Part 1.
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Chapter 113.
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS AND FOR DESIGNATED FACILITIES AND POLLUTANTS
Subchapter C. NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES (FCCA §112, 40 CFR 63)
30 TAC §§113.110, 113.120, 113.130, 113.150, 113.170, 113.200, 113.240, 113.250, 113.260, 113.280, 113.320, 113.330, 113.340, 113.350, 113.380, 113.390, 113.400, 113.440, 113.470, 113.490, 113.500, 113.510, 113.520, 113.530, 113.540, 113.550, 113.560, 113.620, 113.640, 113.650, 113.670, 113.690, 113.700, 113.720, 113.730, 113.740, 113.750, 113.780, 113.790, 113.810, 113.840, 113.860, 113.900, 113.910, 113.930, 113.970, 113.1020, 113.1030, 113.1040, 113.1050, 113.1070, 113.1260
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission)
proposes amendments to Subchapter C, concerning National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories, §§113.110, 113.120,
113.130, 113.170, 113.200, 113.240, 113.250, 113.260, 113.280, 113.320, 113.330,
113.340, 113.350, 113.380, 113.390, 113.400, 113.470, 113.490, 113.500, 113.510,
113.520, 113.530, 113.540, 113.560, 113.620, 113.640, 113.650, 113.670, 113.690,
113.700, 113.720, 113.730, 113.790, and 113.810. The commission also proposes
new §§113.150, 113.440, 113.550, 113.740, 113.750, 113.780, 113.840,
113.860, 113.900, 113.910, 113.930, 113.970, 113.1020, 113.1030, 113.1040,
113.1050, 113.1070, and 113.1260.
The proposed amendments to Chapter 113 incorporate amendments to National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Source Categories
that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made to Title
40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63 (40 CFR 63). These are technology-based
standards commonly referred to as the maximum achievable control technology
(MACT) standards. In addition, the proposed new sections will incorporate
by reference 18 MACT standards which have not been previously incorporated
into Chapter 113. The EPA is developing these national standards to regulate
emissions of hazardous air pollutants under the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA)
Amendments of 1990, §112, as codified in 42 United States Code (USC), §7412.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE PROPOSED RULES
Under federal law, affected industries are required to implement the MACT
standards regardless of whether the commission or EPA is the agency responsible
for implementation. As MACT standards are promulgated or amended by EPA, they
are reviewed for compatibility with current commission regulations and policies.
The commission then incorporates them into Chapter 113 through formal rulemaking
procedures. After each MACT standard or amendment is adopted, the commission
will seek formal delegation from EPA under 40 CFR 63, Subpart E, which implements
42 USC, §7412(1). Upon delegation, the commission will be responsible
to administer and enforce the MACT requirements.
The commission proposes to incorporate amendments that EPA has made to
34 of the federal MACT standards previously incorporated into the commission
rules by updating the federal promulgation dates and
Federal Register
(FR) citations stated in the commission rules. The
34 standards along with their corresponding Chapter 113 sections and original
incorporation date are listed in the following table.
The commission also proposes to incorporate by reference, without change,
18 federal MACT standards as listed in the following table.
SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION
Subchapter C: National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories (FCAA, §112, 40 CFR 63)
Throughout the proposed amendments, the commission is adding the word "Part"
after the phrase "Code of Federal Regulations." Similarly, where the acronym
"CFR" is used in existing sections, it is expanded to the Code of Federal
Regulations. These amendments are proposed so that the rule language will
conform to commission and
Texas Register
formatting
and style standards. In addition, the commission is proposing to amend the
titles of §§113.200, 113.240, 113.350, 113.500, 113.510, 113.520,
113.540, 113.560, and 113.690 to be the same as the titles for the corresponding
subparts in 40 CFR 63.
Section 113.110 - Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry (40 CFR 63, Subpart F)
The commission proposes to amend §113.110 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart F made by the EPA since April 26,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart F on May 8, 2000 (65 FR
26491) and January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6922). The May 8, 2000 amendment revised
the definition of the term "equipment leak" to add "connectors" to the list
of equipment that is subject to the equipment leak provisions. The January
22, 2001 amendment revised the definition of the term "process vent" and added
procedures for identifying "process vents" in order to ensure consistent interpretation
of the term. EPA also revised several provisions to reflect the terminology
used in the revised definition of process vent, and added provisions to allow
off-site control of process vent emissions and to establish a new compliance
date under certain circumstances.
Section 113.120 - Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater
(40 CFR 63, Subpart G)
The commission proposes to amend §113.120 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart G made by the EPA since April 26,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart G on October 17, 2000 (65
FR 61744); December 14, 2000 (65 FR 78268); and January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6922).
The October 17, 2000 amendments included test method version D2879-96 in the
definition of the term "maximum true vapor pressure." The December 14, 2000
amendments consolidated portions of the subpart which are applicable to storage
vessels, process vents, transfer operations, and equipment leaks within the
synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI). The amendments
allow a source the option of complying with a single consolidated rule at
40 CFR Part 65, concerning Consolidated Federal Air Rule (CAR). The CAR is
an optional compliance alternative for SOCMI sources. The commission adopted
the federal CAR into Chapter 113, Subchapter E, on September 25, 2002 with
an effective date of October 20, 2002. As discussed in the previous paragraph,
Subpart G was also amended along with Subpart F on January 22, 2001.
Section 113.130 - Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Equipment Leaks (40 CFR 63, Subpart H)
The commission proposes to amend §113.130 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to H made by the EPA since April 26, 1999.
During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart H on December 14, 2000 (65 FR
78268) and January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6922). The December 14, 2000 amendment
allows sources affected by this subpart the alternative compliance option
of complying with the CAR. As discussed previously, Subpart H was also amended
along with Subparts F and G on January 22, 2001.
Section 113.150 - Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart J)
The commission proposes new §113.150, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the Subpart J rules adopted by the EPA on July 10, 2002 (67
FR 45886). This new MACT standard requires that existing polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) and copolymer production facilities, which already must comply with
the existing vinyl chloride NESHAP found in 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart F, to
continue to comply with that existing NESHAP. This rule reflects EPA's determination
that, except for equipment leaks at new sources, the hazardous air pollutant
(HAP) control level for the PVC and copolymers production source category
resulting from compliance with the existing vinyl chloride NESHAP already
reflects the application of MACT and thus meets the requirements of 42 USC, §7412(d).
For equipment leaks, new sources must comply with the most current technology
standards in the generic MACT rules found in 40 CFR 63, Subpart YY. Compliance
with the existing vinyl chloride NESHAP promotes regulatory consistency and
eliminates the costs that would be incurred by enforcing a new set of standards
that likely would result in no additional HAP emissions reductions.
Section 113.170 - Coke Oven Batteries (40 CFR
63, Subpart L)
The commission proposes to amend §113.170 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart L made by the EPA since October
27, 1993. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart L on January 13, 1994
(59 FR 1992) and October 17, 2000 (65 FR 61744). The January 13, 1994 amendment
included minor corrections to Appendix A of Subpart L. On October 17, 2000,
EPA amended 40 CFR §63.301 and §63.304 by adding English units in
addition to the metric units.
Section 113.200 - Ethylene Oxide Emissions Standards
for Sterilization Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart O)
The commission proposes to amend §113.200 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart O made by the EPA since December
14, 1999. During this time frame, Subpart O was amended on November 2, 2001
(66 FR 55577) to eliminate MACT requirements for chamber exhaust vents. This
action reduced safety problems associated with the previous requirements,
and also revised testing and monitoring requirements for sterilization chamber,
aeration, and chamber exhaust vents to correct technical problems associated
with the previous requirements.
Section 113.240 - Pulp and Paper Industry (40
CFR 63, Subpart S)
The commission proposes to amend §113.240 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart S made by the EPA since April 12,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart S on December 22, 2000 (65
FR 80755) and May 14, 2001 (66 FR 24268). The December 22, 2000 amendments
revised the pulping process vent standards, the biological treatment system
standards, monitoring requirements, and test methods and procedures to address
technical issues identified after promulgation of the subpart in 1998. The
amendment also specified that downtime, due to routine maintenance of pulping
process vent control devices, is included in the excess emissions allowances.
The May 14, 2001 amendments corrected two incorrectly referenced subparagraphs
and made additional technical corrections.
Section 113.250 - Halogenated Solvent Cleaning
(40 CFR 63, Subpart T)
The commission proposes to amend §113.250 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart T made by the EPA since December
14, 1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart T on September 8, 2000
(65 FR 54419) to provide corrections and clarifications to EPA amendments
made on December 3, 1999, and finalized compliance options for continuous
web cleaning. The intent of these amendments was to ensure that all owners
or operators of solvent cleaning machines have appropriate and understandable
requirements for their cleaning machines.
Section 113.260 - Group I Polymers and Resins
(40 CFR 63, Subpart U)
The commission proposes to amend §113.260 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart U made by the EPA since June 30,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart U on June 19, 2000 (65 FR
38030) and July 16, 2001 (66 FR 36924). The June 19, 2000 amendments addressed
numerous technical issues and concerns with the rules raised by petitioners
to the United States Court of Appeals (U.S. Court of Appeals) for the District
of Columbia Circuit,
Union Carbide Corp. v. EPA,
96-413 and Consolidated Cases (D.C. Cir.)
. Also the amendments were
needed to update the rules as necessitated by the January 17, 1997 amendments
to 40 CFR 63, Subparts F - I. The July 16, 2001 amendments corrected minor
cross referencing and typographical errors.
Section 113.280 - Epoxy Resins Production and
Non-Nylon Polyamides Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart W)
The commission proposes to amend §113.280 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart W made by the EPA since March 8,
1995. During this time frame, Subpart W was amended on May 8, 2000 (65 FR
26491) to revise the definition of the term "equipment leak" by adding "connectors"
to the list of equipment that is subject to the equipment leak provisions.
Section 113.320 - Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing
Plants (40 CFR 63, Subpart AA); and
Section 113.330 - Phosphate Fertilizers Production
Plants (40 CFR 63, Subpart BB)
The commission proposes to amend §113.320 and §113.330 by incorporating
by reference, without change, all amendments to Subparts AA and BB made by
the EPA since June 10, 1999. During this time frame, Subparts AA and BB were
amended on December 17, 2001 (66 FR 65072); June 12, 2002 (67 FR 40578); and
June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40814). The December 17, 2000 amendment revised the applicability
and monitoring requirements for both subparts; and corrected typographical
errors in Subpart AA; changed the emissions limit for phosphate rock calciners;
clarified certain monitoring requirements; and specified applicability of
certain parts of the general provisions. However, due to adverse comments
received during the public comment period, on June 12, 2002, EPA withdrew
direct final rule amendment to Subpart AA concerning emissions limit for phosphate
rock calciners. The June 13, 2002 amendment revised the operating requirements
for both subparts, and changed the emissions limit for phosphate rock calciners
in Subpart AA.
Section 113.340 - Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR
63, Subpart CC)
The commission proposes to amend §113.340 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart CC made by the EPA since August
18, 1998. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart CC on May 25, 2001 (66
FR 28840). The May 25, 2001 amendment corrected an error in the amendatory
instructions in an earlier correcting amendment, in which 40 CFR §63.640(b)(1)
and (2) were inadvertently removed from Subpart CC.
Section 113.350 - Off-Site Waste and Recovery
Operations (40 CFR 63, Subpart DD)
The commission proposes to amend §113.350 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart DD made by the EPA since July 20,
1999. During this time frame, Subpart DD was amended on January 8, 2001 (66
FR 1263). This amendment corrected numerous typographical and cross-reference
errors; removed a plus or minus 1% accuracy requirement and replaced it with
a reference to 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B, Performance Specification 8 or
9; and added an additional option to the carbon canister monitoring and replacement
requirements so that the requirements would be consistent with other NESHAP
and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) air rules.
Section 113.380 - Aerospace Manufacturing and
Rework Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart GG)
The commission proposes to amend §113.380 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart GG made by the EPA from September
1, 1998 through December 8, 2000. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart
GG on October 17, 2000 (65 FR 61744) and December 8, 2000 (65 FR 76941). The
October 17, 2000 amendment added the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) test method "E 260-96" to 40 CFR §63.750(b)(2). The December 8,
2000 amendment revised the standards to include a separate emission limit
for exterior primers used for large commercial aircraft at existing facilities
that produce fully assembled, large commercial aircraft.
Section 113.390 - Oil and Natural Gas Production
Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart HH)
The commission proposes to amend §113.390 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart HH made by the EPA since June 17,
1999. During this time frame, Subpart HH was amended on June 29, 2001 (66
FR 34548) to correct errors and to clarify the intent of the standard.
Section 113.400 - Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
(Surface Coating) (40 CFR 63, Subpart II)
The commission proposes to amend §113.400 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart II made by the EPA since December
17, 1996. During this time frame, Subpart II was amended on October 17, 2000
(65 FR 61744) to add references to later versions of ASTM test methods.
Section 113.440 - Chemical Recovery Combustion
Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills (40
CFR 63, Subpart MM)
The commission proposes new §113.440, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules and all amendments to Subpart MM made by the
EPA since January 12, 2001. The standard applies to process components at
new and existing sources used in chemical recovery processes at kraft, soda,
sulfite, and stand-alone semichemical pulp mills. EPA issued the final rules
for Subpart MM on January 12, 2001 (66 FR 3180). Since Subpart MM was initially
issued, EPA amended the rules on July 19, 2001 (66 FR 37591) to make technical
corrections and on August 6, 2001 (66 FR 41086) to correct a typographical
error. HAPs that are regulated by this MACT standard include gaseous organic
HAPs and HAP metals.
Section 113.470 - Containers (40 CFR 63, Subpart
PP)
The commission proposes to amend §113.470 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart PP made by the EPA since July 20,
1999. During this time frame, Subpart PP was amended on January 8, 2001 (66
FR 1263) to correct a cross-reference error.
Section 113.490 - Individual Drain Systems (40
CFR 63, Subpart RR)
The commission proposes to amend §113.490 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart RR made by the EPA since July 20,
1999. During this time frame, Subpart RR was amended on January 8, 2001 (66
FR 1263) to correct typographical errors.
Section 113.500 - Closed Vent Systems, Control
Devices, Recovery Devices, and Routing to a Fuel Gas System or a Process (40
CFR 63, Subpart SS);
Section 113.510 - Equipment Leaks - Control Level
1 (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart TT);
Section 113.520 - Equipment Leaks - Control Level
2 (40 CFR 63, Subpart UU); and
Section 113.540 - Storage Vessels (Tanks) - Control
Level 2 (40 CFR 63, Subpart WW)
The commission proposes to amend §§113.500, 113.510, 113.520,
and 113.540 by incorporating by reference, without change, all amendments
to Subparts SS - UU and WW made by the EPA since November 22, 1999. During
this time frame, Subparts SS - UU and WW were amended on July 12, 2002 (67
FR 46258) as part of an amendment to 40 CFR 63, Subpart YY. The Subpart YY
amendment added four processes (cyanide chemicals manufacturing, carbon black
production, ethylene production, and spandex production) to the generic MACT
standard and incorporated generic requirements established for similar emissions
sources that are also applicable to the four processes. The amendments specified
the appropriate methods for demonstrating compliance with percent reduction
requirements and emission concentration limits for the four processes in Subparts
SS - UU and WW and specified who has the authority to implement and enforce
the subparts. The amendments also specified that the authorities may be delegated
to a state, local, or tribal agency.
Section 113.530 - Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water
Separators (40 CFR 63, Subpart VV)
The commission proposes to amend §113.530 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart VV made by the EPA since July 20,
1999. During this time frame, Subpart VV was amended on January 8, 2001 (66
FR 1263) to correct a typographical error.
Section 113.550 - Ethylene Manufacturing Process
Units: Heat Exchange Systems and Waste Operations (40 CFR 63, Subpart XX)
The commission proposes new §113.550, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules to Subpart XX adopted by the EPA on July 12,
2002 (67 FR 46258). This MACT standard applies to heat exchange systems and
wastewater operations at ethylene manufacturing facilities. The primary HAPs
that will be controlled include benzene; 1,3-butadiene; cumene; ethyl benzene;
hexane; naphthalene; styrene; toluene; o-xylene, m-xylene, and p-xylene.
Section 113.560 - Generic Maximum Achievable Control
Technology Standards (40 CFR 63, Subpart YY)
The commission proposes to amend §113.560 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart YY made by the EPA since November
22, 1999. During this time frame, Subpart YY was amended on December 22, 1999
(64 FR 71852); November 2, 2001 (66 FR 55844); June 7, 2002 (67 FR 39301);
twice on July 12, 2002 (67 FR 46258 and 46289); and February 10, 2003 (68
FR 6635). The December 22, 1999 amendment was a correction to 40 CFR §63.1103(d),
Table 5, to insert a number that was missing. The November 2, 2001 amendment
concerned the regulation of surge control vessels and bottoms receiver vessels.
The June 7, 2002 amendment addressed a petitioner's questions regarding a
recordkeeping provision in the promulgated rules; the definition for "process
vent"; and editorial, cross-reference, and wording errors. The July 12, 2002
amendment established standards for cyanide chemicals manufacturing, carbon
black production, ethylene production, and spandex production source categories.
These four source categories were added to the generic MACT standards to reduce
the regulatory burden associated with the development of separate rulemakings,
to simplify the rulemaking process, to minimize the potential for duplicative
or conflicting requirements, to conserve limited resources, and to ensure
consistency of the air emissions requirements applied to similar emission
points. EPA also issued an amendment on July 12, 2002, which clarified the
EPA intent concerning dry spinning spandex production processes by concluding
that the MACT floor for spandex dry spinning facilities is "no control" and
that adoption of additional emission controls is not warranted. Therefore,
EPA determined that it was not necessary or appropriate to promulgate any
MACT requirements for spandex dry spinning facilities, but controls on spandex
reaction spinning facilities were still necessary. The February 10, 2003 amendment
added a definition for "process wastewater" to Subpart YY.
Section 113.620 - Hazardous Waste Combustors (40
CFR 63, Subpart EEE)
The commission proposes to amend §113.620 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart EEE made by the EPA since November
19, 1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart EEE on July 10, 2000
(65 FR 422920); November 9, 2000 (65 FR 67268); May 14, 2001 (66 FR 24270);
July 3, 2001 (66 FR 35087); October 15, 2001 (66 FR 523610); December 6, 2001
(66 FR 63313); February 13, 2002 (67 FR 6792); February 14, 2002 (67 FR 6968);
and December 19, 2002 (67 FR 77687).
The July 10, 2000 amendment corrected numerous typographical errors and
clarified several issues from the September 30, 1999 promulgated rules; clarified
one issue from a closely related June 19, 1998 amendment; and made one revision
to the November 19, 1999 technical correction.
The November 9, 2000 amendment was an interpretative clarification and
a technical correction. Part one of the amendment addressed several questions
from sources concerning the applicability of new source standards versus existing
source standards for hazardous waste incinerators by specifying the original
intent of the rules on these issues. The second part of the amendment made
three technical corrections which addressed performance testing, the continuous
monitoring system evaluation plans, and continuous monitoring system data
averaging.
The May 14, 2001 amendment was based on a court decision,
Chemical Manufacturers Association v. EPA
, 217 F. 3d 861 (D.C. Cir.
2000), in which the court vacated the Notice of Intent to Comply provisions
of EPA's rules relating to the standards for hazardous waste combustors. EPA
also filed a motion with the Washington D.C. Circuit to vacate certain parameter
limits of baghouses and electrostatic precipitators in order to allow additional
opportunity for notice and comment on the issue (
CKRC v. EPA
, no 99-1457, EPA Motion to November 14, 2000).
The July 3, 2001 amendment improved the implementation of the emission
standards associated with the final rule promulgated on September 30, 1999
(64 FR 52,828), primarily in the areas of compliance, testing, and monitoring
requirements. However, due to adverse comments received during the public
comment period, on October 15, 2001, EPA withdrew portions of three sections,
including the proposed new definition of the phrase "preheater tower combustion
gas monitoring location" from the direct final rules published on July 3,
2001.
The December 6, 2001 amendment extended the compliance date for Subpart
EEE for one year. This amendment was in response to the Washington D.C. Circuit
2001 opinion on
Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v.
EPA
, 255 F.3d 855, 872 issued July 24, 2001. The February 13, 2002
amendment revised the September 1999 emission standards with the issuance
of an Interim Standards Rule which, while less stringent than the original
rules, achieves most of the emission gains of the original rules. The interim
standards replaced the vacated standards temporarily, until final standards
could be promulgated. The February 14, 2002 amendments focused on improving
the implementation of the emissions standards, primarily in the areas of compliance,
testing, and monitoring.
Finally, the December 19, 2002 amendments made the following technical
corrections: 1) sources that comply early are not required to submit the notice
of compliance within 90 days of completing the comprehensive performance test;
2) the hydrochloric acid and chlorine gas emission standard for new lightweight
aggregate kilns was changed to 600 parts per million by volume; 3) the minimum
power requirement for ionizing wet scrubbers was deleted; 4) the requirement
to include a carbon bed testing schedule in the performance test plan was
deleted; 5) combustion system leak requirements were added; 6) the compliance
date extension requirements were changed; 7) the RCRA permitting requirements
were changed; 8) the limit on waste feed-rate for compliance with the dioxin/furan
emissions standard was changed; 9) the limit on the maximum ash feed-rate
for incinerators was changed; and 10) and the sampling and analysis requirements
were changed.
Section 113.640 - Pharmaceuticals Production (40
CFR 63, Subpart GGG)
The commission proposes to amend §113.640 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart GGG made by the EPA since September
21, 1998. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart GGG on August 29, 2000
(65 FR 52588); August 2, 2001 (66 FR 401210); and April 2, 2002 (67 FR 15486).
The August 29, 2000 amendment addressed 12 technical issues and concerns raised
by petitioners in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit,
Section 113.650 - Natural Gas Transmission and
Storage Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart HHH)
The commission proposes to amend §113.650 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart HHH made by the EPA since June 17,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart HHH on June 29, 2001 (66
FR 34548); September 27, 2001 (66 FR 49299); and February 22, 2002 (67 FR
8202). The June 29, 2001 amendment corrected errors and restated the intent
of the standard. The September 27, 2001 and February 22, 2002 amendments made
technical corrections to the June 29, 2001 amendment.
Section 113.670 - Group IV Polymers and Resins
(40 CFR 63, Subpart JJJ)
The commission proposes to amend §113.670 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart JJJ made by the EPA since June 30,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart JJJ on June 19, 2000 (65
FR 38030); August 29, 2000 (65 FR 52319); October 26, 2000 (65 FR 64161);
February 23, 2001 (66 FR 11233); February 26, 2001 (66 FR 11543); July 16,
2001 (66 FR 36924); and August 6, 2001 (66 FR 40903).
The June 19, 2000 amendment addressed numerous technical issues and concerns
with the rules raised by petitioners to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit,
Union Carbide Corp.
v. EPA, 96-413 and Consolidated Cases (D.C. Cir.)
. In addition, the
amendments updated Subpart JJJ as necessitated by amendments to the hazardous
organic NESHAP in Subparts F - I.
The August 29, 2000 amendment was a direct final rule that indefinitely
stayed the compliance date for the process contact cooling tower provisions
for existing affected sources producing polyethylene terephthalate (PET) using
the continuous terephthalic acid high viscosity multiple end finisher process.
However, due to adverse comments, on October 26, 2000, EPA withdrew the August
29, 2000 direct final rule. The February 23, 2001 was another direct final
rule that indefinitely stayed the February 27, 2001 compliance date for the
process contact cooling tower provisions for existing affected sources producing
poly using the continuous terephthalic acid high viscosity multiple end finisher
process.
The February 26, 2001 amendment extended certain compliance dates contained
in the subpart concerning the equipment leaks provisions as applied to PET
affected sources and corrected a reference error. The July 16, 2001 amendment
corrected minor cross-referencing and typographical errors, and made minor
clarifications.
The EPA was petitioned to reconsider the equipment leak detection and repair
standards contained in this subpart as they pertained to PET facilities. The
August 6, 2001 amendment denied the petition and retained the equipment leak
provisions of the promulgated rules, except for a modification of the definition
of a leak for certain ethylene glycol pumps. In addition, the amendment extended
the equipment leak provisions compliance date for PET affected sources to
August 6, 2002, in order to provide PET facilities time to develop a leak
detection and repair program.
Section 113.690 - Portland Cement Manufacturing
Industry (40 CFR 63, Subpart LLL)
The commission proposes to amend §113.690 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart LLL made by the EPA since June 14,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart LLL on April 5, 2002 (67
FR 16614); July 2, 2002 (67 FR 44371); July 5, 2002 (67 FR 44766); and December
6, 2002 (67 FR 72580).
The April 5, 2002 direct final rule amendments improved the implementation
of the emission standards, primarily in the areas of applicability, testing,
and monitoring, to resolve issues and questions raised since promulgation
of the rule. However, due to adverse comments received during the public comment
period concerning the April 5, 2002 amendments, EPA withdrew portions of the
amendments to three sections on July 2, 2002.
The July 5, 2002 amendments corrected errors to Table 1 concerning monitoring
requirements. The amendments also addressed two issues which arose from the
explanatory language in the preamble to the April 5, 2002 direct final rule
amendments. First, the amendments specified that the production rate is not
a parameter for which operating limits are established and that the production
rate measured during dioxin/furan or particulate matter performance testing
is not an operation limit for the source. Furthermore, the amendments specified
that a source would need to reconduct a performance test if the current operation
is not representative of the operation during the previous performance test,
such that the change in operation may adversely affect compliance. Finally,
the amendments specified that only the transfer points used to convey coal
from mill to the kiln are potential affected sources under Subpart LLL.
The December 6, 2002 amendments improved the implementation of the emission
standards, primarily in the areas of applicability, testing, and monitoring,
to resolve issues and questions raised since promulgation of the rule. Specifically,
the amendments addressed the issues raised as a result from adverse comment
to the April 5, 2002 amendments that were withdrawn on July 2, 2002.
Section 113.700 - Pesticide Active Ingredient
Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart MMM)
The commission proposes to amend §113.700 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart MMM made by the EPA since June 23,
1999. During this time frame, EPA amended Subpart MMM twice on November 21,
2001 (66 FR 58393 and 58396); twice on March 22, 2002 (67 FR 13508 and 13514);
June 3, 2002 (67 FR 38200); and September 20, 2002 (67 FR 59336). The November
21, 2001 amendments changed the requirements for pre-compliance plans to three
months in advance of the compliance date instead of six months. Due to issues
raised by petitioners in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit, the amendments also revised the definition of the term "process tank,"
The second of two March 22, 2002 amendments, in a Good Cause Final Rule,
provided an interim compliance date extension for existing sources from June
23, 2002 to August 22, 2002 pending resolution of a settlement agreement.
The interim compliance date extension was necessary because EPA simultaneously
published a March 22, 2002 direct final amendment to extend the compliance
deadline until December 23, 2003, but the comment period extended past the
existing March 23, 2002 pre-compliance plan deadline. The June 3, 2002 amendments
officially extended the compliance date until December 23, 2003.
The September 20, 2002 amendments addressed the issues raised by petitioners
(American Crop Protection Association and American Cyanamid Company (now BASF
Corporation) U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, ACPA
v. EPA, No. 9901334 (Consolidated with ACPA v. EPA, No 99-1332)), to ensure
that the rule was implemented as intended, to correct errors, and to maintain
consistency with other rules.
Section 113.720 - Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic
Resins (40 CFR 63, Subpart OOO)
The commission proposes to amend §113.720 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart OOO made by the EPA since January
20, 2000. During this time frame, Subpart OOO was amended on February 22,
2000 (65 FR 8768) to correct typographical errors and an equation.
Section 113.730 - Polyether Polyols Production
(40 CFR 63, Subpart PPP)
The commission proposes to amend §113.730 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart PPP made by the EPA since June 1,
1999. During this time frame, Subpart PPP was amended on June 14, 1999 (64
FR 31895) and May 8, 2000 (65 FR 26491). The June 14, 1999 amendment was a
correction to an equation. The May 8, 2000 amendment revised the definition
of the term "equipment leak" by adding "connectors" to the list of equipment
that is subject to the equipment leak provisions; corrected errors in several
equations; corrected numerous cross- referencing errors; incorporated definitions
by reference; removed references to 40 CFR 63, Subpart I; and made revisions
concerning the applicability, performance testing, reports, and initial notifications.
Section 113.740 - Primary Copper Smelting (40
CFR 63, Subpart QQQ)
The commission proposes new §113.740, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules to Subpart QQQ adopted by the EPA on June
12, 2002 (67 FR 40478). This new MACT standard establishes emissions limitations
and work practice standards for primary copper smelters that are, or are part
of, a major source of HAP emissions and that use batch copper converters.
The primary toxic metal HAPs that will be controlled include antimony, arsenic,
beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, lead, manganese, nickel, and selenium.
Section 113.750. Secondary Aluminum Production
(40 CFR 63, Subpart RRR)
.
The commission proposes new §113.750, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules for Subpart RRR adopted by the EPA on March
23, 2000 (65 FR 15690) and amended on June 14, 2002 (67 FR 41118); August
13, 2002 (67 FR 52616); September 24, 2002 (67 FR 59787); November 8, 2002
(67 FR 68038); and December 30, 2002 (67 FR 79808). On March 23, 2000, EPA
promulgated standards for new and existing sources at secondary aluminum production
facilities. HAPs emitted by the affected facilities include organic HAPs (including
dioxins and furans), inorganic gaseous HAPs (hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride,
and chlorine), and particulate metal HAPs. Emissions of other pollutants include
particulate matter and volatile organic compounds. Secondary aluminum production
facilities that are area sources are only subject to limitations on emissions
of dioxins and furans only.
As part of a settlement agreement with industry trade associations, the
June 14, 2002 amendments were published as direct final rules and clarified
compliance dates and deferred certain early compliance obligations. The compliance
date for a newly affected source (which is constructed or reconstructed at
an existing aluminum die casting facility, aluminum foundry, or aluminum extrusion
facility and that is subject to the rule) was deferred until March 24, 2003
or upon startup, whichever is later. The amendment also specified that the
operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan must be submitted no later than
the compliance date for existing sources, and 90 days after the initial performance
test for new sources. The amendments also required the owner or operator to
prepare a site-specific plan that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 63, Subpart
A, to obtain approval of the plan, and conduct any performance test no later
that the compliance date for existing sources and within 90 days after the
compliance date stated in rule for new sources. The requirement for notification
of compliance status was revised to correspond to the new dates specified
in the amendments. The August 13, 2002 amendments withdrew the entire June
14, 2002 direct final rule due to adverse comments on several of the provisions
in the direct final rule. Along with the direct final rules, EPA proposed
a parallel rule amendments on June 14, 2002, and adopted all of the amendments
as proposed on September 24, 2002.
The November 8, 2002 amendments corrected an error in the effective date
listed in the September 24, 2002 notice, changing the effective date from
November 25, 2002 to September 24, 2002.
The December 30, 2002 amendments revised the applicability provisions for
aluminum die casters, foundries, and extruders. The amendments also added
new provisions governing control of commonly ducted units; revised the procedures
for adoption of operation, maintenance, and monitoring plans; revised the
criteria concerning testing of representative emissions units; revised the
standard for unvented in-line flux boxes; and clarified the control requirements
for sidewall furnaces.
Section 113.780 - Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic
Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units (40 CFR
63, Subpart UUU)
The commission proposes new §113.780, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final promulgated rules in Subpart UUU adopted by the
EPA on April 11, 2002 (67 FR 17762). This MACT standard affects sources at
petroleum refineries which include catalytic cracking units, catalytic reforming
units, and sulfur recovery units, as well as associated by-pass lines. HAPs
that are to be reduced by this final rule include organics (acetaldehyde,
benzene, formaldehyde, hexane, phenol, toluene, and xylene); reduced sulfur
compounds (carbonyl sulfide and carbon disulfide); inorganics (hydrogen chloride
and chlorine); and particulate metals (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, and nickel).
Section 113.790 - Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(40 CFR 63, Subpart VVV)
The commission proposes to amend §113.790 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart VVV made by the EPA since October
26, 1999. During this time frame, Subpart VVV was amended on March 23, 2001
(66 FR 16140) and October 21, 2002 (67 FR 64742). The March amendments corrected
grammatical, typographic, formatting, and cross-reference errors. Following
this notice, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America filed
a petition for judicial review. As part of the settlement agreement, the October
21, 2002 amendments rescinded the applicability provision specified in 40
CFR §63.1580(c); applied the same NESHAP requirements that apply to industrial
publicly owned treatment works (POTW) treatment plants that are major HAP
sources to all industrial POTW treatment plants that are area HAP sources;
and exempted industrial POTW treatment plants that are area HAP sources from
the permit requirements in 42 USC, §7661a(a).
Section 113.810 - Ferroalloys Production: Ferromanganese
and Silicomanganese (40 CFR 63, Subpart XXX)
The commission proposes to amend §113.810 by incorporating by reference,
without change, all amendments to Subpart XXX made by the EPA since May 20,
1999. During this time frame, Subpart XXX was amended on March 22, 2001 (66
FR 16007) and established new emission limitations for ferromanganese and
silicomanganese production in open submerged arc furnaces. The amendments
established four subcategories within the category of furnaces and specified
numerical emission limitations for particulate matter for each, to account
for differences in emission potential and control, furnace size, operating
conditions, and alloy type.
Section 113.840 - Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
(40 CFR 63, Subpart AAAA)
The commission proposes new §113.840, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final promulgated rules in Supbart AAAA adopted by the
EPA on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2227). This new MACT standard applies to new
and existing municipal solid waste landfills that are major or area sources
of emissions. The HAP emissions from these landfills include, but are not
limited to, benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene, and vinyl chloride.
Section 113.860 - Manufacturing of Nutritional
Yeast (40 CFR 63, Subpart CCCC)
The commission proposes new §113.860, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final promulgated rules in Subpart CCCC adopted by the
EPA on May 21, 2001 (66 FR 27876). This new MACT standard applies to process
components at new and existing major sources which are in the nutritional
yeast manufacturing source category. The EPA identified this source category
as a major source of HAP emissions of acetaldehyde.
Section 113.900 - Solvent Extraction for Vegetable
Oil Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart GGGG)
The commission proposes new §113.900, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final promulgated rules and all amendments to Subpart
GGGG adopted by the EPA since April 12, 2001. The final rule for Subpart GGGG
was issued on April 12, 2001 (66 FR 19006) and amended on April 5, 2002 (67
FR 16317). This new MACT standard applies to process components at new and
existing major sources at vegetable oil production facilities which use solvent
extraction, which includes facilities that produce crude vegetable oil and
meal products by removing oil from listed oil seeds through direct contact
with an organic solvent. The EPA identified this source category as a major
source of HAP emissions of n-hexane.
The April 5, 2002 amendments specified that the startup, shutdown, and
maintenance provisions were applicable to vegetable oil production plants
and specified the applicability of the NESHAP general provisions in 40 CFR
63, Subpart A.
Section 113.910 - Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production
(40 CFR 63, Subpart HHHH)
The commission proposes new §113.910, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final promulgated rules for Subpart HHHH adopted by the
EPA on April 11, 2002 (67 FR 17824). This new MACT standard applies to process
components at new and existing major sources which are in the wet-formed fiberglass
mat production source category. The primary HAP emissions from these sources
are formaldehyde, methanol, and vinyl acetate.
Section 113.930 - Paper and Other Web Coating
(40 CFR 63, Subpart JJJJ)
The commission proposes new §113.930, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final promulgated rules for Subpart JJJJ adopted by the
EPA on December 4, 2002 (67 FR 72330). This new MACT standard applies to facilities
that coat paper and other web substrates. The final standards are designed
to eliminate approximately 80% of nationwide HAP emissions from facilities
that coat paper and other web substrates. The EPA identified this source category
as a major source of HAP emissions of toluene, methanol, methyl ethyl keytone,
xylenes, phenol, methylene chloride, ethylene glycol, glycol ethers, hexane,
methyl isobutyl ketone, cresols and cresylic acid, dimethylformamide, vinyl
acetate, formaldehyde, and ethyl benzene.
Section 113.970 - Surface Coating of Large Appliances
(40 CFR 63, Subpart NNNN)
The commission proposes new §113.970, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules to Subpart NNNN adopted by the EPA on July
23, 2002 (67 FR 48254). This new MACT standard applies to new and existing
sources that apply surface coatings to large appliances. The EPA identified
this source category as a major source of HAP emissions of glycol ethers,
methylene diphenyl diisocyanate, methyl ethyl ketone, toluene, and xylene.
These compounds account for over 80% of the nationwide HAP emissions from
this source category.
Section 113.1020 - Surface Coating of Metal Coil
(40 CFR 63, Subpart SSSS)
The commission proposes new §113.1020, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules and all amendments to Subpart SSSS adopted
by the EPA since June 10, 2002. EPA issued the final rule for Subpart SSSS
on June 10, 2002 (67 FR 39794) and technical corrections on March 17, 2003
(68 FR 12590). This new MACT standard applies to process components at new
and existing sources that coat metal coil products. The primary HAPs that
will be controlled include methyl ethyl ketone, glycol ethers, xylenes (isomers
and mixtures), toluene, and isophorone. The March 17, 2003 amendments corrected
the time line for beginning the first semiannual reporting period and submitting
the first semiannual report.
Section 113.1030 - Leather Finishing Operations
(40 CFR 63, Subpart TTTT)
The commission proposes new §113.1030, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final promulgated rules in Subpart TTTT adopted by the
EPA on February 27, 2002 (67 FR 9156). This new MACT standard applies to process
components at new and existing major sources at leather finishing operations.
The EPA has identified these facilities as major sources of emissions of HAPs,
such as glycol ethers, toluene, and xylene.
Section 113.1040 - Cellulose Products Manufacturing
(40 CFR 63, Subpart UUUU)
The commission proposes new §113.1040, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules in Subpart UUUU adopted by the EPA on June
11, 2002 (67 FR 40044). This new MACT standard applies to process components
at cellulose products manufacturing. Cellulose products manufacturing includes
both the miscellaneous viscose processes (MVP) source category and the cellulose
ethers production (CEP) source category. The MVP source category comprises
the cellulose food casing, rayon, cellulosic sponge, and cellophane manufacturing
industries. The CEP source category comprises the methyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl
methyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, and carboxymethyl
cellulose manufacturing industries. The EPA identified the MVP source category
and the CEP source category as including major sources of emissions of HAPs,
such as carbon disulfide, carbonyl sulfide, ethylene oxide, methanol, methyl
chloride, propylene oxide, and toluene.
Section 113.1050 - Boat Manufacturing (40 CFR
63, Subpart VVVV)
The commission proposes new §113.1050, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules and all amendments to Subpart VVVV adopted
by the EPA since August 22, 2001. EPA issued the final rule for Subpart VVVV
on August 22, 2001 (66 FR 44218) and amendments on October 3, 2001 (66 FR
50504). This new MACT standard applies to process components at new and existing
boat manufacturing facilities, which include fiberglass resin and gel coat
operations, carpet and fabric adhesive operations, and aluminum recreational
boat painting operations. The EPA has identified boat manufacturing as a major
source of HAPs, such as styrene, methyl methacrylate, methylene chloride,
toluene, xylene, n-hexane, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, and
methyl chloroform. The October 3, 2001 amendments corrected typographical
errors.
Section 113.1070 - Rubber Tire Manufacturing (40
CFR 63, Subpart XXXX)
The commission proposes new §113.1070, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules and all amendments to Subpart XXXX adopted
by the EPA since July 9, 2002. EPA issued the final rule for Subpart XXXX
on July 9, 2002 (67 FR 45588) and technical corrections on March 12, 2003
(68 FR 11745). This new MACT standard applies to process components at new
and existing rubber tire manufacturing facilities. The primary HAPs that will
be controlled include toluene and hexane. The March 12, 2003 amendments corrected
typographical errors and made corrections to wording.
Section 113.1260 - Friction Materials Manufacturing
Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart QQQQQ)
The commission proposes new §113.1260, which will incorporate by reference,
without change, the final rules in Subpart QQQQQ adopted by the EPA on October
18, 2002 (67 FR 64498). This new MACT standard applies to process components
at new and existing friction materials manufacturing facilities. The primary
HAPs that will be controlled include n-hexane, toluene, and trichloroethylene.
EFFECT ON SITES SUBJECT TO THE FEDERAL OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAM
Because Chapter 113 contains applicable requirements under 30 TAC Chapter
122, Federal Operating Permits, owners or operators subject to the Federal
Operating Permit Program must, consistent with the amendment process in Chapter
122, revise their operating permit to include the amended Chapter 113 requirements
for each emission unit affected by the amendments to Chapter 113 at their
site.
FISCAL NOTE: COSTS TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
John Davis, Technical Specialist with Strategic Planning and Appropriations,
determined that for the first five-year period the proposed rules are in effect,
no significant fiscal implications are anticipated for the agency or other
units of state and local government due to administration and enforcement
of the proposed rules. The purpose of the proposed rules is to incorporate
by reference, MACT standards mandated by the FCAA and the amendments to that
act. EPA is developing these national MACT standards to regulate emissions
under 42 USC, §7412. The commission will implement and enforce the requirements
of each MACT standard upon delegation by the EPA. HAP sources affected by
the MACT standards are required to comply with the federal standards whether
or not the commission adopts or takes delegation of the standards from EPA.
The proposed rules are not anticipated to add additional costs to the regulated
community beyond what is already required to comply with the federal standards.
PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS
Mr. Davis also determined that for each year of the first five years the
proposed rules are in effect, the public benefit anticipated from enforcement
of and compliance with the proposed rules will be increased consistency between
federal and state air quality regulations and conformance with the requirements
of 42 USC, §7412.
There are no additional fiscal implications anticipated to affected owners
and operators beyond what is already required to comply with federal MACT
standards. The proposed rules affect certain sources of HAPs which will be
required to comply with federal MACT standards whether or not the commission
adopts or takes delegation of the standards from EPA.
SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT
There are no adverse fiscal implications anticipated for small and micro-businesses
as a result of implementation and enforcement of the proposed rules beyond
what is already required to comply with federal MACT standards. The purpose
of the proposed rules is to adopt MACT standards mandated by 42 USC, §7412.
Small or micro-businesses that are sources of HAPs are required to comply
with federal standards whether or not the commission adopts or takes delegation
of the standards from EPA.
LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT
The commission reviewed this proposed rulemaking and determined that a
local employment impact statement is not required because the proposed rules
do not adversely affect a local economy in a material way for the first five
years that the proposed rules are in effect.
DRAFT REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION
The commission reviewed the proposed rulemaking in light of the regulatory
analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined
that the rulemaking does not meet the definition of a "major environmental
rule" as defined in that statute. A "major environmental rule" is one of which
the specific intent is to protect the environment or reduce risks to human
health from environmental exposure and that may adversely affect in a material
way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs,
the environment, or the public health and safety of the state or a sector
of the state. The specific intent of the proposed rules is to adopt MACT standards
mandated by the FCAA and the amendments to that act. EPA is developing these
national MACT standards to regulate emissions of HAPs under 42 USC, §7412.
HAP sources affected by the MACT standards are required to comply with the
federal standards whether or not the commission adopts or takes delegation
of the standards from EPA. The proposed rules are not anticipated to add any
significant additional costs to affected individuals or businesses beyond
the existing requirements to comply with the federal standards. The proposed
rules are intended to protect the environment, but are not anticipated to
have material adverse effects beyond what is already required to comply with
federal MACT standards on the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety of the
state or a sector of the state. In addition, §2001.0225 only applies
to a "major environmental rule," the result of which is to: 1) exceed a standard
set by federal law, unless the rule is specifically required by state law;
2) exceed an express requirement of state law, unless the rule is specifically
required by federal law; 3) exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement
or contract between the state and an agency or representative of the federal
government to implement a state and federal program; or 4) adopt a rule solely
under the general powers of the agency instead of under a specific state law.
This rulemaking does not meet any of these four applicability requirements
of a "major environmental rule." Specifically, the MACT standards within this
proposal are federal technology- based standards which will be adopted by
reference, and therefore, will not exceed any standard set by federal law.
This proposal is not an express requirement of state law, but was developed
by EPA as MACT standards mandated by the FCAA and the amendments to that act.
The proposed rules do not exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement or
a contract between state and federal government. The proposed rules were not
developed solely under the general powers of the agency, but are proposed
under the Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), as codified in Texas Health and Safety
Code (THSC), §382.011, which authorizes the commission to establish
the level of quality to be maintained in the state's air; §382.012, which
authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive
plan for the proper control of the state's air; §382.016, which authorizes
the commission to prescribe reasonable requirements for measuring and monitoring
the emissions of air contaminants; §382.017, which authorizes the commission
to adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA; and §382.051,
which authorizes the commission to adopt rules as necessary to comply with
changes in federal law or regulations applicable to air permits.
TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The commission prepared a preliminary takings impact assessment for this
proposal under Texas Government Code, §2007.043. The specific purpose
of this rulemaking is to facilitate implementation and enforcement of the
MACT standards by the state. This rulemaking will not create any additional
burden on private real property. Under federal law, the affected industries
will be required to implement these MACT standards regardless of whether the
commission or EPA is the agency responsible for implementation of the standards.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The commission determined that the proposed rulemaking is subject to the
Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) in accordance with the Coastal Coordination
Act of 1991, as revised (Texas Natural Resources Code, §§33.201
PUBLIC HEARING
A public hearing on this proposal will be held in Austin on April 28, 2003
at 10:00 a.m. in Building F, Room 2210 of the commission's central office,
located at 12100 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas. The hearing is structured
for the receipt of oral or written comments by interested persons. Individuals
may present oral statements when called upon in order of registration. Open
discussion will not occur during the hearing; however, an agency staff member
will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes prior to the hearing
and will answer questions before and after the hearing.
Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other accommodation
needs who are planning to attend the hearings should contact the agency at
(512) 239-4900. Requests should be made as far in advance as possible.
SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS
Comments may be submitted to Angela Slupe, Office of Environmental Policy,
Analysis, and Assessment, MC 205, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087,
or faxed to (512) 239-4808. All comments should reference Rule Log Number
2002-036a-113-AI. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m., May 5, 2003. For
further information or questions concerning this proposal, contact Keith Sheedy,
Office of Compliance and Enforcement at (512) 239-1556 or Alan Henderson,
Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment at (512) 239-1510.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The new and amended sections are proposed under Texas Water Code (TWC), §5.103,
concerning Rules, and §5.105, concerning General Policy, which authorize
the commission to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties
under the TWC; and under THSC, §382.017, concerning Rules, which authorizes
the commission to adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the
TCAA. The new and amended sections are also proposed under THSC, §382.002,
concerning Policy and Purpose, which establishes the commission's purpose
to safeguard the state's air resources, consistent with the protection of
public health, general welfare, and physical property; §382.011, concerning
General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission to control the
quality of the state's air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control Plan,
which authorizes the commission to prepare and develop a general, comprehensive
plan for the proper control of the state's air; §382.016, concerning
Monitoring Requirements: Examination of Records, which authorizes the commission
to prescribe reasonable requirements for measuring and monitoring the emissions
of air contaminants; and §382.051, concerning Permitting Authority of
the Commission: Rules, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules as necessary
to comply with changes in federal law or regulations applicable to permits
issued under the TCAA.
These proposed new and amended sections implement THSC, §§382.002,
382.011, 382.012, 382.016, 382.017, and 382.051.
§113.110.Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry (40 CFR 63, Subpart F).
The Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart F, is incorporated by reference as amended through
January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6922)
[
§113.120.Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater (40 CFR 63, Subpart G).
The Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry for Process Vents,
Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater Maximum Achievable Control
Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart G, is incorporated by reference as amended through
January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6922)
[
§113.130.Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks (40 CFR 63, Subpart H).
The Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart H, is incorporated by reference as amended through
January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6922)
[
§113.150.Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart J).
The Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part 63, Subpart J, is incorporated by reference as adopted July 10, 2002
(67 FR 45886).
§113.170.Coke Oven Batteries (40 CFR 63, Subpart L).
The Coke Oven Batteries Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard
as specified in 40
Code of Federal Regulations Part
[
§113.200.Ethylene Oxide Emissions Standards for Sterilization Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart O).
The Ethylene Oxide
Emissions Standards for
Sterilization
Facilities Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard as specified in
40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart O, is incorporated
by reference as amended through
November 2, 2001 (66 FR 55577)
[
§113.240.Pulp and Paper Industry [
The Pulp and Paper
Industry
[
§113.250.Halogenated Solvent Cleaning (40 CFR 63, Subpart T).
The Halogenated Solvent Cleaning Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63,
Subpart T, is incorporated by reference as amended through
September
8, 2000 (65 FR 54419)
[
§113.260.Group I Polymers and Resins (40 CFR 63, Subpart U).
The Group I Polymers and Resins Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63,
Subpart U, is incorporated by reference as amended through
July 16, 2001
(66 FR 36924)
[
§113.280.Epoxy Resins Production and Non-Nylon Polyamides Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart W).
The Epoxy Resins Production and Non-Nylon Polyamides Production Maximum
Achievable Control Technology standard as specified in 40
Code of Federal
Regulations Part
[
§113.320.Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR 63, Subpart AA).
The Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing Plants Maximum Achievable Control
Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart AA, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40814)
[
§113.330.Phosphate Fertilizers Production Plants (40 CFR 63, Subpart BB).
The Phosphate Fertilizers Production Plants Maximum Achievable Control
Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart BB, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40814)
[
§113.340.Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR 63, Subpart CC).
The Petroleum Refineries Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard
as specified in 40
Code of Federal Regulations Part
[
§113.350. Off-Site [
The
Off-Site
[
§113.380.Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart GG).
The Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40
Code of Federal Regulations
Part
[
§113.390.Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart HH).
The Oil
and
[
§113.400.Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface Coating) (40 CFR 63, Subpart II).
The Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface Coating) Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40
Code of Federal Regulations
Part
[
§113.440.Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills (40 CFR 63, Subpart MM).
The Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and
Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart MM,
is incorporated by reference as amended through August 6, 2001 (66 FR 41086).
§113.470.Containers (40 CFR 63, Subpart PP).
The Containers Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard as specified
in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart PP, is incorporated
by reference as amended through
January 8, 2001 (66 FR 1263)
[
§113.490.Individual Drain Systems (40 CFR 63, Subpart RR).
The Individual Drain System Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63,
Subpart RR, is incorporated by reference as amended through
January 8,
2001 (66 FR 1263)
[
§113.500.Closed Vent Systems, Control Devices, Recovery Devices, and Routing to a Fuel Gas System or a Process (40 CFR 63, Subpart SS).
The Closed Vent Systems, Control Devices, Recovery Devices, and Routing
to
a
Fuel Gas System or
a
Process Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart SS, is incorporated by reference [
§113.510.Equipment Leaks - Control Level 1 (40 CFR 63, Subpart TT).
The Equipment Leaks
-
Control Level 1 Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart TT, is incorporated by reference [
§113.520.Equipment Leaks - Control Level 2 (40 CFR 63, Subpart UU).
The Equipment Leaks
-
Control Level 2 Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart UU, is incorporated by reference as [
§113.530.Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water Separators (40 CFR 63, Subpart VV).
The Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water Separators Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart VV, is incorporated by reference as amended through
January 8, 2001 (66 FR 1263)
[
§113.540.Storage Vessels (Tanks) - Control Level 2 (40 CFR 63, Subpart WW).
The Storage Vessels (Tanks)
-
Control Level 2 Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart WW, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
July 12, 2002 (67 FR 46258)
[
§113.550.Ethylene Manufacturing Process Units: Heat Exchange Systems and Waste Operations (40 CFR 63, Subpart XX).
The Ethylene Manufacturing Process Units: Heat Exchange Systems and
Waste Operations Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard as specified
in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart XX, is incorporated by
reference as adopted July 12, 2002 (67 FR 46258).
§113.560.Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards [
The Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology
Standards
[
§113.620.Hazardous Waste Combustors (40 CFR 63, Subpart EEE).
The Hazardous Waste Combustor Maximum achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63,
Subpart EEE, in incorporated by reference as amended through
December
19, 2002 (67 FR 77687)
[
§113.640.Pharmaceuticals Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart GGG).
The Pharmaceuticals Production Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40
Code of Federal Regulations Part
[
§113.650.Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart HHH).
The Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart HHH, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
February 22, 2002 (67 FR 8202)
[
§113.670.Group IV Polymers and Resins (40 CFR 63, Subpart JJJ).
The Group IV Polymers and Resins Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63,
Subpart JJJ, is incorporated by reference as amended through
August 6,
2001 (66 FR 40903)
[
§113.690.Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry (40 CFR 63, Subpart LLL).
The Portland Cement Manufacturing
Industry
Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart LLL, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
December 6, 2002 (67 FR 72580)
[
§113.700.Pesticide Active Ingredient Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart MMM).
The Pesticide Active Ingredient Production Maximum Achievable Control
Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart MMM, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
September 20, 2002 (67 FR 59336)
[
§113.720.Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins (40 CFR 63, Subpart OOO).
The Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins Maximum Achievable Control
Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart OOO, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
February 22, 2000 (65 FR 8768)
[
§113.730.Polyether Polyols Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart PPP).
The Polyether Polyols Production Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63,
Subpart PPP, is incorporated by reference as
amended through May 8, 2000
(65 FR 26491)
[
§113.740.Primary Copper Smelting (40 CFR 63, Subpart QQQ).
The Primary Copper Smelting Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard
as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart QQQ, is incorporated
by reference as adopted June 12, 2002 (67 FR 40478).
§113.750.Secondary Aluminum Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart RRR).
The Secondary Aluminum Production Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart RRR,
is incorporated by reference as amended through December 30, 2002 (67 FR 79808).
§113.780.Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units (40 CFR 63, Subpart UUU).
The Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming
Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard
as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart UUU, is incorporated
by reference as adopted April 11, 2002 (67 FR 17762).
§113.790. Publicly [
The
Publicly
[
§113.810.Ferroalloys Production: Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese (40 CFR 63, Subpart XXX).
The Ferroalloys Production: Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese Maximum
Achievable Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations
Part
63, Subpart XXX, is incorporated by reference
as
amended through March 22, 2001 (66 FR 16007)
[
§113.840.Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (40 CFR 63, Subpart AAAA).
The Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart AAAA,
is incorporated by reference as adopted January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2227).
§113.860.Manufacturing of Nutritional Yeast (40 CFR 63, Subpart CCCC).
The Manufacturing of Nutritional Yeast Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart CCCC,
is incorporated by reference as adopted May 21, 2001 (66 FR 27876).
§113.900.Solvent Extraction for Vegetable Oil Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart GGGG).
The Solvent Extraction for Vegetable Oil Production Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part 63, Subpart GGGG, is incorporated by reference as amended through April
5, 2002 (67 FR 16317).
§113.910.Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart HHHH).
The Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production Maximum Achievable Control
Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63,
Subpart HHHH, is incorporated by reference as adopted April 11, 2002 (67 FR
17824).
§113.930.Paper and Other Web Coating (40 CFR 63, Subpart JJJJ).
The Paper and Other Web Coating Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart JJJJ,
is incorporated by reference as adopted December 4, 2002 (67 FR 72330).
§113.970.Surface Coating of Large Appliances (40 CFR 63, Subpart NNNN).
The Surface Coating of Large Appliances Maximum Achievable Control
Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63,
Subpart NNNN, is incorporated by reference as adopted July 23, 2002 (67 FR
48254).
§113.1020.Surface Coating of Metal Coil (40 CFR 63, Subpart SSSS).
The Surface Coating of Metal Coil Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart SSSS,
is incorporated by reference as amended through March 17, 2003 (68 FR 12590).
§113.1030.Leather Finishing Operations (40 CFR 63, Subpart TTTT).
The Leather Finishing Operations Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart TTTT,
is incorporated by reference as adopted February 27, 2002 (67 FR 9156).
§113.1040.Cellulose Products Manufacturing (40 CFR 63, Subpart UUUU).
The Cellulose Products Manufacturing Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart UUUU,
is incorporated by reference as adopted June 11, 2002 (67 FR 40044).
§113.1050.Boat Manufacturing (40 CFR 63, Subpart VVVV).
The Boat Manufacturing Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard
as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart VVVV, is incorporated
by reference as amended through October 3, 2001 (66 FR 50504).
§113.1070.Rubber Tire Manufacturing (40 CFR 63, Subpart XXXX).
The Rubber Tire Manufacturing Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 63, Subpart XXXX,
is incorporated by reference as amended through March 12, 2003 (68 FR 11745).
§113.1260.Friction Materials Manufacturing Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart QQQQQ).
The Friction Materials Manufacturing Facilities Maximum Achievable
Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part 63, Subpart QQQQQ, is incorporated by reference as adopted October 18,
2002 (67 FR 64498).
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority to adopt.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State on March 21, 2003.
TRD-200301876
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: May 4, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-4712
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ or commission)
proposes the repeal of §116.170; new §§116.120, 116.170, 116.172;
and amendments to §§116.12, 116.114, 116.115, 116.143, 116.150,
116.313, 116.315, and 116.715. If adopted, the new and amended sections would
be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency as revisions
to the state implementation plan (SIP).
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE PROPOSED RULES
The commission is proposing rule amendments to ensure the timely submission
of updated and additional information used to process NSR applications. The
commission is proposing that applicants that do not supply requested and necessary
information for the processing of a permit application will have their application
voided. Applications resubmitted within six months would not be subject to
any further permit fees, but the applicant would be required to go back through
the public notice process in order to make possible a public review of updated
and current information about the proposed facility.
The commission currently requires that persons issued an NSR permit under
Chapter 116 begin construction of the facility within 18 months of permit
issuance or the permit will be voided. The executive director may grant an
additional one time 18-month extension to this period. In the case of flexible
permits, the time period to begin construction is specified in the permit
with one 12-month extension available. In the large majority of cases, these
cumulative time periods are sufficient to resolve issues associated with starting
construction. In some cases, particularly when third party litigation is involved,
a permit holder may not be able to start construction within the extended
time periods. The commission is therefore proposing that an additional extension
be available. The commission is specifically proposing that the first 18-month
extension may be granted at the permit holder's request. Another extension
of up to 18 months may be granted by the executive director to resolve litigation
that is not of the permit holder's origin. The commission also believes that
economic or other circumstances can arise which would affect the decision
to start construction and proposes that the executive director retain discretion
to grant a further extension for reasons, not specified in the rule, if the
permit holder has demonstrated an intent to build the project by spending
at least 15% of the estimated capital cost of the project. Any permit holder
receiving a second extension would be required to demonstrate that the project
continues to meet all the rules and regulations of the commission and the
intent of the Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), including protection of the public's
health and physical property. Any extension of the time to begin construction
of a project will subject the permit holder to additional best available control
technology and offset review. Because the same conditions that would motivate
a new NSR permit holder to seek extensions can also apply to holders of flexible
permits, the commission proposes to apply the extension periods and conditions
in proposed §116.120 to flexible permits as well. Flexible permits are
used to authorize changes and modification to existing facilities.
Emission reductions in the form of offsets are obtained prior to the issuance
of an NSR permit to counter the effect of new emissions on air quality. In
recent years, the commission has established programs that create emission
caps in Houston and Dallas and use emission credits and allowances to maintain
the caps. Emission offsets are also considered in these programs and must
meet the same certification standards as emission credits in order to achieve
consistent protection of air quality. The commission is therefore proposing
that emission offsets be certified in the same way as emission credits in
30 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Emissions Banking and Trading. The commission
proposes to retain in Chapter 116 certification of future offsets internal
to a facility. In many cases, these future internal offsets are credited for
the replacement of existing equipment that must be kept in operation until
the new, lower emitting equipment is operational. This is in contrast to offsets
used externally to a facility which must occur before it can be credited.
Those portions of §116.170 that concern the offset of emissions from
rocket engine firing and cleaning would be transferred to a new §116.172.
Emission offsets are reductions that are used to compensate for an emission
increase, usually from new construction, in the same geographic area. Consequently,
offsets are not permanent reductions but will reappear in the future. In order
to make meaningful emission control plans for nonattainment and prevention
of significant deterioration areas, the commission needs timely and accurate
information on emission reductions that will be used as offsets. The commission
is proposing that emission reductions not yet certified and banked as emission
credits by the effective date of these rules must be certified and banked
by September 1, 2004, in order to be considered for offsets.
The commission requires adequate time to process permit renewals and, for
workload management, needs to ensure that those permits closest to expiration
are received first. For these reasons, the commission is also proposing that
permit renewal applications be submitted at least six months, but no earlier
than 18 months, before the permit will expire. By establishing a date for
the earliest submission of a renewal application, the commission will also
increase the possibility that renewal applications are received under the
most current fee tables.
SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION
Subchapter A: Definitions
The definition of "offset" in §116.12 would be amended to state that
an offset would have to be certified as an emission credit under Chapter 101,
Subchapter H, in order to qualify as a reduction. The commission is also proposing
minor changes to abbreviations, rule citations, and acronyms to conform with
Texas Register formatting in the definitions.
Subchapter B: New Source Review Permits
The proposed amendments to §116.114, Application Review Schedule,
would provide for the voiding of an application for a permit or permit amendment
in the event of deficient information supplied with the application. After
two written notifications of the deficiency, if an applicant fails to make
a good faith effort to provide the required information, the executive director
will void the application and notify the applicant. To pursue the project,
the applicant shall submit an entirely new application with a new Form PI-1.
The new application will be subject to the state and federal rules and regulations
in place at the time of submittal. If a new application is submitted within
six months of the voidance of the original application, the application will
be exempt from the fee requirements under §116.140, Applicability. However,
the applicant must go through a new technical review and republish public
notice.
The commission proposes to amend §116.115, General and Special Conditions,
to remove language relating to the voiding of permits and extensions of time
to begin construction and transfer this language to a new §116.120.
The new §116.120, Voiding of Permits, addresses the voiding of permits
and contains language relocated from §116.115. The relocated language
would be amended to allow an additional extension of up to 18 months to begin
construction of a project authorized with an NSR permit. This extension would
be available in the case of a construction delay caused by litigation, not
of the permit holder's origin, associated with the issuance of the permit.
The executive director may also issue an extension if the permit holder has
spent at least 15% of the estimated cost of construction on preparatory work
and has demonstrated that emissions from the facility are in compliance with
commission rules and the intent of the TCAA.
The proposed amendments to §116.143, Payment of Fees, would state
that the permit application fee must be received before an application will
be processed or before the start of any time constraints required of the commission
in application processing. This amendment is intended to ensure the commission
receives fees needed to cover the expense in permit review and processing.
The commission retains the conditions under which fees will or will not be
returned to the applicant. If no permit or amendment is issued or if the applicant
withdraws the application prior to permit issuance, then one-half of the fee
will be refunded. If it is determined that a permit application will meet
the requirements of a permit by rule, the applicant is entitled to a refund
of the fee difference. The commission proposes to add a qualification for
a standard permit or de minimis classification under §116.119, De Minimis
Facilities or Sources, to those conditions under which the applicant may withdraw
the permit application and receive a refund of the fee difference.
The proposed amendment of §116.150, New Major Source or Major Modification
in Ozone Nonattainment Areas, would delete subsection (c) because the time
period specified for the application of certain exemptions to nitrogen oxides
reductions for sources in the Houston-Galveston and Beaumont-Port Arthur ozone
nonattainment areas has expired.
The proposed new §116.170, Applicability of Emission Reductions as
Offsets, would establish the requirements for the use of emission reductions
as offsets. Most existing reductions must be certified as an emission credit
under Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 1 or 4. Some reductions that will
be used internally may still be certified under Chapter 116. The proposed
section would establish the conditions by which future reductions may be used
as offsets. The permit for the facility must contain special conditions that
specify the date the permit holder must submit to the executive director appropriate
and sufficient data that the reduction has occurred. The reduction must be
achieved prior to the commencement of the permitted emissions for which the
offset is required. The reduction must meet the requirements of Chapter 101,
and the permit holder agrees to obtain additional offsets if the executive
director determines the reductions do not satisfy the original offset requirements.
The proposed new §116.172, Emissions Offsets from Rocket Engine Firing
and Cleaning, would contain the conditions under which emissions from rocket
engine firing or cleaning may be offset by alternative or innovative means.
These requirements would be transferred to the new section from existing §116.170.
The language would be modified to state that information regarding rocket
engine offsets would be submitted to the executive director instead of the
commission.
Subchapter D: Permit Renewals
The proposed amendment to §116.313, Renewal Application Fees, would
correct the commission's address with the correct zip code.
The proposed amendments to §116.315, Permit Renewal Submittal, would
state that an application for permit renewal must be submitted at least six
months but no earlier than 18 months prior to the permit expiration date.
The commission intends to allow sufficient time for preparation and submission
of renewals for permit holders whose permit expires within six months of the
potential effective date of these proposed rules. Therefore, this provision
would not become effective until February 1, 2004. With executive director
approval, applications may be submitted before or after these specified time
periods.
Subchapter G: Flexible Permits
The proposed amendments to §116.715, General and Special Conditions,
would remove language concerning voiding of the permit. The commission proposes
to apply the same extension of construction conditions, as stated in the proposed
new §116.120, to flexible permits as would be applied to other NSR permits.
FISCAL NOTE: COSTS TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
John Davis, Technical Specialist with Strategic Planning and Appropriations,
has determined that for the first five-year period the proposed rules are
in effect, there may be fiscal implications, which are not anticipated to
be significant, for certain units of state and local government that own and
operate equipment under NSR permit authorizations. Units of state and local
government that do not own or operate equipment affected by NSR permits would
not be affected by the proposed rules. The commission anticipates the costs
for those affected units of government that have NSR permit applications voided
by the commission will face additional public notice costs between $700 and
$4,000 due to implementation of the proposed rules.
Units of government most likely to be affected by the proposed rulemaking
are municipally-owned electric generating units (power plants) and landfills
along with a small number of university research facilities. The total number
of sites with existing NSR permits is approximately 8,000, some of which are
owned and operated by units of state and local government. The commission
currently processes approximately 1,200 new NSR standard permits, 350 NSR
permit amendments, and 100 NSR permit renewals annually, a small number of
which are submitted by units of state and local government. Of the total number
of applications processed, approximately 115 are voided each year by the commission
and sent back to the applicant for further processing. These proposed rules
would not require additional emission controls or new capital expenses, and
would not change existing permit application fee rates.
The proposed rules would require emission reductions to be used as emission
offsets, which is an emission reduction that is used to compensate for emission
increases from new construction, be certified in the same manner that exists
for emission credits. Additionally, the proposed rules would require existing
emission credits to be certified and banked as offsets by September 1, 2004,
specify conditions under which permit fees may be refunded, specify a time
period for the submission of permit renewal applications, and specify which
fee schedule will apply to permit renewals.
The proposed rules would also implement updated requirements for applicants
that have NSR permit applications voided by the commission. The proposed rules
would require the commission to notify an applicant of the voidance and provide
specific details concerning the application deficiencies. An applicant with
a voided NSR permit application would be required to submit a new application
and repeat the public notification process. The costs for public notice vary
significantly depending on the location of the facility and its proximity
to large metropolitan areas. Small town/city newspapers generally charge much
less for publication of a public notice. The commission estimates a large
city newspaper would charge approximately $3,000 for the display notice and
approximately $450 for the legal notice. A smaller city newspaper would charge
approximately $210 for the display notice and $20 for the legal notice. The
cost for alternative language publication, if needed, is estimated to be $150.
The cost for signs at affected facilities would cost approximately $300. The
total costs for public notice associated with an NSR permit application, renewal,
or amendment would range from $700 to $4,000, assuming alternative language
notice is also required.
This proposal would waive application fees for applicants who have had
applications voided and who reapply within six months. If they do not reapply
during that period, the commission would require the submission of the full
application fee. The fee is .3% of the estimated capital cost of the project
starting with the minimum fee of $900 and a statutory maximum of $75,000.
Persons who have been issued an NSR permit currently have 18 months to
begin construction of the project. A one time 18-month extension is available
to the holder on request. The commission is proposing that another extension
of up to 18 months be made available for permit holders whose project has
been delayed through litigation. The commission would also consider other
circumstances for an extension if the permit holder meets certain conditions.
Additionally, the permit holder would have to spend 15% of the cost of the
project in preparation for construction. The median range of cost for NSR
projects is $8 to $9 million. Fifteen percent of these figures is $1.2 million
and $1.35 million, respectively.
PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS
Mr. Davis has also determined that for each year of the first five years
the proposed rules are in effect, the public benefit anticipated from enforcement
of and compliance with the proposed rules will be more consistent application
of emission credits and offsets, and more timely NSR application submissions
and receipt of application fees.
The total number of sites with existing NSR permits is approximately 8,000,
the majority of which are large industrial businesses. The commission currently
processes approximately 1,200 new NSR permits, 350 NSR permit amendments,
and 100 NSR permit renewals annually, the majority of which are submitted
by industry. Of the total number of applications processed, approximately
115 are voided by the commission and sent back to the applicant for further
processing. These proposed rules would not require additional emission controls
or new capital expenses, and would not change existing permit application
fee rates.
The proposed rules would require that emission reductions used as emission
offsets be certified in the same manner that exists for emission credits.
Additionally, the proposed rules would require existing emission reductions
to be certified and banked as offsets by September 1, 2004, specify conditions
under which permit fees may be refunded, specify a time period for the submission
of permit renewal applications, and specify which fee schedule will apply
to permit renewals.
The proposed rules would also implement updated requirements for applicants
that have NSR permit applications voided by the commission. The proposed rules
would require the commission to notify an applicant of the voidance and provide
specific details concerning the application deficiencies. An applicant with
a voided NSR permit application would be required to submit a new application
and repeat the public notification process. The costs for public notice vary
significantly depending on the location of the facility and its proximity
to large metropolitan areas. The commission estimates the total cost for public
notice will range from $700 to $4,000 per NSR application.
This proposal would waive application fees for applicants who have had
applications voided and who reapply within six months. If they do not reapply
during that period, the commission would require the submission of the full
application fee. The fee is .3% of the estimated capital cost of the project
starting with the minimum fee of $900 up to the statutory maximum of $75,000.
Persons who have been issued an NSR permit currently have 18 months to
begin construction of the project. A one time 18-month extension is available
to the holder on request. The commission is proposing that another extension
of up to 18 months be made available for permit holders whose project has
been delayed through litigation. The commission would also consider other
circumstances for an extension if the permit holder has spent 15% of the cost
of the project. The median range of cost for NSR projects is $8 to $9 million.
Fifteen percent of these figures is $1.2 million and $1.35 million, respectively.
SMALL BUSINESS AND MICRO-BUSINESS ASSESSMENT
There may be adverse fiscal implications, which are not anticipated to
be significant, for small and micro-businesses due to implementation of the
proposed rules, which are intended to make procedural changes to NSR permit
application requirements. The commission anticipates there will be additional
fiscal implications for only those small and micro-businesses with a voided
NSR permit application that would be required to submit a new application
and repeat the public notification process.
The total number of sites with existing NSR permits is approximately 8,000,
a small number of which may be small or micro-businesses. The commission currently
processes approximately 1,200 new NSR permits, 350 NSR permit amendments,
and 100 NSR permit renewals annually, a small number of which may be submitted
by small or micro-businesses that would be affected by the proposed rules.
Of the total number of applications processed, approximately 115 are voided
by the commission and sent back to the applicant for further processing.
This rulemaking would require the commission to notify an applicant of
the voidance and provide specific details concerning the application deficiencies.
An applicant with a voided NSR permit application would be required to submit
a new application and repeat the public notification process. The costs for
public notice vary significantly depending on the location of the facility
and its proximity to large metropolitan areas. The commission estimates the
total cost for public notice will range from $700 to $4,000 per NSR application.
This proposal would waive application fees for applicants who have had
applications voided and who reapply within six months. If they do not reapply
during that period, the commission would require the submission of the full
application fee. The fee is .3% of the estimated capital cost of the project
starting with the minimum fee of $900 and the statutory maximum of $75,000.
The following is an analysis of the potential additional costs per employee
for small or micro-businesses affected by the proposed rules. Small and micro-businesses
are defined as having fewer than 100 or 20 employees, respectively. A small
business which has to go through the public notification process due to a
voided NSR permit application would pay an average of between approximately
$700 to $4,000 per notice or $7.00 to $40 per employee, while a micro-business
would have to pay an average of between $35 to $200 per employee to comply
with the proposed rules. Small businesses that do not reapply for a voided
permit within six months would be required to pay application fees. This cost
would vary according to the size of the project, and would cause an increase
in the cost per employee.
Small businesses would also be eligible to apply for the additional extension
of time to begin construction and would be subject to the same requirement
to spend 15% of the cost of the project in preparation. Small businesses are
typically under the median cost of an NSR project and would be required to
spend proportionately less to qualify for the second extension.
LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT
The commission has reviewed this proposed rulemaking and determined that
a local employment impact statement is not required because the proposed rules
do not adversely affect a local economy in a material way for the first five
years that the proposed rules are in effect.
DRAFT REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION
The commission reviewed the proposed rulemaking in light of the regulatory
analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined
that the rules do not meet the definition of a "major environmental rule."
Major environmental rule means a rule, the specific intent of which is to
protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental
exposure, and that may adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector
of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public
health and safety of the state or a sector of the state. The proposed rules
would require that emission reductions used as emission offsets be certified
in a manner consistent with other TCEQ regulations, establish a deadline for
the certification of existing reductions as emission offsets, establish procedures
for voiding permit applications, establish conditions under which permit fees
may be refunded, specify a time period for the submission of permit renewal
applications, and specify which fee schedule will apply to permit renewals.
These proposed rules would not require additional emission controls or new
capital expenses. Applicants who have their applications voided would be required
to submit a new application and repeat the public notification process. Depending
on location, this notification can cost from $700 to $4,000. This expense
would only be incurred following a lack of action from the applicant after
being notified of deficiencies in its application.
In addition, Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, only applies to a
major environmental rule, the result of which is to: 1) exceed a standard
set by federal law, unless the rule is specifically required by state law;
2) exceed an express requirement of state law, unless the rule is specifically
required by federal law; 3) exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement
or contract between the state and an agency or representative of the federal
government to implement a state and federal program; or 4) adopt a rule solely
under the general powers of the agency instead of under a specific state law.
The proposed rules in Chapter 116 are not subject to the regulatory analysis
provisions of §2001.0225(b), because the proposed rules do not meet any
of the statute's four applicability requirements. The commission invites public
comment regarding the draft regulatory impact analysis determination.
TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The commission completed a takings impact assessment for the proposed rules.
Promulgation and enforcement of the rules will not burden private real property.
The proposed rules will not affect private property in a manner which restricts
or limits an owner's right to the property that would otherwise exist in the
absence of a governmental action. Therefore, the proposed rules do not constitute
a taking under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The commission reviewed the proposed rulemaking and found that the proposal
is a rulemaking identified in Coastal Coordination Act Implementation Rules,
31 TAC §505.11, and therefore, will require that applicable goals and
policies of the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) be considered during
the rulemaking process.
The commission's preliminary consistency determination for the proposed
rules in accordance with 31 TAC §505.22 found that the proposed rulemaking
is consistent with the applicable CMP goal to protect and preserve the quality
and values of coastal natural resource areas (31 TAC §501.12(1)), and
the policy which requires that the commission protect air quality in coastal
areas (31 TAC §501.14(q)). The proposed rules would require emission
reductions used as emission offsets be certified in a manner consistent with
other TCEQ regulations, establish a deadline for the certification of existing
reductions as emission offsets, establish procedures for voiding permit applications,
establish conditions under which permit fees may be refunded, specify a time
period for the submission of permit renewal applications, and specify which
fee schedule will apply to permit renewals. No new emissions would be authorized
if these proposals are adopted. Therefore, the rulemaking is consistent with
the CMP. The commission invites public comment regarding the consistency of
the proposed rules with the CMP.
EFFECT ON SITES SUBJECT TO THE FEDERAL OPERATING PERMITS PROGRAM
New source review is an applicable requirement under 30 TAC Chapter 122,
Federal Operating Permits. These amendments affect the issuance, renewal,
or extension of a new source review permit. Because they do not address permit
content, the amendments do not require changes to Federal Operating Permits.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARING
The commission will hold a public hearing on this proposal in Austin on
April 24, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. in Building F, Room 3202, at the commission's
central office located at 12100 Park 35 Circle. The hearing is structured
for the receipt of oral or written comments by interested persons. Individuals
may present oral statements when called upon in order of registration. Open
discussion will not be permitted during the hearing; however, commission staff
members will be available to discuss the proposal 30 minutes before the hearing
and will answer questions before and after the hearing.
Persons with disabilities who have special communication or other accommodation
needs who are planning to attend the hearing should contact the Office of
Environmental Policy, Analysis, and Assessment at (512) 239-4900. Requests
should be made as far in advance as possible.
SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS
Comments may be submitted to Joyce Spencer, Office of Environmental Policy,
Analysis, and Assessment, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, MC 205,
P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, or faxed to (512) 239-4808. All
comments should reference Rule Log Number 2003-003-116-AI. Comments must be
received by 5:00 p.m., May 5, 2003. Copies of the proposed rules can be obtained
from the commission's website at
http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/oprd
. For further information, please contact Clifton Wise, Policy and
Regulations Division, at (512) 239-2263.
Subchapter A. DEFINITIONS
30 TAC §116.12
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The amendment is proposed under Texas Water Code (TWC), §5.103, concerning
Rules, and §5.105, concerning General Policy, which authorize the commission
to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC;
and under TCAA, §382.017, concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission
to adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. The amendments
are also proposed under TCAA, §382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose,
which establishes the commission's purpose to safeguard the state's air resources,
consistent with the protection of public health, general welfare, and physical
property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and Duties, which authorizes
the commission to control the quality of the state's air; §382.012, concerning
State Air Control Plan, which authorizes the commission to develop a general,
comprehensive plan for control of the state's air; and §382.016, concerning
Monitoring Requirements, Examination of Records, which authorizes the commission
to prescribe reasonable requirements for the measuring and monitoring of emissions
of air contaminants. The amendment is also proposed under 42 United States
Code (USC), §7410(a)(2)(A), which requires SIPs to include enforceable
emission limitations and other control measures or techniques, including economic
incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auction of emission rights.
The proposed amendment implements TWC, §5.103 and §5.105; and
TCAA, §§382.002, 382.011, 382.012, and 382.016.
§116.12.Nonattainment Review Definitions.
Unless specifically defined in the
TCAA
[
(1) - (6)
(No change.)
(7)
Contemporaneous period--As follows.
(A)
For major sources with the potential to emit 250
tons per year (tpy)
[
(i) - (ii)
(No change.)
(B) - (C)
(No change.)
(8)
De minimis threshold test (netting)--A method of determining
if a proposed emission increase will trigger nonattainment review. The summation
of the proposed increase with all other creditable source emission increases
and decreases during the contemporaneous period is compared to the MAJOR MODIFICATION
column of Table I (in
tons per year
[
(9)
Lowest achievable emission rate--For any emitting facility,
that rate of emissions of a contaminant which does not exceed the amount allowable
under applicable New Source Performance Standards promulgated by the
EPA
[
(A) - (B)
(No change.)
(10)
Major facility/stationary source--Any facility/stationary
source which emits, or has the potential to emit, the amount specified in
the MAJOR SOURCE column of Table I of this section or more of any air contaminant
(including volatile organic compounds
(VOCs)
) for which a National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) has been issued. Any physical change
that would occur at a stationary source not qualifying as a major stationary
source in Table I of this section, if the change would constitute a major
stationary source by itself. A major stationary source that is major for
VOCs
[
(11)
Major modification--As follows.
(A)
Any physical change in, or change in the method of operation
of a facility/stationary source that causes a significant net emissions increase
for any air contaminant for which
a National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS)
[
(B)
(No change.)
(12)
(No change.)
(13)
Net emissions increase--The amount by which the sum of
the following exceeds zero: the total increase in actual emissions from a
particular physical change or change in the method of operation at a stationary
source, plus any sourcewide creditable contemporaneous emission increases,
minus any sourcewide creditable contemporaneous emission decreases.
(A) - (D)
(No change.)
(E)
At major sources with the potential to emit 250
tons
per year
[
(i) - (ii)
(No change.)
(F)
For all major sources of
nitrogen oxides (NO
(14)
Offset ratio--For the purpose of satisfying the emissions
offset reduction requirements of the FCAA, §173(a)(1)(A), the emissions
offset ratio is the ratio of total actual reductions of emissions to total
allowable emissions increases of such pollutants. The minimum offset ratios
are included in Table I of this section under the definition of major modification.
In order
for a reduction to qualify as an offset, it must be certified
as an emission credit under Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 1 or 4 of
this title (relating to Emission Credit Banking or Trading; or Discrete Emission
Credit Banking and Trading), except as provided for in §116.170(b) of
this title (relating to Applicability of Emission Reductions as Offsets).
The reduction must not have been relied on in the issuance of a previous nonattainment
or prevention of significant deterioration permit
[
(15)
Potential to emit--The maximum capacity of a facility/stationary
source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design. Any
physical or enforceable operational limitation on the capacity of the facility/stationary
source to emit a pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and
restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material combusted,
stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design only if the limitation
or the effect it would have on emissions is federally enforceable. Secondary
emissions, as defined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations §51.165(a)(1)(viii),
do not count in determining the potential to emit
for
[
(16) - (17)
(No change.)
(18)
Stationary source--Any building, structure, facility,
or installation which emits or may emit any air pollutant subject to regulation
under the
FCAA
[
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been
reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority
to adopt.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State on March 21, 2003.
TRD-200301868
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: May 4, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017
1.
PERMIT APPLICATION
30 TAC §§116.114, 116.115, 116.120
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The new and amended sections are proposed under TWC, §5.103, concerning
Rules, and §5.105, concerning General Policy, which authorize the commission
to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC;
and under TCAA, §382.017, concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission
to adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. The new
and amended sections are also proposed under TCAA, §382.002, concerning
Policy and Purpose, which establishes the commission's purpose to safeguard
the state's air resources, consistent with the protection of public health,
general welfare, and physical property; §382.011, concerning General
Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission to control the quality
of the state's air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control Plan, which
authorizes the commission to develop a general, comprehensive plan for control
of the state's air; §382.016, concerning Monitoring Requirements, Examination
of Records, which authorizes the commission to prescribe reasonable requirements
for the measuring and monitoring of emissions of air contaminants; §382.051,
concerning Permitting Authority of Commission Rules, which authorizes the
commission to issue permits for the construction of a new facility or modification
of an existing facility; §382.0513, concerning Permit Conditions, which
authorizes the commission to establish and enforce permit conditions; §382.0515,
concerning Application for Permit, which authorizes the commission to require
a permit application with plans and specifications necessary for the commission
to determine if the facility will comply with applicable state and federal
regulations and the intent of the TCAA; §382.0517, concerning Determination
of Administrative Completion of Application, which authorizes the commission
to determine when an application is administratively complete; and §382.0518,
concerning Preconstruction Permit, which requires persons planning the construction
or modification of a facility to obtain a permit from the commission.
The proposed new and amended sections implement TWC, §5.103 and §5.105;
and TCAA, §§382.002, 382.011, 382.012, 382.016, 382.051, 382.0513,
382.0515, 382.0517, and 382.0518.
§116.114.Application Review Schedule.
(a)
(No change.)
(b)
Voiding of deficient application.
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
If an applicant fails to make such good faith effort, the
executive director shall void the application and notify the applicant
of the voidance and the remaining deficiencies in the voided application
.
If
a new
[
(c)
(No change.)
§116.115.General and Special Conditions.
(a)
(No change.)
(b)
General conditions. Holders of permits, special permits,
standard permits, and special exemptions shall comply with the following:
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
the following general conditions if the permit or amendment
is issued or amended on or after August 16, 1994, regardless of whether they
are specifically stated within the permit document.
[(A)
Voiding of permit. A permit or permit
amendment under this chapter is automatically void if the permit holder does
one of the following:]
[(i)
fails to begin construction within 18 months of date of
issuance. The executive director may grant a one-time 18-month extension to
the date to begin construction;]
[(ii)
discontinues construction for more than 18 consecutive
months prior to completion; or]
[(iii)
fails to complete construction within a reasonable time.]
(A)
[
(B)
[
(i)
The permit holder shall notify the appropriate air program
regional office of the commission prior to the commencement of operations
of the facilities authorized by the permit. The notification must be made
in such a manner as to allow
a
representative of the commission
to be present at the commencement of operations.
(ii)
The permit holder shall provide a separate notification
for the commencement of operations for each unit of phased construction, which
may involve a series of units commencing operations at different times.
(iii)
Prior to operation of the facilities authorized by the
permit, the permit holder shall identify to the Office of Permitting, Remediation,
and Registration the source or sources of allowances to be utilized for compliance
with Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division 3 of this title (relating to Mass
Emissions Cap and Trade Program).
(C)
[
(i)
If sampling is required, the permit holder shall contact
the commission's Office of Compliance and Enforcement prior to sampling to
obtain the proper data forms and procedures.
(ii)
All sampling and testing procedures must be approved by
the executive director and coordinated with the regional representatives of
the commission.
(iii)
The permit holder is also responsible for providing sampling
facilities and conducting the sampling operations or contracting with an independent
sampling consultant.
(D)
[
(E)
[
(i)
maintain a copy of the permit along with records containing
the information and data sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the permit,
including production records and operating hours;
(ii)
keep all required records in a file at the facility site.
If, however, the facility site normally operates unattended, records must
be maintained at an office within Texas having day-to-day operational control
of the facility site;
(iii)
make the records available at the request of personnel
from the commission or any local air pollution control agency having jurisdiction
over the site. Upon request, the commission shall make any such records of
compliance available to the public in a timely manner;
(iv)
comply with any additional recordkeeping requirements
specified in special conditions attached to the permit;
(v)
retain information in the file for at least two years following
the date that the information or data is obtained; and
(vi)
for persons certifying and registering a federally-enforceable
emission limitation in accordance with §116.611 of this title (relating
to Registration To Use a Standard Permit), retain all records demonstrating
compliance for at least five years.
(F)
[
(G)
[
(H)
[
(i)
Acceptance of a permit by an applicant constitutes an acknowledgment
and agreement that the permit holder will comply with all rules, regulations,
and orders of the commission issued in conformity with the TCAA and the conditions
precedent to the granting of the permit.
(ii)
If more than one state or federal rule or regulation or
permit condition are applicable, the most stringent limit or condition shall
govern and be the standard by which compliance shall be demonstrated.
(iii)
Acceptance includes consent to the entrance of commission
employees and agents into the permitted premises at reasonable times to investigate
conditions relating to the emission or concentration of air contaminants,
including compliance with the permit.
(c)
(No change.)
§116.120.Voiding of Permits.
A permit or permit amendment under this chapter is void if the permit
holder does one of the following:
(1)
fails to begin construction within 18 months, or a time
period specified in the permit, of date of issuance. At the request of the
permit holder, the executive director may grant an 18-month extension to begin
construction. Permits issued to holders who have received extensions will
be subject to further best available control technology review and reevaluation
of netting or offsets as applicable. An additional extension of up to 18 months
may be granted by the executive director if;
(A)
the permit holder becomes involved in litigation not of
the permit holder's initiation regarding the issuance of the permit, and demonstrates
that emissions from the facility will comply with all rules and regulations
of the commission and the intent of the TCAA, including protection of the
public's health and physical property; or
(B)
the permit holder has spent 15% of the estimated capital
cost of the project on preparation for construction, and demonstrates that
emissions from the facility will comply with all rules and regulations of
the commission and the intent of the TCAA, including protection of the public's
health and physical property.
(2)
discontinues construction for more than 18 consecutive
months prior to completion; or
(3)
fails to complete construction within a reasonable time.
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been
reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority
to adopt.
Filed
with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 21, 2003.
TRD-200301869
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: May 4, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017
30 TAC §116.143
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The amendment is proposed under TWC, §5.103, concerning Rules, and §5.105,
concerning General Policy, which authorize the commission to adopt rules necessary
to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC; and under TCAA, §382.017,
concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules consistent
with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. The amendment is also proposed under
TCAA, §382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose, which establishes the
commission's purpose to safeguard the state's air resources, consistent with
the protection of public health, general welfare, and physical property; §382.011,
concerning General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission to control
the quality of the state's air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control
Plan, which authorizes the commission to develop a general, comprehensive
plan for control of the state's air; §382.016, concerning Monitoring
Requirements, Examination of Records, which authorizes the commission to prescribe
reasonable requirements for the measuring and monitoring of emissions of air
contaminants; §382.051, concerning Permitting Authority of Commission
Rules, which authorizes the commission to issue permits for the construction
of a new facility or modification of an existing facility; §382.0513,
concerning Permit Conditions, which authorizes the commission to establish
and enforce permit conditions; §382.0515, concerning Application for
Permit, which authorizes the commission to require a permit application with
plans and specifications necessary for the commission to determine if the
facility will comply with applicable state and federal regulations and the
intent of the TCAA; §382.0517, concerning Determination of Administrative
Completion of Application, which authorizes the commission to determine when
an application is administratively complete; §382.0518, concerning Preconstruction
Permit, which requires persons planning the construction or modification of
a facility to obtain a permit from the commission; and §382.061, concerning
Application, Permit, and Inspection Fees, which requires the commission to
adopt, charge, and collect fees for each application for a permit or renewal
of a permit.
The proposed amendment implements TWC, §5.103 and §5.105; and
TCAA, §§382.002, 382.011, 382.012, 382.016, 382.051, 382.0513, 382.0515,
382.0517, 382.0518, and 382.061.
§116.143.Payment of Fees.
All permit fees will be remitted in the form of a check, certified
check, electronic funds transfer, or money order made payable to the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) or TCEQ and delivered with the
application for permit or amendment to the TCEQ, P.O. Box 13088, MC 214, Austin,
Texas
78711-3088
[
(1)
(No change.)
(2)
Return of fees. [
(A)
If no permit or amendment is issued by
the agency or if the applicant withdraws the application prior to issuance
of the permit or amendment, one-half of the fee will be refunded.
(B)
The fee difference will be refunded if
a permit application is withdrawn because the proposed construction or modification
is determined to meet the requirements of:
(i)
a standard permit issued under Subchapter F of this chapter
(relating to Standard Permits);
(ii)
a permit by rule under Chapter 106 of this title (relating
to Permits by Rule); or
(iii)
the conditions of §116.119 of this title (relating
to De Minimis Facilities or Sources).
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal
has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal
authority to adopt.
Filed
with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 21, 2003.
TRD-200301870
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: May 4, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017
30 TAC §116.150
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The amendment is proposed under TWC, §5.103, concerning Rules, and §5.105,
concerning General Policy, which authorize the commission to adopt rules necessary
to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC; and under TCAA, §382.017,
concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules consistent
with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. The amendment is also proposed under
TCAA, §382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose, which establishes the
commission's purpose to safeguard the state's air resources, consistent with
the protection of public health, general welfare, and physical property; §382.011,
concerning General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission to control
the quality of the state's air; §382.012, concerning State Air Control
Plan, which authorizes the commission to develop a general, comprehensive
plan for control of the state's air; §382.016, concerning Monitoring
Requirements, Examination of Records, which authorizes the commission to prescribe
reasonable requirements for the measuring and monitoring of emissions of air
contaminants; §382.051, concerning Permitting Authority of Commission
Rules, which authorizes the commission to issue permits for the construction
of a new facility or modification of an existing facility; §382.0513,
concerning Permit Conditions, which authorizes the commission to establish
and enforce permit conditions; §382.0515, concerning Application for
Permit, which authorizes the commission to require a permit application with
plans and specifications necessary for the commission to determine if the
facility will comply with applicable state and federal regulations and the
intent of the TCAA; §382.0517, concerning Determination of Administrative
Completion of Application, which authorizes the commission to determine when
an application is administratively complete; and §382.0518, concerning
Preconstruction Permit, which requires persons planning the construction or
modification of a facility to obtain a permit from the commission.
The proposed amendment implements TWC, §5.103 and §5.105; and
TCAA, §§382.002, 382.011, 382.012, 382.016, 382.051, 382.0513, 382.0515,
382.0517, 382.0518, and 382.061.
§116.150.New Major Source or Major Modification in Ozone Nonattainment Areas.
(a) - (b)
(No change.)
[(c)
For sources located in the Houston/Galveston
(HGA) ozone nonattainment area (Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston,
Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties) or the Beaumont/Port Arthur
(BPA) ozone nonattainment area (Hardin, Jefferson, and Orange counties), the
following shall apply to NO
x
emissions.]
[(1)
For permit applications in review after April 12, 1995,
and declared administratively complete on or before December 31, 1997:]
[(A)
Subsection (a)(1), (2), and (4) of this section do not
apply.]
[(B)
The requirements of subsection (a)(3) of this section
apply and shall be made a part of the source's permit. However, the requirements
shall be held in abeyance for a period ending no sooner than January 1, 1998.
The Commission may on or after January 1, 1998, and after making the determinations
described in paragraph (2) of this subsection, require the source to implement
the permit requirements imposed pursuant to the requirements of subsection
(a)(3) of this section. If the Commission requires implementation, the source
shall obtain the NO
x
offsets as specified in
subsection (a)(3) of this section no later than January 1, 2000.]
[(C)
Documentation of proposed increases of NO
x
equal to or greater than 40 tons per year, as well as documentation
of netting calculations for these increases, shall be submitted.]
[(D)
A source otherwise subject to the requirements of subsection
(a)(1) - (4) of this section may, at its option, comply with any of those
requirements.]
[(2)
The commission has reviewed the results of the Urban Airshed
Model for the HGA and BPA ozone nonattainment areas, using data from the Coastal
Oxidant Assessment for Southeast Texas study, in accordance with the United
States Environmental Protection Agency document "Guideline for Determining
the Applicability of Nitrogen Oxides Requirements under Section 182(f)" (December
1993). The commission has determined that additional NO
x
reductions in the HGA and BPA nonattainment areas will contribute
to attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone. The
commission will notify sources which have permit requirements in abeyance
pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection, that the period of abeyance
has ended. The source shall obtain the NO
x
offsets
as specified in subsection (a)(3) of this section no later than January 1,
2000.]
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been
reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority
to adopt.
Filed
with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 21, 2003.
TRD-200301871
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: May 4, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017
30 TAC §116.170
(Editor's note: The text of the following section proposed for
repeal will not be published. The section may be examined in the offices of
the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality or in the Texas Register office,
Room 245, James Earl Rudder Building, 1019 Brazos Street, Austin.)
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The repeal is proposed under TWC, §5.103, concerning Rules, and §5.105,
concerning General Policy, which authorize the commission to adopt rules necessary
to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC; and under TCAA, §382.017,
concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules consistent
with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. The repeal is also proposed under
TCAA, §382.002, concerning Policy and Purpose, which establishes the
commission's purpose to safeguard the state's air resources, consistent with
the protection of public health, general welfare, and physical property; §382.011,
concerning General Powers and Duties, which authorizes the commission to control
the quality of the state's air; and §382.012, concerning State Air Control
Plan, which authorizes the commission to develop a general, comprehensive
plan for control of the state's air.
The proposed repeal implements TWC, §5.103 and §5.105; and TCAA, §§382.002,
382.011, and 382.012.
§116.170.Applicability for Reduction Credits.
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been
reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority
to adopt.
Filed
with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 21, 2003.
TRD-200301872
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: May 4, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017
30 TAC §116.170, §116.172
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The new sections are proposed under TWC, §5.103, concerning Rules,
and §5.105, concerning General Policy, which authorize the commission
to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under the TWC;
and under TCAA, §382.017, concerning Rules, which authorizes the commission
to adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA. The new
sections are also proposed under TCAA, §382.002, concerning Policy and
Purpose, which establishes the commission's purpose to safeguard the state's
air resources, consistent with the protection of public health, general welfare,
and physical property; §382.011, concerning General Powers and Duties,
which authorizes the commission to control the quality of the state's air; §382.012,
concerning State Air Control Plan, which authorizes the commission to develop
a general, comprehensive plan for control of the state's air; §382.016,
concerning Monitoring Requirements, Examination of Records, which authorizes
the commission to prescribe reasonable requirements for the measuring and
monitoring of emissions of air contaminants; §382.051, concerning Permitting
Authority of Commission Rules, which authorizes the commission to issue permits
for the construction of a new facility or modification of an existing facility; §382.0513,
concerning Permit Conditions, which authorizes the commission to establish
and enforce permit conditions; §382.0515, concerning Application for
Permit, which authorizes the commission to require a permit application with
plans and specifications necessary for the commission to determine if the
facility will comply with applicable state and federal regulations and the
intent of the TCAA; §382.0517, concerning Determination of Administrative
Completion of Application, which authorizes the commission to determine when
an application is administratively complete; and §382.0518, concerning
Preconstruction Permit, which requires persons planning the construction or
modification of a facility to obtain a permit from the commission. The new
sections are also proposed under 42 USC, §7410(a)(2)(A), which requires
SIPs to include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures
or techniques, including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits,
and auction of emission rights.
The proposed new sections implement TWC, §5.103 and §5.105; and
TCAA, §§382.002, 382.011, 382.012, 382.016, 382.051, 382.0513, 382.0515,
382.0517, and 382.0518.
§116.170.Applicability of Emission Reductions as Offsets.
(a)
No reduction may be used as an offset unless it has been
certified as an emission credit under Chapter 101, Subchapter H, Division
1 or 4 of this title (relating to Emission Credit Banking and Trading; or
Discrete Emission Credit Banking and Trading), except as provided for in subsection
(c) of this section.
(b)
Reductions not yet certified and banked as an emission
credit must be certified and banked with the executive director by September
1, 2004 in order to be considered for use as an offset.
(c)
A future reduction may be used as an offset for a permit
provided that:
(1)
the permit contains special conditions that specify the
date by which the permit holder must submit to the executive director appropriate
and sufficient data to verify that the reduction has occurred and the reduction
is provided by start of operation;
(2)
the reduction must be achieved prior to commencement of
the permitted emissions for which the offset is required;
(3)
the reduction meets all of the requirements of Chapter
101, Subchapter H, Division 1 or 4 of this title when submitted to the executive
director for review per the requirements of the issued permit; and
(4)
the permit holder agrees to obtain additional offsets if
the review by the executive director indicates the reductions do not satisfy
the original offset requirements.
§116.172.Emissions Offsets from Rocket Engine Firing and Cleaning.
Emissions increases from rocket engine and motor firing, and cleaning
related to such firing, at an existing or modified major source, shall be
allowed to be offset by alternative or innovative means, provided the following
conditions are met.
(1)
Any modification proposed is solely for the purpose of
expanding the testing of rocket engines or motors at an existing source permitted
to test such engines as of November 15, 1990.
(2)
The source demonstrates to the satisfaction of the executive
director that it has used all reasonable means to obtain and utilize offsets,
as determined on an annual basis, for the emissions increases beyond allowable
levels, that all available offsets are being used, and that sufficient offsets
are not available to the source.
(3)
The source has obtained a written finding from the Department
of Defense, Department of Transportation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
or other appropriate federal agency, that the testing of rocket motors or
engines at the facility is required for a program essential to the national
security.
(4)
The source will comply with an alternative measure, imposed
by the executive director, designed to offset any emissions increases beyond
permitted levels not directly offset by the source. In lieu of imposing any
alternative offset measures, the executive director may impose an emissions
fee to be paid, which shall be an amount no greater than 1.5 times the average
cost of stationary source control measures adopted in that area during the
previous three years.
This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been
reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency's legal authority
to adopt.
Filed
with the Office of the Secretary of State on March 21, 2003.
TRD-200301873
Stephanie Bergeron
Director, Environmental Law Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Earliest possible date of adoption: May 4, 2003
For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017
April 26, 1999, at 64 FedReg 20189
].
April 26, 1999, at 64 FedReg 20189
].
April 26, 1999, at 64 FedReg 20189
].
CFR
]
63, Subpart L, [
October 27, 1993,
] is incorporated by reference
as amended through October 17, 2000 (65 FR 61744)
.
December 14, 1999, at 64 FedReg 69637
].
Production ] (40 CFR 63, Subpart S).
Production
] Maximum
Achievable Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations
Part
63, Subpart S, is incorporated by reference as
amended through
May 14, 2001 (66 FR 24268)
[
April 12, 1999,
at 64 FedReg 17555
].
December 14, 1999, 64 FedReg 69637
].
June 30, 1999, 64 FedReg 35023
].
CFR
] 63, Subpart W,
is incorporated
by reference
as amended through
May 8, 2000 (65 FR 26491)
[
March 8, 1995, is incorporated by reference
].
adopted June 10, 1999, at 64 FedReg
31358
].
adopted June 10, 1999, at 64 FedReg
31358
].
CFR
]
63, Subpart CC,
is incorporated by reference
as amended through
May 25, 2001 (66 FR 28840)
[
August 18, 1998, is incorporated by
reference
].
Off-site ] Waste and Recovery Operations (40 CFR 63, Subpart DD).
Off-site
] Waste
and
Recovery
Operations Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard as specified in
40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart DD, is incorporated
by reference as amended through
January 8, 2001 (66 FR 1263)
[
July 20, 1999, at 64 FedReg 38950
].
CFR
] 63, Subpart GG,
is incorporated by reference
as amended through
December 8, 2000 (65 FR 76941
) [
September 1, 1998, is incorporated by reference
].
&
] Natural Gas Production Maximum
Achievable Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations
Part
63, Subpart HH, is incorporated by reference as
amended through June 29, 2001 (66 FR 34548)
[
adopted June 17, 1999,
at 64 FedReg 32610
].
CFR
] 63, Subpart II,
is incorporated by reference
as amended through
October 17, 2000 (65 FR 61744)
[
December 17, 1996, is incorporated by reference
].
July 20, 1999, at 64 FedReg 38950
].
July 20, 1999, at 64 FedReg 38950
].
as adopted June
29, 1999 at 64 FedReg 34854 and
] as amended through
July 12, 2002
(67 FR 46258)
[
November 22, 1999, at 64 FedReg 63702
].
as adopted June
29, 1999, at 64 FedReg 34854 and
] as amended through
July 12, 2002
(67 FR 46258)
[
December 22, 1999 at 64 FedReg 63702
].
adopted June
29, 1999, at 64 FedReg 34854 and as
] amended through
July 12, 2002
(67 FR 46258)
[
November 22, 1999, at 64 FedReg 63702
].
July 20, 1999, at 64 FedReg 38950
].
adopted June 29, 1999, at 64 FedReg
34854
].
MACT ] (40 CFR 63, Subpart YY).
standard
] as specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part
63,
Subpart YY, is incorporated by reference as [
adopted June 29, 1999, at
64 FedReg 34854 and as
] amended through
February 10, 2003 (68 FR
6635)
[
November 22, 1999, at 64 FedReg 63695 and 63702
].
November 19, 1999 at 64 FedReg 63209
].
CFR
] 63, Subpart GGG,
is incorporated by reference as amended through
April 2, 2002 (67 FR 15486)
[
September 21, 1998, is incorporated
by reference
].
adopted June 17, 1999, at 64 FedReg
32610
].
June 30, 1999, at 64 FedReg 35023
].
adopted June 14, 1999, at 64 FedReg
31898
].
adopted June 23, 1999, at 64
FedReg 33550
].
adopted January 20, 2000, at 64
FedReg 29420
].
adopted June 1, 1999, at 64 FedReg 29420
].
Publically ] Owned Treatment Works (40 CFR 63, Subpart VVV).
Publically
] Owned Treatment Works
Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard as specified in 40 Code of
Federal Regulations
Part
63, Subpart VVV, is incorporated by reference
as
amended through October 21, 2002 (67 FR 64742)
[
adopted
October 26, 1999, at 64 FedReg 57572
].
adopted May
20, 1999, at 64 FedReg 27450
].
Chapter 116.
CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION BY PERMITS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION OR MODIFICATION
Texas Clean
Air Act (TCAA)
] or in the rules of the commission, the terms used by
the commission have the meanings commonly ascribed to them in the field of
air pollution control. The terms in this section are applicable to permit
review for major source construction and major source modification in nonattainment
areas. In addition to the terms which are defined by the TCAA, and in §101.1
of this title (relating to Definitions), the following words and terms, when
used in §116.150 and §116.151 of this title (relating to Nonattainment
Review), shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates
otherwise.
tpy
] or more of a nonattainment pollutant,
the period between:
tpy
]) for that
specific nonattainment area. If the major modification level is exceeded,
then nonattainment review is required.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
] under
the
FCAA
[
Federal Clean Air Act
], §111, and which
reflects the following:
volatile organic compounds
] or nitrogen oxides shall
be considered major for ozone. The fugitive emissions of a stationary source
shall not be included in determining for any of the purposes of this definition
whether it is a major stationary source, unless the source belongs to one
of the categories of stationary sources listed in [
Title
] 40 Code
of Federal Regulations[
, Part
] §51.165(a)(1)(iv)(C).
an NAAQS
] has been issued. At a facility/stationary
source that is not major prior to the increase, the increase by itself must
equal or exceed that specified in the MAJOR SOURCE column of Table I of this
section. At an existing major facility/stationary source, the increase must
equal or exceed that specified in the MAJOR MODIFICATION column of Table I.
tpy
] or more of a nonattainment pollutant:
NO
x
]
in ozone nonattainment areas, increases and decreases of NO
x
are creditable only if they resulted from authorizations or applications
received on or after November 15, 1992.
to be considered
creditable, offsets must be enforceable, permanent, quantifiable through a
replicable methodology, real, and surplus. The reduction must be surplus at
the time it was created as well as when it is used. The reduction must have
occurred after January 1, 1990, and have been reported or represented in the
1990 or a subsequent emissions inventory. The reduction must not have been
relied on in the issuance of a previous nonattainment or prevention of significant
deterioration permit
].
of
] a stationary source.
Federal Clean Air Act
].
Subchapter B. NEW SOURCE REVIEW PERMITS
the
] application is
submitted
[
resubmitted
] within six months of the voidance, it shall
meet the
requirements of §116.111 of this title (relating to General Application)
but will
be exempt from the requirements of §116.140 of this title
(relating to Applicability).
(B)
] Report of construction progress.
The permit holder shall report start of construction, construction interruptions
exceeding 45 days, and completion of construction. The report shall be given
to the appropriate regional office of the commission not later than 15 working
days after occurrence of the event.
(C)
] Start-up notification.
(D)
] Sampling requirements.
(E)
] Equivalency of methods. The
permit holder must demonstrate or otherwise justify the equivalency of emission
control methods, sampling or other emission testing methods, and monitoring
methods proposed as alternatives to methods indicated in the conditions of
the permit. Alternative methods shall be applied for in writing and must be
reviewed and approved by the executive director prior to their use in fulfilling
any requirements of the permit.
(F)
] Recordkeeping. The permit holder
shall:
(G)
] Maximum allowable emission
rates. The total emissions of air contaminants from any of the sources of
emissions must not exceed the values stated on the table attached to the permit
entitled "Emission Sources--Maximum Allowable Emission Rates."
(H)
] Maintenance of emission control.
The permitted facilities shall not be operated unless all air pollution emission
capture and abatement equipment is maintained in good working order and operating
properly during normal facility operations. The permit holder shall provide
notification for emissions events and maintenance in accordance with §§101.201,
101.211, and 101.221 of this title (relating to Emissions Event Reporting
and Recordkeeping Requirements; Scheduled Maintenance,
Startup
[
Start-up
], and Shutdown Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; and
Operational Requirements).
(I)
] Compliance with rules.
4.
PERMIT FEES
78711-3087
].
Fees must be paid
at the time an application for a permit or amendment is submitted. Applications
will not be considered for review nor will any time constraints required of
TCEQ for application processing begin until a fee is received
[
Required fees must be received before the agency will begin examination of
the application
].
Fees must be paid at the time an
application for a permit or amendment is submitted. If no permit or amendment
is issued by the agency or if the applicant withdraws the application prior
to issuance of the permit or amendment, one-half of the fee will be refunded
except that the entire fee will be refunded for any such application for which
an exemption under Chapter 106 of this title (relating to Exemptions from
Permitting) is allowed.
] No fees will be refunded after a deficient
application has been voided or after a permit or amendment has been issued
by the agency.
Fees will be returned under the following conditions.
5.
NONATTAINMENT REVIEW
7.
EMISSION REDUCTIONS: OFFSETS
Subchapter D. PERMIT RENEWALS