.2.3 One-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP)Revisions 2.2.3.1

- Houston-Galveston-BrazoriaOne-HourOzoneAttainment SIP Revisions 2.2.3.2

- Dallas-FortWorthOne-HourOzone Attainment SIP Revisions 2.2.3.3

- Beaumont-PortArthurOne-HourOzone Attainment SIP Revisions 2.2.3.4

- NortheastTexas Flexible AttainmentRegion (FAR) One-Hour Ozone SIP Revisions 2.2.3.5

- Regional One-Hour Ozone SIP**Revi~ion** 

### 2.2.3.6

- One-HourOzoneFlexibleAgreements 2.2.3.6.1

- Austin-SanMarcos Metropolitan Statistical Area One-Hour OzoneFlex Plan 2.2.3.6.2

- Corpus Christi One-Hour OzoneFlex Plan 2.2.4 General State ImplementationPlan (SIP) Revision Information 2.2.5 Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration (PSD) andNonattainmentNew SourceReview (NSR) Elements 2.2.5.1 Eight-Hour Ozone 2.2.5.2 FineParticulateMatter (PM2.5) 

### 2.2.5.3 Emission Credits 2.2.6 Protection ofVisibilityElements Chapter 3: FUTUREATTAINMENT PLANS

Vll

### Appendix A
B
C 

### LIST OF APPENDICES AppendixName Maps ofDistances from Texas Eight-HourOzoneNonattainmentAreas to the FourNearestNonattainmentAreas in Adjacent States Major Point Source NOx Rules and Reductions Promulgated in Texas Since 2000 Texas Electric Generating UtilityNOx Control Strategies Comparedto the Clean AirInterstateRule (CAIR)

YIll

### Number 2-1 

### LIST OF TABLE Table Name Distances from Texas Eight-Hour Ozone NonartainmentAreas to the Four Nearest-NonattainmentAreas inAdjacent States

IX

## CHAPTER 1: GENERAL 1.1 BACKGROUND "The History ofthe Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP)," a comprehensive overview ofthe SIPrevisions submittedto the EPAbythe State ofTexas, is available atthe following web site: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementationlair/sip/sipplans.html
.
1.2 INTRODUCTION This revision to the SIP for the transport ofozone and fine particulate matter of2.5 microns and less (PM2.5) 

### sets forth how the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will meet the requirements of Section llO(a)(2)(D)(i) that requires states to submit a SIP that contains adequate provisions that prohibit any source or other type ofemissions activity within the state from emitting any airpollutants in amounts thatwill:

• contribute significantly to nonattainment ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for areas in other states;

• interfere withmaintenance ofthe NAAQS by any other state;

• interfere with measures required to meet an implementation plan for any other state relatedto Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration (PSD); and

• interfere with measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other state related to regional haze andvisibility. On 

### July 18, 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone and a revised NAAQS for particulate matter (PM). For ozone, the EPAreplaced the one-hour standard with an eight-hour standard. The EPA also added anew 24- hour standard and a new annual standard for PM2.5. The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), section 110(a)(1) requires states to submit SIPs within three years after the promulgation ofnew or revised NAAQS that meet the requirements of FCAA, §110(a)(2), including FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport ofpollution. On 

### April 25, 2005, the EPA published a fmding offailure to submit SIPs relating to interstate transportinthe 

### FederalRegister(Volume 70, Number78), which starteda two-yearclockfor the promulgation ofa Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). The finding offailure to submit identified Texas as a state thathadnotproperly addressedinterstatetran.sportin its SIP. The EPA's 

### "SIP Guidance on Section 11O(a)(2)(D)(i) Findings ofFailure to Submit" dated August 11, 2006, notes that states participating in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR.) will satisfy the transport SIP requirements for ozone and PM2.5 

### by submitting a CAIR SIP or by relying on the CAIR. Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do notinterfere with attainment inanother state. Texas is participatingin the federal CAIR. program for PM2.5 

### and thus EPA's guidance is considered as having addressed annual sulfur dioxide 

### (SOz) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) transport for 

### PM z .5. 

### Therefore, Texas' 

### PM z .5 

### transport SIP obligation has been partially fulfilled by the submission ofthe CAIR SIP to the EPA on August 3, 2006. In order to completely fulfill obligations related to interstate transport ofozone and PM2.5, 

### this SIP revision includes verification that the Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration



### 1-1

### PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) permitting programs and the Protection of Visibilityrequirements arebeing implemented inTexas. Texas is not covered underthe CAIR program for eight-hourozone. However, in addition to the annual NOxreductions from the CAIR program, in 1999 the state implemented a strategy in the eastern part ofTexas to reduce NOx emissions from electric generating units (EGU). The CAIR strategy, along with other NOxreducing programs from Texas Eight-Hour Ozone SIP revisions, Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revisions, an Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Program, Eight-Hour Maintenance Plans, and One-HourOzone SIP revisions are describedunder Section 2.2, 

### "Control Strategy Overview." The combination of these NOx reduction programs fulfills the state's obligationfor an ozonetransport SIP. The control strategies include:

• UtilityElectric Generationin Ozone NonattainmentAreas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations;

• UtilityElectric Generationin East and CentralTexas Emission Specifications;

• Texas-specific legislation from the 2001 76th 

### session in Senate Bill 7 (SB 7) that requires aregional NOx cap andtrade program;

• Houston-Galveston-Brazoria nonattainment area Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program;

• Eight-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-FortWorth, andBeaumont-PortArthurareas;

• Eight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact State Implementation Plan Revisions for Austin-RoundRock, NortheastTexas, andthe SanAntonio areas;

• Eight-HourOzoneFlexProgramin the Corpus Christi area;

• Eight-HourOzone MaintenancePlans forVictoriaandEl Paso;

• One-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-FortWorth, ,Beaumont-PortArthur, NortheastTexas andRegional;

• One-HourOzone FlexPlans forAustin and Corpus Christi;

• One-Hour Ozone Northeast Texas Flexible Attainment Region State Implementation PlanRevision; andthe

• One-HourOzoneRegional State ImplementationPlanRevision. CurrentRevision 

### This SIPrevisioncontains several elements thatprovide information onhow Texas is:

• not contributing significantly to nonattainment ofthe ozone and PM2.5 

### NAAQS for areas in otherstates;

• not interfering with the maintenance ofthe ozone and PM2.5 

### NAAQS in any other state;


### 1-2

### • not interfering with measures required to meet an implementation plan for any other staterelatedtoPSD; and

• not interfering with measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other staterelated toregional haze andvisibility.
1.3 HEALTH EFFECTS In 

### 1997, the EPArevisedthe NAAQS for ozone from a one-hour to an eight-hour standardbased on scientific data that indicated that the eight-hour standard provides better protection ofpublic health from longer-term exposures to moderate levels ofozone. To supportthe eight-hour ozone standard, the EPAprovided information that indicated that even low levels ofozone can decrease lung capacity temporarily in some healthy adults and cause inflammation of lung tissue, aggravate asthma, and make people more susceptible to respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis andpneumonia. Children are at a higher risk from exposure to ozone, since they breathe more air per pound of body weightthan adults andbecause children's respiratory systems are still developing. Children also spend a considerable amount oftime outdoors during summer and during the start ofthe school year (August-October) when the highest ozone levels arerecorded. Adults most atriskto ozone exposure are outdoor workers, people exercising outside, and individuals with preexisting respiratory diseases. Also in 1997, the EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter (PM). Fine particles and precursorpollutants are emittedby a wide range ofsources, including powerplants,cars, trucks, industrial sources, and other burning or combustion-related activities. EPA has noted the following health effects associated with 

### PM 2.

### s

### exposure: premature death, aggravation ofheart and lung disease, and asthma attacks. Older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and children are particularly sensitiveto 

### PM 2.s.



### d I 

### f 

### 1.4 PUBLIC HEARINGINFORMATION Th '11 

### h ld bI" h tth fi 

### 11 

### ecommISSIon WI 0 

### apu IC eann a e 0 

### OWInghmes an ocaIOns: CITY DATE 

### TIME LOCATION Austin December 11, 2007 10:00 a.m. Texas Commissionon Environmental Quality 12100North 1-35 BuildingB, Room201A
Thepublic commentperiodwill open onNovember23,2007, andclose onJanuary 7,2008. Writtencomments willbe acceptedviamail, fax, orthroughthe e-comment system. All comments shouldreference ''the Transport SIPrevision" andProjectNumber2007-057-SIP-NR. Comments maybe submittedto KimHerndon, MC 206, StateImplementationPlanTeam, Chief Engineer's Office, Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 orfaxed to (512) 239-5687. Electronic comments may be submittedat http://www5.tceq.state.tx.us/rules/ecomments. 

### Comments mustbereceivedbyJanuary 7,2008, at 5:00p.m. The commentperiodwillbe 45-d.ays long.



### 1-3

### Copies ofthe adopted SIP revision and its appendix canbe obtained fromthe TCEQ's web site at http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipplans.html oruponrequestto: Texas CommissiononEnvironmental Quality AirQualityDivision P. O. Box 13087 Mail Code 206 Austin, Texas 78711-3087 Re: Ozone andPM2.5

### Transport SIP Information
1.S SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS 

### Fora detailed explanation ofthe social and economic issues involvedwith any ofthemeasures in this SIP submission, please refer to the preambles thatprecede each adopted rule package ofthe following referencedrules inpreviously adopted SIPs andrules forthe measure specifiedinthe SIP.

• Utility Electric Generationin Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations, Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Dallas-Fort Worth and Beaumont-Port Arthur, areas can be found in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 117, SubchapterB, Division 2;

• Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas canbe found in 30 TAC Chapter 117, SubchapterB, Division 2;

• Senate Bill 7 Regional NOx Cap can be found in TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 2;

• Mass Emission Cap and Trade can be found 

### in 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 3;

• Eight-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-FortWorth, anqBeaumont-PortArthur areas;

• Eight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact State Implementation Plan Revisions for Austin-RoundRock, NortheastTexas, andthe SanAntonio areas;

• Eight-HourOzone FlexProgram

### in the Corpus Christi area;

• Eight-HourOzone Maintenance Plan inthe Victoria area;

• One-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-ForthWorth, Beaumont-PortArthur, andRegional;

• One-Hour Ozone Flex Programs for Austin-Round Rock area and the Corpus Christi area;

• One-HourOzoneNortheastTexas FlexibleAttainmentRegion; andthe

• One-HourOzoneRegional State ImplementationPlanRevision.



### 1-4

### Specific informationregarding social and economic considerations for these SIP revisions, EACs and the ozone flex programs canbe found within these packages. These documents canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipplans.html


### 1.6 FISCAL AND MANPOWERRESOURCES The TCEQ has determined that its fiscal and manpower resources are adequate and will not be adversely affected through the implementation ofthis plan. Specific information regarding the TCEQbudgetis available uponrequest.


### 1.7 COORDINATIONWITHLOCAL 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 couldbe utilizedifenforcementactivities are delegatedto the TCEQ from the EPA.


### 1.8 ORGANIZATIONS RESPONSffiLE FOR DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT The TCEQ is the agency delegated authority by the Texas Legislature regarding the protection of air quality in the State ofTexas. Other local government entities also have limited authority regarding air quality matters inthe State ofTexas.


### 1.9DATA AVAILABILITY TheTCEQ affirms thatitwillretain all data usedinthe preparation ofthis SIPrevision. All supporting documentation and dataare available from the TCEQ uponrequest orare publicly available viathe TCEQ website at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipplans.html. Additional informationmaybe subjectto confidentialityrestrictions, ifapplicable.



### 1-5

### CHAPTER2: REQumEDCONTROLSTRATEGYELEMENTS 2.1 BACKGROUND Texas is not covered under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) program for eight-hour ozone. However, in addition to the annual nitrogen oxides (NOx) reductions from the CAIRprogram, in 1999 the state implemented a strategy in the eastern part ofTexas to reduce NOx emissions from electric generating units (EGU). The CArR strategy, along with other NOx reducing programs from Texas Eight-Hour Ozone SIP revisions, Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revisions, an Eight-HourOzoneFlexProgram, Eight-HourMaintenance Plans, One-HourOzone SIPrevisions, and One-Hour Ozone maintenance plans are described under Sections 2.2.1 thru 2.2.3 in this chapter. The combination ofthese NOx reduction programs fulfills the state's obligation for an ozone transport SIP. The control strategies specific to electric generating units (EGU) include:



## •

•

•

• Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations; Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission Specifications; Texas-specific legislation from the 2001 76th 

### session in Senate Bill 7 (SB 7) thatrequires aregional NOxcap andtradeprogram; and Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program in the Houston-GalvestonBrazorianonattainmentarea; In addition to EGU control strategies specific forNOx controls in EasternTexas, Texas has eighthour ozone state implementation plan (SIP) revisions in place for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria (HGB) Area, the Dallas-FortWorth (DFW) Area, and the Beaumont-PortArthur (BPA) Area, as well as maintenance plans for Victoria and El Paso. The state also has Early Action Compact SIP revisions for Eight-Hour Ozone in place for the Austin-Round Rock Area, the NortheastTexas Area, andthe SanAntonio Area. An Eight-HourOzone FlexProgramis inplace for Corpus Christi, as well as Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plans for Victoria and El Paso. One-Hour Ozone SIP revisions were developed for HGB, DFW, BPA, Northeast Texas, and a Regional Strategy, as well as One-Hour Ozone Flexible Agreements for the Austin-San Marcos Metropolitan Statistical Area and Corpus Christi. For PM2.5, 

### Texas is included in the federal CArR, andhas submitteda CAIR SIP to the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).


### 2.2 CONTROL STRATEGY OVERVIEW The EPA's guidance for interstate transport SIPs requires states to submit a SIP that contains adequate provisions that prohibit any source or other type ofemissions activity within the state from emitting any airpollutants in amounts thatwill: (1) contribute significantly to nonattainment of the National Ambient 

### Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for areas in other states; (2) interfere with maintenance ofthe NAAQS in any other state; (3) interfere with measures required to meet an implementation plan for any other state relatedto Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration (PSD); and



### 2-1

### (4) interfere with measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other state relatedtoregional haze andvisibility. 2.2.1 Significant Contributions andInterferewithMaintenance Elements Texas is making a section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP submission to address significant contribution to nonattainment and interference withmaintenance ofthe eight-hour ozone standard in another state, because Texas is not covered by CAIR for eight-hour ozone. The commission concurs with the EPA's CAIR modeling EPA document, "Technical Support Documentfor the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule

- Air Quality Modeling, March 2005," 

### which states modeling for all four ofthe nearest non-Texas nonattainment cities (Denver, Memphis-West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge) will be attaining the eight-hour ozone standard in 2010 after CAIR emissions reductions have been made. Therefore, all four ofthe nearest nonattainment cities will be attaining the eighthour ozone standard in 2010 after CAIR is fully implemented. In 

### addition to implementing CAIR for PM2.5, 

### Texas has implemented requirements for emission reductions from electric generating units (EGU), whichprovides assurances that emissions from Texas will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state. Table 2-1, Distancesfrom Texas Eight-Hour OzoneNonattainmentAreas to the FourNearest-Nonattainment Areas in Adjacent States, 

### provides a listing ofthe mileage from the center ofthe nonattainment areas in Texas and the nearest outer boundary of the nonattainment areas in Texas to Denver, Memphis-West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge. Appendix A provides maps of these locations. Table 2-1 Distancesfrom Texas Eight-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to the Four Nearest- }Ii

. 

### A
. Ad' 

### S

onattaznment reas zn ljacent tates 

### City Distance from City to City in Distance from Nonattainment Miles Areato CityinMiles Dallas Houston Beaumont DFW HGB BPA Denver 663 878 907 605 815 862 St. Louis 550 680 630 501 617 603 WestMemphis 413 478 416 371 416 392 Memphis 422 481 423 378 423 394 BatonRouge 369 255 178 320 194 152 Thefollowing informationprovides additional supportto theEPA's modeling thatTexas does not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance ofthe NAAQS in another state. The additional supporting information focuses specifically on ozone specific EGU strategies that correspond with EPA's CAIR ozone program, Additional information is provided regarding other eight-hour ozone strategies in Ozone SIP revisions, EAC SIP revisions, the Ozone Flex Program in Corpus Christi and Ozone Maintenance Plans. Additional information regarding one-hour ozone strategies has also been provided regarding One-Hour Ozone SIP revisions and One-Hour OzoneFlexibleAgreements. 2.2.1.1 Utility Electric Generation in 

### Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations The regulatory provisions relating to the Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations require different specifications for eachnonattainment area in Texas. Theseprovisions apply to each electric generating facility that generates electric energy for compensation, or are owned or operatedby amunicipality orPublic Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) regulated utility or any of its successors, regardless of

2-2

### whether the successor is a municipality or is regulated by the PUC. The compliance date for theseprovisions was May 1,2005. Specific provisions in place for the specified nonattainment areas in Texas: the HGB area, the DFW area, andthe BPA area are describedbelow: -Houston-Ga1veston-Brazoria. The owner or operator of each utility boiler, auxiliary steam boiler, or stationary gas turbine located in the HGB eight-hour ozone nonattainment area must ensure that NOx emissions do not exceed the lower of any applicable permit limit in a permit issued on or after January 2, 2001, for which the owner or operator submitted an application determined to be administratively complete by the executive director before January 2, 2001, any limit in a permit by rule under which construction commencedby January 2,2001; orthe following rates, in pounds per million British thermal units (lblMMBtu) heat input, on the basis ofdaily and 30-day averaging periods specified in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 117.108 and as specified in the Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program in 30 TAC Chapter 101. NOxrates used to determine the daily and 30-day averaging caps for utility boilers include a range of: gas-fired 0.030 lblMMBtu; coal-fired and oil-fired 0.050 lblMMBtu for wall-fired and 0.045 lblMMBtu for tangential-fired; auxiliary steam boilers 0.030 lb/MMBtu; and stationary gas turbines 0.032 lblMMBtu (including duct burners used in turbine exhaustducts). -Dallas-Fort Worth. The owner or operator ofeach utility boiler located in the DFW eight-hour ozone nonattainment area must ensure that emissions ofNOx do not exceed 0.033 lblMMBtu heat input from boilers that are part ofa large DFW system, and 0.06 lb/MMBtu heat input from boilers that are part of a small DFW system, on a daily average orthroughthe provisions ofalimited systemcap. -Beaumont-Port Arthur. The owner or operator ofeach utility boiler located in the BPA eight-hour ozone nonattainment areamust ensure thatNOx emissions do not exceed 0.10 lblMMBtu heat input on a daily average except as provided by the system cap orthe use ofemissions credits for compliance. The above rule affecting the HGB, DFW and BPA areas can be found in 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter B, Division 2. The rule was published in the 

### Texas Registeron June 21, 2002, and the public comment period ended on July 22, 2002. The adopted rule package was published in the 

### Texas Register on January 3, 2003. The effective date ofthe rule package was January 17, 2003. 2.2.1.2 Utility Electric Generationin East and CentralTexas Emission Specifications Theprovisions relating to the Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas apply to each utility electric power boiler and stationary gas turbine, including duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts, that: generate electric energy for compensation; are owned by an electric cooperative, independent power producer, municipality, river authority, orpublic utility; and are located in Atascosa, Bastrop, Bexar, Brazos, Calhoun, Cherokee, Fannin, Fayette, Freestone, Goliad, Gregg, Grimes, Harrison, Henderson, Hood, Hunt, Lamar, Limestone, Marion, McLennen, Milam, Morris, Nueces, Parker, Red River, Robertson, Rusk, Titus, Travis, Victoria, or Wharton County. Utility electric power boilers and stationary gas turbines (including duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts) must ensure that electric powerboilers' NOx 

### emissions do not exceed specific rates in lblMMBtu. The rates are 0.14 lblMMBtu for gas-fired units and 0.165 lblMMBtu for coal-firedunitsbased onheatinputon an annual (calendaryear) average.
2-3

### The compliance date for these requirements was May 1, 2005. This rule, 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter B, Division 2, waspublished in the Texas Register

### on June 21, 2002, and the public comment period ended on July 22, 2002. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Register

### onJanuary 3,2003. The effective date oftherulepackage was January 17,2003. 2.2.1.3 Senate Bill 7 (76th

### Texas Legislature) Senate Bill (SB) 7, 76th 

### Texas Legislature session, requires a cap and trade program for previously grandfathered, or un-permitted, electric generating facilities and other electric generating facilities that choose to participate inthe cap and tradeprogram. The NOx allowances were determinedusing aNOxrate ofO.141b NOx/MMbtu for grandfathered facilities in the East Texasregion andarate ofO.1951b NO:x/MMbtuforthe grandfatheredfacilities in theWestTexas andEl Pasoregion. The fIrst control period for this program began on May 1, 2003. The last revision on this rule package, 30 TAC Chapter 101, SubchapterH, Division 2, waspublished in the Texas Register

### on September 10, 1999, and the public comment period ended on October 11, 1999. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Register

### on January 7, 2000. The effective date ofthe rulepackage was January 11,2000. 2.2.1.4 Houston-Galveston-BrazoriaMass EmissionCap andTrade (MECT) The MECT program applies to all facilities that emitNOxin the HGB ozone nonattainment area and are subject to the emission specifications under Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas mentioned previously plus industrial, commercial, and institutional combustion sources. Units covered include: industrial, commercial, or institutional boilers and process heaters; stationary gas turbines; stationary internal combustion engines; fluid catalytic cracking units (including carbon monoxide (CO) boilers, CO furnaces, and catalyst regenerator vents); boilers and industrial furnaces which were regulated as existing facilities by the EPA under 40 Code ofFederal Regulations Part 266, Subpart H (as was in effect on June 9, 1993); duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts; pulping liquor recovery furnaces; lime kilns; lightweight aggregate kilns; heat treating furnaces and reheat furnaces; magnesium chloride fluidizedbeddryers; andincinerators. The first control period for the MECT program began on January 1, 2002. The last proposal to revise this rule, 30 TAC Chapter 101, Sub9hapter H, Division 3, was published in the Texas Register

### on June 25, 2004, and the public comment period ended on July 26, 2004. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Register

### on November 26, 2004. The effective date of therulepackagewas December2, 2004. 2.2.1.5 Summary ofEmission Reduction Strategies in Texas Related to Electric Generating Unit Strategies The combined EGU-specific strategies listed above have reduced NOx by an estimated 598 tons per day (218,270 tons peryear) from 2000 through 2005. Modeling indicates that an additional two tons per day ofNOx will be reduced from EGUs by 2009, for a total of600 tons per day (219,000 tonsperyear). In 

### addition, the HGB MECT program for non-electric generating facilities (NEGU) has reduced NOxemissions an additional 105 tons per day (38,325 tons per year) from 2000 through 2004, with an additional 76 tons per day (27,740 tons peryear) reduction expected for 2009. Similarly the NEGU NOx reductions expected between 2000 and 2009 for the other two nonattainment areas in East Texas, DFW and BPA, total an additional 49 tons per day (17,885 tons per year).



### 2-4

### This brings the total NOx reductions expected by the rules identified in Section 2.2.1.1 through 2.2.1.4to 831 tons perday (303,315 tonsperyear) between2000 and 2009. The NOx emissions from point sources inventoried and modeled for 2000 for the entire state of Texas,· notjust those areas addressed in Section 2.2.1.1 thru 

### 2.2.1.4 were approximately 2,482 tons per day. By 2005, Texas had made 30 percent reduction (see the 733 ton per day total in Appendix B) since 2000 in total NOx from the rules cited in Sections 2.2.1.1 thru 2.2.1.4. These are actual emissions reductions, notprojectedreductions. A summary ofthe above strategies and the methodology usedto calculatethe emissionreductions is providedin Appendix B.


### 2.2.2 Eight-Bour Ozone StateImplementationPlan (SIP) Revisions Sections 2.2.2.1 thru 

### 2.2.2.9 provides an overview ofsome ofthe eight-hourozone SIP revisions thatTexas has submittedto EPA. 2.2.2.1 Houston-Galveston-BrazoriaEight-HourOzone SIPRevision The eight-county HGB metropolitan area was classified as a "moderate" ozone nonattainrnent area by the EPA under the eight-hour ozone standard on April 15, 2004. The eight counties include: Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties. The governor ofTexas requested a reclassification to severe in June 2007. The EPA notifiedtheTCEQ in July 2007 thatthey will begin theprocess ofreclassification from moderate to severe in response to GovernorPerry's request. The challenges to attain the eight-hourozone standard are greatbecause the HGB areais one ofthe mostcomprehensively controlledindustrial complexes in the world; the area has unique and complex ozone formation chemistry and meteorology; the magnitude ofreductions needed is significant; and the TCEQ lacks regulatory authority to set emission standards for on-road and non-road mobile sources. The commission adoptedthe currentHGB SIPrevision onMay 23, 2007. The HGB SIPrevision documents the substantialprogress toward attainmentmade underthe onehour ozoneNAAQS despite rapid economic andpopulation growth in the area. This SIP revision also documents steps toward attainmentofthe eight-hourozone standard. This SIPrevisionis the first step in addressing the eight-hourozone standardin the HGB area andrepresents the TCEQ's best effort considering the time constraints for planning for attainment ofthe eight-hour ozone standard due to the delay of issuance of the EPA's implementation rules. This SIP revision includes revisions to rules in 30 TAC Chapter 114, related to the Texas Low Emission Diesel Rule (TxLED) for Certain Marine Fuels, 30 TAC Chapter 115, Division I, related to the Control ofVolatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Emissions from Storage and Degassing Operations in the HGB area, and 30 TAC Chapter 117, related to the Water Heater Rule. The revision also includes local Voluntary Mobile Emission Reduction (VMEP) commitments. The TCEQ is committedto continuingprogress towardattainingthe standardandwill workwiththe EPAto set submission dates for new obligations and interimprogress inreducing emissions. The HGB SIP revision attainmentdemonstration will includean expeditiously as practicable attainment date (no later than 

### June 15, 2019). Additional information regarding the specifics of these control strategies inthe HGB Eight-HourOzone SIP revision canbefound at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/siplhgb.html#8hour 2.2.2.2 Dallas-FortWorthEight-HourOzone SIP Revision The nine-county DFW metropolitan area was designated a "moderate" ozone nonattainment area under the eight-hour ozone standard on April 15, 2004. The nine counties include: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties. The DFW



### 2-5

### Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP revision was adopted by the commission on May23,2007, and submittedto the EPA. The DFW SIP revision demonstrates attainment of the eight-hour ozone standard using photochemical modeling, including reductions from associated 30 TAC 117 rules and voluntary mobile emission reductions, and using weight-of-evidence (WoE), including corroborative analysis and additional control measures not explicitly accounted for in the photochemical modeling. The 30 TAC 117 rules will reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from the following sources:

• MajorIndustrial, Commercial, andInstitutional Sources;
• Minor Sources;

• Electric Generating Facilities (EGFs);

• CementKilns; and
• EastTexas Combustion Sources All ofthe rules apply to the nine-county DFW area except for the East Texas Combustion Rule, which applies to 33 counties located in northeast Texas. Through the Voluntary Mobile Emissions Reduction Program (VMEP) in 

### the nine nonattainment counties, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) committed to reducing NOx emissions by March 2009. TheNCTCOG also committedto implementingtransportation control measures (TCMs) in the nine nonattainment counties that will further reduce NOx emissions in 2009. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthese control strategies in the DFW Eight-Hour Ozone AttainmentDemonstration SIPrevision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/dfw.html#EDl 2.2.2.3 Beaumont-PortArthurEight-HourOzone SIP Revisions The BPA three-county nonattainment area was classified as a marginal eight-hour ozone nonattainment area on April 15, 2004. The three nonattainment counties include: Hardin, Jefferson, and Orange. On 

### October 27, 2004, the commission adopted an attainment demonstration for both the one-hour and the eight-hour ozone standard for the BPA area. The attainment demonstration containedresults ofphotochemical modeling and technical analyses in support ofthe demonstration ofattainment ofthe one-hour and the eight-hour ozone standards. The submittal included the post-1996 motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB). Additional informationregardingthe specifics ofthe 2004BPA SIPrevision canbe

### found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/oct2004bpa rop ad.html On 

### September 28, 2005, the commission adopted the BPA Eight-Hour Ozone Standard Attainment Demonstration SIP revision and subsequently submitted it to the EPA. The SIP revision included the adoption ofan Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP revision andrevisions to Chapter 115 rules. The 2005 BPA SIPrevisions addressedeachoftheremaining requirements needed for an EPA-approvable SIP revision. These requirements included a Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) demonstration with associated rulemaking. The rulemaking for major-source applicability cutoffs for purposes ofRACT included rules for batchprocessing (30 TAC 115.167,relating to exemptions) and shipbuilding andrepair(30 TAC 115.427 (a)(3)(H), relating to exemptions) set an exemption level of 100 tons per year ofVOC, based on all stationary sources included in an account. These rules were amended to lower the exemptionlevel to 50 tons peryearwith the BPA SIPrevision. The SIP submission also contains revisionregarding the CleanFuelVehicleprogramandthe threepercentcontingencyrequirement



### 2-6

### and an updatedMVEB. Additional informationregarding the specifics ofthese control strategies inthe 2005 BPA SIPrevision canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sept2005bpa.html 2.2.2.4 Austin-RoundRockEight-HourOzone Early Action Compact SIPRevision The Austin-Round Rock Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revision was adopted by the commission on November 17,2004. This compact was part ofthe strategy for the area including Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties to continue attainment with the eighthour ozone standard promulgated under the Federal Clean Act Amendment (FCAA) of 1990 (as codified in 42 United States Code, 7401 et seq.) This SIP revision included emission reductions needed to demonstrate attainment of the eight-hour ozone standard by 2007 and maintain it through at least 2012. The SIP revision includes five rule revisions requested by the area: Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program in Travis and Williamson Counties (30 TAC 114, Subchapter C); opt-in rule prohibiting heavy-duty diesel vehicle idling injurisdictions that sign enforcement agreements withthe TCEQ (30 TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter 1); lowering the Stage 1 Vapor Recovery exemption to 25,000 gallons/month throughput in the five-county area (30 TAC; Chapter 115, Subchapter C, Divisions 2); degreasing requirements in the five-county area (30 TAC Chapter 115, SubchapterE, Division 1); and seasonal cutback asphaltrestrictions inthe five-county area (30 TAC Chapter 115, SubchapterF, Division 1). This SIP revision also included a commitment to reduce or a commitment to "pursue" or "look into" additional NOxreductions throughtwo additionalprograms. Theseprograms include:

• Texas Emission Reduction Plan (TERP)

- The Austin EAC Region obtained sufficient grants to reduce NOx by two tons per day by 2007 from on- and non-road heavy duty diesel equipment; and

• Power Plant Reductions

- Austin Energy and the Lower Colorado River Authority committed to annual NOx reductions at facilities. These power plants voluntarily committedto reduce annual NOxemissions attheir facilities in and nearthe regionbelow current state and federal mandates. These agreements were detailed and formalized in an enforceable regulatory mechanism. They were effective on December 31, 2005. Additional enforceable annual emission reductions from the University of Texas and FayettePowerProjectwere implementedbyDecember 31, 2006. The Austin-Round Rock EAC SIP revision also committed to encouraging participation in the Clean Air Partners Program and energy efficiency program as local initiatives. In addition to these initiatives, the following voluntary activities were included in the EAC, but there emission reductions were not calculated: Residential Electric Lawn Mower Exchange Program; Adopt-aSchool Bus Program; Tree Planting Guide; and the State Agency Voluntary Commute Reduction Projects. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthese control strategies in the Austin-Round RockEarlyAction Compactcanbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipplans.html#EAC 2.2.2.5 NortheastTexas Eight-HourOzone Early Action Compact SIP Revision The Northeast Texas Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revision was adopted on November 17, 2004. This compact was part ofthe strategy for the area including Gregg, Harrison, Rusk, Smith and Upshur Counties to continue attainment with the eight-hour ozone standard promulgated under the FCAA of 1990 (as codified in 42 United States Code, 7401 et seq.). The Northeast


### 2-7

### Texas SIP revision contains results ofphotochemical modeling and technical analyses in support ofthe demonstration ofattainment ofthe eight-hour ozone standard in 2007 and maintenance of that standardthrough2012. As part of the Northeast Texas EAC SIP revision, the Eastman Chemical Company-Texas operations, and Huntsman Chemical implemented an enhanced Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) program to identify and address emissions of highly reactive VOCs. These highly reactive volatile organic compound (HRVOC) reductions are in addition to previous requirements included in the model. At Eastman, the voluntary LDAR programs will be enforceable under voluntary emission reduction permits. Huntsman Chemical volunteered these emission reductions as part ofa new Flexible Plant-wide Applicability Limit (PAL) Permit that makes the reductions enforceable. The Northeast Texas EAC also committed the area to pursue action on the following voluntary measures: identify and pursue funding for compressor engines and non-road equipment that are eligible for Texas EmissionReduction Plan (TERP) funding; on-road vehicle emissionreductions through the purchase of 18 lower-emitting propane light heavy-duty (Class 2b) vans; public awareness programs; and energy efficiencyprograms. Additional informationregarding the control strategies inthe NortheastTexas EAC can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipplans.html#EAC 2.2.2.6 San Antonio Eight-HourOzone Early Action Compact SIPRevision The SanAntonio Early Action Compact (EAC) SIPrevision was adopted onNovember 17, 2004. This compact was part ofthe strategy for the area including Bexar, Comal, Guadalupe and Wilson Counties to continue attainment with the eight-hour ozone standard promulgated under the FCAA of 1990 (as codified in 42 United States Code, 7401 et seq.). The San Antonio SIP revision was required to implement the Early Action Compacts. This SIP revision is part ofthat attainment demonstration and includes emission reductions needed to demonstrate attainment of the eight-hour standard by 2007 through at least 2012. On April 15, 2004, the San Antonio area received a deferral ofthe effective date ofits designation ofnonattainment for the eight-hour ozone standard for Bexar, Comal, and Guadalupe Counties. The San Antonio area includes two staterule revisions requestedby the areato decrease VOC emissions: lowering the Stage 1 Vapor Recovery exemption to 25,000 gallons/month throughput in the five-county area (30 TAC; Chapter 115, Subchapter C, Divisions 2); and degreasing requirements for the four-county area (30 TAC Chapter 115, Subchapter E, Division 1). The San Antonio EAC region also obtained sufficientTexas Emission Reduction Program (TERP) grants to reduce NOx by 2 tons per dayby 2007 from on- and non-road heavy duty diesel equipment and committed to emission reductions from the following local controls: energy efficiency/renewable energy projects; transportation emissionreductionmeasures (TERMs); andtransportation demand managementprojects. In 

### addition to control strategies that were included in the future control strategy model run, the SIP revision implemented additional programs that although difficult to quantify and include in photochemical modeling, contribute to cleaner air. These programs include alternative fuel vehicle initiatives and alawnmowerrecyclingprogram. Additional informationregarding these control strategies inthe SanAntonio AreaEAC canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipplans.htm1#EAC 2.2.2.7 Comus Christi Eight-HourOzone FlexPlan The Corpus Christi Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was developed according to EPA's guidance, 

### "Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Program

- May 

### 2006." Corpus Christi is the first area in the nation to develop and submitto EPA an Eight-Hour Ozone


### 2-8

### Flex Plan. The MOA encourages the continuation ofvoluntary emission reduction measures to assist in maintaining attainment ofthe eight-hour ozone standard in Nueces and San Patricio Counties. Emission reduction measures included in the MOA, but not limited to, are the Stage I Vapor Recovery Program, the Pollution Prevention Partnership Program, and the Ozone Action Day Program. These will be implemented through an MOA between the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the City ofCorpus Christi, Nueces County, SanPatricio County, the Port ofCorpus Christi Authority, the Corpus Christi Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Corpus Christi Regional Transportation Authority, and the U.s. Environmental Protection Agency. The MOA was adopted by the commission on June 13,2007. Additional infonnation regarding the plan canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/cc.html 2.2.2.8 VictoriaEight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan On March 7, 2007, the commission adopted the Victoria County Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan. This SIP revision contained an eight-hour ozone maintenance plan that will ensure the County ofVictoria remains in attainment ofthe eight-hour ozone NAAQS. Local governments and other interested parties in the Victoria area will continue implementing programs that have provedeffective inmaintaining healthy airqualityto assure thatthe area continues to maintain its attainment status for the eight-hour ozone standard. The maintenance plan is the appropriate mechanism and allows individual communities the flexibility to pursue emission reduction strategies most appropriate for their circumstances. The plan includes the following components: attainment inventory; maintenance demonstration; ambient air quality monitoring; contingency plan; andverification ofcontinued attainment. Additional informationregardingthe Victoria Eight-HourOzone Maintenance Plan canbe found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/sip/vic/06023SIP ado.pdf 2.2.2.9 El Paso Eight-Hour Ozone MaintenancePlan As a result ofthe Federal Clean 

### Air Act (FCAA) Amendments of 1990, El Paso County was designated as nonattainment for the one-hour ozone standard. On April 15, 2004, the EPA designated El Paso County as attainment for the eight-hour ozone standard. The EPA's Phase I Implementation Rule for the eight-hour ozone standard directed that areas designated as nonattainment for the one-hourozone standardbutdesignated attainment for the eight-hour ozone standard must submit a maintenance plan for the eight-hour ozone standardbyJune 15,2007. On January 11, 2006, the commission adopted the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for El Paso. The El Paso Eight-HourOzone Maintenance Planincludes the following components: attainment inventory; maintenance demonstration; ambient air quality monitoring; contingency plan; and verification ofcontinued attainment. Additional infonnation regarding the El Paso Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan canbe found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/sip/sipdocs/2005-07- 

### EP/ELP 03 adoptionSIP 05l206.pdf

2.2.3 One-Hour Ozone StateImplementation Plan (SIP) Revisions Sections 2.2.3.1 

### thru 2.2.3.6 provides an overview ofsome ofthe one-hour ozone SIP revisions thatTexas has submittedto EPA. 2.2.3.1 Houston-Ga1veston-BrazoriaOne-HourOzone Attainment SIP Revisions On December 6, 2000, the TCEQ adoptedrevisions to 30 TAC Chapters 101, 114, 115 and 117 and to the HGB SIP. This SIP revision serves as the attainment demonstration ofthe one-hour ozone standard. The December 2000 submittal contained the following elements: rules and photochemical modeling analyses; post-1999 Rate-of-Progress (ROP) plans for the milestone years 2002 and 2005, and for the attainment year 2007; transportation conformity motor vehicle


### 2-9

### emissions budgets (MVEB) for NOx and VOC; enforceable commitments to implement further measures ifneeded; and acommitmentto performand submit a mid-course reviewbyMay 2004. Additional informationregardingthis SIPrevision canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/dec2000hgb.html On September 26, 2001, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP for the ozone nonattainment area for HGB. The SIP revision for the HGB ozone nonattainment area included the following elements: corrections to the ROP tablelMVEB's budget for the years 2002, 2005, and 2007 due to a mathematical inconsistency; incorporation ofa change to the idling restriction control strategy clarifying that the operator of a rented or leased vehicle is responsible for compliance with the requirements ofChapter 114 in situations where the operator ofa leased or rentedvehicle is not employedbythe ownerofthe vehicle (the commission committedto making this change when the rule was originally adopted in December 2000); incorporation ofrevisions to the clean diesel fuel rules to provide greater flexibility in complying with the requirements of the rule while preserving the emission reductions necessary to demonstrate attainment in the HGB area; incorporation ofa stationary diesel engine rule that was developed as a result ofthe state's analysis ofEPA's reasonably available control measures; incorporation ofrevisions to the point source NOx rules; incorporation ofrevisions to the emissions cap and trade rules; the removal of the construction equipment operating restriction and the accelerated purchase requirement for Tier 2/3 heavy duty equipment; the replacement ofthose rules with the Texas Emission Reduction Plan program; the layout ofthe mid-course review process which details how the state wouldfulfill the commitmentto obtainthe additional emissionreductions necessary to demonstrate attainment ofthe one-hour ozone standard in the HGB area; and replacement of 2007 ROP MVEBs to be consistent with the attainment MVEBs. Additional information regarding this SIPrevision canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sept2001hgb.html On December 13, 2002, the TCEQ adopted revisions to the HGB One-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP. This SIP revision contains rules to reduce emissions ofhighly reactive volatile organic compounds (HRVOC) from four key industrial sources: fugitives, flares, process vents, and cooling towers. The HRVOC rules are performance-based, emphasizing monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting, and enforcement. Additional information regarding this SIP revision canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementationiair/sip/dec2002hgb.html On December 1, 2004, the commission adopted revisions to the SIP for the HGB nonattainment area andrules found inTitle 30, Texas Administrative Code, Chapters 101 and 115. This fulfilled the commitment from 2000 to perform a mid-course review SIP revision to ensure attainment of the one-hour ozone standard. The data gathered from the 2000 Texas Air 

### Quality Study (TexAQS) was used to improve the photochemical modeling work for the HGB area. The collection oftechnical improvements gave a more comprehensive understanding ofthe ozone challenge in Houston as development for a plan to reach attainment. The SIP revision commitments included:

• Highly Reactive Volatile Organic Compounds (HRVOCs): The revision to the SIP implements measures to ensure compliance with the specific strategies to control HRVOC emissions. The amendments also make a variety of changes to correct typographical errors andupdate cross-references.

• HRVOC Emissions Cap and Trade (HECT) Program: The HECT program is an annual cap and trade program to provide compliance flexibility to the Chapter 115 control requirements for process vents and cooling-tower heat exchangers. Sites subject to the


### 2-10

### program are required to possess an HRVOC allowance for each ton of HRVOC emissions. Sites also have the option oftrading excess HRVOC allowances on the open market within a specific trading zone.

• General Fugitives: Therulemaking removes certainrecordkeeping requirements from the general volatile organic fugitive emissions rules in SubchapterD, Division 3, and makes the requirements applicable only to sources of HRVOC fugitive emissions in rule amendments that were revised as part of a concurrent rulemaking in 30 TAC Chapter 115, Subchapter H. The amendments also make a variety of changes to correct typographical errors, update cross-references, add flexibility, and achieve the intended emissionreductions. HGB Motor-Vehicle Idling Limitations: The commission repealed the motor-vehicle idling limitations in the HGB area in Chapter 114, SubchapterJ, Division 1. 

### The commission originally adopted idling limitation rules on December 6, 2000, as a control strategy to reduce NOx emissions in the HGB ozone nonattainment area by limiting the engine idling time ofmotor vehicles with a gross vehicle weightrating over 14,000pounds to five consecutive minutes while the vehicle is operating in the affected area from April 1 to October 31 eachyear. Withregard to the repeal ofthe heavy duty diesel idling rules, by the year 2007, the idling limits would have reduced NOx emissions in the affected area by 0.48 tons per day (tpd). The repeal ofthe idling restriction did not significantly impact modeled ozone concentrations. Given the minimal emission reductions, difficulty ofenforcement, and the development ofa more robust attainment demonstration, the commission maintained that the inclusion of the motor vehicle idling restriction rules was not a reasonable measure. These factors also indicated that this measure did not advance the one-hour ozone attainment date of the HGB area and therefore was not Reasonably Available ControlMeasure (RACM). Additional informationregarding this SIP revision canbe found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/dec2004hgb mcr.html 2.2.3.2 Dallas-FortWorth One-HourOzone Attainment SIPRevisions On February 24, 1999, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP for the DFW area. The DFW area was classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area for the one-hour standard in accordance with the FCAA Amendments of 1990. However, air quality monitoring for 1994 through 1996 show that the one-hour NAAQS for ozone has been exceeded more than one day per year over this three-year period. On February 18, 1998, the EPA issued a final notice in the 

### Federal Register that the DFW area was being reclassified to "serious" for failing to attain the NAAQS for ozone. As 

### a result ofthis reclassification, the EPArequired that a new SIPrevision demonstrating attainment ofthe ozone standard in DFW be submitted by March 20, 1999. The state submitted a SIP revision for DFW that includedphotochemical modeling showing the level ofreductions neededto attain the standardby 1999, aNine PercentROP target calculationfor the years 1997-99, VOC RACT rules in Chapter 115 applicable to sources meeting the 50 tons per year major source level, NOx RACT rules in Chapter 117 applicable to major sources ofNOx, and amendments to Chapter 116 reinstating nonattainment new source review for NOx. The governor submittedthis SIPrevision to EPAonMarch 16, 1999. Additional information regardingthe control strategies intheDFW SIPcanbe found at: htto://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/febI999dfw.html On October 15, 1999, the commission adopted arevisionto the SIP for the DFW one-hour ozone nonattainment area. This SIP revision was developed in order to address the shortfall in needed reductions towards the Nine Percent ROP target and the lack ofmodeled control strategies from the February 24, 1999, SIP revision. Potential emission reduction credits were reviewed that


### 2-11

### were not claimed in the February 1999 SIP revision in order to make up the ROP shortfall. The focus was on VOC reductions because fewer VOC reductions would be needed to make up the shortfall compared to NOx emission reductions. The ROP lacked about 20% of the VOC reductions needed, which amounted to 5.87 tpd. Elements were identified that were not previously consideredthatbring emissionreduction credits in orderto complete the Nine Percent ROP requirements for the years 1996-99. Additional informationregarding the control strategies canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/oct1999dfw.html OnApril 19,2000, the TCEQ adoptedrevisions to the SIP. Theserevisions served as therequired next step in the attainment demonstration planning process for the BPA, DFW, and HGB ozone nonattainment areas. The DFW area's attainment deadline as a serious ozone nonattainment area was November 15, 1999. The April 2000 SIP revision contained a modeling demonstration that showedthatthe airqualityinthe DFW areais influenced attimes from the HGB area. Additional informationregardingthis SIPrevisioncanbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/apr2000dfw.html On August 22, 2001, the TCEQ adopted arevision to the Texas SIP as the required next step in the attainment demonstration planning process for the DFW one-hour ozone nonattainment area. Key revisions included the repeal of the rules regarding fleet composition for heavy diesel equipment and therules regarding operatingrestrictions for diesel construction equipment as part ofthe implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 5, 77th 

### Legislature, 2001. Signed into law in May 2001, SB 5 required the commission to submit a SIP revision to the EPA deleting the requirements oftwo rules, contained in Chapter 114 (relating to Control ofAir Pollution from MotorVehicles), from the SIP no later than October 1,2001. The rule repeals contained in this SIP revision reflected therepeal oftwo rules relatedto construction equipmentthat were adopted on April 19, 2000, as part of the control strategy for the DFW one-hour ozone attainment demonstration. The Texas Emission Reduction Plan (TERP) contained in SB 5 replacedthe rules and resulted in reductions in excess of those expected from the rules that were repealed. Additional informationregarding this SIPrevision canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/aug200Idfw.html On April 27, 2005, the commission adopted a Five Percent Increment of Progress (lOP) SIP revision for the DFW nonattainment area. This SIP revision contained the following control measures:

• TERP: In the DFW area, projects funded as of September 1, 2004, were projected to resultinreductions inNOxemissions ofover7.78 tpd in 2007.

• Energy Efficiency: Statewide adoption ofthe International Residential Code and the International Energy Conservation Code for residential, commercial, and industrial buildings was mandated by the 77th 

### Texas Legislature under Senate Bill 5. The resulting NOx reductions based on electricity andnatural gas savings from existing projects were calculatedto be 0.72 tpd.

• Alcoa, Milam County: Alcoa chose to replace its three existing boilers with two lignitefrred circulating fluidized bed boilers, as presented as an option under a federal consent decree signed onApril 9, 2003. Only one ofthese boilers was to be replacedbyJune 15, 2007, resulting in a reduction of 3.9 tpd ofNOx. Therefore, only that portion ofthe creditimplementedbyJune 15,2007, was includedaspartofthis SIPrevision.

2-12

## •

•

•

• Statewide Portable Fuel Container Rule: The Portable Fuel Container Rule established new requirements relating to the design criteria for portable fuel containers and portable fuel container spouts. The new rules established design criteria for "no-spill" portable fuel containers. Portable fuel containers manufactured under these standards release feweramounts offuel as the resultofspillage and evaporation. Lean-Bum and Rich-Bum Engines: The adopted Five Percent lOP plan included the implementation of new emission specifications and other compliance demonstration requirements in Chapter 117, SubchapterB, Division 3 for certainindustrial, commercial, and institutional stationary, reciprocating internal-combustion engines in the nine-county area. Theresulting NOxreductions were 1.87 tpd. Surface Coating: In 

### rulemaking concurrentto this SIPrevision, the commission adopted a rule to extend the requirements for surface coating to the five newly designated DFW nonattainmentcounties. TheresultingVOC reductions were 0.3 tpd. Stage I Gasoline Unloading: In 

### rulemaking concurrent to this SIP reVISion, the commission adopted a rule to extend the Stage I requirements to the five newly designated DFWnonattainmentcounties. Theresulting VOC reductions were 1.49 tpd. Additional informationregarding this SIPrevision is locatedat: http://www.tceg.state.tx.uS/implementation/air/sip/apr2005dal iop.html 2.2.3.3 Beaumont-PortArthurOne-HourOzoneAttainment SIP Revisions On October27,1999, the TCEQ adopted arevision to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the attainment demonstration for the Beaumont-Port Arthur (BPA) ozone nonattainment area. Because photochemical modeling showed that both VOC and NOx reductions are effective in reducing ground-level ozone in the BPA area, this SIP revision identified, under separate rulemaking, revisions to the NOx RACT requirements to include lean bum engines. Also, VOC RACT rules were modified for industrial wastewater and batch processes. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthis SIP revision can be found at: 

### httD:/ /www.tceg.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/oct1999bpa.html The BPA area is classified as moderate onApril 2, 1996, andtherefore, wasrequiredto attain the one-hour ozone standard by November 15, 1996. The BPA area did not attain the standard by that date, and also did not attain the standard by November 15, 1999, the attainment date for serious areas. In 

### determining the appropriate attainment date for an area, EPA considered the effect of transport of ozone or its precursors from an upwind area which interferes with the downwind area's ability to attain. On July 16, 1998, EPA issued a guidance memorandum titled 

### "Extension ofAttainment Datesfor Downwind Transport Areas." The guidance, referred to hereinafter as the "transport guidance," provided a means for EPA to extend the attainment date for an area affectedby transported airpollution, withoutreclassifying ("bumping up") the area to a higher classification. The transport guidance was particularly relevant to BPA, which is downwind 1-17 ofthe HGA areaand is affectedbytransportfromHGA. OnApril 16, 1999, EPA proposed in the 

### FederalRegisterto allow BPA to take advantage ofthe transport guidance ifan approvable attainmentdemonstration was submittedbyNovember 15, 1999. The SIP revision contained results of photochemical modeling demonstrating transport from HGB to BPA. Following EPA's transport guidance, it was demonstrated that BPA attained the one-hour ozone standard. In 

### addition, the November 1999 SIP revision contained adopted rules for industrial wastewater and batch process sources to ensure that VOC emission limits for these


### 2-13

### sources meet EPA's guidelines for RACT. Furthermore, the SIP revision included adopted rules establishing NOx RACT emission limits for gas-fired, lean-bum stationary internal combustion engines. These NOx rules represented "Phase I" ofa two-part revision to the BPA attainment demonstration SIP revision. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthis SIP revision canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/octl999bpa.html The April 2000 SIP revision represented "Phase II" 

### ofthe BPA attainment demonstration SIP revision, and contained adopted rules specifying NOx emission limits for electric utility boilers, industrial boilers, and industrial process heaters. These strategies in combination with the richburn engine rules reduced NOx emission from 170.51 tons per ozone day (tpod) to 75.09 tpod. In accordance with EPA guidance, implementation ofthese NOx emission limits represented a reasonable level ofcontrol, necessary for an approvable attainment demonstration. Modeling of these Phase II

### reductions showedthatthe BPA area attains the one-hourozone standard, using WoE analyses. Additional informationregarding this SIPrevision canbe found at: htm.://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/apr2000bpa.html 2.2.3.4 NortheastTexas Flexible AttainmentRegion (FAR) One-HourOzone SIP Revision On May 12, 1999, the commission adopted a revision to the SIP for the Northeast Texas region which made certain local ozone precursor emission reduction programs federally enforceable. This revision was submitted to EPA on June 4, 1999. Four affected companies (Norit Americas, Inc.; La Gloria Oil and Gas Company; Eastman Chemical Company, Texas Eastman Division; and ARCO Permian) in the Northeast Texas region voluntarily agreed to be subject to the implementation ofenforceable emission reduction measures pursuant to Part A, Sections 2-5 of the NortheastTexas Flexible AttainmentRegion (FAR) Memorandum ofAgreement. The MOA required the immediate implementation ofcontrol measures through the use ofAgreed Orders, which are included in the SIP revision and are federally enforceable. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthese control strategies canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/may1999net.html OnApril 19, 2000, the TCEQ adopted arevisionto the SIPto incorporatetwo agreed orders into the NortheastTexas SIPrevision. Thisrevision incorporatedinto the SIP an agreed ordersigned by the EastmanChemical Company, Texas Operations, ofLongview, Texas, inHarrison County (accountnumberHH-0042-M). The agreed ordermade federally enforceable certainlocal ozone precursoremissionreductionprograms. Throughthe use ofAgreed Orders these measures were adopted andincludedintheNortheastTexas FAR SIPrevision and are federally enforceable. Additional informationregarding this SIPrevision canbe found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/apr2000net.html 2.2.3.5 Regional One-HourOzone SIP Revision On April 19,2000, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP. These revisions served as the requirednext step inthe attainmentdemonstrationplanningprocess forthe BPA, DFW, andHGB ozone nonattainment areas, and the Central and East Texas region. Due to the significant air quality concerns under the one-hour ozone NAAQS, and the anticipated challenges under the eight-hour NAAQS, Texas developed a regional strategy to reduce emissions. This strategy contained five elements: support ofthe National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program and bring cleaner cars to Texas by model year 2001; Stage I 

### vapor recovery for larger gas stations; cleanergasoline; the Clean Air

### Responsibility Enterprise (CARE) program; andreductioninNOx emissions from larger point sources. Additional information regarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/apr2000reg.html

2-14

### 2.2.3.6 One-HourOzone FlexibleAgreement The One-Hour Ozone Flexible Agreement is a voluntary local approach to encourage emission reductions that will keep an area in attainment of the one-hour ozone standard, while also working toward achieving the health benefits envisioned under the eight-hour ozone standard. The One-Hour Ozone Flexible Agreement plans were implemented through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between EPA, the stateenvironmental agency, andlocal governments. 2.2.3.6.1 Austin-SanMarcos Metropolitan StatisticalArea One-HourOzone FlexPlan 

### On March 28, 2002, local governments, community and business leaders, environmental groups, and concerned citizens in the Austin/San Marcos Metropolitan Statistical Area signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the TCEQ and the EPA to implement programs to improveregional airquality. Additional informationregardingthisplancan be found at: http://www.cleanairforce.org/03%20Flex%20Agreement.htm 2.2.3.6.2 Corpus Christi One-HourOzoneFlexPlan 

### On September 18, 2002, the Nueces and San Patricio Counties, the Corpus Christi urban airshed, signed an Ozone Flex Intergovernmental Agreement with the TCEQ and the EPA. Additional informationregardingthisplancanbe found at: http://www.tceg.state.ix.us/assets/public/implementation/air/sip/eacdocs/CC 03 091702.pdf
2.2.4 General StateImplementationPlan (SIP) RevisionInformation Additional informationregarding the numerous other SIPrevisions thatTexashas adoptedfrom 1972through 2007 canbe found at: http://www.tceg.state.ix.us/implementation/air/sip/sipplans.html
2.2.5 Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD) and NonattainmentNew SourceReview (NSR) Element FCAA Section 11O(a)(2)(D)(i)(ll) contains a requirement for states to submit SIPs that contain adequate provisions verifying that the Texas SIP prohibits any source or type of emissions activity within the state from emitting air pollutants in amounts that will interfere with another state's SIP measures forpreventing significantdeterioration ofairquality. 2.2.5.1 Eight-HourOzone All major sources in Texas are subject to PSD and Nonattainment NSR permitting programs, implemented in 30 TAC Chapter 116. Major sources are defined in 30 TAC § 116.12(17) in relation to the federal classification ofan area for nonattainment permitting and by reference to 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR) § 51.166 forPSD. 2.2.5.2 FineParticulateMatter (PMu) All major sources in Texas are subject to PSD and Nonattainment NSR permitting programs, implemented in 30 TAC Chapter 116. Major sources are defined in 30 TAC § 116.12(17) in relation to the federal classification ofan area for nonattainment PerImtting and by reference to 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR) § 51.166 forPSD. Additionally, theseprograms arebeing implementedin accordance withEPA's interim guidanceregarding the use ofPM10 

### as a surrogate forPM2.5•



### 2-15

### 2.2.5.3 Emission Credits The use ofemissionreductions for offsets is governedby 30 TAC § 

### 116.170, which requires that all emissionreductions be certified as emission credits under 30 TAC Chapter 101 priorto its use as offsets.
2.2.6ProtectVisibilityElement Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(ll) also contains a requirement for all states to submit SIPs that contain adequate provisions prohibiting "

... any source or othertype ofemission activity within the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will

- interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other state
.... to protect visibility." The EPA has previously found that all states contain sources whose emissions are reasonably anticipated to contribute to regional haze in one ormore Class I areas. Pursuant to this finding, Texas is currently under an obligation to submit a SIP revision that addresses regional haze, including a long-term strategy to address visibility impairment for each Class I area, which may be affected by emissions from Texas. The TCEQ and other states and Regional Planning Organizations are currently engaged in the task ofidentifying those Class I areas impacted by each state's emissions. States are responsible for developing strategies for addressing regional haze for inclusion in theirregional haze SIP. Since states have not yet submittedRegional Haze SIPs, itis notpossible atthis time for Texas to determine whetherTexas interferes withmeasures to protect visibility in the applicable SIP of another state until the regional haze SIPs are submittedto EPA andare approved. Texas hasbeenworking withthe following organizations as itdevelops the Regional Haze SIP: States Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, NewMexico, Oklahoma, andWyoming United States Federal Agencies United States Forest Service Federal Land Managers; United States Fish and Wildlife Service Land Managers; National Parks Service Land Managers; and the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency. Tribal Representatives Louisiana

- ChitimachaTribe ofLouisiana; CoushattaTribe ofLouisiana; JenaBand ofChoctawIndians; and Tunica-Biloxi Indians ofLouisiana New Mexico

- Eight Northern Indian Pueblo Council; Mescalero Apache Tribe; Pueblo ofAcoma; Pueblo of Cochiti; Pueblo ofIsleta; Pueblo ofJemez; Jicarilla Apache Nation; Pueblo ofLaguna; Pueblo of Nambe; Pueblo ofPicuris; Pueblo ofPojoaque; Pueblo ofSandia; Pueblo ofSan Felipe; Pueblo ofSan lldefonso; Ohkay Owingeh (formerly San Juan); Pueblo of Santa Ana; Pueblo ofSanta Clara; Pueblo ofSanto Domingo; Pueblo ofTaos; Pueblo ofTesuque; and Pueblo ofZia; Zuni TribeOklahomaAbsentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town; Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Caddo Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Cherokee Nation; Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma; Chickasaw Nation; Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; Citizen Potawatomi Nation; Comanche Nation ofOklahoma; Delaware Nation (West); Eastern Shawnee Tribe of


### 2-16

### Oklahoma; Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Inter Tribal Environmental Council of Oklahoma; Iowa Tribe ofOklahoma; Kaw Nation; Kialegee Tribal Town; Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma; Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma; Muscogee (Creek) Nation; Osage Nation; Otoe-Missouri Tribe ofOklahoma Ottawa Tribe ofOklahoma; Pawnee Nation ofOklahoma; Peoria Tribe ofIndians ofOklahoma; Ponca Tribe ofIndians ofOklahoma; QuapawTribe ofOklahoma; Sac and Fox Nation; Seneca-Cayuga Tribe ofOklahoma; SeminoleNation ofOklahoma; ShawneeTribe; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Tonkawa Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians of Oklahoma; WichitaandMfiliatedTribes; andWyandotteNationTexasAlabama-Coushatta Tribe ofTexas; Kickapoo Traditional Tribe ofTexas; and Ysleta del Sur Pueblo ofTexas Regional Planning Organization CENRAP

- Central Regional Planning Organization

- Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, andTexas



### 2-17

### CHAPTER3: FUTURE ATTAINMENT PLANS 

### The Federal Clean Air 

### Act (FCAA), section IIO(a)(l) requires states to submit SIPs withinthree years after the promulgation ofnew orrevised NAAQS that meet the requirements ofFCAA, 

### § IIO(a)(2), including FCAA, 

### § 110(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport of pollution. Therefore, ifthe NAAQS is revised in the future, the TCEQ will need to take the adequate steps relating tothe interstate transportofairpollution.



### 3-1

### Appendix A**'~f** o/lllng



### Denver , f.:6raska
I,
- 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from the City of Beaumont

"fOfldiJ "'/uliulIltl !\,'ntuc \y

7/'1lf1t'ssrr



### Baton 

### Rouge '\7&**~\\es** 11m un

This map was generated by the Chief Englneefs Ollice, AirQuality Divfsion of the Texas Corrmission on EnvirotYTlental Quality. No daims are made to the aCQJ(scy or completeness 01 the data or to the suitability for a pa'ticular use, For information concerning this map, contact Kim Hendon of the Air Quality Divfsion at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkami (512) 239-1934 July 30,2007 ( (ahoma l1Isas



# r

I r (I"l('

Tun Commission on Envlronmental Quality Chief Engln

..... OffIce AirQuality DIvI.lon PO Box 13087 (Mill Code 164) Austin, Texu 78711-3087 I.JI""IIII_Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution

### Denver , e6rasfta 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from Beaumont 

# I PortArthur Area

;4(1160,"11 

### 1\rntlIe/iY

'J/'IIII/'sser

_I1.USlSSlppi**~\1.,ssolln**

This map was generated by the Chief Engineefs Office. Air**Qua~ty** Dillislon 01 the Texas Commission on Envirorrnental Quality. No dalms are made to the a=rBcy or completeness of the data or to the sullabitity !of a pa'ticular use. For infonnation concerning this map. contact Kim Hendon of the Air Quality Dillislon at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkami (512) 239-1934 July 30.2007 t>/Juftomu



### I TCEQ 

# n Protecting Texas by
• Reducing and Preventing Pollution

Tex
.. CommlllJon on Environmental Quality Chlel Englneefl Office Air Quality Dlvllion PO Box 13087 (Mill Colle 164) AUIUn, Texu 78711-3087

### ·" "millB



### Denver 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from the City of Dallas

/(t'/III1Cf{y

1,'/1 1/1'JSi't'**~I**



# . ,

### We~t 'Memphis Memphl Saint Louis

umont

This map was generated by the Chief Englneefs 01lice, AirQuality Division of the Texas Commission on Enviformental Quality. No daims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data or to the sUitability for a pa1icular use, For information conceming lhis map, contact Kim Hendon of the AirQuality Division at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkami (512) 239·1934 July 30,2007 

# \ Jifal/Clma NJIIsas

: rw**~,'1i'.tJ** 0

Teul Commll.lon on Envlronmenlll QUIIIty Chief Englneefl Omce AirQuality DMIIon PO Box 13087 (Mill Code 164) Aullln. Teul 78711-3087 

# n protecting Texas by Reducingand

- Preventing Pollution 

### iii1liiiiiI TCEQ1\,'1/t

### ud(y

:W

ISsrSSlppr /

### Saint

Louis

'lNlIIl'SSI'C 

### West ,'Memphis Memphi

This map was generated by the Chief Engineers Office. Air Quality Division of the Texas Commission on EnvjrorrTlental Quality. No daims are madeto the accuracy or completeness 01 the data or to the**suitabi~ty** for a p&1icular use. For information concerning this map, contect Kim Hendon of the Air Quality Division at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkarni (512) 239-1934 July 30, 2007 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent

Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from Dallas/Fort Worth Area L-.----------..,...----------.-
-- . ---'

/VLtlsas 

### ( 'e ras lJ

, /"U'**~We.** ICO 

### Denver '11. O/llinn

TexIS Comml
..lon on Envlronmentll QUIIIty Chlel Englne.""om.1 AirQUIIIty D1v1llon PO Box 13087 (Mill Code 164) AusUn, Texu 78711-3087

### Denver 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from the City of Houston

i1/l1b,im i 'Ii'/JIl/'sser 

### West 'Memphis Memphis Saint Louis
WlSsoun



### Baton Rouge

......**'--'.-'l.~~** tf\\\eS

This map was genaraled by the Chiaf Enginaefs O1fice, Air Quality Division of tha Texas Corrmission on Environmental Quality. No daims are made to the accuracy or oompleteness of the data or to the suitability for a pMicular use. For infoonalion concerning this map, oontact Kim Hendon 01 theAir Quality Division

.at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkarni (512) 239-1934 JlAy 30,2007 <.l {ahoma !\}J-flsas



### r a

I Texis Commission on Envlronmenll! QUll1ly Chief Englneefs Office Air QUIIIly D1vlslon PO Box 13087 (Man Code 184) Auslln. TeXIs 78711-3087 TCEQ**I.~-Protectlng** Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution**'~I~y()m** 

### i"Jj

Denver 

### , c6rasf.g 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Area

Ihmdll len/H'sse/'**~111sruslpp'** 

### Saint Louis

### We~t 'Memphis MemphiS

This map was generated by the Chief Englneefs Ollice, AirQuality Division of the Texas Convnission on Environmental**Qual~y.** No daims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data 0( to 1M suitaMty for a pa1icular use. For nfo<malion concerning this map, contact Kim Hendon oftheAir Quality Division al (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkarnl (512) 239-1934 July 30,2007 Okjulwma 

### "sas

Tex
.. Commlilion on EnVIronmenial QUIIIty ChiefEnglneefl Office AirQUIIIty OMllon PO Box 13087 (Mill Code 164) AUltln, Texas 78711-3087 , t"'U'

### AppendixB

### MajorPointSourceNO xRules andReductionsPromulgatedin Texas since2000 Modeled Additional Base 2004-05 NOx Future Modeled NOx Year Intermediate Reductions Year NOx Reductions Area of Base NOx YearNOx 2000-05 NOx Reductions 2000-09 Rule State Year (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) for 2009 (tpd) (tpd) Notes SB7 and "EastTX" 2000 776 435 341 435 341 Final compliance date of East! Attainment May 2005; includes those Central Counties units thatcan trade and TX EGUs those that cannot; 2005 Ch.1l7 value includes new unit growth 2000-05, 2000 values for non-acidrain units, and 2005 acidrain values for acidrainunits. WestTexas 2000 145 99 46 99 46 Final compliance date of EGUs May 2005; includes those units that cantrade and those thatcannot; 2005 value includes new unit growth 2000-05, 2000 values for non-acidrain units, and 2005 acid rain values for acid rainunits. DFW DFW9-co 2000 73 16 57 16 0.4 57 Final compliance date of Ch.1l7 EGUs May 2005; 2005 value includes new unit growth 2000-05, 2000 controlled values fornon-acidrain units, and 2005 acidrain values for acid rainunits. The 2009 value includes recent SIP rules.Modeled Additional Base 

### 2004-0S NOx Future Modeled NOx Year Intermediate Reductions Year NOx Reductions Area of Base NOx YearNOx 

### 2000-oS NOx Reductions 

### 2000-09 Rule State Year (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) for

### 2009 (tpd) (tpd) Notes DFW DFW9- 2000 49 45 

### 4 26 19.4 23 The 2004 value is ozone Ch.117 County season actuals reported. (cont.) NEGUs Final compliance date of May 2005 for engine and industrialboilers. The 2009 value includes recent SIP rules. BPA BPA3- 2000 26 11 

### IS 11 15 The 2004 value is ozoneCh.l17 County season actuals reported. EGUs BPA3- 2000 97 71 

### 26 71 26 The 2004 value is ozoneCounty season actuals reported. NEGUs Final compliance for these engines, heaters, andboilers is May 2005. HGB HGB Mass 2000 192 53 

### 139 51 2 141 The 2004 value is ozoneMECT Emission season actuals reported. Cap and Final compliance for most Trade for ofthese is May2005. The EGUs cogen units have until April 2008 for final compliance withthe lastphase ofthe Cap. HGBMass 2000 283 178 

### lOS 102 76 181 The 2004 value is ozoneEmission season actuals reported. Cap and Final compliance for most Trade for ofthese is April 2008 with NEGUs the lastphase ofthe Cap. Totals 

### 1641 908 733 810 98 831 EGU subtotal 1212 614 598 612 2 600 NEGU subtotal 429 294 135 199 95 230

### AppendixC

# Texas Electric Generating UtilityNOx Control Strategies Compared to the CleanAirInterstate Rule (CAIR) (as ofFebruary 23, 2007) Facility Type StateEmissionRate CAIR2009 CAIR2015 Requirements UtilityElectric Generation in Ozone NonattainmentAreasEmission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Gas-Fired Electric Power 0.030 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu UtilityBoilers Generating Systems Industrial, Commercial 0.020 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOx!MMBtu andInstitutional 0.030 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.036 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu Coal-Fired Wall-Fired 0.050 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOx/MMBtu UtilityBoilers Tangential-Fired 0.045 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu
Oil-FiredUtility Wall-Fired 0.050 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOx/MMBtu Boilers I Tangential-Fired 0.045 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu AuxiliarySteamUtilityBoilers 0.0301b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu Coke-FiredBoilers 0.057 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOxlMMBtu WoodFuel-FiredBoilers 0.060 IbofNOxlMMBtu 0.15 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu Stationary Gas Electric Power 0.032 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu Turbines Generating Systems Industrial, Commercial 0.032 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu O.l51b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOxlMMBtu and Institutional 0.15 lbofNOxlMMBtu 0.26 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu Dallas-FortWorth Large Utility Boilers 0.033 Ib ofNOxIMMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu SmallUtilityBoilers 0.06 Ib ofNOxIMMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOxlMMBtu Beaumont-PortArthur AllUtilityBoilers 0.10 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu



### 1

# Texas Electric Generating UtilityNOxControl Strategies Compared to the Clean AirInterstateRule (CAIR) (as ofFebruary 23, 2007) FacilityType StateEmission Rate CAIR2009 CAIR2015 Requirements UtilityElectric Generation in East and Central Texas Gas-FiredUtilityBoilers 0.141b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.15 Ib ofNOxIMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOxlMMBtu Coal-FiredUtilityBoilers 0.1651b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOxlMMBtu SenateBill 7 EastTexasRegion Grandfatbered 0.141b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.1251b ofNOxlMMBtu Facilities WestTexas and EI Paso Region 0.1951b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu Grandfatbered Facilities



### 2

# WRITTEN AND ORAL TESTIMONYReference Number W-1 INDEX OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY

Submitted 

### By Sierra Club, Houston Regional Group

# SIERRA CLUB
FOUNDED 1892 

### December 2, 2007 Ms. Kim Herndon IVIC 206 Air Quality Division Chief Engineer's Office Texas Commission on Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087 Austin, Texas 78711-3087 Dear Ms. Herndon, 

## Houston Regional Group P. O. Box 3021 Houston, Texas 77253-3021 713-895-9309 http://texas.sierraclub.org/houston/



## DEC 0 <) 

## 2007 

# W-1

Enclosed are the comments of the Houston Regional Group of the Sierra Club (Sierra Club) regarding the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's (TCEQ) proposed Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The Sierra Club is very disappointed with this proposed SIP. Instead of making specific progress in attaining the eight-hour ozone standard by reducing ozone and precursor emissions caused by transport, both inside and outside Texas, TCEQ has the audacityto say that it does not have to do anything. While a weak U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may allow TCEQ to once again declare victory and extol its virtues as an air quality agency the truth lies behind TCEQ and EPA and not in front. The truth is dependent on what has not been done forthree decades and not what has been done. For over three decades the TCEQ and its predecessor agencies have adopted a minimalist and incremental policy of ozone and precursor air pollution control and reduction. This policy has resulted in declarations of attainment of the ozone standard many times, with EPA's acquiescence. In reality this policy has led to the failure of every ozone SIP in Houston for over 30 years. TCEQ has a perfect track record of failure. The Sierra Club has a perfect track record of success in calling for additional air pollution reductions and predicting the failure of each SIP that TCEQ and EPA approved and extolled. Who should the public believe now? TCEQ boldly lists the SIPs and regulations/rules it has approved over the past eight years as victories instead of the defeats they are. The goal is to attain the ozone standard and not just reduce emissions. TCEQ tries to turn the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments on their head by equating reductions in ozone and precursors with success when only attainment of the ozone standard really signals victory. TCEQ's strategy is like a football coach declaring victory because his/her team scored 30 points when they usually score 14 points. The coach unfortunately does not point out that the opposing team scored 50 points.

"WhenwetIl'to

### pickout anything

### byitself, we fmd ithitchedto evezythingelsein

### the universe."

## Johnlfuir
Printed on 100% Kenaitree free paper

### Just as TCEQ's modeling, approved by EPA, predicted attainment

## bf-{h~ 'dibrle standard many times in the past now EPA's March 2005, "Technical Support Document for the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule
- Air Quality Modeling", regarding attainment of the eight-hour ozone standard in 2010 by the states which Texas transports ozone and precursor emissions to (Denver, Memphis
- West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge), does the same. Butthis is untrue. Modeling has failed to demonstrate attainment every time it has been used for SIPs because the emissions inventory (EI) is faulty. We now know there are much greater amounts of ozone precursors than thought in the past. This remains true today and has been shown by TCEQ's 2000 and 2005-2006 air quality studies in the Houston area. A faulty EI means faulty modeling; means faulty predictions of precursor and ozone transport; means faulty attainment of the ozone standard. The king has no clothes. What TCEQ should have done with this SIP was reduce transport within Texas and thus it would have reduced transport outside of Texas. It is ironic that only a few years ago TCEQ was pointing a finger at Houston and saying the reason the Beaumont
- Port Arthur and Dallas
- Fort Worth areas were not attaining the ozone standard was due to transport of ozone and precursors from Houston. Apparently this transport phenomena stops at the Texas state line and does not cause problems for other states. How convenient and neat. It is too bad TCEQ has not cleaned up its own backyard so that real attainment can be achieved by other parts ofTexas and the country more quickly. It appears to the Sierra Club that TCEQ has no real commitment to attain the ozone standard in the Houston area. TCEQ failed to submit a SIP this year which showed that the Houston area will attain the eight hour ozone standard. We are told that we have to wait 12 more years (49 years after the Federal Clean Air Act was passed) for attainment of the ozone standard. This is too long. The sad thing is TCEQ sentences the public, the people who own the TCEQ, to more years of unhealthy air pollution. This means that greater numbers of people will die and become ill due to TCEQ's minimalist and incremental policy of excruciatingly slow air pollution clean-up. The public does not deserve such distain. The Sierra Club can only hope that the TCEQ will care more in the future about the death and illness of people than it shows now with this SIP. The Sierra Club opposes the approval of this SIP because it does. not reduce significantly and or resolve the transport of ozone, precursors, and non-attainment areas in Texas or in other states. The Sierra Club urges TCEQ to "do the right thing" and withdraw this SIP. TCEQ should prepare and submit an SIP that vigorously addresses the ozone and



### 2

### precursors transport problem in Texas and in adjacent states. It is the least that TCEQ can do to protect the public. The Sierra Club appreciates this opportunity to comment. Sincerely,

# 8~ Brandt Mannchen Chair, Air Quality Issue Committee Lone Star Chapterofthe Sierra Club Chair, Air Quality Committee Houston Sierra Club 5431 Carew Houston, Texas 77096 713-664-5962 brandtshnfbt@juno.com Thank you.



## Dcr 0 

## a 2007

3

### Reference Number INDEX OF ORAL TESTIMONY

Submitted by
No oral testimonywas received pertaining to this proposal.

### Page 1 

# TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PUBLIC HEARING REGISTRATION 

## Location: Austin 

## Date: December 11, 2007 

## Concerning: Interstate transport of Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter

NAME REPRESENTING PRESENTING ORALTESTIMONY? (CIRCLE ONE)

# tV~e~ fPL ('"

# V2;r Yes 

# ®

# G~~\d**C,,<>.~4** S "'"
..........c:....:;)

# C""~ 

# ..........ic

# ~'J Yes 

# Q0

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

Yes 

### No

# EVALUATION OF TESTIMONY

# Texas Commission on Environmental Quality INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM



### To: Commissioners Date: March 28, 2008 Thru: LaDonna Castaiiuela, ChiefClerk Glenn Shankle, Executive Director 

### From: fDaVid C. 

### Schanbacher, P.E., ChiefEngineer
DocketNo.: 2007-1244-SIP Subject: Commission Approval for Adoption Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine ParticulateMatter (PM2 .5)Transport State Implementation Plan Revision ProjectNo. 2007-057-SIP-NR

Reasons for the SIP revision: On July 18, 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone (eight-hour ozone) and for fine particulate matter 

### (PM2.S)' 

### Section 11O(a)(l) ofthe Federal Clean AirActrequires states to submitnew SIPs to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of new or revised NAAQS. Section IIO(a)(2) lists the elements that the new SIP submissions must contain. Among other things, SIPs for a new or revised NAAQS must contain adequate provisions to address interstate transport of air pollution, pursuant to § IIO(a)(2)(D)(i). On April 25, 2005, the EPA published a finding offailure to submit in the 

### FederalRegister (Volume 70, Number 78) that required SIPs relating to interstate transport ofeight-hour ozone and PM2 .5. The action started a two-year clock for the promulgation of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). The finding offailure to submit identified Texas as a state that had not yet properly addressed interstate transport pollution in its SIP. Several areas in Texas are nonattainment for the eight-hour ozone NAAQS (HoustonGalveston-Brazoria, Dallas-Fort Worth, Beaumont-Port Arthur, and San Antonio

- deferred\ butthe entire state is currently designated attainment for the 1997 24-hour and annual standards for 

### PM 2.S

### NAAQS. This revision to Texas' State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone (03) 

### and fine particulate matter 

### (PM 2.S) 

### transport sets forth how the commission will meet the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), § 1l0(a)(l), § IIO(a)(2), including § IIO(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport of pollution of 0 3 

### and PM2 .5. The purpose of this SIP revision is to document that any emissions from Texas' sources that may have contributedto nonattainment in another state have been mitigated through existing control strategies.
What the SIP revision will do: The EPA's 

### "SIP Guidance on Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) Findings of Failure to Submit" dated August 11, 2006, notes that states participating in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) will satisfy the transport SIP requirements for ozone and PM2 .5 by submitting a CAIR SIP or by relying on the CAIR Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do not interfere with attainment in another state. Based on the EPA's guidance, since Texas is participating in the federal CAIR program for PM2 .5, Texas has addressed annual sulfur dioxide (S02) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) transport for PM2 .5.

1 Reclassification to attainment is currently pending. It was proposedin the FederalRegisteron February 6, 2008. Finalredesignation to attainment is anticipated to take place in April 2008.

### Commissioners Page 2 March 28, 2008 Re: DocketNo. 2007-1244-SIP Therefore, Texas' PM2.5 

### transport SIP obligation has been partially fulfilled by the submission ofthe CAIR SIP to the EPA on August 3, 2006. The SIP revision includes verification that the Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review permitting programs and the Protection ofVisibility requirements are being implemented in Texas. Texas is not regulated under the CAIR program for eight-hour ozone contribution. However, annual NOx reductions are required because ofthe PM2.5

### contribution underthe CAIR program. Additionally, Texas has a strategy in place for the eastern part ofthe state to reduce NOx emissions from electric generating units. This strategy, along with other NOx-reducing programs in existing SIP revisions, Early Action Compact SIP revisions, and an Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan, is the basis ofTexas' Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter(PM2.5) 

### Transport SIP revision submittal. The control strategies defined in this SIP revision that are comparable to the CAIR program include: Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations; Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission Specifications; Texas-specific legislation from the 1999 76th 

### session in Senate Bill 7 (SB 7) thatrequires a regional NOxcap and trade program; and a Mass Emissions Cap and Trade program in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria nonattainment area. Information regarding additional control strategies in the eight-hour ozone SIP revisions, Early Action Compact SIP revisions, an Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan, an eight-hour ozone maintenance plan, one-hour ozone SIP revisions, One-Hour Ozone Flex Plans, one-hour ozone flexible attainment region SIP revision, and the one-hour ozone regional SIP revision have also been incorporated intothis SIP revision. This SIP revision documents the appropriate supporting information that includes, but is not limited to: background information, significant contribution elements, noninterference with maintenance elements, prevention ofsignificantdeterioration elements, and avisibility protection element. Based on the EPA document, 

### "Technical Support Documentfor the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule

- Air Quality Modeling, March 2005, " all ofthe nearest states' (Colorado, Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri, and Louisiana) nonattainment areas (Denver, Memphis-West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge) will be attaining the eight-hour ozone and PM2.5 

### standards. Therefore, Texas has adequately addressed federal requirements for potential transport issues associated with eight-hour ozone and PM2.5 

### and fulfilled its eighthour ozone and PM2.5

### transport SIP obligations through its participation in CAIR and the implementation of ozone strategies forthe one- and eight-hour standards. 

### Statutory authority: The authority to propose and adopt the SIP is derived from Texas Health and Safety Code, Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), § 

### 382.002, which provides that the policy and purpose ofthe 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; and 

### § 382.012, which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive plan forthe control ofthe state's air. 

### Potentially controversial matters: None. There are no additional control strategies orrules as part ofthis SIP revision. This SIP revision only contains a summary ofcurrently implemented strategies.

### Commissioners Page 3 March 28, 2008 Re: DocketNo. 2007-1244-SIP Public comment: The 45-day public commentperiod opened onNovember 23,2007, and closed on January 7, 2008. A public hearing was scheduled for December 11, 2007, in Austin. No commenters signed-up to provide oral testimony; therefore, the hearing was not officially opened. One written comment was received during the comment period from the Sierra Club

- Houston Regional Group (Sierra Club). The overall concern from the Sierra Club is that the commission is not doing enough to protect air quality in Texas, specifically in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria area. Significantchanges from proposal: No changes were made tothe proposed SIP revision from proposal to adoption. Agency contacts: Kim Herndon, ProjectManager, 239-1421, Air Quality Division Terry Salem, StaffAttorney, 239-0469
Attachments

cc: ChiefClerk, 5 copies Executive Director's Office David C. Schanbacher, P.E. Ashley K. Wadick Daniel Womack Zak Covar Office ofGeneral Counsel Kim Herndon Terry Salem

# STAFF RECOMMENDATIONSREVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) CONCERNING OZONE (03) AND FINE PARTICULATE MATTER (PM 2.S) TRANSPORT EMISSIONS

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

DOCKET NO. 2007-1244-SIP PROJECT NO. 2007-057-SIP-NR
Adopted April 16, 2008SECTION 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 ofNitrogen (No change.) G. SulfurDioxide (No change.) H. Conformity with theNational Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (No change.) I. Site Specific (No change.) J. Mobile Source Strategies (No change.) K. Clean AirInterstate Rule (No change.) L. Transport (New.) M. Regional Haze (Proposed December 2007.)EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone (03) and fine particulate matter (PM2 .S) transport sets forth how the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will meet the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), section IIO(a)(l) requirement for states to submit SIPs within three years after the promulgation of new or revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to meet the requirements of FCAA, § 110(a)(2), including FCAA, § IIO(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport of0 3 and/or PM2 .5. On July 18, 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone and a revisedNAAQS for particulate matter (PM). For ozone, the EPA replaced the one-hour standard with an eight-hour standard and for PM, the EPA added anew 24-hour standard and a new annual standard for particulate matter of2.5 microns and less (PM2 .5). The purpose ofthis SIP revision is to document that any emissions from sources in Texas that may contribute to nonattainment in another state have been mitigated through existing control strategies. On April 25, 2005, the EPA published a finding of states' failure to submit in the Federal Register (Volume 70, Number 78) that required SIPs relating to interstate transport ofeight-hour ozone and PM2 .5. This publication started a two-year clock for the promulgation of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). The finding offailure to submit identified Texas as a state that had notproperly addressed interstate transport pollution. Several areas in Texas are nonattainment for the eight-hour ozone NAAQS, but the entire state is currently designated attainment for the 1997 24-hour and annual standards for PM2 .S• The EPA's "SIP Guidance on Section llO(a)(2)(D)(i) Findings ofFailure to Submit" dated August 11, 2006, notes that states participating in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) will

. satisfy the transport SIP requirements for ozone and PM2 .5 by submitting a CAIR SIP or by relying on the CAIR FIP to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do not interfere with attainment in another state. Texas is participating in the federal CAIR program for PM2 .S and is considered as having addressed annual sulfur dioxide (S02) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) transport for PM2 .5. Therefore, Texas' PM2 .5 transport SIP obligation has been partially fulfilled by the submission ofthe CAIR SIP to the EPA on August 3, 2006. This SIPrevision also includes verification that the Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) permitting programs and the Protection of Visibility requirements are being implemented in Texas. Texas is not covered under the CAIR program for eight-hour ozone contribution. However, in addition to the annual NOx reductions from the CAIR program Texas has a strategy in place for the eastern part of the state to reduce NOx emissions from electric generating units. This strategy, along with otherNOx reducing programs in current ozone SIP revisions, is the basis of Texas' Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter (PM2 .5) Transport SIP revision submittal. The control strategies that are comparable to the CAIR program include: Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations; Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission Specifications; Texas-specific legislation from the 1999 76m session in Senate Bill 7 (SB 7) that requires a regional NOxcap and trade program; and a Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program in the Houston-Galveston-Brazorianonattainment area. The combined electric generating unit (EGU) specific strategies listed above have reduced NOx by an estimated 598 tons per day from 2000 through 2005. This equates to an estimated 218,270 tons per year. Control strategy modeling indicates that an additional two tons per day will be


### ES-lreduced by 2009, for a total of 600 tons per day or 219,000 tons per year. In addition, the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) MECT program for non-electric generating facilities has reduced NOx emissions an additional 105 tons per day or 38,325 tons peryear from 2000 through 2004, with an additional 76 tons per day or 27,740 tons per year reduction expected in 2009. In addition to the listed reductions that are consistent with CAIR, Texas has numerous other strategies through eight- and one-hour ozone initiatives that are described in Chapter 2. These strategies include, but are not limited to: programs to reduce NOx emissions from major industrial, commercial, and institutional sources; cement kiln controls; transportation control measures (TCMs); local voluntary mobile source emission reduction programs (VMEP); Texas Low EmissionDiesel (TxLED); and the Texas Emission Reduction Program (TERP). In addition to the control strategies that are already in place to reduce NOxemissions in Texas, an EPA document, "Technical Support Documentfor the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule

- Air Quality Modeling, March 2005," states that modeling predicts that all four ofthe nonattainment areas (Denver, Memphis-West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge) in states nearest to Texas (Colorado, Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri, and Louisiana) will be attaining the eight-hour ozone standard in 2010 after CAIR emissions reductions have been made. The EPA's analysis included Texas emissions east ofLaredo, including the Beaumont-Port Arthur, Dallas-FortWorth, and the Houston-Galveston-Brazorianonattainment areas. In conclusion, the existing environmental and technical work contained in the EPA's document, "Technical Support Documentfor the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule

- Air Quality Modeling, March 2005," confirms that all nonattainment areas in adjacent states will be attaining the eighthour ozone standard. In addition, the EPA's recognition that CAIR is adequate to demonstrate compliance with the PM2.5 transport requirements shows Texas has adequately addressed any potential transport issues associated with eight-hour ozone and PM2.5 and fulfilled its eight-hour ozone and PM2.5transport SIP obligations.



### ES-2SECTION V: LEGAL AUTHORlTY A. General The TCEQ has the legal authority to implement, maintain, and enforce the NAAQS. The first airpollution control act, known as the Clean Air Act ofTexas, 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 and 2007. In 1989, the TCAA was codified as Chapter 382 oftheTexas Health & 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 ofair

. resources. In 1991, the Texas Legislature abolished the TACB effective September I, 1993, and

its powers, duties, responsibilities, and functions were transferred to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC). With the creation ofthe TNRCC, the authority over air quality is found in both the Texas Water Code and the TCAA. Specifically, the authority ofthe 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 ofthe Executive Director. This Chapter 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 I, 2013, and changed the name ofthe TNRCC to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The TCAA specifically authorizes the TCEQ to establish the level ofquality to be maintained in the state's air and to control the quality ofthe state's air by preparing and developing a general, comprehensive plan. The TCAA, Subchapters A - D, also authorize the TCEQ to collect informationto enable the commission to develop an inventory ofemissions; 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 ofthe state as well as with industries and the Federal Government; and establish and operate a system of permits for construction ormodification offacilities. Local government authority is found in Subchapter E ofthe 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 territorialjurisdiction, 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 ofair pollution not inconsistent with the provisions of the TCAA orthe rules ororders ofthe commission. Subchapters F, G, and H ofthe TCAA authorize the TCEQ to establish low emission vehicle requirements for mass transit authorities, local government fleets, and private fleets; create a mobile emissions reduction credit program; establish vehicle inspection and maintenance programs in certain areas ofthe state, consistent with the requirements ofthe federal Clean Air Act; establish gasoline volatility and low emission diesel standards; and fund and authorizeparticipating counties to implement low-income vehicle repair assistance, retrofit and accelerated vehicle retirementprograms. B. Applicable Law The following statutes and rules provide necessary authority to adopt and implement the SIP. The rules listed below have previously been submitted as part ofthe SIP. Statutes TEXAS HEALTH & SAFETY CODE, Chapter 382 TEXAS WATER CODE All sections ofeach subchapter are included, unless otherwise noted. September I, 2007 September 1, 2007

SubchapterH: SubchapterI: SubchapterJ: SubchapterL: Chapter 5: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission SubchapterA: General Provisions SubchapterB: Organization ofthe Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission SubchapterC: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission SubchapterD: General Powers and Duties ofthe Commission SubchapterE: Administrative Provisions for Commission SubchapterF: Executive Director (except §§ 5.225, 5.226, 5.227, 5.2275,5.231,5.232, and 5.236) Delegation ofHearings Judicial Review Consolidated Permit Processing Emergency andTemporary Orders (§§ 5.514, 5.5145 and 5.515 only) Chapter7: Enforcement SubchapterA: General Provisions (§§ 7.001,7.002,7.00251,7.0025,7.004, 7.005 only) SubchapterB: Corrective Action and Injunctive Relief(§ 7.032 only) SubchapterC: Administrative Penalties SubchapterD: Civil Penalties (except § 7.109) SubchapterE: Criminal Offenses and Penalties: §§ 7.177, 7.179-7.183 Rules All ofthe following rules are found in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code, as ofthe following effective dates: Chapter 7, Memoranda ofUnderstanding, §§ 7.110 and 7.119 Chapter 19, Electronic Reporting Chapter 35, Subchapters A-C, K: Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension orAmendmentof Permit Conditions Chapter39, PublicNotice, §§ 39.201; 39.401; 39.403(a) and (b)(8)-(1O); 39.405(f)(1) and (g);39.409; 39.411 (a), (b)(1)-(6) and (8)-(10) and (c)(1)-(6) and (d); 39.413(9), (11), (12) and (14); 39.418(a) and (b)(3) and (4); 39.419(a), (b),(d) and (e); 39.420(a), (b) and (c)(3) and (4); 39.423 (a) and (b); 39.601;

11 May 2, 2002 March 1, 2007

July 20, 2006

March 29, 200639.602; 39.603; 39.604; and 39.605 Chapter 55, Request for Contested Case Hearings; Public July 5, 2006 Comment, §§ 55.1; 55.2I(a)

- (d), (e)(2), (3) and {l2), (f) and (g); 55.101(a), (b), (c)(6)

- (8); 55.103; 55.150; 55.152(a)(l), (2) and (6) and (b); 55.154; 55.156; 55.200; 55.201(a)

- (h); 55.203; 55.205; 55.209 and 55.211 Chapter 101: General Air Quality Rules August 16, 2007 Chapter 106: Permits by Rule, SubchapterA June 30, 2004 Chapter Ill: Control ofAirPollution from Visible Emissions July 19,2006 and Particulate Matter Chapter 112: Control ofAirPollution from Sulfur Compounds July 16, 1997 Chapter 113: Standards ofPerformance for Hazardous Air Pollutants December 27,2007 and for Designated Facilities and Pollutants Chapter 114: Control ofAirPollution fromMotor Vehicles January 6, 2008 Chapter 115: Control ofAirPollution from Volatile Organic Compounds July 19,2007 Chapter 116: Permits for New ConstructionorModification January 10,2008 Chapter 117: Control ofAirPollution from Nitrogen Compounds June 14, 2007 Chapter 118: Control ofAir PollutionEpisodes March 5, 2000 Chapter 122, § 122.122: Potential to Emit December 11, 2002 Chapter 122, § 122.215: Minor PermitRevisions June 3, 2001 Chapter 122, § 122.216: Applications for Minor PermitRevisions June 3,2001 Chapter 122, § 122.217: Procedures forMinorPermit Revisions December 11, 2002 Chapter 122, § 122.218: Minor Pennit Revision Procedures for Pennit Revisions June 3,2001 Involving the Use ofEconomic Incentives, Marketable Permits, and Emissions Trading

IIILIST OF ACRONYMSBPA

-**Beaumont~Port** Arthur CAIR

- Clean Air Interstate Rule CARE

- Clean Air Responsibility Enterprise CFR

- Code ofFederal Regulations CO

- Carbon Monoxide DFW

- Dallas-Fort Worth EAC

- Early Action Compact EGF

- Electric Generating Facility EGU

- Electric Generating Units EPA

- United States Environmental Protection Agency FAR

- Flexible AttainmentRegion FCAA

- Federal Clean AirAct FIP

- Federal Implementation Plan FR

- Federal Register HECT

- HRVOC Emission Cap and Tr<:lde HGB

- Houston-Galveston-Brazoria HRVOC

- Highly Reactive Volatile Organic Compound lOP

- Increment ofProgress Lb- Pound LDAR

- LeakDetection and Repair MECT

- Mass Emission Cap andTrade MMBtu

- MillionBritishThermal Unit MVEB

- Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget MWe

- MegawattElectrical MWh

- MegawattHour MOA

- Memorandum ofAgreement NAAQS

- National AmbientAir Quality Standards NCTCOG

- North Central Texas Council ofGovernments NEGU

- Non-Electric Generating Facilities NLEV

- National Low Emission Vehicle NOx - Nitrogen Oxides orOxides ofNitrogen NSR

- New Source Review 0 3 - Ozone PAL

- Flexible Plant-wideApplicability Limit Permit PM

- Particulate Matter PMIO - Particulate Matter 10 microns and less PM2.5 - Particulate Matter2.5 microns and less PSD

- Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration PUC

- Public Utility Commission ofTexas RACM

- Reasonable Available Control Measure RACT

- Reasonable Available Control Technology ROP

- Rate ofProgress SB

- Senate Bill SIP

- State Implementation Plan S02

- SulfurDioxide TAC -Texas Administrative Code TACB

- Texas Air Control Board TCAA

- Texas Clean AirAct TCEQ

- Texas Commission onEnvironmental Quality (commission)

IVTCM

- Transportation Control Measure TPD

- Tons per Day TPOD

- Tons per Ozone Day TERM

- Transportation Emission Reduction Measure TERP

- Texas Emission Reduction Plan TexAQS

- Texas Air Quality Study TNRCC

- Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission TPY

- Tons perYear TxLED

- Texas Low Emission Diesel VMEP

- Voluntary Mobile Source Emission Reduction Program VOC

- Volatile Organic Compound WoE

- Weight ofEvidence



### vREVISIONS TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) CONCERNING OZONE (03) AND FINE PARTICIUTLATE MATTER (PM 2.S) TRANSPORT EMISSIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: GENERAL 1.1 Background 1.2 Introduction 1.3 Health Effects 1.4 Public Hearing and Commenters 1.5 Social and Economic Considerations 1.6 Fiscal and ManpowerResources 1.7 Coordination with Local Agencies 1.8 Organization Responsible for Development, Implementation, and Enforcement 1.9
. DataAvailability Chapter 2: REQUIRED CONTROL STRATEGY ELEMENTS 2.1 Background 2.2 Control Strategy Overview 2.2.1 Significant Contribution and Interfere MaintenanceElements 2.2.1.1

- Utility Electric Generation in OzoneNonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations 2.2.1.2.

- Utility Electric Generation inEast and Central Texas Emission Specifications 2.2.1.3

- Senate Bill 7 (76tD Texas Legislature) 2.2.1.4

- Houston-Ga1veston-BrazoriaMass Emission Cap and Trade (MECT) 2.2.1.5

- Summary ofEmission Reductions Related to Electric Generating Unit Strategies 2.2.2. Eight-HourOzone State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revisions 2.2.2.1

- Houston-Galveston-BrazoriaEight-Hour Ozone SIP Revision 2.2.2.2

- Dallas-FortWorth Eight-HourOzone SIP Revision 2.2.2.3

- Beaumont-PortArthurEight-Hour Ozone SIPRevisions 2.2.2.4

- Austin-Round RockEight-HourOzone Early Action Compact SIP Revision

VI2.2.2.5

- NortheastTexas Eight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact SIP Revision 2.2.2.6

- SanAntonio AreaEight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact SIP Revision 2.2.2.7

- Corpus Christi Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan 2.2.2.8

- Victoria County Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan 2.2.2.9

- El Paso County Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan 2.2.3 One-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revisions 2.2.3.1

- Houston-Galveston-Brazoria One-Hour Ozone Attainment SIP Revisions 2.2.3.2

- Dallas-Fort Worth One-Hour OzoneAttainment SIP Revisions 2.2.3.3

- Beaumont-PortArthur One-Hour Ozone Attainment SIP Revisions 2.2.3.4

- NortheastTexas Flexible AttainmentRegion (FAR) One-Hour Ozone SIP Revisions 2.2.3.5

- Regional One-Hour Ozone SIP Revision 2.2.3.6

- One-HourOzoneFlexible Agreements 2.2.3.6.1

- Austin-San Marcos Metropolitan Statistical Area One-Hour Ozone Flex Plan 2.2.3.6.2

- Corpus Christi One-Hour Ozone Flex Plan 2.2.4 General State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Information 2.2.5 Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD) and NonattainmentNew Source Review (NSR) Elements 2.2.5.1 Eight-HourOzone 2.2.5.2 Fine Particulate Matter(PM2.5) 2.2.5.3 Emission Credits 2.2.6 Protection ofVisibility Element Chapter 3: FUTUREAITAINMENT PLANS

vii

### viiiAppendix A


### B
C
D LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Name Maps ofDistances from Texas Eight-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to the FourNearestNonattainmentAreas in Adjacent States Major Point Source NOx Rules and Reductions Promulgated in Texas Since 2000 Texas Electric Generating Utility NOxControl Strategies Compared to the Clean AirInterstate Rule (CAIR) Response to Comments

IXNumber 2-1 LIST OF TABLE Table Name Distances from Texas Eight-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to the Four Nearest-NonattainmentAreas in Adjacent States



### x

### CHAPTER 1: GENERAL
1.1 BACKGROUND "The History ofthe Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP)," a comprehensive overview ofthe SIP revisions submitted to the EPA by the State ofTexas, is available at the following Web site: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.htm]
.
1.2 INTRODUCTION This revision to the SIP for the transport ofozone and fine particulate matter of2.5 microns and less (PM2 .5) sets forth how the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will meet the requirements of FCAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) that requires states to submit a SIP that contains adequate provisions that prohibit any source or other type ofemissions activity within the state from emitting any airpollutants in amounts that will:

• contribute significantly to nonattainment ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for areas in otherstates;

• interfere with maintenance ofthe NAAQS by any other state;

• interfere with measures required to meet an implementation plan for any other state related to Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration (PSD); and

• interfere with measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other state related to regional haze and visibility. On July 18, 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone and a revised NAAQS for particulate matter (PM). For ozone, the EPA replaced the one-hour standard with an eight-hour standard. The EPA also added a new 24- hour standard and a new annual standard for PM2.5. The FCAA, section llO(a)(l) requires states to submit SIPs within three years after the promulgation ofnew orrevised NAAQS that meet the requirements of FCAA, §llO(a)(2), including FCAA, §110(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport ofpollution. On April 25, 2005, the EPA published a finding offailure to submit SIPs relating to interstate transport in the Federal Register (Volume 70, Number 78), starting a two-year clock for the promulgation ofaFederal Implementation Plan (FIP). The finding offailure to submit identified Texas as a state that had notproperly addressed interstate transport in its SIP. The EPA's "SIP Guidance on Section llO(a)(2)(D)(i) Findings ofFailure to Submit" dated August 11, 2006, notes that states participating in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) will satisfy the transport SIP requirements for ozone and PM2 .5 by submitting a CAlR SIP or by relying on the CAIR Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to demonstrate that emissions from Texas do not interfere with attainment in another state. Texas is participating in the federal CAIR program for PM2 .5 and thus EPA's guidance is considered as having addressed annual sulfur dioxide (S02) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) transport for PM2 .5. Therefore, Texas' PM2 .5 transport SIP obligation has been partially fulfilled by the submission ofthe CAIR SIP to the EPA on August 3, 2006. In order to completely fulfill obligations related to interstate transport ofozone and PM2.5, this SIP revision includes verification that the Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration

1-1PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) pennitting programs and the Protection of Visibility requirements are being implemented in Texas. Texas is not covered under the CAIRprogram for eight-hour ozone. However, in addition to the annual NOx reductions from the CAIR program, in 1999 the state implemented a strategy in the eastern part ofTexas to reduce NOx emissions from electric generating units (EGU). The CAIR strategy, along with other NOx reducing programs from Texas Eight-Hour Ozone SIP revisions, Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revisions, an Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Program, Eight-Hour Maintenance Plans, and One-Hour Ozone SIP revisions are described under Section 2.2, "Control Strategy Overview." The combination of these NOx reduction programs fulfills the state's obligation for an ozonetransport SIP. The control strategies in the SIPrevisions include:

• Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations;

• Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission Specifications;

• Texas-specific legislation from the 1999 76th session in Senate Bill 7 (SB 7) that required emissions reductions ofapproximately 50 percent under a regional NOx cap and trade program;

• Houston-Galveston-Brazoria nonattainment area Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program that required NOx reductions of approximately 80 percent across NOxpoint sources;

• Eight-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Beaumont-PortArthur areas;

• Eight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact State Implementation Plan Revisions for Austin-Round Rock, NortheastTexas, and the SanAntonio areas;

• Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan in the Corpus Christi area;

• Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plans for Victoria County and EI Paso County;

• One-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-FortWorth, Beaumont-Port Arthur, NortheastTexas and Regional;

• One-Hour Ozone Flex Plans for Austin and Corpus Christi areas;

• One-Hour Ozone Northeast Texas Flexible Attainment Region State Implementation Plan Revision; and the

• One-Hour Ozone Regional State Implementation Plan Revision. Current Revision This SIP revision contains several elements thatprovide infonnation on how Texas is:

• not contributing significantly to nonattainment ofthe ozone and PM2
.5 NAAQS for areas in other states;

1-2• not interfering with the maintenance ofthe ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state;
• not interfering with measures required to meet an implementation plan for any other state related to PSD; and

• not interfering with measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other state relatedto regional haze and visibility.
1.3 HEALTH EFFECTS In 1997, the EPA revised the NAAQS for ozone from a one-hourto an eight-hour standard based on scientific data that indicated that the eight-hour standard provides better protection ofpublic health from longer-term exposures to moderate levels ofozone. To support the eight-hour ozone standard, the EPA provided information that indicated that even low levels ofozone can decrease lung capacity temporarily in some healthy adults and cause inflammation of lung tissue, aggravate asthma, and make people more susceptible to respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis and pneumonia. Children are at a higher risk from exposure to ozone, since they breathe more air per pound of body weight than adults and because children's respiratory systems are still developing. Children also spend a considerable amount oftime outdoors during summer and during the start ofthe school year (August-October) when the highest ozone levels are recorded. Adults most at risk to ozone exposure are outdoor workers, people exercising outside, and individuals with pre-existing respiratory diseases. Also in 1997, the EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter (PM). Fine particles and precursorpollutants are emitted by a wide range ofsources, including power plants, cars, trucks, industrial sources, and other burning or combustion-related activities. The EPA has noted the following health effects associated with PM2.5 exposure: premature death, aggravation of heart and lung disease, and asthma attacks. Older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and children are particularly sensitiveto PM2.5•

d 1 1.4 PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMENTERS Th d bl· h h fi 11 e commISSIon 0pene a pu IC earmg at teo owmg tIme an ocatlOn: CITY DATE TIME LOCATION Austin December 11, 2007 10:00 a.m. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 12100 Park35 Circle Building B, Room 20IA
The public comment period was opened on November 23,2007, and closed on January 7, 2008. The comment period was 45-days long. An opportunity to provide public comment was offered at a public hearing scheduled in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 2007; however, no oral comments were provided at the hearing. One written comment was received during the comment period from the Sierra Club

- Houston Regional Group (Sierra Club). The response to the Sierra Club's comments can be found inAppendix D.

1-3Copies ofthe adopted SIP revision and its appendix can be obtained from the TCEQ's Web site at http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.htmlorupon requestto: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Air Quality Division P. O. Box 13087 Mail Code 206 Austin, Texas 78711-3087 Re: Ozone and PM2.5Transport SIPInfonnation
1.5 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS For a detailed explanation ofthe social and economic issues involved with any ofthe measures in this SIP submission, please refer to the preambles that precede each adopted rule package ofthe following referenced rules in previously adopted SIPs and rules forthe measure specified inthe SIP.

• Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations, Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Beaumont-Port Arthur, areas can be found in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 117, SubchapterB, Division 2;

• Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas can be found in 30 TAC Chapter 117, SubchapterB, Division 2;

• Senate Bill 7 Regional NOx Cap can be found in TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 2;

• Mass Emission Cap and Trade can be found in 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 3;

• Eight-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-FortWorth, and Beaumont-PortArthur areas;

• Eight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact State Implementation Plan Revisions for Austin-Round Rock, NortheastTexas, and the SanAntonio areas;

• Eight-Hour OzoneFlex Program inthe Corpus Christi area;

• Eight-HourOzoneMaintenance Plan for Victoria County;

• One-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan Revisions for Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Dallas-FortWorth, Beaumont-PortArthur, and Regional;

• One-Hour Ozone Flex Programs for Austin-Round Rock area and the Corpus Christi area;

• One-Hour Ozone Northeast Texas Flexible Attainment Region; andthe

• One-Hour Ozone Regional State Implementation Plan Revision.

1-4Specific infonnation regarding social and economic considerations for these SIP revisions, EACs, and the ozone flex programs can be found within these packages. These documents can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html
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 ofthis plan. Specific infonnation regarding the TCEQ budget is available upon request.
1.7 COORDINATION WITH LOCAL AGENCIES The TCEQ has detennined that there will be no assignment to local agencies. However, preexisting assignments to local agencies regarding various enforcement activities remain in effect and couldbe utilized ifenforcement activities are delegated to the TCEQ from the EPA.
1.8 ORGANIZATIONS RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION, AND ENFORCEMENT The TCEQ is the agency delegated authority by the Texas Legislature regarding the protection of air quality in the State ofTexas. Other local government entities also have limited authority regarding airquality matters inthe State ofTexas.
1.9 DATA AVAILABILITY The TCEQ affinns that it will retain all data used in the preparation ofthis SIP revision. All supporting documentation and data are available from the TCEQ upon request or are publicly available via theTCEQ Web site at: http://v.'Ww.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html. Additional infonnation may be subjectto confidentiality restrictions, ifapplicable.



### 1-5CHAPTER 2: REQUIRED CONTROL STRATEGY ELEMENTS 2.1 BACKGROUND Texas is not covered under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) program for eight-hour ozone. However, in addition to the annual nitrogen oxides (NOx) reductions from the CAIR program, in 1999 the state implemented a strategy in the eastern part ofTexas to reduce NOx emissions from electric generating units (EGUs). The CAIR strategy, along with otherNOx reducing programs from Texas Eight-Hour Ozone SIP revisions, Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revisions, EightHour Maintenance Plans, an Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Program, One-Hour Ozone SIP revisions, a One-Hour Ozone Flexible Attainment Region SIP revision, and One-Hour Ozone Flexible Agreements are described under Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.3 in this chapter. The combination of these NOx reduction programs fulfills the state's obligation for an ozone transport SIP. The control strategies specific to EGUs include:



### •

•

• Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations;

.Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission

Specifications; Texas-specific legislation from the 1999 76tlI session in Senate Bill 7 (SB 7) thatrequires NOx reductions through aregional cap andtrade program; and Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program in the Houston-GalvestonBrazorianonattainment area. In addition to EGU control strategies specific forNOxcontrols in Eastern Texas, Texas has eighthour ozone SIP revisions in place for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area, the DallasFort Worth (DFW) area, and the Beaumont-Port Arthur (BPA) area, as well as maintenance plans for Victoria and El Paso. The state also has Early Action Compact SIP revisions for Eight-Hour Ozone in place for the Austin-Round Rock area, the Northeast Texas area, and the San Antonio area. An Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Program is in place for Corpus Christi, as well as Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plans for Victoria and EI Paso. One-Hour Ozone SIP revisions were developed for HGB, DFW, BPA, Northeast Texas, and a Regional Strategy, as well as One-Hour Ozone Flexible Agreements for the Austin-San Marcos Metropolitan Statistical Area and Corpus Christi. For PM25, Texas is included in the federal CAIR and has submitted a CAIR SIP to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
2.2 CONTROL STRATEGY OVERVIEW The EPA's guidance for interstate transport SIPs requires states to submit a SIP revision that contains adequate provisions that prohibit any source or other type ofemissions activity within the state from emitting any airpollutants in amounts that will: (1) contribute significantly to nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for areas in other states; (2) interfere with maintenance ofthe NAAQS in any otherstate; (3) interfere with measures required to meet an implementation plan for any other state related to Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration (PSD); and
2-1(4) interfere with measures required to meet the implementation plan for any other state relatedto regional haze and visibility.
2.2.1 Significant Contributions and Interfere with Maintenance Elements Texas is making a section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP submission to address significant contribution to nonattainment and interference with maintenance ofthe eight-hour ozone standard in another state, because Texas is not covered by CAIR for eight-hour ozone. The commission concurs with the EPA's CAIR modeling EPA document, "Technical Support Documentfor the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule

- Air Quality Modeling, March 2005," which states modeling for all four ofthe nearest non-Texas nonattainment cities (Denver, Memphis-West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge) will be attaining the eight-hour ozone standard in 2010 after CAIR emissions reductions have been made. In addition to implementing CAIR for PM2.5, Texas has implemented requirements for emission reductions from EGUs, which provides assurances that emissions from Texas will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state. Table 2-1, Distancesfrom Texas Eight-Hour Ozone NonattainmentAreas to the FourNearest-NonattainmentAreas inAdjacentStates, provides a listing ofthe mileage from the center ofthe nonattainment areas in Texas and the nearest outer boundary ofthe nonattainment areas in Texas to Denver, Memphis-West Memphis, St. Louis, and Baton Rouge. Appendix A provides maps ofthese locations. Table 2-1 Distancesfrom Texas Eight-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to the Four NearestNonattainmentAreas inAd'acentStates

HGB from Nonattainment

in Miles Distance Areato Ci DFW Houston Dallas City Distance from City to City in Miles

St. Louis

The following infonnation provides additional supportto the EPA's modeling that Texas does not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance ofthe NAAQS in another state. The additional supporting infonnation focuses specifically on ozone specific EGU strategies that correspond with the EPA's CAIR ozone program. Additional infonnation is provided regarding other eight-hour ozone strategies in ozone SIP revisiqns, EAC SIP revisions, the ozone flex program in Corpus Christi, and ozone maintenance plans. Additional infonnation regarding one-hour ozone strategies within one-hour ozone SIP revisions and one-hour ozone flexible agreements has also been provided. 2.2.1.1 Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations The regulatory provisions relating to the Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for Attainment Demonstrations require different specifications for each nonattainment area in Texas. These provisions apply to each electric generating facility that generates electric energy for compensation, or are owned or operated by a municipality or Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) regulated utility or any of its successors, regardless of whether the successor is a municipality or is regulated by the PUC. The compliance date for these provisions was May 1, 2005.



### 2-2Specific provisions in place forthe specified nonattainment areas in Texas are described below: -Houston-Galveston-Brazoria. The owner or operator of each utility boiler, auxiliary steam boiler, or stationary gas turbine located in the HGB eight-hour ozone nonattainment area must ensure that NOx emissions do not exceed the lower of any applicable permit limit in a permit issued on or after January 2, 2001, for which the owner or operator submitted an application determined to be administratively complete by the executive director before January 2, 200I; any limit in a permit by rule under which construction commenced by January 2, 200I; or the following rates, in pounds per million British thermal units (lb/MMBtu) heat input, on the basis of daily and 30-day averaging periods specified in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 117.108 and as specified in the Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) program in 30 TAC Chapter 101. NOx rates used to determine the daily and 30-day averaging caps for utility boilers include a range of: gas-fired 0.030 Ib/MMBtu; coal-fired and oil-fired 0.050 Ib/MMBtu for wall-fired and 0.045 Ib/MMBtu for tangential-fired; auxiliary steam boilers 0.030 Ib/MMBtu; and stationary gas turbines 0.032 Ib/MMBtu (including duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts). -Dallas-Fort Worth. The owner or operator of each utility boiler located in the DFW eight-hour ozone nonattainment area must ensure that emissions ofNOx do not exceed 0.033 Ib/MMBtu heat input from boilers that are part ofa large DFW system, and 0.06 Ib/MMBtu heat input from boilers that are part of a small DFW system, on a daily average orthrough the provisions ofa limited system cap. -Beaumont-Port Arthur. The owner or operator ofeach utility boiler located in the BPA eight-hour ozone nonattainment area must ensure that NOx emissions do not exceed 0.10 Ib/MMBtu heat input on a daily average except as provided by the system cap or the use ofemissions credits for compliance. The above rules affecting the HGB, DFW, and BPA areas can be found in 30 TAC Chapter 117, SubchapterB, Division 2. The rules were published in the Texas Register on June 21, 2002, and the public comment period ended on July 22, 2002. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Register on January 3, 2003. The effective date ofthe rule package was January 17, 2003. 2.2.1.2 Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Emission Specifications The provisions relating to the Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas apply to each utility electric power boiler and stationary gas turbine, including duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts, that: generate electric energy for compensation; are owned by an electric cooperative, independent power producer, municipality, river authority, or public utility; and are located in Atascosa, Bastrop, Bexar, Brazos, Calhoun, Cherokee, Fannin, Fayette, Freestone, Goliad, Gregg, Grimes, Harrison, Henderson, Hood, Hunt, Lamar, Limestone, Marion, McLennen, Milam, Morris, Nueces, Parker, Red River, Robertson, Rusk, Titus, Travis, Victoria, or Wharton County. Utility electric power boilers and stationary gas turbines (including duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts) must ensure that electric power boilers' NOx emissions do not exceed specific rates in Ib/MMBtu. The rates are 0.14 Ib/MMBtu for gas-fired units and 0.165 Ib/MMBtu for coal-fired units based on heatinput on an annual (calendar year) average. The compliance date for these requirements was May I, 2005. This rule, 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter B, Division 2, was published in the Texas Register on June 21, 2002, and the public comment period ended on July 22, 2002. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Registeron January 3,2003. The effective date ofthe rule package was January 17,2003.


### 2-32.2.1.3 Senate Bill 7 (76th Texas Legislature) Senate Bill (SB) 7, 76th Texas Legislature session, requires a cap and trade program for previously grandfathered, or unpermitted, electric generating facilities and other electric generating facilities that chooseto participate in the cap and trade program. TheNOxallowances were determined using aNOxrate of0.14 Ib NOx/MMbtu for grandfathered facilities in the East Texas region and arate of0.195 Ib NOx/MMbtu for the grandfathered facilities inthe WestTexas and EI Paso region. The first control period for this program began on May 1, 2003. The last revision on this rule package, 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 2, was published inthe Texas Register on September 10, 1999, and the public comment period ended on October 11, 1999. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Register on January 7, 2000. The effective date ofthe rule package was January 11, 2000. 2.2.1.4 Houston-Galveston-BrazoriaMass Emission Cap and Trade (MECT) The MECT program applies to facilities that emitNOxin the HGB ozone nonattainment area and are subject to the emission specifications under Utility Electric Generation· in Ozone Nonattainment Areas mentioned previously plus industrial, commercial, and institutional combustion sources. Units covered include: industrial, commercial, or institutional boilers and process heaters; stationary gas turbines; stationary internal combustion engines; fluid catalytic cracking units (including carbon monoxide (CO) boilers, CO furnaces, and catalyst regenerator vents); boilers and industrial furnaces which were regulated as existing facilities by the EPA under 40 Code ofFederal Regulations Part 266, Subpart H (as was in effect on June 9, 1993); duct burners used in turbine exhaust ducts; pulping liquor recovery furnaces; lime kilns; lightweight aggregate kilns; heat treating furnaces and reheat furnaces; magnesium chloride fluidized bed dryers; and incinerators. The first control period for the MECT program began on January 1, 2002. The last proposal to revise this rule, 30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 3, was published in the Texas Register on June 25, 2004, and the public comment period ended on July 26, 2004. The adopted rule package was published in the Texas Register on November 26, 2004. The effective date of the rulepackage was December2, 2004. 2.2.1.5 Summary ofEmission Reduction Strategies in Texas Related to Electric Generating Unit Strategies The combined EGU-specific strategies listed above have reduced NOx by an estimated 598 tons per day (218,270 tons per year) from 2000 through 2005. Control strategy modeling indicates that an additional two tons per day ofNOx will be reduced from EGUs by 2009, for atotal of600 tons perday (219,000 tons peryear). In addition, the HGB MECT program for non-electric generating units (NEGU) has reduced NOx emissions an additional 105 tons per day (38,325 tons peryear) from 2000 through 2004, with an additional 76 tons per day (27,740 tons per year) reduction expected for 2009. Similarly the NEGU NOx reductions expectedbetween 2000 and 2009 for the othertwo nonattainment areas in East Texas, DFW and BPA, total an additional 49 tons per day (17,885 tons per year). This bringsthe total NOxreductions expected by the rules identified in Section 2.2.1.1 through 2.2.1.4 to 831 tons perday (303,315 tons peryear) between 2000 and 2009. The NOx emissions from point sources inventoried and modeled for 2000 for the entire state of Texas, notjust those areas addressed in Section 2.2.1.1 thru 2.2.1.4 were approximately 2,482 tons perday. By 2005, Texas had made an overall 30 percent reduction (see the 733 ton perday


### 2-4total in Appendix B) since 2000 in total NOx from the rules cited in Sections 2.2.1.1 thru 2.2.1.4. Across East Texas, including the nonattainment counties, NOx reductions for the above source categories amount to no less than 45 percent between 2000 and 2005. These are actual emissions reductions, not projected reductions. A summary ofthe above strategies and the methodology usedto calculate the emission reductions is provided inAppendix B.
2.2.2 Eight-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revisions Sections 2.2.2.1 thru 2.2.2.9 provides an overview ofsome ofthe eight-hour ozone SIP revisions that Texas has submitted to the EPA. 2.2.2.1 Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Eight-Hour Ozone SIP Revision The eight-county HGB metropolitan area was classified as a "moderate" ozone nonattainment area by the EPA under the eight-hour ozone standard on April 15, 2004. The eight counties include: Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties. The governor ofTexas requested a reclassification to severe in June 2007. The EPA notified the TCEQ in July 2007 that they will begin the process ofreclassification from moderate to severe in response to Governor Perry's request. The challenges to attain the eight-hour ozone standard are great because the HGB area is one ofthe most comprehensively controlled industrial complexes in the world; the area has unique and complex ozone formation chemistry and meteorology; the magnitude ofreductions needed is significant; and the TCEQ lacks regulatory authority to set emission standards for on-road and non-road mobile sources. The commission adopted the current HGB SIP revision on May 23, 2007. The HGB SIPrevision documents the substantial progress toward attainment made underthe onehour ozone NAAQS despite rapid economic and population growth in the area. This SIP revision also documents steps toward attainment ofthe eight-hourozone standard. This SIP revision is the first step in addressing the eight-hour ozone standard in the HGB area. This SIP revision includes revisions to rules in 30 TAC Chapter 114, related to the Texas Low Emission Diesel Rule (TxLED) for Certain Marine Fuels; 30 TAC Chapter 115, Division I, related to the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Emissions from Storage and Degassing Operations in the HGB area; and 30 TAC Chapter 117, related to the Water Heater Rule. The revision also includes local Voluntary Mobile Emission Reduction (VMEP) commitments. The TCEQ is committed to continuing progress toward attaining the standard and will work with the EPA to set submission dates for new obligations and interim progress in reducing emissions. The HGB SIP revision attainment demonstration will include an expeditiously as practicable attainment date (no later than June 15, 2019). Additional information regarding the specifics of these control strategies in the HGB Eight-Hour Ozone SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.2.2 Dallas-Fort Worth Eight-Hour Ozone SIP Revision The nine-county DFW metropolitan area was designated a "moderate" ozone nonattainment area under the eight-hour ozone standard on April 15, 2004. The nine counties include: Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, and Tarrant Counties. The DFW Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP revision was adopted by the commission on May 23, 2007, and submittedto the EPA. The DFW SIP revision demonstrates attainment of the eight-hour ozone standard using photochemical modeling, including reductions from associated 30 TAC 117 rules and voluntary mobile emission reductions, and using weight-of-evidence (WoE), including corroborative analysis and additional control measures not explicitly accounted for in the photochemical


### 2-5modeling. The 30 TAC 117 rules will reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from the following sources:

• majorindustrial, commercial, and institutional sources;
• minor sources;
• electric generating facilities (EGFs);

• cementkilns; and

• EastTexas combustion sources. All ofthe rules apply to the nine-county DFW area except for the East Texas Combustion Rule, which applies to 33 counties located in northeast Texas. Through the Voluntary Mobile Emissions Reduction Program (VMEP) in the nine nonattainment counties, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) committed to reducing NOx emissions by March 2009. The NCTCOG also committed to implementing transportation control measures (TCMs) in the nine nonattainment counties that will further reduce NOx emissions in 2009. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthese control strategies in the DFW Eight-HourOzone AttainmentDemonstration SIPrevision can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.2.3 Beaumont-Port ArthurEight-Hour Ozone SIP Revisions The BPA three-county nonattainment area was classified as a marginal eight-hour ozone nonattainment area on April 15, 2004. The three nonattainment counties include: Hardin, Jefferson, and Orange. On October 27, 2004, the commission adopted an attainment demonstration for both the one-hour and the eight-hour ozone standard for the BPA area. The attainment demonstration contained results ofphotochemical modeling and technical analyses in support ofthe demonstration ofattainment ofthe one-hour and the eight-hour ozone standards. The submittal included the post-1996 motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB). Additional information regarding the specifics ofthe 2004 BPA SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html On September 28, 2005, the commission adopted the BPA Eight-Hour Ozone Standard Attainment Demonstration SIP revision and subsequently submitted it to the EPA. The SIP revision included the adoption ofan Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP revision and revisions to Chapter 115 rules. The 2005 BPA SIP revisions addressed each ofthe remaining requirements needed for .an EPA-approvable SIP revision. These requirements included a Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) demonstration with associated rulemaking. The rulemaking for major-source applicability for the purposes ofRACT included rules for batch processing (30 TAC 115.167, relating to exemptions), and ship building and repair (30 TAC 115.427 (a)(3)(H), relating to exemptions). An exemption level of100 tons per year ofVOC was setbased on all stationary sources included in an account. These rules were amended to lowerthe exemption level to 50 tons peryear withthe BPA SIP revision. The SIP submission also contains revision regarding the Clean Fuel Vehicle program and the three percentcontingency requirement and an updated MVEB. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthese control strategies in the 2005 BPA SIP revision can be found at: http://v.'Ww.tceg.state.tx.us/nav!eg/sip.html 2.2.2.4 Austin-Round Rock Eight-Hour Ozone Early Action Compact SIPRevision The Austin-Round Rock Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revision was adopted by the commission on November 17,2004. This compact was part ofthe strategy for the area including Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties to continue attainment with the eight

### 2-6hour ozone standard promulgated under the Federal Clean Act Amendment (FCAA) of 1990 (as codified in 42 United States Code, 7401 et seq.) This SIP revision included emission reductions needed to demonstrate attainment of the ·eight-hour ozone standard by 2007 and maintain it through at least 2012. The SIP revision includes five rule revisions requested by the area: Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program in Travis and Williamson Counties (30 TAC 114, Subchapter C); opt-in rule prohibiting heavy-duty diesel vehicle idling injurisdictions that sign enforcement agreements withthe TCEQ (30 TAC Chapter 114, SubchapterJ); lowering the Stage 1 Vapor Recovery exemption to 25,000 gallons/month throughput in the five-county area (30 TAC; Chapter lIS, Subchapter C, Divisions 2); degreasing requirements in the five-county area (30 TAC Chapter lIS, SubchapterE, Division I); and seasonal cutback asphaltrestrictions in the five-county area (30 TAC Chapter 115, SubchapterF, Division I). This SIP revision also included a commitment to pursue additional NOx reductions through two additional programs. These programs include:

• Texas Emission Reduction Plan (TERP)

- The Austin EAC Region obtained sufficient grants to reduce NOx by two tons per day by 2007 from on- and non-road heavy duty diesel equipment; and

• Power Plant Reductions

- Austin Energy and the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) committed to annual NOx reductions at facilities. These power plants voluntarily committed to reduce annual NOx emissions below current state and federal mandates at their facilities in and near the region. These agreements were detailed and formalized in air permit revisions. Austin Energy implemented an environmental dispatch program for gas-fired facilities on ozone action days that became effective on January 1, 2005. Austin Energy also implemented a voluntary NOx cap of 1,500 tons per year encompassing the Holly, Decker, and Sand Hills facilities that was included as a special condition ofthe Holly Power Plant air permit as ofJanuary 11, 2004. LCRA's permit alterations were received from the TCEQ on December 21, 2005, for Sam Gideon Power Plant, and on February 24, 2006, for the Fayette Power Project. Additional enforceable annual emission reductions from the University ofTexas and Fayette Power Projectwere implementedby December 31, 2006. The Austin-Round Rock EAC SIP revision also committed to encouraging participation in the Clean Air Partners Program and energy efficiency program as local initiatives. In addition, the following voluntary activities were included in the EAC without quantifying the associated emission reduction: Residential Electric Lawn Mower Exchange Program; Adopt-a-School Bus Program; Tree Planting Guide; andthe State Agency Voluntary CommuteReduction Projects. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthese control strategies in the Austin-Round Rock Early Action Compactcan be found at: http://v{ww.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.htrnJ 2.2.2.5 NortheastTexas Eight-Hour OzoneEarly Action Compact SIP Revision The Northeast Texas Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revision was adopted on November 17, 2004. This compact was part ofthe strategy forthe area including Gregg, Harrison, Rusk, Smith, and Upshur Counties to continue attainment with the eight-hour ozone standard promulgated under the FCAA of 1990 (as codified in 42 United States Code, 7401 et seq.). The Northeast Texas SIP revision contains results ofphotochemical modeling and technical analyses in support ofthe demonstration ofattainment ofthe eight-hour ozone standard in 2007 and maintenance of that standard through 2012.


### 2-7As part of the Northeast Texas EAC SIP reVlSlon, the Eastman Chemical Company-Texas Operations and Huntsman Chemical implemented an enhanced Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) program to identify and address emissions of highly reactive VOCs. These highly reactive volatile organic compound (HRVOC) reductions are in addition to previous requirements included in the model. At Eastman, the voluntary LDAR programs will be enforceable under voluntary emission reduction permits. Huntsman Chemical volunteered these emission reductions as part ofa new Flexible Plant-wide Applicability Limit (PAL) Permit that makes the reductions enforceable. The Northeast Texas EAC also committed the area to pursue action on the following voluntary measures: identify and pursue funding for compressor engines and non-road equipment that are eligible for Texas Emission Reduction Plan (TERP) funding; on-road vehicle emission reductions through the purchase of 18 lower-emitting propane light heavy-duty (Class 2b) vans; public awareness programs; and energy efficiency programs. Additional information regarding the control strategies inthe NortheastTexas EAC can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html 2.2.2.6 SanAntonio Eight-Hour Ozone EarlyAction Compact SIP Revision The San Antonio Early Action Compact (EAC) SIP revision was adopted on November 17, 2004. This compact was part of the strategy for the area including Bexar, Comal, Guadalupe, and Wilson Counties to continue attainment with the eight-hour ozone standard promulgated under the FCAA of 1990 (as codified in 42 United States Code, 7401 et seq.). The San Antonio SIP revision was required to implement the EAC. This SIP revision is part of that attainment demonstration and includes emission reductions needed to demonstrate attainment ofthe eighthour standard by 2007 through atleast 2012. On April 15,2004, the San Antonio areareceived a deferral ofthe effective date ofits designation ofnonattainment for the eight-hour ozone standard for Bexar, Comal, and Guadalupe Counties. The San Antonio area includes two state rule revisions requested by the areato decrease VOC emissions: lowering the Stage 1 Vapor Recovery exemption to 25,000 gallons/month throughput in the five-county area (30 TAC; Chapter 115, Subchapter C, Divisions 2); and degreasing requirements for the four-county area (30 TAC Chapter 115, Subchapter E, Division 1). The San Antonio EAC region also obtained sufficient Texas Emission Reduction Program (TERP) grants to reduce NOx by 2 tons per day by 2007 from on- and non-road heavy duty diesel equipment and committed to emission reductions from the following local controls: energy efficiency/renewable energy projects; transportation emission reduction measures (TERMs); and transportation demand management projects. In addition to control strategies that were included in the future control strategy model run, the SIP revision implemented additional programs that although difficult to quantify and include in photochemical modeling, contribute to cleaner air. These programs include alternative fuel vehicle initiatives and alawnmowerrecycling program. Additional information regarding these control strategies inthe San Antonio AreaEAC can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html 2.2.2.7 Corpus Christi Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan The Corpus Christi Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was developed according to EPA's guidance, "Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Program

- May 2006." Corpus Christi is the first area in the nation to develop and submit to the EPA an Eight-Hour Ozone Flex Plan. The MOA encourages the continuation of voluntary emission reduction measures to assist in maintaining attainment ofthe eight-hour ozone standard in Nueces and San Patricio Counties. Emission reduction measures included in the MOA, are the Stage I Vapor Recovery 'Program, the Pollution Prevention Partnership Program, and the Ozone Action Day


### 2-8Program. These will be implemented through an MOA between the TCEQ, the City ofCorpus Christi, Nueces County, San Patricio County, the Port of Corpus Christi Authority, the Corpus Christi Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Corpus Christi Regional Transportation Authority, and the EPA. The MOA was adopted by the commission on June 13,2007. Additional information regarding the plan can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.2.8 Victoria County Eight-Hour OzoneMaintenance Plan On March 7, 2007, the commission adopted the Victoria County Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan. This SIP revision contained an eight-hour ozone maintenance plan that will ensure the County ofVictoria remains in attainment ofthe eight-hour ozone NAAQS. Local governments and other interested parties in the Victoria area will continue implementing programs that have proven effective in maintaining healthy air quality to assure that the area continues to maintain its attainment status for the eight-hour ozone standard. The maintenance plan is the appropriate mechanism and allows individual communities the .flexibility to pursue emission reduction strategies most appropriate for their circumstances. The plan includes the following components: attainment inventory; maintenance demonstration; ambient air quality monitoring; contingency plan; and verification ofcontinued attainment. Additional information regarding the Victoria Eight-Hour Ozone MaintenancePlan can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.2.9 EI Paso County Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan As aresult ofthe FCAA Amendments of] 990, EI Paso County was designated as nonattainment for the one-hour ozone standard. On April 15, 2004, the EPA designated EI Paso County as attainment for the eight-hour ozone standard. The EPA's Phase I Implementation Rule for the eight-hour ozone standard directed that areas designated as nonattainment for the one-hour ozone standard but designated attainment for the eight-hour ozone standard must submit a maintenance plan for the eight-hour ozone standard by June 15,2007. On Januaiy II, 2006, the commission adopted the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for EI Paso. The EI Paso Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan includes the following components: attainment inventory; maintenance demonstration; ambient air quality monitoring; contingency plan; and verification ofcontinued attainment. Additional information regarding the EI Paso Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html
2.2.3 One-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revisions Sections 2.2.3.1 thru 2.2.3.6 provide an overview ofsome ofthe one-hour ozone SIP revisions that Texas has submitted to EPA. 2.2.3.1 Houston-Galveston-Brazoria One-Hour OzoneAttainment SIP Revisions On December 6, 2000, the TCEQ adopted revisions to 30 TAC Chapters 101, 114, 115, and 117, as well as revisions to the HGB SIP. This SIP revision served as the attainment demonstration of the one-hour ozone standard. The December 2000 submittal contained the following elements: rules and photochemical modeling analyses; post-1999 Rate of Progress (ROP) plans for the milestone years 2002 and 2005, and for the attainment year 2007; transportation conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB) for NOx and VOC; enforceable commitments to implement further measures ifneeded; and a commitment to perform and submit a mid-course review by May 2004. Additional information regarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html On September 26, 2001, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP for the HGB ozone nonattainment area. The SIP revision for the HGB ozone nonattainment area included the


### 2-9following elements: corrections to the ROP table MVEB's budget for the years 2002, 2005, and 2007 due to a mathematical inconsistency; incorporation of a change to the idling restriction control strategy clarifying that the operator of a rented or leased vehicle is responsible for compliance with the requirements ofChapter 114 in situations where the operator ofa leased or rented vehicle is not employed by the ownerofthe vehicle (the commission committedto making this change when the rule was originally adopted in December 2000); incorporation ofrevisions to the clean diesel fuel rules to provide greater flexibility in complying with the requirements of the rule while preserving the emission reductions necessary to demonstrate attainment in the HGB area; incorporation ofa stationary diesel engine mle that was developed as a result ofthe state's analysis ofEPA's reasonably available control measures; incorporation ofrevisions to the point source NOx rules; incorporation ofrevisions to the emissions cap and trade rules; the removal of the construction equipment operating restriction and the accelerated purchase requirement for Tier 2/3 heavy duty equipment; the replacement ofthose rules with the TERP program; the layout ofthe mid-course review process which details how the state would fulfill the commitment to obtain the additional emission reductions necessary to demonstrate attainment of the one-hour ozone standard in the HGB area; and replacement of 2007 ROP MVEBs to be consistentwith the attainmentMVEBs. Additional information regarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html On December 13, 2002, the TCEQ adopted revisions to the HGB One-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP. This SIP revision contained rules to reduce emissions ofHRVOC from four key industrial sources: fugitives, flares, process vents, and cooling towers. The HRVOC rules are performance-based, emphasizing monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting, and enforcement. Additional information regarding this SIPrevision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html On December 1, 2004, the commission adopted revisions to the SIP for the HGB nonattainment area and rules found in Title 30, TAC, Chapters 101 and 115. This fulfilled the commitment from 2000 to perform a mid-course review SIP revision to ensure attainment ofthe one-hour ozone standard. The data gathered from the 2000 Texas Air Quality Study (TexAQS) was used to improve the photochemical modeling work for the HGB area. The collection of technical improvements gave a more comprehensive understanding ofthe ozone challenge in Houston for the development ofaplanto reach attainment. The SIP revision commitments included:

• HRVOC: The revision to the SIP implemented measures to ensure compliance with the specific strategies to control HRVOC emissions.

• HRVOC Emissions Cap and Trade (HECT) Program: The HECT program is an annual cap and trade program to provide compliance flexibility to the Chapter 115 control requirements for process vents and cooling-tower heat exchangers. Sites subject to the program are required to possess an HRVOC allowance for each ton of HRVOC emissions. Sites also have the option oftrading excess HRVOC allowances on the open market within a specifictrading zone.

• General Fugitives: The rulemaking removed certain recordkeeping requirements from the general volatile organic fugitive emissions rules in Subchapter D, Division 3, and makes the requirements applicable only to sources of HRVOC fugitive emissions in rule amendments that were revised as part of a concurrent mlemaking in 30 TAC Chapter 115, Subchapter H. The amendments also made a variety of changes to correct typographical errors, update cross-references, add flexibility, and achieve the intended emission reductions.


### 2-10• HGB Motor-Vehicle Idling Limitations: The commISSIOn repealed the motor-vehicle idling limitations in the HGB area in 30 TAC Chapter 114, Subchapter J, Division 1. The commission originally adopted idling limitation rules on December 6, 2000, as a control strategy to reduce NOxemissions in the HGB ozone nonattainment area by limiting the engine idling time of motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating over 14,000 pounds to five consecutive minutes while the vehicle is operating in the affected area from April 1 to October 31 each year. With regard to the repeal ofthe heavy duty diesel idling rules, by the year 2007, the idling limits would have reduced NOx emissions in the affected area by 0.48 tons per day (tpd). The repeal of the idling restriction did not significantly impact modeled ozone concentrations. Given the minimal emission reductions, difficulty ofenforcement, and the development ofa more robust attainment demonstration, the commission maintained that the inclusion ofthe motor vehicle idling restriction rules was not a reasonable measure. These factors also indicated that this measure did not advance the one-hour ozone attainment date of the HGB area and therefore was not Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM). Additional information regarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.3.2 Dallas-Fort Worth One-Hour OzoneAttainment SIP Revisions On February 24, 1999, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP for the DFW area. The DFW area was classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area for the one-hour standard in·. accordance with the FCAA Amendments of 1990. However, air quality monitoring for 1994 through 1996 show that the one-hour NAAQS for ozone has been exceeded more than one day per year over this three-year period. On February 18, 1998, the EPA issued a final notice in the Federal Register that the DFW area was being reclassified to "serious" for failing to attain the NAAQS for ozone. As a result ofthis reclassification, the EPA required that a new SIP revision demonstrating attainment ofthe ozone standard in DFW be submitted by March 20, 1999. The state submitted a SIP revision for DFW that included photochemical modeling showing the level ofreductions needed to attain the standard by 1999, aNine Percent ROP target calculation for the years 1997-99, VOC RACT rules in 30 TAC Chapter 115 applicable to sources meeting the 50 tons per year major source level, NOx RACT rules in 30 TAC Chapter 117 applicable to major sources ofNOx, and amendments to 30 TAC Chapter 116 reinstating nonattainment new source review for NOx. The governor submitted this SIP revision to the EPA on March 16, 1999. Additional information regarding the control strategies in the DFW SIP can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.usinav/egisip.htInl On October 15, 1999, the commission adopted a revision to the SIP for the DFW one-hour ozone nonattainment area. This SIP revision was developed in order to address the shortfall in needed reductions towards the Nine Percent ROP target and the lack ofmodeled control strategies from the February 24, 1999, SIP revision. Potential emission reduction credits were reviewed that were not claimed in the February 1999 SIP revision in order to make up the ROP shortfall. The focus was on VOC reductions because fewer VOC reductions would be needed to make up the shortfall compared to NOx emission reductions. The ROP lacked about 20% of the VOC reductions needed, which amounted to 5.87 tpd. Elements were identified that were not previously considered that bring emission reduction credits in orderto complete the Nine Percent ROP requirements for the years 1996-99. Additional information regarding the control strategies can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/navieg/sip.html On April 19, 2000, the TCEQ adopted revisions to the SIP. These revisions served as the required next step in the attainment demonstration planning process for the BPA, DFW, and HGB ozone nonattainment areas. The DFW area's attainment deadline as a serious ozone nonattainment area
2-11was November 15, 1999. The April 2000 SIP revision contained a modeling demonstration that showed thatthe air quality in the DFW area is influenced attimes from the HGB area. Additional informationregarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.t.C.us/nav/eg/sip.html On August 22, 2001, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP as the required next step in the attainment demonstration planning process for the DFW one-hour ozone nonattainment area. Key revisions included the repeal of the rules regarding fleet composition for heavy-diesel equipment and the rules regarding operating restrictions for diesel construction equipment as part ofthe implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 5, 77th Legislature, 2001. Signed into law in May 2001, SB 5 required the commission to submit a SIP revision to the I?PA deleting the requirements oftwo rules, contained in 30 TAC Chapter 114 (relating to Control ofAir Pollution froin Motor Vehicles), from the SIP no later than October 1,2001. The rule repeals contained in this SIP revision reflected the repeal oftwo rules related to construction equipment that were adopted on April 19, 2000, as part ofthe control strategy for the DFW one-hour ozone attainment demonstration. The TERP program contained in SB 5 replaced· the rules and resulted in reductions in excess ofthose expected from the rules that were repealed. Additional information regarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html On April 27, 2005, the commission adopted a Five Percent Increment ofProgress (lOP) SIP revision for the DFW nonattainment area. This SIP revision contained the following control measures:

• TERP: In the DFW area, projects funded as ofSeptember 1, 2004, were projected to result in reductions in NOxemissions ofover 7.78 tpd in 2007.

• Energy Efficiency: Statewide adoption ofthe International Residential Code and the International Energy Conservation Code for residential, commercial, and industrial buildings was mandated by the 77th Texas Legislature under SB 5. The resulting NOx reductions based on electricity and natural gas savings from existing projects were calculatedto be 0.72 tpd.

• Alcoa, Milam County: Alcoa chose to replace its three existing boilers with two lignitefired circulating fluidized bed boilers, as presented as an option under a federal consent decree signed on April 9,2003. Only one ofthese boilers was to be replaced by June 15, 2007, resulting in a reduction of 3.9 tpd ofNOx. Therefore, only that portion ofthe credit implemented by June 15, 2007, was included as part ofthis SIPrevision.

• Statewide Portable Fuel Container Rule: The Portable Fuel Container Rule established new requirements relating to the design criteria for portable fuel containers and portable fuel container spouts. The new rules established design criteria for "no-spill" portable fuel containers. Portable fuel containers manufactured under these standards release fewer amounts offuel as the result ofspillage and evaporation.

• Lean-Burn and Rich-Burn Engines: The adopted Five Percent lOP plan included the implementation of new emission specifications and other compliance demonstration requirements in 30 TAC Chapter 117, Subchapter B, Division 3 for certain industrial, commercial, and institutional stationary reciprocating internal-combustion engines in the nine-county area. The resulting NOxreductions were 1.87 tpd.

2-12• Surface Coating: In rulemaking concurrentto this SIP revision, the commission adopted a rule to extend the requirements for surface coating to the five newly designated DFW nonattainment counties. The resulting VOC reductions were 0.3 tpd.

• Stage I Gasoline Unloading: In rulemaking concurrent to this SIP reVISIOn, the commission adopted a rule to extend the Stage I requirements to the five newly designated DFW nonattainment counties. The resulting VOC reductions were 1.49 tpd. Additional information regarding this SIP revision is located at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.3.3**Beaumont~Port** Arthur One-Hour Ozone Attainment SIP Revisions On October 27, 1999, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP concerning the attainment demonstration for the Beaumont-Port Arthur (BPA) ozone nonattainment area. Because photochemical modeling showed that both VOC and NOx reductions are effective in reducing ground-level ozone in the BPA area, this SIP revision identified, under separate rulemaking, revisions to the NOx RACT requirements to include lean bum engines. Also, VOC RACT rules were modified for industrial wastewater and batch processes. Additional informationregarding the specifics ofthis SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eg!sip.html The BPA area was classified as moderate on April 2, 1996, and therefore, was required to attain the one-hour ozone standard by November 15, 1996. The BPA area did not attain the standardby that date and also did not attain the standard by November 15, 1999, the attainment date for serious areas. In determining the appropriate attainment date for an area, EPA considered the effect of transport of ozone or its precursors from an upwind area which interferes with the downwind area's ability to attain. On July 16, 1998, EPA issued a guidance memorandum titled "Extension ofAttainment Dates for Downwind Transport Areas." The guidance, referred to hereinafter as the "transport guidance," provided a means for the EPA to extend the attainment date for an area affected by transported air pollution, without reclassifying the area to a higher classification. The transportguidance was particularly relevantto BPA, whichis downwind ofthe HGB area and is affected by transport from HGB. On April 16, 1999, the EPA proposed in the Federal Register to allow BPA to take advantage ofthe transport guidance if an approvable attainment demonstration was submittedby November 15, 1999. The SIP revision contained results of photochemical modeling demonstrating transport from HGB to BPA. Following the EPA's transport guidance, it was demonstrated that BPA attained the one-hour ozone standard. In addition, the November 1999 SIP revision contained adopted rules for industrial wastewater and batch process sources to ensure that VOC emission limits for these sources meet the EPA's guidelines for RACT. Furthermore, the SIP revision included adopted rules establishing NOx RACT emission limits for gas-fired, lean-bum stationary internal combustion engines. These NOx rules represented "Phase I" ofa two-part revision to the BPA attainment demonstration SIP revision. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthis SIP revision canbe found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.htm1 The April 2000 SIP revision represented "Phase II" ofthe BPA attainment demonstration SIP revision, and contained adopted rules specifying NOx emission limits for electric utility boilers, industrial boilers, and industrial process heaters. These strategies in combination with the richbum engine rules reduced NOx emission from 170.51 tons per ozone day (tpod) to 75.09 tpod. In accordance with EPA guidance, implementation ofthese NOx emission limits represented a reasonable level ofcontrol, necessary for an approvable attainment demonstration. Modeling of these Phase II reductions showed thatthe BPA area attains the one-hour ozone standard, using


### 2-13weight ofevidence analyses. Additional information regarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.3.4 NortheastTexas Flexible AttainmentRegion (FAR) One-Hour Ozone SIP Revision On May 12, 1999, the commission adopted a revision to the SIP for the Northeast Texas region which made certain local ozone precursor emission reduction programs federally enforceable. This revision was submittedto EPA on June 4, 1999. Four affected companies (Norit Americas, Inc.; La Gloria Oil and Gas Company; Eastman Chemical Company, Texas Eastman Division; and ARCO Permian) in the Northeast Texas region voluntarily agreed to be subject to the implementation ofenforceable emission reduction measures pursuant to Part A, Sections 2-5 of the Northeast Texas FAR Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). The MOA required the immediate implementation of control measures through the use of agreed orders, which are included in the SIP revision and are federally enforceable. Additional information regarding the specifics ofthese control strategies can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html On April 19,2000, the TCEQ adopted arevision to the SIP to incorporate two agreed orders into the Northeast Texas SIP revision. This revision incorporated into the SIP an agreed order signed by the Eastman Chemical Company, Texas Operations, ofLongview, Texas, in Harrison County (account number HH-0042-M). The agreed order made federally enforceable certain local ozone precursor emission reduction programs. Through the use ofagreed orders these measures were adopted and included inthe NortheastTexas FAR SIP revision and are federally enforceable. Additional information regardingthis SIPrevision can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html 2.2.3.5 Regional One-HourOzone SIP Revision On April 19, 2000, the TCEQ adopted a revision to the Texas SIP to serve as the required next step in the attainment demonstration planning process for the BPA, DFW, and HGB ozone nonattainment areas, and the Central and East Texas region. Due to the significant air quality concerns under the one-hour ozone NAAQS, and the anticipated challenges under the eight-hour NAAQS, Texas developed a regional strategy to reduce emissions. This strategy contained five elements: support of the National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program; Stage I vapor recovery for larger gas stations; cleaner gasoline; the Clean Air Responsibility Enterprise (CARE) program; and reduction inNOxemissions from largerpoint sources. Additional information regarding this SIP revision can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.htm1 2.2.3.6 One-Hour Ozone Flexible Agreement The One-Hour Ozone. Flexible Agreement is a voluntary local approach to encourage emission reductions that will keep an area in attainment of the one-hour ozone standard, while also working toward achieving the health benefits envisioned under the eight-hour ozone standard. The One-Hour Ozone Flexible Agreement plans were implemented through a MOA between the EPA, the TCEQ, and local governments. 2.2.3.6.1 Austin-SanMarcosMetropolitan StatisticalArea One-Hour Ozone Flex Plan On March 28, 2002, local governments, community and business leaders, environmental groups, and concerned citizens in the Austin/San Marcos Metropolitan Statistical Area signed a MOA with the TCEQ and the EPA to implement programs to improve regional airquality. Additional informationregarding this plan can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html

2-142.2.3.6.2 Corpus Christi One-Hour Ozone FlexPlan On September 18, 2002, Nueces and San Patricio Counties, which comprise the Corpus Christi urban airshed, signed an Ozone Flex Intergovernmental Agreement with the TCEQ andthe EPA. Additional information regarding this plan can be found at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/sip.html

2.2.4 General State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Information Additional information regarding the numerous other SIP revisions that Texas has adopted from 1972 through 2007 can be found at: http://www.tceg.state.tx.us/nav/eg/sip.html
2.2.5 Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) Element FCAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) contains a requirement for states to submit SIP revisions that contain adequate provisions verifYing that the Texas SIP prohibits any source or type of emissions activity within the state from emitting air pollutants in amounts that will interfere with another state's SIP measures for preventing significant deterioration ofair quality. 2.2.5.1 Eight-HourOzone All major sources in Texas are subject to PSD and Nonattainment NSR permitting programs, implemented in 30 TAC Chapter 116. Major sources are defined in 30 TAC § 116.12(17) in relation to the federal classification ofan area for nonattainment permitting and by reference to 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR) § 51.166 forPSD. 2.2.5.2 Fine Particulate Matter CPM251 All major sources in Texas are subject to PSD and Nonattainment NSRpermitting programs, implemented in 30 TAC Chapter 116. Major sources are defined in 30 TAC § 116.12(17) in relation to the federal classification ofan area for nonattainment permitting and by reference to 40 Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR) § 51.166 for PSD. Additionally, these programs are being implemented in accordance with EPA's interim guidance regarding the use ofPM10 as a surrogate forPM25. 2.2.5.3 Emission Credits The use ofemission reductions for offsets is governed by 30 TAC § 116.170, which requires that all emission reductions be certified as emission credits under 30 TAC Chapter 101 priorto use as offsets.
2.2.6 ProtectVisibility Element Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) also contains a requirement for all states to submit SIPs that contain adequate provisions prohibiting "
... any source or other type ofemission activity within the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will

- interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other state
.... to protect visibility." The EPA has previously found that all states contain sources whose emissions are reasonably anticipated to contribute to regional haze in one or more Class I areas. Pursuant to this finding, Texas is currently under an obligation to submit a SIP revision that addresses regional haze, including a long-term strategy to address visibility impairment for each Class I area, which may be affected by emissions from Texas. The TCEQ and other states and Regional Planning Organizations are currently engaged in the task ofidentifYing those Class I areas impacted by each state's emissions. States are responsible for developing strategies for addressing regional


### 2-15haze for inclusion in their regional haze SIP. Texas is currently in the process offinalizing its Regional Haze SIP, which was proposed on December 5, 2007. The State has determined that the existing control strategies in Texas are adequate to address visibility impacts on Class I areas in other states. At this time, no other states have requested additional control strategies for Texas sources. Texas invited over 100 federal, state, tribal, and local entities to join the July 2007 consultation calls concerning the development ofTexas' Regional Haze SIP. These entities were also invited to make comments on the Regional Haze SIP proposal, and were invited to attend the public hearing on February 19,2008. The following organizations were contacted by Texas for input on the Regional Haze SIPrevision: States Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Wyoming United States Federal Agencies United States Forest Service Federal Land Managers; United States Fish and Wildlife Service Land Managers; National Parks Service Land Managers; and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Tribal Representatives Louisiana

- ChitimachaTribe ofLouisiana; CoushattaTribe ofLouisiana; Jena Band ofChoctaw Indians; and Tunica-Biloxi Indians ofLouisiana New MexicoEight Northern Indian Pueblo Council; Mescalero Apache Tribe; Pueblo of Acoma; Pueblo of Cochiti; Pueblo ofIsleta; Pueblo ofJemez; Jicarilla Apache Nation; Pueblo ofLaguna; Pueblo of Nambe; Pueblo ofPicuris; Pueblo ofPojoaque; Pueblo ofSandia; Pueblo ofSan Felipe; Pueblo ofSan Ildefonso; Ohkay Owingeh (formerly San Juan); Pueblo ofSanta Ana; Pueblo ofSanta Clara; Pueblo ofSanto Domingo; Pueblo ofTaos; Pueblo ofTesuque; and Pueblo ofZia; Zuni TribeOklahomaAbsentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town; Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Caddo Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Cherokee Nation; Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma; Chickasaw Nation; Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; Citizen Potawatomi Nation; Comanche Nation of Oklahoma; Delaware Nation (West); Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Inter Tribal Environmental Council of Oklahoma; Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma; Kaw Nation; Kialegee Tribal Town; Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma; Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma; Muscogee (Creek) Nation; Osage Nation; Otoe-Missouri Tribe ofOklahoma Ottawa Tribe ofOklahoma; Pawnee Nation ofOklahoma; Peoria Tribe ofIndians ofOklahoma; Ponca Tribe ofIndians ofOklahoma; Quapaw Tribe ofOklahoma; Sac and Fox Nation; Seneca-Cayuga Tribe ofOklahoma; Seminole Nation ofOklahoma; Shawnee Tribe; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Tonkawa Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians of Oklahoma; Wichita and Affiliated Tribes; and Wyandotte NationTexasAlabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas; Kickapoo Traditional Tribe ofTexas; and Ysleta del Sur Pueblo ofTexas


### 2-16Regional Planning Organization CENRAP

- Central Regional Planning Organization

- Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas The Regional Haze SIP consultation process with the federal land managers and adjacent states is ongoing.



### 2-17CHAPTER3: FUTURE ATTAINMENT PLANS The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), section 110(a)(I) requires states to submit SIPs within three years after the promulgation ofnew or revised NAAQS that meet the requirements ofFCAA, § 110(a)(2), including FCAA, § 110(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport of pollution. Therefore, ifthe NAAQS is revised in the future, the TCEQ will need to take the adequate steps relating to the interstate transportofairpollution.



### 3-1

### APPENDIX A'f.-j)yoming



### Denver

CoCoraao

'New**~lf1e:xjco**

.... Protecting Texas by



### .. Ji Reducing and Preventing Pollution 

## Mil TCEQ Texas CommlBBlon on Environmental Quality Chief Englnee(s Omee Air Quality DIvision PO Box 13087 (Mall Code 164) Austin, Texas 78711-3087 :J./e6raJ/(,a

'l(ansas

O/(,fafzoma 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from the City of Beaumont 

# '" Saint 

## Louis !jllissouri

fJ'ellnessee

This map was generated by the Chief Engineer's OlTice, Air Quality Division ofthe Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. No daims are made to the accuracy or completeness ofthe data orto the suitability for a particular use. For information concerning this map, contact Kim Hendon of the Air Quality Division at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkami (512) 239-1934 July 30, 2007!**~,** f



### ---- _. 

### 'tel1nessee

ThiS map was generated by the Chief Engineer's Office, Air Quality Division 01 the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. No daims are made to the accuracy or completeness ofthe data or to the suitability for a particular use. For information concerning this map, contact Kim Hendon of the Air Quality Division at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkarni (512) 239-1934 July 30,2007 

### :Missouri 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent

Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from Beaumont 

# I PortArthur Area

...**~--~'''-** ...**_~~** ...__._.--''-'---_.,._-'

## L..--,-----------.::----------...,------
.......I



### Of<.Iafwma 1(ansas .'Ne6ras!(sl

.'New :Me;;:,fco 

### Denver 

### Wyoming

Tex.s Commission on Environment., Quality Chief Englnee(s Office Air Qu.lity Division PO Box 13087 (Msn Code 164) Au_tin, Tex._ 78711·3087 

# n Protecting Texas by Reducing and 

# I!!!!!!!liIi Preventing Pollution 

# ... TCEQ

### :Missouri

This map was generated by the Chief Engineer's Office, Air auality Division of the Texas Commission on Environmental auality. No daims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data or to the suitability for a particular use. For infonnation concerning this map, contad Kim Hendon ofthe Air Quality Di\llsion at (512) 239·1421 Raj Nadkarni (512) 239-1934 July 30, 2007 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent

Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from the City of Dallas

Ol(t:aflOma 1(ansas 

# \
\



# ......**_-~---_**

# .._.-.-_.--.---1 5Ve6rasl(a



### Denver Coforado



### :Ne'w :Mexjco 

### 'Wyoming 

# I

.-----..-..-.-.-..---'--_.

__.....-...1_
.. .----------,

# I 

# I I

TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Chief Englnee(s Omce AirQuality Division PO Box 13087 IMslI Code 1641 Austin, Texas 78711-3087 1

.......IProteclting Texas by

,

## ~~:;~~~~~~:~and !Iii Pollution

### 'f.1Jyoming



### Denver \ 

### Jie6ras(a \**\-~.** 

# " Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from Dallas/Fort Worth Area

This map was generated by the Chief Engineer's Office. Aj( Quality Division ofthe Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. No dairns are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data or to the suitability for a particular use. For information concerning this map, contact Kim Hendon ofthe Air Quality Division at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkarni (512) 239-1934 July 30,2007 

### jlCa6ama 5I1ississippi 5I1issouri



### o(falioma 1(jznsas



### Jiew 5I1e:{jco

T •••• Comml••lon on Environment•• Qu.llty Chl.fEnglnee(. Omce Air Qu.llty Dlvl.lon PO Bo. 130871M.1I Cod. 1641 Au.tln, T
.... 78711.3087 

# n Protecting Texas by Reducingand**~Preventing** Pollution TCEQ

### I [-

-------- ----

### ---_
.._- - 

# I 

# I

fifd6ama 

## \ 

# \ 'Tennessee

:Jvtississippi :Missouri

This map was generated by the Chief Engineer's Office, Air Quality Division of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data or to the suitability for aparticular USB. For information concerning this map, contact Kim Hendon ofthe Air Quality Division al (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkami (512) 239-1934 July 30,2007 

# Distance to Nearest and Adjacent

Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from the City of Houston

Ol(fdfioma 

### 1(ansas .We6rasfta 

# ----------1

,

TCEQ 

### Denver

'New 

### :Jvte:xjco Co{oraao

Tn
.. Comm's.'on onEnvironmental Quality Chle' Englneefs Office AirQuality Dlvl./on PO Box 13087lMaU Code 1641 AusUn, Ten. 78711·3087

### :J{e6ras/(,a 

### uyominlJ



### Denver 

### "---'-1

# I i 

# _-_

.._

### _----_


# __ _._ 

## --_..

# _-_. Distance to Nearest and Adjacent Non-Texas Nonattainment Cities from Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Area

This map was generated by the Chief Enginee(s Office, Air Quality Division ofthe Texas Commission on Environmental auality. No daims are made to the accuracy or completeness ofthe data or to the suitability for a particular use. For information concerning this map, contact Kim Hendon of the Air Quality Division at (512) 239-1421 Raj Nadkarni (512) 239-1934 July 30,2007 -'- --'--



### :J{ew**~Mexjco**

Protecting Texas by 

### I" 

### II Reducing and**~Preventing** Pollution TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Chief Englnee(e Office Air Quailly DIvision PO Box 13087 (Mall Code 164) Austin, Texas 78711-3087 

### 1(ansas " '",,-

### \ Saint 

### \.r-ouiS
:-'I1issouri**~ississippi** 

### <Tennessee



# I ./4.ta6a11la 

## ! 

# \ \

### APPENDIXBModeled Additional Base 2004-05 NOx Future Modeled NOx Year Intermediate Reductions Year NOx Reductions Area of Base NOx YearNOx 2000-05 NOx Reductions 2000-09 Rule State Year (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) for 2009 (tDd) (tDd) Notes DFW DFW9- 2000 49 45 4 26 19.4 23 The 2004 value is ozone Ch.117 County season actuals rep0l1ed. (cont.) NEGUs Final compliance date of May 2005 for engine and industrial boilers. The 2009 value includes recent SIP rules. BPA BPA 3- 2000 26 11 15 11 15 The 2004 value is ozoneCh.117 County season actuals reported. EGUs BPA3- 2000 97 71 26 71 26 The 2004 value is ozoneCounty season actuals reported. NEGUs Final compliance for these engines, heaters, and boilers

- is May 2005. HGB HGB Mass 2000 192 53 139 51 2 141 The 2004 value is ozoneMECT Emission season actuals reported. Cap and Final compliance for most Trade for ofthese is May 2005. The EOUs cogen units have until April 2008 for final compliance withthe lastphase ofthe CaD. HOB Mass 2000 283 178 105
. 102 76 181 The 2004 value is ozoneEmission season actuals reported. Cap and Final compliance for 1110St Trade for ofthese is April 2008 with NEGUs the lastDhase ofthe Cap. Totals 1641 908 733 810 98 831 EOU subtotal 1212 614 598 612 2 600 NEGU subtotal 429 294 135 199 95 230Major PointSource NOxRules andReductions Promulgatedin Texas since 2000 Modeled Additional Base 2004-05 NOx Future Modeled NOx Year Intermediate Reductions Year NOx Reductions Area of Base NOx YearNOx 2000-05 NOx Reductions 2000-09 Rule State Year (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) (tpd) for 2009 (tpd) (tpd) Notes SB7 and "EastTX" 2000 776 435 341 435 341 Final compliance date of East! Attainment May 2005; includes those Central Counties units that can trade and TX EGUs those that cannot; 2005 Ch.117 value includes new unit growth 2000-05, 2000 values for non-acid rain units, and 2005 acid rain**--~---"'----"** 

### ,. --f---------.- values for acid rain units.

.... _.__.._._.".

__..._'_H -_..•**_~-**

West Texas 2000 145 99 46 99 46 Final compliance date of EGUs May 2005; includes those units that can trade and those that cannot; 2005 value includes new unit growth 2000-05, 2000 values for non-acid rain units, and 2005 acid rain values for acid rain units. DFW DFW 9-co 2000 73 16 57 16 0.4 57 Final complianc'e date of Ch.117 EGUs May 2005; 2005 value includes new unit growth 2000-05, 2000 controlled values for non-acid rain units, and 2005 acid rain values for acid rain units. The 2009 value includes recent SIP rules.

### APPENDIXC

## Texas Electric Generating Utility NOxControl Strategies Compared to the Clean AirInterstate Rule (CAIR)
Facility Type State Emission Rate CAIR 2009 CAIR2015 Requirements Utility Electric Generation in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Emission Specifications for AttainmentDemonstrations Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Gas-Fired Electric Power 0.030 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOxlMMBtu Utility Boilers Generating Systems Industrial, Commercial 0.020 lb ofNOxlMMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOx/MMBtu and Institutional 0.030 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.036 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Coal-Fired Wall-Fired 0.050 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Utility Boilers Tangential-Fired 0.045 lb ofNOx/MMBtu
Oil-Fired Utility Wall-Fired 0.050 lb ofNOxlMMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOxlMMBtu Boilers Tangential-Fired 0.045 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Auxiliary Steam Utility Boilers 0.030 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu Coke-Fired Boilers 0.057 lb ofNOxlMMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Wood Fuel-Fired Boilers 0.060 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu Stationary Gas Electric Power 0.032 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Turbines Generating Systems Industrial, Commercial 0.032 lb ofNOxlMMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOx/MMBtu and Institutional 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.26 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Dallas-FortWorth Large Utility Boilers 0.033 lb ofNOx /MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Small Utility Boilers 0.06 lb ofNOx /MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu Beaumont-PortArthur All Utility Boilers 0.10 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.15 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.1251b ofNOx/MMBtu

## Texas Electric Generating Utility NOx Control Strategies Compared to the Clean AirInterstate Rule (CAIR)
Facility Type State Emission Rate CAIR 2009 CAIR2015 Requirements Utility Electric Generation in East and Central Texas Gas-Fired Utility Boilers 0.141b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.15 Ib ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOx/MMBtu Coal-Fired Utility Boilers 0.165 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.151b ofNOxlMMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOx/MMBtu Senate Bill 7 EastTexas Region Grandfathered 0.14 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 lb ofNOx/MMBtu Facilities West Texas and El Paso Region 0.195 lb ofNOx/MMBtu 0.151b ofNOx/MMBtu 0.125 Ib ofNOxlMMBtu Grandfathered Facilities



### 2

### APPENDIXDPUBLIC COMMENT A public hearing was scheduled for December 11,2007, in Austin. No commenters signed-up to provide oral testimony, therefore the hearing was not officially opened. One written comment was received during the comment period from the Sierra Club

- Houston Regional Group (Sierra Club).
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The Sierra Club stated that their comments were in reference to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's (TCEQ) proposed Eight-Hour Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision forthe Clean AirInterstate Rule (CAIR). The commission would like to clarify that this proposed SIP revision is in reference to Section llO(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP revision and is not a SIP revision for the CAIR SIP. The proposed SIP revision is concerning ozone and fine particulate matter transport emissions to other states.
The SierraClub also commented thatthe emissions inventory is faulty. "A faulty EI means faulty modeling; means faulty predictions ofprecursor and ozone transport; means faulty attainment of the ozone standard." The TCEQ continues to refine its information, including emissions inventory, with each SIP revision submittal. Emissions inventory data will always require close scrutiny because future projections as well as reported data are used in SIP revision development and submittals. However, this SIP revision concerning ozone and fine particulate matter transport emissions relies on existing SIP revisions the commission has submitted to the EPA and does not contain a revised emissions inventory. Nor does it contain modeling, but relies on technical work conducted by the EPA.
"The Sierra Club opposes the approval ofthe Transport SIP revision because it does not reduce significantly and/or resolve the transport ofozone, precursors, and nonattainment areas in Texas or other states." The TCEQ should reduce transport within Texas and thus it would reduce transport outside ofTexas. This SIP revision is not an attainment demonstration. The purpose ofthis SIP revision does not concentrate on how sources within Texas impact Texas, but how sources within Texas impact other states. The EPA is predicting, based on their modeling, that the impact of existing controls, in addition to the future controls from CAIR, will result in all nonattainment areas in adjacent states attaining the eight-hour ozone standard. In addition, the EPA's recognition that CAIR is adequate to demonstrate compliance with the 

### PMZ • 5transport requirement shows Texas has adequately addressed any potential transport issues associated with eight-hour ozone and 

### PM Z

• 5 and fulfilled its eight-hour ozone and 

### PM Z

• 5transport SIP obligations.
The Sierra Club commented that they have many concerns regarding ozone pollution in Texas, specifically the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area. The Sierra Club commented that "forover three decades the TCEQ and its predecessor agencies have adopted a minimalist and incremental policy ofozone and precursor airpollution control and reduction." The commission appreciates the commenter's concerns regarding past and future attainment demonstrations in Texas. The commission recognizes the chaHenges, as well as the success that Texas, particularly the HGB area, has overcome and accomplished in the past thirty years. Trend data for the period 1991 through 2007 in the HGB area show that both the one-hour and eight-hour ozone design values have decreased over the past 17 years. The 2007 one-hour design value was 153 parts per billion (ppb), representing a 31 percent decrease from the value for 1991 (220 ppb). The 2007 eight-hour design value was 96 ppb, a 19 percent decrease from the 1991 value of 119 ppb. These decreases occurred in spite ofa 31 percent increase in area population. The foHowing graph depicts this information.



### 2

### One-Hour and Eight-Hour Ozone Design Values and Estimated Population for the HGB Area 

## (1991-2007) 250 .---------------..........-::-----.:..-...----------------,- 6



# - t/) 

### c 

### 4 0 

### :IE 

# - 5

c 

## o 3 ;; .!!! ::::JCO D.. 

## 2 "C 

## .! CU 

### E ;; t/) 

### 1 

## w 

# 8-HrDV= -1.0*Yr+ 118.89 R2 

### =

# 0.5353 

# --------------------

---------------------- 50 Q) 

### .2 

### 150 cu 

## > c en 

### 100

# r::~~:::::;:;::::~==-~~-=~:::::!::::::=::::====::::::~ 

# ...**~~_=:F'===~:=:;iI** .........--...

# '_=J
Q) 

### c 

## o N 

# o 200

# 1--~:::::~~=:~::=;:;~:2~s::::=J1~-:H:r**D~V~=~-3~.~4*~Y~r~+~2~18~.:32~** :c R2

# =O.8215 c. Co 

# -

O+--......,....--.....---.-----.---,------.----.-------.---..---.----..----.----,---r----,..----+-O 

### 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007* 

# • 1-HrDV

- I

# 1-HrNMOS • 

# 8-HrDV

- I

# 8-HrNMOS 

## -*-

# Population Linear(1-HrDV) Linear(8-HrDV)
·Source: Ozone
- EPA and Mother database. 2007 data is current as of January 8, 2008 and is sUbject to change. 1991-2006 Population --http://www.census.gov/popestlarchives/1990s/MA-99-03b.txt and http://www.census.gov/popestlcounties/CO-EST2006-01.hlml, July 3, 2007 2007 Population --hllp://www.window.state.tx.us/ecodala/popdala/popfiles.hlml 

### 3

### ORDERADOPTING REVISION TO THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN


### DocketNo. 2007-1244-SIP On April 16, 2008, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Commission), during a public meeting, considered adoption of revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Ozone (03) 

### and Fine Particulate Matter 

### (PM2.

### s) 

### transpOlt emissions. The Commission adopts this revision to the SIP documenting how the Commission has met the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), section 1l0(a)(1) requirement for states to submit SIPs after the promulgation ofnew or revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to meet the requirements ofFCAA, § 

### ll0(a)(2), including FCAA, § 

### 110(a)(2)(D)(i), relating to interstate transport of

### 0 3 

### and/or

### PM 2.

### s. 

### Under Tex. Health & 

### Safety Code Ann. §§ 

### 382.011, 382.012, and 382.023 (Vernon 2001), the Commission has the authority to control the quality ofthe state's air and to issue orders consistent with the policies andpurposes ofthe Texas Clean AirAct, Chapter 382 ofthe Tex. Health & 

### Safety Code. Notice ofthe proposed SIP revision was published for comment in the November 23, 2007, issue ofthe Texas Register (32 

### TexReg 8603). Pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 

### 51.102 and after proper notice, the Commission conducted apublic hearing to considerthe revision to the SIP. Propernotice included prominent advertisement inthe areas affected at least 30 days priorto the date ofthe hearing. An 

### opportunity to provide public comment was offered at apublic hearing scheduled in Austin, Texas, on December 11,2007; however, no oral comments wereprovided atthe hearing. The Commission circulated hearing notices ofits intended action to the public, including interested persons, the Regional Administrator ofthe (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, atthe hearing or during the commentperiod. Priorto the scheduled hearing, copies ofthe 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 revision were submitted to the Commission during the comment period, and were considered by the Commission as reflected. in the analysis oftestimony incorporatedby 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 revision andtheirposition concerning the same. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION that the revision to the SIP incorporated by reference to this Order is hereby adopted. The adopted revision to the SIP is incorporated by reference in this Orderas ifsetforth at length verbatim in this Order.

### IT IS FURTHER ORDERED BYTHE COMMISSION that on behalfofthe Commission, the Chairman should transmit a copy of this Order, together with the adopted revision to the SIP, to the Regional Administrator ofEPA as aproposed revision to the Texas SIP pursuant to the Federal Clean AirAct, codified at 42 U.S. Code Ann. §§ 7401

- 7671q, as amended.**,~ (~1**  

# .-) .'.Ifany portion ofthis Order is for any reason held to be invalid by a court ofcompetentjurisdiction, the invalidity ofany portion shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions.

Date issued: 

# APR 2

# 22008 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY