## TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT

Revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan

Submitted on January 5, 2015

Chapter 114

– Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles

Subchapter H. Low Emission Fuels Division 1. Gasoline Volatility
Section 114.301 Control Requirements for Reid Vapor Pressure Section 114.304 Registration of Gasoline Producers and Importers Section 114.306 Recordkeeping Requirements Section 114.307 Exemptions
Section 114.309 Affected Counties



### June 1 , 2015

FOR FURTHER INFO RMATION CONTACT: Ms. Tracie Donaldson , United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, Air Permits Section (6PD

- R), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202

- 2733, (214) 665

- 6633

.1

Contents:
I. Introduction

II. Background

II I

. Technical Evaluation of SIP Submittal
A. Review of 30 TAC Chapter 114 Low RVP Gasoline Program Rule Revision
B. Part 51, Appendix V Completeness Checklist

IV

. Proposed Action2

I. Introducti o n

This technical support document (TSD) evaluates a revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted on January 5, 2015 and signed by the Governor’s designee, TCEQ Chairman Shaw. On September 10, 2014, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) adopt ed revisions to 30 Administrative Code Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles , Subchapter H. Low Emission Fuel s

. This review will determine if the changes to the Texas SIP are consistent with the requir ements of the Clean Air Act and EPA’s policy and guidance.

The TCEQ adopted amended Sections 114.306, 114.307, 114.309 and repealed Section 114.304 of 30 Texas Administrative Code Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from
Motor Vehicles and corresponding revisions to the state implementation plan. The amendments remove the prohibition on the increased use of methyl

- tertiary

- butyl

- ether (MTBE) in gasoline to conform to the low Reid vapor pressure (RVP) gasoline requirements; remove the r equirements for gasoline producers and importers that supply low RVP gasoline to the affected counties; remove annual reporting and certification requirements on the use of MTBE in low RVP gasoline; and make other non

- substantive clarifying changes as need ed for accuracy and consistency.

The changes to sections 114.307 and 114.309 and the repeal of section 114.304 were submitted for SIP approval. The revision to section 114.301 was not in the approved SIP. One revision to section 114.306 was in 114.306(c) which was inadvertently approved into the SIP and is being removed by this action

.

II. Background

The use of MTBE as an oxygenate for compliance with RFG regulations and as a gasoline octane enhancement was common when TCEQ adopted Chapter 114 in July 1999. Amid growing concern over MTBE contamination in ground and surface waters, TCEQ adopted the prohibition specified in 114.301(c) in April 2000 to prevent gasoline producers from increasing the use of MTBE to conform to the low RVP requirements.
T he registration requirements in 114.304 and the annual reporting requirements specified in 114.306(c) were also adopted in April 2000 to enhance the enforceability of the MTBE prohibition in 114.301(c). The EPA approved the Low RVP Gasoline Program rules i n Chapter 114 as a SI P control strategy for the one

- hour ozone NMOS in the Houston

Galveston

- Brazoria and Dallas

- Fort Worth nonattainment areas in the April 26, 2001, issue of the Federal Register (66 FR 20927).

Subsequently, with the passage of the Energ y Policy Act in 2005, the federal regulations requiring the use of oxygenates, such as MTBE, in RFG were repealed and a new federal
renewable fuel standard requiring the use of ethanol in gasoline was enacted. As a result, gasoline producers began to blend ethanol into gasoline to meet the new federal renewable fuel standard, and MTBE was effectively removed from general use as a gasoline additive by the gasoline refining industry, primarily due to growing concerns over the MTBE contamination of groundwater and surface water. Samples of gasoline
collected statewide in 2011 for a summer fuel field study conducted by the TCEO3

showed only trace amounts of MTBE in some samples, i.e., less than 0.1 % by volume, while every gasoline sample collected contained etha nol ranging from 1.99% to 9.44% by
volume.

The amendments to the Regional Low RVP Gasoline Program rules remove obsolete requirements that provide no benefit to the state and are no longer necessary for the implementation and enforcement of the primary ga soline volatility control requirements of the rule. In addition, the proposal would provide regulatory consistency between the Chapter 114 gasoline volatility requirements and the E l Paso Low RVP Gasoline requirements, specified in the 30 Texas Administrat ive Code (TAC) Chapter 115 regulations in §§115.252, 115.253, 115.255

- 115.257, and 115.259, which do not prohibit the use of MTBE and do not require registration and annua1 reporting.4

I II. Technical Evaluation of the Texas January 5, 2015 SIP Revision Submittal

The action accompanying this TSD addresses the proposed revisions to the Low Emission Fuels Program Requirements found in Chapter 114 Subchapter H of the Texas SIP. Chapter 114 Subchapter H contains the regulations for the control of low RVP114.307 Fuels.

This submittal contains both substantive and non

- substantive changes. The substantive changes are specified and addressed in the tables below. In this table new text is underlined and deleted text is depicted with strikeout

.

A. Review of Chapter 114 revisions

Table I.A Chapter 114 Subchapter H Revisions
Revisions to the Texas SIP Adopted on September 10, 2014 Submitted on January 5, 2015 SIP Revision Submittal January 5, 2015 Comments

114.304. Registration of Gasoline Producers and Importers. Each producer and importer that, as of May 1, 2000, sells, offers for sale, supplies, or offers for supply from its production facility or import facility gasoline to counties listed in §114.309 of this title (relating to Affected Counties) shall register with the executive director, or his designated representative, by July 1, 2000. Beginning July 1, 2000, gasoline producers and importers that are not supplying gasoline to the affected counties as of May 1, 2000, shall register wi thin 30 days after the first date that such person will produce or import gasoline intended to be sold, offered for sale, supplied, or offered for supply from its production or import facility to counties listed in §114.309 of this title. Registration shal l be on forms prescribed by the executive director, or his designated representative, and shall include a statement of acceptance of the standards and enforcement provisions of this division; and shall include a statement of consent by the registrant that the executive director, or his designated representative, shall be permitted access to documentation and records. The executive director, or his designated representative, shall maintain a listing of all registered producers and importers. This requirement was added to enhance the enforceability of the
MTBE restriction. It is no longer needed since MTBE is no longer in significant use as a fuel
additive.

Section 114.306 Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Certification Requirements. (c) Each producer and importer subject to the provisions of §114.301 of this title shall submit to the executive director, or his designated representative, by November 30 of each year, a report which includes a quantification of the total gallons of gasoline and the total gall ons of MTBE contained in gasoline for which the transfer documents contain the statement in subsection (b)(7) of this section during the periods May 1 through October 1 of 1998 and May 1 through October 1 of the current calendar year. The certifying report shall attest that all information contained in the report is true and accurate and is based on knowledge of the certifying official. The report must also
include either: (1) a certification statement that the use of MTBE in gasoline for which t he transfer documents contain the statement in subsection (b)(7) of this section during the period May 1 through October 1 of the current calendar This provision was adopted under stat e authority to protect groundwater and was not
intended to be included in
the SIP. This was specifically stated in the
SI P submittal dated April
25 , 2000 but was inadvertently included in the SIP. Therefore, we are removing it from the SIP.5

Table I.A Chapter 114 Subchapter H Revisions
Revisions to the Texas SIP Adopted on September 10, 2014 Submitted on January 5, 2015 SIP Revision Submittal January 5, 2015 Comments

year has not increased on an average per gallon basis over that in the period May 1 through October 1, 1998; or (2) if the average per gallon use of MTBE during the period May 1 through October l of the current calendar year exceeds the average per gallon use of MTBE during the period May 1 through October 1, 1998, documentation and explanation of the basis for the increased use in a manner sufficient to demonstrate that the producer or importer did not increase the use of MTBE during the period covered by the certification to conform with §114.301(a) of this title.

Section 114.30 7 Exemptions (a) The following uses are exempt from §§114.301, 114.305, and 114.306 of this title (relating to Control Requirements for Reid Vapor Pressure; Approved Test Methods; and Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Certification Requirements): This change simply
reflects the fact that there are no longer reporting
and certification requirements (Section 114.304) and is not
substantive.
Section 114.309 Affected

Counties All affected persons in the following counties shall be in compliance with §§114.301 and §§114.405 114.304

- 114.307 of this title (relating to Control Requirements for Reid Vapor Pressure ; Registration of Gasoline Producers and Importers ; Approved Test Meth ods; Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Certification Requirements; and Exemptions) no later than the dates specified in §114.301(b) of this title: Anderson, Angelina, Aransas, Atascosa, Austin, Bastrop, Bee, Bell, Bexar, Bosque, Bowie, Brazos, Burleson, Caldwe ll, Calhoun, Camp, Cass, Cherokee, Colorado, Comal, Cooke, Coryell, De Witt, Delta, Ellis, Falls, Fannin, Fayette, Franklin, Freestone, Goliad, Gonzales, Grayson, Gregg, Grimes, Guadalupe, Harrison, Hays, Henderson, Hill, Hood, Hopkins, Houston, Hunt, Jack son, Jasper, Johnson, Karnes, Kaufman, Lamar, Lavaca, Lee, Leon, Limestone, Live Oak, Madison, Marion, Matagorda, McLennan, Milam, Morris, Nacogdoches, Navarro, Newton, Nueces, Panola, Parker, Polk, Rains, Red River, Refugio, Robertson, Rockwall, Rusk, Sab ine, San Augustine , San Jacinto, San Patricio, San Augustine , Shelby, Judge Smith, Somervell, Titus, Travis, Trinity, Tyler, Upshur, Van Zandt, Victoria, Walker, Washington, Wharton, Williamson, Wilson, Wise,
and Wood. These changes also reflect
the elimi nation of the registration and reporting requirements and are not
substantive.
There is also a correction
to the list of counties to put them into alphabetic order. This change is not
substantive.

The anal ysis presented above in Table I.A. demonstrates that the re visions to Texas Chapter 114, Subchapter H submitted on January 5, 2015 , are approvable.6

B. Part 51, Appendix V Completeness Checklist

The criteria for completeness determination are found in Appendix V to Part 51

– Criteria for determining the completeness of plan submissions and are outlined below:

1.0 Purpose: This appendix V sets forth the minimum criteria for determining whether a state implementation plan submitted for consideration by the EPA is an official submission for purposes of review under § 51.103.

1.1 The EPA shall return to the submitting official any plan or revision thereof which fails to meet the criteria set forth in this appendix V, and request corrective action, identifying the component(s) absent or insuffi cient to perform a review of the submitted plan.

1.2 The EPA shall inform the submitting official whether or not a plan submission meets the requirements of th is appendix V within 60 days of the EPA ’s receipt of the submittal, but

no later than 6 months af ter the date which the State was required to submit the plan or revision. If a completeness determination is not made by 6 months from receipt of a submittal, the submittal shall be deemed complete by operation of law on the date 6 months from receipt. A determination of completeness under this paragraph means that the submission is an official submission for purposes of § 51.103.

The attached checklist outlines the basic criteria included under 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 of Appendix V.7

Administrative Materials (2.1)

1. The package is sent with a formal submittal letter from the Governor or his or her designee requesting the EPA ’s approval of the revision.

The SIP revisions addressed in this action were sub mitted via letter from Commissioner

Shaw dated January 5, 2015

.

2. Evidence is included that the State has adopted the revision in the State code or body of regulations, or that the State has issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter document) in final form. This evidence would include the date of ad option or final issuance and the effective date of revision, if different from the adoption/issuance date.

The SIP revisions addressed in this action were adopted September 10, 2014

.

3. Evidence is included that the State has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the revision, e.g., a citation of the appropriate State authority. Legal authority discussed in Section V

- A

4. A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the SIP including an indication of the changes made to the existing approved place where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.

The SIP submittal included a copy of the official State regulation document.

5. Evidence is included that the S tate followed all of the procedural requirements of its laws and/or its constitution in the conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan.

The SIP submittal package include d a certification demonstrating the SIP submittal was developed pursu ant to 40 CFR 51.104.

6. Evidence is included that public notice was given of the proposed changes consistent with the procedures approved by the EPA , including the date of publication of such notice (e.g., notarized or certified copies of any public notices published in newspapers). (The notice should be at least 30 days prior to the public hearing(s).8

The SIP submittal addressed in this action included a summary of the Public Notices published for the rule revisions, as well as, copies showing evidence of the published notices. These public notices included information regarding the public comment period and upcoming public hearings.

7. A certification is included indicating that public hearing(s) was/were held in accordance with the information provided in t he public notice(s) and the State’s laws and constitution, if applicable.

The SIP submittal contain ed a signed affidavit that certif ied that the required procedures

were followed with respect to public notice, public hearing, and public participation.

8. A c ompilation of public comments and the State’s response is included.

The SIP submittal addressed in this action included copies of comments received from the public on the State regulation, as well as, as the State’s responses to the comments

received.9

Technical Support (2.2)

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the revision included.

Volatile Organic Compounds

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations an d the status of the attainment plan for the affected area(s) is included.

The provisions evaluated as part of this action can be applied statewide.

3. Quantifications of the changes in SIP allowable emissions from the affected sources is included. (Examples include estimates of changes in current actual emissions from affected sources and/or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline

levels and allowa ble emissions anticipated if the revisions were approved.)

Not applicable to this SIP revision. The new regulation only affects the fees paid in order to emit pollutants, but does not affect emission levels directly.

4. Demonstration is included that the NAA QS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and visibility as applicable would be protected if the revision were approved and implemented.

Not applicable to this SIP revision. This plan revision does not pertain to redesignating an area to attainment for a nationa l primary ambient air quality standard. Nor does this revision pertain to prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) increments and demonstrations of reasonable further progress.

5. FOR REDESIGNATIONS:

a. Is there a fully approved maintenance plan for the primary ambient air quality standards for at least 10 years as required by § 175A of the Clean Air Act?

Not applicable.

b. Are contingency measures included?

Not applicable.

6. Modeling information, if applicable, is required to support the proposed revision

.

Not applicable.10

7. Evidence is included where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology (e.g., add

- on controls, industrial/process equipment designs, reformulated materials, etc.).

Not applicable.

8. Eviden ce is included indicating that a SIP revision contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements to ensure stated emission

levels.

Not applicable.

9. Compliance/enforcement strategies including how compliance will be determined in practice (including at what frequency).

Not applicable.

10. As appropriate, special economic and technological justifications are included per applicable EPA policies or an explanation why such justifications are not necessary should

be incl uded. For example, requests for alternative RACT may require such justification.

Not applicable. No special economic and technical justifications are required by other applicable EPA policies are necessary because no such policies are relevant in this case.

The January 5, 2015 SIP submittal meet s the completeness criteria established in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.11

I V

. Proposed Action

It is recommended that the EPA a pprove of the adoption of the revisions to 30 Administrative Code Chapter 114, Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles , Subchapter H. Low Emission
Fuels

, submitted on January 5, 2015 . See discussion regarding basis for approval in Sections I I
of this TSD and in Section III of the Federal Regis ter.

This technical support document has evaluated the revisions to the Low RVP Gasoline Program Rule revisions adopted on September 10, 2014 and submitt ed as a revision to the Texas SIP on January 5, 2015.

It is recommended that the EPA propose a pproval of the January 5, 2015 revision. Because these

are noncontroversial revisions the EPA should consider a direct final approval.