GEORGE W. BUSH 

GOVERNOR 

Ms. Jane Saginaw 

Regional Administrator 

STATE OF TEXAS 

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

September 20, 1995 

U. S. Enviromental Protection Agency 

Region 6 

1445 Ross Avenue 

Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 

Dear Ms. Saginaw: 

L-~~· ----~-- ____ ; 

f\SF' '--~~-- ': :~~ 

L__ ___ _,6i: \ ·----

Enclosed are revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 116, which were adopted by the Texas Natural 

Resource Conservation Commission on July 26, 1995. The revised sections included new 

§116.614, concerning Standard Permit Definitions, and a new §116.615, concerning 

General Conditions. In addition, § 116.610, concerning Applicability, and §116.617, 

concerning Standard Permit List, were revised. The new sections and amendments 

streamline the permit process for oil and gas facilities and establish a new standard permit 

for oil and gas facilities under new § 116.617(3). The revisions are being submitted to 

you as a proposed revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Also enclosed is a 

public hearing certification, as required by 40 CFR 51.102(f); a complete record of the 

public hearing; and the adoption Order. 

I look forward to your expeditious approval of this revision to the Texas SIP. 

GWB:ab 

Enclosures 

cc: Mr. Dan Pearson, Executive Director, Texas Natural Resource Conservation 

Commission 

Posr 01'1'1CE Box 12428 AurnN, TEXAS 78711 (512) 46'}-2000 (VoJCE)/(512)475·3165 (IDD) 
John Hall, Chairman 

Pam Reed, Commissioner 

R. B. "'Ralph" Marquez, Commissioner 

Dan Pearson, Ex~cutive Dir~ctor 

TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

Proteding Texa.s bg Redudng and Preventing Pollution 

THE STATE OF TEXAS § 

COUNTY OF TRAVIS § 

This is to certify that the attached are true and correct 

copies of revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 116 and the State 

Implementation Plan adopted on July 26, 1995 pursuant to.40 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR), §51.104. Prior to the adoption of the 

revisions, a public hearing was held pursuant to 40 CFR, 

§51.102(a), and notice of the hearing was given which conformed to 

the requirements of 40 CFR, §51.102(d). I am the custodian of the 

records of the Commission. 

To certify which, witness my hand and the seal of the Texas 

Natural Resource Conservation Commission, this the 26th day of 

July, 1995. 

P.O. Box 13087 

Chief Clerk 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation 

Commission 

Austin, Texas 78711-3087 512/239-1000 

prinkd on r~cwled paprr U!IO,I: ~(1\'-ha~ed mk 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Public Hearing 

April 5, 1995 

30 TAC Chapter 116 

Standard Permits 
INTRODUCTION 

A public hearing was held in Austin on April 5, 1995 to consider 

new §116.14, concerning Standard Permit Definitions and new 

§116.615, concerning General Conditions. In addition, revisions 

were proposed to §116.610, concerning Applicability and §116.617, 

concerning Standard Permit List. The proposed new sections and 

amendments streamline the permit process for oil and gas facilities 

and establish a new standard permit for oil and gas facilities 

under new §116.617(3). 

Written comments were accepted through April 7, 1995. All testimony and comments have been reviewed and seriously considered. 

This volume contains a complete record of the public hearing and is 

divided into the following four sections: 

o Public Notification and Proposal 

o Written and Oral Testimony 

o Evaluation of Testimony 

o Staff Recommendations 

Additional copies of this hearing record are maintained in the 

TNRCC central office at 12118 North IH-35, Austin, Texas 78753. 

For further information, contact Sam Wells at (512) 239-1441. 
PUBLIC 

NOTIFICATION AND 

PROPOSAL 
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION 

Notification to the public of the proposed revisions was 

conducted by the following procedures: 

1. Publication of the notice of public hearing in the following 

newspapers on the dates listed: 

El Paso Times-Herald Post; March 3, 1995 

Fort Worth Star-Telegram; March 3, 1995 

Houston Chronicle; March 3, 1995 

San Antonio Express-News; March 5, 1995 

2. Publication of the public hearing notice and proposed rule 

in the Texas Register on March 3, 1995. 

4. Correspondence forwarding the notice of public hearings to 

the following officials and agencies: 

Speaker of the House 

Lieutenant Governor 

Dallas Department of Health and Human Services 

El Paso City-County Health District 

Fort Worth Public Health Department 

Galveston County Health District 

Houston Department of Health and Human Services 
Harris County Pollution Control Department 

City of El Paso 

North Central Texas Council of Governments 

Houston-Galveston Area Council 

South East Texas Regional Planning Commission 

Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology 

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality 

New Mexico Air Quality Bureau 

Oklahoma State Department of Health 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 
EXAMPLE OF 

NEWSPAPER CLASSIFIED AD 

San Antonio Express-News 

March 5, 1995 

NOTICE OF PUBl~ HEARING 

BY THE TEXAS NATURAl RESOURCE CONSERVATION 

COMMISSKIN 

. ON PROPOSED RE~SIONS TO 30 lAC CHAPTER 116 AND 

THE STATE IMPLEMEIITATION PLAN 

Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the 

requirements ol the Texas Health and Safety 

Code, §382.017; Texas Goveinment Code, 

Subchapter B, Chapter 2001: and 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations, §51.102 of the United 

States Environmental Protection Agency 

regulations concerning State lmplementalion 

Plans (SIP), the Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission (TNRCC or 

Commission) will conduct a public hearing to 

receive testimony concerning revisions to 30 

TAC Chapter 116 and 1.he SIP. 

The TNRCC proposed new §116.14, 

concerning Standard Permit Definitions, and 

new §116.615, concerning General Conditions. 

In addition, the TNRCC proposes amendments 

to §116.610, concerning Applicability, and 

§116.617, concerning Standard Permit List. 

The proposed new sections and amendments 

streamline the permit process for oil and gas 

facilities and establish a new standard permit 

for oil and gas facilities under new §116.617(3). 

A public hearing on the proposal will be held 

April 5, 1995 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 201 A of 

TNRCC Building B, located at12124 North IH35, Park 35 Technology Center, Austin. The 

hearing is structured for the receipt of oral or 

written comments by interested persons. 

Individuals may present oral statements when 

called upon in order of registration. Open 

discussion within the audience will not occur 

during the hearing; however, a TNRCC staff 

member will be available to discuss the 

proposal 30 minutes prior to the hearing and 

will answer questions before and after the 

hearing. 

Written comments not presented at the hearing 

may be submitted to the TNRCC central office 

in Austin through April 7, 1995. Material 

received by the TNRCC Office of Policy and 

Regulatory Development by 4:00 p.m. on April 

7, 1995 will be considered by the Commission 

prior to any final action on the proposal. Please 

mail written comments to Lisa Martin, Office of 

Policy and Regulatory Development, P.O. Box 

13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. Copies of 

the revision are available at !he central office of 

the TNRCC, located at 12118 North IH-35, Park 

35 Technology Center, Building E, Austin, and 

at all TNRCC regional offices. For technical 

information, contact Tammy Villareal at (512) 

239-1283. For general information, contact 

Sam Wells at (512) 239·1441. 

Persons with disabilities who have special 

communication or other accommodation needs 

who are planning to attend the hearing should 

contact the agency at (512) 239-1459. 

Requests should be made as far in advance as 

possible. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 23, 1995. 

Kevin McCalla 

Acting Director, Legal Services 

Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 
violating the following permit provisions contained in 

lNRCC Permit Number 19154:, Special Provision 2: failure to monitor daily oxygen content of exhaust at the inlet 

to the catalytic converter on the Waukesha 7042 GSJ and 

the Superior SG-825 engines identified as EPNs 10 and 

58, to maintain inlet oxygen concentrations in the range of 

1,000 to 5,000 ppmv; and, Special Provision 2: failure to 

conduct annual evaluations of catalyst degradation by 

measuring NOx concentrations upstream and downstream 

of the catalytic converter on the Waukesha 7042 GSJ and 

the Superior SG-825 engines identified as EPNs 10 and 

58, NOTICE: The lNRCC mailed notice of the 

previously-referenced violations to the Company on August 16, 1993, PENALTY: $21,000, STAFF ATTORNEY: 

Lisa Uselton, (512) 239-5692, REGIONAL OFFICE: 6421 

Camp Bowie Boulevard, Suite 312, Ft. Worth, Texas 

76116, (817) 732-5531 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on Fet:ruary 27, 1995. 

TAD·9502404 Kevin McCalla 

Aalng Director, Legal Services DM&Ion 

Texaa Natural Resource Conaarvatlon 

Commlsalon 

Filed: February 27, t995 

• • • 

Notice of Public Hearing (Standard 

Permits) 

Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the requirements of 

the Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, Subchapter B, Chapter 20()1; and 40 Code 

of Federal Regulations, §51.102 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency regulations concerning State 

Implementation Plans (SIP), the Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Cornmiasion (lNRCC or Commission) will 

conduct a public hearing to receive testimony concerning 

revisions to Chapter 116 and the SIP. 

The lNRCC proposes new §116.14, concerning Standard 

Permit Definitions and new §116.615, concerning General 

Conditions. In addition, lNRCC proposes amendments to 

§116.610, concerning Applicability and §116.617, concerning Standard Permit List. The proposed new sections 

and amendments streamline the permit proceas for oil and 

gas facilities and establish a new standard permit for oil 

and gas facilities under new §116.617(3). 

A public hearing on the proposal will be held April 5, 

1995, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 201A of 1NRCC Building B. 

located at 12124 North IH-35, Park 35 Technology Center, 

Austin, Texas. The hearing is structured for the receipt of 

oral or written comments by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when called upon in order 

of registration. Open discussion within the audience will 

not occur during the hearing; however, a lNRCC staff 

member will be available to discuas the proposal 30 minutes prior to the hearing and will answer questions before 

and after the hearing. 

Written comments not presented at the hearing may be 

submitted to the lNRCC central office in Austin through 

April 7, 1995. Material received by the lNRCC Office of 

Policy and Regulatory Development by 4:00p.m. on April 

7, 1995 will be considered by the Commission prior to any 

final action on the proposal. Please mail written comments 

to Lisa Martin, Office of Policy and Regulatory Development, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. Copies 

of the revision are available at the central office of the 

lNRCC located at 12118 North JH-35, Park 35 Techno!-

• 

ogy Center, Building E. Austin, and at all lNRCC regional offlces. For technical information, contact Tammy 

Villareal at (512) 239-1283. For general information, contact Sam Wells at (512) 239-1441. 

Persons with disabilities who have special communication 

or other accommodation needs who are planning to attend 

the hearing should contact the agency at (512) 239-1459. 

Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 24, 1995. 

TAD-9502363 Kevi'l McCalla 

Acting Director, Legal Servloaa DM&Ion 

Texaa Natural Resource Conaarv8llon 

Commission 

Filed: February 24, t 995 

• • • 

Public Utility Commission of TexaS 

Notice of Application to Amend 

Certificate of Convenience and 

Necessity 

Notice is given to the public of the filing with the Public 

Utility Commission of Texas of an applicatioo on February 17, 1995, to amend a Certificate of Convenience and 

Necessity pursuant to §§16(a), 17(e), 50, 52, and 54 of the 

Public Utility Regulatory Act A summary of the application follows. 

Docket Title and Number: Application of Midwest Electric 

Cooperative, Inc. for a Certificate of Convenience and 

Necessity for a Transmission Line within Scurry County, 

Docket Number 13951 before the Public Utility Commission of Texas. 

The Application: In Docket Number 13951, Midwest Electric Cooperative, Inc. requests approval of its application 

to construct approximately 14 miles of 69-kY transmission 

line. 

Persons who wish to intervene in the proceeding or comment upon action sought; should contact the Public Utility 

Commission of Texas, at 7800 Shoal Creek Boulevard, 

Suite 400N, Austin, Texas 78757, or call the Public Utility 

Public Wormation Division at (512) 458-0388, or (512) 

458-0221 for teletypewriter for the deaf within 15 days of 

this notice. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 27, 1995. 

TAD-9502400 John M. Renfrow 

Secre1ary of the Cornmlsslon 

PubHc Ullllty CorMllsslon or Texaa 

Filed: February 27, 1995 

• • • 

Notice of Intent to File an Application 

for Approval of a Customer-Specific 

Contract Pursuant to Substantive Rule 

23.27 

Notice is given to the public of the intent to flle with the 

Public Utility Commission of Texas an application 

pursuant to Public Utility Commiasion Substantive Rule 

23.27 for approval of customer-specific contract for Billing and Collection Services. 

Tariff Title and Number. Application of Southwestern Bell 

Telephone Company for Approval of Customer-Specific 

IN ADDITION March 3, 1995 20 Te:rReg 1585 
and follow lor applicants, certilicands, licens~ 

ees and the general publtc. There will be no 

effect on small businesses. There is no anttctpaled economic cost lo persons who are re~ 

qui'ed 10 comply with the rule as proposed. 

Comments on the proposal may be submiHed 

to JanK:e C. Alvarez, Texas Slate Board of 

Examiners of Psychologis1s, 9101 Burnet 

Road, Suite 212, Austin, Texas 78758, (512) 

835-2036. 

The amendment is proposed under Texas 

Civil Statutes, Arttckl 4512c, which provKie 

the Texas State Board ol Examiners ol Psy· 

chologists with the authority to make all rules, 

not inconsistent with the Constitution and 

Laws of this State, whtch are reasonably nee· 

essary lor the proper performance of its duties and regulations of proceedings before it. 

The proposed amendment does not aHect 

other statutes, arttcles, or codes. 

§465./J. Termination of Employment. On 

termination of employment in an agency. 

the psychologist should cooperate in facilitating the transfer of the agency's patients 

or clients to other staff members of the 

agency. [Upon termination of the psychologist's employment, patient or client files 

remain the properry of the employing agen· 

cy.] This section is not intended to infringe 

on the right or the individual patients or 

clients to choose their own therapist. 

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal 

has been reviewe.:t by legal counsel and 

found to be within the agency's authority to 

adopt. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on Fetruary 22, 

1995. 

TA0·9502312 Rebecca E. Forkner 

Exerutive Director 

Texas Stale Board of 

Examineno ol 

Psychologists 

Earliest possible date of adoption: April 3, 

1995 

For fw1her information, please call: (512) 

835-2036 

• • 

Chapter 4 7 3. Fees 

• 22 TAC §473..5 

• 

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psy· 

chologists prql()ses an amendment to 

§473.5, concerning miscellaneous tees. The 

amendment ts being propose.:t in order to 

include those fees charged for duplicate re· 

newal permits and nottces. 

Rebecca E. FOO·mer, executive director, has 

determined that lor the first five-year period 

the rule ts in eHect there will be no fiscal 

impltcations tor state or local government as 

a resutl. ot enforcing or administering the rule. 

Ms. F~ner also has determined thai for 

each year of the first frve year-5 the rule is in 

eUect the pl.bltc benefit anttcipate.:t as a result 

of enforcing the rule will be that the Board will 

generate adequate funds to tunction eHtciently and to ensure that the Board has an 

adequate cash balance to carry out the man· 

dates of the Psychologists' Certiftcation and 

Licensing Act. There will be no eHed on small 

businesses. The anticipaled economtc cost to 

persons who are requi'ed to comply with the 

rule as proposed will be in direct proportion to 

the benefit received from the requested re· 

newal permit and/or nottce. 

Comments on the proposal may be slbmitted 

to Jantce C. Alvarez, Texas Slate Board of 

Examiners of Psychologists, 9101 Burnet 

Road, Sui1e 212, Austin, Texas 78758, (512) 

835-2036. 

The amendment is proposed under Texas 

Civil Statutes, At1icle 4512c, which provide 

the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psy· 

chologists with the authority to make all rules, 

not inconsistent with the Constitution and 

laws of this State, which are reasonably nee· 

essary lor the proper per1ormance of its du· 

ties and regulations of proceedings before it. 

The proposed amendment does not aHect 

other stalutes, articles, or codes. 

§473.5. Miscellaneous Fees (Not refundable). 

(a)·Ul (No change.) 

(k) Cost of destroyed, lost or 

stolen $10 annual renewal permits 

(I) Cost or a replacement renewal 

notice $10. 

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal 

has been reviewed by legal counsel and 

found to be within the agency's authority to 

adopt. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 22, 

1995. 

TRD-9502314 RebecCa E. Forkner 

Executive Director 

Texas Stela Board ol 

Examiner-5 ol 

Psychologlals 

Earliest possi~ date of adoption: Apil 3, 

1995 

For fw1her information, please call: (512) 

835-2036 

• • • TITLE 30. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

Part I. Texas Natural 

Resource Conservation 

Commission 

Chapter 116. Control of Air 

Pollution by Permits for 

New Construction or 

Modification 

The Texas Natural Resource Conservalion 

Commission (TNRCC or Commission) proposes new §116.14, concerning Standard 

Permit Definitions and new §116. 615, con~ 

cerning General Condilions. Also, TNRCC 

proposes amendments to §118. 610, concerning A.Wiicability and §116.617, concerning Slandard Permit List. The proposed new 

sections and amendments streamline the per· 

mit process tor oil and gas facilities and es· 

lablish a new standard permit lor oil and gas 

facilities under new §116.617(3). 

20 TexRrg 1506 March 3, 1995 Taas Register • 

The s1andard permil simplifies and acceler· 

ales the permit review process by establishing stardardized conditions targeting the oil 

ard gas industry. The specifte condi1ions are 

wrinen to ensile bolh the application of Besl 

Available Control Technology (BACl) as well 

as protedion of the public health and welfare. 

tf ·an oi ard gas fac~ity meets all ol the 

condittons of the new standard permit, then it 

wouk:l not be necessary to slhmit a general 

applicalion under the requirements of 

§116.111. This wiR streamline the agency re~ 

view process and aiiCM' more rapid app:oval 

lhan wouk:l be possible under new SOISCe 

review permits. 

Sedion 116.14 acijs a definition tor the term 

·oil ard gas facility: Sedion 116.610 is modtfied to delete the General Conditions and 

relitle the sed ion to • Applicability: Section 

116.615 incll .des the general conditions nCM' 

located in §116.610 ard adds applicable oe~>­

etal cond~ions fourd in SLbchapter B, COilceming appriC8ble new soLJ""ce review 

permits. Section 116.617 contains the startdatd permits list ard adds a new standard 

permit f6r oil and gas facilities. 

Steve Mnick, Stralegic Planning ard Appropriations Division, has determined thai for the 

first five-year period the sections are in eHect. 

there w~l be no major fiscal i~r.cations for 

stale or local government as a result of ertforcing or administering the sections. 

Mr. Minick aiso has determined that lor each 

year of the firSt frve years the sedions are in 

effect the plhlic benefit anticipated as a resul. 

of enforcing the sections wiD be better utiliza· 

lion of staff resources by aiiCM'ing the permits 

staff to allocate more time on the review of 

permit applications tor co~lex fac~ities, and 

to reduce the review time for smaller facilities 

whtch have a less significant impact on ambient air quality. There w~l be minimal costs to 

the regulated industry tor the proposed rukls 

changes to the General Condrtions. For facilities qualifying Ia an Oil ard Gas Standattf 

Perm~. a Hal lee ol $450 will be charged 

instead of basing the fee on the capital cost of 

the projed, as required for a formal 

Subchapter B permit This should reduce 

start-14> costs to the oil ard gas irdustry . 

There is no anttcipated economic cost to persons who are requi'ed to comply with the 

sections as prql()sed. 

A pl.blic hearing on the proposal will be held 

April 5, 1995, al10:00 a.m. in Room 201A of 

TNRCC Building B, located al 12124 North 

IH-35, Pari< 35 Technology Center, Austin. 

The hearing is strucllled tor the receipt of 

oral or written comments by interested per~ 

sons. Individuals may present oral stalements 

when called upon in order of reQistraHon. 

Open discussion within the al..dience wiD noc 

OCCIS during the hearing; hCM'ever, a TNRCC 

staff member wiD be available to discuss the 

prql()sal 30 minutes prior to the hearing and 

will answer questions before and after the 

hearing. 

Written comments not presented at the hearing may be sl.bmitted to the TNACC central 

offiCe in Austin through April7, 1995. Material 

received by the TNRCC Office ol Policy and 

Regulatory Development by 4:00 p.m. on 
) 

Apri 7, 1995 will be considered by 1he Commission pria lo any final actton on the proposal. Please mail written comments to Usa 

Manin, OffiCe of Policy and Regulatory Development, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 

78711-3087. Copies of the revision are avail· 

able a1 lhe central otfoce of lhe TNRCC fo. 

caled al 12118 North IH-35, Park 35 

Technology Center, Buik1ing E, Austin, and al 

aJI TNRCC regk>na.l offices. Fa technical information, contaCI Tammy Villareal a1 (512) 

23~1283. Fa general infamaJion, contact 

Sam Wells at (512) 239-1441. 

Persons with disabilities who have special 

communication a other accommodation 

needs who are ~anning to anend lhe hearing 

shoul:l contactlhe agency al (512) 239-1459. 

Requests shouki be made as far in advance 

as possiJie. 

Subchapter A. Definitions 

• 30 TAC §116.14 

The new section is proposed under the Texas 

Heafth and Safely Code, Texas Clean Ai' Ad 

(TCAA), §382.017, which provi:les 1he 

TNACC w~h the aulhor~y fo adopt rules consislenl w~h lhe policy and pu-poses of the 

TCAA. 

The puposed new sectk>n affects the HeaHh 

and Safely Code, §382.017. 

§116.14. Standard Permit Definitions. Oil 

and gas facility-For the purposes of 

Subchapter F of this chapter (relating lo 

Standard Permits) only, oil and gas facilities 

shall be defined as facility clusters which 

handle gases and liquids associated with the 

production, conditioning, processing, and 

pipeline transfer of fluids found in geologic 

formations beneath the earth's surface. 

These oil and gas facilities include. but are 

not limited to: oil or gas production facility 

clusters; salt water disposal facility clusters; 

carbon dioxide separation facility clusters; 

or oil or gas pipeline facility clusten consisting of one or more tanks. separators. 

dehydration units, free water knockouts. 

gunbarrels, heater treaters. vapor recovery 

units, flares. pumps. internal combustion 

engines, gas turbines. compressors. natural 

gas liquid recovery units, or gas sweetening 

and other gas conditioning facilities. This 

deflnition does not include sulfur recovery 

units. 

This agency hereby certifies lhalfhe proposal 

has been reviewed by legal counsel and 

fourd lo be within the agency's aulhaity to 

adopt 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 24, 

1995. 

TAD-9502364 Kevin McCalla 

Acting Director, Legal 

Services Division 

Texas Natural Resource 

Conservalion 

Commission 

Proposed date of adoption: May 17, 1995 

For h.nher inlormation, please call: (512) 

239-1966 

• • • 

Subchapter F. Standard Permits 

• 30 TAC §§ll6.610, 116.615, 

]]6.617 

The amendments and new seclton are pro· 

posed under lhe Texas HeaKh and Safety 

Cocle, Texas Clean Air ACI (TCAA), 

§382.017, which provides lhe TNRCC with 

lhe authority to adopt rules consislenl wilh 

lhe policy and p'-"f'OSOS of the TCAA. 

The proposed amendments and new sedion 

affed the HeaHh and Safely Cocle, §382.017. 

§116.610. Applicabiliry [and General Con· 

ditions). 

(a)-(g) (No change.) 

§116.615. General Conditions. The following general conditions shall be applicable to holders of standard permits, but may 

not be specifically stated within the standard permit document. 

(1) Protection of public health 

and welfare. The emissions from the facility 

shall comply with all applicable rules and 

regulations of the Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission (lNRCC or 

Commission) adopted under the Texas 

Health and Safety Code, Chapter 382, and 

with intent of the Texas Clean Air Acl 

(TCAA), including protection of health and 

property of the public. 

(2) Standard permit representations. All representations with regard to 

construction plans. operating procedures. 

and maximum emission rates in any registration for a standard permit become conditions· upon which the facility or changes 

thereto shall be constructed and operated. 11 

shall be unlawful for any person to vary 

from such representations if the change will 

affect that person's right to claim a standard 

permit under this section. Any change in 

condition such that a person is no longer 

eligible to claim a standard permit under 

this section requires proper authorization 

under §116.110 of this title (relating to Applicability). The owner or operator of the 

facility must notify the lNRCC of any 

other change in conditions which will result 

in a change in the method of control of 

emissions. a change in the character of the 

emissions, or an increase in the discharge of 

the various emission as compared to the 

representations in the original registration or 

any previous notification of a change in 

representations. Notice of changes in representations must be received by the lNRCC 

no later than 30 days after -the change. 

(3) Standard permit in lieu of 

permit amendment. All changes authorized 

by standard permit to a facility previously 

permiued pursuant to §116.110 of this title 

shall be administratively incorporated into 

that facility's permit at such time as the 

permit is amended or renewed. 

(4) Voiding of standard permit. 

A standard permit under -this chapter is automatically void if the holder fails to begin 

construction within 18 months of date of 

registration, discontinues construction for 

more than 18 consecutive months prior to 

completion, or fails to complete construction within a reasonable time. Upon request, 

the Executive Director may grant a onetime 

18-month extension of the date to begin 

construction. 

(5) Construction progress. Start 

of construction. construction interruptions 

exceeding 45 days. and completion of construction shall be reported to the appropriate 

regional office of the lNRCC not later than 

15 working days after occurrence of the 

event. 

(6) Start-up notification. The ap· 

propriate air program regional office of the 

Commission shall be notified prior to the 

commencement of operations of the facilities authorized by the standard permit in 

such a manner that a representative of the 

lNRCC may be present. Phased construction. which may involve a series of units 

commencing operations at different times. 

shall provide separate notification for the 

commencement of operations for each unit. 

(7) Sampling requirements. II 

sampling of stacks or process vents is required, the standard permit holder shall contact the lNRCC Office of Air Quality prior 

to sampling to obtain the proper data forms 

and procedures. All sampling and testing 

procedures must be approved by the Executive Diiector and coordinated with the regional representatives of the Commission. 

The standard permit holder is also responsible for providing sampling facilities and 

conducting the sampling operations or contracting with an independent sampling con· 

sultant. 

(8) Equivalency of methods. It 

shall be the responsibility of the standard 

permit holder to demonstrate or otherwise 

justify the equivalency of emission control 

methods, sampling or other emission testing 

methods, and monitoring methods proposed 

as alternatives to .methods indicated in the 

conditions of the standard permit. Alternative methods shall be applied for in writing 

and must be reviewed and approved by the 

Executive Director prior to their use in fulfilling any requirements of the standard permit. 

(9) Recordkeeping. A copy of 

the standard permit. along with information 

and data sufficient to demonstrate applicability of and compliance with the standard 

permit. shall be maintained in a file at the 

plant site and made available at the request 

of personnel from the lNRCC. the United 

States Environmental Protection Agency, or 

any air pollution control program having 

jurisdiction. For facilities that normally op-

• PROPOSED RULES March 3, 1995 20 Te:rReg 1507 
erato unattended, this information shaU be 

maintained at the nearest staffed location 

within Texas specified by the standard permit holder in the standard permit application. This infonnation shall include, but is 

-- limited to. production records and oper· 

• ,&, hours. Additional recordkeeping requirements may be specified in 

requirements for the standard permit. Information in the fue shall be retained for at 

least two years following the date that the 

information or data is obtained. 

(10) Maintenance of emission 

control. The facilities covered by the standard permit shall not be operated unless all 

air pollution emission capture and abatement equipment is maintained in good 

working order and operating properly _during nonnal facility operations. Nodfication 

for upsets and maintenance shall be made in 

accordance with §101.6 and §101.7 of this 

title (relating to Notification Requirements 

for Major Upset and Notification Requirements for Maintenance). 

(11) Compliance with rules. 

Registration of a standard permit by a standard permit applicant constitutes an acknowledgement and agreement that the 

holder will comply with all rules, regulations. and orders of the Commission issued 

in conformity with the TCAA and the conditions precedent to the granting of the standard permit If more_ than one state or 

federal rule or regulation or permit condition is applicable, the most stringent limit or 

·ondition shall govern and be the standard 

y which compliance shall be demonstrated. 

Acceptance includes consent to the entrance 

of Commission employees and agents into 

the permitted premises at reasonable times 

to investigate conditions relating to the 

emission or concentration of air contaminants. including compliance with the stan· 

dard permit. 

§116.617. Standard Permits List. Pursuant 

to the Texas Clean Air Act. §382.051, projects involving the types of facilities or 

physical or operational changes to facilities 

listed in this section qualify for a stsndard 

permit subject to the conditions stated in 

§116.610 of this title (relating to Applicability [and General Conditions]). 

(1)-(2) (No change.) 

(3) Installation and/or modification of oil and gas facilities. 

{A) Emission specifications. 

(i) Conditioning of produced ps containing greater than 0.3 

long tons per day of total sulfur shall not 

be allowed. 

(ii) No facility shall be 

allowed to emit total uncontrolled emissions of sulfur compounds,_except sulfur 

dioxide (SO,). from all vents (excluding 

process fugitives emissions) equal to or 

greater than four pounds per hour unless 

the vapors are collected and vented to a 

flare. 

(iii) Any vent, excludine 

any safety relief valves that discharge to 

the atmosphere only as a result of fire or 

failure of utilities, emittine sulfur com· 

pounds otber than sulfur dioxide, shall be 

at least 20 feet above ground level. 

(iv) New or modified internal combustion reciprocatine eneines 

or eas turbines permitted under this 

standard permit shall satisfy all or the 

requirements of Standard Exemption 

Number 6, except that reJ:istration usine 

the Form Pl-7 or PI-8 shall not be required. Emissions from enJ:ines or turbines shall be liruited to the amounts 

found in § 116.2ll(a)(l) of this title (relating to Standard Exemption List). 

(v) Total Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) emissions from 

a natural gas glycol dehydration unit 

shall not exceed teo tons per year (tpy) 

unless the vapors are collected and cootrolled in accordance with subparagraph 

(B)(ii) of this paragraph. 

(vi) Aoy combustion 

unit (excluding flares, internal combus· 

tion enJ:ioes, or natural eas turbines), 

greater than 40 million British thermal 

units (Btu) per hour in size (using lower 

heating values) shall not emit more than 

0.06 pounds of nitrogen oxides (NO,) per 

million Btu. 

(vii) No facility shall be 

allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC process fuJ:itive emissions equal to or ereater 

than ten tpy, but less than 25 tpy, unless 

the equipment is inspected and repaired 

according to subparagraph (C)(i) or this 

paragraph. 

(vii•) No facility shall be 

allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC prcr 

cess fugitive emissions equal to or ereater 

than 25 tpy unless the equipment is inspected and repaired accordine to 

subparagraph (C)(ii) of this paragraph. 

(ir) No facility shall be. 

allowed to emit hydrogen sulfide (H,S) or 

SO. process fuJ:itive emissions unless the 

equipment is inspected and repaired according to subpara~raph (C) (iii) of this 

paragraph. Components in sweet crude 

oil or eas service as defined by Chapter 

101 of this title (relating to General 

Rules) are exempt from these limitations. 

(>1 Flares shall be designed, operated, and inspected in ac· 

cordance with 40 CFR 60.18, including 

specifications of minimum heating values 

of waste eas. maximum tip velocity, and 

pilot flame monitorine. If necessary to 

insure adequate combustion. sufficient 

eas shall be added to make the eases 

combustible. An infrared monitor is considered equivalent to a thermocouple for 

20 Te:rRcg 1508 March 3, 1995 Teras Register • 

name monitoring purposes. An automatic 

ienition system may be used in lieu of a 

continuous pilot. 

(:ri) Appropriate docu· 

mentation shall be submitted to demonstrate that compliance with the PSD and 

nonattainment new source review (NSR) 

provisions of the FCAA, Parts C and 0, 

and reeulations promulgated thereunder. 

are being meL The oil and eas facility 

shall be required to meet tbe requirements or Subchapter B of the chapter 

(relating to New Source Review Permits) 

instead of this subchapter if a PSD or 

nonattainment permit is required. 

(rii) Documentation 

shall be submitted to demonstrate com· 

pliance with applicable New Source Performance Standards (NSPS, 40 CFR 60) 

and National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollution (NESHA P, 40 

CFR 61) • 

(:riu) New and increased 

emissions sball not cause or contribute to 

a violation of any National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) or regulation 

property line standards as specified in 

Chapters 111, 112, and 113 of this title 

(relating to Control of Air Pollution 

From Visible Emissions and Particulate 

Matter; Control of Air Pollution From 

Sulfur Compounds; and Control of Air 

Pollution From Toxic Materials). Engineerine judgment and/or computerized 

air dispersion modeline may be used in 

this demonstration. To show compliance 

with §116.610(a)(l) or this title (relating 

to Applicability) for hydrogen sulfide, the 

property line standard in Chapter 112 or 

this title shall be used as the "L" value 

instead or the value represented by §116. 

610(a)(l) or this title. 

(:riv) Fuel for all combustion units and flare pilots shall be 

sweet natural ps or liquid petroleum 

eas, fuel 1:35 containine no more than ten 

grains or total sulfur per 100 dry standard cubic feet (scdO, or field gas. If field 

eas contains more than l.S grains hydrogen sulfide or 30 grains total sulfur compounds per 100 scdf, the operator shall 

maintain records, includine at least quarterly measurements of fuel hydrogen sulfide- and total sulfur content, which 

demonstrate that the annual sulfur dioxide emissions from the facility do not 

exceed the limitations listed in the standard permit registration. If a flare is the 

only combustion unit on a property, the 

operator shall not be required to maintain such records on flare pilot eas. 

(B) Control requirements. 

(i) Floating roofs or 

equivalent controls shall be required on 
all new or modified storage tanks, unless 

the tank is Jess than 25,000 gallons in size 

or the vapor p~ure of the compound to 

be stored in the tank is less than 0.5 

pounds per square incb absolute (psia) at 

maximum short-term storage temperature. 

Ol For internal 

noatioe roors, mechanical shoe primary 

seal or liquid-mounted primary seal or a 

vapor-mounted primary with a rimmounted secondary seals shall be used. 

(II) Mechanical shoe 

or liquid-mounted primary seals shall include a rim-mOunted secondary seal on 

all external noatioe roors tanks. Vapormounted primary seals will not be accepted. 

(III) All noatiog roof 

tanks shall comply with the requirements 

under §115.112(a)(2)(A)·(F) or this title 

(relatine to Control Requirements). 

OVl In lieu or a 

floating roof', tank emissions may be 

routed to: 

(·a·) a combustion 

device such that a minimum VOC destruction efficiency of 98% is achieved; 

or 

(·b·) a vapor recovery system snch that a minimum VOC 

recovery efTkiency of 95% is achieved. 

(V) Independent or 

the exemptions listed in tbis clause, if the 

emissions from any raed roof tank exceed ten tpy or voc or ten tpy or sulrur 

compounds, the tank emissions shall be 

routed to a combustion device, vapor recovery unit, or equivalent method of control that meets the requirements listed in 

subclause OVl or this clause. 

(ii) The VOC emissions 

rrom a natural gas elycol dehydration 

unit shall he controlled as roUows. 

0) If total uncontrolled VOC emissions are equal to or 

ereater than ten tons per year 1 but less 

than SO tons per year, a minimum of 

80% by weight minimum control effi· 

ciency shall be achieved by either operating a condenser and a separator (or flash 

tank), vapor recovery unit, combustion 

device, or equivalent control device. 

01) Ir total uncon· 

trolled VOC emissions are equal to or 

ereater than 50 tpy, a minimum of: 

(·a·) 98% by 

weight minimum control efficiency shall 

be achieved by a combustion device or 

equivalent; or 

(·b-) 95% by 

weight minimum control efficiency shall 

be achieved by a vapor recovery system 

or equivalent. 

(C) Inspection requirements. 

(I) Owners or operators 

who are subject to subparaeraph (A)(vii) 

or this paraeraph ohall comply with the 

following requirements. 

(I) No component 

shall be allowed to have a VOC leak ror 

more than IS days arter the leak is detected to exceed a VOC concentration 

ereater than 10,000 parts per million by 

volume (ppmv) above hackeround as 

methane, propane, or hexane, or the 

dripping or exuding of process fluid 

based on sight, smell, or sound for all 

components. The VOC fugitive emission 

components which contact process nuids 

where the VOCs have an aggregate partial pressure or vapor pressure of less 

than 0.5 psia at 100 deerees Fahrenheit 

are exempt from this requirement. If 

VOC fuEitive emission components are in 

service where the operating pressure is at 

least five kilopasc•ls (5.0 Kpa, equivalent 

to 0.725 pounds per square inch (psi)) 

below ambient p~ure, then these components are also exempt from this requirement as lone as the equipment is 

identified in a list that is made available 

upon request by Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission (TNRCC) representatives, the EPA, or any other air 

pollution control agency having jurisdiction. All pipine: and valves two inches 

nominal size and smaller are also exempt 

from this requirement. 

(II) All technically 

feasible repairs shall be made to repair a 

VOC leaking process fugitive component 

within IS days arter the leak is detected. 

If the repair of a component would require a unit shutdown, the repair may be 

delayed until the next scheduled shutdown. All leaking components which cannot be repaired until a scheduled 

shutdown shall be identified for such repair by taeging. The TNRCC Executive 

Director, at his or her discretion, may 

require early unit shutdown or other ap· 

propriate action based on the number 

and severity of tagged leaks awaiting 

shutdown. 

(Ul) New and reworked underground process pipelinl'S 

containing VOCs shall contain no buried 

valves such that process fugitive emission 

inspection and repair is rendered impractical. 

(IV) To the extent 

that good engineering practice will permit, new and reworked valves and piping 

connections in VOC service sball be so 

located to be reasonably acces.o;;ible for 

leak-<:heckine: during plant operation. 

Valves elevated more than two meters 

above a support surface will be considered nonaccessible and shall be identified 

in a list to be ma_de available upon request. 

(V) New and reworked piping connections in VOC service shall be welded or naneed. Screwed 

connections are permissible only on pip· 

ing smaller than two-inch diameter. No 

later than the next scheduled quarterly 

monitoring after initial installation or replacement, all new or reworked connections shall be eas-tested or hydrau~callytested at no less than normal operating 

pressure and adjustments made as necessary to obtain leak·free perfonnance. 

Flanees in VOC service shall be inspected 

by visual, audible, and/or olfactory 

means at least weekly by operating personnel walk-throueh. 

(VI) Each openended Yalve or Hne in VOC service, other 

than a valve or line used for safety relief, 

shall be equipped with a cap, blind 

flange, plug, or a second valve. Except 

during sampling, the second valve shall 

be closed. 

(VII) Accessible 

valves in VOC senice shall be monitored 

by leak-<:hecking for fugitive emissions at 

least quarterly using an approved gas 

analyzer. For valves equipped with rupture discs, a pressure gauee shall be in· 

stalled between the relief valve and 

rupture disc to monito.r disc integrity. All 

leaking discs shall be replaced at the ear· 

liest opportunity, but no later than the 

next process shutdown. SeaUess!leakless 

valves (including, but not limited to, 

welded bonnet bellows and diaphragm 

valves) and relief valves equipped with a 

rupture disc upstream or venting to tt 

control device are exempt from monitoring. 

(VIJO Dual pump 

seals with barrier fluid at higher pressure 

than process pressure, seals degassing to 

vent control systems kept in eood working order, or seals equipped with an automatic seal failure detection and alarm 

• PROPOSED RULES March 3, 1995 20 TerRcg 1509 
system, submerged pumps, or seal-less 

pumps (including, but not limited to, diaphragm, canned, or magnetic driven 

-umps) are exempt from monitoring. 

(IX) All other pump 

and compressor seals emitting VOCs 

shall be monitored with an approved gas 

analyzer at least quarterly. 

(X) After completion 

of the required quarterly inspections for 

a period of at least two years, the operator of the oil and gas facility may request 

in writine to the TNRCC, Office of Air 

Quality, New Source Review Proeram 

that the monitorlng schedule be revised 

based on the percen~ of valves leaking. 

The percent of val..,. leakine shall be 

detennined by dividing the sum of valves 

leaking during current monitoring and 

valves for which repair has been delayed 

by the total number of valves subject to 

the requirements. This request shall include all data that has been developed to 

justify the following modifications in the 

monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two 

consecutive quarterly leak detection 

periods with the percent of valves lea kine 

equal to or less than·'2.0%, an owner or 

operator may beein to skip one of the 

quarterly leak detection periods for the 

vaJ,·es in gas/vapor and lieht liquid service. 

(-b-) After five 

consecutive quarterly leak detection 

periods with the percent of ,·alves leaking 

equal to or less than 2.0%, an owner or 

operator may begin to skip three of the 

quarterly leak detection periods for the 

valves in gasf,·apor and light liquid service. 

(ii) Owners or operators 

who are subject to subparaeraph (A)( viii) 

of this paragraph shall comply with the 

following requirements. 

(I) No component 

shall be allowed to have a VOC leak for 

more than 15 davs after the leak is found 

which exceeds ·a VOC concentration 

ereater than 500 ppmv for all components except pumps and compressors and 

greater than 2,000 ppmv for pumps and 

compressors above background as methane, propane, or hexane, or the dripping 

or exuding of process fluid based on 

sight, smell, or sound. The VOC fugitive 

emission components which contact process nuids where the VOCs have an aggregate partial pressure or vapor 

pressure of lt:ss than. 0.044 psia at 100 

degrees Fahrenheit are exempt from this 

rt."quirement. If VOC fugitive emission 

components are in service where the op· 

erating pressure is at least five kPa (0. 

725 psi) below ambient pressure, these 

components are also exempt from this 

requirement as long as the equipment is 

identified in a list that is made available 

upon request by TNRCC representatives, 

the EPA, or any air pollution control 

agency having jurisdiction. All piping 

and valves two inches nominal size and 

smaller are also exempt from this requirement. 

(II) All technically 

feasible repairs shall be made to repair a 

VOC leaking process fueitive component 

within 15 days after the leak is detected. 

U the repair of a component would require a unit shutdown, the repair may be 

delayed until the next scheduled shutdown. AU leaking components which can· 

not be repaired until a scheduled 

shutdown shall be identified for such repair by tagging. The Executive Director, 

at his or her discretion, may require 

early unit shutdown or other appropriate 

action based on the number and severity 

of taeeed leaks awaitine shutdown. 

(Ill) New and reworked underwound process pipelines 

containing VOCs shall contain no buried 

valves such that process ful:itive emission 

inspection and repair is rendered impractical. 

(IV) To the extent 

that good engineering practice will permit, new and reworked valves and piping 

connections in V OC service shall be so 

located to be reasonably accessible for 

leak..checking during plant operation. 

Valves elevated more than two meters 

above a support surface will be considered nonaccessible and shall be identified 

in a list to be made available upon request. 

(V) New and reworked piping connections in VOC service shall be welded or flanged. Screwed 

connections are permissible only on piping smaller than two~inch diameter. No 

later than the next scheduled quarterly 

monitoring afler initial installation or replacement, all new or reworked connections shall be eas-tested or hydraulicallytested at no less than normal operating 

pressure and adjustments made as neces· 

sary to obtain leak~free performance. 

Flanges in VOC service shall be inspected 

by visual, audible, and/or olfactory 

means at least weekly by operating per· 

sonnel walk~through. 

(VI) Each openended valvt: or line in VOC senice. other 

20 TexReg 1510 March 3, 1995 TexaJ Register • 

than a valve or line used for safety relief, 

shall be equipped with a cap, blind 

flange, plug, or a second valve. Except 

during sampling, the second valve shall 

be closed. 

(VII) Accessible 

valves in VOC service shall be monitored 

by leak..checking for fu£itive emissions at 

least quarterly using an approved gas 

analyzer. For valves equipped with rupture discs, a pressure gauge shall be installed between the relief valve and 

rupture disc to monitor disc: interrity. All 

leaking discs shall be replaced at the earliest opportunity, but no later than the 

next process shutdown. Sealless!leakl..,. 

,·alves (including, but not limited to, 

welded bonnet bellows and diaphragm 

valves) and relief valves equipped with a 

rupture disc upstream or venting to a 

control device are exempt from monitoring. 

(VITI) Dual pump 

seals with barrier fluid at higher pressure 

than process pressure, seals derassing to 

vent control systems kept in good working order, or seals equipped with an automatic seal failure detection and alarm 

system, submer~d pumps, or seal-less 

pumps (including, but not limited to, diaphragm, canned, or magnetic driven 

pumps) are exempt from monitoring. 

(IX) All other pump 

and compressor seals emitting VOCs 

shall be monitored with an approved gas 

analyrer at least quarterly. 

(X) After completion 

of the required quarterly inspections for 

a period of at least two years, the operator of the oil and gas facility may request 

in writing to the TNRCC, Office of Air 

Quality, New Source Review Prow-am 

that the monitoring schedule be revised 

based on the percent of valves leaking. 

The percent of valves leaking shall be 

determined by dividing the sum of valves 

leaking during current monitoring and 

valves for which·repair has been delayed 

by the total number of valves subject to 

the requirements. This request shall include all data that have been developed 

to justify the following modifications in 

the monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two 

consecuti-.·e quarterly leak detection 

periods with the percent of valves leaking 

equal to or less than 2.0%, an owner or 

operator may begin to skip one of the 

quarterly leak detection periods for the 

-.·alves in gasl-.·apor and light liquid ser-

-.·ice. 

(-b·) After five 

consecutive quartl"rly leak detl"Ction 

periods with the percent of valvt..-s leaking 
equal to or less than 2.0%, an owner or 

operalor may b.,.;n lo skip lbree of lbe 

quarterly leak detection periods lor tbe 

valves in £as'vapor and li£hl liquid service. 

(XI) A direcled 

mainlenance pro.,-am sball be used and 

coosist of the repair and maintenance ol 

VOC fueilive emission componeols assisled simultaneously by lbe use of an 

approved ps analyzer sucb lbal a minimum concentration of leakin£ VOC is 

obtained lor each component bein£ main· 

tained. Replaced componenls sball be remonilored wilbin 30 days of being placed 

back into VOC service. · 

(iU) Audilory and visual 

cbecka for SO, and H,S leaks within lhe 

operating area shall be made every day. 

Immedialely. but no later lhan eight hours 

upon deJection of a lealc. plant personnel 

shall lake lhe following aclions: 

(I) isolate the leak; 

{ll) commence repair 

or replacement of the leakin£ component; 

and 

{III) use a leak collectioo/contaiomeot system to prevent the 

leak until repair or replacement can be 

made il immediate repair is not possible. 

(D) Approved test melbods. 

(i) An approved ps 

analyzer used for tbe VOC fueitive inspection and repair requirement in 

subpara.,-aph (C)(ii)(XI) of Ibis para-

£11lph, shaU conform to requirements 

fisted in 40 CFR 60.48S(a) and (b). 

(iO Tutweiler analysis or 

equivalent sball be used to determine tbe 

hydroeen sulfide content as required under subpara£r&phs (A) and (E) of Ibis 

paraeraph. 

{iii) Proper operation ol 

any condenser used as a VOC emissions 

control device to comply witb 

subpara.,-aph (A)(v) of tbis paraeraph 

shall be tested to demonstrate compliance 

with the minimum control efficiency. 

Sampling shall occur within 60 days after 

start-up ol new or modified facilities. The 

permittee shall contact the Source and 

Mobile Monitorin£ Section, Monitorin£ 

Division 45 days prior to samplin£ for 

approval of sampling protocol. The appropriate recional office in the re&ion 

where the source is located shall also be 

::ontacted 45 days prior to samplin£ to 

provide them the opportunity to view the 

iamplin£. Neither the re£ional office nor 

the Source and Mobile Monitorin£ Sec· 

tion personnel are required to view the 

testin£. Santplin£ reports which comply 

wilb the provisions of the TNRCC Sampling Procedure Manual, Chapter 14, 

shall be distribuled to tbe appropriate 

TNRCC re£ional office, any local air pol· 

Jution control prouams, and the Source 

and Mobile Monitorin£ Section. 

(E) Monitoring and 

recordkeepin£ requirements. 

(IJ The resulls of the 

VOC fucitive emission inspection and re· 

pair requirements sball be made avail· 

able to tbe Executive Director or his or 

ber desienated representative upon re· 

quest. Records, for aU components, shall 

include: 

(I) appropriate 

dates; 

(II) test melbods; 

(ill) instrument 

readings; 

(IV) repair resulls; 

and 

(V) corrective actions. Records of nange inspections are 

not required unless a leak is detected. 

(ii) Records for repairs 

and replacements made due to inspec· 

tions of H,S and SO, components shall be 

maintained. 

(iii) Records shall be 

kept for each production, processing, and 

pipeline tank battery or Cor each storage 

tank if not located at a tank battery, on a 

monthly basis, as follows: 

(I) lank battery identification or storage tank identification, if 

not located at a tank batteryi 

(II) compound 

storedi 

(ill) monthly 

throu£hput in barrels/month; and 

(IV) cumulative an· 

nual throu£hput, barrels'year. 

(il-) A plan shall be submitted to show how continuous compliance will be demonstrated for the 

efficiency requirements listed in 

subpara.,-aph (B)(i)(IV) of this parauaph. The demonstration may include, 

but is not limited to, monitoring 

nowrates, temperatures, or Other opera tin£ parameters. 

(v) Records shall be 

kept on at least a monthly basis of all 

production facility now rates (in standard cubic feet per day) and total sulfur 

content of gas processing streams. Total 

sulfur shall be calculated in lon£ tons per 

day. 

(vi) All required records 

shall be made available to representatives 

of the TNRCC, EPA, or local air pollution control agencies upon request and be 

kept for at least two years. All required 

records shall be kept at the plant site 

unless the plant site is unman ned durin£ 

business hours. For plant sites ordinarily 

unmanned durin£ business hours, therecords shall be maintained· at the nearest 

office in the slate having day-to-day operations control or the plant site. 

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal 

has been reviewed by legal counsel and 

found to be within the agency's au!haity to 

adopl. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 24, 

1995. 

TR0-9502365 Kevin McCalla 

Acting Director, Legal 

Services Division 

Texas N81Ural AeiSOUrce 

Conserv811on 

Commission 

Proposad date ol adoption: May 17, t995 

For further information, please call: (512) 

239-1966 

• • • TilLE 34. PUBLIC FlNANCE 

Part I. Comptroller of 

Public Accounts 

Chapter 5. Funds Management 

(Fiscal Affairs) 

Claims Processing-Purchase 

Vouchers 

• 34 TAC §5.55 

(Editor's note: Tl~ re.rt of rhe following section 

propoud for repeal will nor /"le pu/"1/ished. The 

section may be examined in the offices of tl1l' 

Comptroller of Public Accounts or in the Texas 

Regisler office. Room 145, James Earl Rudder 

Building, 1019 Bra:.os Street, Austin.) 

The Comptroller ol Public Accounts p-oposes 

the repeal ol §5.55, concerning prompt payment act requirements far state agencies. 

The section is being repealed so that a slbstantially revised section may be adopted. 

Mike Reissig, chief revenue estimator, has 

determined that tor the first five-year pertod 

the repeal will be in etlect there will be no significant revenue impact on the stale or local government. 

• PROPOSED RULES March 3, 1995 20 TexReg 1511 
John Hall, Chairman 

Pam Reed, CommiSJioncr 

Peggy Carner, CommiSJloner 

Dan Pearsol\ E.xecu1i,,, Dlrector 

TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCB CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

Prolecling Texa.J bv Reducing and Prtvenling Po/lullon 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 

BY THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

ON PROPOSED REVISIONS TO 30 TAC CHAPTER 116 AND 

THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the requirements of the 

Texas Health and Safety Code, §382.017; Texas Government Code, 

Subchapter B, Chapter 2001; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations, 

§51.102 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency 

regulations concerning State Implementation Plans (SIP), the 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC or Commission) will conduct a public hearing to receive testimony concerning revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 116 and the SIP. 

The TNRCC proposes new §116.14, concerning Standard Permit 

Definitions, and new §116.615, concerning General Conditions. In 

addition, the TNRCC proposes amendments to §116.610, concerning 

Applicability, and §116.617, concerning Standard Permit List. 

The proposed new sections and amendments streamline the permit 

process for oil and gas facilities and establish a new standard 

permit for oil and gas facilities under new §116.617(3). 

A public hearing on the proposal will be held April 5, 1995 at 

10:00 a.m. in Room 201A of TNRCC Building B, located at 12124 

North IH-35, Park 35 Technology Center, Austin. The hearing is 

structured for the receipt of oral or written comments by 

interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when 

called upon in order of registration. Open discussion within the 

audience will not occur during the hearing; however, a TNRCC 

staff member will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes 

prior to the hearing and will answer questions before and after 

the hearing. 

Written comments not presented at the hearing may be submitted to 

the TNRCC central office in Austin through April 7, 1995. Material received by the TNRCC Office of Policy and Regulatory 

Development by 4:00p.m. on April 7, 1995 will be considered by 

the Commission prior to any final action on the proposal. Please 

mail written comments to Lisa Martin, Office of Policy and 
., 

PAGE TWO 

Regulatory Development, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. 

Copies of the revision are available at the central office of the 

TNRCC, located at 12118 North IH-35, Park 35 Technology Center, 

Building E, Austin, and at all TNRCC regional offices. For 

technical information, contact Tammy Villareal at {512) 239-1283. 

For general information, contact Sam Wells at {512) 239-1441. 

Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other 

accommodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should 

contact the agency at {512) 239-1459. Requests should be made as 

far in advance as possible. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 23, 1995. 

Kevii£..1( 

Acting Director, Legal Services 

Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 1 of 34 

The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC or 

Commission) proposes new §116.14, concerning Standard Permit 

Definitions and new §116.615, concerning General Conditions. 

Also, TNRCC proposes amendments to §116.610, concerning Applicability and §116.617, concerning Standard Permit List. The proposed new sections and amendments streamline the permit process 

for oil and gas facilities and establish a new standard permit 

for oil and gas facilities under new §116.617(3). 

The standard permit simplifies and accelerates the permit review 

process by establishing standardized conditions targeting the oil 

and gas industry. The specific conditions are written to ensure 

both the application of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) 

as well as protection of the public health and welfare. If an 

oil and gas facility meets all of the conditions of the new 

standard permit, then it would not be necessary to submit a 

general application under the requirements of §116.111. This 

will streamline the agency review process and allow more rapid 

approval than would be possible under new source review permits. 

Section 116.14 adds a definition for the term "oil and gas 

facility." Section 116.610 is modified to delete the General 

Conditions and retitle the section to "Applicablility." Section 

116.615 includes the general conditions now located in §116.610 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 2 of 34 

and adds applicable general conditions found in Subchapter B, 

concerning applicable new source review permits. Section 116.617 

contains the standard permits list and adds a new standard permit 

for oil and gas facilities. 

Steve Minick, Strategic Planning and Appropriations Division, has 

determined that for the first five-year period the sections are 

in effect there will be no major fiscal implications for state or 

local government as a result of enforcing or administering the 

sections. 

Mr. Minick also has determined that for each year of the first 

five years the sections are in effect the public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing the sections will be better utilization of staff resources by allowing the permits staff to 

allocate more time on the review of permit applications for 

complex facilities, and to reduce the review time for smaller 

facilities which have a less significant impact on ambient air 

quality. There will be minimal costs to the regulated industry 

for the proposed rules changes to the General Conditions. For 

facilities qualifying for an Oil and Gas Standard Permit, a flat 

fee of $450 will be charged instead of basing the fee on the 

capital cost of the project, as required for a formal Subchapter 

B permit. This should reduce start-up costs to the oil and gas 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 3 of 34 

industry. There is no anticipated economic cost to persons who 

are required to comply with the sections as proposed. 

A public hearing on the proposal will be held April 5, 1995 at 

10:00 a.m. in Room 201A of TNRCC Building B, located at 12124 

North IH-35, Park 35 Technology Center, Austin. The hearing is 

structured for the receipt of oral or written comments by interested persons. Individuals may present oral statements when 

called upon in order of registration. Open discussion within the 

audience will not occur during the hearing; however, a TNRCC 

staff member will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes 

prior to the hearing and will answer questions before and after 

the hearing. 

Written comments not presented at the hearing may be submitted to 

the TNRCC central office in Austin through April 7, 1995. Material received by the TNRCC Office of Policy and Regulatory 

Development by 4:00p.m. on April 7, 1995 will be considered by 

the Commission prior to any final action on the proposal. Please 

mail written comments to Lisa Martin, Office of Policy and 

Regulatory Development, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. 

Copies of the revision are available at the central office of the 

TNRCC located at 12118 North IH-35, Park 35 Technology Center, 

Building E, Austin, and at all TNRCC regional offices. For 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 4 of 34 

technical information, contact Tammy Villareal at (512) 239-1283. 

For general information, contact Sam Wells at (512) 239-1441. 

Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other 

accommodation needs who are planning to attend the hearing should 

contact the agency at (512) 239-1459. Requests should be made as 

far in advance as possible. 

The new section is proposed under the Texas Health and Safety 

Code, Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), §382.017, which provides the 

TNRCC with the authority to adopt rules consistent with the 

policy and purposes of the TCAA. 

The new section affects the Health and Safety Code, §382.017. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

SUBCHAPTER A 

DEFINITIONS 

§116.14. Standard Permit Definitions. 

Page 5 of 34 

Oil and gas facility - For the purposes of Subchapter F of 

this chapter (relating to Standard Permits) only, oil and gas 

facilities shall be defined as facility clusters which handle 

gases and liquids associated with the production, conditioning, 

processing, and pipeline transfer of fluids found in geologic 

formations beneath the earth's surface. These oil and gas 

facilities include, but are not limited to: oil or gas production facility clusters; salt water disposal facility clusters; 

carbon dioxide separation facility clusters; or oil or gas 

pipeline facility clusters consisting of one or more tanks, 

separators, dehydration units, free water knockouts, gunbarrels, 

heater treaters, vapor recovery units, flares, pumps, internal 

combustion engines, gas turbines, compressors, natural gas liquid 

recovery units, or gas sweetening and other gas conditioning 

facilities. This definition does not include sulfur recovery 

units. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 6 of 34 

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed 

by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's authority to 

adopt. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 23, 1995. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 7 of 34 

The amendments and new section are proposed under the Texas 

Health and Safety Code, Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), §382.017, 

which provides the TNRCC with the authority to adopt rules 

consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. 

The proposed amendments and new section affect the Health and 

Safety Code, §382.017. 

SUBCHAPTER F 

STANDARD PERMITS 

§116.610. Applicability [and General Conditions]. 

(a) - (g) (No change.) 

§116.615. General Conditions. 

The following general conditions shall be applicable to 

holders of standard permits, but may not be specifically stated 

within the standard permit document. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 8 of 34 

(1) Protection of public health and welfare. The emissions 

from the facility shall comply with all applicable rules and 

regulations of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

(TNRCC or Commission) adopted under the Texas Health and Safety 

Code, Chapter 382, and with intent of the Texas Clean Air Act 

(TCAA), including protection of health and property of the 

public. 

(2) Standard permit representations. All representations 

with regard to construction plans, operating procedures, and 

maximum emission rates in any registration for a standard permit 

become conditions upon which the facility or changes thereto 

shall be constructed and operated. It shall be unlawful for any 

person to vary from such representations if the change will 

affect that person's right to claim a standard permit under this 

section. Any change in condition such that a person is no longer 

eligible to claim a standard permit under this section requires 

proper authorization under §116.110 of this title (relating to 

Applicability) . The owner or operator of the facility must 

notify the TNRCC of any other change in conditions which will 

result in a change in the method of control of emissions, a 

change in the character of the emissions, or an increase in the 

discharge of the various emission as compared to the representations in the original registration or any previous notification 
Texas Natural Resource Page 9 of 34 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

of a change in representations. Notice of changes in representations must be received by the TNRCC no later than 30 days after 

the change. 

(3) Standard permit in lieu of permit amendment. All 

changes authorized by standard permit to a facility previously 

permitted pursuant to §116.110 of this title shall be administratively incorporated into that facility's permit at such time as 

the permit is amended or renewed. 

(4) Voiding of standard permit. A standard permit under 

this chapter is automatically void if the holder fails to begin 

construction within 18 months of date of registration, discontinues construction for more than 18 consecutive months prior to 

completion, or fails to complete construction within a reasonable 

time. Upon request, the Executive Director may grant a onetime 

18-month extension of the date to begin construction. 

(5) Construction progress. Start of construction, construction interruptions exceeding 45 days, and completion of 

construction shall be reported to the appropriate regional office 

of the TNRCC not later than 15 working days after occurrence of 

the event. 

• 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 10 of 34 

(6) Start-up notification. The appropriate air program 

regional office of the Commission shall be notified prior to the 

commencement of operations of the facilities authorized by the 

standard permit in such a manner that a representative of the 

TNRCC may be present. Phased construction, which may involve a 

series of units commencing operations at different times, shall 

provide separate notification for the commencement of operations 

for each unit. 

(7) Sampling requirements. If sampling of stacks or 

process vents is required, the standard permit holder shall 

contact the TNRCC Office of Air Quality prior to sampling to 

obtain the proper data forms and procedures. All sampling and 

testing procedures must be approved by the Executive Director and 

coordinated with the regional representatives of the Commission. 

The standard permit holder is also responsible for providing 

sampling facilities and conducting the sampling operations or 

contracting with an independent sampling consultant. 

(8) Equivalency of methods. It shall be the responsibility 

of the standard permit holder to demonstrate or otherwise justify 

the equivalency of emission control methods, sampling or other 

emission testing methods, and monitoring methods proposed as 

alternatives to methods indicated in the conditions of the 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 11 of 34 

standard permit. Alternative methods shall be applied for in 

writing and must be reviewed and approved by the Executive 

Director prior to their use in fulfilling any requirements of the 

standard permit. 

(9) Recordkeeping. A copy of the standard permit, along 

with information and data sufficient to demonstrate applicability 

of and compliance with the standard permit, shall be maintained 

in a file at the plant site and made available at the request of 

personnel from the TNRCC, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, or any air pollution control program having jurisdiction. For facilities that normally operate unattended, this 

information shall be maintained at the nearest staffed location 

within Texas specified by the standard permit holder in the 

standard permit application. This information shall include, but 

is not limited to, production records and operating hours. 

Additional recordkeeping requirements may be specified in requirements for the standard permit. Information in the file 

shall be retained for at least two years following the date that 

the information or data is obtained. 

(10) Maintenance of emission control. The facilities 

covered by the standard permit shall not be operated unless all 

air pollution emission capture and abatement equipment is main-
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 12 of 34 

tained in good working order and operating properly during normal 

facility operations. Notification for upsets and maintenance 

shall be made in accordance with §101.6 and §101.7 of this title 

(relating to Notification Requirements for Major Upset and 

Notification Requirements for Maintenance) . 

(11) Compliance with rules. Registration of a standard 

permit by a standard permit applicant constitutes an acknowledgement and agreement that the holder will comply with all rules, 

regulations, and orders of the Commission issued in conformity 

with the TCAA and the conditions precedent to the granting of the 

standard permit. If more than one state or federal rule or 

regulation or permit condition is applicable, the most stringent 

limit or condition shall govern and be the standard by which 

compliance shall be demonstrated. Acceptance includes consent to 

the entrance of Commission employees and agents into the permitted premises at reasonable times to investigate conditions 

relating to the emission or concentration of air contaminants, 

including compliance with the standard permit. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

§116.617. Standard Permit List. 

Page 13 of 34 

Pursuant to the Texas Clean Air Act, §382.051, projects 

involving the types of facilities or physical or operational 

changes to facilities listed in this section qualify for a 

standard permit subject to the conditions stated in §116.610 of 

this title (relating to Applicability [and General Conditions]). 

( 1) - ( 2) (No change. ) 

l1l Installation and/or modification of oil and gas facilities. 

JAl Emission specifications. 

lil Conditioning of produced gas containing 

greater than 0.3 long tons per day of total sulfur shall not be 

allowed. 

(iil No facility shall be allowed to emit total 

uncontrolled emissions of sulfur compounds. except sulfur dioxide 

~,). from all vents (excluding process fugitives emissions) 

equal to or greater than four pounds per hour unless the vapors 

are collected and vented to a flare. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 14 of 34 

(iiil Any vent. excluding any safety relief valves 

that discharge to the atmosphere only as a result of fire or 

failure of utilities. emitting sulfur compounds other than sulfur 

dioxide. shall be at least 20 feet above ground level. 

liYl New or modified internal combustion reciproeating engines or gas turbines permitted under this standard 

permit shall satisfy all of the requirements of Standard Exemption Number 6. except that registration using the Form PI-7 or 

PI-8 shall not be required. Emissions from engines or turbines 

shall be limited to the amounts found in §116.211(al (1) of this 

title (relating to Standard Exemption List) . 

(vl Total Volatile Organic Compound (VOCl emissions from a natural gas glycol dehydration unit shall not exceed 

10 tons per year (tpyl unless the vapors are collected and controlled in accordance with subparagraph (B) (iil of this paragraph. 

(vil Any combustion unit (excluding flares. 

internal combustion engines. or natural gas turbines), greater 

than 40 million British thermal units (Btu) per hour in size 

(using lower heating values) shall not emit more than 0.06 pounds 

of nitrogen oxides (NO.l per million Btu. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 15 of 34 

(viil No facility shall be allowed to emit 

uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions equal to or greater 

than 10 tpy. but less than 25 tpy. unless the equipment is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph (C) (i) of this 

paragraph. 

(viii) No facility shall be allowed to emit 

uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions equal to or greater 

than 25 tpy unless the equipment is inspected and repaired 

according to subparagraph (C) (iil of this paragraph. 

(ixl No facility shall be allowed to emit hydrogen sulfide (H,Sl or so, process fugitive emissions unless the 

equipment is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph 

(C) (iiil of this paragraph. Components in sweet crude oil or gas 

service as defined by Chapter 101 of this title (relating to 

General Rules) are exempt from these limitations. 

(x) Flares shall be designed. operated. and 

inspected in accordance with 40 CFR 60.18. including specifications of minimum heating values of waste gas. maximum tip velocity, and pilot flame monitoring. If necessary to insure adequate 

combustion. sufficient gas shall be added to make the gases 

combustible. An infrared monitor is considered equivalent to a 
Texas Natural Resource Page 16 of 34 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

thermocouple for flame monitoring purposes. An automatic ignition system may be used in lieu of a continuous pilot. 

(xi) Appropriate documentation shall be submitted 

to demonstrate that compliance with the PSD and nonattainment new 

source review (NSR) provisions of the FCAA. Parts C and D. and 

regulations promulgated thereunder. are being met. The oil and 

gas facility shall be required to meet the requirements of 

Subchapter B of the chapter (relating to New Source Review 

Permits) instead of this subchapter if a PSD or nonattainment 

permit is required. 

(xii) Documentation shall be submitted to demonstrate compliance with applicable New Source Performance Standards (NSPS. 40 CFR 60) and National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollution (NESHAP. 40 CFR 61). 

(xiii) New and increased emissions shall not 

cause or contribute to a violation of any National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) or regulation property line standards as 

specified in Chapters 111. 112. and 113 of this title (relating 

to Control of Air Pollution From Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter; Control of Air Pollution From Sulfur Compounds; and 

Control of Air Pollution From Toxic Materials). Engineering 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 17 of 34 

judgment and/or computerized air dispersion modeling may be used 

in this demonstration. To show compliance with §116.610(a) (1) of 

this title (relating to Applicability) for hydrogen sulfide. the 

property line standard in Chapter 112 of this title shall be used 

as the "L" value instead of the value represented by 

§116. 610 (a) ( 1) of this title. 

(xivl Fuel for all combustion units and flare 

pilots shall be sweet natural gas or liquid petroleum gas. fuel 

gas containing no more than 10 grains of total sulfur per 100 dry 

standard cubic feet (scdfl. or field gas. If field gas contains 

more than 1.5 grains hydrogen sulfide or 30 grains total sulfur 

compounds per 100 scdf. the operator shall maintain records. 

including at least quarterly measurements of fuel hydrogen 

sulfide and total sulfur content. which demonstrate that the 

annual sulfur dioxide emissions from the facility do not exceed 

the limitations listed in the standard permit registration. If a 

flare is the only combustion unit on a property. the operator 

shall not be required to maintain such records on flare pilot 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

laL Control requirements. 

Page 18 of 34 

{il Floating roofs or equivalent controls shall 

be required on all new or modified storage tanks. unless the tank 

is less than 25.000 gallons in size or the vapor pressure of the 

compound to be stored in the tank is less than 0.5 pounds per 

square inch absolute {psial at maximum short-term storage temperature. 

lil For internal floating roofs. mechanical 

shoe primary seal or liquid-mounted primary seal or a yapormounted primary with a rim-mounted secondary seals shall be used. 

l1Il Mechanical shoe or liquid-mounted 

primary seals shall include a rim-mounted secondary seal on all 

external floating roofs tanks. Vapor-mounted primary seals will 

not be accepted. 

{III) All floating roof tanks shall comply 

with the requirements under §115.112(a) (2} (A) - (F) of this title 

(relating to Control Requirements) . 

(IV) In lieu of a floating roof. tank 

emissions may be routed to: 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 19 of 34 

(-a-) a combustion device such that a 

minimum VOC destruction efficiency of 98% is achieved; or 

( -b- l a vapor recovery system such that . 

a minimum VOC recovery efficiency of 95% is achieved. 

(Vl Independent of the exemptions listed in 

this clause. if the emissions from any fixed roof tank exceed 10 

tpy of VOC or 10 tpy of sulfur compounds. the tank emissions 

shall be routed to a combustion device. vapor recovery unit. or 

equivalent method of control that meets the requirements listed 

in subclause (IV) of this clause. 

liil The VOC emissions from a natural gas glycol 

dehydration unit shall be controlled as follows. 

(I) If total uncontrolled VOC emissions are 

equal to or greater than 10 tons per year. but less than 50 tons 

per year. a minimum of 80% by weight minimum control efficiency 

shall be achieved by either operating a condenser and a separator 

(or flash tank). vapor recovery unit. combustion device. or 

equivalent control device. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 20 of 34 

(Ill If total uncontrolled VOC emissions are 

equal to or greater than 50 tpy. a minimum of: 

(-a-l 98% by weight minimum control 

efficiency shall be achieved by a combustion device or equivalent: or 

(-b-l 95% by weight minimum control 

efficiency shall be achieved by a vapor recovery system or 

equivalent. 

(Cl Inspection requirements. 

(il Owners or operators who are subject to 

subparagraph (A) (viil of this paragraph shall comply with the 

following requirements. 

(I) No component shall be allowed to have a 

VOC leak for more than 15 days after the leak is detected to 

exceed a VOC concentration greater than 10.000 parts per million 

by volume (ppmvl above background as methane. propane. or hexane. 

or the dripping or exuding of process fluid based on sight. 

smell. or sound for all components. The VOC fugitive emission 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 21 of 34 

components which contact process fluids where the VOCs have an 

aggregate partial pressure or vapor pressure of less than 0.5 

psia at 100 degrees Fahrenheit are exempt from this requirement. 

If VOC fugitive emission components are in service where the 

operating pressure is at least five kilopascals (5.0 Kpa. equivalent to 0.725 pounds per square inch (psill below ambient pressure. then these components are also exempt from this requirement 

as long as the equipment is identified in a list that is made 

available upon request by Texas Natural Resource Conservation 

Commission (TNRCCl representatives. the EPA. or any other air 

pollution control agency having jurisdiction. All piping and 

valves two inches nominal size and smaller are also exempt from 

this requirement. 

(II) All technically feasible repairs shall 

be made to repair a VOC leaking process fugitive component within 

15 days after the leak is detected. If the repair of a component 

would require a unit shutdown. the repair may be delayed until 

the next scheduled shutdown. All leaking components which cannot 

be repaired until a scheduled shutdown shall be identified for 

such repair by tagging. The TNRCC Executive Director. at his or 

her discretion. may require early unit shutdown or other appropriate action based on the number and severity of tagged leaks 

awaiting shutdown. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 22 of 34 

(III) New and reworked underground process 

pipelines containing VOCs shall contain no buried valves such 

that process fugitive emission inspection and repair is rendered 

impractical. 

(IV) To the extent that good engineering 

practice will permit. new and reworked valves and piping connections in VOC service shall be so located to be reasonably accessible for leak-checking during plant operation. Valves elevated 

more than two meters above a support surface will be considered 

nonaccessible and shall be identified in a list to be made 

available upon request. 

(V) New and reworked piping connections in 

VOC service shall be welded or flanged. Screwed connections are 

permissible only on piping smaller than two-inch diameter. No 

later than the next scheduled quarterly monitoring after initial 

installation or replacement. all new or reworked connections 

shall be gas-tested or hydraulically-tested at no less than 

normal operating pressure and adjustments made as necessary to 

obtain leak-free performance. Flanges in VOC service shall be 

inspected by visual. audible. and/or olfactory means at least 

weekly by operating personnel walk-through. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 23 of 34 

(VI) Each open-ended valve or line in VOC 

service. other than a valve or line used for safety relief. shall 

be equipped with a cap. blind flange. plug. or a second valve. 

Except during sampling. the second valve shall be closed. 

(VII) Accessible valves in VOC service shall 

be monitored by leak-checking for fugitive emissions at least 

quarterly using an approved gas analyzer. For valves equipped 

with rupture discs. a pressure gauge shall be installed between 

the relief valve and rupture disc to monitor disc integrity. All 

leaking discs shall be replaced at the earliest opportunity. but 

no later than the next process shutdown. Seal-less/leakless 

valves (including. but not limited to. welded bonnet bellows and 

diaphragm valves) and relief valves equipped with a rupture disc 

upstream or venting to a control device are exempt from monitor-

(VIII) Dual pump seals with barrier fluid at 

higher pressure than process pressure. seals degassing to vent 

control systems kept in good working order. or seals equipped 

with an automatic seal failure detection and alarm system. 

submerged pumps. or seal-less pumps (including. but not limited 

to. diaphragm. canned. or magnetic driven pumps) are exempt from 

monitoring. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 24 of 34 

(IX) All other pump and compressor seals 

emitting VOCs shall be monitored with an approved gas analyzer at 

least quarterly. 

(X) After completion of the required quarterly inspections for a period of at least two years. the operator of the oil and gas facility may request in writing to the 

TNRCC. Office of Air Quality. New Source Review Program that the 

monitoring schedule be revised based on the percent of valves 

leaking. The percent of valves leaking shall be determined by 

dividing the sum of valves leaking during current monitoring and 

valves for which repair has been delayed by the total number of 

valves subject to the requirements. This request shall include 

all data that has been developed to justify the following modifications in the monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two consecutive quarterly 

leak detection periods with the percent of valves leaking equal 

to or less than 2.0%. an owner or operator may begin to skip one 

of the quarterly leak detection periods for the valves in 

gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(-b-l After five consecutive quarterly 

leak detection periods with the percent of valves leaking equal 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 25 of 34 

to or less than 2.0%. an owner or operator may begin to skip 

three of the quarterly leak detection periods for the valves in 

gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(iil Owners or operators who are subject to 

subparagraph (A) (viii) of this paragraph shall comply with the 

following requirements. 

(I) No component shall be allowed to have a 

VOC leak for more than 15 days after the leak is found which 

exceeds a VOC concentration greater than 500 ppmv for all components except pumps and compressors and greater than 2.000 ppmv 

for pumps and compressors above background as methane. propane. 

or hexane. or the dripping or exuding of process fluid based on 

sight, smell. or sound. The VOC fugitive emission components 

which contact process fluids where the VOCs have an aggregate 

partial pressure or vapor pressure of less than 0.044 psia at 100 

degrees Fahrenheit are exempt from this requirement. If VOC 

fugitive emission components are in service where the operating 

pressure is at least five kPa (0.725 psi) below ambient pressure. 

these components are also exempt from this requirement as long as 

the equipment is identified in a list that is made available upon 

request by TNRCC representatives. the EPA. or any air pollution 

control agency having jurisdiction. All piping and valves two 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 26 of 34 

inches nominal size and smaller are also exempt from this requirement. 

(Ill All technically feasible repairs shall 

be made to repair a VOC leaking process fugitive component within 

15 days after the leak is detected. If the repair of a component 

would require a unit shutdown. the repair may be delayed until 

the next scheduled shutdown. All leaking components which cannot 

be repaired until a scheduled shutdown shall be identified for 

such repair by tagging. The Executive Director. at his or her 

discretion. may require early unit shutdown or other appropriate 

action based on the number and severity of tagged leaks awaiting 

shutdown. 

(!Ill New and reworked underground orocess 

pipelines containing VOCs shall contain no buried valves such 

that process fugitive emission inspection and repair is rendered 

impractical. 

(IV) To the extent that good engineering 

practice will permit. new and reworked valves and piping connections in VOC service shall be so located to be reasonably accessible for leak-checking during plant operation. Valves elevated 

more than two meters above a support surface will be considered 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 27 of 34 

nonaccessible and shall be identified in a list to be made 

available upon request. 

(Vl New and reworked piping connections in 

VOC service shall be welded or flanged. Screwed connections are 

permissible only on piping smaller than two-inch diameter. No 

later than the next scheduled quarterly monitoring after initial 

installation or replacement. all new or reworked connections 

shall be gas-tested or hydraulically-tested at no· less than 

normal operating pressure and adjustments made as necessary to 

obtain leak-free performance. Flanges in VOC service shall be 

inspected by visual. audible. and/or olfactory means at least 

weekly by operating personnel walk-through. 

(VI) Each open-ended valve or line in VOC 

service. other than a valve or line used for safety relief. shall 

be equipped with a cap. blind flange. plug. or a second valve. 

Except during sampling. the second valve shall be closed. 

(VII) Accessible valves in VOC service shall 

be monitored by leak-checking for fugitive emissions at least 

quarterly using an approved gas analyzer. For valves equipped 

with rupture discs. a pressure gauge shall be installed between 

the relief valve and rupture disc to monitor disc integrity. All 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 28 of 34 

leaking discs shall be replaced at the earliest opportunity. but 

no later than the next process shutdown. Seal-less/leakless 

valves (including. but not limited to. welded bonnet bellows and 

diaphragm valves) and relief valves equipped with a rupture disc 

upstream or venting to a control device are exempt from monitor-

(VIII) Dual pump seals with barrier fluid at 

higher pressure than process pressure. seals degassing to vent 

control systems kept in good working order. or seals equipped 

with an automatic seal failure detection and alarm system. 

submerged pumps. or seal-less pumps (including. but not limited 

to. diaphragm. canned. or magnetic driven pumps) are exempt from 

monitoring. 

(IX) All other pump and compressor seals 

emitting VOCs shall be monitored with an approved gas analyzer at 

least quarterly. 

(X) After completion of the required quarterly inspections for a period of at least two years. the operator of the oil and gas facility may request in writing to the 

TNRCC. Office of Air Quality. New Source Review Program that the 

monitoring schedule be revised based on the percent of valves 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Con'trol of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 29 of 34 

leaking. The percent of valves leaking shall be determined by 

dividing the sum of valves leaking during current monitoring and 

valves for which repair has been delayed by the total number of 

valves subiect to the requirements. This request shall include 

all data that have been developed to iustify the following 

modifications in the monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two consecutive quarterly 

leak detection periods with the percent of valves leaking equal 

to or less than 2.0%. an owner or operator may begin to skip one 

of the quarterly leak detection periods for the valves in 

gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(-b-) After five consecutive quarterly 

leak detection periods with the percent of valves leaking equal 

to or less than 2.0%. an owner or operator may begin to skip 

three of the quarterly leak detection periods for the valves in 

gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(XI) A directed maintenance program shall be 

used and consist of the repair and maintenance of VOC fugitive 

emission components assisted simultaneously by the use of an 

approved gas analyzer such that a minimum concentration of 

leaking VOC is obtained for each component being maintained. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 30 of 34 

Replaced components shall be re-monitored within 30 days of being 

placed back into VOC service. 

(iiil Auditory and visual checks for S02 and ~ 

leaks within the operating area shall be made every day. Immediately. but no later than eight hours upon detection of a leak. 

plant personnel shall take the following actions: 

(I) isolate the leak: 

(Ill commence repair or replacement of the 

leaking component: and 

(III) use a leak collection/containment 

system to prevent the leak until repair or replacement can be 

made if immediate repair is not possible. 

(D) Approved test methods. 

(i) An approved gas analyzer used for the VOC 

fugitive inspection and repair requirement in subparagraph 

(C) (iil (XI) of this paragraph. shall conform to requirements 

listed in 40 CFR 60.485(a) and (b). 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 31 of 34 

(iil Tutweiler analysis or equivalent shall be 

used to determine the hydrogen sulfide content as required under 

subparagraphs (A} and (E) of this paragraph. 

(iiil Proper operation of any condenser used as a 

VOC emissions control device to comply with subparagraph (A) (vl 

of this paragraph shall be tested to demonstrate compliance with 

the minimum control efficiency. Sampling shall occur within 60 

days after start-up of new or modified facilities. The permittee 

shall contact the Source and Mobile Monitoring Section. Monitoring Division 45 days prior to sampling for approval of sampling 

protocol. The appropriate regional office in the region where 

the source is located shall also be contacted 45 days prior to 

sampling to provide them the opportunity to view the sampling. 

Neither the regional office nor the Source and Mobile Monitoring 

Section personnel are required to view the testing. Sampling 

reports which comply with the provisions of the TNRCC Sampling 

Procedure Manual. Chapter 14. shall be distributed to the appropriate TNRCC regional office. any local air pollution control 

programs. and the Source and Mobile Monitoring Section. 

(E) Monitoring and recordkeeping requirements. 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 32 of 34 

(il The results of the VOC fugitive emission 

inspection and repair requirements shall be made available to the 

Executive Director or his or her designated representative upon 

request. Records. for all components. shall include: 

(I) appropriate dates; 

(Ill test methods: 

(III) instrument readings: 

(IV) repair results: and 

(Vl corrective actions. Records of flange 

inspections are not required unless a leak is detected. 

(iil Records for repairs and replacements made 

due to inspections of H,S and so, components shall be maintained. 

(iiil Records shall be kept for each production. 

processing. and pipeline tank battery or for each storage tank if 

not located at a tank battery. on a monthly basis. as follows: 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Page 33 of 34 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

(I) tank battery identification or storage 

tank identification, if not located at a tank battery; 

(II) compound stored; 

(III) monthly throughput in barrels/month; 

(IV) cumulative annual throughput. barrels/year. 

(ivl A plan shall be submitted to show how 

continuous compliance will be demonstrated for the efficiency 

requirements listed in subparagraph (B) (il (IV) of this paragraph. 

The demonstration may include. but is not limited to, monitoring 

flowrates. temperatures. or other operating parameters. 

(vl Records shall be kept on at least a monthly 

basis of all production facility flow rates (in standard cubic 

feet per dayl and total sulfur content of gas processing streams. 

Total sulfur shall be calculated in long tons per day. 

(vil All required records shall be made available 

to representatives of the TNRCC. EPA. or local air pollution 
Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

Control of Air Pollution 

by Permits for New Construction 

or Modification 

Chapter 116 

Page 34 of 34 

control agencies'upon request and be kept for at least two years. 

All required records shall be kept at the plant site unless the 

plant site is unmanned during business hours. For plant sites 

ordinarily unmanned during business hours. the records shall be 

maintained at the nearest office in the state having day-to-day 

operations control of the plant site. 

This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed 

by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's authority to 

adopt. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on February 23, 1995. 
WRITTEN AND 

ORAL TESTIMONY 
Reference Number 

W-1 

W-2 

W-3 

W-4 

W-5 

W-6 

INDEX OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY 

Submitted By 

Patrick J. Nugent, Association of Texas 

Intrastate Natural Gas Pipelines 

Eugene Lipnicky, City of Dallas 

Gerald W. Fontenot, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency 

Brandt Mannchen, GHASP 

Sarosh J. H. Manekshaw, Pennzoil Company 

Don Mustard, TMOGA 
8 

=-

Association of Texas Intrastate 

Natural Gas Pipelines 

Patrick J. Nugent 

Executive Director 

March 20, 1995 

Ms. Lisa Martin 

Office of Policy and Regulatory Development 

P. o. Box 13087 

Austin, TX 78711-3087 

Dear Ms. Martin: 

Re: Proposed Changes to 

Chapter 116, Title 30 

Environmental Quality 

The Association of Texas Intrastate Natural Gas Pipelines 

submits the following comments in reference to the above 

stated docket. 

116.14 The term "facility cluster" should not be used in the 

Permit Definition. The term facility should suffice. The 

manner in which this definition is written could cause one to 

think that similar facilities in a general area should be 

grouped together. We would suggest the following change: 

§116.14 standard Permit Definitions. Oil and gas 

facility - For the purposes of subchapter F of this 

chapter (relating to Standard Permits) only, oil and 

gas facilities shall be defined as equipment on a 

location which handle gases and liquids associated 

with the production, condition, processing, and 

pipeline transfer of fluids found in geologic 

formations beneath the earth's surface.· These oil 

and gas facilities include, but are not limited to: 

oil and gas production equipment, salt water 

disposal facility equipment, carbon dioxide 

separation facility equipment, or oil or gas 

pipeline equipment consisting of one or more tanks, 

separators, dehydration units, free water knockouts, 

gunbarrels, heater treaters, vapor recovery units, 

flares, pumps, internal combustion engines, gas 

turbines, compressors, natural gas liquid recovery units, or gas sweetening and other gas conditioning 

equipment. This definition does not include sulphur 

recovery units. 

604 West 14th Street Austin. Texas 78701 (512) 478-2871 
Ms. Lisa Martin 

March 20, 1995 

Page 2 

116.615(2) We would suggest this section read as detailed 

below: The removal, shutdown or other decrease in emissions 

at a facility should not require a notification to the TNRCC. 

This will be burdensome to industry and to the Commission. 

(2) Standard permit representations. All 

representations with regard to construction plans, 

operating procedures, and maximum emission rates in 

any registration for a standard permit become 

conditions upon which the facility or changes 

thereto shall be constructed and operated. It shall 

be unlawful for any person to vary from such 

representations if the change will affect that 

person's right to claim a standard permit under this 

section. Any change in condition such that a person 

is no longer eligible to claim a standard permit 

under this section requires proper authorization 

under §116.110 of this title (relating to 

Applicability). The owner or operator of the 

facility must notify the TNRCC of any change in 

conditions which will result in an increase in the 

discharge of the various emissions as compared to 

the representations in the original registration or 

any previous notification of a change in 

representations. Notice of changes in 

representations must be received by the TNRCC no 

later than 30 days after the change. 

115.615(5) There is no need for construction interruptions or 

construction complications to be detailed to the TNRCC. This 

is unnecessary and burdensome to industry and the TNRCC. We 

recommend the following changes: 

(5) Construction progress. Start of construction 

shall be reported to the appropriate regional office 

of the TNRCC not later than 15 working days after 

occurrence of the event. 

116.615(6) The notification to the regional office needs a 

time period attached to it. Otherwise, the way it is written 

is too ambiguous and could case some notification problems. 

(6) Start-up notification. The appropriate air 

program regional office of the Commission shall be 

notified 48 hours prior to the commencement of 

operations of the facilities authorized by the 

standard permit. 
Ms. Lisa Martin 

March 20, 1995 

Page 3 

116.615(7) To require adherence to undisclosed forms and 

standards is unnecessary. Industry should be allowed to use 

sound engineering judgment to conduct emission sampling. This 

will allow the industry flexibility in using new techniques as 

they become available. We recommend the following changes. 

(7) Sampling requirements. The standard permit 

holder is responsible for providing sampling 

facilities and conducting the sampling operations or 

contracting with an independent sampling consultant. 

All sampling techniques should conform to acceptable 

industry standard engineering practices. 

116.617(A)(i) The current standard exemption list allows 

facilities with a sulphur content of 2 LTPD to be built. Why 

is the limit so low for the general permit? The limitations 

should be the same. Therefore, this limit should be changed 

from .3 long tons of sulphur per day to 2 long tons of sulphur 

per day. 

116.617(A)(vii) We would suggest adding the following: "Only 

piping and valves larger than 2 inches in nominal size and 

larger should be included in the fugitive emissions 

estimation." This will make this section consistent with 

Section (C). The same phrase should be added to 

116.617 (A) (viii) • 

Should you have any questio , please feel free to 

contact me. 

PJN/aa 
CITY OF DALLAS 

March 30, 1995 

Lisa Martin 

Office of Policy and Regulatory Development 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, Texas 78711-3087 

8 

Re: Proposed Revisions to Chapter 116 of the State Implementation 

Plan 

Dear Ms. Martin: 

The City of Dallas Air Pollution Control section has reviewed the 

referenced changes. We wish to address the following. 

Since local agencies have an enforcement responsibility we would 

recommend that "local agency" be included in the following rules: 

116.615(2) (twice) 

116.615 (6) (twice) 

Sinceretly 

--£ z... 2!:'1 _,\_./~ ,n 

Air 

Eugene 

Pollution 

Lipni ky 

Control ~ Engineer 

Air Pollution Control Section 

dj 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH SERVICES 320 E. JEFFERSON. ROOM LL13 DALLAS. TEXAS 75203 TELEPHONE 214·948-4435 
APR-07-1995 14'21 FROM 6 air DALLAS TX. TO 85122391500 P.002 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGIONS 

1445 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 1200 

DALLAS, TX 75202·2733 

Ms. Jodena Henneke 

Director 

'IFR -7 199S 

Air Policy and Regulations Division 

Office of Air Quality 

Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, TX 78711-3087 

8 

RE: Revisions to Chapter 116 and the State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) New Standard Permit for Oil and Gas Facilities under 

New Section 116.617(3) 

Dear Ms. Henneke: 

We have reviewed the package dated March 2, 1995, concerning 

revisions to Chapter 116 and the SIP. The proposed new sections 

and amendments streamline the permit process for oil and qas facilities and establish a new standard permit for oil and gas 

facilities under new section 116.617(3). On the basis of our 

evaluation, we have no items of concern. 

This concludes our review of the proposed regulation. We 

have no objections to the State adopting this proposal as part of 

its rules and submitting it as a SIP revision. If you have any 

questions, please call Hr. Reverdie Daron Page of my staff at 

(214) 665-7222. 

Sincoroly yfl 

Chief 

~-~ont~ Air Programs Branc 
Lisa }1artin 

Office of Policy and Regulatory Develo~~ent 

TNRCC 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, Texas 78711-3087 

Dear T • .L.J1sa, 

March 23, 1.99<; 

Enclosed ~re tbe co~ments of the Galveston-Houston 

Association for Smog Prevention (GHASP) c.nncerning proposed 

Standard Permit for oil and gas facilities. 

8 

1) One concern we have is there is no regulation of possi~le 

nuisance conditions due to oil and gas facilities being placed too 

close to residences, wildlife areas, or other sensitive receptors. 

We have seen in the City Limits of Houston, Texas oil and gas wells 

drilled next to people's houses. Due to the potential for air pol-

~ution from these facilities which can generate H2S, NOx, CO, diesel 

particulates, polycyclic aromatic compounds and other air pollutants 

which are carcinogenic, mutagenic and can cause other r.ealth problems 

there needs to be a distance requirement fro~ sensitive receptors 

like residences and wildlife areas. We suggest somewhere between 

';00-1.000 feet. 

2) The TNRCC is proposing a flat fee of ~450 for each standard 

oil and gas permit. We object to this subsidy of this industry 

which should pay a capital cost of the project fee like all other 

projects. 1-.rhy are we giving this industry such a break when it is 

a powerful industry that can afford a higher fee. In addition why 

should the Public have to subsidize, with its health, breathing the 

air.pol~ution fr?M these fac~lit~es which people do n?t have a 

cho1ce 1n breath1ng. Prea~h1ng 1s not voluntary hut 1nvc1untary. 

Why does the Public have to subsidize an industry to pollute its 

air and have to breathe in this pollution involuntarily? we object! 

3) Under 116.615(1}, the last sentence, after health, add 

•welfare, environment''. We need to protect all welfare that the 

public possesses and especially need to key out the environment 

as something to protect in this regulation. 

4) Under 116.615(2}, we object to allowing the operator to 

make a change first and then tell TNRCC up to ?0 days after the 

change. We want TNRCC to be told at least 30 days before the 

change is made so if you do not agree with the change you can address the issue before it happens. As TNPCC knows it is hard to 

stop something once it has started. Do not make protection of the 

,..... P.O. Bex-3053Ye= AOU$TON~ TE~___!=l7249-0SS1-
Public harder than it already is. 

Also under {4), define "reasonable time" This is too subjective 

and will ensure that inequitable enforcement occurs because each 

region will define what reasonable time is differently. Under (6) 

TNRCC must be notified at least 30 days before start-up and must 

make every effort to be at the start-up. In addition under (7), 

Sampling requirements, TNRCC must be notified at least 30 days before sampling so it can have the opportunity to have a representative present. In addition under each of these rules you need to also 

notify the local air pollution agency an equal amount of time ahead 

of the proposed action. 

Under (9), the records should be kept at least 5 years to 

coincide with having enough data to do a thorough compliance 

review when renewal time occurs. Again, under (11), reasonable 

times needs to be defined. 

5) Under 116.617(3)(A)(iii), you need to require a rupture disk 

be placed before the safety relief valve to reduce fugitive emissions 

Also under (x), an infrared monitor should be required so that actual 

emissions data can be obtained. 

Under (B)(i), 5,000 gallons should be the limit to ensure 

that as many sources as possible have controls on them to minimizE 

emissions. Also under (IV)(-a-), you say destruction efficiency here 

but under (II)(-a-) on page 20, you say control efficiency when 

speaking about a combustion device. You need to be consistent. Whicl 

is it? In addition under both of these I am not in favor of allowin~ 

vapor recovery systems to have 3% less control efficiency. You need 

to require that that 3% be made up some other way so that these two 

control devices are indeed equivalent. 

On page 22, under (II), define •technically feasible''· You 

always say that they phrases have the meaning normally given in 

the pollution control field. But what is that normal definition. 

I would appreciate a copy of the definition for technically feasible. 

Also under (IV) on page 22 what does ''reasonably accessible" mean? 

I do not support automatically allowing values more than two meters 

high as being "nonaccessible". The company must prove they are nonaccessible. 

Under (V) on page 23, require the records be kept that document 

a visual, audible, and olfac-tory inspection was made weekly by 

personnel in a walk-through. Under (VII) on page 24 the rupture diskE 

should have some sort of pressure gage and records kept to ensure 

that leaks do not develop. 

On page 27, under (II), define ''technically feasible'' and 

under (III) define ''rendered impractical" and under (IV) define 

"reasonably accessible''. Again I do not support a nonaccessible 

designation unless the company can prove it. Also under (VII) on 

page 29 the rupture disk needs to have a pressure gage installed 

to ensure no leak develops. On page 30, (XI), this is needed under 

{C)(ii) also. 
On page 33, under (i), you need to add the local air pollution 

agencies too. 

On page 34, under (iv), define ''continuous compliance•. 

If this already has an accepted definiton in the field of air 

pollution I would like a copy of this definition. 

On page 35, (vi), I want records kept for five years to give a 

clearer determination of continuous compliance. 

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this proposal. 

I!J~ Brandt Mannchen 

GHASP 

1705 Michigan #3 

Houston, Texas 77006 

H713-521-9534, W713-640-4313 
~~ C' 

PENNZOIL PLACE • P 0 BOX 2967 • HOUSTON, TEXAS 77252·2967 • (7'JQ..546-8516 ... ,-,~ . ~ 

8 ~G<~ ·:0 . "'/. 

April7, 1995 ~~~ ,:_:, ~ SAROSH J. H. MANEKSHAW "9/ ~ • <9r. () -

Envtronmental, Safety ~A~ ~Q <.J 

and Health Allatra ~ 

<: 9-

~cf Ms. Lisa Martin CERTIFIED MAIL ~ 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Office of Policy and Regulatory Development #Z 769968247 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, Texas 78711-3087 

SUBJECT: Proposed Rules Relating to Oil and Gas Facility Permits for 

Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification 

20 TexReg 1506; March 3, 1995 

Dear Ms. Martin: 

Pennzoil Company is a natural resources company engaged, with its subsidiaries, 

in the exploration, production, refining, sales, and distribution of petroleum and petroleum-based 

products. Pennzoil Exploration and Production Company (PEPCO) conducts oil and gas 

exploration and production activities in Texas and is understandably interested in changes to air 

permits affecting oil and gas facilities. 

Pennzoil appreciates the opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process, and 

we arc submitting the following comments on proposed rules relating to standard air permits for 

oil and gas facilities. In general, Pennzoil supports the comments submitted by Texas MidContinent Oil and Gas Association (TMOGA). Pennzoil supports rules that create standard 

permits for oil and gas facilities because they simplify and accelerate the permit process while 

maintaining protection of the public health and environment However, several sections of the 

proposed rule could be made more workable with minor changes. Pennzoil's suggestions for 

each section arc detailed below: 

§ 116.617 Standard Permits List. 

(3) Installation and/or modification of oil and gas facilities. 

(A) Emission Specifications. 

(iv) The last sentence "emissions from engines or turbines shall be limited to the 

amounts found in §116.2ll(a)(1)ofthis title (relating to Standard Exemption List)" is redundant, 

and Pennzoil recommends that the wording be deleted. 

(vii) and (viii) Pennzoil generally supports TMOGA's comments on these 

sections related to emission control requirements. 

We believe that a non-directed leak detection program should only be applicable 

for oil and gas facilities with total VOC emissions exceeding 25 tpy and total fugitive VOC 
TX- Oil and Gas Facility Air Permits 

April 7, 1995 

Page 2 PENNZOIL ~i>!l't' 

·' 

emissions exceeding 20 tpy. The vast majority of oil and gas facilities are located in rural areas. 

Requiring a leak detection program for these small, often remote facilities is burdensome and 

costly. Additionally, a directed maintenance program should not be required for any oil and gas 

facility covered by this standard permit. 

Pennzoil suggests that the proposed wording of sections (vii) and (viii) be deleted 

and combined into one section (vii) as follows: 

"(vii) If total VOC emissions exceed 25 tpy and total fugitive VOC emissions 

exceed 20 tpy, equipment will be inspected and repaired according to section (C)(i)." 

(B) Control Requirements. 

(I) The volume of storage tanks requiring emissions controls is listed in gallons; 

however, because volumes in the oil and gas industry are typically expressed in barrels, Pennzoil 

suggests that the volume be expressed in barrels. 

The proposed threshold levels for tank control requirements are entirely too 

stringent. The proposed rules require controls if the maximum short term vapor pressure of the 

stored product is greater than 0.5 psia. The preamble of the proposed rule states that the specific 

conditions arc written to ensure the application of Best Available Control Technology (BACT); 

however, our understanding of the current TNRCC BACT policy is that vent controls are 

required for storage tanks with a nominal capacity greater than 40,000 gallons containing 

products with a maximum short term vapor pressure greater than 1.5 psi a. 

TNRCC Regulations: "Chapter 115.112 - Control of Air Pollution From Volatile 

Organic Compounds - Table II( a) Required Control Devices for Storage Tanks for Crude Oil 

and Condensate" requires no emission controls for storage tanks of any nominal capacity 

containing a compound with a true vapor pressure less than 1.5 psia. These regulations were 

written to ensure that sources in the greatest ozone nonattainment areas would substantially 

reduce VOC emissions. Yet, even under these conditions, the state chose to establish threshold 

values of 1.5 psia and 40,000 gallons. Furthermore, the EPA NSPS Kb regulations and EPA 

CTG requirements also reference 40,000 gallons and 1.5 psia as thresholds for emissions 

controls. 

The proposed standard permit requirement for emission controls for compounds 

with vapor pressures greater than 0.5 psia is inconsistent with other policies of the TNRCC, and 

would unnecessarily more tightly regulate the oil and gas industry. Additionally, if the proposed 

rules are adopted as written, they would result in State regulations that were much more 

stringent than Federal EPA regulations. Pennzoil suggests that a vapor pressure of 1.5 psia is 

appropriate and protective of health and the environment. 

Pennzoil requests that section (3)(B)(i) be amended to read: 

"Floating roofs or equivalent controls shall be required on all new or modified 

storage tanks, unless the tank is less than 1000 barrels in size or the vapor pressure of the 

compound to be stored in the tank is less than 1.5 psla at maximum short-term storage 

temperature." 
TX - Oil and Gas Facility Air Permits 

April 7, 1995 

Page 3 

General Comments 

PENNZOIL C~i>il'\1 ,:'-

Existing Exemptions: In the preamble, there is no specific mention of the 

current Standard Exemption program. Standard Exemptions are currently being employed at a 

number of appropriate oil and gas facilities. All Standard Exemptions now applicable to oil and 

gas facilities should remain available. Pennzoil requests that the preamble specifically mention 

that the proposed rules will not affect the eligibility of existing air Emission Standard 

exemptions. 

In summary, Pennzoil supports the introduction of standard permits for oil and 

gas facilities. The suggestions listed below would improve the proposed rule: 

•Require leak detection programs only if the total VOC emissions exceed 25 tpy 

and total fugitive VOC emissions exceed 20 tpy, 

•Amend the required control threshold for vapor pressure of stored compounds to 

1.5 psia and the storage tank volume to 1000 barrels to be consistent with existing state and 

federal regulations and TNRCC policy, 

•Clarify that the standard permit will not change eligibility for Standard 

Exemptions. 

Again, Pennzoil appreciates the opportunity to participate in the rulemaking 

process for standard oil and gas facility air permits. We hope that these comments will assist the 

TNRCC in developing effective and reasonable oil and gas facility permit regulations. 

Sincerely, 
APR 07 '95 03:09PM APC EHS CPT&Sl,HOU 

ADDITIONAL TMOGA COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

APRU.. 7, 1995 

30 TAC §116.14, §116.610, §116.615, AND §116.617 

STANDARD OIL AND GAS FACll.ITY PERMIT 

Tens Register 1506: March 3, 1995 

1. TMOGA believes that internal company guidelines affecting facility 

locations, and specific TNRCC policies regarding H2S and other potential 

air conta=inant~ are ~ufficient to preclude imposing specific di~tance 

requirement~ with regard to oil and qa~ facilities that would be ~ubject to 

the propo~ed Standard Oil and Ga~ Permit. 

2. TMOGA continues to support the proposed language contained in §116.125 

(2). 

3. The TNRCC needs to retain the right to determine on a project-byproject basis, as outlined in §116.115 (4), what i~ considered a 

"reasonable timen for a project to be completed. The length of time to 

complete a project i~ hiqhly dependent upon physical location, project ~ize, and project type. These factors mu~t be considered in e~tablishing 

construction parameters. TMOGA supports the language, as currently 

written, in §116.115 (4). 

4. TMOGA continues to support its' earlier comment~ submitted on April 5, 

1995 concerning §116.617(3) (A) (iii). In addition, 'I'MOGA opposes any 

language which would require the installation of rupture disk prior to the ~afety relief valve. Many companies maintain safety policie~ which expre~~ly prohibit thi~ type of installation becau~e of the possible safety 

hazard. Debri~ from a ruptured di~k could lodge in the safety valve 

causing it to malfunction. 

5. TMOGA continues to support it~· previous comment~ ~ubmitted on April 5, 

1995 concerning §116. 611(3) (A) (z), this includes the TNRCC language which 

con~iders an infrared monitor to be equivalent to a thermocouple for flame 

detection purpo~es. However, TMOGA i~ opposed to any requirement that an 

infrared monitor be the preferred detection source. This would impose 

unnecessary cost liabilities at many remote locations. 
INDEX OF ORAL TESTIMONY 

Reference Number Submitted by 

0-1 Don Mustard, TMOGA 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

Before the 

TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO 

30 TAC CHAPTER 116 

AND THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION 

PLAN 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X DOCKET NO. APR-080 

X 

X 

1 

9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

10 PUBLIC HEARING 

11 APRIL 5, 1995 

12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

BE IT REMEMBERED that the above matter came 

on for hearing on the 5th day of April 1995 beginning at 

10 a.m before the Honorable Lisa Martin, Hearings 

Examiner, at the Texas Natural Resource Conservation 

Commission, 12118 North IH-35, Park 35 Technology 

Center, Building E, Room 201A, Austin, Texas, whereupon 

the following proceedings were had: 

ORIGINAL 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 5, 1995 

MORNING SESSION: 10 A.M. 

* * * * * 

2 

MS. MARTIN: Okay, good morning. I 

would like to welcome you to this public hearing 

being conducted by the Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission. If there's anyone in the 

audience who has not yet registered, please do so at 

this time and please register whether you plan to 

present testimony or not. If you're not familiar 

with the proposed changes, handout materials are 

available at the registration table. 

My name is Lisa Martin. I'm in the office 

of policy and regulatory development, and I will be 

serving as your hearings officer this morning. Our 

court reporter is Evelyn Roof, and with me at the 

table are Tammy Villarreal with the TNRCC new source 

review program and Sam Wells with the office of 

policy and regulatory development. 

The purpose of this hearing is to solicit 

comments and testimony from the public regarding 

proposed revisions to Chapter 116 and the state 

implementation plan. At this time those of you who 

intend to present testimony, please stand to be 

sworn in by the court reporter and raise your right 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

hand. 

3 

(All witnesses present in the 

hearing room were duly sworn. 

MS. MARTIN: Okay, at this time, we have 

one commentor registered, and it's Don Mustard. If 

you would, please stand, and you can remain at your 

seat, and please spell your name for the court 

reporter. 

MR. MUSTARD: Okay, do you want me to 

give my testimony? Is that what you're asking? 

MS. MARTIN: Yes. 

MR. MUSTARD: My name is Don Mustard, 

M-u-s-t-a-r-d, and I represent the Texas 

Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association, and at this 

time I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the 

proposed standard oil and gas permit and would like 

to express my appreciation to the TNRCC and to Tammy 

for the work that has been done in preparing this 

draft standard permit. 

I would like to highlight some of the 

primary concerns that TMOGA has with the proposed 

oil and gas permit. The full extent of the TMOGA 

comments are contained in the written document I 

will turn in at this public hearing. First, TMOGA 

would like to confirm that the TNRCC has no 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

4 

intention of proposing the elimination of the 

standard exemptions now applicable to oil and gas 

facility construction and modification. The 

preamble of the final draft of this proposed 

standard permit contained the following sentence, 

"With the addition of the oil and gas standard 

permit, a third form of authorization will be 

available in addition to Subchapter B, i.e., new 

source review permit, and Subchapter C, i.e., 

standard exemptions." This sentence was deleted 

from the preamble when it was published in the Texas 

Register. All of the TMOGA recommendations with 

regard to the standard permit presume that the 

various standard exemptions now applicable to oil 

and gas production operations will remain available 

to our members. 

Second, TMOGA requests a minor clarification 

of the definition of oil and gas facility and would 

like to see a definition of sulfur recovery unit in 

proposed Section 116.14. The suggested definition 

in our written comments for sulfur recovery unit is 

intended to clearly distinguish sulfur recovery 

units from gas sweetening units. 

Third, TMOGA would like to see Section 

116.617(3) (A) (i) clarified to ensure that this 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

5 

emissions specification prohibits the release to the 

atmosphere of more than 0.3 long tons per day of 

total sulfur. As currently proposed, the language 

could be interpreted to mean that the produced gas 

itself could contain no more than 0.3 long tons per 

day of sulfur. This would essentially eliminate the 

ability of many facilities to use this proposed 

permit. TMOGA suggests the language be clarified to 

state that venting or flaring more than 0.3 long 

tons per day of total sulfur shall not be allowed. 

This would prevent any confusion in this regard. 

Fourth, TMOGA requests that the TNRCC limit 

the applicability of required VOC fugitive emission 

controls proposed in section 116.167(3) (A) (vii) and 

(viii) to properties where total VOC emissions 

exceed 25 tons per year and fugitives exceed 20 tons 

per year. In addition, delete requirements for use 

of the 28VHP fugitive emission control standard in 

(viii) and renumber the remainder of Section 

116.617(A) accordingly. Proposed language for these 

changes are included in the written comments. 

TMOGA has major concerns with regard to 

(vii) and (viii). The proposed 10 tons per year VOC 

applicability threshold would ~mpose operationally 

burdensome fugitive emission controls without regard 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

6 

to the control costs and air quality impacts of 

fugitive emissions from the majority of the 

regulated facilities. Most oil and gas facilities, 

with the exception of natural gas processing plants, 

are relatively small, in rural locations, are widely 

scattered and typically unmanned making application 

of fugitive emission controls especially costly. 

Fugitive emission controls should not be required 

for such relatively minor emission levels. 

The small natural gas processing plants to 

which this permit might be applicable are already 

required by new source performance standards to 

apply fugitive VOC emission controls for new 

construction and modification making this provision 

unnecessary for those facilities. TMOGA is 

particularly opposed to any requirement in the 

standard permit for implementation of 28VHP leak 

detection and repair program. There is no 

conceivable need for so stringent a program in this 

permit. Larger oil and gas production and 

processing facilities that are subject to PSD are 

not eligible to use the standard permit. We 

strongly urge that such a program not be considered 

BACT for oil and gas production operations. 

We have previously commented to the TNRCC on 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

7 

the impracticability of meeting a standard in oil 

and gas production operations that requires repair 

of components with a VOC leak rate of only 500 parts 

per million by volume. Even more important, a 

requirement for a directed maintenance program and 

remonitoring of components within 30 days of being 

placed back in VOC service may be practical for 

plant operators whose facilities are in relative 

close proximity to each other. However, it would 

create a very great hardship for operators in remote 

and/or widely scattered facilities. We believe that 

any small incremental reduction in VOC fugitives 

attributable to this level of control would not be 

cost effective for oil and gas operations. 

TMOGA does not believe that many operators 

are likely to avail themselves of this standard 

permit when to do so would require application of 

28VHP standards to their facilities. 

Fifth, TMOGA suggests that Section 

116.617(3) (B) (i) be revised to, A, clarify that 

these control requirements do not apply to 

pressurized tanks, and, B, raise the exemption level 

for floating roofs or equivalent controls to tanks 

of up to 40,000 gallons in size. TMOGA strongly 

concurs with the proposal to provide alternatives to 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

8 

the use of floating roofs as control devices for 

tanks in oil and gas operations. We continue to 

urge the commission to exempt tanks larger than the 

25,000 gallons from these control requirements and 

specifically recommend that any tanks whose nominal 

size is not greater than 42,000 gallons be exempted. 

Forty-two thousand gallon tanks are commonly used in 

oil and gas production operations. 

Finally, TMOGA requests that Section 

116.617(3) (C) (ii) be revised to clarify that it is 

not necessary to visit a facility every day for the 

sole purpose of checking for sour gas leaks and to 

delete a provision that has no apparent 

applicability to gaseous leaks. Many oil and gas 

facilities with relatively low production rates, 

especially those in remote areas, are not visited by 

operating personnel every day. In many cases, the 

increased operating costs associated with daily 

visits would make such marginal properties 

uneconomic to operate. 

Again, I work like to thank the TNRCC for 

all their work on this draft permit and for the 

opportunity to comment at this public hearing. 

Thank you. 

MS. MARTIN: Thank you, Mr. Mustard. Is 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

9 

there anyone else in the audience who wishes to 

present testimony at this time? Okay, I would like 

to point out that the end of the comment period for 

this rule making is April 7, 1995 at 4 p.m. 

Thank you for attending this public hearing. 

I now declare the hearing closed. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS 

COUNTY OF TRAVIS 

* * * * * 

HEARING ADJOURNED 

* * * * * 

REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 

X 

X 

17 I, Evelyn Roof, certified shorthand reporter 

18 for the state of Texas, do hereby certify that the above 

19 and foregoing nine pages constitutes a full, true and 

20 correct transcript of the proceedings had before the 

21 Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission on April 

22 5, 1995, at Austin, Texas in the hearing relating to the 

23 matter of Proposed Revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 116 and 

24 the State Implementation Plan. 

25 I further certify that a stenographic record 
10 

1 was made by me at the time of the hearing and said 

2 stenographic notes were thereafter reduced to 

3 computerized transcription under my direction and 

4 control. 

5 Witness my hand this, the 17th day of April 

6 1995. 

7 

8 

9 

Evelyn R f 

10 

11 

12 

13 

Certified Shorth Reporter 

14 My Certification Expires: 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

December 31, 1995 

State of Texas 

(Certificate No. 2845) 
Oil & Gas Standard Permits - Chapter 116 

Public Hearing Registration 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

Location: Austin Date: April 5' 1995 

N arne & Mailing Address Representing Making Oral 

Presentation 

(circle one) . ;) 1'-1 ~ f fu-v cA. ( A ...... o(J (_,_,,pc-..--~·., J./c"'\. ) -, noc,A 

p o. a"" 3o"r<. @) No 

H<!J~,~-o., T~ 7 7;;J..S-J '3()9-z. 

c~ \.-.\A-V\ s AQv.\,_ f':. 6/\'S ® I 00 "-\ E 1...-=P '\10 ""\ \)Qo Yes 

SM 1'2:.2-t<. 

\ 

~~~ 

Skr 

oo l'-112 

~"Z..lfc, 

~~ L\ l-o ..l;T t=o AGN..\"-"" ~ Yes ~ 

("\arc- Pk, \ \ 1\:> _s 

p.u. 

\-l"''"t-.AA 

f.>""-

..,-, 

ll '0 <? 

II .1.$\- II'?.~ ~;U\A.. Yes ~ 

fRrll.:I c L o Glb:£6-0 @ A/0~ ou~ c._ myself Yes 

I 

Yes No 

Yes No 

Yes No 

-

Yes No 

Yes No 

Yes No 

Yes No 
EVALUATION OF 

TESTIMONY 
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

To: 

From: 

Subject: 

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 

Commissioners Date: July 7, 1995 

Beverly Hartsock, Deputy Director ~~ Office of Policy and Regulatory Developmen~vConsideration for adoption of new 30 TAC Chapter 116, 

Subchapter F, concerning Standard Permits. If 

approved, the standard permit would streamline air 

quality permit processing for oil and gas facility 

applications. The change would allow faster review of 

certain production facilities by standardizing best 

available technology. The proposal was published in 

the Texas Register on March 3, 1995 (20 TexReg 1506). 

The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission proposes to 

adopt new 30 TAC Sections 116 .14, concerning Standard Permit 

Definitions and new Section 116.615, concerning General Conditions 

and amendments to Section 116.610, concerning Applicability and 

Section 116.617, concerning Standard Permit List. 

The proposed adoption of the oil and gas standard permit would add 

a third alternative for submitting and approving new source 

construction permit applications for oil and gas facilities. In 

the past, air quality permits would be subjected to Section 116.111 

permit review. A second alternative includes standard exemptions 

such as Standard Exemption 66, which excludes full Section 116.111 

permit review if emission levels fall below stringent de minimis 

levels and meet other operational criteria. A third alternative, 

this oil and gas standard permit, provides an avenue for rapid 

permit review for facilities which are not eligible for a standard 

exemption. The standard permit allows for higher de minimis 

pollution levels without compromising Best Available Control 

Technology (BACT) requirement, or protection of public health, 

welfare, and the environment and, at the same time, eliminates the 

need for permit review as otherwise required under Section 116.111. 

This will create incentives for mid-sized oil and gas extraction 

and pipeline transmission industries in Texas to expand. 

Exploratory drilling operations are not affected by this rule 

change. 

After careful consideration of comments submitted during the April 

5, 1995 public hearing and in subsequent meetings with industry 

representatives, staff have incorporated BACT to protect public 

health and welfare and flexibility for the affected industries. 

The pollutants of concern include volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, 

particulate matter, and hydrogen sulfide. Various BACT design 

measures apply to flares, VOC collection systems, condensers, 
Page Two July 7, 1995 

tanks, vents, oil and water separators, pumps, valves, and other 

sources. Significant controversy is not expected on this rule 

modification. 

The rule also reorganizes definitions, general conditions, and 

applicability so that additional standard permits can be added, 

such as the proposed municipal solid waste standard permit, and so 

that the text is clearer in its intent. 

A total of six commenters presented written testimony representing 

industry and an environmental group. One commenter from industry 

presented oral tesimony. 
EVALUATION OF TESTIMONY 

The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC or 

commission) adopts new §116.14, concerning Standard Permit 

Definitions and new §116.615, concerning General Conditions. 

Also, the TNRCC adopts amendments to §116.610, concerning Applicability and §116.617, concerning Standard Permit List. Sections 

116.14, 116.615, and 116.617 are adopted with changes to the 

proposed text as published in the March 3, 1995, issue of the 

Texas Register (20 TexReg 1506). Section 116.610 is adopted 

without changes and will not be republished. 

The new sections and amendments streamline the permit process for 

oil and gas facilities and establish a new standard permit for 

oil and gas facilities under new §116.617(3). Section 116.14 

adds a definition for the term "oil and gas facility" and "offplant receptor." Section 116.610 is modified to delete the 

General Conditions and retitle the section to "Applicability." 

Section 116.615 includes the general conditions now located in 

§116.610 and adds applicable general conditions found in Subchapter B, concerning applicable new source review permits. Section 

116.617 contains the standard permit list and adds a new standard 

permit for oil and gas facilities. 

A public hearing was held in Austin on April 5, 1995. Six 

commenters submitted written testimony on the proposal and one 

1 
commenter presented oral testimony. The Galveston-Houston 

Association for Smog Prevention (GHASP) , the Texas Mid-Continent 

Oil and Gas Association (TMOGA), the City of Dallas, the Association of Texas Intrastate Natural Gas Pipelines (Intrastate), and 

the Pennzoil Company made objections or recommendations. The 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) submitted a 

letter stating that it has no issues of major concern. 

A general comment from the TMOGA and Intrastate was that there 

are existing provisions for permitting oil and gas facilities 

such as with the standard exemption program, and that today's 

standard permit should be a new, third alternative. Existing 

wording seems to imply that the oil and gas standard permit is a 

replacement for Standard Exemption Number 66. 

A key passage which clarified the relationship to the standard 

exemption program was inadvertently deleted from the Texas 

Register proposal. This standard permit is now a third alternative. 

The GHASP did not address specific rule language, but proposed 

that a distance requirement of perhaps 500 to 1,000 feet should 

be added to reduce potential air pollution impacts from oil and 

gas facilities. Another commenter disagreed with having distance 

requirements in this standard permit, since the TNRCC and industry policies are sufficient. 

2 
There is an existing TNRCC regulation, §101.4 (concerning Nuisance), which prohibits the discharge of air contaminants in 

concentrations and duration which would be injurious to or which 

would adversely affect human health or welfare, animal life, 

vegetation, or property, or which would interfere with the normal 

use and enjoyment of animal life, vegetation, or property. Best 

Available Control Technology (BACT) and impacts considerations 

(including off-plant receptors) were incorporated into the rule 

development. 

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emission limits in this rule take into 

consideration the distance to the nearest off-plant receptor to 

ensure consistency with the property line standards in 30 TAC 

§112.3(a) and §112.31 (concerning control of sulfur dioxide); 

therefore, distance requirements have been adequately addressed. 

The GRASP also objected to the flat fee of $450 for each oil and 

gas standard permit on the grounds that this fee is equivalent to 

a subsidy for industry. 

Staff time and manpower to evaluate and process a standard permit 

application are significantly less than the resources required to 

review and process a formal Subchapter B permit application. The 

intent of a standard permit is to simplify and accelerate the 

permit review process for facilities which can pre-qualify to a 

relatively stringent level of control. Standard permit review is 

3 
streamlined because BACT measures and pollution impacts are 

incorporated into the standard permit eligibility criteria so 

that the extent of the permit review consists only of ensuring 

the facility meets all conditions of the standard permit. 

The TNRCC staff maintains that a $450 permit application fee is 

consistent with the existing fee structure and is appropriate for 

the resources required to review and process a standard permit 

application. 

The TMOGA requested that the TNRCC consider deleting §116.610(d)-

(g), concerning applicability, since they appear to be redundant 

to the general conditions under §116.615(1)-(3) and (9). 

The TNRCC staff agrees that the intent of the rule revision was 

to delete the outdated general conditions in §ll6.610(d)-(g) and 

create a new §116.615 entitled "General Conditions." However, 

the final rule cannot be modified because in the proposal, 

subsections (d)-{g) were proposed with no changes. Therefore, 

subsections (d)-(g) must be deleted in a future proposal. 

Intrastate and the TMOGA offered changes to the definition of the 

term "oil and gas facility" in §116.14, concerning Standard 

Permit Definitions. The TMOGA suggested using the term "water 

injection" in place of ''salt water disposal," and adding a 

definition for "sulfur recovery unit" to distinguish sulfur 

4 
recovery units from natural gas sweetening units. The new 

definition for sulfur recovery units would be "a process device 

whose primary purpose is to recover elemental sulfur from acid 

gas; a process device that incidentally recovers minor quantities 

of elemental sulfur during natural gas sweetening shall not be 

considered a sulfur recovery unit." In Intrastate's opinion, the 

term ''facility cluster'' is misleading and should be clarified to 

include special types of equipment. 

The TNRCC has no objection to replacing the term "salt water 

disposal" with "water injection," adding a definition for sulfur 

recovery unit, and replacing the term "facility cluster" with 

"facility." These changes have been incorporated into §116.14 

relating to definitions. However, the TNRCC does not agree with 

the proposed definition for a sulfur recovery unit. The TMOGA 

does not consider a "Lo-Cat" unit (a proprietary device name) as 

a form of sulfur recovery and takes the position that the sulfur 

recovered by a Lo-Cat unit is incidental. Instead, the TNRCC 

considers a Lo-Cat unit to be a true form of sulfur recovery, and 

retains the original language to exclude all sulfur recovery 

units. 

Intrastate, the GHASP, and the City of Dallas disagreed with 

paragraphs in §116.615, concerning General Conditions. They 

stated that in paragraph (1), the terms "welfare and environment" 

should be added to the general purpose of protecting health and 

5 
property. In paragraph (2) , the GHASP objected to the 30-day 

time window to notify the TNRCC of changes in representations of 

the permit. Intrastate objected to the notification requirements 

in the case of plant shutdowns or decreases in production levels. 

The City of Dallas and the GHASP stated that paragraphs (2) and 

(6) should include notification of local air quality agencies in 

changes of representation and upon start-up. In paragraph (4), 

the GHASP stated that the term "reasonable time" should be better 

defined because it is too subjective; another commenter supported 

the more general terms. In paragraph (5), Intrastate objected to 

notification requirements upon changes in construction scheduling. The GHASP also desired clarification of time periods 

specified in paragraphs (6) and (7), relating to start-up notification and sampling requirements. Finally, the GHASP requested 

that information in paragraph (9), relating to recordkeeping, 

should be maintained by the plant operator for at least five 

years, instead of two years as proposed. 

Responses follow the order of comments presented. The TNRCC 

feels that the concept of "welfare" is adequately treated in 

paragraph (1) and is consistent with the General Rules (30 TAC 

§101.4). No change is needed to §116.615(2), regarding the 

notification to the TNRCC within 30 days after the change, 

because a facility may remain eligible for the standard permit 

following changes; therefore, post-change notification is acceptable, but the rule wording has been modified to clarify this 

6 
assumption. The TNRCC does not agree with Intrastate's request 

to exclude notifications in the cases of removal, shutdown, or 

other decreases in emissions, because the current wording of 

§116.615(2) specifically states that notification to the TNRCC of 

changes in conditions is required if the facility is no longer 

eligible for a standard permit or if the change in conditions 

will result in a change in method of control, a change in character of emissions, or an increase in discharge of emissions. 

Notification to other air pollution agencies having jurisdiction 

has been added in paragraphs (2) and (6). The TNRCC has decided 

to retain the term "reasonable time" in paragraph (4), since 

"reasonable time" for project completion will vary depending on 

each project's size and complexity. In response to the comment 

regarding construction progress in paragraph (5), it is necessary 

to monitor start of construction and construction interruptions 

to enforce the requirements of paragraph (4). The TNRCC staff 

believes that it is not necessary to specify a minimum time for 

advance notification to the regional offices prior to start-up 

and sampling of facilities which are eligible for a standard 

permit, since the facilities are smaller sources of emissions. 

The TNRCC allocates staff resources to larger emission sources 

which are not eligible for the standard permit; therefore, the 

TNRCC feels that notification prior to start-up and sampling in 

paragraphs (6) and (7) without a minimum time specified is 

adequate. 

7 
The TNRCC also disagrees with Intrastate's request to remove the 

requirement of contacting the TNRCC Office of Air Quality prior 

to sampling to obtain the proper data and forms and to get 

approval for the sampling method selected. These requirements 

are necessary to maintain consistency and to ensure sampling is 

conducted properly. Lastly, the TNRCC disagrees with the GRASP's 

request to require five years of data for demonstration of 

compliance in §116.615(9) and §116.617(3) (E) (viii). The TNRCC 

feels that the requirement to maintain information on file for at 

least two years is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with 

standard permit representations and is consistent with existing 

rules and current permit requirements. A public compliance file 

is maintained at the TNRCC Austin office for periods much longer 

than two years and may be viewed upon request. 

The TMOGA, Intrastate, the GHASP, and Pennzoil suggested revisions to §116. 617 (3) (A), concerning emission specifications. 

Several commenters desired the TNRCC to adopt some specific oil 

and gas industry terminology. The TMOGA disagreed with the 

wording concerning releases of more than 0.3 long tons of sulfur 

per day by specifying vents or flares in clause (i), because the 

limits apply to venting or flaring, not the content of the 

petrochemicals themselves. Intrastate desired that the standard 

permit limitation on sulfur emissions should be expanded to two 

(2.0) long tons per day to be consistent with the applicable 

standard exemption for oil and gas facilities. The TMOGA sug8 
gested that the proper term should be ''routed" instead of •vented'' in clause (ii) . In clause (iii) , the phrase "failure of 

utilities• should be replaced with •emergency relief of system 

pressure.• The GHASP desired that rupture discs should be placed 

ahead of any safety relief valves; TMOGA disagreed with this 

design because industry safety policies expressly prohibit this 

practice. Finally, clause (vi) should be revised to clarify that 

a 40 million British thermal unit per hour heat input threshold 

relates to maximum heat input during operation instead of being a 

design parameter. 

The TNRCC agrees to some minor changes in terminology contained 

in §116.617(3) (A) (i) and (ii) as recommended by the TMOGA. 

The TNRCC staff disagrees with the recommendation by Intrastate 

to change the sulfur limit to include facilities which condition 

produced gas up to 2.0 long tons per day of sulfur. While it is 

true that Standard Exemption Number 66 includes sulfur recovery 

units which condition produced gas containing less than two long 

tons per day of sulfur compounds, this standard permit does not 

include sulfur recovery units. Further, sulfur which is not 

recovered is emitted to the atmosphere and is limited by Standard 

Exemption 66 to a maximum of 25 tons per year of sulfur dioxide 

and 4.0 pounds per hour of total sulfur compounds. 

9 
Regarding the discussion of rupture disks in §116.617(3) (A) (iii), 

the TNRCC disagrees with the recommendation to require rupture 

discs on safety relief valves, because debris from a ruptured 

disc could lodge in the safety valve causing it to malfunction 

and result in the loss of a vessel. Section 

116.617 (3) (C) (i) (VII) and §116. 617 (3) (C) (ii) (VII) require that 

accessible valves be leak-checked for fugitive emissions at least 

quarterly with an approved gas analyzer. These same subclauses 

allow the company the option of installing rupture discs on 

valves which are not monitored. 

Regarding §116.617(3) (A) (iii) and emergency procedures, the TNRCC 

disagrees with the TMOGA's recommendation to replace "failure of 

utilities" with "emergency relief of system pressure," since this 

would likely exempt all relief valves from minimum vent height 

requirements. 

The TNRCC disagrees with the TMOGA's recommendation to base the 

oxides of nitrogen (NOx) limitation on the maximum heat input 

during operation as opposed to by design specification. The 

intent of this subparagraph is to ensure that combustion units 

with a design maximum heat input greater than 40 million British 

thermal units (MMBtu) per hour will not exceed 0.06 pounds of NOx 

per MMBtu. If based on heat input during actual operation, 

combustion units with design capacities greater than 40 MMBtu 

could be able to operate at or below 40 MMBtu and emit more than 

10 
0.06 pounds of NO. per MMBtu. There would be no guarantee that 

the unit would be able to achieve the 0.06 pounds per MMBtu NO. 

limitation if the heat input of the unit was increased above 40 

MMBtu. 

Pennzoil offered an editorial change in §116.617(3) (A) (iv) to 

delete the phrase "relating to the Standard Permit list" because 

it appears to be redundant. 

The TNRCC does not agree with the Pennzoil comment that the last 

sentence of §116.617(3) (A) (iv) is redundant and should be deleted. The current language is not redundant, since §116.2ll(a) (1) 

of this title contains applicable emission limits which are not 

listed in Standard Exemption Number 6. 

Many commenters submitted major comments on process and fugitive 

emissions limits contained in §116.617(3) (A) (vii) (ix). The TMOGA 

and Pennzoil requested that the uncontrolled process emission 

limits for total volatile organic hydrocarbons in clause (vii) be 

set at 25 tons per year (tpy) and that the TNRCC set a new limit 

of 20 tpy for fugitive volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. 

The existing 10 tpy applicability threshold as stated in the 

standard permit proposal for oil and gas facilities could impose 

regulatory burdens without regard to costs, while having negligible air quality benefits. Commenters also stated that requirements for monitoring total fugitive emissions below 25 tpy should 

11 
be removed, because many of the affected oil and gas facilities 

are in remote, rural areas, making emissions controls and monitoring very costly. Another major recommendation for the proposed rule language is to remove the leak detection requirements 

for hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide process emissions set 

forth in §116.617(3) (A) (ix). The TMOGA strongly objected to 

stringent leak detection and repair programs for the oil and gas 

industry, monitoring standards known as "28VHP," which require 

corrective actions if VOC levels exceed 500 parts per million, 

and suggested the deletion of the entire §116.617(3) (C) (ii). 

Finally, Intrastate again objected to fugitive leak detection for 

piping and valves smaller than a nominal two-inch diameter size. 

Pennzoil suggested that §116.617(3) (A) (vii) and (viii) could be 

improved by combining them to read: "If total VOC emissions 

exceed 25 tpy and total fugitive VOC emissions exceed 20 tpy, 

equipment will be inspected according to subparagraph (C) (i) ." 

Alternatively, the TMOGA suggested language to not control VOC 

emissions at oil and gas facilities if total emissions are below 

25 tpy and if fugitive emissions are below 20 tpy (as in Standard 

Exemption Number 66), and use "28M Guidelines" if total VOC 

emissions are equal to or above 25 tpy and fugitives are above 20 

tpy. Relatively minor suggestions for the fugitive emissions 

sections in §116. 617 ( 3) (A) (vii) - (x) were also included. The 

TMOGA requested that only piping and valves greater than two 

inches nominal size be included in fugitive emissions estimations. 

12 
Regarding the TMOGA and Pennzoil comments on §116.617(3) (A) (vii) 

and §116.617(3) (A) (viii), the TNRCC agrees to add flexibility 

into the fugitive VOC monitoring requirements by considering the 

distance between the facility and the nearest off-plant receptor. 

This flexibility will significantly reduce the number of facilities subject to §116.617(3) (A) (viii). The TNRCC disagrees with 

the recommendation to delete §116.617(3) (A) (viii) and 

§116.617(3) (C) (ii). The TNRCC feels this fugitive monitoring 

program is necessary to control large emission sources, including 

sources with uncontrolled emissions greater than 25 tpy which are 

located close to an off-plant receptor and for all sources with 

uncontrolled emissions greater than 40 tpy. These controls are 

necessary to protect public health, welfare, and the environment 

from the potential impacts of significant emission sources. 

The TNRCC disagrees with Intrastate's recommendation to exclude 

piping and valves less than two inches in nominal size from the 

fugitive emissions estimation, since these must be included to 

determine the level of fugitive VOC monitoring covered under 

§116.617(3) (C) (i) or §116.617(3) (C) (ii), and for the sake of rule 

consistency, as stated previously. For the sake of consistency 

and general engineering practices, 30 TAC Chapter 115 does not 

exclude piping and valves less than two inches in nominal diameter from monitoring requirements. Therefore, all piping must be 

monitored except as noted in the standard permit. 

13 
The TMOGA requested that alternative methods to approve flare 

design, such as EPA Reference Method 22, should be allowed to be 

approved if approved by the executive director. Finally, the 

GHASP desired that infrared monitors be required to monitor flame 

temperature. The TMOGA opposed this view and offered that a 

thermocouple is equivalent to the use of infrared equipment for 

flame temperature detection. 

Regarding §116.617(3) (A) (x), the TNRCC agrees to include wording 

which will allow an equivalent performance standard approved by 

the commission. The intent of §116. 617 (3) (A) (x) is for flares to 

meet the design and operational requirements of 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 60.18 and not the physical 

inspection and testing requirements themselves. The word 

"inspected" has been removed from the rule text to clarify this 

requirement. Regarding the recommendation from the GRASP on the 

infrared monitor, an infrared monitor is not in this case an 

emissions measuring device. It is solely used to detect flameout conditions. Opacity and visible emission operational requirements are contained in a separate rule (30 TAC 

§lll.lll(a) (4)). 

The TMOGA, Intrastate, and Pennzoil objected to paragraphs in 

§116.617(3) (B), concerning control requirements. One commenter 

stated that the limitations in subsection (i) should not apply to 

pressurized tanks, and that floating roof tanks should not be 

14 
required unless the tank capacity is greater than 42,000 gallons. 

The existing rule language limits tanks without floating roofs to 

25,000 gallons. Another commenter stated that barrels are the 

industry standard for measuring tank sizes (e.g., a 1000-barrel 

limit). Further, BACT for storage tanks requires no controls if 

the true vapor pressure is less than 1.5 pounds per square inch 

(psi), as stated in 30 TAC Chapter 115. The BACT requirement 

should be increased from 0.5 psi to 1.5 psi at maximum operating 

temperatures, because these rules are designed to be the most 

stringent rules to prevent ozone formation in air quality 

nonattainment areas. Additionally, the desired 42,000 gallon and 

1.5 psi levels are warranted because they are equivalent to EPA 

programs for federal New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and 

Control Technology Guidelines. Opposing this view, the GRASP requested that the 25,000-gallon tank size limitation be restricted 

to 5,000 gallons, above which floating tank roofs would be required. 

Regarding comments to §116.617(3) (B) (i), the TNRCC agrees to 

include an exception for pressurized tanks which comply with 

Standard Exemption Number 83 and also agrees to include the term 

"nominal" relating to tank capacity, to allow for slight variations in tank capacity. 

The TNRCC disagrees with changing the size or vapor pressure 

exemption limits for storage tanks, since the limits in the 

proposed rule are consistent with current BACT requirements. The 

15 
TNRCC also feels it is not necessary to express the storage tank 

capacity in units of barrels, since the conversion from units of 

gallons to barrels is very straightforward. In fact, barrels are 

used in monitoring and recordkeeping requirements in paragraph 

(E) of the standard permit, but tank capacity is typically sized 

in terms of gallons. 

The GHASP and the TMOGA responded to language in 

§116.617(3) (B) (i) (IV), relating to control requirements. In 

addition to using floating-roof tanks to capture VOCs, other 

containment or destruction methods should be allowed. The TMOGA 

noted that pressurized containers may be used to prevent hydrocarbon loss, as another option to requiring floating roof tanks 

or flares. The GHASP questioned why vapor recovery systems (95%) 

are 3.0% less effective than combustion devices (98%), so that 

the two alternatives are not equivalent. 

The TNRCC agrees to modify the wording of 

§116.617 (3) (B) (ii) (II) (-a-) from "control efficiency" to "destruction efficiency" for consistency with 

§116.617(3) (B) (i) (IV) (-a-). In response to the comment regarding 

the 3.0% difference between the control efficiencies of combustion devices and vapor recovery systems, it is not technically 

feasible for a vapor recovery system to achieve the same control 

efficiency as a combustion device. The TNRCC does not specify 

the type of control to be used, since this will vary depending on 

16 
variables such as the type and quantity of pollutants to be 

controlled, type of process, and technical and economic feasibility. The control efficiencies identified in 

§116.617 (3) (B) (ii) (II) (-a-) and (-b-) represent efficiencies 

which the TNRCC currently considers to be best available and most 

technically feasible for the respective control devices. 

It is important to note that vapor recovery systems do not 

introduce new contaminants into ambient air as a result of the 

control process, as do combustion devices and flares. Vapor 

recovery systems remove contaminants from a waste stream, whereas 

combustion devices convert contaminants into other less hazardous 

compounds which are then introduced into the atmosphere. 

The TMOGA suggested amending §116.617(3) (C) (i) (I), concerning 

inspection requirements, to delete metric measurement units, 

include evaluation of applicable NSPS criteria for determining 

whether to monitor piping and valves two inches in nominal size 

and smaller, and remove the term "upstream" relating to installation of rupture discs to allow flexibility in rupture disc 

location. 

Regarding the TMOGA comments on §116.617(3) (C) (i) (I), metric 

equivalents are proposed as a method of being flexible, not as a 

restrictive measure. In the last sentence of same subclause, the 

TNRCC agrees with the TMOGA's recommendation to include the 

17 
applicability of NSPS and Chapter 115. The TNRCC also agrees 

with TMOGA's recommendation to delete "upstream" to allow the 

option of installing an upstream or downstream rupture disc. 

In §116. 617 (3) (C) (i) (II), the GHASP questioned the definition of 

the terms "technically feasible" and "rendered impractical" as 

they apply to repairs on leaking process VOC fugitive emissions. 

The same commenter similarly questioned the definition of the 

term "reasonably accessible" in subclause (IV). Also, the 

commenter requested that walk-through inspection records be 

maintained on a weekly basis in subclause (V) , and in subclause 

(VII) that pressure gauges should be installed to monitor rupture 

disc integrity. These same comments would also apply to 

§116.617(3) (C) (ii), concerning oil and gas facilities which have 

the potential to emit over 25 tons per year. 

Regarding the GRASP's comments on the terms "technically feasible" and "rendered impractical," the TNRCC feels that these 

terms can not be specifically defined, since there are too many 

variables to evaluate before a determination is made. The 

definitions will vary depending on the type and complexity of the 

project or situation. The TNRCC will determine what is considered "technically feasible" and a "rendered impractical" on a 

project-by-project basis. 

18 
Regarding the comment on the definition of the term "reasonably 

accessible" used in §116.617 (3) (C) (i) (IV) and 

§116. 617 (3) (C) (ii) (IV) , reasonably accessible valves are those 

which would not expose monitoring personnel to immediate danger. 

The TNRCC determines what is considered "reasonably accessible" 

on a case-by-case basis due to the variability of monitoring 

scenarios. The height limitation of two meters originated in 40 

CFR, Part 60.482-7(h), which considers valves to be inaccessible 

if they cannot be monitored without elevating the monitoring 

personnel more than two meters above a support surface. Section 

116.617(3)(C)(i)(IV) and §116.617(3)(C)(ii)(IV) require that a 

list of inaccessible valves be maintained and made available upon 

request; therefore, any valves which the company considers to be 

inaccessible are subject to evaluation by the TNRCC. 

Regarding the GHASP comment on §116.617(3) (C) (i) (V) and 

§116.617(3) (C) (ii) (V) which identified the need to keep records 

documenting visual, audible, and olfactory inspections, these 

records are already included in §116.617(3) (E) (ii). Regarding 

the GHASP comment on §116.617(3) (C) (i) (VII) and 

§116.617(3) (C) (ii) (VII) requesting that rupture discs be required 

to be equipped with pressure gauges, this requirement is already 

included in these two subclauses. The TNRCC does not agree with 

the GHASP' s request to include §116. 617 (3) (C) (ii) (XI) under 

§116.617(3) (C) (ii). Including the directed maintenance require19 
menta in two locations under the same fugitive monitoring program 

would be redundant. 

The TMOGA suggested the removal of the requirement to perform 

daily inspections for each site in §116.617(3) (C) (iii) on the 

basis that added expenses would make marginal oil and gas facilities unprofitable. 

The TNRCC has modified the language of §116.617(3) (A) (ix) and 

added new §116.617(3) (E) (i) to allow the option of installing 

ambient H2S property line monitors in the event it is not possible for operations personnel to check the facility on a daily 

basis. This regulatory flexibility allows for low-cost, unmanned 

surveillance. 

The TNRCC has replaced "plant personnel" with "operating personnel." The TNRCC does not agree with the recoimllendation to delete 

§116. 617 (3) (C) (iii) (III) . This requirement is necessary in the 

event that efforts to isolate and repair the leak, as required by 

§116.617 (3) (C) (iii) (I) and (II) are unsuccessful. 

The TMOGA suggested modifications to §116.617(3) (D), concerning 

approved test methods, in which air quality models could be used 

to demonstrate proper operation of condensers instead of using 

monitors. Use of dispersion modeling can be used for predicting 

VOC emissions from glycol dehydrator units. 

20 
The TNRCC does not entirely agree with the TMOGA's recommendations to §116.617(3) (D) regarding the use of computer simulation 

modeling in lieu of ambient sampling to demonstrate proper in-use 

operation of a condenser. While computer simulations are effective tools for predicting air quality impacts, they cannot be 

used to verify actual operating conditions for demonstration of 

compliance with permit limits. The TNRCC maintains that sampling 

and testing is necessary to obtain actual data to verify that a 

control device is actually operating as previously predicted or 

represented. 

The TMOGA, GHASP, and the City of Dallas offered corrections to 

§116.617(3) (E), concerning monitoring and recordkeeping requirements. The TMOGA argued that inspection records be kept for 

process vents or flares, but not for all process streams. The 

GHASP and the City of Dallas noted that local air pollution 

agencies should be included in §116.617(3) (E) (i) regarding 

availability of fugitive inspection and repair information. 

The TNRCC agrees with the TMOGA's recommendation to allow records 

to be kept on the total sulfur content of gas process vents or 

flares, but does not agree with removing the option of keeping 

records on the total sulfur content of gas processing streams. 

The TNRCC prefers to include both options to allow flexibility in 

the method used for demonstrating compliance with total sulfur 

content limits. The TNRCC agrees with recommendations to include 

21 
air pollution control agencies in the notification requirements 

under §116.615(6) and (7) and §116.617(3) (E) (ii), as recommended 

by GHASP and the City of Dallas. 

Under §116. 617 (3) (E) (iv), the GHASP requested definition of the 

term "continuous compliance." The TMOGA suggested that the term 

"continuous" in clause (iv) should be deleted from permit compliance demonstrations. 

Regarding the GHASP's request for a definition of "continuous 

compliance," this term cannot be specifically defined, since 

demonstration of compliance will vary depending on each facility 

and type of operation; therefore, the TNRCC will determine how 

continuous compliance will be demonstrated on a case-by-case 

basis. Continuous compliance may be demonstrated through a 

variety of methods which may include periodic monitoring or 

recording of appropriate operational parameters on a continuous 

basis or on some ongoing specified frequency. The TNRCC has 

replaced the term "continuous" with "ongoing," however, to 

clarify its intent, because the former term can be confused with 

Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems, a technical sampling 

protocol. 

22 
The new section is adopted under the Texas Health and Safety 

Code, Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA) §382.017, which provides the 

TNRCC with the authority to adopt rules consistent with the 

policy and purposes of the TCAA. 

23 
STAFF 

RECOMMENDATIONS
SUBCHAPTER A 

DEFINITIONS 

§116.14. Standard Permit Definitions. 

The following words and terms, when used in this subchapter, 

shall have the following meanings, unless the context 

clearly indicates otherwise. 

Oil and gas facility - For the purposes of Subchapter F of 

this chapter (relating to Standard Permits) only, oil and gas 

facilities shall be defined as facilities which handle gases and 

liquids associated with the production, conditioning, processing, 

and pipeline transfer of fluids found in geologic formations 

beneath the earth's surface. These oil and gas facilities 

include, but are not limited to: oil or gas production facilities; water injection facilities; carbon dioxide separation 

facilities; or oil or gas pipeline facilities consisting of one 

or more tanks, separators, dehydration units, free water knockouts, gunbarrels, heater treaters, vapor recovery units, flares, 

pumps, internal combustion engines, gas turbines, compressors, 

natural gas liquid recovery units, or gas sweetening and other 

gas conditioning facilities. This definition does not include 

sulfur recovery units. 

1 
Sulfur recovery unit - For the purposes of Subchapter F of 

this chapter only, sulfur recovery unit shall be defined as a 

process device whose primary purpose is to recover elemental 

sulfur from acid gas. 

Off-plant receptor - For the purposes of Subchapter F of 

this Chapter only, off-plant receptor shall be defined as any 

recreational area or residence or other structure not occupied or 

used solely by the owner or operator of the facilities or owner 

of the property upon which the facilities ~re located. 

This agency hereby certifies that the section as adopted has been 

reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the 

agency's legal authority. 

Issued in Austin, Texas on July 26, 1995. 

2 
SUBCHAPTER F 

STANDARD PERMITS 

The amendments and new section are proposed under the Texas 

Health and Safety Code, Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), §382.017, 

which provides the TNRCC with the authority to adopt rules 

consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. 

§116.610. Applicability. 

(a) (g) (No change.) 

§116.615. General Conditions. 

The following general conditions shall be applicable to holders 

of standard permits, but may not be specifically stated within 

the standard permit document. 

(1) Protection of public health and welfare. The 

emissions from the facility shall comply with all applicable 

rules and regulations of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation 

Commission (TNRCC or commission) adopted under the Texas Health 

and Safety Code, Chapter 382, and with intent of the Texas Clean 

Air Act (TCAA), including protection of health and property of 

the public. 

3 
(2) Standard permit representations. All representations with regard to construction plans, operating procedures, 

and maximum emission rates in any registration for a standard 

permit become conditions upon which the facility or changes 

thereto, shall be constructed and operated. It shall be unlawful 

for any person to vary from such representations if the change 

will affect that person's right to claim a standard permit under 

this section. Any change in condition such that a person is no 

longer eligible to claim a standard permit under this section 

requires proper authorization under §116.110 of this title 

(relating to Applicability) . If the facility remains eligible to 

claim a standard permit, the owner or operator of the facility 

must notify the TNRCC of any change in conditions which will 

result in a change in the method of control of emissions, a 

change in the character of the emissions, or an increase in the 

discharge of the various emissions as compared to the representations in the original registration or any previous notification 

of a change in representations. Notice of changes in 

representations must be received by the TNRCC no later than 30 

days after the change. 

(3) Standard permit in lieu of permit amendment. All 

changes authorized by standard permit to a facility previously 

permitted pursuant to §116.110 of this title shall be administratively incorporated into that facility's permit at such time as 

the permit is amended or renewed. 

4 
(4) Voiding of standard permit. A standard permit 

under this chapter is automatically void if the holder fails to 

begin construction within 18 months of date of registration, 

discontinues construction for more than 18 consecutive months 

prior to completion, or fails to complete construction within a 

reasonable time. Upon request, the executive director may grant 

a onetime 18-month extension of the date to begin construction. 

(5) Construction progress. Start of construction, 

construction interruptions exceeding 45 days, and completion of 

construction shall be reported to the appropriate regional office 

of the TNRCC not later than 15 working days after occurrence of 

the event. 

(6) Start-up notification. The appropriate air 

program regional office of the commission and any other air 

pollution control program having jurisdiction shall be notified 

prior to the commencement of operations of the facilities authorized by the standard permit in such a manner that a representative of the TNRCC may be present. Phased construction, which may 

involve a series of units commencing operations at different 

times, shall provide separate notification for the commencement 

of operations for each unit. 

( 7) Sampling requirements. If sampling of stacks or 

process vents is required, the standard permit holder shall 

5 
contact the TNRCC Office of Air Quality and any other air pollution control program having jurisdiction prior to sampling to 

obtain the proper data forms and procedures. All sampling and 

testing procedures must be approved by the executive director and 

coordinated with the regional representatives of the commission. 

The standard permit holder is also responsible for providing 

sampling facilities and conducting the sampling operations or 

contracting with an independent sampling consultant. 

( 8) Equivalency of methods. It shall be the responsibility of the standard permit holder to demonstrate or otherwise 

justify the equivalency of emission control methods, sampling or 

other emission testing methods, and monitoring methods proposed 

as alternatives to methods indicated in the conditions of the 

standard permit. Alternative methods shall be applied for in 

writing and must be reviewed and approved by the executive 

director prior to their use in fulfilling any requirements of the 

standard permit. 

(9) Recordkeeping. A copy of the standard permit 

along with information and data sufficient to demonstrate applicability of and compliance with the standard permit shall be 

maintained in a file at the plant site and made available at the 

request of personnel from the TNRCC, United States Environmental 

Protection Agency, or any air pollution control program having 

jurisdiction. For facilities that normally operate unattended, 

6 
this information shall be maintained at the nearest staffed 

location within Texas specified by the standard permit holder in 

the standard permit application. This information shall include, 

but is not limited to, production records and operating hours. 

Additional recordkeeping requirements may be specified in 

requirements for the standard permit. Information in the file 

shall be retained for at least two years following the date that 

the information or data is obtained. 

(10) Maintenance of emission control. The facilities 

covered by the standard permit shall not be operated unless all 

air pollution emission capture and abatement equipment is maintained in good working order and operating properly during normal 

facility operations. Notification for upsets and maintenance 

shall be made in accordance with §101.6 and §101.7 of this title 

(relating to Notification Requirements for Major Upset and 

Notification Requirements for Maintenance) . 

(11) Compliance with rules. Registration of a standard permit by a standard permit applicant constitutes an acknowledgement and agreement that the holder will comply with all 

rules, regulations, and orders of the commission issued in 

conformity with the TCAA and the conditions precedent to the 

granting of the standard permit. If more than one state or 

federal rule or regulation or permit condition are applicable, 

the most stringent limit or condition shall govern and be the 

7 
standard by which compliance shall be demonstrated. Acceptance 

includes consent to the entrance of commission employees and 

agents into the permitted premises at reasonable times to investigate conditions relating to the emission or concentration of 

air contaminants, including compliance with the standard permit. 

§116.617. Standard Permit List. 

Pursuant to the Texas Clean Air Act, §382.051, projects involving 

the types of facilities or physical or operational changes to 

facilities listed in this section qualify for a standard permit 

subject to the conditions stated in §116.610 of this title 

(relating to Applicability) . 

(1) (2) (No change.) 

(3) Installation and/or modification of oil and gas 

facilities. 

(A) Emission specifications. 

(i) Venting or flaring more than 0.3 long 

tons per day of total sulfur shall not be allowed. 

(ii) No facility shall be allowed to emit 

total uncontrolled emissions of sulfur compounds, except sulfur 

8 
dioxide (S02 ) , from all vents (excluding process fugitives emissions) equal to or greater than four pounds per hour unless the 

vapors are collected and routed to a flare. 

(iii) Any vent, excluding any safety relief 

valves that discharge to the atmosphere only as a result of fire 

or failure of utilities, emitting sulfur compounds other than 

sulfur dioxide, shall be at least 20 feet above ground level. 

(iv) New or modified internal combustion 

reciprocating engines or gas turbines permitted under this 

standard permit shall satisfy all of the requirements of Standard 

Exemption Number 6, except that registration using the Form PI-7 

or PI-8 shall not be required. Emissions from engines or turbines shall be limited to the amounts found in §116.2ll(a) (1) of 

this title (relating to Standard Exemption List). 

(v) Total Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) 

emissions from a natural gas glycol dehydration unit shall not 

exceed 10 tons per year (tpy) unless the vapors are collected and 

controlled in accordance with subparagraph (B) (ii) of this paragraph. 

(vi) Any combustion unit (excluding flares, 

internal combustion engines, or natural gas turbines), with a 

design maximum heat input greater than 40 million British thermal 

9 
units (Btu) per hour (using lower heating values) shall not emit 

more than 0.06 pounds of nitrogen oxides (NOxl per million Btu. 

(vii) No facility which is less than 500 

feet from the nearest off-plant receptor shall be allowed to emit 

uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions equal to or greater 

than 10 tpy, but less than 25 tpy, unless the equipment is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph (C) (i) of this 

paragraph. 

(viii) No facility which is 500 feet or more 

from the nearest off-plant receptor shall be allowed to emit 

uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions equal to or greater 

than 25 tpy unless the equipment is inspected and repaired 

according to subparagraph (C) (i) of this paragraph. 

(ix) No facility which is less than 500 feet 

from the nearest off-plant receptor shall be allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions equal to or greater 

than 25 tpy unless the equipment is inspected and repaired 

according to subparagraph (C) (ii) of this paragraph. 

(x) No facility shall be allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions equal to or greater 

than 40 tpy unless the equipment is inspected and repaired 

according to subparagraph (C) (ii) of this paragraph. 

10 
(xi) No facility which is located less than 

one quarter of a mile from the nearest off-plant receptor shall 

be allowed to emit hydrogen sulfide (H2 8) or 802 process fugitive 

emissions unless the equipment is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph (C) (iii) of this paragraph. No facility 

which is located at least one quarter of a mile from the nearest 

off-plant receptor shall be allowed to emit H28 or 802 process 

fugitive emissions unless the equipment is inspected and repaired 

according to subparagraph (C) (iii) of this paragraph or unless 

the H2 8 or 802 emissions are monitored with ambient property line 

monitors according to subparagraph (E) (i) of this paragraph. 

Components in sweet crude oil or gas service as defined by 

Chapter 101 of this title (relating to General Rules) are exempt 

from these limitations. 

(xii) Flares shall be designed and operated 

in accordance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 

60.18 or equivalent standard approved by the commission, including specifications of minimum heating values of waste gas, 

maximum tip velocity, and pilot flame monitoring. If necessary 

to ensure adequate combustion, sufficient gas shall be added to 

make the gases combustible. An infrared monitor is considered 

equivalent to a thermocouple for flame monitoring purposes. An 

automatic ignition system may be used in lieu of a continuous 

pilot. 

11 
(xiii) Appropriate documentation shall be 

submitted to demonstrate that compliance with the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) and nonattainment new source 

review (NSR) provisions of the FCAA, Parts C and D, and regulations promulgated thereunder, are being met. The oil and gas 

facility shall be required to meet the requirements of Subchapter 

B of the chapter (relating to New Source Review Permits) instead 

of this subchapter if a PSD or nonattainment permit is required. 

(xiv) Documentation shall be submitted to 

demonstrate compliance with applicable New Source Performance 

Standards (NSPS, 40 CFR 60) and National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollution (NESHAP, 40 CFR 61). 

(xv) New and increased emissions shall not 

cause or contribute to a violation of any National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) or regulation property line standards as 

specified in Chapters 111, 112, and 113 of this title (relating 

to Control of Air Pollution From Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter; Control of Air Pollution From Sulfur Compounds; and 

Control of Air Pollution From Toxic Materials). Engineering 

judgment and/or computerized air dispersion modeling may be used 

in this demonstration. To show compliance with §116.610(a) (1) of 

this title (relating to Applicability) for H2S emissions from 

process vents, 10 milligrams per cubic meter shall be used as the 

12 
"L" value instead of the value represented by 116.610(a) (1) of 

this title. 

(xvi) Fuel for all combustion units and 

flare pilots shall be sweet natural gas or liquid petroleum gas, 

fuel gas containing no more than 10 grains of total sulfur per 

100 dry standard cubic feet (scdf), or field gas. If field gas 

contains more than 1.5 grains of H2S or 30 grains total sulfur 

compounds per 100 scdf, the operator shall maintain records, 

including at least quarterly measurements of fuel H2S and total 

sulfur content, which demonstrate that the annual 802 emissions 

from the facility do not exceed the limitations listed in the 

standard permit registration. If a flare is the only combustion 

unit on a property, the operator shall not be required to maintain such records on flare pilot gas. 

(B) Control requirements. 

(i) Floating roofs or equivalent controls 

shall be required on all new or modified storage tanks, other 

than pressurized tanks which meet Standard Exemption 83, unless 

the tank is less than 25,000 gallons in nominal size or the vapor 

pressure of the compound to be stored in the tank is less than 

0.5 pounds per square inch absolute (psia) at maximum short-term 

storage temperature. 

13 
(I) For internal floating roofs, 

mechanical shoe primary seal or liquid-mounted primary seal or a 

vapor-mounted primary with a rim-mounted secondary seals shall be 

used. 

(II) Mechanical shoe or liquid-mounted 

primary seals shall include a rim-mounted secondary seal on all 

external floating roofs tanks. Vapor-mounted primary seals will 

not be accepted. 

(III) All floating roof tanks shall 

comply with the requirements under §115.112(a) (2) (A) 

this title (relating to Control Requirements) . 

(F) of 

(IV) In lieu of a floating roof, tank 

emissions may be routed to: 

(-a-) a destruction device such 

that a minimum VOC destruction efficiency of 98% is achieved; or 

(-b-) a vapor recovery system such 

that a minimum VOC recovery efficiency of 95% is achieved. 

(V) Independent of the exemptions 

listed in this clause, if the emissions from any fixed roof tank 

exceed 10 tpy of VOC or 10 tpy of sulfur compounds, the tank 

14 
emissions shall be routed to a destruction device, vapor recovery 

unit, or equivalent method of control that meets the requirements 

listed in subclause (IV) of this clause. 

(ii) The VOC emissions from a natural gas 

glycol dehydration unit shall be controlled as follows. 

(I) If total uncontrolled VOC emissions 

are equal to or greater than 10 tons per year, but less than 50 

tons per year, a minimum of 80% by weight minimum control efficiency shall be achieved by either operating a condenser and a 

separator (or flash tank), vapor recovery unit, destruction 

device, or equivalent control device. 

(II) If total uncontrolled VOC emissions are equal to or greater than 50 tpy, a minimum of: 

(-a-) 98% by weight minimum destruction efficiency shall be achieved by a destruction device 

or equivalent; or 

(-b-) 95% by weight minimum 

control efficiency shall be achieved by a vapor recovery system 

or equivalent. 

(C) Inspection requirements. 

15 
(i) Owners or operators who are subject to 

subparagraph (A) (vii) or (viii) of this paragraph shall comply 

with the following requirements. 

(I) No component shall be allowed to 

have a VOC leak for more than 15 days after the leak is detected 

to exceed a VOC concentration greater than 10,000 parts per 

million by volume (ppmv) above background as methane, propane, or 

hexane, or the dripping or exuding of process fluid based on 

sight, smell, or sound for all components. The VOC fugitive 

emission components which contact process fluids where the VOCs 

have an aggregate partial pressure or vapor pressure of less than 

0.5 psia at 100 degrees Fahrenheit are exempt from this requirement. If VOC fugitive emission components are in service where 

Lhe operating pressure is at least 0.725 pounds per square inch 

(psi) (five kilopascals (Kpa)) below ambient pressure, then these 

components are also exempt from this requirement as long as the 

equipment is identified in a list that is made available upon 

request by Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) 

representatives, the EPA, or any other air pollution agency 

having jurisdiction. All piping and valves two inches nominal 

size and smaller, unless subject to Federal New Source Performance Standards requiring a fugitive VOC emissions leak detection 

and repair program or Chapter 115 of this title (relating to 

Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds) , are 

also exempt from this requirement. 

16 
(II) All technically feasible repairs 

shall be made to repair a VOC leaking process fugitive component 

within 15 days after the leak is detected. If the repair of a 

component would require a unit shutdown, the repair may be 

delayed until the next scheduled shutdown. All leaking components which cannot be repaired until a scheduled shutdown shall 

be identified for such repair by tagging. The TNRCC executive 

director, at his or her discretion, may require early unit 

shutdown or other appropriate action based on the number and 

severity of tagged leaks awaiting shutdown. 

(III) New and reworked underground 

process pipelines containing VOCs shall contain no buried valves 

such that process fugitive emission inspection and repair is 

rendered impractical. 

(IV) To the extent that good engineering practice will permit, new and reworked valves and piping 

connections in VOC service shall be so located to be reasonably 

accessible for leak-checking during plant operation. Valves 

elevated more than two meters above a support surface will be 

considered non-accessible and shall be identified in a list to be 

made available upon request. 

(V) New and reworked piping connections 

in VOC service shall be welded or flanged. Screwed connections 

17 
are permissible only on piping smaller than two-inch diameter. 

No later than the next scheduled quarterly monitoring after 

initial installation or replacement, all new or reworked 

connections shall be gas-tested or hydraulically-tested at no 

less than normal operating pressure and adjustments made as 

necessary to obtain leak-free performance. Flanges in VOC 

service shall be inspected by visual, audible, and/or olfactory 

means at least weekly by operating personnel walk-through. 

(VI) Each open-ended valve or line in 

VOC service, other than a valve or line used for safety relief, 

shall be equipped with a cap, blind flange, plug, or a second 

valve. Except during sampling, the second valve shall be closed. 

(VII) Accessible valves in VOC service 

shall be monitored by leak-checking for fugitive emissions at 

least quarterly using an approved gas analyzer. For valves 

equipped with rupture discs, a pressure gauge shall be installed 

between the relief valve and rupture disc to monitor disc integrity. All leaking discs shall be replaced at the earliest 

opportunity, but no later than the next process shutdown. 

Sealless/leakless valves (including, but not limited to, welded 

bonnet bellows and diaphragm valves) and relief valves equipped 

with a rupture disc or venting to a control device are exempt 

from monitoring. 

18 
(VIII) Dual pump seals with barrier 

fluid at higher pressure than process pressure, seals degassing 

to vent control systems kept in good working order, or seals 

equipped with an automatic seal failure detection and alarm 

system, submerged pumps, or sealless pumps (including, but not 

limited to, diaphragm, canned, or magnetic driven pumps) are 

exempt from monitoring. 

(IX) All other pump and compressor 

seals emitting VOC shall be monitored with an approved gas 

analyzer at least quarterly. 

(X) After completion of the required 

quarterly inspections for a period of at least two years, the 

operator of the oil and gas facility may request in writing to 

the TNRCC, Office of Air Quality, New Source Review Division that 

the monitoring schedule be revised based on the percent of valves 

leaking. The percent of valves leaking shall be determined by 

dividing the sum of valves leaking during current monitoring and 

valves for which repair has been delayed by the total number of 

valves subject to the requirements. This request shall include 

all data that has been developed to justify the following modifications in the monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two consecutive 

quarterly leak detection periods with the percent of valves 

19 
leaking equal to or less than 2.0%, an owner or operator may 

begin to skip one of the quarterly leak detection periods for the 

valves in gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(-b-) After five consecutive 

quarterly leak detection periods with the percent of valves 

leaking equal to or less than 2.0%, an owner or operator may 

begin to skip three of the quarterly leak detection periods for 

the valves in gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(ii) Owners or operators who are subject to 

subparagraph (A) (ix) or (x) of this paragraph shall comply with 

the following requirements. 

(I) No component shall be allowed to 

have a VOC leak for more than 15 days after the leak is found 

which exceeds a VOC concentration greater than 500 ppmv for all 

components except pumps and compressors and greater than 2,000 

ppmv for pumps and compressors above background as methane, 

propane, or hexane, or the dripping or exuding of process fluid 

based on sight, smell, or sound. The VOC fugitive emission 

components which contact process fluids where the VOCs have an 

aggregate partial pressure or vapor pressure of less than 0.044 

psia at 100 degrees Fahrenheit are exempt from this requirement. 

If VOC fugitive emission components are in service where the 

operating pressure is at least 0.725 psi (five Kpa) below ambient 

20 
pressure, these components are also exempt from this requirement 

as long as the equipment is identified in a list that is made 

available upon request by TNRCC representatives, the EPA, or any 

air pollution control agency having jurisdiction. All piping and 

valves two inches nominal size and smaller are also exempt from 

this requirement. 

(II) All technically feasible repairs 

shall be made to repair a VOC leaking process fugitive component 

within 15 days after the leak is detected. If the repair of a 

component would require a unit shutdown, the repair may be 

delayed until the next scheduled shutdown. All leaking components which cannot be repaired until a scheduled shutdown shall 

be identified for such repair by tagging. The executive director, at his or her discretion, may require early unit shutdown or 

other appropriate action based on the number and severity of 

tagged leaks awaiting shutdown. 

(III) New and reworked underground 

process pipelines containing VOCs shall contain no buried valves 

such that process fugitive emission inspection and repair is 

rendered impractical. 

(IV) To the extent that good engineering practice will permit, new and reworked valves and piping 

connections in VOC service shall be so located to be reasonably 

21 
accessible for leak-checking during plant operation. Valves 

elevated more than two meters above a support surface will be 

considered non-accessible and shall be identified in a list to be 

made available upon request. 

(V) New and reworked piping connections 

in VOC service shall be welded or flanged. Screwed connections 

are permissible only on piping smaller than two-inch diameter. 

No later than the next scheduled quarterly monitoring after 

initial installation or replacement, all new or reworked connections shall be gas-tested or hydraulically-tested at no less than 

normal operating pressure and adjustments made as necessary to 

obtain leak-free performance. Flanges in VOC service shall be 

inspected by visual, audible, and/or olfactory means at least 

weekly by operating personnel walk-through. 

(VI) Each open-ended valve or line in 

VOC service, other than a valve or line used for safety relief, 

shall be equipped with a cap, blind flange, plug, or a second 

valve. Except during sampling, the second valve shall be closed. 

(VII) Accessible valves in VOC service 

shall be monitored by leak-checking for fugitive emissions at 

least quarterly using an approved gas analyzer. For valves 

equipped with rupture discs, a pressure gauge shall be installed 

between the relief valve and rupture disc to monitor disc integ22 
rity. All leaking discs shall be replaced at the earliest 

opportunity, but no later than the next process shutdown. 

Sealless/leakless valves (including, but not limited to, welded 

bonnet bellows and diaphragm valves) and relief valves equipped 

with a rupture disc or venting to a control device are exempt 

from monitoring. 

(VIII) Dual pump seals with barrier 

fluid at higher pressure than process pressure, seals degassing 

to vent control systems kept in good working order or seals 

equipped with an automatic seal failure detection and alarm 

system, submerged pumps, or sealless pumps (including, but not 

limited to, diaphragm, canned, or magnetic driven pumps) are 

exempt from monitoring. 

(IX) All other pump and compressor 

seals emitting VOC shall be monitored with an approved gas 

analyzer at least quarterly. 

(X) After completion of the required 

quarterly inspections for a period of at least two years, the 

operator of the oil and gas facility may request in writing to 

the TNRCC, Office of Air Quality, New Source Review Division that 

the monitoring schedule be revised based on the percent of valves 

leaking. The percent of valves leaking shall be determined by 

dividing the sum of valves leaking during current monitoring and 

23 
valves for which repair has been delayed by the total number of 

valves subject to the requirements. This request shall include 

all data that have been developed to justify the following 

modifications in the monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two consecutive 

quarterly leak detection periods with the percent of valves 

leaking equal to or less than 2.0%, an owner or operator may 

begin to skip one of the quarterly leak detection periods for the 

valves in gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(-b-) After five consecutive 

quarterly leak detection periods with the percent of valves 

leaking equal to or less than 2.0%, an owner or operator may 

begin to skip three of the quarterly leak detection periods for 

the valves in gas/vapor and light liquid service. 

(XI) A directed maintenance program 

shall be used and consist of the repair and maintenance of VOC 

fugitive emission components assisted simultaneously by the use 

of an approved gas analyzer such that a minimum concentration of 

leaking VOC is obtained for each component being maintained. 

Replaced components shall be remonitored within 30 days of being 

placed back into VOC service. 

24 
(iii) For owners and operators who are 

subject to the applicable parts of subparagraph (A) (xi) of this 

paragraph, auditory and visual checks for 802 and H2S leaks 

within the operating area shall be made every day. Immediately, 

but no later than eight hours upon detection of a leak, operating 

personnel shall take the following actions: 

(I) isolate the leak; and 

(II) commence repair or replacement of 

the leaking component; or 

(III) use a leak collection/containment 

system to prevent the leak until repair or replacement can be 

made if immediate repair is not possible. 

(D) Approved test methods. 

(i) An approved gas analyzer used for the 

VOC fugitive inspection and repair requirement in subparagraph 

(C) of this paragraph, shall conform to requirements listed in 40 

CFR 60.485(a) and (b). 

(ii) Tutweiler analysis or equivalent shall 

be used to determine the hydrogen sulfide content as required 

under subparagraphs (A) and (E) of this paragraph. 

25 
(iii) Proper operation of any condenser used 

as a VOC emissions control device to comply with subparagraph 

(A) (v) of this"·paragraph 'shall be tested to demonstrate compliance with the minimum control efficiency. Sampling shall occur 

within 60 days after start-up of new or modified facilities. The 

permittee shall contact the Engineering Services Section, Air 

Quality Enforcement Division 45 days prior to sampling for 

approval of sampling protocol. The appropriate regional office 

in the region where the source is located shall also be contacted 

45 days prior to sampling to provide them the opportunity to view 

the sampling. Neither the regional office nor the Engineering 

Services Section, Air Quality Enforcement Division personnel are 

required to view the testing. Sampling reports which comply with 

the provisions of the TNRCC Sampling Procedure Manual, Chapter 

14, shall be distributed to the appropriate regional office, any 

local programs, and the Engineering Services Section, Air Quality 

Enforcement Division. 

(E) Monitoring and recordkeeping requirements. 

(i) If the operator elects to install and 

maintain ambient H2S property line monitors to comply with 

(A) (xi) of this paragraph, the monitors shall be approved by the 

TNRCC Engineering Services Section, Air Quality Enforcement 

Division office in Austin, and shall be capable of detecting and 

alarming at H2S concentrations of 10 ppmv. Operations personnel 

26 
shall perform an initial on-site inspection of the facility 

within 24 hours of initial alarm and take corrective actions as 

listed in subparagraph (C) (iii) (I)- (III) of this paragraph within 

eight hours of detection of a leak. 

(ii) The results of the VOC leak detection 

and repair requirements shall be made available to the executive 

director, his or her designated representative, or any air 

pollution control agency having jurisdiction upon request. 

Records, for all components, shall include: 

(I) appropriate dates; 

(II) test methods; 

(III) instrument readings; 

(IV) repair results; and 

(V) corrective actions. Records of 

flange inspections are not required unless a leak is detected. 

(iii) Records for repairs and replacements 

made due to inspections of H2S and 802 components shall be maintained. 

27 
(iv) Records shall be kept for each production, processing, and pipeline tank battery or for each storage 

tank if not located at a tank battery, on a monthly basis, as 

follows: 

(I) tank battery identification or 

storage tank identification, if not located at a tank battery; 

(II) compound stored; 

(III) monthly throughput in barrels/ 

month; and 

(IV) cumulative annual throughput, barrels/year. 

(v) A plan shall be submitted to show how 

ongoing compliance will be demonstrated for the efficiency 

requirements listed in subparagraph (B) (i) (IV) of this paragraph. 

The demonstration may include, but is not limited to, monitoring 

flowrates, temperatures, or other operating parameters. 

(vi) Records shall be kept on at least a 

monthly basis of all production facility flow rates (in standard 

cubic feet per day) and total sulfur content of process vents or 

28 
flares or gas processing streams. Total sulfur shall be calculated in long tons per day. 

(vii) Records shall be kept of all ambient 

property line monitor alarms and shall include the date, time, 

duration, and cause of alarm, date and time of initial on-site 

inspection, and date and time of corrective actions taken. 

(viii) All required records shall be made 

available to representatives of the TNRCC, EPA, or local air 

pollution control agencies upon request and be kept for at least 

two years. All required records shall be kept at the plant site, 

unless the plant site is unmanned during business hours. For 

plant sites ordinarily unmanned during business hours, the 

records shall be maintained at the nearest office in the state 

having day-to-day operations control of the plant site. 

This agency hereby certifies that the sections as adopted have 

been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise 

of the agency's legal authority. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on July 26, 1995. 

29 
rHE STATE OF TEXAS 

TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE 

COU:HY OF TRAVIS 

CONSERVATIONeG~~ 1 true and correct copy c 

Tb>as Natural Resource Conaervatlon Commission documf 

the ong.nat of which .il flleclln llle permanent records of • 

CcmmiSSIOn 

GIVen unaer my hand 1110 1M 111111 of office on 

,, 

DOCKET ~ 

NO. 95-0993-RUL Gloria A. V~squez.'CiHetCter~ 

Texaa Natu1e1 f!esour..e 

ConservatiOn Comrn1FS1on 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Texas Health and Safety Code Annotated, 

§382.017 (Vernon's 1992); Texas Government Code Annotated, Subchapter B, 

Chapter 2001 (Vernon's 1993); and 40 Code of Federal Regulations, §51.102, the 

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC or Commission) , after 

proper notice, conducted a public hearing on April 5, 1995 to consider 

revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 116 and the State Implementation Plan (SIP) ; and 

WHEREAS, new §116.14, concerning Standard Permit Definitions, and new 

§116.615, concerning General Conditions, were adopted. In addition, amendments to §116.610, concerning Applicability, and §116.617, concerning Standard 

Permit List, were adopted. The adopted rules streamline the permit process 

for oil and gas facilities and establish a new standard permit for oil and gas 

facilities under new §116.617(3); and 

WHEREAS, the Commission duly circulated to interested persons, the 

Regional Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and 

all applicable local air pollution control agencies hearing notices of its 

intended action; and 

WHEREAS, interested persons were invited to submit data, views, and 

recommendations on the proposed revisions, either orally or in writing, at the 

hearing; and 

WHEREAS, copies of the proposed revisions were available for public 

inspection at the Commission's central office and regional offices prior to 

the scheduled hearing; and 

WHEREAS, data, views, and recommendations of interested persons were 

submitted to the Commission at the hearing and were considered by the 

Commission as reflected in the attached analysis of testimony; and 

SEP 1 :· 1' 
DOCKET NO. 95-0993-RUL 

PAGE TWO 

WHEREAS, the TNRCC finds that said analysis of testimony includes the 

n:..mes of_all int~rested groups or associations offering comment on the 

revisf6ns· and-. th~ir position concerning the proposed revisions; and ' . •· ·' I ' 

WHEREAS';•' the Texas Health and Safety Code Annotated, 

§382.017 gives the Commission authority to make rules and regulations consistent with the policies and purposes of the Texas Clean Air Act; and 

WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the reasoned justification and 

factual bases for the proposed revisions are fully set out in the analysis of 

testimony; and 

WHEREAS, the Commission hereby certifies that the revisions, as adopted, 

have been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the 

Commission's legal authority. 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED BY THE TNRCC THAT: 

1. The revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 116 and the SIP appended to this 

Order are hereby adopted and promulgated; 

2. The Executive Director is instructed to transmit a certified copy of 

this Order, together with the adopted revisions, to the Governor of Texas for 

submittal to the Regional Administrator of the EPA as a proposed revision to 

the Texas SIP pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act, §110, as amended; and 

3. The Executive Director is instructed to file a certified copy of the 

adopted revisions with the Secretary of State pursuant to the Administrative 

Procedure Act. 

PASSED AND APPROVED at the regular meeting of the TNRCC on this the 

26th day of July, 1995. 
DOCKET NO. 95-0993-RUL 

PAGE THREE 

BY: 

TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

P~ Reed, Commissioner 

Acting for the Chairman 

ATTEST: 

I 
The Texas Package 51 es Association p-ovided comment incficaf it was in opposition 

to §50.9(c) ol the rule. n the anemative to 

that opposHion, the ialion suggested 

amendments relaxing the provisions of 

§50.9(c). The commiss determined that 

the questioned provision as necessary. The 

suggested amendments were rejected because they would rnal<e t proposad rule too 

cumbersome in operaf 

This amendment is 

ity of §5.31 of the Tex 

Code. 

that the rule a5 

adqlled hes been rev" by legal counsel 

and found to be a valid e ercise olthe agency's legal authority. 

Issued in Austin, Texas, August 10, 1995. 

TAD-9510018 Doyn 

Adml 

Texas 

Co 

Effective date: August 31 1995 

Proposal ptblication date June 30, 1995 

For lwther ase call: (512) 

206-3204 

• 

1TILE 25. 

VICES 

Part XI. Texas ancer 

Council 

Chapter 703. t Contracts 

and Grants 

• 25 T AC §703.9, 

The Texas Cancer Co 

ments to §703.9 and 

project contrads and g 

the proposed text as pu 

1995, issue of the 

Two comments were r 

applicabilHy to state a 

who are not indLDecl 

128. 

The amendments are 

Heanh and Solely Chapters 1 02. 002 

and 102.009, which P«N. esthe Texas Can· 

hority to develop and 

Plan, and Texas 

52-13& §4, which provide the Texas Can r Counci with the authorly to adopt ru · s governing councl 

pradice and proced es. 

§703.9. Audits. Au "ts of contractors are 

required in accord ce with the requirements of the Unifo Grant and Contract 

Management Stan (UGCMS). The 

Council shall reimb se the contractor for 

the relative cost of e required audit 

common 

lowed: 

(A)- (No change.) 

(F) ayment for direct services to patients for screening, diagnosis. or 

other support servi if third-party coverage is currently ilable. 

ifies that the rule as 

adopted has been r iewed by legel counsel 

and found to be a v lid exercise of the agency's lege I authority. 

Issued in Austin, Te s. on August 9, 1995. 

TA0-9509985 

Proposal plblicali 

For luther 

463-3190 

• • • TI1LE 30. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

Part I. Texas Natural 

Resource Conservation 

Commission 

Chapter 116. Control of Air 

Pollution by Permits for 

New Construction or 

Modification 

The Texas Natural Resource Conservatton 

Commission (1NRCC or commission) adopts 

new §116.14, concerning Standard P..-m~ 

Definitions and new §118. 615, ooncerning 

Gen..-al Condftions. Also, the TNRCC adopts 

amendments to §116.610, concerning Ajlpficabilfty and §116.617, concerning Standard 

Perm~ Ust. Sections 116.14, 116.615, and 

• 

20 Te:rReg 6324 August 18, 1995 Te:ras Register • 

116.617 are ~ad wHh changes to the 

proposed text as published in the March 3, 

1995, issue of the Texas Reaister (20 

TexReg 1506). Sedion 116.610 is adopted 

wHhot.C changes and will not be replblished. 

The new sections and amendments streamline the permit process ICI' oil and gas facilities and establish a new standard permft lor 

oil and gas tacirdies under new §116.617(3). 

Sedion 116.14 adds a definition lor the terms 

"oil and gas facilfty" and "off-plant receptor." 

Sed ion 116.610 is modified to delete the 

Gen..-al CondHions and retftle the section to 

"Applicability." Section 116.615 includes the 

general oondHions now located in §116.610 

and adds applicable general oondHions found 

in Slb:hapter 8, concerning applicable new 

source review permits. Sedion 116.617 contains the standard permit list and adds a new 

standard permH for oil and ges laciiHies. 

A plblic hearing was held in Austin on April 5, 

1995. Six commenters slbmitted written testimony on the prqJOSal and one commenter 

presented aal testimony. The GalvestonHouston Associalion ICI' Smog Prevenlion 

(GHASP). the Texas Mid-Continent Oil and 

Gas Associa!ion (TMOGA), the Cfty ol Dallas, 

the Association ot Texas Intrastate Nattnl 

Gas Pipelines (Intrastate), and the PeMZoil 

Co1J1>811y made objections or recommendations. The Uniled States Envronmental Protedion Agency (EPA) submitted a leHer 

stating that iJ: has no issues ol maja' concern. 

A generaJ comment t-om the TMOGA 8nd 

lntrastale was thai there are existing provisions for permitting oil and gas facilities such 

as with the standard exemption program. and 

that today's standard permft shoold be a new, 

thi'd alternative. Existing wording seems to 

i""ly that the oil and ges standard permft is a 

replacement for Standard Exemption Number 

66. 

A key passage which clarined the relationship 

to the standard exerJ1ltion progam was inad-

, vertently deleted from the Texas Register 

proposal. This standard permH is now a third 

alternative. 

The GHASP did nol adchss specific rule 

language, but proposed that a distance re- qui"ement ot perhaps 500 to 1.000 feet 

should be added to reduce potential air poQution i"ll'lcls from oil and gas laciiHies. Another commenter disa"eed with having 

distance requi"ements in this standard permit, 

since the TNRCC and industry policies are 

SuffiCient. 

There is an existing TNRCC regulation, 

§101.4 (concerning Nuisance), which prohil> 

its the discharge of ai" contaminants in concenbld:ions and di.I"Blion which woutf be 

injurious to or which wouk.1 adversely affect 

human health or weUere, animal life, vegetation, or property, or which would interlere with 

the namal use and enjoyment of animal IHe, 

vegetalion. or property. Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and impeds considerations Qnch.ding otl-plant receptors) were 

incorporated into the rule development. 

Hyd'ogen sumde (H .. S) emission limits in this 

rule take into consideration the distance to 

the nearest on-plant receptCI' to ensLn consistency with the pr~y line standards in 30 
TAG §112.3(a) and §112. 31 (concerning 

conlrol of sulfl.l' dioxkle); therefore, distance 

requirements have been adequately adcrossed. 

The GHASP also objected 10 1he 11at lee o1 

$450 tor each oil and gas standard permit on 

lhe grounds that this tee is equrvatent to a 

stbsidy lor industry. 

Staff time and manpoYter to eValuate and 

process a standard permit application are significantly less than the resou-ces requi"ed to 

rev~ and process a formal Subchapter B 

permit awttcation. The intent of a standard 

permit is to simplify and acceterate the permit 

review process for facilities which can prequallly to a relatively stringent level of control. 

Standard permit review is_ streamlined because BACT meas~Ses and pollution impacts 

are incorporated into the standard permit eligibility aiteria so that the extenl of the permit 

review consists only ol ensuring the lacility 

meets an. conditions of the standard permit. 

The TNRCC staff maintains that a $450 permit iij:plication tee is consiSienl with the exiSIing tee structure and is app-cp-iate for the 

resol.l'ces requi"ed to review and process a 

S1andard permit -tication. 

The TMOGA requested 1hat 1he TNRGG consoar dele1ing §116.610(d)-(g), concerning 

applicability, since they appear to be redundant 10 the general conditions urder 

§116.615(1)-(3) and (9). 

The TNRCC s1aH a~ees 1ha11he intent olthe 

rute revision was to dekrte lhe outdated general cond~ioos in §116.610(d)-(g) and aeale 

a new §116. 615 en1~1ed "General Cooditions: However. the final rute cannot be modified, because in the proposal, subsections 

(d)-(g) were proposed w~h no changes. 

Therefore, subsections (d)-(g) must be deleted in a future pr01X>58I. 

Intrastate and the TMOGA oHered changes to 

the definition of the term "'oil and gas facility" 

in §1 1 6.14, concerning Standard Permit Definitions. The TMOGA suggested using the 

term •water injection• in place of "'satl water 

disposal," and adding a defin~ion lor "sullur 

recovery unit"' to distinguish suHur reCOYery 

units from natural gas sweetening units. The 

new definition for sulfur recovery units would 

be •a process devtce whose pimary PIJlX>SS 

is to recover elemental sulfur from aci::t gas; a 

process device that incidentally recoVers minor quantities of elemental suHur dwing natural gas sweetening shall not be considered a 

sulfl.l' recovery unit: In Intrastate's opinion, 

the term "'facility cluster" is misleading and 

should be clarifted to include special types of 

equipment. 

The TNRGG has no objection 1o replacing 1he 

term "'satt water disposal• wilh ·water injection; adding a definition lor sulll.l' recOYery 

unit, and replacing the term •tacility cluSier" 

with "'facility." These changes have been incorporated into § 116.14 relating to definitions. 

Ho.vever, the TNRCC does not agree with 

the proposed definition tor a sunur reCOYery 

unit. The TMOGA does not consi::Jer a "'loGal" unit (a prcp-ietary device name) as a 

term of sulfur recovery and takes the position 

that the sulfur recovered by a Lo-Cal unit is 

incidental. Instead, the TNRCC consi::ters a 

Lo-Cal unit to be a true lorm ol sulfur recbv· 

ery, and retains the original language to ex· 

elude aU sulfur recOYery Wlits. 

lntraS1a1e, 1he GHASP, and the Gny ol Dallas 

disagreed wi1h para~aphs in §116.615, concerning General Cond~ions. They slated thai . 

in para(J"aph (1 ), the terms "'weHare and envi· 

ronment" should be added to the general 

purpose of pro1eding healh and property. In 

para~aph (2), the GHASP objected to the 

30-<lay time windCM to no1ity the TNRCC of 

changes in representations ot the permit Intrastate objected to the notificalion requi"ements in the case of plant shutdo.vns or 

deaeases in production levels. The City of 

Dallas and the GHASP S1a1ed 1hat para-

~aphs (2) and (6) should indude no1iriC81ion 

of local ai" quality agencies in changes of 

representation an::t l4KJf1 start-up. In para-

~aph (4), the GHASP S1a1ed tha1 the term 

"reasonable time• shouki be better defined 

because ij is too slbjective; ano1her 

commenter supported· lhe more general 

1erms. In para~aph (5), lntraS1ale dJjected 10 

notificalion requi"ements l4KJf'l changes in 

cons1ruclion scheduling.· The GHASP also 

desO-ed claririC81ion of time periods opacified 

in para~aphs (6) and (7). relating to start-14' 

notificalion and sampling requi"ements. FinaHy, the GHASP requeS1ed 1hat i-malion 

in para~aph (9), relating 10 recortl<eeping, 

should be maintained by the plant operalor 

for alleast five years, inSiead of two years as 

proposed. 

Responses follow the ader of comments 

presen1ed. The TNRCC feels that the concept 

ot "weHare" is adequately 1realed in para-

~aph (1) and is consiS1ent wijh the General 

Rules (30 TAG §101.4). No change is needed 

10 § 116.615(2), regarding the no1ificalion 10 

the TNRCC within 30 days after the change, 

because a facility may remain eligible for the 

sta..-.:::tard permit follo.ving changes; therefore, 

post-change notifica1ion is acceptable, bu1the 

rule wading has been modified to clarity this 

assu!l1)1ion. The TNRCC does not agree with 

lntraslale's request to exclude notifications in 

the cases of remOYal, shutdown, or other 

deaeases in emissions, because the cl.ITent 

wording ol §116.615(2) specifically Slates that 

notification to the TNRCC of changes in conditions is requi"ed it the tacility is no longer 

eligible for a Slandard pennit or it the change 

in co..-.:::tilions will resutl in a change in melhod 

ot control, a- change in character of emissions, or an inaease in discharge ot emissions. Notification to other ai" pollution 

agencies having jl..lisdK:tion has been added 

in para~aphs (2) and (6). The TNRCC has 

deci::ted to retain the term "reasonable time"' 

in pera(Japh (4), since ·reasonable ttme• for 

projed C0111Jielion wilt vary depe..-.:::ting on 

each project's size a..-.:::t complexity. In response to the comment regarding construelion progress in paragraph (5), I is necessary 

to monilor Slart of construction a..-.:::t construction inlerruptions to enforce the requirements 

ot para~aph (4). The TNRCC S1aH beieves 

that it is not necessary to specify a minimum 

lime for advance notification to lhe regional 

oHices prior to start-14' and sampling ot facilities which are eligibte fa a standard permit, 

since the lacililies are smaller sol.l'ces ot 

emissions. The TNRCC allocates staH resol.l'ces to larger emission sol.l'ces which are 

not eligible lor the standard permit; therefore, 

the TNRCC leets that nolification prior to 

start-14' and sampling in para~aphs (6) and 

(7) without a minimum time specified is adequale. 

The TNRCC atso disa(J"ees with Intrastate's 

requeSI to remove the requi"ement of contacting the TNRCC Office of Air Quality prior to 

sampling to otlain the proper data a..-.:::t forms 

and to get apprOYal for the S&r11Jiing method 

seleded. These requi"ements are necessary 

to maintain consiSiency and to ensu-e sampling is conduded properly. l.as11y, the 

TNRCC disagrees wijh the GHASP's request 

to requi"e five years of data lor demonstration 

ot complianca in §116.615(9) 'and 

§116.617(3)(E)(viii). The TNRCC teals 1hat 

the requirement to maintain information on 

file fa at least two years is sufficient to demonSirate compliance wilh slandard permit representations and is consistent with existing 

rules and CLITBnt permit requirements. A public compliance file is maintained at the 

TNRGG Austin olfica for periods much longer 

than two years a..-.:::t may be viewed upon 

request 

The TMOGA, Intrastate, the GHASP, and 

Pennzoil suggested revisions to 

§116.617(3)(A), concerning emission specifications. Several commenters desired the 

TNRCC to adopt some spec~ic oil and gas 

induS1ry 1erminology. The TMOGA disagreed 

wilh the wording concerning releases of more 

than 0.3 long tons of sulfl.l' per day by specitying vents or nares in dause (i), because the 

limits awly to venting or Haring, not the content of the petrochemicals themselves. Intraslate desred 1hal 1he standard permi1 

fimitation on sunur emissions should be expanded 10 1wo (2.0) long tons per day to be 

consistent with the applicable Slandard exemption tor oil and gas facilities. The TMOGA 

suggested that the proper term shouki be 

•routed"' instead of •vented"' in clause (ii). In 

clause (iii), the phrase "faill.l'e of utilities• 

shouki be replaced with "emergency relief of 

system pressure." The GHASP desired 1ha1 

n~ure discs should be placed ahead of any 

safety relief valves; TMOGA disagreed with 

this design because i..-.:::tustry safety policies 

expresSly prohilit this pradice. Finally, 

clause (vi) should be revised 1o clarity 1hat a 

40 million British thermal unit per hOll' heat 

input threshold reiates 10 maximum heat input 

during operation instead of being a design 

parameter. 

The TNRCC agrees to some minor changes 

in terminology contained in § 116. 617(3)(A)(i) 

and (ii) as recommended by 1he TMOGA. 

The TNRCC SlaH disa(Jees with the recomme..-.:::talion by Intrastate to change the sulfur 

limit to include facilities which co..-.:::tition produced gas "' to 2.0 long tons per day o1 

suHLI'. While it is true that Standard Exemption Number 66 inch.des sulfur recovery units 

which co..-.:::tition produced gas containing tess 

1han 1w0 long tons per day o1 sulfur compounds, this starDard permit does 1101 inch.De 

sulfl.l' recovery units. FL11her, sultl.l' which is 

not recovered is emitted to the, atmosphere 

and is timrted by Standard Exemption 66 to a 

maximum of 25tons per year of sulfl.l' dioxi::le 

a..-.:::t 4.0 pou..-.:ts per hol.l' of total sulfur compounds. 

+ ADOrTED RULES August 18, 1995 20 Te:rReg 6325 
Regarding the discussion of "4lfure disks in 

§116.617(3)(A)(o~. the TNRCC disa"ees 

wlh the reccmmenda.tion to requi'e rt4)t!Se 

discs on safety relief valves. because det.is 

from a ""'"ed disc could lodge in the safety 

valve causing it to maHunction and result in 

the loss of a vessel. Section 

116.817(3)(C)(i)(VII) and ~~(VII) raqui"e that 

accessible valves be leak-checked for fugitive 

emissions at least quarlerly wHh an approved 

gas analyzer. These same slbclauses allow 

the COI'J1)af1Y the option of installing rt4J!Ure 

discs on valves which are not monitored. Rega-ding §116.617(3)(A) ~u) and emervency 

procedures, the TNRCC disa"ees wHh the 

TMOGA's recommendation lo replace •taiiU"e 

of utilities• with •emergency reltet of system 

priSSU'e,• Alee this would likely exempt all 

relief v&ties from minimum vent height requnrnents. 

The TNRCC disagrees wHh the TMOGA's 

naoommendafion to base the oxides of nitrogen (NO) limitation on the maximum heal 

input dU"ing operation as ORJOS8d to by design specifiCBfion. The intent of this 

...,..."aph is IO OnsU"O thai oombuslion 

unils with a design maximum heat ii1Jut 

graaler than 40 mimon British thermal units 

(MMBiu) per hour wiD not exceed 0.06 

pounds of NO, per MMBfu. If based on heal 

input dl.l'ing actual operation, combustion 

units with design capaciUes o-eater than 40 

MMBiu could be able to operate at or below 

40 MMBfu and ami more than 0.06 pounds 

ol NO, per MMBiu. There would be no guarantee thai the unit would be able to achieve 

the 0.06 pounds per MMBiu NO, limHation if 

the heal input of the unH was increased 

above 40 MMBtu. 

Pemzoi offlnd an eddorial change in 

§116.617(3)(A)(w) to delete the phrase "relating to lhe Standard PermH list" because H 

appears to be redundant. 

The TNRCC does nol ag-ee with the Pennzoil 

comment thai the last sentence of 

§116.617(3)(A)(w) is redunclant and should 

be defefed. The current language is not redunclarC, since §116.211 (8)(1) of this IHie 

conlains applicable emission limits which are 

1101 listed in Standard Exert'4ltion Number 6. 

Many commenters submtned major comments on pocess and fugitive emissions limHs contained in §116.617(3)(A)(vi~~x). The 

TMOGA and PeMzoil requested that the uncontrolled process emission imHs for total 

volalile organic hydrocarbons in clause (vii) 

be set at 25 tons per year (tpy) and that the 

TNRCC sel a new limit of 20 tpy for fugitive 

volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. 

The existing 10 lpy app~cabiify lhnashold as 

Sfafed in the standard perml proposal for oil 

and gas facilities coukt impose regulatory 

bt.a'dens ~ regard to costs, while having 

negligible or quality benefits. Cornmenters 

also Slated thai requrements for monHoring 

total fugHive emissions below 25 lpy should 

be removed. because many of the aflecfed oil 

and gas facilities are in remote, n.n.l areas, 

making emissions controls and monitoring 

very COSily. Anolher major reccmmenda.tion 

for lhe prqx>sed rule language is to remove 

the leak defection requi'ements for hydrogen 

sutfi:le and sulh.r dkJxtde p-ocess emissions 

set forth in §116.617(3)(A)(ix). The TMOGA 

strongly oqected to stringent leak defection 

and repai' programs for the oil and gas industry, monitoring standards known as "28VHP," 

whidl require carective actions if VOC levels 

exceed 500 parts per miDion, and suggested 

the deletion of the enti"e §116.617(3)(C)OO. 

FinaUy, Intrastate again objected to fugitive 

leak detection for piping and valves smaller 

than a nominal two-inch diameter size. 

Pennzoil suggested thai §116.617(3)(A)(vi) 

and (via) could be improved by coiTbining 

them to read: "If total VOC emissions exceed 

25 lpy and total fuglive VOC emissions exceed 20 tpy, equipment wit be inspacfed according to subparagraph (C)(~." Alternatively, 

the TMOGA suggested language to not control VOC emissions a1 oil and gas facilities if 

total emissions are below 25 tpy and ~ fugitive emissions are below 20 tpy (as in Standard Exemption Number 66), and use "28M 

Guidelines" if total VOC emissions are equal 

to or -ve 25tpy and fugijives are above 20 

tpy. Relatively minor sugge~tions for the fugitive emissions sections in §116.617(3)(A)(vi)-

(x) were also included. The TMOGA requested that only piping and vafvas ~ater 

than two indles oominaJ size be included in 

fugitive emissions estimations. 

Regarding the TMOGA and PeMzoi comments on §116.617(3)(A)(vu) and (vio), the 

TNRCC a"ees to add flexibiiHy into the fugitive VOC monHoring requin!ments by considering the <fostance between the facifdy and the 

nearest off-plant receptor. This flexbility wil 

significantly reduce the number of facilittes 

subject IQ §116.617(3)(A)(viii). The TNRCC 

disag-ees with the recommendation to delete 

§116.617(3)(A)(vii~ and §116.617(3)(C)OO. 

The TNRCC feels this fugHive momoring pro-

"am is necessary to control large emission 

sou-ces, inciLJ:ting sources with unconb'olled 

emissktns g-ealer than 25 tpy whidl are bcaled dose to an off-plant recepfor and for an 

sources with unoontroJJed emissions ~er 

than 40 tpy. These controls are necessary to 

protect p!blic heafth, welfare, and the environment from the potential impacts of significant emission sources. 

The TNRCC disag-ees with lntrastale's recommendation to exdLJ:te piping and valves 

less than two inches in nominal size ~ the 

fugitive emissions estimation, since these 

must be included to determine the. level of 

lugitrve VOC monitoring covered under 

§116.617(3)(C)(~ or (i~. and for the sake of 

rule consistency. as stated previously. For the 

sake of consistency and general enQineering 

practices, 3D TAC Chapter 115 does not exclude piping and valves less than two inches 

in oominal diameter from monitoring requi-ements. Therefae, all piping must be moni· 

tored except as noted in the standard permH. 

The TMOGA requested thai afternalive methods to apprOYe flare design, such as EPA 

Referenca Mefhod 22, should be allowed fo 

be approved if approved by the executive 

director. Finally, the GHASP desi"ed thai infrared monitors be requi'ed to monitor ftame 

temperalu-e. The TMOOA opposed this view 

and offered that a thermoco14>le is equivalent 

to the use of inhred equipment for name 

temperalure detedion. 

Regarding §116.617(3)(A)(x), the TNRCC 

agrees to indLJ:te wording whidl wiD allow an 

20 Te:rReg 6326 August 18, 1995 Teras Register • 

equivalent performance Slandard approved 

by the commission. The intent o1 

§116.617(3)(A)(x) is for flares to meet the 

design and operational requrements o1 40 

Code ol Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 

60.18 and not lhe physical i15P11Cfion and 

testing requi"ements lhemsalves. The word 

"inspacled' has been removed """' lhe rule 

text to clarify this raqui"emenf. Regowding the 

recommandallon from the GHASP on lhe intared monlor, an Dr.-eel monilor is no1 in 

this case an enossions rNBsumg devioa. If is 

solely used to delecl flame-out conditions. 

OpacHy and - emiSSion operational ne- qui"ements ana contained in a separate rule 

(30 TAC §111.111(8)(4)). 

The TMOOA, lntnastafe, and PeMZoi ~ 

jected IO -hs in §116.617(3) (B), con- ca-ning control requirements. One 

commenter Sfafed thai the imHalions in subsection (~ should not apply to press..w.d 

fari<s. and thai -ing roof - - not 

be required unless the lank capacity is 

greater than 42,000 gallons. The existing rule 

isnguage limits tanks wifho<f -ing roofs to 

25,000 galons. Another commerder Sfafed 

that blmtls are the industry standard for 

measuring lank sizes (e.g., a 1,DDO-barrel 

limH). Furlher, BACT for storage - requi"es no oortro1s ~ lhe trua vapor pressure is 

lesslhan 1.5 pounds per square inch (psi), as staled in 3D TAC Chapter 115. The BACT 

requi"ement should be incnlased from 0.5 psi 

to 1.5 psi at maximu-n operating temperaIU"es, because these rules are designed to be 

the most stringent rules fo prove,.. ozone 

fonnalion in or qua11y nonaffainmenf areas. 

Additionally. the desired 42,000 gallon and 

1.5 psi levels are warranfed because lhay are 

equivale,.. to EPA~ for federal New 

Sou-ca Perflmlanoa Standards (NSPS) and 

Control Technology Guide6nes. Opposing 

this view, the GHASP raql»SSed thai the 

25,DOO-galon lank size linlifafion be re&lricled 

to 5,000 galons, above which floating lank 

roots woukt be requi'ed. 

Regll"ding comments to §116.617(3)(BW). 

the TNRCC - to include an exception 

for preSSIOized tari<s which con.,ty with 

Standard Exemption Nu- 83 and also 

a"""s to include the farm "nciminar relating 

to lank capacity, to allow for slight v-tions 

in lank capacify. 

The TNRCC disagrees wlh changing lhe size 

or vapor pressLI"I exempUon limits tor storage tarl<s, since lhe lirnHs in the proposed 

rule are consistent with current BACT requrements. The TNRCC also feels I is not 

necessary fo express the storage tarl< capacijy in units of ban"els, sinca lhe convension 

.. om unHs of gallons to barrels is very 

straightforward. In lacl, ban"els are used in 

monHorinO and reoorclceeping requi'emenls 

in para~ (E) of lhe standard parmi, but 

tarl< capacity is fypicaly sized in terms of 

galons. 

The GHASP and the TMOGA nasponded fo 

language in §116.617(3)(B)(~(IV), relating to 

control requi'ements.. In addition to using 

ftoating-roof ,.,.... to capfU"B vocs, - containment or destruction methods should 

be allowed. The TMOGA noted lhal ,.._... 

ized oontainers may be used to prevent hydrocarbon loss, as another option to requiring • 
floating roof tanks a flares. The GHASP 

questioned why vapor recovery systems 

(95%) are 3.0% less eHedive than combus· 

lion devices (98%), so that the two allerna· 

's are not equivalent. 

1 h8 TNRCC a(J"ees to modify the wading of 

§116.617(3)(B)(u)(ll)(-a-) tram "eoolrol efficiency• to •destruction efficiency• for consistency wijh §116.617(3)(B)(~(IV)(-a-). In 

response to the comment regarding the 3.0% 

difference between the control efficiencies at 

oombuSlion devices and vapor recovery systems, il is noltechnically leasble fa a vapor 

recovery system to achieve the same control 

efficiency as a combustion device. The 

TNRCC does not specify the type of control 

to be used, since this win vary depending on 

variables such as the type and quantity ol 

pollutants to be controllad, type of process, 

and technical and economic feasibility. The 

control etfeciencies K:tentifl8d in 

§116.617(3)(B)(ii)(ll)(-a-) and (-b-) raprasent 

efficiencies which lhe TNRCC Cln"entty considers to be best available and mosl: technicalfy feasible lor the respective control 

devices. 

It is important to note thai vapor reCCNery 

systems do not intrcduce new contaminants 

into ambient ai" as a resutl of lhe control 

p-ocess, as do combuSlian devices and 

flares. Vapor recovery systems remove contaminants tram a waSle stream, whereas 

combusrion devices convert contaminants 

into other less hazardous corJ1X)Unds which 

are then introduced into the atmosphere. 

The TMOGA suggestad amending 

16.617(3)(C)(~(I). concerning inspectioo 

-1uirements, to delete metric measurement 

units, include evaluation of SRlficable NSPS 

criteria fa determining whether to monitor 

piping and valves two inches in nominal size 

and smaller, and remove the term •1.4)stream· 

relaling to installation at ~LI'e discs to aDow 

nexibility in ruptl.l'e disc location. 

Regarding the TMOGA comments on 

§116.617(3)(C)(i)(l), metric equivalents are 

proposad as a method of being flexille, not 

as a restrictive measure. In the last sentence 

of the same slbclause. the TNRCC agrees 

with lhe TMOGA's recommendation to in· 

etude the applicabilijy of NSPS and Chapter 

115. The TNRCC also agrees wijh TMOGA's 

recommendation to delete •1.4)stream• to al· 

klw the option of instamng an upstream or 

downstream rupll.l'e disc. 

In §116.617(3)(C)(~(II), the GHASP questioned the definitton of the terms •technically 

feasible· and •rendared imp-adicar as they 

apply to repairs on leaking p-ocess VOC fugitive emissions. The same commenter similar1y questioned the definition of the term 

·reasonably accessible• in sliJclause (IV). 

Also, the commenler requested thai wakttTough inspection records be maintained on 

a weekly basis in subclause (V), and in 

subclause (VII) that press<re gouges should 

be installed to monitor rupture disc inteo-~YThese same commenls would also apply to 

§116.617(3)(C)(o), concerning oil and gas facilities which have the potential to emit over 

tons per year. 

Hegarding the GHASP's comments on the 

tenns •technically feasible• and •rendered im· 

p-acticat,· the TNRCC leels that these terms 

cannot be specifically defined, since there are 

too many variables to evaluate before a de· 

termination is made. The deflllilions will vary 

depending on the type and compledy of the 

p-oject or silualion. The TNRCC will deter· 

mine what ts considered 1echnically feasible• 

and a •rendered imp-adicar on a projed-byproject besis. 

Regarding the comment on the definition of 

the term •reasonably accesst:JJe• used in 

§116.617(3)(C)(~(IV) and (i~(IV), reasonably 

accessble valves are those which would not 

expose monitoring persoMel to immediale 

danger. The TNRCC determines whal is considered •reasonabfy accessible• on a caseby-case basis due to the variability of monitoring scenarios. The height imitation of two 

melers aiginaled in 40 CFR, Part 

60.482-7(h). which considers valves to be 

lnaccessble if they cannot be monitaed without elevating the monitoring personnel more 

than two meters above a support surface. 

Section 116.617(3)(C) (i)(IV) and (i)(IV) requi"e thai a list of inaccessible valves be 

maintained and made avaiiable 1.4)0n request; 

therelae, any valves which the company 

considers to be inaccessllle are sli>ject to 

evaluation by lhe TNRCC. 

Regarding the GHASP comment on 

§116.617(3)(C)O)(V) and O~(V) which identified the need to keep records documenting 

Visual, audllle, and oHadory inspedions, 

these recads are a .. eady inch.ded in 

§116.617(3)(E)(i~- Regarding lhe GHASP 

comment on §116.617(3)(C)(~(VII) and 

Oi)(VII) requesting that r'4't<re discs be requrad to be equipped wijh presslll! gouges, 

this requi"ement is a .. eady indudecl in these 

two slbclauses. The TNRCC does not agree 

wHh the GHASP's request to include 

§116.617(3)(C)(i~(XI) under 

§116.617(3)(C)(i~. Including the directad 

maintenance requi"ements in two locations 

under the same fugitive monitaing P'OO"am 

would ba redundant. 

The TMOGA suggested the removal of the 

requi"ement to perfcnn daily inspections for 

each sije in §116.617(3)(C)(ii~ on the basis 

that added expenses would make marginal oil 

and gas laciiHies u'1)r<lfrtable. 

The TNRCC has modifiad the language of 

§116.617(3)(A)(ix) and -ad new 

§116.617(3)(EW) to allow the optioo of installing ambient H.,S p-operty line manilas in the 

event it ts not possible fa operations personnel to check the lacilijy on a daily basis. This 

regulatory flexibility allows lor iow-cost, unmanned stn~eillance. 

The TNRCC hes replaced "plant personner 

with •operating personnel.· The TNRCC does 

not ao-ee with the recommendation to delete 

§116.617(3)(C)(iii) (Ill). This requ~ement is 

necessary in the evenl that eflorts Ia isolate 

and repai" the leak, as required by 

§116.617(3)(C)(iii)(l) and (II) are unsuocesslul. 

The TMOGA suggestad modifications to 

§116.617(3)(D). concerning approvad test 

methcds, in which air quality models could be 

used to demonstrate p-aper q,eration of condensers instead of using manilas. Use at 

dispersion modeling can be used tor p-ediding VOC emissions from gtycol dehydrata 

units. 

The TNRCC does not entirety a(J"ee with the 

TMOGA's recommendations to 

§116.617(3)(D), regarding the use of computer simulation mcdeling in lieu of ambient 

sam~ing to demonstrale p-aper in-use operation of a condenser. While computer simulations are effective tools for predicting air 

Quality impads, they cannel be used to verify 

actual operating conditions fa demonstration 

of complianca wijh permi timijs. The TNRCC 

maintains that sam~ing and testing is necessary to cbtain actual data to verify thai a 

control device is actually operating as p-eviously predictad or representad. 

The TMOGA, GHASP, and the CHy of Dallas 

ollerad corrections to §116. 617(3)(E). concerning monitaing and record<eeping requi"ements. The TMOGA arguad that 

inspection records be kepi for process vents 

a flares, but not for all p-ocess streams. The 

GHASP and the CHy of Dallas notad that 

local air pollution agencies should be includad in §116.617(3)(E)(~. regarding availabiiHy of lugHive inspection and repair 

information. 

The TNRCC ajJ"ees wHh the TMOGA's recommendation to allow records to be kept: on 

the total sutfu' content of gas process vents 

or nares, but does not agree with removing 

the optioo of keeping recads on the total 

suttl.l' content of gas processing srreams. The 

TNRCC prefers to include both options to 

aliow nexbilily in the method used fa demonstrating compliance with total sulfu' content 

rtmils. The TNRCC a179es with recommenda· 

lions to include ai" pollution control agencies 

in the notification requi"emenas under 

§116.615(6) and (7) and §116.617(3)(E)Q~. 

as recanmendad by GHASP and the City of 

Dallas. 

Under §116.617(3)(E)(1Y), the GHASP requested definition of the term •continuous 

compliance." The TMOGA suggestad that the 

term •continuous· in clause (iv) should be 

deleted from permit corJ1)liance demonstrations. 

Regarding the GHASP's request lor a delin~ 

lion of •continuous com~iance,• this term 

cannot be specifically defined, since demonstration of com~iance will vary depending on 

each facility and type of operation; therefae, 

the TNRCC wm determine how continuous 

com~iance will be demonstrated on a caseby-case basts. Continuous compliance may 

ba demonsb'ated through a variety at methcds which may include periodic monitoring or 

recording of app-opriate operational parameters on a continuous basis a on some ongoing specified lrequency. The TNRCC hes 

replaced the term •continuous· with "ongoing,• hoNever, to clarify its intent, because the 

former term can be confused with Continuous 

Emission Monitoring Systems, a technical 

sampling protocol. 

Subchapter A Definitions 

• 30 TAC §116.14 

The new section is adopted under the Texas 

HeaNh and Safety Code, Texas Clean Ar Act 

(TCAA) §362.017, which provides the 

TNRCC wijh the authorny to adopt rules con-

• ADOPTED RULES August 18, 1995 20 TexReg 6327 
sistent wijh the policy and pt6p0Ses ol the 

TCAA. 

§116.14. Standard Permit Definilions. The following words and terms, 

when used in this subchapter, shall have the 

following meanings, unless the context 

clearly indicates otherwise. 

Oil and gas facility-For the purposes 

of Subchapter F of this chapter (relating to 

Standard Permits) only, oil and gas facilities 

shall be defmed as facilities which handle 

gases and liquids associated with the production. conditioning. processing, and pipeline transfer of fluids found in geologic 

formations beneath the earth's surface. 

These oil and gas facilities include, but are 

not limited to: oil or gas production facilities; water injection facilities; carbon dioxide separation facilities; or oil or gas 

pipeline facilities consisting of one or more 

tanks. separators. dehydration units, free 

water knock-outs, gunbarrels, heater treaters, vapor recovery units, flares, pumps, 

internal combustion engines. gas turbines. 

compressors. natural gas liquid recovery 

units. or gas sweetening and other gas conditioning facilities. This definition does not 

include sulfur recovery units. 

Sulfur recovery unit-For the pur-

~ poses of Subchapter F of this chapter only, 

sulfur recovery unit shall be defmed as a 

process device whose primary purpose is to 

recover elemental sulfur from acid gas. 

Off-plant receptor-For the purposes 

of Subchapter F of this chapter only, offplant receptor shall be defined as any recreational area or residence or other structure 

not occupied or used solely by the owner or 

operator of the facilities or owner of the 

property upon which the facilities are located. 

This agency hereby certifies that the rule as 

adopted has been reviewed by legal counsel 

and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authaity. · 

Issued in Austin, Texas, on August 9, 1995. 

TRD-9510157 Lydia Oonzalez·Gromatzky 

Aeting Diractor, Laglllf 

Servi.;es Division 

Texas N81ural Resource 

Conservation 

Commission 

EHective dale: September 1, 1995 

Proposal publicatioo date: March 3, t995 

For h.rther information, please call: (512) 

239-1966 

• • • 

Subchapter F. Standard Permits 

• 30 TAC §§116.610, 116.615, 

116.617 

The amendments and new sedion are 

adopted under the Texas HeaHh and Safety 

Code, Texas Clean Ar Ad (TCAA), 

§382.017, which provides the TNRCC w~h 

the auhority to adopt rules consistent w~h 

the policy and purposes of the TCAA. 

§116.615. General Condirions. The following general conditions shall be applicable to holders of standard permits, but may 

not be specifically stated within the standard permit document. 

(I) Protection of public health 

and welfare. 1be emissions from the facility 

shall comply with all applicable rules and 

regulations of the Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission ('INRCC or 

commission) adopted under the Texas 

Health and Safety Code, Chapter 382, and 

with intent of the Texas Oean Air Act 

(TCAA). including protection of health and 

property of the public. 

(2) Standard permit representations. All representations with regard to 

construction plans, operating procedures, 

and maximum emission rates in any registration for a standard permit become conditions upon which the facility or changes 

thereto, shall be constructed and operated. It 

shall be unlawful for any person to vary 

from such representations if the change will 

affect that person's right to claim .a standard 

permit under this section. Any change in 

condition such that a person is no longer 

eligible. to claim a standard permit under 

this section requires proper authorization 

under §116.110 of this title (relating to Applicability). U the facility remains eligible 

to claim a standard permit. the owner or 

operator of the facility must notify the 

1NRCC of any change in conditions which 

will result in a change in the method of 

control of emissions, a change in the character of the emissions. or an increase in the 

discharge of the various emissions as compared to the representations in the original 

registration or any previous notification of a 

change in representations. Notice of 

changes in representations must be reccived 

by the 1NRCC no later than 30 days after 

the change. 

(3) Standard permit in lieu of 

permit amendment. All changes authorized 

by standard permit to a facility previously 

permitted pursuant to §116.110 of this title 

(relating to Applicability) shall be administratively incorporated into that facility's 

permit at such time as the permit is 

amended or renewed. 

(4) Voiding of standard permit. 

A standard permit under this chapter is automatically void if the holder fails to begin 

construction within 18 months of date of 

registration. discontinues construction for 

more than 18 consecutive months prior to 

completion, or fails to complete construe· 

tion within a reasonable time. Upon request. 

the executive director may grant a onetime 

18-month extension of the date to begin 

construction. 

20 TexReg 6328 August 18, 1995 Texas Register • 

(5) Construction progress. Start 

of construction, construction interruptions 

exceeding 45 days, and completion of construction shall be reported to the appropriate 

regional office of the 1NRCC not later than 

15 working days after occurrence of the 

event. 

(6) Start-up notification. The appropriate air program regional office of the 

commission and any other air pollution control program having jurisdiction shall be 

notified prior to the commencement of op· 

erations of lhe·facilities authorized by the 

standard permit in such a manner that a 

representative of the 1NRCC may be present. Phased construction, which may involve a series of units commencing 

operations at different times. shall provide 

separate notification for the commencement 

of operations for each unit. 

(7) Sampling requirements. If 

sampling of stacks or process vents is required, the standard permit holder shall contact the 1NRCC Office of Air Quality and 

any other air pollution control program having jurisdiction prior to sampling to obtain 

the proper data forms and procedures. All 

sampling and testing procedures must be 

approved by the executive director and coordinated with the regional representatives 

of the commission. 1be standard permit 

holder is also responsible for providing 

sampling facilities and conducting the sampling operations or contracting with an in-

. dependent sampling consultant. 

(8) Equivalency of methods. It 

shall be the responsibility of the standard 

permit holder to demonstrate or otherwise 

justify the equivalency of emission control 

methods, sampling or other emission testing 

methods. and monitoring methods proposed 

as alternatives to methods indicated in the 

conditions of the standard permit. Alternative methods shall be applied for in writing 

and must be reviewed and approved by the 

executive director prior to their use in fulfilling any requirements of the standard permit. 

(9) Recordkeeping. A copy of 

the standard permit along with information 

and data sufficient to demonstrate applica· 

bility of and compliance with the standard 

permit shall be maintained in a file at the 

plant site and made available at the request 

of persoMel from the lNRCC. United 

States Environmental Protection Agency. or 

any air pollution control program having 

jurisdiction. For facilities that normally operate unattended. this information shall be 

maintained at the nearest staffed location 

within Texas specified by the standard per· 

mit holder in the standard permit application. This information shall include, but is 

not limited to, production records and operating hours. Additional recordkeeping re· 

quirements may be specified in 

requirements for the standard permit. In for-
I 

mation in the file shall be retained for at 

least two years following the date that the 

information or data is obtained. 

(10) Maintenance of emission 

control. The facilities covered by the standard permit shall not be operated unless all 

air pollution emission capture and abatement equipment is maintained in good 

working order and operating properly during normal facility operations. Notification 

for upsets and maintenance shall be made in 

accordance with §101.6 and §101.7 of this 

title (relating to Notification Requirements 

for Major Upset and Notification Requirements for Maintenance). 

(11) Compliance with rules. 

Registration of a standard permit by a standard permit applicant constitutes an acknowledgement and agreement that the 

holder will comply with all rules, regulations. and orders of the commission issued 

in conformity with the TCAA and the conditions precedent to the granting of the standard permit. If more than one state or 

federal rule or regulation or permit condition are applicable. the most stringent limit 

or condition shall govern and be the standard by which compliance shall be demonstrated. Acceptance includes consent to the 

entrance of commission employees and 

agents into the permitted premises at reasonable times to investigate conditions relating to the emission or concentration of air 

)

contaminants, including compliance with 

'<, the standard permit. 

§II6.617. Standwd Permir List. Pursuant 

to the Texas Clean Air Act, §382.05!. projects involving the types of facilities or 

physical or operational changes to facilities 

listed in this section qualify for a standard 

permit subject to the conditions stated in 

§116.610 of this title (relating to Applicability). 

(1)-(2) (No change.) 

(3) Installation and/or modification of oil and gas facilities. 

(A) Emission specifications. 

(i) Venting or flaring 

more than 0.3 long tons per day of total 

sulfur shall not be allowed. 

(ii) No facility shall be allowed to emit total uncontrolled emissions 

of sulfur compounds, except sulfur dioxide 

(SOJ, from all vents (excluding process 

fugitives emissions) equal to or greater than 

four pounds per hour unless the vapors are 

collected and routed to a flare. 

'! (iii) Any venr, excluding 

any safety relief valves that discharge to the 

· )' atmosphere only as a result of fire or failure 

, of utilities. emitling sulfur compounds oilier l than sulfur dioxide. shall be at least 20 feet 

f above ground level. 

(iv) New or modified internal combustion reciprocating engines or 

gas turbines permitted under this standard 

permit shall satisfy all of the requirements 

of Standard Exemption Number 6, except 

that registration using the Form Pl-7 or Pl-8 

shall not be required. Emissions from engines or turbines shall be limited to the 

amounts found in §116.2ll(a)(l) of this 

title (relating to Standard Exemption List). 

(v) Total volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from a natural 

gas glycol dehydration unit shall not exceed 

ten tons per year (tpy) unless the vapors are 

collected and controlled in accordance with 

subparagraph (B)(ii) of this paragraph. 

(vi) Any combustion unit 

(excluding flares, internal combustion engines, or natural gas turbines), with a design 

maximum heat input greater than 40 million 

British thermal units (Btu) per hour (using 

lower heating values) shall not emit more 

than 0.06 pounds of nitrogen oxides (NO.) 

per million Btu. 

(vii) No facility which is 

less than 500 feet from the nearest off-plant 

receptor shall be allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions 

equal to or greater than ten tpy, but less 

than 25 tpy. unless the equipment is inspected and repaired according to 

subparagraph (C)(i) of this paragraph. 

(viii) No facility which is 

500 feet or more from the nearest off-plant 

receptor shall be allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions 

equal to or greater than 25 tpy unless the 

equipment is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph (C)(i) of this paragraph. 

(ix) No facility which is 

less than 500 feet from the nearest off-plant 

receptor shall be allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC process fugitive emissions 

equal to or greater than 25 tpy unless the 

equipment is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph (C)(ii) of this paragraph. 

(x) No facility shall be allowed to emit uncontrolled VOC process 

fugitive emissions equal to or greater than 

40 tpy unless the equipment is inspected 

and repaired according to subparagraph 

(C)(ii) of this paragraph. 

(xi) No facility which is 

located less than one quarter of a mile from 

the nearest off-plant receptor shall be allowed to emit hydrogen sulfide (H,Sl or 

so~ process fugitive emissions unless the 

e-,qu-ipment is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph (C)(iii) of this paragraph. No facility which is located at least 

one quaner of a mile from the nearest offplant receptor shall be allowed to emit H,S 

or so~ process fugitive emissions unless the 

equipffient is inspected and repaired according to subparagraph (C)(iii) of this paragraph or unless the H,S or SO, emissions 

are monitored with ambient property line 

monitors according to subparagraph (E)(i) 

of this paragraph. Components in sweet 

crude oil or gas service as defrned by Chapter 101 of this title (relating to General 

Rules) are exempt from these limitations. 

(xii) Flares shall be designed and operated in accordance with 40 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 

60.18 or equivalent standard approved by 

the commission. including specifications of 

minimum heating values of waste gas. maximum tip velocity, and pilot flame monitor~ 

ing. If necessary to ensure adequate 

combustion. sufficient gas shall be added to 

make the gases combustible. An infrared 

monitor is considered equivalent to a thermocouple for flame monitoring purposes. 

An automatic ignition system may be used 

in lieu of a continuous pilot. 

(xiii) Appropriate documentation shall be submitted to demonstrate 

that compliance with the Prevention of Sig-

' nif1cant Deterioration (PSD) and 

nonattainment new source review (NSR) 

provisions of the FCAA. Parts C and D. and 

regulations promulgated thereunder. are being met. The oil and gas facility shall be 

required to meet the requirements of 

Subchapter B of the chapter (relating to 

New Source Review Permits) instead of this 

subchapter if a PSD or nonattainment permit is required. 

(xiv) Documentation shall 

be submitted to demonstrate compliance 

with applicable New Source Performance 

Standards (NSPS, 40 CFR 60) and National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollution (NESHAP. 40 CFR 61). 

(xv) New and increased 

emissions shall not cause or contribute to a 

violation of any National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) or regulation 

property line standards as specified in 

Chapters 111, 112, and 113 of this title 

(relating to Control of Air Pollution From 

Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter; 

Control of Air Pollution From Sulfur Compounds; and Control of Air Pollution From 

Toxic Materials). Engineering judgment 

and/or computerized air dispersion modeling may be used in this demonstration. To 

show compliance with §116.610(a)(l) of 

this title (relating to Applicability) for H.,S 

emissions from process vents. ten mil!igrams per cubic meter shall be used as the 

'1.." value instead of the value represented 

by §116.610(a)(l) of this title. 

(xvi) Fuel for all combustion units and flare pilots shall be sweet 

natural gas or liquid petroleum gas. fuel gas 

containing no more than ten grains of total 

sulfur per 100 dry standard cubic feet 

(scdf), or field gas. If field gas contains 

+ ADOPTED RULES August 18, 1995 20 Tc:rReg 6329 
more than 1.5 grains of H,S or 30 grains 

lola! sulfur compounds per 100 scdf. the 

operator shall maintain records,- including at 

least quarterly measurements of fuel HlS 

and total sulfur content. which demonstrate 

that the annual SO, emissions from the facility do not exceed the limitations listed in 

the standard permit registration. If a flare is 

the only combustion unit on a property, the 

operator shall not be required to maintain 

such records on flare pilot gas. 

(B) Control requirements. 

(i) Aoaling roofs or 

equivalent controls shall be required on all 

new or modified storage tanks. other than 

pressurized tanks which meet Standard Exemption 83, unless the tank is less than 

25.000 gallons in nominal size or the vapor 

pressure of the compound to be stored in 

the tank is less than 0.5 pounds per square 

inch absolute (psia) at maximum short-term 

storage temperature. 

(I) For internal floating roofs. mechanical shoe primary seal or 

liquid-mounted primary seal or a vapormounted primary with a rim-mounted secondary seals shall be used. 

(ll) Mechanical shoe 

or liquid-mounted primary seals shall include a rim-mounted secondary seal on all 

external floating roofs tanks. Vapormounted primary seals will not be accepted. 

(Ill) All floating roof 

tanks shall comply with the requirements 

under §115.112(a)(2)(A)-(F) of this title (relating to Control Requirements). 

(IV) In lieu of a floating roof. tank emissions may be routed to: 

(-a-) a destruction 

device such that a minimum VOC destruction efficiency of 98% is achieved; or 

(-b-) a vapor recovery system such that a minimum VOC 

recovery efficiency of 95% is achieved. 

(V) lndependentofthe 

exemptions listed in this clause. if the emissions from any fixed roof tank exceed ten 

tpy of VOC or ten tpy of sulfur compounds, 

the tank emissions shall be routed to a 

destruction device, vapor recovery unit. or 

equivalent method of control that meets the 

requirements listed in subclause (IV) of this 

clause. 

(ii) The VOC emissions 

from a natural gas glycol dehydration unit 

shall be controlled as follows. 

(!) If total uncontrolled VOC emissions are equal to or 

greater than ten tons per year, but less than 

50 tons per year. a minimum of 80% by 

weight minimum control efficiency shall be 

achieved by either operating a condenser 

and a separator (or flash tank), vapor recovery unit, destruction device. or equivalent 

control device. 

(ll) If total uncontrolled VOC emissions are equal- to or 

greater than SO tpy, a minimum of: 

(·a·) 98% by 

weight minimwn destruction efficiency 

shall be achieved by a destruction device or 

equivalent; or 

(-b-) 95% by 

weight minimum control efficiency shall be 

achieved by a vapor recovery system or 

equivalent. 

(C) Inspection requirements. 

(i) Owners or operators 

who are subject to subparagraph (A)(vii) or 

(viii) of this paragraph shall comply with 

the following requirements. 

(I) No component 

shall be allowed to have a VOC leak for 

more than 15 days after the leak is detected 

to exceed a VOC concentration greater than 

10, 000 parts per million by volume (ppmv) 

above background as methane, propane, or 

hexane, or the dripping or exuding of process fluid based on sight. smell, or sound 

for all components. The VOC fugitive emission components which contact process fluids where the VOCs have an aggregate 

partial pressure or vapor pressure of less 

than 0.5 psia at 100 degrees Fahrenheit are 

exempt from this requirement. If VOC fugitive emission components are in service 

where the operating pressure is at least 

0.725 pounds per square inch (psi) (five 

kilopascals (Kpa)) below ambient pressure. 

then these components are also exempt 

from this requirement as long as the equipment is identified in a list that is made 

available upon request by Texas Natural 

Resource Conservation Commission 

(1NRCC) representatives. the EPA. or any 

other air pollution agency having jurisdiction. All piping and valves two inches nominal size and smaller. unless subject to 

Federal New Source Performance Standards 

requiring a fugitive VOC emissions leak 

detection and repair program or Chapter 

1 15 of this title (relating to Control of Air 

Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds). are also exempt from this requirement. 

<m All technically 

feasible repairs shall be made to repair a 

20 TexReg 6330 August 18, 1995 Texas Register • 

VOC leaking process fugitive component 

within 15 days after the leak is detected. If 

the repair of a component would require a 

unit shutdown, the repair may be delayed ., 

until the next scheduled shutdown. All leak- ~), 

ing components which caMot be repaired 

until a scheduled shutdown shall be identified for such repair by tagging. The 

1NR.CC executive director, at his or her 

discretion. may require early unit shutdown 

or other appropriate action based on the 

number and severity of tagged leaks awaiting shutdown. 

(Ill) New and reworked underground process pipelines containing VOCs shall contain no buried valves 

such that process fugitive emission inspection and repair is rendered impractical. 

(IV) To the extent that 

good engineering practice will permit, new 

and reworked valves and piping connections 

in VOC service shall be so located to be 

reasonably accessible for leak-checking during plant operation. Valves elevated more 

than two meters above a support surface 

will be considered non-accessible and shall 

be identified in a list to be made available 

upon request 

(V) New and reworked piping connections in VOC service 

shall be welded or flanged. Screwed con- ~) 

nections are permissible only on piping ... , 

smaller than two-inch diameter. No later 

than the next scheduled quarterly monitoring after initial installation or replacement, 

all new or reworked coMections shall be 

gas-tested or hydraulically-tested at no less 

than normal operating pressure and adjustments made as necessary to obtain leak-free 

performance. Ranges in VOC service shall 

be inspected by visual. audible, and/or olfactory means at least weekly by operating 

personnel walk-through. 

(VI) Each open-ended 

valve or line in VOC service, other than a 

valve or line used for safety relief. shall be 

equipped with a cap, blind flange, plug. or a 

second valve. Except during sampling, the 

second valve shall be closed. 

(VTI) Accessible 

valves in VOC service shall be monitored 

by leak-checking for fugitive emissions at 

least quarterly using an approved gas 

analyzer. For valves equipped with rupture 

discs, a pressure gauge shall be installed 

between the relief valve and rupture disc to 

monitor disc integrity. All leaking discs 

shall be replaced at the earliest opportunity, • 

but no later than the next process shutdown. 

Sealless/leakless valves (including, but not 

limited to, welded bnnnet bellows and dia-
1 

l 

l 

' 

phragm valves) and relief valves equipped 

with a rupture disc or venting to a control 

tt-·ice are exempt from monitoring. 

(VIII) Dual pump 

seals with barrier fluid at higher pressure 

than process pressure, seals degassing to 

vent control systems kept in good working 

order, or seals equipped with an automatic 

seal fallure detection and a1ann system, 

submerged pumps. or sealless pumps (in· 

cluding. but not limited to. diaphragm. 

canned. or magnetic driven pumps) are ex· 

empt from monitoring. 

(IX) All other pump 

and compressor seals emitting VOC shall be 

monitored with an approved gas analyur at 

least quarterly. 

(X) After completion 

of the required quarterly inspections for a 

period of at least two years. the operator of 

the oil and gas facility may request in writing to the lNRCC. Office of Air Quality. 

New Source Review Division that the moni· 

toring schedule be revised based on the 

percent of valves leaking. The percent of 

valves leaking shall be detennined by divid· 

ing the sum of valves leaking during CUJTent 

monitoring and valves for which repair has 

._, delayed by the total number of valves 

>ject to the requirements. This request 

.oall include all data that has been developed to justify the following modifications 

in the monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two 

consecutive quarterly leak detectinn periods 

with the percent of valves leaking equal to 

or less than 2J)fo, an owner or operator _ 

may begin to slcip one of the quarterly leak 

detection periods for the valves in gas/vapor 

and light liquid service. 

( ·b·) After five 

consecutive quarterly leak detection periods 

with the pereent of valves leaking equal to 

or less than 2.0%. an owner or operator 

may begin to slcip three of the quarterly leak 

detection periods for the valves in gas/vapor 

and light liquid service. 

(ii) Owners or operators 

who are subject to subparagraph (A)(ix) or 

(x) of this para&raph shall comply with the 

following requirements. 

(I) No component 

shall be allowed to have a VOC leak for 

more than 15 days afrer the leak is found 

which exceeds a VOC concentration greater 

than 500 ppmv for all components except 

pumps and compressors and greater than 2. 

-'X) ppmv for pumps and compressors 

JOve back&round as methane, propane, or 

hexane, or the dripping or exuding of process fluid based on sight, smell. or sound. 

The VOC fugitive emission components 

which contact process fluids where the 

VOCs have an aggregate partial pressure or 

vapor pressure of less than 0. 044 psia at 

I 00 degrees Fahrenheit are exempt from 

this requirement. If VOC fugitive emission 

components are in service where the operat· 

ing pressure is at least 0.725 psi (five Kpa) 

below ambient presswe. these components 

are also exempt from this requirement as 

long as the equipment is identified in a list 

that is made avallable upon request by 

lNRCC representatives, the EPA, or any 

air pollution control agency having jurisdiction. All piping and valves two inches nominal size and smaller are also exempt from 

this requiremenl 

(II) All technically 

feasible repairs shall be made to repair a 

VOC leaking process fugitive component 

within 15 days afrer the leak is detected. If 

the repair of a component would require a 

unit shutdown. the repair may be delayed 

until the next scheduled shutdown. All leaking components which cannot be repaired 

until a scheduled shutdown shall be identified for such repair by tagging. The executive director. at his or her discretion, may 

require early unit shutdown or other appro· 

priate action based on the number and severity of tagged leaks awaiting shutdown. 

(Ill) New and reworked underground process pipelines containing VOCs shall contain no buried valves 

such that process fugitive emission inspection and repair is rendered impractical. 

(IV) To the extent that 

good engineering practice will permit. new 

and reworked valves and piping coMections 

in VOC service shall be· so located to be 

reasonably accessible for lw-<:hecking during plant operation. Valves elevated more 

than two meters above a support surface 

will be considered non-accessible and shall 

be identified in a list to be made available 

upon request. 

(V) New and ~-

worked piping coMections in VOC service 

shall be welded or flanged. Screwed connections are permissible only on piping 

smaller than two-inch diameter. No later 

than the next scheduled quarterly monitoring after initial installation or replacement. 

all new or reworked coMections shall be 

gas-tested or hydraulically-tested at no less 

than normal operating pressure and adjustments made as necessary to obtain leak·free 

performance. Flanges in VOC service shall 

be inspected by visual audible. and/or olfactory means at least weekly by operaLing 

personnel wallc.-through. 

(VI) Each open-ended 

valve or line in VOC service, other than a 

valve or line used for safety relief. shall be 

equipped with a cap. blind flange. plug. or a 

second valve. Except during sampling. the 

second valve shall be closed. 

(VIT) Accessible 

valves in VOC service shall be monitored 

by leak-<:hecking for fugitive emissions at 

least quarterly using an approved gas 

ana!:~=. For valves equipped with rupture 

discs. a pressure gauge shall be installed 

between the relief valve and rupture disc to 

monitor disc integrity. All leaking discs 

shall be replaced at the earliest opportunity. 

but no later than the next process shutdown. 

Sealless/leakless valves (including, but not 

limited to, welded boMet bellows and diaphragm valves) and relief valves equipped 

with a rupture disc or venting to a control 

device are exempt from monitoring. 

(VIIT) Dual pump 

seals with barrier fluid at higher pressure 

than process pressure, seals degassing to 

vent control systems kept in good working 

order or seals equipped with an automatic 

seal failure detection and alarm system, 

submerged pumps. or sealless pumps (including. but not limited to, diaphragm. 

canned. or magnetic driven pumps) are ex· 

empt from monitoring. 

(IX) All other pump 

and compressor seals emitting VOC shall be 

monitored with an approved gas analyzer at 

least quarterly. 

(X) Nter completion 

of the required quarterly inspections for a 

period of at least two years, the operator of 

the oil and gas facility may request in writing to the lNRCC. Office of Air Quality, 

New Source Review Division that the monitoring schedule be revised based on the 

percent of valves leaking. The percent of 

valves leaking shall be determined by dividing the sum of valves leaking during current 

monitoring and valves for which repair has 

been delayed by the total number of valves 

subject to the requirements. This request 

shall include all data that have been developed to justify the following modifications 

in the monitoring schedule. 

(-a-) After two 

consecutive quarterly leak detection periods 

with the percent of vaflves leaking equal to 

or less than 2.0%, an owner or operator 

may begin to slcip one of the quarterly leak 

detection periods for the valves in gas/vapor 

and light liquid service. 

(·b·) Nter flve 

consecutive quarterly leak detection periods 

with the percent of valves lealcing equal to 

or less than 2.0%, an owner or operator 

• ADOPTED RULES August 18, 1995 20 Te:rReg 6331 
may begin to skip three of the quanerly leak 

detection periods for the valves in gas/vapor 

and light liquid service. 

(XI) A directed maintenance program shall be used and consist 

of the repair and maintenance of VOC fugitive emission components assisted simultaneously by the use of an approved gas 

analyzer such that a minimum concentration 

of leaking VOC is obtained for each component being maintained. Replaced components shall be remonitored within 30 days 

of being placed back into VOC service. 

(iii) For owners and operators who are subject to the applicable parts 

of subparagraph (A)(xi) of this paragraph, 

auditory and visual checks for SO, and H.,S 

leaks within the operating area shall be 

made every day. Immediately. but no later 

than eight hours upon detection of a leak. 

operating personnel shall take the following 

actions: 

(I) isolate the leak; 

and 

(ll) commence repair 

or replacement of the leaking component; or 

(III) use a leak collection/containment system to prevent the leak 

until repair or replacement can be made if 

immediate repair is not possible. 

(D) Approved rest methods. 

(i) An approved gas 

analyzer used for the VOC fugitive inspection and repair requirement in subparagraph 

(C) of this paragraph. shall conform to requirements listed in 40 CFR 60.485(a) and 

(b). 

(ii) Tutweiler analysis or 

equivalent shall be used to determine the 

hydrogen sulfide content as required under 

subparagraphs (A) and (E) of this paragraph. 

(iii) Proper operation of 

any condenser used as a VOC emissions 

control device to comply with subparagraph 

(A)(v) of this paragraph shall be tested to 

demonstrate compliance with the minimum 

control efficiency. Sampling shall occur within 60 days after stan-up of new or 

modified facilities. The permittee shall contact the Engineering Services Section. Air 

Quality Enforcement Division 45 days prior 

to sampling for approval of sampling protocol. The appropriate regional office in the 

region where the source is located shall also 

be contacted 45 days prior to sampling to 

provide them the opponunity to view the 

sampling. Neither the regional office nor 

the Engineering Services Section. Air Quality Enforcement Division personnel are required to view the testing. Sampling repons 

which comply with the provisions of the 

1NRCC Sampling Procedure Manual. 

Chapter 14. shall be distributed to the appropriate regional office, any local programs. and the Engineering Services 

Section. Air Quality Enforcement Division. 

(E) Monitoring and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

(i) If the operator elects 

to install and maintain ambient H,S property line monitors to comply with 

subparagraph (A)(xi) of this paragraph. the 

monitors shall be approved by the 1NRCC 

Engineering Services Section, Air Quality 

Enforcement Division office in Austin. and 

shall be capable of detecting and alarming 

at H,S concentrations of ten ppmv. Operations persoMel shall perform an initial onsire inspection of the facility within 24 

hours of initial alarm and take corrective 

actions as listed in subparagraph (C)(iii)(l)-

(lll) of this paragraph within eight hours of 

detection of a leak. 

(ii) The results of the 

VOC leak detection and repair requirements 

shall be made available to the executive 

director, his or her designated representative. or any air pollution control 

agency having jurisdiction upon request. 

Records, for all components. shall include: 

(I) appropriate dates; 

(ll) test methods; 

(III) instrument readings; 

(IV) repair results; and 

(V) corrective actions. 

Records of flange inspections are not required unless a leak is detected. 

(iii) Records for repairs 

and replacements made due to inspections 

of H,S and SO, components shall be maintained. 

(iv) Records shall be kept 

for each production, processing. and pipeline tank banery or for each storage tank if 

not located at a tank battery. on a monthly 

basis. as. follows: 

(I) tanlc battery identification or storage tank identification. if not 

located at a tank banery; 

(ll) compound stored; 

20 TerReg 6332 August 18, 1995 Tems Register • 

(Ill) monthly throughput in barrels/month; and 

(IV) cwnulative annual throughput, banels/year. 

(v) A plan shall be submitted to show how ongoing compliance 

will be demonstrated for the efficiency requirements listed in subparagraph (B)(i) 

(IV) of this paragraph. The demonstration 

may include. but is not limited to. monitoring flowrates, temperatures. or other operating parameters. 

(vi) Records shall be kept 

on at least a monthly basis of all production 

facility flow rates (in standard cubic feet per 

day) and total sulfur content of process 

vents or flares or gas processing streams. 

Total sulfur shall be calculated in long tons 

per day. 

(vii) Records shall be 

kept of all ambient property line monitor 

alarms and shall include the date, time, 

duration. and cause of alarm, date and time 

of initial on-site inapection. and date and 

time of corrective actions taken. 

(viii) AU required records 

shall be made available to representatives of 

the 1NRCC, EPA, or local air pollution 

control agencies upon request and be kept 

for at least two years. AU required records 

shall be kept at the plant site. unless the 

plant site is unmanned during business 

hours. For plant sites ordinarily unmanned 

during business hours. the records shall be 

maintained at the nearest office in the state 

having day-to-day operations control of the 

plant site. 

This agency hereby cenifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by legal counsel 

and lcund to be a valid exercise ol the agency's authaity. 

Issued in Austin. Texas. on August 9, 1995. 

TR0-9510158 L)'dla GonzUz-Gromatzky 

Acting Olreclor, Legal 

Services Diviaion 

Taxa PU~ural Reaource 

Conaervallon 

Commluion 

Eftective date: September 1, 1995 

Proposal publication dale: March 3. 1995 

FIJ" further information, please call: (51 2) 

239-!966 

• • •