# 1 

# Technical Support Document

Revisions to the Texas State Implem entation Plan fo r General Permitting Definitions and the Qual ified Facilities Program

Rule Project Number 2010-006-116-PR

April 20, 2016

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ad ina Wiley, United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, Air Permits Section (6PD-R), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-2115.

# 2 Subject: Review of Revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan for General Permitting Definitions and the Qualified Facilities Program



# Contents

I. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. ... 3

A. What actions are evaluated in th is Technical Support Document? .................................. 3

B. What is not addressed in this TSD? ................................................................................. 3

II. Summary of State Submittal ................................................................................................... 7

A. Revisions to the General Defi nitions of the Texas SIP .................................................... 7

B. Revisions to the Texas Minor NSR Program for the Qualif ied Facilities Program ......... 7

III. Technical Evaluation .......................................................................................................... . 9

A. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the October 5, 2010, SIP Submittal ....................... 10

B. Evaluation of the Revisions to the Te xas NSR General Definitions Submitted on October 5, 2010 ............................................................................................................... .......... 15

1. Approval history of 30 TAC Secti on 116.10 – General Definitions .......................... 15

2. Preliminary Determination of the Revisions to the Texas General Definitions at 30

TAC Section 116.10............................................................................................................. . 26

C. Evaluation of the Texas Qualif ied Facilities Program ................................................... 28

1. Evaluation of the Texas Qualified Faciliti es Program as a Minor NSR Program ...... 28

2. Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Revisions to the Texas SIP for the Texas Qualified Facilities Program ............................................................................................................ ..... 32

3. Evaluation of How the October 5, 2010 Submittal Addresses the EPA’s June 7, 2010 Comment Letter on Qualified Facilities ............................................................................... 42

4. Evaluation of How the October 5, 2010 Submittal Addresses the EPA’s April 14, 2010 Disapproval .............................................................................................................. .... 51

D. Evaluation of the October 5, 2010, Texas SIP Submittal with respect to Clean Air Act Section 110(l) ................................................................................................................ ............ 54

IV. Conclusion .................................................................................................................... ..... 55

# 3 

# I. Executive Summary

A. What actions are evaluated in this Technical Support Document?

This technical support document (TSD) reviews revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the general permitting definitions and the Qualified Facilities program submitted on October 5, 2010. This review will determine if th e revisions to the SIP are consistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA’s policy and guidance.

October 5, 2010

 On September 15, 2010, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) adopted amendments to the Texas Qualified Facility Minor NSR program to address deficiencies identified in EPA’s final disapproval from April 14, 2010. These revisions became effective on October 7, 2010. The TCEQ also adopted revi sions to the general permitting definitions.

 The adopted revisions were submitted as revisions to the Texas SIP on October 5, 2010, in a letter from Mr. Bryan W. Shaw, PhD., Ch airman of the TCEQ. The October 5, 2010, submittal included the following revisions to Ti tle 30 of the Texas Air Code (30 TAC):

o Amendments to Section 116.10 [not including Section 116.10(5)(F)],

o New Section 116.17,

o Amendments to Section 116.111 [not including Secti on 116.111(a)(2)(K)],

o Amendments to Section 116.116 [not in cluding Section 116.116(b)(3)], and

o Amendments to Section 116.117 [not including Section 116.117(a)(4)(B)].

March 25, 2011

 Mr. Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., P.E., Chairman of the TCEQ, submitted a clarification letter for the October 5, 2010, Qualified Facilitie s Program SIP submittal on March 25, 2011.

 In this letter, the TCEQ requested that the EP A consider the Qualified Facilities program as submitted on October 5, 2010, as well as the prev ious submittals that established the base program. The TCEQ provided the prior submittals for our reference. The prior submittals included: March 13, 1996; July 22, 1998; September 11, 2000 and September 4, 2002.

 The TCEQ also noted that 30 TAC Section 116.118 had been repealed in a separate rulemaking on February 23, 2011. However, si nce EPA had disapproved 30 TAC Section 116.118 on April 14, 2010, the TCEQ was not submitting the repeal as a SIP revision and

does not consider that 30 TAC Secti on 116.118 is still before us for review.



# B. What is not addressed in this TSD?

Portions of the October 5, 2010, submittal have b een addressed by EPA in separate rulemaking

actions.

 EPA has approved the October 5, 2010, revi sions to 30 TAC Section 116.111. See the TSD and the November 10, 2014, final approv al for the Texas GHG PSD SIP. 79 FR
66626, EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0808.

 EPA has separately approved the revisions to the definition of “modification of existing facility” at 30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(E) with respect to Flexible Permits. See our July

# 4 14, 2014, final conditional approval of the Te xas Flexible Permits Program, 79 FR 40666 and electronic docket, EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0542.

Table 1: Revisions to the Texas SIP Reviewed in this Action

Section Title Submittal Date Adoption Date EPA Action

30 TAC Section

116.10 General Definitions – Opening paragraph 10/05/2010 09/15/2010 Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(1) Actual Emissions 10/05/2010 09/15/2010 Deletion of

definition reviewed

in this action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(2) Allowable

Emissions 10/05/2010 09/15/2010 Deletion of

definition reviewed

in this action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(1) Best Available Control Technology 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 EPA disapproved

BACT at 30 TAC Section 116.10(3)

on 09/15/2010. The October 5, 2010

revision is a new

definition

30 TAC Section 116.10(2) Dockside Vessel 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(3) Dockside Vessel

Emissions 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(4) Facility 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(5) Federally

enforceable 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Non-substantive

edits and renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action. Note that 30

TAC Section 116.10(5)(F) is NOT part of the

Texas SIP.

30 TAC Section 116.10(6) Grandfathered facility 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(7) Lead smelting plant 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering of existing SIP-

# 5 Table 1: Revisions to the Texas SIP Reviewed in this Action

approved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(8) Maximum

allowable emissions rate table (MAERT) 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(9) Modification of Existing Facility 03/13/1996 2/14/1996 Reviewed in this

action. 07/22/1998 06/17/1998

09/11/2000 08/09/2000

09/04/2002 08/21/2002

10/5/2010 9/15/2010

30 TAC Section 116.10(10) New Facility 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(11) New source 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(12) Nonattainment area 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(13) Public notice 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(14) Qualified facility 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section 116.10(15) Source 10/5/2010 9/15/2010 Renumbering ofexisting SIPapproved definition.

Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section

116.17 Qualified Facility

Definitions 10/05/2010 09/15/2010 Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section

116.111 General Application 10/05/2010 09/15/2010 Approved by EPA

on 11/14/2014. See

79 FR 66626.

Note that 30 TAC

Section 116.111(a)(2)(I) is

in the SIP as of

8/21/2002.

The SIP does not

include 30 TAC

# 6 Table 1: Revisions to the Texas SIP Reviewed in this Action

Section 116.111(a)(2)(K)

30 TAC Section 116.116(e) Changes at Qualified Facilities 3/13/1996 2/14/1996 Disapproved

4/14/2010. See 71

FR 19468 07/22/1998 06/17/1998 Disapproved

4/14/2010. See 71

FR 19468

10/05/2010 09/15/2010 Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section

116.117 Documentation and

Notification of Changes to Qualified Facilities 3/13/1996 2/14/1996 Disapproved

4/14/2010. See 71

FR 19468 07/22/1998 06/17/1998 Disapproved

4/14/2010. See 71

FR 19468

10/05/2010 09/15/2010 Reviewed in this

action.

30 TAC Section

116.118 Pre-Change Qualification 3/13/1996 2/14/1996 Disapproved

4/14/2010. See 71

FR 19468 07/22/1998 06/17/1998

30 TAC Section

116.311 Permit Renewal Application (a)(1) as submitted

07/22/1998 06/17/1998 Reviewed in this

action.

Renumbered to (a)(2) 09/04/2002 08/21/2002 Reviewed in this

action.

# 7 

# II. Summary of State Submittal

A. Revisions to the General Definitions of the Texas SIP

On October 5, 2010, the TCEQ submitted revisions to the General Definitions for the Texas SIP. These General Definitions apply to all Texas air permitting activities, major and minor. The TCEQ has submitted substantive revisions to the de finition of “BACT” that is used for all Texas permit actions, including minor NS R, and the definition of “modification of existing facility” to clarify scope and implementation of the Texas Minor NSR program. TCEQ has also submitted several non-substantive changes to address formatting concerns a nd renumbering of the section.



# B. Revisions to the Texas Minor NSR Progra m for the Qualified Facilities Program

On April 14, 2010, EPA finalized a disapproval of the Texas Qualified Fa cilities program as submitted by the TCEQ on March 13, 1996 and revised on July 22, 1998. See 75 FR 19468. Specifically, our disapproval covered the fo llowing regulations unde r 30 TAC Chapter 116:

 30 TAC Section 116.116(e) – Changes at Qualified Facilities, in its entirety as submitted March 13, 1996 and repealed and re-adopted June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998;

 30 TAC Section 116.117 – Documentation and Notification of Changes to Qualified Facilities, in its entirety as submitted March 13, 1996 and repealed and re-adopted June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998;

 30 TAC Section 116.118 – Pre-Change Qualifica tion, in its entirety as submitted March 13, 1996 and repealed and re-adopted June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998;

 the definitions of “actual emissions” at 30 TAC Section 116.10(1) as submitted March 13, 1996 and repealed and re-adopted June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998;

 the definition of “allowable emissions” at 30 TAC Section 116.10(2) as submitted March 13, 1996; repealed and re-adopted June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998; and submitted September 11, 2000;

 the definition of “modification of existi ng facility” at 30 TAC Section 116.10(11)(E) as submitted March 13, 1996; repealed and re-a dopted June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998; and submitted September 4, 2002; and

 the definition of “qualified facility” at 30 TAC Section 116.10(16) as submitted March 13, 1996; repealed and re-adopted June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998; and submitted September 4, 2002.

On October 5, 2010, the TCEQ submitted revisions to the Texas SIP to revise the Minor NSR Qualified Facilities program to address th e flaws identified in the EPA’s April 14, 2010 disapproval. Because the EPA has already fina lly disapproved the prior Qualified Facilities program, we will evaluate the October 5, 2010 revi sion as a new program submitted to the Texas SIP. On March 25, 2011, the TCEQ resubmitted th e prior SIP revisions pertaining to the Qualified Facilities program – specifically, th e submittals dated March 13, 1996; July 22, 1998; September 11, 2000; and September 4, 2002. The EPA is not revaluating the portions of these submittals that have already been disapproved becau se these specific provisions are no longer in front of us, but we will rely on the state’s reco rd in the development of the revised Qualified Facilities program for our program evaluation.

# 8 The October 5, 2010 SIP submittal included the following new provisions to establish and implement the Minor NSR Qualified Facility Program:

 30 TAC Section 116.17 – Qualified Facility Definitions TCEQ has submitted a new section containing definitions specific to the Qualified Facility program. These new definitions ar e “actual emissions”, “allowable emissions”,

and “revision”.

 30 TAC Section 116.111 – General Application TCEQ submitted substantive revisions clar ifying the implementation of BACT – the Texas air permitting program applies BACT to all permitted actions; State BACT is applied to all actions, including minor NSR, a nd federal BACT is appl ied to PSD actions. EPA has approved these revisions in a se parate action on November 10, 2014 at 79 FR

66626.

 30 TAC Section 116.116 – Changes to Facilities TCEQ submitted new secti on to 30 TAC Section 116.116(e) specific to the Qualified Facilities program to addre ss the concerns in EPA’s Ap ril 14, 2010, final disapproval. Specifically, the submitted changes require th at a Qualified Facility have an existing permit or authorization under Chapters 106 and 116 and a separate netting analysis will be conducted for each proposed change to demonstrate that the change is not subject to major source permitting requirements under PSD and NNSR.

 30 TAC Section 116.117 – Documentation and Notification of Changes to Qualified

Facilities TCEQ submitted new 30 TAC Section 116.117 to identify the documentation and notification requirements that must be used by all qualified facilities.

# 9 

# III. Technical Evaluation

The October 5, 2010, SIP submittal establishing the Texas Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program is evaluated for compliance with the rele vant requirements of the Act and Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR) pa rt 51 – Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementation Plans. These requirements include, but are not limited to the following:

1. §110(a)(2)(C) of the Act which provides: (C) include a program to provide for the regula tion of the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covere d by the plan as necess ary to assure that national ambient air quality standards are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D; 2. §110(l) of the Act which provides: (l) Plan Revisions. – Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under this chapter shall be adopted by such State af ter reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other appl icable requirement of the chapter. 3. 40 CFR 51.160 – Legally enforceable proced ures. The regulatory text of 40 CFR 51.160

is available on line at Electroni c Code of Federal Regulations: http://ecfr.gpoaccess .gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=07e214c52bbfc82a2781e3e 14c7616ca&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.1&idno=40 4. 40 CFR 51.161 – Public availability of in formation. The regulatory text of 40 CFR

51.161 is available on line at Electron ic Code of Federal Regulations: http://ecfr.gpoaccess .gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=07e214c52bbfc82a2781e3e 14c7616ca&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.2&idno=40 5. Other applicable requirements of the Act, 40 CFR part 51, and applicable policy and guidance will be identified in the evaluation where appropriate.

Specifically, the October 5 2010, submittal is first reviewed for completeness as a SIP submittal under Part 51, Appendix V. This will be follo wed by a detailed analysis of the submitted revisions with respect to the SIP-approved defi nitions and permitting provisions to determine consistency with EPA regulations, guidance and whether the submitted provisions interfere with any applicable CAA provisions. Th is analysis produces a writte n evaluation used to make a

determination of whether or not the October 5, 2010 SIP revision establ ishing the Texas Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program is in agr eement with the CAA, other EPA policies or guidance.

# 10 

# A. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the October 5, 2010, SIP Submittal

The criteria for completeness determination ar e 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 th e minimum criteria for determining whether a State implementation plan submitted for consid eration by 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 insufficient 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 this appendix V within 60 days of EPA's receipt of the submittal, but no

later than 6 months after the date which th e 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 crit eria included under 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 of Appendix V.

# 11 SIP Completeness Checklist for the October 5, 2010, SIP Submittal

Rule Log No: 2010-006-116-PR

Administrative Materials (2.1)

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

The SIP revision was submitted by a letter from Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman of the TCEQ, dated October 5, 2010. The SIP submittal was received by EPA Region 6 Air Planning Section on October 8, 2010.

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

The revisions were adopted by the TCEQ on September 15, 2010, and became effective
October 7, 2010.

3. Evidence is included that the State has neces sary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the revision, e.g., a citati on of the appropriate State authority.

The authority for promulgating changes to the Texas State Implementa tion is found in the Texas Clean Air Act, Chapter 382 of the Texas Health and Safety Code.

4. A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the SIP includin g an indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan where applicable. Th e submittal shall be a copy of the official State regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by the appropria te 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 October 5, 2010, submittal included a copy of the official State regulation document, submitted by Chairman Shaw.

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

The SIP submittal package included a certifi cation demonstrating the SIP submittal was developed pursuant to 40 CFR 51.104.

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

Notices of public hearings were published in the following newspape rs on the date listed:

 Austin American Statesman: April 2, 2010

 Fort Worth Star-Telegram: April 2, 2010

 Houston Chronicle: April 2, 2010

TCEQ conducted a public hearing in Austin, Texas, on May 10, 2010.

TCEQ also provided publica tion in the Texas Register of the public hearing on April 16, 2010 at 35 TexReg 3092 and of the proposed rules at 35 TexReg 2978.

7. A certification is included indi cating that public hearing(s) was/were held in accordance with the information provided in the pub lic notice(s) and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable.

An order adopting revisions to the SIP was in cluded. This order st ates that the public hearing was conducted pursuant to Texas Health and Safety Code § 382.017, Texas Government Code Chapter 2001, and 40 CFR § 51.102.

8. A compilation of public comments and the State's response is included.

The SIP submittal package did include a compilation of comments and the State’s response to comments. TCEQ received writt en testimony from 6 parties during the comment period, including EPA Region 6. No oral comments were received.

Technical Support (2.2)

The State should include the followi ng technical information in its SIP revision request package.

1. Identification of all regu lated pollutants affected by the revision is included.

The SIP submittal revises the Texas Minor NSR program to include the Qualified Facilities Program. This program applies to all pollutants.

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/nonattainment design ation of the locations and th e status of the attainment plan for the affected area(s) is included.

The Texas Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Prog ram is available to all stationary sources, statewide, that already ha ve a Chapter 116 permit or a Permit By Rule under Chapter

106.

# 13 3. Quantification of the changes in SIP allowa ble 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 differen ces between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipat ed if the revisions were approved.)

Allowable emissions will be established for each source in th e applicable permits.

4. Demonstration is included that the NAAQ S/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and visibility as applicable would be prot ected if the revision were approved and implemented.

For a stationary source to obtain a Qualified Facilities authorization, the source must already have an existing permit and must demonstr ate that the revision is not subject to major NSR permitting requirements. Therefor e, the NAAQS and PSD increments will be protected by virtue that perm it process requires a minor action.

5. FOR REDESIGNATIONS:

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

Not applicable.

b. Are contingency measures included?

Not applicable.

6. Modeling information, if app licable, is required to s upport the proposed revision.

Modeling information is not necessary to s upport the analysis and review of the proposed public notice and partici pation provisions.

7. Evidence is included where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology (e.g., add-on controls, industria l/process equipment designs, reformulated materials, etc.).

Appropriate emission limitations will be established in individual permits.

8. Evidence is included indicating that a SIP re vision contains emission limitations, work practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporti ng requirements to ensure stated emission

levels.

# 14 Appropriate recordkeeping/reporting requireme nts will be established in each permit.

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

Compliance/enforcement strategies are not applicable to this SIP submittal. Any source using the Qualified Facilities Progrma al ready has a Chapter 106 or 116 permit, which includes compliance/enforcement strategies.

10. As appropriate, special economic and tec hnological jus tifications are included per applicable EPA policies or an explanation why such justificati ons are not necessary should be included. For example, requests for alternative RACT may require such justification.

These justifications are not n ecessary for this SIP revision.

The October 5, 2010, SIP submittal (Rul e Project No. 2010-020-101-PR) meets the completeness criteria establishe d in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.B.Evaluation of the Revisions to the Texas NSR General Definitions Submitted on October 5, 20101.Approval history of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General DefinitionsTCEQ has revised 30 TAC Section 116.10 in 5 separate rulemakings submitted on March 13, 1996; July 22, 1998; September 11,2000; September 4, 2002; and October 5, 2010.We note the July 22, 1998 submittal repealed and replaced the March 13, 1996submittal. EPA concludes that the March 13, 1996 action resubmitted on March 25, 2011 is not before EPA for review b/c of therepeal and replacement.Our analysis of 30 TAC Section 116.10 will focus on the initial adoption submitted July 22, 1998 and the revisions submitted onSeptember 11, 2000; September 4, 2002; and October 5, 2010.EPA has taken several SIP actions on componentsof 30 TAC Section 116.10 throughout the years.EPA’s initial approval of 30 TAC Section 116.10 was published on September 18, 2002at 67 FR 58697. This action approvedthe definitions for “federally enforceable”, “lead smelting plant,” “new source,” “nonattainmentarea,” and “public notice” intothe SIP at 30 TAC Section 116.10(5), (7), (11), (12), (13) and (15), respectively. This action addressed revisions adopted bythe State on June 17, 1998 and submitted on July 22, 1998.EPA approved revisions to the generaldefinitions at 30 TAC Section 1160.10 onAugust 28, 2007 at 72 FR 49198. This actionapproved the definitions of “dockside vessel,” “dockside vessel emissions,” “federally enforceable,” “lead smelting plant,”“new source,” “nonattainment area,” “public notice,” and “source” at 30 TAC Sections 116.10(4), (5), (7)(A) – (7)(E), (9), (13)– (15) respectively. This action addressed revisions initially adopted by the State on June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22,1998 and revised through the September 4, 2002 submittal. EPA’s SIP-approval does not include 30 TAC Sections 116.10(1),(2), (3), (6), (7)(F), (8),(10), (11), (12), and (16). Seethe docket at EPA-R06-OAR-2007-0285.EPA approved additional portions of 30 TAC Section 116.10 on April 14, 2010 at 75 FR 19468. As a result of this action, theSIP then contained the definitions for “dockside vessel,” “dockside vessel emissions,” “facility,” “federally enforceable,”“grandfathered facility,” “leadsmelting plant,” “maximum allowable emissionsrate table (MAERT),” “new facility,” “newsource,” “nonattainment area,” “public notice,” and “source” 30 TAC Sections 116.10(4),(5), (6), (7)(A) – (7)(E), (8), (9),(10), (12), (13) – (15) and (17)asinitially adopted on June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998 and revised through theSeptember 4, 2002 submittal. EPA’s SIP-approval does not include 30 TAC Sections 116.10 (1), (2), (3), (7)(F), (11),and (16).See the docket at EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0025.On September 15, 2010, EPA disapproved the definition of “BACT” at 30 TAC Section 116.10(3) as adopted on June 17, 1998and submitted on July 22, 1998. See 75 FR 56424, EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0025.16EPA approved additional portions of 30 TAC Section 116.10 onNovember 17, 2011 at 76 FR 71260. As a result of this action,the SIP then contained the definitions for “dockside vessel,”“dockside vessel emissions,” “facility,” “federally enforceable,”“grandfathered facility,” “leadsmelting plant,” “maximum allowable emissions rate table (MAERT),” “modification ofexisting facility,” “new facility,” “newsource,” “nonattainment area,” “public notice,” and “source” 30 TAC Sections116.10(4), (5), (6), (7)(A) – (7)(E), (8), (9), (10), (11) introductory paragraph, (11)(C), and (11)(D), (12), (13) – (15) and(17)as initially adopted on June 17, 1998 and submitted July 22, 1998and revised through the September 4, 2002 submittal. In thissame action, EPA disapproved 30 TAC Sections 116.10(11)(G).EPA’s SIP-approval does not include 30 TAC Sections (1),(2), (3), (7)(F), (11)(A), (11)(B),(11)(E), (11)(F), (11)(G),and (16). See the docket at EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0025.On July 14, 2014, EPA approved portions of the revisions adopted on September 15, 2010 and submitted October 5, 2010. See79 FR 40666. Specifically, EPA approved 30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(E), previously submitted as 116.10(11)(E) but revisedbecause of renumbering. See the docket forFlexible Permits at EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0542.Note that the current version of the state approved General Definitions is adoptedfrom September 15, 2010, effective October5, 2010. This is the version of the general definitions submittedfor SIP approval on October 5,2010. This proposed rule wouldupdate the SIP to be consistent with the current state adopted general definitions and remove a SIP-gap.The following table summarizes the revisions submitted byTCEQ and whether EPA has taken action on the revision.Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s AnalysisCurrent SIP-Approved LanguageUnless specifically defined in the TCAA or in therules of the commission, the terms used by thecommission have the meanings commonly ascribedto them in the field of air pollution control. Inaddition to the terms which are defined by theTCAA, and in §101.1 of this title (relating toDefinitions), the following words and terms, whenused in this chapter, shall have the followingmeanings, unless the context clearly indicatesotherwise.Revision adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010Unless specifically defined inthe Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA)or in the rules of the commission, the terms used by thecommission have the meanings commonly ascribed to them inthe field of air pollution control. In addition to the terms whichare defined by the TCAA, and in §101.1 of this title (relating toDefinitions), the following words and terms, when used in thischapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the contextclearly indicates otherwise.Non-substantive revision to theintroductory paragraph to spell outan acronym.Revision is approvable.Revision adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(1). Actual emissions – The highest rate of emissions ofan air contaminant actually achieved from a qualified facilitywithin the 120-month period prior to the change. This rate cannot exceedany applicable federal or state emissionslimitation. This definition applies only when determining whether there has been a net increase in allowable emissionsunder § 116.116(e) of this title (relating to Changes to Facilities).EPA disapproved the definition of“actual emissions” at 30 TACSection 116.10(1) on April 14,2010. See 75 FR 19471.17Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s AnalysisRevision deletes a provision thatwas not in the Texas SIP.This deletion is approvable.Note that because the deleteddefinition of “actual emissions” isspecific to the Qualified Facilityprogram, it has been moved to newsection 116.17 which will bediscussed separately.Revision adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(2). Allowable emissions – The authorized rate of emissionsof an air contaminant from a facility as determined inaccordance with this section. This rate cannot exceed any applicable state or federal emissions limitation. This definitionapplies only when determining whether there has been a netincrease in allowable emissionsunder § 116.116(e) of thistitle.A.Permitted facility – For a facility with a permit under this chapter, the allowable emissions shall be anyemission limit established in the permit on a maximum allowable emissions rate table and any emission limitcontained in representations in the permit application which was relied upon in issuing the permit, plus anyallowable emissions authorized under Chapter 106 of this title (relating to Permits by Rule).B.Facility permitted by rule – For a facility operating under Chapter 106 of this title, the allowable emissionsshall be the least of the emissions rate allowed in Chapter 106, Subchapter A of this title (relating to GeneralRequirements), the emissions rate specified in the applicable permit by rule, or the federally enforceableemission rate established on a PI-8 form.C.Qualified grandfathered facility – For a qualified grandfathered facility, the allowable emissions shall be themaximum annual emissions rate after the implementation of any air pollution control methods to become aqualified facility, plus 10% of the maximum annual emission rate prior to the implementation of such controlmethods, but in no case shall the allowable emissions be greater than the maximum annual emissions rate priorto the implementation of such control methods. The maximum annual emissions rate is the emissions rate at themaximum annual capacity according tothe physical or operational designof the facility, data from actualoperations over a period of no more than 12 months that demonstrates the maximum annual capacity, or otherinformation that demonstrates the maximum annual capacity. Except where a grandfathered facility has beenmodified, the allowable emissions for the modification shall be determined as a permitted facility.D.Standard permit facility – For a facility authorized by astandard permit, other than § 116.617(2) of this title(relating to Standard Permits for Pollution Control Projects), the allowable emissions shall be the maximumemissions rate represented in the registration to use the standard permit.EPA disapproved the definition of“allowable emissions” at 30 TACSection 116.10(2) on April 14,2010. See 75 FR 19471.Revision deletes a provision thatwas not in the Texas SIP.This deletion is approvable.Note that because the deleteddefinition of “allowable emissions”is specific to the Qualified Facilityprogram, it has been moved to newsection 116.17 which will bediscussed separately.18Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s AnalysisE.Special exemption facility – For a facility operating under a special exemption, the allowable emissions shall bethe emissions rate represented in the original special exemption request.F.The allowable emissions for a qualified facility shall notbe adjusted by the voluntary installation of controls.Revision adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20101.(3)Best available control technology (BACT)– An air pollution control method for a new or modified facility thatthrough experience and research, has proven to be operational, obtainable, and capable of reducing or eliminatingemissions from the facility, and is considered to be technically practical and economically reasonable for the facility.The emissions reduction can be achieved through technology such as the use of add-on control equipment or byenforceable changes in production processes, systems, methods, or work practices. BACT with consideration givento the technical practicability and the economic reasonableness of reducing or eliminating emissions from the facility.EPA disapproved the definition of“BACT” at 30 TAC Section116.10(3) as adopted June 17,1998 and submitted on July 22,1998 on September 15, 2010. See75 FR 56424. Because of thedisapproval, the only version of theBACT definition before EPA forreview is that submitted onOctober 5, 2010.The October 5, 2010, submittalrenumbered the definition of“BACT” to 30 TAC Section116.10(1). Additionally, the initialdefinition (that was disapproved byEPA) was substantively revised toaddresses our concerns identifiedin the 2010 disapproval. Further,this revised BACT definition, inconjunction with the revisionssubmitted on October 5, 2010, forGeneral Application Provisions at30 TAC Section 116.111(a)(2)(C)ensures that federal BACT must beapplied to any PSD subject sourceor modification. State BACT (asdefined at 30 TAC Section116.10(1)) will apply to allpermitting actions in Texas, butcannot trump the requirement toevaluate and apply as appropriatethe SIP approved PSD BACTrequirements at 30 TAC Section116.160(c)(1)(A). EPA proposed19Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s Analysisapproval of the revisions to 30TAC 116.111(a)(2)(C) onFebruary 18, 2014. We finalizedour approval on November 10,2014.See79 FR 66626.These revisions are approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language4.Dockside vessel -- Any water-based transportation,platforms, or similar structures which are connected ormoored to the land.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20102.(4) Dockside vessel -- Any water-based transportation,platforms, or similar structures which are connected ormoored to the land.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language5.Dockside vessel emissions -- Those emissionsoriginating from a dockside vessel that are the result offunctions performed by onshore facilities or usingonshore equipment. These emissions include, but arenot limited to:A.loading and unloading of liquid bulk materials;B.loading and unloading of liquified gaseousmaterials;C.loading and unloading of solid bulk materials;D.cleaning and degassing of liquid vesselcompartments; andE.abrasive blasting and painting.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20103)(5) Dockside vessel emissions -- Those emissionsoriginating from a dockside vessel that are the result offunctions performed by onshore facilities or usingonshore equipment. Theseemissions include, but arenot limited to:a.loading and unloading of liquid bulk materials;b.loading and unloading of liquified gaseousmaterials;c.loading and unloading of solid bulk materials;d.cleaning and degassing of liquid vesselcompartments; ande.abrasive blasting and painting.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language6)Facility - A discrete or identifiable structure, device,item, equipment, or enclosure that constitutes orcontains a stationary source, including appurtenancesother than emission control equipment. A mine,quarry, well test, or road is not a facility.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20104)(6) Facility - A discrete or identifiable structure,device, item, equipment, or enclosure that constitutesor contains a stationary source, includingappurtenances other than emission control equipment.A mine, quarry, well test, or road is not a facility.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language7.Federally enforceable -- All limitations and conditionswhich are enforceable by the EPA, including:Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20105)(7) Federally enforceable -- All limitations andconditions which are enforceable by the UnitedNon-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering and spell outthe acronym for EPA.20Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s AnalysisA.those requirements developed under Title 40 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 60and 61 (40 CFR 60 and 61);B.Chapter 113, Subchapter C of this title (relatingto National Emission Standards for HazardousAir Pollutants for Source Categories (FCAA,§112, 40 CFR 63));C.requirements within any applicable stateimplementation plan (SIP);D.any permit requirements established under 40CFR §52.21;E.any permit requirements established underregulations approved under 40 CFR Part 51,Subpart I, including permits issued under theEPA-approved program that is incorporated intothe SIP and that expressly requires adherence toany permit issued under such program; orF.NOT IN SIP.States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),including:A.those requirements developed under Title 40 of theCode of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 60 and 61(40 CFR 60 and 61);B.Chapter 113, Subchapter C of this title (relating toNational Emission Standards for Hazardous AirPollutants for Source Categories (FCAA, §112, 40CFR 63));C.requirements within any applicable stateimplementation plan (SIP);D.any permit requirements established under 40 CFR§52.21;E.any permit requirements established underregulations approved under 40 CFR Part 51, SubpartI, including permits issued under the EPA-approvedprogram that is incorporated into the SIP and thatexpressly requires adherence to any permit issuedunder such program; orF.NOT SUBMITTED TO THE SIP.This revision is approvable.In a letter dated June 29, 2011,EPA returned 30 TAC Section116.10(5)(F) (as submitted onSeptember 11, 2000 as a revisionto the SIP) to the TCEQ becausethe provision implements section112(g) of the CAA and is outsidethe scope of the Texas SIP. Thisprovision was subsequentlyrenumbered to 30 TAC Section116.10(7)(F) and then 30 TACSection 116.10(5)(F). TCEQ didnot resubmit 30 TAC Section116.10(5)(F) as revised onSeptember 15, 2010, in theOctober 5, 2010, submittal. This isoutside the scope of the SIP andnot before us for review.Current SIP-Approved Language8.Grandfathered facility - Any facility that is not a newfacility and has not been modified since August 30,1971.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20106)(8) Grandfathered facility - Any facility that is not anew facility and has not been modified since August30, 1971.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language9.Lead smelting plant -- Any facility which producespurified lead by melting and separating lead frommetal and nonmetallic contaminants and/or byreducing oxides into elemental lead. Raw materialsconsist of lead concentrates, lead-bearing ores or leadscrap, drosses, or other lead-bearingresidues. Additional processing may include refiningand alloying. A facility which only remelts lead barsor ingots for casting into lead products is not a leadsmelting plant.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20107)(9) Lead smelting plant -- Any facility whichproduces purified lead by melting and separating leadfrom metal and nonmetallic contaminants and/or byreducing oxides into elemental lead. Raw materialsconsist of lead concentrates, lead-bearing ores or leadscrap, drosses, or other lead-bearingresidues. Additional processing may include refiningand alloying. A facility which only remelts lead barsor ingots for casting into lead products is not a leadsmelting plant.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.21Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s AnalysisCurrent SIP-Approved Language10.Maximum allowable emissions rate table (MAERT) -A table included with a preconstruction permit issuedunder this chapter that contains the allowable emissionrates established by the permit for a facility.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20108)(10) Maximum allowable emissions rate table(MAERT) - A table included with a preconstructionpermit issued under this chapter that contains theallowable emission rates established by the permit fora facility.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language11.Modification of existing facility - Any physical changein, or change in the method of operation of, a facility ina manner that increases the amount of any aircontaminant emitted by the facility into the atmosphereor that results in the emission of any air contaminantnot previously emitted. The term does not includeRevisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20109.(11) Modification of existing facility - Any physicalchange in, or change in the method of operation of, afacility in a manner that increases the amount of anyair contaminant emitted by the facility into theatmosphere or that results in the emission of any aircontaminant not previously emitted. The term doesnot include:The renumbering of the definitionof “modification of existingfacility” from 30 TAC Section116.10(11) to 30 TAC Section116.10(9) is a non-substantivechange.The renumbering is approvable.Definition of “Modification of existing facility”continued...Revisions adopted June 17, 1998Submitted July 22, 1998A.Insignificant increases in the amount of any aircontaminant emitted that is authorized by one ormore commission exemptions;Definition of “Modification of existing facility”continued...Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010A.Insignificant increases in the amount of any aircontaminant emitted that is authorized by one ormore permits by rule under Chapter 106 of thistitle (relating to Permits by Rule) commissionexemptionsEPA has taken no action to date onthe sub-paragraph (A) of“modification of existing facility”that specifies emissions authorizedthrough a PBR are not accountedfor in the modification of anexisting facility. This subparagraph initially submitted July22, 1998, has been revised throughthe October 5, 2010, submittal toremove an obsolete cross-referenceto the term “commissionexemption”. The “commissionexemptions” have been replacedby the PBR program, which hasbeen SIP-approved by EPA (68 FR64543). We note that modificationsto facilities that would be subjectto major source NSR requirements(PSD or NNSR) would not qualifyas a PBR. Therefore, excludingemissions authorized under a PBR22Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s Analysisfrom the definition of modificationof a facility will not violate NSRrequirements. 30 TAC Section116.10(9)(A) is approvable.This revision is approvable.Definition of “Modification of existing facility”continued...Revisions adopted June 17, 1998Submitted July 22, 1998B.Insignificant increases at a permitted facility;Definition of “Modification of existing facility”continued...Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010B.Insignificant increases at a permitted facility;The submitted deletion ofsubparagraph (b) is approvable.The circumstance of “insignificantincreases at a permitted facility”can only occur under a PBR; assuch, the scenario is alreadycovered under subparagraph (a).Definition of “Modification of existing facility”continued...Current SIP-Approved LanguageC.maintenance or replacement of equipmentcomponents that do not increase or tend toincrease the amount or change the characteristicsof the air contaminants emitted into theatmosphere;D.an increase in the annual hours of operationunless the existing facility has received apreconstruction permit or has been exempted,under the TCAA, §382.057, from preconstructionpermit requirements;Definition of “Modification of existing facility”continued...Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010B.(c) maintenance or replacement of equipmentcomponents that do not increase or tend to increasethe amount or change the characteristics of the aircontaminants emitted into the atmosphere;C.(d) an increase in the annual hours of operationunless the existing facility has received apreconstruction permit or has been exempted, underthe TCAA, §382.057, from preconstruction permitrequirements;The renumbering of previouslySIP-approved provisions at 30TAC Section 116.10(11)(C) and(D) to new paragraphs 30 TACSection 116.10(9)(B) and (C),respectively, is a non-substantiverevision to correct formatting.These renumberings areapprovable.Definition of “Modification of existing facility” continued...Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010D.a physical change in, or change in the method of operation of, a facility that does not result in a net increase inallowable emission of any air contaminant and that doesnot result in the emission of any air contaminant notpreviously emitted, provided that the facility:i.Has received a preconstruction permit or permit amendment or has been exempted under the TCAA, §382.057, from preconstruction permit requirements no earlier than 120 months before the change will occur;orii.Uses, regardless of whether the facility has beenexempted under the TCAA, § 382.057, an air pollutioncontrol method that is at least as effective as the BACT that the commission required or would have requiredThe EPA disapproved the portionof the “modification of existingfacility” pertaining to QualifiedFacilities on April 14, 2010, assubmitted as 30 TAC Section116.10(11)(E). This disapprovalcovered the initial submittal of theprovision on July 22, 1998 and therevisions submitted on September4, 2002.23Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s Analysisfor a facility of the same class or type as a condition of issuing a permit or permit amendment 120 monthsbefore the change will occur;Since our disapproval, the TCEQhas revised the Qualified Facilitiesprogram and resubmitted as a SIPrevision on October 5, 2010. Assuch, we are reviewing the October5, 2010 SIP submittal only becauseall other versions of this definitionhave been addressed in EPA’sdisapproval action. The portion ofthe definition of “modification ofexisting facility” at 30 TACSection 116.10(9)(D) identifies thescope of the Qualified Facilitiesprogram. This definition isnecessary for the minor NSRprogram, and works with 30 TACSections 116.17, 116.116(e), and116.117 to create the minor NSRQualified Facilities program.30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(D) isapprovable.Definition of “Modification of existing facility” continued...Current SIPE.a physical change in, or change in the method of operation of, a facility where the change is within the scope ofa flexible permit or a multiple plant permit; orEPA has already approved 30 TACSection 116.10(9)(E) as it relatesto Flexible Permits. See 79 FR40666, July 14, 2014. We note thatmultiple plant permits have notbeen submitted to EPA as revisionsto the Texas SIP.Definition of “Modification of existing facility” continued...Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010F.a change in the method of operation of a natural gas processing, treating, or compression facility connected toor part of a natural gas gathering or transmission pipeline which does not result in an annual emission rate ofany air contaminant in excess of the volume emitted at the maximum designed capacity, provided that thefacility is one for which:On November 17, 2011, the EPAdisapproved the portion of the“modification to existing facility”definition pertaining tograndfathered natural gasprocessing at 30 TAC Section116.10(11)(G) as initially24Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s Analysisi.Construction or operation started on or before September 1, 1971, and at which either no modificationhas occurred after September 1, 1971, or at which modifications have occurred only under Chapter 106of this title; orii.Construction started after September 1, 1971, and before March 1, 1972, and which registered inaccordance with TCAA, § 382.060,as that section existed prior to September 1, 1991.submitted July 22, 1998 throughthe September 4, 2002 submittal.Since that disapproval, the TCEQhas resubmitted this provision inthe October 5, 2010, SIP revisionas 30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(F).As such, the EPA is reviewing theOctober 5, 2010 provision as a newSIP revision, without any pendingbacklogged actions.The EPA initially disapproved thisportion of the definition because itis not clearly limited to minor NSRand we could not demonstrate howthe exemption from permittingaddressed the anti-backslidingrequirements of CAA Section110(l). The state did not augmentthe initial record in any way tocontradict our initial findings orfinal disapproval from November17, 2011. As such, EPA continuesto find that the provisionaddressing changes in operationfor natural gas processing facilitiesas submitted at 30 TAC Section116.10(9)(F) on October 5, 2010,should be disapproved as clearlynot limited to minor NSR and notsatisfying CAA section 110(l).This revision is not approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language12)New facility - A facility for which construction iscommenced after August 30, 1971, and no contract forconstruction was executed on or before August 30,Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 201010)(12) New facility - A facility for which constructionis commenced after August30, 1971, and no contractfor construction was executed on or before AugustNon-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.25Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s Analysis1971, and that contract specified a beginningconstruction date on or before February 29, 1972.30, 1971, and that contract specified a beginningconstruction date on or before February 29, 1972.Current SIP-Approved Language13)New source -- Any stationary source, the constructionor modification of which is commenced after March 5,1972.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 201011)(13) New source -- Anystationary source, theconstruction or modification of which is commencedafter March 5, 1972.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language14)Nonattainment area -- A defined region within thestate which is designated by the EPA as failing tomeet the national ambient air quality standard for apollutant for which a standard exists. The EPA willdesignate the area as nonattainrnent under theprovisions of FCAA, §107(d).Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 201012)(14) Nonattainment area -- A defined region withinthe state which is designated by the EPA as failing tomeet the national ambient air quality standard for apollutant for which a standard exists. The EPA willdesignate the area as nonattainrnent under theprovisions of FCAA, §107(d).Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language15)Public notice -- The public notice of application for apermit as required in this chapter.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 201013)(15) Public notice -- The public notice of applicationfor a permit as required in this chapter.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 201014)(16) Qualified facility – An existing facilitythat satisfies the criteria of either paragraph 9(D)(i) (9)(E)(i) or (ii) ofthis section.On April 14, 2010, the EPAdisapproved the definition of“Qualified Facility” at 30 TACSection 116.10(16) as initiallysubmitted on July 22, 1998through the September 4, 2002revision.Since the time of this disapproval,the TCEQ resubmitted a revisedQualified Facilities Program onOctober 5, 2010, including thedefinition of Qualified Facility at30 TAC Section 116.10(14). Thisdefinition is necessary for theMinor NSR program, and workswith 30 TAC Sections 116.17,26Table 2: Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10Annotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.10 – General Definitions EPA’s Analysis116.116(e), and 116.117 to createthe minor NSR Qualified Facilitiesprogram.This revision is approvable.Current SIP-Approved Language17)Source -- A point of origin of air contaminants,whether privately or publicly owned or operated.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 201015)(17) Source -- A point of origin of air contaminants,whether privately or publicly owned or operated.Non-substantive revision to theSIP-approved definition to accountfor section numbering.This revision is approvable.2.Preliminary Determination of the Revisions to the Texas General Definitions at 30 TAC Section 116.10The analysis presented in Table 2 demonstrates that 30 TAC Section 116.10, with the exception of 30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(F), asrevised through the October 5, 2010, is approvable as a revision to the Texas SIP.30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(F) provides for modifications to be made at natural gas processing facilities without a case-by-case permit.On November 17, 2011, we disapproved the subparagraph (G) portionof the “modification of existing facility” definition at 30 TACSection 116.10(11) as submitted on July 22, 1998 and further revised on September 4, 2002. We previously disapproved subparagraph(G) because it was not clearly limited to Minor NSR and we could not demonstratewhether this exemption met the anti-backslidingrequirements of CAA 110(l).See76 FR 71260. The TCEQ resubmitted this identical provision in the October 5, 2010 submittal,renumbered to be 30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(F), and we are reviewing the resubmitted subparagraph (F) as a new revision to theTexas SIP. The exemption provides that changes at certain natural gas processing, treating, or compressionfacilities are notmodifications if the change does not resultin an annual emissions rate of any air contaminant in excess of the volume forgrandfathered facilities. The “annual emissionsrate” is the same as the “volume emitted at maximum design capacity;” therefore, thiswould provide an exemption for those sources from permit reviewfor any emission increases at these facilities. The requirements of40 CFR 51.160(e) allow a state to identify facilities that will besubject to review under itsMinor NSR program and require its MinorNSR SIP to discuss the basis for determining which facilitieswill be subject to review. The submitted definition at 30 TAC Section116.10(9)(F), however, does not contain an applicability statement or regulatory provision limiting this type of change to Minor NSR.The TCEQ has not submitted any additional evidence to substantiatethat this provision is only applicable to the Texas Minor NSRprogram. Further, the submittal does not include any explanation ofthe basis for exempting this type of change from the permittingSIP requirements. Without an analysis describing how this exemption does not negatethe Major NSR SIP requirements and meets theMinor NSR SIP requirements in 40 CFR 51.160 and the CAA’s anti-backsliding requirements in section 110(l), EPA has no basis to27approve this exemption. As such, we find that 30 TAC Section116.10(9)(F) should be disapproved asinconsistent with federal lawsand regulations for Minor NSR permitting.C.Evaluation of theTexas Qualified Facilities Program1.Evaluation of the Texas Qualified Facilities Program as a Minor NSR ProgramThe TCEQ has submitted the Texas QualifiedFacilities Program as a component of the Texas Minor NSR Program. As such, EPAmust evaluate whether the program satisfiesall requirements for Minor NSR as promulgated in EPA’s Minor NSR regulations at 40CFR 51.160 ad 51.161.Table 3: Evaluation of the Qualified Facilities Program as aMinor NSR Program under 40 CFR 51.160Federal Regulations for Minor NSR,40 CFR 51.160 Legally enforceable proceduresEPA’s Evaluation of how the Texas Qualified Facilities Programsatisfies the Minor NSR requirements for Legally EnforceableProceduresa)Each plan must set forth legally enforceable procedures that enable theState or local agency to determine whether the construction ormodification of a facility, building,structure or installation, orcombination of these will result in –1)A violation of applicable portions of the control strategy; or2)Interference with attainment or maintenance of a national standard inthe State in which the proposed source (or modification) is located orin a neighboring State.The Texas Qualified Facilities program islimited to minor NSR changes atexisting permitted facilities that result in no net increase in allowableemissions and no emission of an air contaminant not previously emitted. TheTexas Qualified Facilities program isnot a minor NSR permit – it merelyauthorizes the transfer of permittedallowable emissions between qualifyingfacilities.The Qualified Facilities program enables a permitted facility to increaseallowable emissions, provided that another permitted facility has acorresponding decrease in allowable emissions resulting in no net increase inemission allowables. Because both facilities in the transaction have a permitissued under either Chapter 106 (Permits by Rule) or Chapter 116 (PSD,NNSR, SP, or Minor NSR) the transferof allowable emissions will not resultin interference with attainment or maintenance because the underlyingpermits have already demonstrated compliance with the NAAQS andapplicable portions of the control strategy.Additionally, the Qualified Facilityprogram at 30 TAC Section116.116(e)(5)(E) requires that the facility owner demonstrate that thequalified facility change will not adversely affect ambient air quality.The Texas Qualified Facilities program satisfies 40 CFR 51.160(a).b)Such procedures must include meansby which the State or local agencyresponsible for final decision making on an application for approval toconstruct or modify will prevent construction or modification if –1)It will result in a violation of applicable portions of the controlstrategy; orThe Texas Qualified Facilities program islimited to minor NSR changes atexisting permitted facilities that result in no net increase in allowableemissions and no emission of an air contaminant not previously emitted. TheQualified Facilities program cannot be used to authorize construction of anew facility nor can it be used to authorize a modification that would be29Table 3: Evaluation of the Qualified Facilities Program as aMinor NSR Program under 40 CFR 51.160Federal Regulations for Minor NSR,40 CFR 51.160 Legally enforceable proceduresEPA’s Evaluation of how the Texas Qualified Facilities Programsatisfies the Minor NSR requirements for Legally EnforceableProcedures2)It will interfere with the attainment or maintenance of a nationalstandard.subject to PSD or NNSR. The Qualified Facilities Program authorizeschanges that do not need a specific permit modification.Prior to making a change, the facility owner or operator submits Form PI-E,Notification of Changes to Qualified Facilities, to the TCEQ pursuant to 30TAC Section 116.116(e)(2). The TCEQ has the responsibility to review thepre-change notification and has the authority as the permitting authority inTexas to deny a PI-E. Under this review authority, the TCEQ can verify thatQualified Facilities program is being applied correctly.Because the Qualified Facilities programdoes not authorize construction or amodification it is exempt from the permitting requirements of 40 CFR51.160(b). However, because the program requirements at 30 TAC Section116.116(e)(2) require the TCEQ to review the notificiation paperworkassociated with a QF and to deny ifnecessary, the Texas Qualified Facilitesprogram and the Texas SIP provisions for permitting continue to satisfy 40CFR 51.160(b).c)The procedures must provide for the submission, by the owner oroperator of the building, facility, structure, or installation to beconstructed or modified of such information on –1)The nature and amounts of emissionsto be emitted by it or emittedby associated mobile sources;2)The location, design, construction, and operation of such facility,building, structure, or installation as may be necessary to permit theState or local agency to make the determination referred to inparagraph (a) of this section.The Texas Qualified Facilities programat 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(2)requires a pre-change notification be submitted to TCEQ. This pre-changenotification, the PI-E form, identifies the nature of the change and the existingpermits or authorizations that are partof the change and demonstrate that thechange results in no net increase in allowable emissions or the emission ofany air contaminant not previously emitted.The Texas Qualified Facilities program satisfies 40 CFR 51.160(c).d)The procedures must provide that approval of any construction ormodification must not affect the responsibility to the owner or operator tocomply with applicable portions of the control strategy.For a change to be authorized as a Qualified Facility change, the facilitiesinvolved must have underlying permits/authorizations under Chapters 106 orChapter 116. As such, the underlying permits continue to require the owner oroperator to comply with applicable portions of the control strategy.The Texas Qualified Facilities Program satisfies 40 CFR 51.160(d).e)The procedures must identify types and sizes of facilities, buildings,structures, or installations which will be subject to review under thisThe Texas Qualified Facilities program requires submission of a pre-changenotification, Form PI-E. This form provides information to the TCEQ aboutthe existing permitted facilities involved in the change, identifies the nature of30Table 3: Evaluation of the Qualified Facilities Program as aMinor NSR Program under 40 CFR 51.160Federal Regulations for Minor NSR,40 CFR 51.160 Legally enforceable proceduresEPA’s Evaluation of how the Texas Qualified Facilities Programsatisfies the Minor NSR requirements for Legally EnforceableProceduressection. The plan must discuss the basis for determining which facilitieswill be subject to review.the change and demonstrates that thechange results in no net increase inallowable emissions or the emission ofany air contaminant not previouslyemitted.The Texas Qualified Facilities Program satisfies 40 CFR 51.160(e).f)The procedures must discuss the air quality data and the dispersion orother air quality modeling data used to meet the requirements of thissubpart.1)All applications of air quality modeling involved in this subpart shallbe based on the applicable models, data bases, and otherrequirements specified in appendix W of this part (Guideline on AirQuality Models).2)Where an air quality model specified in appendix W of this part(Guideline on Air Quality Models) is inappropriate, the model maybe modified or another model substitited. Such a modification orsubstitution of a model may be made on a case-by-case basis or,where appropriate, on a generic basis for a specific State program.Written approval of the Administrator must be obtained for anymodification or substitution. In addition, use of a modified orsubstituted model must be subject to notice and opportunity forpublic comment under procedures set forth in §51.102.The Texas Qualified Facilities program islimited to minor NSR changes atexisting permitted facilities that result in no net increase in allowableemissions and no emission of an air contaminant not previously emitted. Theexisting permits are issued under Chapters 106 and 116, which requiredispersion modeling as appropriate.The qualified change itself does not need dispersion modeling because theprogram results in no net allowable emission increases from alreadypermitted allowable emissions at facilities. Therefore, the dispersionmodeling already provided by the facility will be accurate.The Texas Qualified Facilities program satisfies 40 CFR 51.160(f).Table 4: Evaluation of the Qualified Facilities Program as aMinor NSR Program under 40 CFR 51.161Federal Regulations for Minor NSR,40 CFR 51.161 Public Availability of InformationEPA’s Evaluation of how the Texas Rule SP satisfies the Minor NSRrequirements for Public Participationa)The legally enforceable procedures in § 51.160 must also require theState or local agency to provideopportunity for public comment oninformation submitted by owners and operators. The public informationmust include the agency’s analysisof the effect of construction ormodification on ambient air quality, including the agency’s proposedapproval or disapproval.The Texas Qualified Facility program provides for existing permitted sourcesto make changes that do not require a permitting action. This program is anexemption from minor NSR permit requirements. Therefore, the programdoes not need to provide public notice of the change.Each facility involved in the QualifiedFacility transaction was previouslypermitted and followed the applicable SIP approved public notice process forthe Chapter 106 or Chapter 116 permit/authorization.b)For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, opportunity for publiccomment shall include, as a minimum –The Texas Qualified Facility program provides for existing permitted sourcesto make changes that do not require a permitting action. This program is an31Table 4: Evaluation of the Qualified Facilities Program as aMinor NSR Program under 40 CFR 51.161Federal Regulations for Minor NSR,40 CFR 51.161 Public Availability of InformationEPA’s Evaluation of how the Texas Rule SP satisfies the Minor NSRrequirements for Public Participation1)Availability for public inspection in at least one location in the areaaffected of the information submitted by the owner or operator andof the State or local agency’s analysis of the effect on air quality;2)A 30-day period for submittal of public comment; and3)A notice by prominent advertisement in the area affected of thelocation of the source information and analysis specified inparagraph (b)(1) of this section.exemption from minor NSR permit requirements. Therefore, the programdoes not need to provide public notice of the change.Each facility involved in the QualifiedFacility transaction was previouslypermitted and followed the applicable SIP approved public notice process forthe Chapter 106 or Chapter 116 permit/authorization.c)Where the 30-day comment period required in paragraph (b) of thissection would conflict with existingrequirements for acting on requestsfor permission to construct or modify, the State may submit for approvala comment period which is consistent with such existing requirements.The Texas Qualified Facility program provides for existing permitted sourcesto make changes that do not require a permitting action. This program is anexemption from minor NSR permit requirements. Therefore, the programdoes not need to provide public notice of the change.Each facility involved in the QualifiedFacility transaction was previouslypermitted and followed the applicable SIP approved public notice process forthe Chapter 106 or Chapter 116 permit/authorization.d)A copy of the notice required by paragraph (b) of this section must alsobe sent to the Administrator throughthe appropriate Regional Office, andto all other State and local airpollution control agencies havingjurisdiction in the region in which such new or modified installation willbe located. The notice also must be sentto any other agency in the regionhaving responsibility for implementingthe procedures required under thissubpart. For lead, a copy of the notice is required for all point sources.The definition of point for lead is given in § 51.100(k)(2).The Texas Qualified Facility program provides for existing permitted sourcesto make changes that do not require a permitting action. This program is anexemption from minor NSR permit requirements. Therefore, the programdoes not need to provide public notice of the change.Each facility involved in the QualifiedFacility transaction was previouslypermitted and followed the applicable SIP approved public notice process forthe Chapter 106 or Chapter 116 permit/authorization.The analysis presented in Tables 3 and 4 demonstrates that the Texas Qualified Facilities Program satisfies the applicable federalrequirements for Minor NSR under 40 CFR 51.160 and 51.161. The program is an exemption from permitting for minor changes atexisting permitted facilities. Therefore, the Qualified Facilities program satisfies 40 CFR 51.160(e) as identifying the type of changesthat do not require permits in the Texas Air Program. Becausethese changes are not permitted, there is no requirement for publicnotice of the changes.322.Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Revisions to the Texas SIP for the Texas Qualified Facilities ProgramTable 5 – Evaluation of New 30 TAC Section 116.17 – Qualified Facility DefinitionsAnnotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.17 EPA’s AnalysisRevisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 201030 TAC Section 116.17 – Qualified Facility DefinitionsThe words and terms, when used in this subchapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the contextclearly indicates otherwise.New definitions at 30 TAC Section 116.17 areapprovable as necessary components for thecreation and implementation of the Minor NSRQualified Facilities program.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20101.Actual emissions – The highest rate of emissionsof an air contaminant actually achieved from aqualified facility within the l20-month period prior toa change to a facility under § 116.116(e) of thistitle (relating to Changes at Facilities), This ratecannot exceed any applicable federal or stateemissions limitation. This definition applies only when determining whether there has been a netincrease in allowable emissions under § 116.116(e) of this title.New section 30 TAC Section 116.17(1) isnecessary for the implementation of the QFprogram. This new definition of “actualemissions” is used to demonstrate there is no netincrease in allowable emissions and that the QFprogram will not result in an adverse air qualityimpact.This definition is approvable.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20102.Allowable emissions – The authorized rate of emissions of an air contaminant from a facility asdetermined in accordance withthis paragraph. This rate cannotexceed any applicable state or federalemissions limitation. This definition applies only when determining whether there has been a netincrease in allowable emissions under § 116.116(e) of this title.A.Permitted facility – For a facility with a permit under this chapter, the allowable emissions shallbe any emission limit established in the permit on a maximum allowable emissions rate table andany emission limit contained in representations in the permit application which was relied uponin issuing the permit, plus any allowable emissions authorized under Chapter 106 of this title(relating to Permits by Rule).B.Facility permitted by rule - For a facility operating under Chapter 106 of this title, the allowableemissions shall be the least of the emissions rate allowed in Chapter 106, Subchapter A of thistitle (relating to General Requirements), the emissions rate specified in the applicable permit byrule, or the federally enforceable emission rate established in accordance with § 106.6 of thistitle (relating to Registration of Emissions).C.Standard permit facility – For a facility authorizedby standard permit, other than the Air QualityStandard Permit for Pollution Control Projects, the allowable emissions shall be the maximumemissions rate represented in the registration to use the standard permit.D.Special exemption facility - For a facility operating under a special exemption, the allowableemissions shall be the emissions rate represented in the original special exemption request.New section 30 TAC Section 116.17(2) isnecessary for the implementation of the QFprogram. This new definition of “allowableemissions” is used to demonstrate there is no netincrease in allowable emissions and that the QFprogram will not result in an adverse air qualityimpact.Note that 30 TAC Section 116.17(2)(D) refers to“special exemption facilities”. The TCEQ hasacknowledged in the October 1, 2010, response tocomments that this provision is an obsoletereference and the intent of the agency is to deletethis provision. The TCEQ further explained in theMay XX, 2015, clarification letter that thisprovision was not deleted, which was anoversight. Regardless, the reference to “specialexemption facility” is obsolete. Thereforeapproving an obsolete provision into the TexasSIP will not undermine the attainment goals forthe state.33Table 5 – Evaluation of New 30 TAC Section 116.17 – Qualified Facility DefinitionsAnnotation and Evaluation of 30 TAC Section 116.17 EPA’s AnalysisThis definition is approvable.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 20103.Revision – a change made in the conditions or emission rates of a permit issued under §116.111 ofthis title (relating to General Application), or to the representations in the registration for a standardpermit issued under Subchapter F of this chapter (relating to Standard Permits) to codify physicalchanges or new emission rates as authorized by §116.116(e) of this title (relating to Changes atFacilities).New section 30 TAC Section 116.17(3) isnecessary for the implementation of the QFprogram. This new provision ensures the changeswill be federally enforceable and properlydocumented. This revision is approvable.The analysis presented in Table 5 shows that the Qualified Facilities specific definitions submitted on October 5, 2010, as new30TAC Section 116.17 are approvable and necessary for the implementation of the Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program.Table 6 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30TAC Section 116.116 – Changes to FacilitiesAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.116 EPA’s AnalysisCurrent SIP-Approved Languagea)Representations and conditions. The following are the conditions upon which a permit, specialpermit, or special exemption are issued:1)representations with regard to construction plansand operation procedures inan application for apermit, special permit, or special exemption; and2)any general and special conditions attached to the permit, special permit, or special exemptionitself.No changes submitted to the SIP-approvedprovision. Language at 30 TAC Section116.116(a) is provided for context and referenceonly.Current SIP-Approved Languageb)Permit amendments.1)Except as provided in subsection (e) of this section, the permit holder shall not vary from anyrepresentation or permit condition without obtaining a permit amendment if the change will cause:A.a change in the method of control of emissions;B.a change in the characterof the emissions; orC.an increase in the emission rate of any air contaminant.2)Any person who requests permit amendments must receive prior approval by the executivedirector or the commission. Applications must be submitted with a completed Form PI-1 and aresubject to the requirements of §116.111 of this title (relating to General Application).3)NOT IN SIP.No changes submitted to the SIP-approvedprovision. Language at 30 TAC Section116.116(b) is provided for context and referenceonly.34Table 6 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30TAC Section 116.116 – Changes to FacilitiesAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.116 EPA’s Analysis4)Any person who applies for an amendment to a permit to construct a new facility or modify anexisting facility shall comply with the provisions in Chapter 39 of this title.Current SIP-Approved Languagec)Permit alteration.1)A permit alteration is:A.a decrease in allowable emissions; orB.any change from a representation in an application, general condition, or special condition ina permit that does not cause:i.a change in the method of control of emissions;ii.a change in the character of emissions; oriii.an increase in the emission rate of any air contaminant.2)Requests for permit alterations that must receive prior approval by theexecutive director arethose that:A.result in an increase in off-propertyconcentrations of air contaminants;B.involve a change in permit conditions; orC.affect facility or control equipment performance.3)The executive director shall be notified in writing of all other permit alterations not specified inparagraph (2) of this subsection.4)A request for permit alteration shall include information sufficient to demonstrate that the changedoes not interfere with the owner or operator's previous demonstrations of compliance with therequirements of §116.111(a)(2)(C) of this title.5)Permit alterations are not subject to the requirements of §116.111(a)(2)(C) of this title.No changes submitted to the SIP-approvedprovision. Language at 30 TAC Section116.116(c) is provided for context and referenceonly.Current SIP-Approved Languaged)Permits by rule under Chapter 106 of this title(relating to Permits by Rule) in lieu of permitamendment or alteration.1)A permit amendment or alteration is not requiredif the changes to the permitted facility qualifyfor an exemption from permitting or permit by rule under Chapter 106 of this title unlessprohibited by permit condition as provided in §116.115 of this title (relating to General andSpecial Conditions).2)All changes authorized under Chapter 106 of thistitle to a permitted facility shall be incorporatedinto that facility's permit when the permit is amended or renewed.No changes submitted to the SIP-approvedprovision. Language at 30 TAC Section116.116(d) is provided for context and referenceonly.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010e)Changes to qualified facilities.Section heading. This provision is approvable.35Table 6 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30TAC Section 116.116 – Changes to FacilitiesAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.116 EPA’s AnalysisRevisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...1)Prior to determining if this subsection may beapplied to a proposed change to a facility, thefollowing will apply:A.The facility must be authorized under this chapter or Chapter106 of this title.B.A separate netting analysis shall be madefor each proposed change to determine theapplicability of major New Source Review by demonstrating that any increase in actualemissions is below the threshold for major modification as defined in §116.12 of this title(relating to Nonattainment and Prevention of Significant Deterioration Review Definitions).Proposed changes exceeding the major modification threshold cannot be authorized underthis subsection. This analysis shall meet the definition and requirements of net emissionsincrease in §116.12 of this title.This submitted revision is approvable. New 30TAC Section 116.116(e)(1)(A) and (B)limits thequalified facilities program to existing, permittedfacilities under Chapter 116 or Chapter 106 andlimits the changes to minor NSR by requiring anapplicability analysis for NNSR and PSD.This provision is approvable.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...2)Prior to changes under this subsection, facilityowners or operators will submit Form PI-E,Notification of Changes to Qualified Facilities,and the following additional requirements willapply:A.Facility owners or operators will simultaneouslysubmit, where applicable, an application fora permit revision for each permit issued under §116.111 of this title involved in the qualifiedfacility transaction.B.Owners or operators of facilities authorized under Subchapter F of this Chapter, (relating toStandard Permits) shall submit arevision to the representations in the facility registration inaccordance with §116.611 of this title (relating to Registration to Use a Standard Permit).C.Any applicable permit issued under §116.111 of this title will be revised to reflect changesunder this subsection to facilities authorized under Chapter 106 of this title. If no applicablepermit issued under §116.111 of this title is involved in the qualified facility transaction thenchanges shall be certified by a registration for an emission rate under §106.6 of this title(relating to Registration of Emissions).D.No allowable emission rate as defined in §116.17 of this title (relating to Qualified FacilitiesDefinitions) shall be exceeded.E.The facility has received a preconstruction permitor permit amendmentno earlier than 120months before the change will occur, or uses control technology that is at least as effective asthe BACT that the commission required or would have required for a facility of the sameclass or type as a condition of issuing a permit or permit amendment 120 months before thechange will occur. There will be no reduction in emission control efficiency.New section 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(2) isapprovable. This new provision ensures that thechanges made by the participating facilities willbe federally enforceable and documented inpermit revisions.36Table 6 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30TAC Section 116.116 – Changes to FacilitiesAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.116 EPA’s AnalysisRevisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...3)Notwithstanding any other subsection of this section, a physical or operational change may bemade to a qualified facility if it can be determined that the change does not result in:A.a net increase in allowable emissions of any air contaminant; andB.the emission of any air contaminant not previously emitted.New section 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(3) isapprovable – this provision identifies the scope ofthe minor NSR Qualified Facilities program andensures that the QF will not allow the emission ofnew contaminants and there will be no net airquality impact since there will be no net increasein previously permitted allowable emissions.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...4)In making the determination in paragraph (3) of this subsection, the effect on emissions of thefollowing shall be considered:A.any air pollution control method applied to the qualified facility;B.any decreases in allowable emissions from other qualified facilities at the same commission airquality account that have received a preconstruction permit or permit amendment no earlier than120 months before the change will occur; andC.any decrease in actual emissions from other qualified facilities at the same commission airquality account that are not included insubparagraph (B) of this paragraph.New 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(4) isapprovable. This new provision specifies how theTCEQ will evaluate the changes to a qualifiedfacility. This provision enables the TCEQ toconsider control equipment applied at the facilityand to provide for netting of permitted allowableand actual emissions to offset the increase inactual emissions associated with the proposedchange.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...5)The determination in paragraph (3) of this subsection shall be based on the allowable emissionsfor air contaminant categories and any allowable emissions for individual compounds. If aphysical or operational change would result in emissions of an air contaminant category orcompound above the allowable emissions for thatair contaminant category or compound, theremust be an equivalent decrease in emissions at the same facility or a different facility at the sameaccount.A.The equivalent decrease in emissions shall be based on the same time periods (e.g., hourly and12-month rolling average rates) as the allowable emissions for the facility at which the changewill occur.B.Emissions of different compounds within the same air contaminant category may beinterchanged. Emissions of substances that were, but are not currently, listed as a volatileorganic compound (VOC) by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maybe substituted for emissions of compounds currently listed by EPA as a VOC as referenced in§101.1 of this title (relating to Definitions) provided the compound being used as a substitute isnot regulated as a hazardous air pollutant and is not toxic.The substitution of current VOCs forcompounds that have been removed from the VOC list by EPA is prohibited.New 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(5) isapprovable. This provision requires that if there isan allowable emission increase there must be anallowable emission decrease within the qualifiedfacility. This ensures the qualified change willhave no net increase in permit allowables. Thisprovision also enables the TCEQ to substituteallowables of one air contaminant for another aircontaminant of the same category, such as a VOCsubstitution. This trading of emission allowablesrequires a demonstration of no negative impacton air quality. EPA has determined that thisprovision is approvable. The provision will resultin no net increase in permitted allowables (thathave been permitted as protective of air quality)and the interchange of pollutants of the samecategory must also demonstrate no adverse effecton air quality.37Table 6 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30TAC Section 116.116 – Changes to FacilitiesAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.116 EPA’s AnalysisC.For allowable emissions for individual compounds, any interchange shall adjust the emissionrates for the different compoundsin accordance with the ratio of the effects screening levels ofthe compounds. The effects screening level shall be determined by the executive director.D.For allowable emissions for air contaminant categories, interchanges shall use the unadjustedemission rates for the different compounds.E.The facility owner or operator shall demonstrate that the change will not adversely affectambient air quality.F.An air contaminant category is a group of related compounds, such as volatile organiccompounds, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur compounds.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...6)Persons making changes to qualified facilities under this subsection shall comply with theapplicable requirements of §116.117 of thistitle (relating to Documentation and Notification ofChanges to Qualified Facilities).30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(6) is approvable.This new provision ensures that theowner/operator making the changes to qualifiedfacilities must comply with the recordkeepingand documentation provisions in new 30 TACSection 116.117. Among these new provisions isthe requirement that the source maintainnecessary records to demonstrate no adverseimpact on air quality and that federal PSD andNNSR requirements are not violated.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...7)As used in this subsection, the term "physical and operational change" does not include:A.construction of a new facility; orB.changes to procedures regarding monitoring, determination of emissions, and recordkeepingthat are required by a permit.30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(7) is approvable.This new section ensures that a qualified facilitychange cannot be used to construct a new facilityor to make changes in the monitoring,recordkeeping or emission determinationsrequired by a permit. New 30 TAC Section116.116(e)(7) in conjunction with new (e)(8) and(e)(10) provides that a facility may install newemission controls but cannot reduce the level ofcontrols or recordkeepingalready required in theapplicable permits or authorizations.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...8)Additional air pollution control methods may be implemented for the purpose of making a facility aqualified facility. The implementation of any additional control methods to qualify a facility shall besubject to the requirements of this chapter. The owner or operator shall:30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(8) is approvable.This new section along with 30 TAC Section116.116(e)(10) provides that a facility can installcontrols to become a qualified facility, but nocontrols can be reduced under the existing permitconditions. Note that the reference to BACTcontrols at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(8) is to38Table 6 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30TAC Section 116.116 – Changes to FacilitiesAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.116 EPA’s AnalysisA.utilize additional control methods that are as effective as best available control technology(BACT) required at the time the additional control methods are implemented; orB.demonstrate that the additional control methods, although not as effective as BACT, wereimplemented to comply with a law, rule, order, permit, or implemented to resolve a documentedcitizen complaint.State BACT. As discussed in our analysis of therevisions to 30 TAC Section 116.10, the TexasAir Program applies BACT to all permittedactions – major and minor. Actions subject toPSD are further subjectedto SIP-approved PSDBACT.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...9)For purposes of this subsection and §116.117 ofthis title, the following subparagraphs apply.A.Intraplant trading means the consideration of decreases in allowable and actual emissions fromother qualified facilities in accordance withparagraph (4) of this subsection.B.The allowable emissions from facilities that were never constructed shall not be used inintraplant trading.C.The decreases in allowable and actual emissions shall be based on emission rates for the sametime periods (e.g., hourly and 12-month rolling average) as the allowable emissions for thefacility at which the change will occur and for which an intraplant trade is desired.D.Actual emissions shall be based on data that is representative of the emissions actually achievedfrom a facility during the relevant time period (e.g., hourly or 12-month rolling average).New 30 TAC Section 116.116(9) is approvable.This new section establishes the parameters onallowable emissions involved in the qualifiedfacility allowable netting.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...10)The existing level of control may not be lessened for a qualified facility.30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(10) is approvable.This new provision ensures that the level ofcontrol will not be reduce for any facility as partof the qualified facility. This also ensures thatfederal control requirements required through theexisting permits will not be lessened or reduced.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010(e) Changes to qualified facilities continued...11)A separate netting analysis shall be performed for each proposed change under this subsection.30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(11) is approvable.This provision requires a separate netting analysisfor each proposed change – thus ensuring thatfederal PSD and NNSR applicability will not becircumvented.Current SIP-Approved Languagef)Use of credits. Notwithstanding any other subsection of this section, discrete emission reductioncredits may be used to exceed permit allowables as described in §101.376(b) of this title (relating toDiscrete Emission Credit Use) if all applicable conditions of §101.376 of this title are met. Thissubsection does not authorize any physical changes to a facility.No changes submitted to the SIP-approvedprovision. Language at 30 TAC Section116.116(f) is provided for context and referenceonly.39The analysis presented in Table 6 shows that the specific provisions for implementing the MinorNSR Qualified Facilities program at30 TAC Section 116.116(e) submitted on October 5, 2010, are approvableand necessary for establishing the scope and requirementsof the Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program.Table 7 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.117 –Documentation and Notification of Changes to QualifiedFacilitiesAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.117 EPA’s AnalysisRevisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010a)Persons making changes under §116.116(e) of this title (relating to Changes to Facilities) shallmaintain documentation at the plant site demonstrating that the changes satisfy § 116.116(e) of thistitle. If the plant site is unmanned, the regional manager may authorize an alternative site to maintainthe documentation. The documentation shall be made available to representatives or the commissionupon request. The documentation shall include:1)quantification of all emission increases and decrease associated with the physical or operationalchange;2)a description of the physical or operational change;3)a description of any equipment being installed; and4)sufficient information as necessary to showthat the project will not adversely affect ambientair quality and will comply as applicable with:A.§116.150 and §116.151 of this title (relating to Nonattainment Review) and §§116.160 -116.163 of this title (relating to Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration Review); orB.NOT SUBMITTED AS PART OF SIP.New 30 TAC Section 116.117(a) is approvable.This new provision establishes sufficientrecordkeeping requirements for facilitiesparticipating in the Qualified Facilities program.30 TAC Section 116.117(a)(3)(A) further limitsthe applicability of the QF program to minorNSR by requiring the owner or operator of thesource to maintain adequate information todemonstrate there is no adverse impact on airquality and that all requirements of NNSR andPSD are satisfied.Revisions adopted September 15, 2010Submitted October 5, 2010b)Nothing in this section shall limit the applicability of any federal requirement.New 30 TAC Section 116.117(b) is approvable.This new provision ensures that federalrequirements will be applied to the stationarysource. If the source should be a major PSD orNNSR modification then the QF program wouldnot apply. This new provision limits the scope tothe Texas Minor NSR program.The analysis presented in Table 7 above demonstrates thatthe provision submitted on October 5, 2010, at 30 TAC Section 116.117forthe Documentation and Notification of Changes to Qualified Facilities are approvable. These provisions ensure that all federalrequirements will be satisfied and that the source cannotcircumvent federal major source permitting requirements.40Table 8 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.311 – Permit Renewal ApplicationAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.311 EPA’s AnalysisTexas SIPApproved by EPA on November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70354)As adopted by TCEQ on August 21, 2002 and submitted September 4, 2002(a)In order to be granted a permit renewal, the permit holder shall submit information in support of theapplication which demonstrates that:No revisions submitted. Language provided forcontext.Texas SIPApproved by EPA on November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70354)As adopted by TCEQ on August 21, 2002 and submitted September 4, 2002(1).dockside vessel emissions associated with the facility will comply with all rules and regulationsof the commission and with the intent of the TCAA, including protection of the health andproperty of the public and minimization of emissions to the extent possible, consistent with goodair pollution practices.No revisions submitted. Language provided forcontext.Texas SIPApproved by EPA on March 10,2006 (71 FR 12285)As adopted by TCEQ on April 6,1994 and submitted April 29,1994(2).The facility is being operatedin accordance with allrequirements and conditionsof the existing permit,including representations inthe application for permit toconstruct and subsequentamendments, and anypreviously granted renewal.Revisions adopted June 17, 1998and submitted July 22, 1998(1).the facility is being operatedin accordance with allrequirements and conditionsof the existing permit,including representations inthe application for permit toconstruct and subsequentamendments, and anypreviously granted renewal,unless otherwise authorizedfor a qualified facility;Revisions adopted August 21,2002 and submitted September 4,2002(2).The facility is beingoperated in accordancewith all requirementsand conditions of theexisting permit,includingrepresentations in theapplication for permit toconstruct andsubsequentamendments, and anypreviously grantedrenewal.In the July 22, 1998 submittal, the TCEQrenumbered previously SIP-approved section 30TAC Section 116.311(a)(2) and 30 TAC Section116.311(a)(1) and added the phrase pertaining toqualified facilities. The September 4, 2002,submittal included a renumbering of thisprovision to 30 TAC Section 116.311(a)(2).The revisions to this section pertaining toQualified Facilities as submitted on July 22, 1998and further revised in the September 4, 2002,submittal are approvable.The Qualified Facilitiesprogram authorizes revisions that are exempt fromthe requirement to obtain a permit for newconstruction or modification; as such changesauthorized under the Qualified Facilitiesprovisions are exemptfrom the requirement toobtain a permit renewal under 30 TAC Section116.311.Texas SIPApproved by EPA on November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70354)As adopted by TCEQ on August 21, 2002 and submitted September 4, 2002(3).the facility meets the requirements of any applicable New Source Performance Standards aslisted under Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 60, promulgated by the EPA underthe authority of the FCAA, §111, as amended;No revisions submitted. Language provided forcontext.41Table 8 – Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.311 – Permit Renewal ApplicationAnnotation and Evaluation of Revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.311 EPA’s AnalysisTexas SIPApproved by EPA on November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70354)As adopted by TCEQ on August 21, 2002 and submitted September 4, 2002(4).the facility meets the requirements of any applicable emission standard for hazardous airpollutants as listed under Title 40 CFR Part 61, promulgated by EPA under the authority of theFCAA, §112, as amended; andNo revisions submitted. Language provided forcontext.Texas SIPApproved by EPA on November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70354)As adopted by TCEQ on August 21, 2002 and submitted September 4, 2002(5).the facility meets the requirements of any applicable maximum achievable control technologystandard as listed under 40 CFR Part 63, promulgated by the EPA under FCAA, §1l2 or as listedunder Chapter 113, Subchapter C of this title (relating to National Emissions Standards forHazardous Air Pollutants for SourceCategories (FCAA§112, 40 CFR 63)).No revisions submitted. Language provided forcontext.(6).NOT IN SIPReturned to TCEQ on June 29, 2011. Sectionpertains to CAA section 112(g); this section isimplemented outside of the Texas SIP.Texas SIPApproved by EPA on November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70354)As adopted by TCEQ on August 21, 2002 and submitted September 4, 2002(b)In addition to the requirements in subsection (a)of this section, if the commission determines itnecessary to avoid a condition of air pollution or to ensure compliance with otherwise applicablefederal or state air quality control requirements, then:(1).the applicant may be required to submit additional information regarding the emissions from thefacility and their impacts on the surrounding area; and(2).the commission shall impose as a condition for renewal only those requirements the executivedirector determines to be economically reasonable and technically practicable considering theage of the facility and the impact of its emissions on the surrounding area.No revisions submitted. Language provided forcontext.Texas SIPApproved by EPA on November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70354)As adopted by TCEQ on August 21, 2002 and submitted September 4, 2002(c)A compliance history review must be conducted in accordance with Chapter 60 of this title (relating toCompliance History).No revisions submitted. Language provided forcontext.

# 3. Evaluation of How the October 5, 2010 Submittal Addresses the EPA’s June 7, 2010 Comment Letter on Qualified Facilities

The TCEQ proposed the revised Qualified Faci lities Program through Rule Project Number 2010-006-116-PR. The comment period for the proposed rulemaking closed on June 7, 2010. The TCEQ received comment letters from 13 or ganizations, including the EPA Region 6. The EPA’s comment letter, dated June 7, 2010, is av ailable as a supporting document in the docket and also available in the TCEQ ’s October 5, 2010, SIP submittal. While the TCEQ’s October 5, 2010, SIP submittal package includes a response to comment for each comment received, we are providing our analysis below of how the TCEQ addressed the concerns we submitted on June 7,

2010.

Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response

1. The "Background and reason(s) for the rulemaking"

section of the Executive Summary states that the Qualified Facility Program authorizes increases in

actual emissions at facilities. This statement is inconsistent with our understanding that the Qualified Facility Program is designed to only

allow increases in allowable emissions to net out against decreases in allo wable emissions. Please revise this statement to accurately reflect the intent of the Qualified Facility Program. The TCEQ clarified the intent of the Qualified Facilities program at 35 TexReg 8956. The TCEQ explains that the program does allow increases in actual emissions as part of the minor NSR program.

But these increases in actual emissions are authorized by the netting of permitted allowable emissions that result in no net increase in permitted allowables.

Upon review of the TCEQ’s response, the EPA finds that our initial understanding of the program was inaccurate. We have determined that the TCEQ’s October 5, 2010 SIP submittal clearly explains the scope of the program and its applicability under Minor

NSR.

2. EPA agrees with the st atement in the 30 TAC Chapter 116 preamble that the revisions to 30 TAC sections 116.10(5)(F), 116.111(a)(2)(K), 116.116(b)(3), and 116.117(a)(4)(B) will not be

submitted as SIP revisions. These sections all refer to section 112(g) of the CAA, which is not implemented through the SIP. No response necessary from the TCEQ. The EPA was expressing support with a statement in the preamble.

3. The 30 TAC Chapter 116 preamble at page 10, Notification of Changes at Qualified Facilities,

states that the submission of PI-E forms has resulted in significant denials for changes under the Qualified Facility Program. The rule is unclear how TCEQ has the authority to deny Qualified Facility changes when there is no approval process required for the PI-E form. Does TCEQ have a set amount of time to review and respond to the PI-E form? If TCEQ does not respond within the appropriate time, does the facility have a default approval? Where do the rules contain such provisions?

Also, the preamble statement referenced above is inconsistent with the rule language requirements at 30 TAC sections 116.116(e)(2) and 116.117(b). The TCEQ revised the proposed Qualified Facilities Program as a result of this comment. The submitted rules at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(2) require prior notification for all qualified facility changes. The proposed language about submitting the PI-E form as part of the annual report has been removed from the adopted version of 30 TAC Section 116.117(b) to avoid confusion. The TCEQ also removed the proposed language at 30 TAC Section 116.117(b)(3) and (b)(4) that id entified changes that required prior notification – since the adopted rule at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(2) requires prior notification to the TCEQ for all changes there is no need to identify specific types of changes th at require prior notice.

# 43 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response New 30 TAC section 1 16.116(e)(2) requires owners or operators to submit Form PI-E prior to making any changes to qualified facilities. However, 30 TAC section 116.117(b) requires the submittal of Form PI-E as part of the annual report. Further, the 30 TAC Chapter 116 preamble at page8, Netting and Double Counting, implies that prechange notification is only required when the intraplant trade moves emissions from the interior of a site to a point closer to the property line. Please explain how the PI-E form is used; is this form submitted pre-change or post-change? TCEQ should revise the regulatory language to be consistent with the intent expressed in the preamble, by clearly identifying the requirements for submittal of the PI-E form, requiring pre-change notification for all qualified facilities changes, and including an express procedure for TCEQ review and respond. The TCEQ provided clarifica tion on the use of the PIE Form in the Response to Comments. See 35 TexReg 8956 and 8957, October 1, 2010.

The TCEQ’s response adequately addresses the EPA’s

concerns.

4. TCEQ must provide explicit regulatory language to define the term "facility" as it applies to the Qualified Facility Program. We recognize that TCEQ interprets "facility," as it applies to the Qualified Facility Program, to preclude inclusion of more than one stationary source. However, the lack of rule language clarifying the meaning of the term "facility," as it applies to this Program, makes this definition overly vague; and therefore, unenforceable. As we stated in our final disapproval of the Qualified Facility Program, Texas's rules apply the term "facility" in different ways without providing clarification in the rule language. 75 FR19468, at 19489 (April14, 2010). Texas's PSD nonPAL rules explicitly limit the definition of "facility" to "emissions unit," but the Qualified Facility rules fail to make such a limitation. Compare 30 TAC 116.10(6) to 30 TAC 116.160(c)(3). The State clearly thought the prudent legal course was to limit "facility" explicitly to "emissions unit" in its PSD SIP non-PALs revision. However, TCEQ did not include sufficient information in its proposed revisions to demonstrate that the lack of this explicit limitation in the submitted Qualified Facility revisions is at least as stringent as the revised

definition in the PSD non PALs definition. We recommend that TCEQ resolve this deficiency by adding a specific definition of the term "facility" to the Qualified Facility Definitions at 30 T AC 116.17 or provide in its revised Qualified Facility Rule a description of what a "facility'' is under the Qualified Facility Program. The TCEQ’s response to comment explains that the term “facility” is a SIP-approved definition. This definition is consistently applied across the Texas air programs, including within the Qualified Facilities Program. See 35 TexReg 8957, October 1, 2010. Under the Texas regulations, a “facility” is equivalent to the federal definition of “emissions unit”. Further, a facility cannot include more than one stationary source, nor can it include every emission point on a company site, even if limit ed to the same SIC code.

The TCEQ’s response adequately addresses the EPA’s

concerns.

5. The 30 TAC Chapter 116 preamble at page 6 clearly indicates that the TCEQ uses the term The TCEQ’s response to comments at 35 TexReg 8957 explains that the EPA is misinterpreting the use

# 44 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response "account" synonymously with EPA's use of "source." While this pream ble statement is a step towards addressing our concerns identified in the final disapproval of the Qualified Facility Program, the TCEQ must also revise the Qualified Facility rule language to include this statement to improve clarity and transparency of the rule and to entirely address our concerns. See 75 FR 19468, at 19489-

19490. of the term “account”. The TCEQ explains that the “account” is equivalent to the EPA definition of “stationary source”. The stat e definition of "account" and the federal definition of "stationary source" both include the concept of multiple points of emissions (state defined "facilities" and federally defined "emission units") under common control located within a clearly defined area. It is only within this area that qualified facility transactions may occur.

The preamble and the re sponse to comment is sufficient to explain the use of the term “account”. The EPA does not believe that specific regulatory revisions are necessary.

6. The portion of the definition of "allowable emissions" at 30 TAC 116.10(2)(C) relating to "qualified grandfathered facility" is proposed for deletion under 30 TAC section 116.10. However,

we note that there continue to be references to actual emissions throughout the Qualified Facility rule language, see 30 TAC sections 116.116(e)(4)(C), 116.116(e)(9)(A), 116.116(e)(9)(C), 116.116(e)(9)(D). It is our understanding of the Qualified Facility Program that actual emissions were only used for qualified grandfathered facilities. Please confirm that this interpretation is correct. If our understanding is correct and actual emissions were only used for qualified grandfathered facilities, please remove all references to actual emissions from the proposed language. However, if our understanding is incorrect please explain ho w actual emissions are to be used in a program that is designed for netting of

allowable emissions. The TCEQ clarified the intent of the Qualified Facilities program at 35 TexReg 8956. The TCEQ explains that the program does allow increases in actual emissions as part of the minor NSR program.

But these increases in actual emissions are authorized by the netting of permitted allowable emissions that result in no net increase in permitted allowables.

The TCEQ’s response is adequate to address the

EPA’s concerns.

7. The proposed definition of "Best Available Control Technology (BACT)" at 30 TAC section 116.10(1)

must be revised to more clearly indicate this definition is for any air c ontaminant or facility not subject to federal permitting requirements, as indicated by the rule preamble on page 12. We recommend that TCEQ use the following language to promote rule clarity:

State (or alternately, Texa s) Best available control technology (BACT) An air pollution control method for a new or modified facility that through experience and research, has proven to be operational, obtainable, and capable of reducing or eliminating emissions from the facility, and is considered technically pr actical and economically reasonable for the facility. The emission reduction can be achieved through technology such as the use The TCEQ did not revise the definition of “BACT” at 30 TAC Section 116.10(1) as recommended by the EPA. However, the adopted definition of “BACT” along with the submitted revisions to 30 TAC Section 116.111(a)(2)(C) make cl ear that the Texas SIP contains two types of BACT – federal BACT applied to PSD permits and Texas BACT that is applicable to all state permitting actions. Note that on November 10, 2014, the EPA SIP-approved the revisions to 30

TAC Section 116.111 that were submitted on October
5, 2010. See 79 FR 66626.

# 45 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response of add-on control equipment or by enforceable changes in production processes, systems, methods, or work practice. This definition applies to any air contaminant or facility not subject to federal permitting requirements under Title I, part C, of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Fo r air contaminants or facilities subject to the Title I, part C, CAA requirements, the definition of BACT at section 116.111(a)(2)(C), which requires BACT as defined in 40 CFR 52.2l(b)(l2), will apply.

8. Please explain why the definition of "qualified facility" has been retained in 30 TAC section 116.10

rather than recodified into the new 30 TAC section 116.17, Qualified Facility Definitions. The TCEQ’s response to comments explains the structure of the definitions in the October 5, 2010, submittal. Changing the rule citation for the location of the definition would unnecessarily complicate the interpretation of these rules and permits. The TCEQ’s explanation is sufficient to address the EPA’s inquiry.

See 35 TexReg 8957.

9. New 30 TAC section 116.17(2) provides that the allowable emissions for a permitted facility at new 30 TAC section 116.17(2)(A) would include the emission limit established in the permit or maximum allowable emissions rate table (MAERT)

and any emission limit contained in representations in the permit application that was relied upon in issuing the permit. This section may provide an opportunity for double-counting and over inflation of the allowable emissions for a permitted facility. Please verify that emissions limits are only cumulative if the emission limits in the permit, MAERT, and permit application are separate,entirely unrelated limits in order to prevent doublecounting. The TCEQ’s response to comments explains the use

of the MAERT table and th at emission limits placed in a MAERT table override/replace the emission limits contained in a permit application. Therefore there is no risk for double counting of emissions. See

35 TexReg 8957.

The TCEQ’s explanation addresses the EPA’s

concerns.

10. Please explain what is meant by a "Special Exemption Facility" at 30 TAC section 116.17(2)(D). Is a special exemption facility exempt from the requirements to have an underlying 30 TAC Chapter 116 permit or authorization under 30 TAC Chapter 106 at 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(1)(A)? If so, what is the basis for the exemption? The TCEQ revised the proposal as a result of this comment. The TCEQ explains in the RTC that the term “special exemption facility” is now obsolete in the Texas air permitting program. See 35 TexReg

8957. Therefore, the TCEQ deleted the proposed language at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(1)(A0 in the final submittal package. However, the reference to “special exemption facility” was overlooked in the final adoption and submittal of 30 TAC Section 116.17(2)(D). The TCEQ s ubmitted a clarification letter on May XX, 2015, addressing this oversight and confirming that the provision is obsolete and inclusion in the SIP will not impact attainment strategies for the

state. The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

11. New 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(1)(B) crossreferences the major NSR netting requirements at 30 TAC section 116.12(20). The SIP-approved major NSR netting provisions are located at 30 The TCEQ revised the proposal as a result of this comment. The TCEQ agrees that the correct citation is 30 TAC Section 116.12(13). The TCEQ finalized 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(1)(B) with a general citation

# 46 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response TAC section 116.12(13). EPA is evaluating pending

revisions to 30 TAC section 116.12 that substantively revise and renumber this section. 30 TAC section 116.12(20) must be approved before EPA could proceed with a proposed action on the revised Qualified Facility Program. Our comments on the proposed revisions to 30 TAC section 116.116(e) do not reflect any intent or future action by the EPA to grant SIP approval to the revisions to

30 TAC section 116.12. to 30 TAC Section 116.12 to reduce administrative burden if the specific citation is renumbered within 30

TAC Section 116.12 in the future. See 35 TexReg

8957.

The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

12. New 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(2)(A) requires owners or operators to submit an application for a permit alteration for each permit issued under 30 TAC section 116.111 involved in the qualified facility transaction. The SIP-approved alteration provisions at 30 TAC section 116.116(c)(B)(iii) state that a permit alteration is "any change from a representation in an application, general condition, or special condition in a permit that does not cause an increase in the emission rate of any air

contaminant." Therefor e, the SIP-approved alteration process cannot be used to revise the permit for the facilities involved in the qualified facility transaction that has the increase in allowables. To use permit alterations for the

facilities with emission incr eases, the TCEQ must propose a revision to the permit alterations provisions. The TCEQ revised the proposal as a result of this comment. The TCEQ’s response to comments at 35 TexReg 8957 explains that the TCEQ agrees the use of the term “alteration” was confusing. Therefore the TCEQ created the new definition of “revision” at 30 TAC Section 116.17 to prov ide a means to make the qualified change federally enforceable.

The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

13. There appears to be a typo graphical error in new 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(2)(D). We believe the

sentence should read:

No allowable emission rate in as defined in § 116.17 of this title (relating to Qualified Facilities Definitions) shall be exceeded. The TCEQ agreed there was a typographical error and corrected the error in the final adoption.

The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

14. Our final disapproval of the Qualified Facility Program determined that the program was deficient as a minor NSR program because it did not require participating facilities to have an underlying permit and an air quality impact analysis. See 75 FR 19468, at 19486-19487. New 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(2)(E) includes the following language:" ... regardless of whether the facility has received a preconstruction permit or permit amendment ....” This section must be revised to accurately address

this concern and to be consistent with the stated intent of the TCEQ, which is that a facility must have an authorization under 30 TAC Chapter 106 or 116 and air quality impact analysis in order to be "qualified" under the Program. See new 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(l)(A). The TCEQ revised the proposal as a result of this comment. The TCEQ adopted 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(1)(A) which explicitly requires that sources involved in the qualified facility program are already authorized by a PBR, SP or case-by-case permit. See 35 TexReg 8958.

The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

# 47 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response

15. The interchange methodology at 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(5) is unapprovable for the sulfur dioxides and PM NAAQS. The term "sulfur compounds" used in the interchange methodology is broad enough to include hydrogen sulfide, which is a regulated NSR pollutant (see 40 CFR 52.2l(b)(23)(i) and 52.21 (i)(5)(i)), and requires a separate netting analysis from sulfur oxides. The interchange methodology also allows PM2.s to be interchanged with PM10, which are two separate pollutants. For additional information see our final disapproval of the Qualified Facility Program at 75
FR 19468, at 19474. TCEQ did not change the proposal as a result of this comment. However, in the response to comments at

35 TexReg 8958, the TCEQ explains that 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(5)(E) requires an applicant to demonstrate that the change will not adversely affect air quality before the TCEQ approves the change. It is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate the interchange will not impact air quality, if that cannot be accomplished the TCEQ doesn’t approve the qualified facility trade. TCEQ recognizes that sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide are dangerous compounds with disaster potential. A demonstration of an acceptable interchange between these substances will be difficult and subject to intense review before approval. However, the State has determined that allowing the interchange, should an applicant be able to make the appropriate demonstration, could reduce the potential harmful effects of these substances. The

State is also aware that de monstrations of the relative

health effects of PM10 and PM2.5 and their interchange are not fully developed. Without an approved and replicable demonstration, such an interchange would not be allowed, but the State does not want to prohibit potential air quality benefits if future developments allow a successful and replicable

demonstration.

The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

16. 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(5)(E) requires an owner or operator to demonstrate that the change will not adversely affect ambient air quality, but 30 TAC section 116.117(a)(4) only requires an owner or operator to maintain sufficient information to show that the project is not exp ected to adversely affect ambient air quality. We interpret 30 TAC section 116.117(a)(4) as requiring a lesser degree of stringency in the analysis. Therefore, the TCEQ must revise 30 TAC section 11 6.117(a)(4) to require a demonstration co nsistent with 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(5)(E). Please also explain the replicable procedure that TCEQ will employ to determine the change will not adversely impact ambient air quality. The TCEQ revised the rule as a result of this comment. The TCEQ uses established modeling procedures to determine air quality effects. Applicants for qualified facility changes must conform to these procedures in demonstrating that qualified facility changes will not adversely affect air quality, and the results obtained by the applicant must be replicable.

See 35 TexReg 8958.

The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

17. 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(8)(A) provides that a facility may utilize control methods that are as effective as BACT required at the time the control methods are implemented. It is our understanding of the Texas Clean Air Act that only State BACT can apply to a minor NSR program, including the Qualified Facility Program. Please confirm this understanding. Also, 30 TAC section The TCEQ’s response to comments at 35 TexReg 8958 confirms that the cited language at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(8)(A) is only applicable to the Qualified Facilities program, which is a minor NSR program. As such, only state BACT applies as provided in 30 TAC Section 116.10(1). The TCEQ further explained the procedures used for establishing

State BACT.

# 48 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response 116.116(e)(8)(A) must be revised to explicitly provide that State BACT at 30 TAC section 116.10(1) applies. Please explain the replicable procedure that TCEQ will employ to determine the

control method is as effective as State BACT. The TCEQ’s response addresses the EPA’s concerns.

18. The Chapter 116 preamble at pages 8-9 states thatnew 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(l0) contains antibacksliding provisions such that the existing level of control may not be lessened for a Qualified Facility. The preamble further explains that this anti-backsliding provision will be implemented for intraplant trades through revisions to the maximum allowable emission rate table (MAER T) for the participating facilities. The rule language at 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(l0) does not require a c hange to the MAERT, nor can we find this provision elsewhere in the proposed rules. The TCEQ should revise the rule language to require MAERT revisions as explained in the preamble. The TCEQ did not revise the proposal as a result of this comment. However, the response to comments at

35 TexReg 8958 explains that the MAERT is revisedanytime a new emission rate is established in a caseby-case permit. The adopted rule at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(2) requires that a permit will be revised when the qualified facility change is made – this

means that the MAERT will be revised.

The TCEQ’s response addresses our concerns.

19. The annual report under 30 TAC section 116.117(b)(l) must be revised to address our concerns about the time lag between when the change is made and the TCEQ is notified. As noted in our final disapproval of the Qualified Facility Program, a six month report will better enable the TCEQ to monitor compliance with NAAQS, RFP or other control strategies. See 75 FR 19468, at 19482. The TCEQ has revised the proposal as a result of this comment. See 35 TexReg 8959 for the TCEQ’s explanation.

The TCEQ’s response addresses our concerns.

20. 30 TAC section 116.117(b)(1) should be revised to require reporting for changes to Qualified Facilities with intraplant trading. The TCEQ has revised the proposal as a result of this comment. See 35 TexReg 8959 for the TCEQ’s explanation.

The TCEQ’s response addresses our concerns.

21. TCEQ has deleted the provision for post-change notification (former 30 TAC section 116.117(b)(2)), but the revised regulations do not expressly require prechange notification in all instances. As discussed above in Comment 3, we find that the proposed regulations governing notification requirements are vague. We strongly encourage TCEQ to expressly state that pre-change notification is required for all qualified changes. If TCEQ does not intend to require pre-change notifi cation for all qualified changes, then we request that TCEQ further clarify timing and requirements for notification for all qualified changes contemplated under the Program. The TCEQ revised the proposal as a result of this

comment. The final submittal includes new 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(2) which requires that the applicant provide prior notifi cation of all changes. See 35 TexReg 8959 for the TCEQ’s explanation.

The TCEQ’s response addresses our concerns.

22. New 30 TAC section 116.117(b)(2) requires prechange notification if a physical or operational change at a Qualified Fac ility will affect compliance with a permit special condition. Please explain what constitutes a permit special condition. Does this mean that a facility can change and/or remove federally required monitoring, reporting, and The TCEQ revised the proposal as a result of this comment. As explained in the response to comments

at 35 TexReg 8959, the TCEQ has deleted the cited provision. See the response to comments for the TCEQ’s full explanation.

The TCEQ’s response addresses our concerns.

# 49 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response recordkeeping requirements without public notice? Is it possible that a facility could modify special

conditions established under federal Consent

Decrees or enforcement actions? We recommend that TCEQ revise this provision to clarify its applicability.

23. We interpret 30 TAC section 116.118, Pre-change Qualification, as applying only to facilities that do not have an existing permit, i.e., qualified grandfathered facilities. Please explain the types of

facilities that are covered under 30 TAC section 116. 118. If these facilities are indeed qualified grandfathered facilities please consider removing 30

TAC section 116.118. If these facilities are not qualified grandfathered facilities, we recommend clarifying 30 T AC sections 116.118(a)(1) and (a)(2) to improve clarity of the rule language. The TCEQ agrees with the EPA’s interpretation that this section only applies to grandfathered facilities. Therefore, the TCEQ withdrew the proposed

amendment to 30 TAC Section 116.118 as a result of

this comment. See 35 TexReg 8959.

The TCEQ’s response addresses our concerns.

24. The proposed supplement to the SIP titled "Concerning the Qualified Facility Program as Authorized by Senate Bill 1126" identifies all of the Qualified Facilities in Texas. The TCEQ has created this supplemental document in an effort to show that these facilities will not adversely impact attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, RFP, or any other applicable requir ement of the Act. TCEQ makes the argument that Qualified Facilities net allowable emissions from existing permits that were issued under SIP-approved permit programs consistent with section 110(l) of the CAA. Therefore, the Qualified Facility Program by extension must demonstrate consistency with section 110(l) of the CAA. However, this analysis does not address the Qualified GrandfatheredFacilities, which did not have underlying SIPapproved Chapter 116 permits or Chapter 106 authorizations. The proposed SIP supplement must be revised to identify which of these facilities were Qualified Grandfathered F acilities so that we can assess the impact of sources without permits on this Program. The TCEQ must also provide verification that each Qualified Grandf athered Facility is now covered under a SIP-approved Chapter 116 permit or Chapter 106 authorization. The TCEQ revised the SIP supplement and the response to comments to discuss grandfathered

facilities and how these facilities are now authorized.

See 35 TexReg 8959 for the TCEQ’s explanation. The TCEQ confirmed that any facility that was previously grandfathered is now authorized under the Texas air program (Chapter 116 or Chapter 106). Because each of these facilities is now an authorized facility, the supplement does not include a listing of grandfathered

facilities.

The TCEQ’s response addresses our concerns.

25. The "Program Summary" portion of the proposed supplement to the SIP titled "Concerning the Qualified Facility Program as Authorized by Senate Bill 1126" must be revised to accurately reflect the requirements of new 30 TAC section 116.116(e)(1)(A), that a facility must have an authorization under 30 TAC Chapter 106 or 116 before it can become a qualified facility. The TCEQ revised the SIP supplement to address our

concerns.

# 50 Table 9 – Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Submittal and the EPA’s June 7, 2010

Comment Letter

The EPA’s Comments Our Analysis of the TCEQ’s Response

26. The "TCEQ Administration of the Qualified Facilities Program" portion of the proposed supplement to the SIP titled "Concerning the Qualified Facility Program as Authorized by Senate Bill 1126" must be revised to clearly indicate that

the references to BACT are to State BACT. See

comments numbers 7 and 17 above for additional

information. The TCEQ revised the SIP supplement to address our

concerns.

27. Appendix 4 - Senate Bill 1126 Guidance – of the proposed supplement to the SIP titled "Concerning the Qualified Facility Program as Authorized by Senate Bill 1126", must be reviewed and updated

consistent with each of th e concerns identified in our Qualified Facility disapproval notice and the proposed revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 116. EPA is unable to determine whether the revised Qualified Facility Program complies with section 110(l) of the CAA until TCEQ updates this guidance to correlate

with the revised rules and submits the updated guidance to EPA. The TCEQ is not submitting the guidance for inclusion into the Texas SIP. The TCEQ explains at

35 TexReg 8960 that the guidance will be updated to maintain consistency with the adopted QF program and the EPA’s approval of the QF program.

The EPA finds this response adequate to address our concerns. We do not require that guidance be a part of a state’s SIP. However, the guidance cannot circumvent the approved SI P or enable the state to authorize an activity that is not approved under the

Texas SIP.



# The analysis presented in Table 9 above demonstr ates that the TCEQ has adequately addressed

the EPA’s concerns.

# 4. Evaluation of How the October 5, 2010 Submittal Addresses the EPA’s April 14, 2010 Disapproval

On April 14, 2010, EPA finalized our disapproval of the Texas Qualified Facilities Program because it did not meet: 1) the Minor NSR SIP requirements and 2) the NSR SIP requirements for a substitute Major NSR SIP revision.

a) Deficiencies under Minor NSR

Presented below is our evaluation of how the newly submitted October 5, 2010, Qualified Facilities program addresse s each of the identified Minor NSR from our April 14, 2014 disapproval.

Table 10: Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Qu alified Facilities Program and the April 14, 2010 Minor NSR Deficiencies

Identified Deficiency How the Octo ber 5, 2010 Submittal corrects the deficiency It is not clearly limited to Minor NSR thereby allowing major modifications to occur without a Major NSR permit The TCEQ has submitted new requirements at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e) (1)(B) that requires that before a change can be accepted as a qualified facility change, the applicant must conduct a netting analysis for each associated change to ensure that major source PSD or NNSR permitting requirements are not applicable. It has no regulatory provisions clearly prohibiting the use of this Program from circumventing the Major NSR SIP requirements thereby allowing sources to avoid the requirement to obtain preconstruction permit authorizations for projects that would otherwise require a Major NSR preconstruction permit The TCEQ has submitted new requirements at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e) (1)(B) that requires that before a change can be accepted as a qualified facility change, the applicant must conduct a netting analysis for each associated change to ensure that major source PSD or NNSR permitting requirements are not applicable. It does not require that first an applicability

determination be made whether the modification is subject to Major NSR thereby exempting new major stationary sources and major modifications from the EPA Major NSR SIP requirements The TCEQ has submitted new requirements at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e) (1)(B) that requires that before a change can be accepted as a qualified facility change, the applicant must conduct a netting analysis for each associated change to ensure that major source PSD or NNSR permitting requirements are not applicable. It fails to meet the statutory and regulatory requirements for a SIP revision The October 5, 2010, revision does meet the statutory requirements for a SIP revision. As demonstrated in section III.A of this TSD, the October 5, 2010 submittal satisfies the completeness criteria for a SIP revision under 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. It is not consistent with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements as interpreted in EPA policy and guidance on SIP revisions The TCEQ has submitted new requirements at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(1)(B) that requires that before a change can be accepted as a qualified facility change, the applicant must conduct a netting analysis for each associated change to ensure that major source PSD or NNSR permitting requirements are not applicable. The TCEQ also submitted 30 TAC Section 116.117(b) which states that nothing in the Qualified Facilities program can be construed to limit the applicability of any federal requirement. Th erefore, the October 5, 2010 Qualified Facilities Program will be consistent

# 52 Table 10: Evaluation of the October 5, 2010 Qu alified Facilities Program and the April 14, 2010 Minor NSR Deficiencies

Identified Deficiency How the Octo ber 5, 2010 Submittal corrects the deficiency with statutory and regulatory requirements for major and minor source permitting. It is not an enforceable Minor NSR permitting program The October 5, 2010, QF Submittal is not a minor NSR permitting program. Rather, the QF program is mechanism to promote flexibility among currently permitted sources in Texas that are either authorized under a Texas PBR or Chapter 116. The QF program

enables sources to make ch anges to already existing permitted sources without a permit. Further, the program requires that for the existing permits involved in the change, the PBR/SP/or other Chapter 116 permit will be revised to make any changes in allowable emissions federally enforceable. It lacks legally enforceable safeguards to ensure that the exempted changes will not violate a Texas control strategy and will not interfere with NAAQS

attainment The October 5, 2010 Qualified Facilities program allows changes at existing permitted facilities to occur - but these changes are not subject to major source permitting requirements and will not result in a net

increase in allowable emissi ons. Therefore, because the permitted allowables do not change, the EPA has determined that there will be no impact to the control strategies or interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or incremen t. Further, the revised Qualified Facility program at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(2) requires that the existing permit authorizations (PBR, SP, or existing Chapter 116 permit) must be revised to reflect the transfers of allowable emissions. Note that even though the program involves transfers of allowables, there will be

no net increase in allowable emissions and therefore no impact on air quality from what was already permitted. Additionally, the Qualified Facility program at 30 TAC Section 116.116(e)(5)(E) re quires that the facility owner demonstrate that the qualified facility change will not adversely affect ambient air quality.

EPA lacks sufficient available information to determine that the requested relaxation to the Texas

Minor NSR SIP will not interf ere with any applicable requirement concerning atta inment and RFP, or any other applicable requirement of the Act The October 5, 2010, Qualified Facilities Program

submittal is not a relaxation of the Texas Minor NSR Program. As explained in this TSD, the Qualified Facilities program is only applicable at existing permitted facilities. These participating facilities can provide for an actual increase in emissions as a result of netting of permit allowables. So while there is a possibility of an increase in actual emissions, there will

be no net increase in allowable emissions and consequently no impact on air quality since the permit allowables have already been reviewed for air quality impacts.

# 53 b) Deficiencies under Major NSR

Because the analysis presented in the preceding s ections of this TSD clearly demonstrates that the October 5, 2010, submitted Qualified Facilities Program is a component of the Texas Minor NSR program, we do not need to analyze how the program addresses the deficiencies identified as not meeting a substitute Major NSR SIP re vision. These identified deficiencies are not applicable to a minor NSR program because it cannot be used to substitute for or circumvent federal major source permitting requirements.

# D. Evaluation of the October 5, 2010, Texas SIP Submittal with respect to Clean Air Act Section 110(l)

Section 110(l) of the CAA states that:

Each revision to an implementation plan submi tted by a State under this Chapter shall be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and re asonable further progress, or any other applicable requirement of this chapter.

Thus, under Section 110(l), the EP A cannot propose to approve a SIP revision that has not been developed with reasonable notice and public hear ing. Nor can we propose to approve a revision that will worsen air quality. The EPA has dete rmined that the revisions to the General Definitions and the Qualified Facilities Minor NSR program as submitted by the TCEQ on October 5, 2010, was developed using the Texas SI P-approved process with adequate notice and comment procedures. Our analysis also indicates that the General Definitions, with the exception of 30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(F) as discussed prev iously, are necessary to implement the CAA required title I permitting programs in Texas. As such, these General Definitions will support the state’s air quality programs and will not interfere with attainment, reasonable further progress or any other applicable requirements of the CAA. Additionally, the EPA has determined that the Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program estab lishes a mechanism to allow modifications at existing, permitted facilities to occur without a permit revision by requiring an increase in permitted emission allowables to be offset by a corresponding decrease in permitted emission allowables at the same facility. Because the faci lities participating in the Qualified Facilities program have been previously authorized under SIP-approved permitted mechanisms, the permitted emission allowables have been developed such that there is no interference with attainment, reasonable further progress or any ot her applicable requireme nt of this chapter. Therefore, the EPA concludes that approval a nd implementation of the Qualified Facilities program will not result in degradation of air quality.

# 55 IV. Conclusion

The technical analysis provided in the preceding s ections has compared the applicable sections

of the CAA and 40 CFR Part 51 to the October 5, 2010 proposed revision to the Texas SIP for

revisions to the General Defin itions and the creation of the Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program. This analysis found that the Septem ber 15, 2010, adoption of the revisions submitted on October 5, 2010, are consistent with the CAA a nd the EPA’s regulations. It is recommended that the EPA propose approval of the fo llowing revisions to the Texas SIP:

 Substantive and non-substantive revisions to the General Definitions at 30 TAC Section 116.10, as initially adopted on June 17, 1998 an d submitted on July 22, 1998 and revised through October 5, 2010, with the exception of 30 TAC S ection 116.10(9)(F). Note that 30 TAC Section 116.10(5)(F) has not been submitted or proposed for inclusion in the Texas

SIP.

 New section 30 TAC Section 116.17 establishi ng the definitions for the Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program as adopt ed by the State on September 15, 2010 and submitted on October 5, 2010.

 Substantive revisions to 30 TAC Secti on 116.116(e)(1) – (e)(11) creating the Texas Minor NSR Qualified Facilities Program as adopted by the State on September 15, 2010 and submitted on October 5, 2010.

 New section 30 TAC Section 116.117 establis hing the documentation and notification requirements for the Minor NSR Qualified Fa cilities Program as a dopted by the State on September 15, 2010 and submitted on October 5, 2010. Note that 30 TAC Section 116.117(a)(3)(B) has not been submitted or proposed for inclusion in the Texas SIP.

 The SIP narrative titled “Revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) Concerning the Qualified Facility Program as Author ized by Senate Bill 1126” as submitted on October 5, 2010.

It is recommended that the EPA propose to disapprove 30 TAC Section 116.10(9)(F) pertaining to natural gas processing f acilities as submitted on October 5, 2010. The EPA previously disapproved this provision on November 17, 2011, as not clearly limited to the Minor NSR program and as not satisfying the anti-backslid ing requirements under CAA section 110(l). The state resubmitted the provision on October 5, 2010, unchanged with the exception of numbering and provided no additional evidence to substant iate inclusion in the Texas Minor NSR program or to demonstrate that the exemption from permitting was justified under section 110(l). As such,

we continue to find that this provision is not clearly lim ited to Minor NSR and should be disapproved as inconsistent with the re quirements of section 110 of the Act.