TITLE 30.ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Part 1. TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Chapter 25. ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING LABORATORY ACCREDITATION AND CERTIFICATION

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ) adopts amendments to §25.9 and §25.62 without changes to the proposed text as published in the March 24, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 2389) and the text will not be republished.

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE ADOPTED RULES

The purpose of the adopted rules is to refer to more recent laboratory accreditation standards adopted by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) and to expand the sources of proficiency test samples for drinking water laboratories seeking or holding certifications issued by the commission.

SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION

Adopted §25.9, Standards for Environmental Testing Laboratory Accreditation, replaces the phrase "Chapters 3, 4, and 5, adopted July 2002, and Chapters 1, 2, and 6, adopted June 2003" with "approved June 2003" to refer to the most recent laboratory accreditation standards adopted by NELAC.

Adopted §25.62(d), Proficiency Test Sample Analyses, replaces the phrase "Proficiency test samples shall be purchased from a provider approved by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, if available" with "Proficiency test samples, if available, shall be purchased from a National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program-designated provider or a provider approved by the National Institute of Standards and Technology." The change expands the number of potential sources of proficiency test samples for drinking water laboratories seeking or holding certifications issued by the commission.

FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION

The commission reviewed the adopted rules in light of the regulatory analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined that the rulemaking is not subject to §2001.0225 because it does not meet the definition of a major environmental rule. A "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.

This rulemaking updates the agency’s standards for accreditation and expands the number of potential sources of proficiency test samples for drinking water laboratories seeking or holding certifications issued by the commission. Thus, these rules do not meet the definition of a "major environmental rule." These rules are not a major environmental rule and do not meet any of the four applicability requirements that apply to a major environmental rule. Under Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, the adopted rules do not exceed a standard set by federal law or 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. The adopted rules do not exceed a standard set by federal law nor exceed the requirement of a delegation agreement because there is no federal authority regarding laboratory accreditation.

These revisions do not adopt a rule solely under the general powers of the commission and do not exceed an express requirement of state law. The requirements that are implemented through these rules are expressly defined under Texas Water Code (TWC), Chapter 5, Subchapter R, which requires the commission to enact rules governing the accreditation of environmental laboratories.

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The commission’s final assessment indicates that Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007, does not apply to these adopted amendments because the adopted amendments are not a taking as defined in Chapter 2007, nor are they a constitutional taking of private real property. The purpose of the adopted amendments is to update NELAC standards referenced in these rules.

Promulgation and enforcement of these adopted rules will not affect private real property, which is the subject of the rules, because the adopted amendments will neither restrict nor limit the owner’s right to the property, nor cause a reduction of 25% or more in the market value of the property. The adopted rules only apply to environmental testing laboratories that submit data to the commission for use in its decisions. Property values will not be decreased because the adopted amendments will not limit the use of real property. Thus, these adopted rules will not constitute a taking under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007.

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The commission reviewed this rulemaking and found that the adoption is not a rulemaking subject to the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) because the rulemaking was neither identified in 31 TAC §505.11, nor affected any action or authorization identified in §505.11. Therefore, the adoption is not subject to the CMP.

PUBLIC COMMENT

The commission received no comments concerning this rulemaking.

Subchapter B. ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING LABORATORY ACCREDITATION

30 TAC §25.9

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The amendment is adopted under the general authority granted in TWC, §5.013, which establishes the general jurisdiction of the commission over other areas of responsibility as assigned to the commission under the TWC and other laws of the state; §5.103 and §5.105, which authorize the commission to adopt rules and policies necessary to carry out its responsibilities and duties under the TWC; and §5.802 and §5.805, which require the agency to adopt rules for the administration of the laboratory accreditation program.

The adopted amendment implements TWC, §§5.013, 5.103, 5.105, 5.802, and 5.805.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 29, 2006.

TRD-200603518

Robert Martinez

Acting Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Effective date: July 19, 2006

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017


Subchapter C. ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING LABORATORY CERTIFICATION

30 TAC §25.62

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The amendment is adopted under the general authority granted in TWC, §5.013, which establishes the general jurisdiction of the commission over other areas of responsibility as assigned to the commission under the TWC and other laws of the state; §5.103 and §5.105, which authorize the commission to adopt rules and policies necessary to carry out its responsibilities and duties under the TWC; and §5.802 and §5.805, which require the agency to adopt rules for the administration of the laboratory accreditation program.

The adopted amendment implements TWC, §§5.013, 5.103, 5.105, 5.802, and 5.805.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 29, 2006.

TRD-200603519

Robert Martinez

Acting Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Effective date: July 19, 2006

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017


Chapter 35. EMERGENCY AND TEMPORARY ORDERS AND PERMITS; TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OR AMENDMENT OF PERMIT CONDITIONS

Subchapter K. AIR ORDERS

30 TAC §§35.801, 35.802, 35.804, 35.805, 35.807, 35.808

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (commission or TCEQ) adopts amendments to §§35.801, 35.802, 35.804, 35.805, 35.807, and 35.808 without changes to the proposed text as published in the March 10, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 1599) and these sections will not be republished.

The amended sections will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP).

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE ADOPTED RULES

House Bill (HB) 2949, 79th Legislature, 2005, amended Texas Water Code (TWC), §5.515, to allow for authorization of emergency orders to repair or replace roads, bridges, or other infrastructure improvements involving public works projects destroyed during a catastrophe. The TWC previously only authorized emergency orders to allow repair of a facility or control equipment. Amended TWC, §5.515 adds language regarding the contents of the application for an emergency order. The required language in the application pertaining to the reason for allowing the construction and emissions was expanded to include preventing a "loss of a critical transportation thoroughfare." The purpose of this rulemaking is to reflect these changes in Subchapter K of this chapter.

The adopted rules add language authorizing emergency orders to include repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure improvements to the list of actions that can be authorized by an emergency order. Additionally, the adopted rules authorize an applicant to list loss of a critical transportation thoroughfare as a reason why the construction and emissions are essential. As a point of clarification, it is noted that the issuance of an emergency order, under the adopted rules, to a rock crusher or concrete batch plant that performs wet batching, dry batching, or central mixing will not be prohibited under TWC, §5.5145, or subject to penalty under TWC, §7.052(b), because the facility is considered to be operating under a temporary authorization as provided in TWC, §5.501(a)(2)(A). A facility which has been issued an emergency order has been provided a limited-term authorization and must submit an application for a permit or permit modification within 60 days of the order issuance, as described in 30 TAC §35.806.

SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION

The commission adopts administrative changes throughout the rules to conform with Texas Register requirements and agency guidelines.

The adopted amendment to §35.801, Emergency Orders Because of Catastrophe, adds roads, bridges, or other infrastructure to the list of repairs or replacements for which the commission may authorize immediate action. The commission also revises the definition of catastrophe by replacing the word "operator" with the word "applicant" and by adding the language "or a road, bridge, or other infrastructure."

The adopted amendment to §35.802, Application of an Emergency Order, adds language, in paragraphs (1) and (5), allowing an applicant to state that the proposed construction and emissions are essential to prevent the loss of a critical transportation thoroughfare, and that the construction and emissions are necessary for the repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure to the list of possible statements in an application for an emergency order of why the construction and emissions are necessary. In describing the limitations on the proposed construction and emissions, the applicant may cite the public works project as the specific basis for the emergency authorization.

The adopted amendment to §35.804, Issuance of Order, adds language to the list in paragraph (1) of possible reasons that would allow the commission to issue an emergency order, allowing the commission to issue an order under this subchapter if it is found that the proposed construction and emissions are essential to prevent the loss of a critical transportation thoroughfare, and that the construction and emissions are necessary for the repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure. New §35.804(5)(C), adds public works projects needed to rebuild or repair damaged roads, bridges, or other infrastructure destroyed during a catastrophe to the list of limitations of the proposed construction and emissions.

The adopted amendment to §35.805, Contents of an Emergency Order, adds in paragraph (3), public works projects needed to rebuild or repair damaged roads, bridges, or other infrastructure destroyed during a catastrophe to the list of limitations of the proposed construction and emissions.

The adopted amendment to §35.807, Affirmation of an Emergency Order, adds language to the list in paragraph (1) of possible reasons that would allow the commission to issue an emergency order, allowing the commission to affirm a proposed or issued order under this subchapter if the applicant shows that the proposed construction and emissions are essential to prevent the loss of a critical transportation thoroughfare, and that the construction and emissions are necessary for the repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure. New §35.807(5)(C) adds public works projects needed to rebuild or repair damaged roads, bridges, or other infrastructure destroyed during a catastrophe to the list of limitations of the proposed construction and emissions.

The adopted amendment to §35.808, Modification of an Emergency Order, adds language, in paragraph (1), allowing the commission to modify a proposed or issued order under this subchapter if the applicant shows that the proposed construction and emissions are essential to prevent the loss of a critical transportation thoroughfare, and that the construction and emissions are necessary for the repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure.

FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION

The commission reviewed the adopted rulemaking in light of the regulatory analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined that the rulemaking is not subject to §2001.0225 because it does not meet the definition of a "major environmental rule" as defined in that statute. A "major environmental rule" means a rule, the specific intent of which, is to protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from 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 commission has determined that the adopted rulemaking does not fall under the definition of a "major environmental rule" because it does not adversely affect any of the categories listed in §2001.0225, and the amendments do not mandate new requirements for the regulated community. Rather, the adopted rules are intended to reflect the statutory changes made to TWC, §5.515, by HB 2949, which provide authorization for specific types of facilities that may emit air contaminants in limited circumstances. Material adverse effects on the environment are not anticipated, and the impacts on the economy and productivity are expected to be significant and positive insofar as recoveries from catastrophic events will be more quickly and efficiently realized.

Furthermore, the adopted rulemaking does not meet any of the four applicability requirements listed in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225(a). Texas Government Code, §2001.0225(a), 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 because this rulemaking: 1) does not exceed any standard set by federal law; 2) does not exceed the requirements of state law under TWC, Chapter 5, Subchapter L; 3) does not exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement or contract between the state and an agency or representative of the federal government to implement any state and federal program; and 4) is not proposed solely under the general powers of the agency, but rather specifically under TWC, §5.515.

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The commission evaluated these adopted rules and performed an analysis of whether these rules constitute a takings under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007. The specific purpose of the rules is to incorporate into commission rules the changes made to TWC, §5.515, by the Texas Legislature, by adding language to authorize emergency orders in the event of a catastrophe to include the repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure.

Promulgation and enforcement of the amendments would constitute neither a statutory nor a constitutional taking of private real property. There are no burdens imposed on private real property under this rulemaking because the amendments neither relate to, nor have any impact on, the use or enjoyment of private real property, and there would be no reduction in value of property as a result of this rulemaking. None of the adopted rules mandate any new requirements, but rather, provide for a specific type of authorization.

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The commission reviewed the adopted rulemaking and found that the rulemaking is one identified in the Coastal Coordination Act Implementation Rules, 31 TAC §505.11(b)(2), relating to rules subject to the Coastal Management Program, and will, therefore, require that goals and policies of the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) be considered during the rulemaking process.

The CMP goal applicable to the adopted rules is to protect, preserve, restore, and enhance the diversity, quality, quantity, functions, and values of coastal natural resource areas. CMP policies applicable to the adopted rules include the administrative policies and the policies for specific activities related to the emission of air pollutants. Promulgation and enforcement of these rules is consistent with the applicable CMP goals and policies because the rules will establish clear and consistent requirements governing the issuance of emergency and temporary orders for the repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure when necessitated by a catastrophe, as authorized by TWC, Chapter 5, Subchapter L. Under the authority granted by statute, the commission may issue emergency or temporary orders to address unforeseen circumstances such as potential catastrophes. Promulgation and enforcement of these rules will not violate or exceed any standards identified in the applicable CMP goals and policies because they will allow the commission to take steps to mitigate emergency or potential emergency situations, which will result in environmental benefits for the entire state, including coastal areas.

PUBLIC COMMENT

A public hearing on the proposed rules was held in Austin on April 4, 2006, at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality but no oral comments were received. Written comments were submitted by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) and the EPA.

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

NCTCOG supported the amendments and commented that construction associated with emergency orders issued for the repair of infrastructure destroyed during a catastrophe may mitigate long-term emissions due to congestion which may result from an unresolved infrastructure failure.

The commission appreciates the support and concurs in the rationale proffered by NCTCOG that identifies potential environmental benefits which may result through the use of the emergency order authorization tool.

EPA commented that it interprets TWC, §5.501, to provide the commission with the general authority to issue temporary or emergency orders. The EPA further stated its understanding that through these orders, the commission may issue a temporary permit or temporarily suspend or amend a permit condition.

Section 5.501 does include authority to issue a temporary permit or temporarily suspend or amend a permit condition. However, the commission has never issued a temporary permit in lieu of a conventional authorization method for facilities with air emissions. The authority exercised through the Chapter 35 rules and this rulemaking is for issuance of emergency orders. Emergency orders are most accurately described as limited-term authorizations necessary to respond to certain catastrophic events. For example, in one instance, an emergency order was issued to install a larger boiler to replace two smaller boilers that were damaged in a catastrophic event until the two smaller boilers could be repaired. However, the larger boiler was not allowed to operate at a firing rate that would create emissions greater than the permitted limit for the two boilers, thus providing a limited-term authorization for the larger boiler, with no greater impact on the environment. The emergency order rules require that a facility which has been issued an emergency order submit an application for a permit or permit modification within 60 days of the order issuance.

EPA expressed its understanding that the Chapter 35 emergency order rules enable the commission to authorize a temporary permit or suspension of permit requirements without necessitating the submission of any such action to the EPA as a revision to the SIP. EPA stated that such an arrangement, which it identified as "director discretion," would run afoul of the requirement for the submission of a SIP revision contained in Federal Clean Air Act, §110(I).

The Chapter 35 emergency order rules, as amended through this adoption, do not contemplate the issuance or suspension of a permit or permit conditions. Rather, the rules authorize the issuance of a limited-term authorization necessary to respond to certain catastrophic events.

EPA expressed concern that the proposed amendments would allow a source to avoid preconstruction requirements and permit review procedures, while authorizing emissions in contravention of state and federal requirements. Specifically, EPA stated that any SIP revision submittal must demonstrate that the proposed revision would not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements, or negatively affect the existing air quality in Texas.

The Chapter 35 emergency order rules, as amended through this adoption, contemplate and call for a comprehensive technical review. As set forth in 30 TAC §35.805, and other sections in Subchapter K, as well as within each issued emergency order, any construction authorized by an emergency order may not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or violate applicable portions of the control strategy. To that end, the review of emergency order applications conducted by the commission consists of an evaluation of best available control technology (BACT) and a review of potential impacts of human health and the environment by the use of air dispersion modeling and evaluation by the commission's Toxicology Section. The review also includes input from the commission's applicable regional office and the commission's Air Permits Division, as appropriate. The review will ensure that the construction is subject to current and possibly more stringent requirements than were in existence for facilities that are being replaced. The technical review process is at least as comprehensive as the commission's review of permit applications. Therefore, these rules, as a revision to the SIP, do not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, violate PSD requirements, or negatively affect existing air quality in Texas.

Additionally, the emergency order rules require that a facility which has been issued an emergency order submit an application for a permit or permit modification within 60 days of the order issuance. As set forth in 30 TAC §35.806, the permit application will be considered without regard to the activity(ies) authorized under an emergency order. Since 1993, the commission has issued approximately 13 air emergency orders. The majority of these authorized replacement or repairs of damaged facilities and/or control equipment, while a few authorized new facilities and one authorized a different loading operation. In a number of cases, operation under the emergency order authority actually lasted less than the maximum 180-day term (one was operated for less than one week). Therefore, the impact to the environment was relatively minimal, and permit applications were not necessary for all of these authorizations.

EPA commented that under certain extraordinary circumstances, such as natural disasters, the commission could exercise its enforcement discretion. EPA intends to review such circumstances on a case-by-case basis.

Historically, the commission has not encountered unauthorized construction after natural disasters or other catastrophic events, and therefore there have been few opportunities, if any, to choose between exercising enforcement discretion and consideration of issuance of an emergency order. The rules in Subchapter K anticipate that an application for an emergency order be submitted prior to construction of the replacement facilities. If a facility was constructed without authorization, it would be operating without having undergone a BACT or health impacts review. However, when confronted with an application for a temporary authorization necessitated by the occurrence of a catastrophic event, the commission prefers to rely upon the emergency order authorization tool in order to ensure that a comprehensive review is conducted, which is a case-by-case review that should meet EPA requirements. As noted earlier in this preamble, the commission has issued very few emergency orders; some were due to catastrophic events that were also natural disasters.

EPA indicated that it may be able to approve the emergency order program, as submitted through previous SIP revisions, assuming that when considering the issuance of an emergency order, the state incorporates a review process which is equivalent to the process used in considering an application for a regular permit.

As described earlier, the review of applications for emergency orders is at least as comprehensive as the commission's review of permit applications. Additionally, the emergency order rules require that a facility which has been issued an emergency order submit an application for a permit or permit modification within 60 days of the order issuance. As set forth in 30 TAC §35.806, the permit application will be considered without regard to the activity(ies) authorized under an emergency order. Therefore, a person who is granted an emergency order is on notice that there is no guarantee that the subsequent permit application will be granted and, if so, whether the construction and operating requirements will be the same.

EPA requested clarification on what authority the TCEQ relies upon in requiring a technical review of emergency order applications which contains modeling, BACT, lowest achievable emission rate, Class I impacts, and impacts on soils, vegetation, and visibility.

As indicated earlier, the Chapter 35 emergency order rules, as amended through this adoption, contemplate and call for a comprehensive technical review. As set forth in 30 TAC §35.805, as well as within each issued emergency order, any construction authorized by an emergency order may not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of NAAQS or violate applicable portions of the control strategy. The commission interprets this directive to necessitate a comprehensive impacts review as described in previous responses to comments. This interpretation is grounded in Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §382.024. Such a review is also predicated upon the required showing that the activity authorized under an emergency order will not cause or contribute to air pollution, as set forth in TWC, §5.515(d). The applicant must also demonstrate that there will be no more than a de minimus increase in off-property air contaminant concentrations, per TWC, §5.515(c). To ensure that the emergency order will not violate applicable portions of the control strategy, the review will check for compliance with such applicable portions, for example, as permitting requirements, federal permitting applicability, new source performance standards (NSPS), national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS), and rules adopted for control of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxide emissions in nonattainment areas. Additionally, the TCEQ has in the past conducted and required applicants to conduct air dispersion modeling as appropriate to assure compliance.

EPA inquired as to what would happen if an entity was found to be in violation of a state or federal requirement after an emergency order was issued. Specifically, EPA wondered whether the emergency order issuance would shield such an entity from enforcement action.

An emergency order issued under Chapter 35 would not shield an entity from an enforcement action brought for violating a state or federal requirement or the terms of the emergency order. Additionally, each emergency order issued by the executive director will be considered by the commission during an open public meeting and must be affirmed, set aside, or modified, which provides the commission the opportunity to ensure compliance with such requirements.

EPA commented that 30 TAC §116.410 allows a facility to apply for an emergency order under TWC, §5.515, while Chapter 35 of the Texas Administrative Code authorizes immediate action under an emergency order. EPA wondered whether a source may submit a single application for an emergency order or must submit two applications.

The rules pertaining to emergency orders have been moved in their entirety to Chapter 35. There remains a reference to emergency orders in 30 TAC §116.1200, renumbered from 30 TAC §116.410, effective February 1, 2006, which directs the public to Chapter 35. Only one application is required.

EPA sought the commission's interpretation on whether TWC, §5.515 must be submitted and approved into the SIP.

The legal authority to adopt the emergency order rules adopted and submitted to EPA in 1998 and these amendments is listed in the STATUTORY AUTHORITY sections of the rulemaking documents, and as such, is submitted to EPA for its review as part of this revision into the SIP.

EPA sought the commission's interpretation on what provisions of Chapter 35 need to be approved into the SIP for air purposes.

Through this rulemaking, the commission is submitting amendments to Subchapter K of Chapter 35. Subchapter K has previously been submitted as a revision to the SIP. Since this rulemaking is not opening Chapter 35, Subchapters A - C, nor were subsections in Subchapters A - C proposed for removal from consideration as a revision to the SIP, the commission cannot revise the SIP submission at adoption of these rules to concurrently designate applicable subsections within those subchapters.

EPA questioned where the term " de minimis increase" as used in the current Chapter 35 emergency order provisions is defined for all criteria pollutants. Further, EPA asks if there is an ambient de minimis threshold for ozone or ozone precursors and where the term "national ambient air quality standards" is defined.

In determining de minimus amounts for purposes of reviewing emergency order applications, the commission refers to the definition of " de minimis impact" in 30 TAC §101.1(25) as a guideline for assessing truly de minimus amounts of air contaminants. A " de minimis impact" is defined as "A change in ground level concentration of an air contaminant as a result of the operation of any new major stationary source or of the operation of any existing source that has undergone a major modification that does not exceed the following specified amounts." The referenced specified amounts are set forth in an attached chart. The chart provides various amounts by NAAQS averaging times, for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter greater than 10 microns (PM 10 ), ranging from 1 to 25 micrograms per cubic meter.

While there is no ambient de minimus threshold for ozone or ozone precursors per se , the commission reviews each emergency order application and identifies whether there are any predicted adverse off-property concentrations of either criteria or non-criteria pollutants regardless if there is any increase in emissions. The definition of National Ambient Air Quality Standards is defined in 30 TAC §101.1(68).

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

These amendments are adopted under TWC, §5.102, which establishes the commission's general authority necessary to carry out its jurisdiction; §5.103, which establishes the commission's general authority to adopt rules to carry out its duties under the TWC and the other laws of the state; §5.105, which establishes the commission's authority to set policy by rule; §5.501, which establishes the commission's authority to issue emergency orders; §5.502, which sets forth requirements for emergency order applications; §5.504, which establishes the commission's authority to hold a hearing on the issuance of an emergency order; and §5.515, which allows the commission to issue emergency orders for immediate action for the addition, replacement, or repair of facilities or control equipment, or the repair or replacement of roads, bridges, or other infrastructure, and authorizing associated emissions of air contaminants, whenever a catastrophe necessitates such construction and emissions otherwise precluded under the Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA). In addition, these rules are adopted under THSC, §382.011, which gives the commission the authority to control the quality of the state's air; §382.012, which authorizes the commission to develop a state air control plan; §382.017, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules implementing the TCAA; §382.024 and §382.025, which establish the authority of the commission to issue air orders and what factors the commission must consider when issuing such orders; and §382.063, which authorizes the commission to issue emergency orders because of catastrophe.

The adopted amendments implement TWC, §§5.501, 5.502, 5.504, and 5.515, and THSC, §§382.011, 382.012, 382.024, 382.025 and 382.063.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 30, 2006.

TRD-200603529

Robert Martinez

Acting Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Effective date: July 20, 2006

Proposal publication date: March 10, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 239-0348


Chapter 39. PUBLIC NOTICE

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ or commission) adopts amendments to §§39.501, 39.503, and 39.651 with changes to the text as published in the March 24, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 2403).

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE ADOPTED RULES

House Bill (HB) 1609, 79th Legislature, 2005, amended Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.0666, 361.0791, and 361.082, by making the applicant’s public meeting and the TCEQ’s public meeting on new hazardous waste management facilities and new municipal solid waste management facilities discretionary, rather than mandatory. In order to implement this change, the commission adopts amendments to §§39.501, 39.503, and 39.651 to reflect the change in statutory language from "shall hold a public meeting" to "may hold a public meeting."

SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION

Administrative and grammatical changes are adopted throughout the sections to bring the existing rule language into agreement with Texas Register requirements, agency guidelines, and guidance provided in the Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual , November 2004.

The adopted amendments to §39.501(e), Application for Municipal Solid Waste Permit, distinguish between applications filed before September 1, 2005, the effective date of HB 1609, and applications filed on or after September 1, 2005. The mandatory public meeting requirements in paragraph (1) for applications filed before September 1, 2005, are left in place, changing the subject from the "applicant" to the "application" to conform to the language in Section 6 of HB 1609. New paragraph (2) is adopted for discretionary public meetings for applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, and removes the 45-day requirement for the applicant’s public meeting. New paragraph (2)(A)(i) also specifies that the agency’s public meeting will be held under 30 TAC §55.154 that, in turn, requires the executive director or the Office of Public Assistance to hold a public meeting if the executive director determines that there is a substantial or significant degree of public interest in an application or if a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located requests that a public meeting be held. At the direction of the commission, guidance on the executive director’s discretion in determining substantial public interest in an application has been added by repeating a portion of Texas Water Code (TWC), §5.554 in new clause (ii). New paragraph (3) defines "substantial public interest" in terms of a local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is proposed to be located by formal resolution of the entity's governing body; a council of governments with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is proposed to be located by formal request of either the council’s solid waste advisory committee, executive committee, or governing board; a homeowners’ or property owners’ association formally organized or chartered and having at least ten members located in the general area in which the facility is proposed to be located; or a group of ten or more local residents, property owners, or businesses located in the general area in which the facility is proposed to be located. Existing paragraphs (2) - (4) are renumbered as paragraphs (4) - (6), and references back to paragraph (1)(A) in renumbered paragraphs (4) and (6) are made to refer back to paragraph (1)(A) or (2)(A) while the reference back to paragraph (1)(B) in renumbered paragraph (5) is made to refer back to paragraph (1)(B) or (2)(B).

The adopted amendments to §39.503(e)(1), Application for Industrial or Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, distinguish between applications filed before September 1, 2005, the effective date of HB 1609, and applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, changing the subject from the "applicant" to the "application" to conform to the language in Section 6 of HB 1609. New paragraph (1)(A) retains the mandatory public meeting for applications filed before September 1, 2005, while new paragraph (1)(B) makes the public meeting discretionary for applications filed on or after September 1, 2005. New paragraph (1)(B)(i) also specifies that the agency’s public meeting will be held under 30 TAC §55.154 that, in turn, requires the executive director or the Office of Public Assistance to hold a public meeting if the executive director determines that there is a substantial or significant degree of public interest in an application or if a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located requests that a public meeting be held. At the direction of the commission, guidance on the executive director’s discretion in determining substantial public interest in an application has been added by repeating a portion of TWC, §5.554 in new clause (ii).

The adopted amendments to §39.503(e)(2) distinguish between applications filed before September 1, 2005, the effective date of HB 1609, and applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, changing the subject from the "applicant" to the "application" to conform to the language in Section 6 of HB 1609 and including Class 3 modifications with major amendments. New paragraph (2)(A) retains the mandatory public meeting for applications filed before September 1, 2005, if a person affected files a request for a public meeting with the chief clerk concerning the application before the deadline to file public comment or hearing requests. New paragraph (2)(B) makes the public meeting discretionary for applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, and removes the affected person requirement deleted from the statute in HB 1609. New paragraph (2)(B)(i) also specifies that the agency's public meeting will be held under §55.154 that, in turn, requires the executive director or the Office of Public Assistance to hold a public meeting if the executive director determines that there is a substantial or significant degree of public interest in an application or if a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located requests that a public meeting be held. At the direction of the commission, guidance on the executive director’s discretion in determining substantial public interest in an application has been added by repeating a portion of TWC, §5.554 in new clause (ii). New paragraph (3) defines "substantial public interest" in terms of a local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal resolution of the entity’s governing body; a council of governments with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal request of either the council’s solid waste advisory committee, executive committee, or governing board; a homeowners’ or property owners’ association formally organized or chartered and having at least ten members located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located; or a group of ten or more local residents, property owners, or businesses located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located. Existing paragraphs (3) - (6) are renumbered as paragraphs (4) - (7).

The adopted amendments to renumbered §39.503(e)(4) distinguish between applications filed before September 1, 2005, the effective date of HB 1609, and applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, changing the subject from the "applicant" to the "application" to conform to the language in Section 6 of HB 1609. New paragraph (3)(A) retains the applicant’s mandatory public meeting for applications filed before September 1, 2005, and retains the 45-day deadline. New paragraph (3)(B) makes the applicant’s public meeting discretionary for applications filed on or after September 1, 2005.

The adopted amendments to renumbered §39.503(e)(5) and (7) make references back to paragraph (1) refer back to paragraph (1) or (2).

The adopted amendments to §39.651(e)(1), Application for Injection Well Permit, distinguish between applications filed before September 1, 2005, the effective date of HB 1609, and applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, changing the subject from the "applicant" to the "application" to conform to the language in Section 6 of HB 1609. New paragraph (1)(A) retains the mandatory public meeting for applications filed before September 1, 2005, while new paragraph (1)(B) makes the public meeting discretionary for applications filed on or after September 1, 2005. New paragraph (1)(B)(i) also specifies that the agency's public meeting will be held under §55.154 that, in turn, requires the executive director or the Office of Public Assistance to hold a public meeting if the executive director determines that there is a substantial or significant degree of public interest in an application or if a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located requests that a public meeting be held. At the direction of the commission, guidance on the executive director’s discretion in determining substantial public interest in an application has been added by repeating a portion of TWC, §5.554 in new clause (ii).

New §39.651(e)(2) separates the requirements for public meetings on applications for major amendments from old paragraph (1) and distinguishes between applications filed before September 1, 2005, the effective date of HB 1609, and applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, changing the subject from the "applicant" to the "application" to conform to the language in Section 6 of HB 1609 and including Class 3 modifications with major amendments. New paragraph (2)(A) retains the mandatory public meeting for applications filed before September 1, 2005, if a person affected files a request for public meeting with the chief clerk concerning the application before the deadline to file public comment or hearing requests. New paragraph (2)(B) makes the public meeting discretionary for applications filed on or after September 1, 2005, and removes the affected person requirement deleted from the statute in HB 1609. New paragraph (2)(B)(i) also specifies that the agency's public meeting will be held under §55.154 that, in turn, requires the executive director or the Office of Public Assistance to hold a public meeting if the executive director determines that there is a substantial or significant degree of public interest in an application or if a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located requests that a public meeting be held. At the direction of the commission, guidance on the executive director’s discretion in determining substantial public interest in an application has been added by repeating a portion of TWC, §5.554 in new clause (ii). New paragraph (3) defines "substantial public interest" in terms of a local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal resolution of the entity's governing body; a council of governments with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal request of either the council's solid waste advisory committee, executive committee, or governing board; a homeowners' or property owners' association formally organized or chartered and having at least ten members located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located; or a group of ten or more local residents, property owners, or businesses located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located.

New §39.651(e)(4) separates the statements that a public meeting is not a contested case proceeding and that a public meeting held as part of a local review committee process meets the requirements of this subsection if public notice is provided, similar to the separation of these statements in §39.501(e)(4) and §39.503(e)(5). Existing paragraphs (2) and (3) are renumbered as paragraphs (5) and (6).

FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION

The commission reviewed the rules in light of the regulatory analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined that the rules are not subject to §2001.0225, because they do not meet the criteria for a "major environmental rule" as defined in that statute.

A "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 specific intent of the rules is to make public meetings on applications for new, major amendments, or Class 3 modifications for hazardous waste management facilities or new municipal solid waste management facilities discretionary. It is not anticipated that the rules will 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 commission concludes that these rules do not meet the definition of a major environmental rule.

Furthermore, even if the rules did meet the definition of a major environmental rule, the rules are not subject to Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, because they do not meet any of the four applicable requirements specified in §2001.0225(a). Section 2001.0225(a) applies to a rule adopted by an agency, 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.

In this case, the rules do not meet any of these requirements. First, the applicable federal standard calls for discretionary public meetings if there is a significant degree of public interest in a draft permit (40 Code of Federal Regulations §124.12(a)). Second, the rules do not exceed an express requirement of state law in Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.0666(a), 361.0791(a) and (b), and 361.082(d), as amended by HB 1609. Third, there is no delegation agreement that would be exceeded by the rules. Fourth, the commission adopts these rules under the specific authority of Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.0666(a), 361.0791(a) and (b), and 361.082(d). These rules are also adopted under the authority of Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.011, 361.017, and 361.024, which provide the commission the authority to adopt rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act. Therefore, the commission does not adopt these rules solely under the commission's general powers.

The commission invited public comment on the draft regulatory impact analysis determination. No comments were received.

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The commission evaluated these rules and performed a preliminary assessment of whether the rules constitute a taking under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007. The specific purpose of the rules is to make public meetings for solid waste applications discretionary. The rules would substantially advance this stated purpose by making public meetings on solid waste applications subject to the same discretionary standards used for other waste programs.

Promulgation and enforcement of these rules would be neither a statutory nor a constitutional taking of private real property because the rules do not affect real property. These rules exercise commission jurisdiction over public meetings for municipal solid waste and hazardous waste applications.

There are no burdens imposed on private real property, and the benefits to society are more efficient use of agency staff resources in avoiding public meetings where no one from the public attends. In addition, the rules do not burden, restrict, or limit an owner's right to property or reduce its value by 25% or more beyond that which would otherwise exist in the absence of the regulation. Therefore, these rules will not constitute a taking under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007.

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The commission reviewed the adopted rules and found that they are neither identified in Coastal Coordination Act Implementation Rules, 31 TAC §505.11(b)(2) or (4), nor will they affect any action or authorization identified in Coastal Coordination Act Implementation Rules, 31 TAC §505.11(a)(6). Therefore, the adopted rules are not subject to the Texas Coastal Management Program.

PUBLIC COMMENT

The proposed rules were published for comment in the March 24, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 2403). No public hearing was held. The comment period closed April 24, 2006. A comment was received from the appointed representative from Red River County on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee of the Ark-Tex Council of Governments.

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

Comment

The representative from Red River County commented that by making the public meeting requirement discretionary, no public meetings would occur. He asked that "shall" be preserved in the rule.

Response

The commission disagrees with this comment. The executive director’s discretion is restricted by §55.154 that requires the executive director or the Office of Public Assistance to hold a public meeting if the executive director determines that there is a substantial or significant degree of public interest in an application or if a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located requests that a public meeting be held. In addition, new language defines "substantial public interest" in terms of a local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal resolution of the entity's governing body; a council of governments with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal request of either the council's solid waste advisory committee, executive committee, or governing board; a homeowners' or property owners' association formally organized or chartered and having at least ten members located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located; or a group of ten or more local residents, property owners, or businesses located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located.

No changes to the proposed rule were made in response to comments.

Subchapter I. PUBLIC NOTICE OF SOLID WASTE APPLICATIONS

30 TAC §39.501, §39.503

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The amendments are adopted under Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.0666, 361.0791, and 361.082, as amended by HB 1609, which makes public meetings on solid waste applications discretionary; §361.011, which establishes the commission's jurisdiction over all aspects of the management of municipal solid waste with all powers necessary or convenient to carry out the responsibilities of that jurisdiction; §361.017, which establishes the commission's jurisdiction over all aspects of the management of industrial solid waste and hazardous municipal waste with all powers necessary or convenient to carry out the responsibilities of that jurisdiction; and §361.024, which provides the commission with rulemaking authority.

The adopted amendments implement HB 1609, which amended Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.0666, 361.0791, and 361.082.

§39.501.Application for Municipal Solid Waste Permit.

(a) Applicability. This section applies to applications for municipal solid waste permits that are declared administratively complete on or after September 1, 1999.

(b) Preapplication local review committee process. If an applicant for a municipal solid waste permit decides to participate in a local review committee process under Texas Health and Safety Code, §361.063, the applicant shall submit to the executive director a notice of intent to file an application, setting forth the proposed location and type of facility. The executive director shall mail notice to the county judge of the county in which the facility is to be located. If the proposed facility is to be located in a municipality or the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, a copy of the notice must also be mailed to the mayor of the municipality. The executive director shall also mail notice to the appropriate regional solid waste planning agency or council of government. The mailing must be by certified mail.

(c) Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain a Permit.

(1) Upon the executive director's receipt of an application, or notice of intent to file an application, the chief clerk shall mail notice to the state senator and representative who represent the area in which the facility is or will be located.

(2) After the executive director determines that the application is administratively complete:

(A) notice must be given as required by §39.418 of this title (relating to Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit) and, if a newspaper is not published in the county, then the applicant shall publish notice in a newspaper of circulation in the immediate vicinity in which the facility is located or proposed to be located. This notice must contain the text as required by §39.411(b)(1) - (9), (11), and (12) of this title (relating to Text of Public Notice);

(B) the chief clerk shall publish Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit in the Texas Register ; and

(C) the executive director or chief clerk shall mail the Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit, along with a copy of the application or summary of its contents to the mayor and health authority of a municipality in whose territorial limits or extraterritorial jurisdiction the solid waste facility is located, and to the county judge and the health authority of the county in which the facility is located.

(d) Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision. The notice required by §39.419 of this title (relating to Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision) must be published once as required by §39.405(f)(2) of this title (relating to General Notice Provisions). The notice must be published after the chief clerk has mailed the Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision to the applicant. The notice must contain the text as required by §39.411(c)(1) - (6) of this title.

(e) Notice of public meeting.

(1) If an application for a new facility is filed before September 1, 2005:

(A) the agency shall hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application; and

(B) the applicant shall hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located. This meeting must be held before the 45th day after the date the application is filed.

(2) If an application for a new facility is filed on or after September 1, 2005:

(A) the agency:

(i) may hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title (relating to Public Meetings) in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application; but

(ii) shall hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application:

(I) on the request of a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is proposed to be located; or

(II) if the executive director determines that there is substantial public interest in the proposed facility; and

(B) the applicant may hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located.

(3) For purposes of this subsection, "substantial public interest" is demonstrated if a request for a public meeting is filed by:

(A) a local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is proposed to be located by formal resolution of the entity's governing body;

(B) a council of governments with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is proposed to be located by formal request of either the council's solid waste advisory committee, executive committee, or governing board;

(C) a homeowners' or property owners' association formally organized or chartered and having at least ten members located in the general area in which the facility is proposed to be located; or

(D) a group of ten or more local residents, property owners, or businesses located in the general area in which the facility is proposed to be located.

(4) A public meeting is not a contested case proceeding under the Administrative Procedure Act. A public meeting held as part of a local review committee process under subsection (b) of this section meets the requirements of paragraph (1)(A) or (2)(A) of this subsection if public notice is provided under this subsection.

(5) The applicant shall publish notice of any public meeting under this subsection, in accordance with §39.405(f)(2) of this title, once each week during the three weeks preceding a public meeting. The published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters). For public meetings under paragraph (1)(B) or (2)(B) of this subsection, the notice of public meeting is not subject to §39.411(d) of this title, but instead must contain at least the following information:

(A) permit application number;

(B) applicant's name;

(C) proposed location of the facility;

(D) location and availability of copies of the application;

(E) location, date, and time of the public meeting; and

(F) name, address, and telephone number of the contact person for the applicant from whom interested persons may obtain further information.

(6) For public meetings held by the agency under paragraph (1)(A) or (2)(A) of this subsection, the chief clerk shall mail notice to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title (relating to Mailed Notice).

(f) Notice of hearing.

(1) This subsection applies if an application is referred to the State Office of Administrative Hearings for a contested case hearing under Chapter 80 of this title (relating to Contested Case Hearings).

(2) The applicant shall publish notice at least once under §39.405(f)(2) of this title.

(3) Mailed notice.

(A) If the applicant proposes a new facility, the applicant shall mail notice of the hearing to each residential or business address located within 1/2 mile of the facility and to each owner of real property located within 1/2 mile of the facility listed in the real property appraisal records of the appraisal district in which the facility is located. The notice must be mailed to the persons listed as owners in the real property appraisal records on the date the application is determined to be administratively complete. The notice must be mailed no more than 45 days and no less than 30 days before the hearing. Within 30 days after the date of mailing, the applicant shall file with the chief clerk an affidavit certifying compliance with its obligations under this subsection. Filing an affidavit certifying facts that constitute compliance with notice requirements creates a rebuttable presumption of compliance with this subparagraph.

(B) If the applicant proposes to amend a permit, the chief clerk shall mail notice to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title.

(4) Notice under paragraphs (2) and (3)(B) of this subsection must be completed at least 30 days before the hearing.

§39.503.Application for Industrial or Hazardous Waste Facility Permit.

(a) Applicability. This section applies to applications for industrial or hazardous waste facility permits that are declared administratively complete on or after September 1, 1999.

(b) Preapplication requirements.

(1) If an applicant for an industrial or hazardous waste facility permit decides to participate in a local review committee process under Texas Health and Safety Code, §361.063, the applicant shall submit a notice of intent to file an application to the executive director, setting forth the proposed location and type of facility. The applicant shall mail notice to the county judge of the county in which the facility is to be located. If the proposed facility is to be located in a municipality or the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, a copy of the notice must also be mailed to the mayor of the municipality. Mailed notice must be by certified mail. When the applicant submits the notice of intent to the executive director, the applicant shall publish notice of the submission in a paper of general circulation in the county in which the facility is to be located.

(2) The requirements of this paragraph are set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §124.31(b) - (d), which is adopted by reference as amended and adopted in the CFR through December 11, 1995, (60 FR 63417) and apply to all hazardous waste part B applications for initial permits for hazardous waste management units, hazardous waste part B permit applications for major amendments, and hazardous waste part B applications for renewal of permits, where the renewal application is proposing a significant change in facility operations. For the purposes of this paragraph, a "significant change" is any change that would qualify as a Class 3 permit modification under §305.69 of this title (relating to Solid Waste Permit Modification at the Request of the Permittee). The requirements of this paragraph do not apply to an application for minor amendment under §305.62 of this title (relating to Amendment), correction under §50.45 of this title (relating to Corrections to Permits), or modification under §305.69 of this title, or to an application that is submitted for the sole purpose of conducting post-closure activities or post-closure activities and corrective action at a facility, unless the application is also for an initial permit for hazardous waste management unit(s), or the application is also for renewal of the permit, where the renewal application is proposing a significant change in facility operations.

(c) Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit.

(1) Upon the executive director’s receipt of an application, or notice of intent to file an application, the chief clerk shall mail notice to the state senator and representative who represent the area in which the facility is or will be located and to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title (relating to Mailed Notice). For all hazardous waste part B applications for initial permits for hazardous waste management units, hazardous waste part B permit applications for major amendments, and hazardous waste part B applications for renewal of permits, the chief clerk shall provide notice to meet the requirements of this subsection and 40 CFR §124.32(b), which is adopted by reference as amended and adopted in the CFR through December 11, 1995, (60 FR 63417) and the executive director shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR §124.32(c), which is adopted by reference as amended and adopted in the CFR through December 11, 1995, (60 FR 63417). The requirements of this paragraph relating to 40 CFR §124.32(b) and (c) do not apply to an application for minor amendment under §305.62 of this title, correction under §50.45 of this title, or modification under §305.69 of this title, or to an application that is submitted for the sole purpose of conducting post-closure activities or post-closure activities and corrective action at a facility, unless the application is also for an initial permit for hazardous waste management unit(s), or the application is also for renewal of the permit.

(2) After the executive director determines that the application is administratively complete:

(A) notice must be given as required by §39.418 of this title (relating to Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit). Notice under §39.418 of this title will satisfy the notice of receipt of application required by §281.17(d) of this title (relating to Notice of Receipt of Application and Declaration of Administrative Completeness); and

(B) the executive director or chief clerk shall mail notice of this determination along with a copy of the application or summary of its contents to the mayor and health authority of a municipality in whose territorial limits or extraterritorial jurisdiction the solid waste facility is located, and to the county judge and the health authority of the county in which the facility is located.

(d) Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision. The notice required by §39.419 of this title (relating to Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision) must be published once as required by §39.405(f)(2) of this title (relating to General Notice Provisions). In addition to the requirements of §39.405(h) and §39.419 of this title, the following requirements apply.

(1) The applicant shall publish notice at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in each county that is adjacent or contiguous to each county in which the facility is located. One notice may satisfy the requirements of §39.405(f)(2) of this title and of this subsection, if the newspaper meets the requirements of both rules.

(2) If the application concerns a hazardous waste facility, the applicant shall broadcast notice of the application on one or more local radio stations that broadcast to an area that includes all of the county in which the facility is located. The executive director may require that the broadcasts be made to an area that also includes contiguous counties.

(3) The notice must comply with §39.411 of this title (relating to Text of Public Notice). The deadline for public comments on industrial solid waste applications will be not less than 30 days after newspaper publication, and for hazardous waste applications, not less than 45 days after newspaper publication.

(e) Notice of public meeting.

(1) If an application for a new hazardous waste facility is filed:

(A) before September 1, 2005, the agency shall hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application; or

(B) on or after September 1, 2005, the agency:

(i) may hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title (relating to Public Meetings) in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application; but

(ii) shall hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning this application:

(I) on the request of a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is proposed to be located; or

(II) if the executive director determines that there is substantial public interest in the proposed facility.

(2) If an application for a major amendment to or a Class 3 modification of an existing hazardous waste facility permit is filed:

(A) before September 1, 2005, the agency shall hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is located to receive public comment concerning the application if a person affected files a request for a public meeting with the chief clerk concerning the application before the deadline to file public comment or hearing requests; or

(B) on or after September 1, 2005, the agency:

(i) may hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title in the county in which the facility is located to receive public comment concerning the application; but

(ii) shall hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title in the county in which the facility is located to receive public comment concerning the application:

(I) on the request of a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located; or

(II) if the executive director determines that there is substantial public interest in the facility.

(3) For purposes of this subsection, "substantial public interest" is demonstrated if a request for a public meeting is filed by:

(A) a local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal resolution of the entity's governing body;

(B) a council of governments with jurisdiction over the location at which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal request of either the council's solid waste advisory committee, executive committee, or governing board;

(C) a homeowners( or property owners( association formally organized or chartered and having at least ten members located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located; or

(D) a group of ten or more local residents, property owners, or businesses located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located.

(4) If an application for a new industrial or hazardous waste facility that would accept municipal solid waste is filed:

(A) before September 1, 2005, the applicant shall hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located. This meeting must be held before the 45th day after the date the application is filed; or

(B) on or after September 1, 2005, the applicant may hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located.

(5) A public meeting is not a contested case proceeding under the Administrative Procedure Act. A public meeting held as part of a local review committee process under subsection (b) of this section meets the requirements of paragraph (1) or (2) of this subsection if public notice is provided under this subsection.

(6) The applicant shall publish notice of any public meeting under this subsection, in accordance with §39.405(f)(2) of this title, once each week during the three weeks preceding a public meeting. The published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters). For public meetings under paragraph (3) of this subsection, the notice of public meeting is not subject to §39.411(d) of this title, but instead must contain at least the following information:

(A) permit application number;

(B) applicant’s name;

(C) proposed location of the facility;

(D) location and availability of copies of the application;

(E) location, date, and time of the public meeting; and

(F) name, address, and telephone number of the contact person for the applicant from whom interested persons may obtain further information.

(7) For public meetings held by the agency under paragraph (1) or (2) of this subsection, the chief clerk shall mail notice to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title.

(f) Notice of hearing.

(1) Applicability. This subsection applies if an application is referred to the State Office of Administrative Hearings for a contested case hearing under Chapter 80 of this title (concerning Contested Case Hearings).

(2) Newspaper notice.

(A) The applicant shall publish notice at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the facility is located and in each county and area that is adjacent or contiguous to each county in which the proposed facility is located.

(B) If the application concerns a hazardous waste facility, the hearing must include one session held in the county in which the facility is located. The applicant shall publish notice of the hearing once each week during the three weeks preceding the hearing under §39.405(f)(2) of this title. The published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters) or have a total size of at least nine column inches (18 square inches). The text of the notice must include the statement that at least one session of the hearing will be held in the county in which the facility is located.

(3) Mailed notice.

(A) If the applicant proposes a new solid waste management facility, the applicant shall mail notice to each residential or business address located within 1/2 mile of the facility and to each owner of real property located within 1/2 mile of the facility listed in the real property appraisal records of the appraisal district in which the facility is located. The notice must be mailed to the persons listed as owners in the real property appraisal records on the date the application is determined to be administratively complete. The chief clerk shall mail notice to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title, except that the chief clerk shall not mail notice to the persons listed in paragraph (1) of that section. The notice must be mailed no more than 45 days and no less than 30 days before the hearing. Within 30 days after the date of mailing, the applicant shall file with the chief clerk an affidavit certifying compliance with its obligations under this subsection. Filing an affidavit certifying facts that constitute compliance with notice requirements creates a rebuttable presumption of compliance with this subparagraph.

(B) If the applicant proposes to amend or renew an existing permit, the chief clerk shall mail notice to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title.

(4) Radio broadcast. If the application concerns a hazardous waste facility, the applicant shall broadcast notice of the hearing under subsection (d)(2) of this section.

(5) Deadline. Notice under paragraphs (2)(A), (3), and (4) of this subsection must be completed at least 30 days before the hearing.

(g) Injection wells. This section does not apply to applications for an injection well permit.

(h) Information repository. The requirements of 40 CFR §124.33(b) - (f), which is adopted by reference as amended and adopted in the CFR through December 11, 1995, (60 FR 63417) apply to all applications for hazardous waste permits.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 29, 2006.

TRD-200603520

Robert Martinez

Acting Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Effective date: July 19, 2006

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017


Subchapter L. PUBLIC NOTICE OF INJECTION WELL AND OTHER SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS

30 TAC §39.651

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The amendment is adopted under Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.0666, 361.0791, and 361.082, as amended by HB 1609, which makes public meetings on solid waste applications discretionary; §361.011, which establishes the commission's jurisdiction over all aspects of the management of municipal solid waste with all powers necessary or convenient to carry out the responsibilities of that jurisdiction; §361.017, which establishes the commission's jurisdiction over all aspects of the management of industrial solid waste and hazardous municipal waste with all powers necessary or convenient to carry out the responsibilities of that jurisdiction; and §361.024, which provides the commission with rulemaking authority.

The adopted amendment implements HB 1609, which amended Texas Health and Safety Code, §§361.0666, 361.0791, and 361.082.

§39.651.Application for Injection Well Permit.

(a) Applicability. This subchapter applies to applications for injection well permits that are declared administratively complete on or after September 1, 1999.

(b) Preapplication local review committee process. If an applicant decides to participate in a local review committee process under Texas Health and Safety Code, §361.063, the applicant shall submit a notice of intent to file an application to the executive director, setting forth the proposed location and type of facility. The applicant shall mail notice to the county judge of the county in which the facility is to be located. In addition, if the proposed facility is to be located in a municipality or the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, a copy of the notice must be mailed to the mayor of the municipality.

(c) Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain Permit.

(1) On the executive director’s receipt of an application, or notice of intent to file an application, the chief clerk shall mail notice to the state senator and representative who represent the area in which the facility is or will be located.

(2) After the executive director determines that the application is administratively complete, notice must be given as required by §39.418 of this title (relating to Notice of Receipt of Application and Intent to Obtain a Permit). This notice must contain the text as required by §39.411(b)(1) - (9) and (12) of this title (relating to Text of Public Notice). Notice under §39.418 of this title will satisfy the notice of receipt of application required by §281.17(d) of this title (relating to Notice of Receipt of Application and Declaration of Administrative Completeness).

(3) After the executive director determines that the application is administratively complete, in addition to the requirements of §39.418 of this title, notice must be given to the School Land Board, if the application will affect lands dedicated to the permanent school fund. The notice must be in the form required by Texas Water Code, §5.115(c).

(4) For notice of receipt of application and intent to obtain a permit concerning Class I underground injection wells, the chief clerk shall also mail notice to:

(A) persons who own the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located, if different from the applicant;

(B) landowners adjacent to the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located;

(C) persons who own mineral rights underlying the existing or proposed injection well facility; and

(D) persons who own mineral rights underlying the tracts of land adjacent to the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located.

(5) The chief clerk or executive director shall also mail a copy of the application or a summary of its contents to the mayor and health authority of a municipality in whose territorial limits or extraterritorial jurisdiction the solid waste facility is located and to the county judge and the health authority of the county in which the facility is located.

(6) For Class I underground injection wells, the published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters) and the notice must appear in the section of the newspaper containing state or local news items.

(d) Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision. The notice required by §39.419 of this title (relating to Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision) must be published once under §39.405(f)(2) of this title (relating to General Notice Provisions) after the chief clerk has mailed the preliminary decision and the Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision to the applicant. This notice must contain the text as required by §39.411(c)(1) - (6) of this title. In addition to the requirements of §39.405(h) and §39.419 of this title, the following requirements apply.

(1) The applicant shall publish notice at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in each county that is adjacent or contiguous to each county in which the proposed facility is located. One notice may satisfy the requirements of §39.405(f)(2) of this title and of this subsection, if the newspaper meets the requirements of both rules.

(2) For Class I underground injection wells, the published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters) and the notice must appear in the section of the newspaper containing state or local news items.

(3) The chief clerk shall mail notice to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title (relating to Mailed Notice) and to local governments located in the county of the facility. "Local governments" have the meaning as defined in Texas Water Code, Chapter 26.

(4) For Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision concerning Class I underground injection wells, the chief clerk shall also mail notice to:

(A) persons who own the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located, if different from the applicant;

(B) landowners adjacent to the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located;

(C) persons who own mineral rights underlying the existing or proposed injection well facility; and

(D) persons who own mineral rights underlying the tracts of land adjacent to the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located.

(5) If the application concerns a hazardous waste facility, the applicant shall broadcast notice under §39.503(d)(2) of this title (relating to Application for Industrial or Hazardous Waste Facility Permit).

(6) The deadline for public comments on industrial solid waste applications will be not less than 30 days after newspaper publication, and for hazardous waste applications, not less than 45 days after newspaper publication.

(e) Notice of public meeting.

(1) If an application for a new hazardous waste facility is filed:

(A) before September 1, 2005, the agency shall hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application; or

(B) on or after September 1, 2005, the agency:

(i) may hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title (relating to Public Meetings) in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application; but

(ii) shall hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title in the county in which the facility is proposed to be located to receive public comment concerning the application:

(I) on the request of a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is proposed to be located; or

(II) if the executive director determines that there is substantial public interest in the proposed facility.

(2) If an application for a major amendment to or a Class 3 modification of an existing hazardous waste facility permit is filed:

(A) before September 1, 2005, the agency shall hold a public meeting in the county in which the facility is located to receive public comment on the application if a person affected files with the chief clerk a request for a public meeting concerning the application before the deadline to file public comment or to file requests for reconsideration or hearing; or

(B) on or after September 1, 2005, the agency:

(i) may hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title in the county in which the facility is located to receive public comment on the application; but

(ii) shall hold a public meeting under §55.154 of this title in the county in which the facility is located to receive public comment concerning the application:

(I) on the request of a member of the legislature who represents the general area in which the facility is located; or

(II) if the executive director determines that there is substantial public interest in the facility.

(3) For purposes of this subsection, "substantial public interest" is demonstrated if a request for a public meeting is filed by:

(A) a local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the location in which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal resolution of the entity's governing body;

(B) a council of governments with jurisdiction over the location in which the facility is located or proposed to be located by formal request of either the council’s solid waste advisory committee, executive committee, or governing board;

(C) a homeowners’ or property owners’ association formally organized or chartered and having at least ten members located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located; or

(D) a group of ten or more local residents, property owners, or businesses located in the general area in which the facility is located or proposed to be located.

(4) A public meeting is not a contested case proceeding under the Administrative Procedure Act. A public meeting held as part of a local review committee process under subsection (a) of this section meets the requirements of this subsection if public notice is provided in accordance with this subsection.

(5) The applicant shall publish notice of the public meeting once each week during the three weeks preceding a public meeting under §39.405(f)(2) of this title. The published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters).

(6) The chief clerk shall mail notice to the persons listed in §39.413 of this title.

(f) Notice of contested case hearing.

(1) Applicability. This subsection applies if an application is referred to the State Office of Administrative Hearings for a contested case hearing under Chapter 80 of this title (relating to Contested Case Hearings).

(2) Newspaper notice.

(A) If the application concerns a facility other than a hazardous waste facility, the applicant shall publish notice at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the facility is located and in each county and area that is adjacent or contiguous to each county in which the proposed facility is located.

(B) For Class I underground injection wells, the published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters) and the notice must appear in the section of the newspaper containing state or local news items.

(C) If the application concerns a hazardous waste facility, the hearing must include one session held in the county in which the facility is located. The applicant shall publish notice of the hearing once each week during the three weeks preceding the hearing under §39.405(f)(2) of this title. The published notice must be at least 15 square inches (96.8 square centimeters) with a shortest dimension of at least three inches (7.6 centimeters). The notice must appear in the section of the newspaper containing state or local news items. The text of the notice must include the statement that at least one session of the hearing will be held in the county in which the facility is located.

(3) Mailed notice.

(A) For all applications concerning underground injection wells, the chief clerk shall mail notice to persons listed in §39.413 of this title.

(B) For notice of hearings concerning Class I underground injection wells, the chief clerk shall also mail notice to:

(i) persons who own the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located, if different from the applicant;

(ii) landowners adjacent to the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located;

(iii) persons who own mineral rights underlying the existing or proposed injection well facility; and

(iv) persons who own mineral rights underlying the tracts of land adjacent to the property on which the existing or proposed injection well facility is or will be located.

(C) If the applicant proposes a new solid waste management facility, the applicant shall mail notice to each residential or business address, not listed under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, located within 1/2 mile of the facility and to each owner of real property located within 1/2 mile of the facility listed in the real property appraisal records of the appraisal district in which the facility is located. The notice must be mailed to the persons listed as owners in the real property appraisal records on the date the application is determined to be administratively complete. The notice must be mailed no more than 45 days and no less than 30 days before the contested case hearing. Within 30 days after the date of mailing, the applicant shall file with the chief clerk an affidavit certifying compliance with its obligations under this subsection. Filing an affidavit certifying facts that constitute compliance with notice requirements creates a rebuttable presumption of compliance with this subparagraph.

(4) Radio broadcast. If the application concerns a hazardous waste facility, the applicant shall broadcast notice under §39.503(d)(2) of this title.

(5) Deadline. Notice under paragraphs (2)(A), (3), and (4) of this subsection must be completed at least 30 days before the contested case hearing.

(g) Approval. All published notices required by this section must be in a form approved by the executive director prior to publication.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 29, 2006.

TRD-200603521

Robert Martinez

Acting Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Effective date: July 19, 2006

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017


Chapter 111. CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM VISIBLE EMISSIONS AND PARTICULATE MATTER

Subchapter B. OUTDOOR BURNING

30 TAC §111.203, §111.209

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ or commission) adopts amendments to §111.203 and §111.209. Section 111.209 is adopted with change to the proposed text as published in the February 10, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 819). Section 111.203 is adopted without change to the proposed text and the text will not be republished.

The amended sections will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP).

BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE ADOPTED RULES

House Bill (HB) 39, 79th Legislature, 2005, amended Texas Health and Safety Code (THSC), §382.018, Outdoor Burning of Waste and Combustible Material, by making it subject to Local Government Code, §352.082, Outdoor Burning of Household Refuse in Certain Residential Areas. Under Local Government Code, §352.082, a person commits a Class C misdemeanor if the person intentionally or knowingly burns household refuse outdoors on a lot that is located in a neighborhood or on a lot that is smaller than five acres. Local Government Code, §352.082, is applicable only to the unincorporated area of a county that is adjacent to a county with a population of 3.3 million or more, in which a planned community is located that has 20,000 or more acres of land that was originally established under the Urban Growth and New Community Development Act of 1970 (42 United States Code, §§4501 et seq .) and that is subject to restrictive covenants containing ad valorem or annual variable budget-based assessments on real property. The adopted rules will prohibit the burning of household refuse in the area delineated by Local Government Code, §352.082.

Senate Bill (SB) 1710, 79th Legislature, 2005, also amended THSC, §382.018, by adding subsections (b) and (c), which require the commission to authorize by rule the burning of waste consisting of plant growth in areas that meet the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and do not contain any part of a city that does not meet the NAAQS if the waste is burned on the property of origin and by the owner of the property or any other person authorized by the owner. The commission is prohibited from requiring prior commission approval of the burning, or from authorizing the burning only when no practical alternative exists. Current rules do not make a distinction between attainment and nonattainment areas regarding outdoor disposal fires. The adopted rules will implement the authorization by rule required by THSC, §382.018.

SB 1710 also amended THSC, §382.018, by adding subsections (d) and (e), which prohibit the commission from controlling or prohibiting outdoor burning of waste consisting of plant growth at a site designated for burning of waste generated from specific residential properties located outside of a municipality and in a county with a population of less than 50,000, if supervised by a fire department employee acting in the scope of the person's employment. The current rules do not authorize the burning of waste at designated sites. The adopted rules will establish minimal compliance determination criteria to ensure that all activities meet the qualifications for burns at designated sites. The commission notes that only three counties, Chambers, Hardin, and Rockwall, are within designated nonattainment areas and have a population of less than 50,000. Burning of domestic waste, including plant growth, is already authorized in these counties for private residences when collection of domestic waste is not provided or authorized by the local governmental entity having jurisdiction. To the commission's best available knowledge, no residential properties outside of municipalities in these counties are provided with domestic waste collection by the local governmental entity having jurisdiction. Therefore, the adopted rules will not cause an increase in plant growth burning in designated nonattainment areas.

DEMONSTRATING NONINTERFERENCE UNDER FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT, SECTION 110(l)

Issue

The commission provides the following information to clarify why the amendments to §111.203 and §111.209 and the Texas SIP, will not negatively impact the status of the state's attainment areas.

The requirement for reasonable notice and public hearing is satisfied through the hearing held on March 7, 2006, and the public comment period, which was held from February 10, 2006, to March 13, 2006. EPA also issued draft guidance on June 8, 2005, "Demonstrating noninterference Under Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act When Revising a State Implementation Plan." The guidance states (page 6) that ". . .areas have two options available to demonstrate noninterference for the affected pollutant(s)." This document provides detail of the identified existing measures in the rule preamble to show compliance with option (1) of EPA's guidance: Substitution of one measure by another with equivalent or greater emissions reduction/air quality benefits.

Background

In September 1996 (21 TexReg 8505), the commission approved revisions to the Texas outdoor burning regulations by repealing §§111.101, 111.103, 111.105, and 111.107 and adopting §§101.201-101.221, 111.201, 111.203, 111.205, 111.207, 111.209, 111.211, 111.213, 111.215, 111.219 and 111.221. In October 1999 (64 FR 57983), EPA took a direct final action to approve these revisions to the state's outdoor burning regulations as amendments to the SIP. However, EPA received an adverse comment regarding the amendments and, therefore, withdrew the direct final rulemaking in December 1999 (64 FR 70592). EPA is now in the process of reviewing that action.

As this rulemaking is a revision of regulations currently under review and consideration by EPA for inclusion in the Texas SIP, the commission is asking EPA to review these revisions to §111.203 and §111.209 for inclusion in the SIP, concurrently with the previously submitted outdoor burning regulations.

Analysis of Revisions

a) Revision of §111.203 adds the definitions of "Neighborhood" and "Refuse" as repeated from THSC, §343.002. No air control measures have been removed.

b) Revisions to §111.209.

1) Section 111.209 has been made subject to Local Government Code, §352.082, which classifies certain types of outdoor burning as a Class C misdemeanor. This revision is more restrictive than current outdoor burning rules, which do not prohibit outdoor burning in the area specified in amended Local Government Code, §352.082 (Montgomery County). Furthermore, the adoption of this rule revision and/or the SIP has no bearing on the implementation and enforcement of Local Government Code, §352.082. No air control measures have been removed.

2) THSC, §382.018(d) was amended to prohibit the commission from controlling or prohibiting outdoor burning of waste consisting of plant growth generated from specific residential properties on designated sites outside of a municipality and in counties with a population of less than 50,000. THSC, §382.018(d) is self-implementing. To address the statutory amendment, §111.209(5) authorizes outdoor burning at certain sites as designated by the property owner. However, this revision merely consolidates currently authorized outdoor burning, and does not authorize an increase in outdoor burning frequency. Burning waste consisting of plant growth generated from residential properties within the county but outside of municipalities is currently authorized under §111.209(1) as burning of domestic waste. To the commission's best available knowledge, county jurisdictions do not regularly provide domestic waste collection as that service is ordinarily provided by a municipality. The revision provides an option allowing homeowners to consolidate yard waste at a designated site before burning, rather than having many smaller fires throughout the neighborhood. Furthermore, the revision places additional restrictions on outdoor burning at such a designated site than currently exist for burning of domestic waste. Specifically, the revision requires mandatory notice to the commission prior to the burn and requires supervision by a fire department employee who is part of the fire protection personnel, as defined by Texas Government Code, §419.021, that is acting in the scope of that person's employment. The required supervision of a fire department employee for each burn imposes limits on the frequency and number of outdoor burns and, therefore, would not constitute a relaxation of the SIP. No air control measures have been removed.

3) THSC, §382.018(b) was amended to require the commission to authorize by rule the burning of waste consisting of plant growth on the property of origin, if in an area that meets the NAAQS. Section 111.209(4)(B) authorizes the burning of plant growth on the property of origin in most areas of attainment, regardless of the type of activity that produced the waste. Current rules authorize the burning of waste plant growth on the property of origin, but limit activities to right-of-way maintenance, landclearing operations, and maintenance along water canals, and only when no practical alternative to burning exists.

However, most activities that generate plant waste are the result of right-of-way maintenance, landclearing operations, maintenance along water canals, or domestic activities. Plant waste generated from all of these activities is currently authorized. Therefore, no restriction on the type of activity for which waste plant growth may be burned has been removed.

THSC, §382.018(c) was amended to prohibit rules adopted under THSC, §382.018(b) from 1) requiring prior approval of the burn; and 2) authorizing the burning only when no practical alternative to burning exists. The removal of the requirement to burn only when no practical alternative to burning exists does not constitute the removal of a practical or effective air control measure. In response to comments during the 1996 rulemaking (21 Tex Reg 8509), the commission stated that "The commission's intent. . .is to foster an analysis of practical alternatives prior to burning." The current rule does not require approval of the practical alternative analysis prior to burning. Once the responsible party has determined that alternatives are not practical, it is unreasonable to dispute the determination due to the broad and vague nature of the definition of practical alternative, per §111.101(4) (formerly §111.101(3)), "An economically, technologically, ecologically, and logistically viable option." TCEQ guidance document RG-049, Appendix D, states that when evaluating these four criteria the standard of judgment should be that of a "reasonable person." Therefore, practical alternative does not constitute an air control measure, but rather a measure to foster an analysis prior to burning, as was the commission's intent. To demonstrate this, there is no record in the commission's compliance database of any Notices of Violation or Enforcement for violation of the practical alternative clause. Actions on record regarding outdoor burning cite the burning of inappropriate material, burning in unauthorized locations, burning under unauthorized conditions (e.g. high winds, inappropriate hours, proximity to receptors, etc.), burning of domestic waste where waste collection is provided, or causing nuisance conditions. This further demonstrates that the appropriate air control measures to ensure noninterference with the Texas SIP are in place. Additionally, the commission stated during the 1996 rulemaking and in RG-049 that "The use of trench burners is a practical alternative under certain circumstances." The use of trench burners has not been demonstrated to significantly increase burning efficiency, but is rather a method used to prevent nuisance conditions. Therefore, the removal of practical alternative does not imply an increase in the quantity of material that may be burned, or an increase in air contaminants resulting from burning.

Finally, the current rule is subject to all of the air control measures in §111.219. The revised rules, for areas in attainment, are subject to the air control measures in §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7), and subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town, consistent with Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments. The revised rules, for areas in nonattainment, maintain all of the air control measures in §111.219.

The commission does not anticipate increased burning or a relaxation of the Texas SIP for those municipalities in areas of attainment. Municipalities in areas of attainment remain subject to the prohibitions on outdoor burning in §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7), which list prohibited burn materials, specify appropriate weather conditions, and prohibit causing adverse effects to any thoroughfares or off-site sensitive receptors. The adopted rules will confer control of allowable outdoor burning to local authorities but require that ordinances prohibiting or regulating outdoor burning comply with the TCAA, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments. Regardless of whether in areas of attainment or nonattainment, persons conducting outdoor burns remain responsible for any consequences, damages, or injuries resulting from the burning in accordance with §111.221, Responsibility for Consequences of Outdoor Burning.

Conclusion

In addition to the above analysis of the rule, §101.4, General Nuisance, continues to provide a determination for whether an air contaminant release is a nuisance. The commission determined that there are sufficient rules and procedures in place to assure compliance with the Texas SIP, and that sufficient air control measures exist in this rulemaking so as not to constitute a relaxation of the Texas SIP.

SECTION BY SECTION DISCUSSION

Administrative and grammatical changes are adopted throughout the sections to bring the existing rule language into agreement with Texas Register requirements, agency guidelines, and guidance provided in the Texas Legislative Council Drafting Manual , November 2004.

The adopted amendment to §111.203, Definitions, adds the definition of "Neighborhood" and "Refuse" and renumbers subsequent definitions to accommodate the adopted new definitions. The adopted new definitions are repeated from THSC, §343.002.

The adopted amendment to §111.203 will also update the name "Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission" to "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality."

The adopted amendment to §111.209, Exception for Disposal Fires, is made subject to Local Government Code, §352.082. The proposed rule repeated Local Government Code, §352.082, in proposed subsection (b). All of adopted §111.209 is instead made subject directly to Local Government Code, §352.082. Local law enforcement will be the primary authority in the enforcement of Local Government Code, §352.082.

The adopted amendment to §111.209 also authorizes, as required by THSC, §382.018(b), the burning of plant growth on the property on which it was generated and by the owner of the property, or any person authorized by the owner, in counties that are not designated as nonattainment and that do not contain any part of a city that is part of a designated nonattainment area, by adding adopted new paragraph (4)(B), proposed as subsection (a)(4)(B). The adopted rule expands the existing options for on-site burning of plant growth in most attainment areas by removing the requirement to consider practical alternatives and by allowing on-site burning of plant growth by all property owners, rather than only for right-of-way maintenance, landclearing operations, and maintenance along waterways. The adopted rule, §111.209(4)(B), is subject to §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7), and subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town, consistent with TCAA, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments.

The adopted paragraph (4) does not expand the existing options for on-site burning of plant growth in nonattainment areas. Paragraph (4)(A), proposed as subsection (a)(4)(A), will continue to authorize burning in nonattainment areas, but only for right-of-way maintenance, landclearing operations, and maintenance along water canals, and only in the absence of a practical alternative. When proposed, subsection (a)(4)(A) covered the entire state. The adopted rule, §111.209(4)(A), is subject to §111.219.

The context of "plant growth" has been expanded in paragraph (4) to match the language used in SB 1710. When proposed, subsection (a)(4)(B) was explicitly subject to authorization by the owner of the property, per the requirement in SB 1710. All burning under adopted paragraph (4) is subject to authorization by the owner of the property. This is to clarify that while the language is required by SB 1710 for burning under paragraph (4)(B), the absence of the language elsewhere does not imply that burning on site without the consent of the property owner is authorized.

To protect human health and safety and environmental receptors, adopted §111.209(4)(B) is made subject to §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7), relating to General Requirements for Allowable Outdoor Burning. In order to ensure that local authorities retain appropriate authority to enact ordinances controlling outdoor burning, adopted §111.209(4)(B) is made subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town and that are consistent with TCAA, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments. The commission also notes that all responsible persons engaged in outdoor burning are subject to §111.221, relating to Responsibility for Consequences of Outdoor Burning.

The adopted amendment to §111.209 also provides for the burning of waste plant growth generated from specific residential properties at designated sites located outside of municipalities and within counties with a population of less than 50,000, by adding adopted new paragraph (5), proposed as subsection (a)(4)(C). Under specific conditions, the commission is prohibited from controlling or prohibiting burning under THSC, §382.018(d). The burn must be at a designated burn site, located outside of a municipality, and within a county with a population of less than 50,000. All material burned must consist of plant growth generated at specific residential properties for which the site is designated. The burn must be supervised by a fire department employee acting in the scope of the person's employment, who must notify the commission of each supervised burn. To determine if burns under adopted paragraph (5) meet the conditions of THSC, §382.018(d), the adopted rule requires the owner of the site or the owner's authorized agent to post the designated site, maintain a description or list of specific residential properties for which the site is designated, ensure that all waste burned consists of plant growth generated from these properties, and to ensure that a qualified fire department employee supervises each burn at the site. The requirement under proposed subsection (a)(4)(C)(iii), now paragraph (5)(C), to include the name of each property owner on the record of designated residential properties has been struck from the adopted rule.

FINAL REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION

The commission reviewed the adopted rulemaking in light of the regulatory analysis requirements of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225, and determined that the rulemaking is not subject to §2001.0225 because it does not meet the definition of a major environmental rule as defined in the Administrative Procedure Act. A "major environmental rule" is a rule that is specifically intended to protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure, and that may adversely affect in a material way the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety of the state or a sector of the state. The primary purpose of the adopted rules is to protect the environment through the regulation of the outdoor burning of waste and combustible material. The adopted rules will not have an adverse material impact because the adopted rules are limited to revisions to the prohibition on and exception for disposal fires. The adopted revisions will: 1) prohibit the burning of domestic waste in residential areas that are in unincorporated areas of a county adjacent to a county with a population of 3.3 million or more and where there is a planned community of 20,000 acres or more. In these residential areas, domestic waste cannot be burned in a neighborhood or on a lot that is less than five acres; 2) allow for the burning of waste consisting of plant growth in areas that meet the NAAQS and do not contain any part of a city that does not meet the NAAQS if the waste is burned on the property of origin and by the owner of the property or any other person authorized by the owner; and 3) allow for the outdoor burning of waste consisting of plant growth at a site designated for consolidated burning of waste generated from specific residential properties located outside of a municipality and in a county with a population of less than 50,000, if supervised at the time of the burning by a fire department employee acting in the scope of the person's employment.

Furthermore, the adopted rulemaking does not meet any of the four applicability requirements listed in Texas Government Code, §2001.0225(a), where the adopted rules: 1) are specifically required by state law, namely THSC, §382.018; 2) do not exceed the express requirements of THSC, §382.018; 3) do not exceed a requirement of a federal delegation agreement or contract between the state and an agency or representative of the federal government to implement a state and federal program; and 4) are not an adoption of a rule solely under the general powers of the commission.

Based on this assessment, the adopted rulemaking does not constitute a major environmental rule and is not subject to the regulatory analysis provisions of Texas Government Code, §2001.0225. Public comments were solicited. No public comments were received regarding the regulatory impact analysis determination.

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The commission evaluated the adopted rules and performed an assessment of whether the adopted rules constitute a taking under Texas Government Code, Chapter 2007. The primary purpose of the adopted rules is to protect the environment through the regulation of the outdoor burning of waste.

Promulgation and enforcement of these adopted rules will be neither a statutory nor a constitutional taking of private real property. Specifically, the subject adopted regulations do not affect a landowner's rights in private real property because this rulemaking does not burden (constitutionally), nor restrict or limit the owner's right to property and reduce its value by 25% or more beyond that which would otherwise exist in the absence of the regulations. The adopted rules are limited to revisions to the prohibition on and exception for disposal fires. The adopted revisions will: 1) prohibit the burning of domestic waste in residential areas that are in unincorporated areas of a county adjacent to a county with a population of 3.3 million or more and where there is a planned community of 20,000 acres or more. In these residential areas, domestic waste cannot be burned in a neighborhood or on a lot that is less than five acres; 2) allow for the burning of waste consisting of plant growth in areas that meet the NAAQS and do not contain any part of a city that does not meet the NAAQS if the waste is burned on the property of origin and by the owner of the property or any other person authorized by the owner; and 3) allow for the outdoor burning of waste consisting of plant growth at a site designated for consolidated burning of waste generated from specific residential properties located outside of a municipality and in a county with a population of less than 50,000, if supervised at the time of the burning by a fire department employee acting in the scope of the person's employment.

CONSISTENCY WITH THE COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The commission reviewed the adopted rulemaking and found that the revision is subject to the Texas Coastal Management Program (CMP) in accordance with the Coastal Coordination Act, Texas Natural Resources Code, §33.201 et seq ., and therefore must be consistent with all applicable CMP goals and policies. The commission conducted a consistency determination for the adopted rules in accordance with Coastal Coordination Act Implementation Rules, 31 TAC §505.22, and found that the adopted rulemaking is consistent with the applicable CMP goals and policies.

The CMP goals applicable to the adopted rules include: to protect, preserve, restore, and enhance the diversity, quality, quantity, functions, and values of coastal natural resource areas; to ensure sound management of all coastal resources by allowing for compatible economic development and multiple human uses of the coastal zone; to ensure and enhance planned public access to and enjoyment of the coastal zone in a manner that is compatible with private property rights and other uses of the coastal zone; and to balance these competing interests.

The specific CMP policy applicable to the adopted rules requires that commission rules under THSC, Chapter 382, governing emissions of air pollutants, shall comply with regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations, adopted in accordance with Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), 42 United States Code, §7401, et seq ., to protect and enhance air quality in the coastal area so as to protect coastal natural resources areas and promote the public health, safety, and welfare.

Promulgation and enforcement of the rules will not violate or exceed any standards identified in the applicable CMP goals and policies. The adopted rules are consistent with these CMP goals and policies. The rules do not create or have a direct or significant adverse effect on any coastal natural resource areas.

Public comments were solicited. No public comments were received regarding the consistency with the coastal management program.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

The commission received written comments from four individuals, the City of Lufkin, Brazos River Authority (BRA), TXU Electric Delivery (TXU), Houston Regional Group of the Sierra Club (HSC), Earthmoving Contractors Association of Texas (ECAT), Galveston County Health District (GCHD), and United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A public hearing was held on March 7, 2006. The commission received oral comments from the Texas Illegal Dumping Resource Center (TIDRC), Texas Builder's Association (TBA), and ECAT.

Three individuals were opposed to authorizing landowners to burn within the city limits, while one individual supported burning in the city limits. The City of Lufkin was opposed to restricting burning to one hour after sunrise to one hour before sunset. BRA, TXU, HSC, and TBA generally supported the rulemaking. TIDRC did not oppose the rulemaking but made several suggestions. GCHD did not indicate support or opposition to the rulemaking. ECAT's comments were outside the scope of the rulemaking.

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

One individual commented that due to her allergies and her husband's emphysema there should be no burning allowed within the city limits. She also commented that she has had to leave her house and seek medical attention as a result of burning in her neighborhood. Two individuals would like to see a statewide ban on burning within a city limit and would like the ban to be enforced.

The commission has undertaken this rulemaking to comply with SB 1710. SB 1710 requires the commission to authorize by rule the burning of plant growth in most attainment areas, if burned on the property of origin. The commission believes the intent of the legislation, in part, is to direct and delegate appropriate authority to local governments in efforts to ensure that regulatory policies address the concerns of affected citizens. In response to the comment, the commission has made §111.209(4)(B) subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town and that are consistent the TCAA, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments. This will allow each affected municipality to determine and address the concerns of affected citizens. Allowable outdoor burning is not permitted at any time to rise to a level of nuisance conditions. Anyone may report a nuisance condition to the commission and file a complaint by calling 1-888-777-3186.

One individual commented that she is concerned that her current practice of burning leaves in her yard at her residence in the city limits will be prohibited or limited under the proposed amendments to outdoor burning in 30 TAC Chapter 111.

Under current rules, there is no provision allowing a person to burn yard waste on site where waste collection is provided by the local entity having authority. Under the adopted rule, however, this type of burning will be authorized even when waste collection is provided. As noted in the response to the previous comment, this authority is subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town and that are consistent with TCAA, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments. This will allow each affected municipality to determine and address the concerns of affected citizens. The commission believes city governments should be allowed to control burning within their limits at the local level. No change has been made in response to the comment.

The City of Lufkin commented that §111.219(6)(A) was too restrictive and that the requirement to begin burning no earlier than one hour after sunrise and to have the burn completed no later than one hour before sunset should be changed. The city commented that the winds are generally calmer and the humidity higher early in the morning and later in the evening which would reduce the possibility for the burn to get out of control.

The commission agrees that in many instances the meteorological conditions early in the morning and late in the evening may reduce the risk of an out of control burn. The requirements of §111.219 are intended to improve the dispersion conditions necessary to reduce the potential impacts of smoke and related emissions from burns subject to the requirements of this section. No change to the rule has been made.

BRA commented that overall it supported the rule changes; however, it expressed concern that the requirement under proposed §111.209(a)(4)(C)(i) and §111.209(a)(4)(C)(vi) that the burning be "directly supervised by an employee of a fire department who is part of the fire protection personnel, as defined by Local Government Code, §419.021, and is acting in the scope of the person's employment," was too restrictive. BRA commented that this requirement "does not recognize the considerable skill and training that volunteer firefighters have in fighting brush fires, grass fires and wildfires," and "in contrast to the vast wildfire experience of volunteer firefighters, most municipal firefighter's training focuses primarily on structural firefighting." BRA was concerned that this requirement eliminates most of rural Texas, where local governments rely solely upon volunteer fire departments for fire protection, from taking advantage of the revised outdoor burning rules.

The commission recognizes the considerable skill and training that volunteer firefighters have in fighting brush fires, grass fires, and wildfires. However, the commission has undertaken this rulemaking to comply with SB 1710. SB 1710 is specific in its requirement that the burning be "directly supervised by an employee of a fire department who is part of the fire protection personnel, as defined by Local Government Code, §419.021, and is acting in the scope of the person's employment." No change to the rule has been made in response to the comment.

TXU commented that it supported the rule as proposed and emphasized the importance of two sections contained in the proposed rule: 1) TXU supports the additional flexibility in specific circumstances and/or operations that the applicability of §111.209(a)(4)(A) and §111.209(a)(4)(B) provides for "on-site burning" for "right-of-way (ROW) management." Section 111.209(a)(4)(A) and §111.209(a)(4)(B) of the proposed rule allows outdoor burning regardless of whether a practical alternative to burning exists. The ability to conduct outdoor burning without having to provide evidence of practical alternatives would greatly expedite cleanup and management of ROW. For example, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita resulted in large amounts of wood and brush, some in remote areas inaccessible by most vehicles; and 2) TXU supports allowing a "contractual easement document" to be acceptable documentation that an individual or company is an "authorized agent," and supports the inclusion of an "authorized agent" in §111.209(a)(4)(B). TXU may not be the actual property owner, but may have a contractual easement agreement with the owner to maintain the ROW.

Proposed §111.209(a)(4)(A) and §111.209(a)(4)(B) were intended to be two separate authorizations, i.e., a person would have to choose whether he intended to burn under subparagraph (A) or (B), but could not pick and choose from both. Subparagraph (A) was intended to apply statewide but only to the listed activities (i.e., ROW, landclearing, maintenance along water canals), and only when no practical alternative to burning exists. Subparagraph (B) was intended to apply only in certain areas of the state, but for all activities including, but not limited to, ROW, landclearing, and maintenance along water canals, and only by the landowner or any person authorized by the landowner. Under proposed subparagraph (A), burning for ROW in nonattainment areas would be permitted, as long as no practical alternatives existed. Under proposed subparagraph (B), burning for ROW would be permitted, but only with landowner authorization.

In response to TXU's first point, the commission has made the authorizations under subparagraphs (A) and (B) mutually exclusive. Subparagraph (A) applies only in a county that is part of a designated nonattainment area or that contains any part of a municipality that extends into a designated nonattainment area. Subparagraph (B) applies in all other areas. Under subparagraph (A), only the listed activities are authorized and practical alternatives must be considered. Subparagraph (B) includes, but is not limited to, the listed activities and consideration of practical alternatives is not required. Burning under either subparagraph (A) or subparagraph (B) is restricted to plant growth generated on the property on which it is burned.

In response to TXU's second point, the proposed rule did not contain language allowing a "contractual easement document" to be acceptable documentation that an individual or company is an "authorized agent." SB 1710 is specific in that the burning must be by the property owner or any other person authorized by the owner. The commission authorizes burning of plant growth, but does not authorize the infringement of the property rights of landowners. Whether or not a "contractual easement document" is acceptable documentation that an individual or company is authorized by the landowner to burn plant growth is a matter between the parties to the document. The adopted rule makes both subparagraphs (A) and (B) subject to the requirement that burning must be by the property owner or any other person authorized by the owner.

HSC commented that it supported the rule change that makes the burning of household waste a Class C misdemeanor. Unfortunately, HSC commented, the way HB 39 is worded, TCEQ must apply this rule only to areas near The Woodlands. Therefore, other areas will not receive commensurate protection.

HB 39 created a Class C misdemeanor in Local Government Code, Chapter 352. The commission has undertaken this rulemaking, as it relates to HB 39, to ensure that the exceptions for disposal fires contained in §111.209 are consistent with the new criminal statute. No change to the rule has been made in response to the comment.

HSC commented that it does not support the implementation of the language in SB 1710 which prohibits the commission from requiring prior approval for outdoor burning under the proposed rules. HSC commented that approval by the TCEQ of outdoor burning provides public protection and information.

The commission has undertaken this rulemaking to comply with SB 1710. SB 1710 is specific in its requirement that the commission cannot require prior commission approval. No change to the rule has been made in response to the comment.

HSC commented that the phrase "plant growth" is not defined in §111.203 and the TCEQ should "strictly define this phase so that there are no unintended legal surprises when the rule is tested in court."

The commission has expanded the context of the term "plant growth" to include "trees, brush, grass, leaves, branch trimmings, or other plant growth," and believes the meaning is clear from the expanded context. The term has not been strictly defined in 30 TAC §101.203.

HSC commented that it supported the requirements under §111.209(a)(4)(C)(i)-(vi), as reasonable things for an owner of a designated site or the owner's agent to do.

The commission appreciates the comment. No change to the rule has been made in response to the comment.

TBA commented that it supported the proposed rules. It pointed out four issues which it stated probably do not affect the substance of the rule but may help eliminate ambiguities.

In §111.209(a)(4), the proposed rule uses the language "brush, trees, and other plant growth." Using the language "brush, trees, grass, leaves, branch trimmings, or other plant growth" would expand the language a little and be consistent with the language used in SB 1710, and in proposed §111.209(a)(4)(C)(i).

The commission agrees that using the language "brush, trees, grass, leaves, branch trimmings, or other plant growth" would expand the language and be consistent with the language used in SB 1710. The language has been revised as recommended.

TBA commented that in §111.209(a)(4)(B), the proposed rule uses the language "In a county that is not part of {a} designated nonattainment area." TBA recommends using the language "In an area," rather than, "In a county." The statute uses the word "area" rather than "county." "County" could be ambiguous; does it mean both the incorporated and the unincorporated areas of the county? Or does it mean the unincorporated areas only? TBA prefers that the language "municipality that extends into a designated nonattainment area," read "municipality that is designated nonattainment area." TBA believes this may not be substantive but might help clarify the rule.

The commission believes that the term "county" represents the only comprehensive set of legally defined areas in Texas. Furthermore, nonattainment areas are designated along county lines. No change has been made in response to the comment.

The commission believes that the language "in a county that is not part of a designated nonattainment area and that does not contain any part of a municipality that extends into a designated nonattainment area" is necessary to concisely define the counties in which proposed §111.209(a)(4)(B) is not applicable. The rule is not applicable in two types of counties: 1) all counties in designated nonattainment areas; and 2) counties in attainment areas that both border a nonattainment county and in which a municipality extends across the county line into both the attainment and nonattainment areas. No change has been made in response to this comment.

TBA commented that in §111.209(a)(4)(B), the proposed rule is subject to the requirements of §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7). TBA believes paragraph (7) may be redundant. Paragraph (7) talks about burning oil, non-wood construction items, and similar things. The rule itself does not contemplate the burning of things like oil or non-wood construction materials.

While the commission acknowledges that proposed §111.209(a)(4)(B) does not contemplate the burning of items such as those prohibited in §111.219(7), the commission believes that making §111.209 subject to §111.219(7), emphasizes the necessity and importance of complying with the general restriction. No change has been made in response to the comment.

TBA commented that in §111.209(a)(4)(C)(iii), the proposed rule requires the owner of a designated site to maintain records of the designated residential properties for which the site is designated. The record must contain the description of a platted subdivision and/or a list of each property address and the name of each property owner. TBA believes the language is confusing. Does it mean you must maintain the description of the platted subdivision or a list of each address, and in any event the name of each property owner? Or does it mean you must maintain the description or both the address and name of each property owner? TBA suggests the requirement to maintain the name of each property owner may not be necessary and that removing it would eliminate the confusion. The owner of the designated site may not have the name of the residential property owner, but if he has the description of the subdivision and the address of each property, then he knows the locations designated for the site.

The commission agrees that the requirement to include the name of each property owner may be an unnecessary restriction and may be the cause of confusion. The requirement has been struck from the rule.

TIDRC commented that while HB 39 created a Class C misdemeanor, located under Local Government Code, §352.052, the commission created a crime with a larger penalty under Texas Water Code, §7.177(a)(5), by restating this prohibition against outdoor burning in proposed §111.209(b).

The commission has undertaken this rulemaking as it relates to HB 39 to ensure that the exceptions for disposal fires contained in §111.209 are consistent with the new criminal statute located in Local Government Code, Chapter 352. TIDRC is correct that under Texas Water Code, §7.177(a)(5), an intentional or knowing violation of commission rules adopted under THSC, Chapter 382, carries penalties of up to $50,000 for an individual and up to 180 days confinement. The commission has made §111.209 subject directly to Local Government Code, §352.052, rather than repeating the restriction in proposed §111.209(b). This will provide notice of this new criminal statute without creating a larger penalty than HB 39 intended.

TIDRC commented that SB 1710 specifically refers to areas that meet the NAAQS, but proposed §111.209(a)(4)(B), uses language that would have the rule change apply everywhere except nonattainment areas, which would include the undetermined areas, which constitute most of Texas. This would greatly expand the area that the rule would be applicable to beyond that specified in SB 1710.

The commission concurs that the language in proposed §111.209(a)(4)(B) encompasses most attainment areas, and the language in SB 1710 does not encompass the undetermined areas. However, the language in SB 1710 does not describe an enforceable area. It is possible for an area to meet the NAAQS one day, and fail to meet the NAAQS for a particular pollutant on the next day, depending on atmospheric conditions and pollutant transport from other areas. On the other hand, nonattainment areas are designated and legally defined areas. No change has been made in response to the comment.

TIDRC commented that not all cities have local ordinances to deal with illegal burning. Some of them rely on the criminal application of Texas Water Code, §7.177 to address local burning within the city limits. By removing the criminal penalty for burning of brush and limbs and other plant waste inside the city limit, some cities will have to change their ordinances to ensure that their local policies will criminalize outdoor burning.

The commission concurs that removing the criminal penalty for burning inside the city limit could prove a significant inconvenience to many Texas municipalities. The commission has undertaken this rulemaking to comply with SB 1710. SB 1710 requires the commission to authorize by rule the burning of plant growth in most attainment areas, if burned on the property of origin. The commission believes the intent of the legislation, in part, is to direct and delegate appropriate authority to our local governments in efforts that regulatory policies address the concerns of affected citizens. In response to the comment, the commission has made §111.209(4)(B) subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town and that are consistent with TCAA, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments. This will allow each affected municipality to determine and address the concerns of affected citizens.

GCHD commented that the proposed revisions authorize the burning of plant growth in areas that meet the NAAQS and do not contain any part of a city that does not meet the NAAQS if the waste is burned on the property of origin and by the owner of the property or any other person authorized by the owner. GCHD asked the question, "What about burning of plant material in nonattainment areas on property of origin by the owner of the property or any other person authorized by the owner?"

The adopted rule does not authorize outdoor burning in designated nonattainment areas on the property of origin by the owner or the property or any other person authorized by the owner. No change to the rule has been made in response to the comment.

ECAT commented that it is a statewide organization made up of contractors who specialize in heavy dirt work, with a major portion of their work in the area of agriculture and natural resource conservation type work. ECAT does mechanical brush control as it relates to pasture conditions, and primarily as it relates to increasing and conserving both groundwater and surface water. ECAT has major concerns and interests in how the contractors dispose of the brush in their business. Burning in most of their applications is the only practical method. Therefore, it concerns ECAT when there are discussions at the state environmental agency that could possibly limit, or put unrealistic controls on this best practice. ECAT offers its services in the future to the commission whenever work on rules concerning agricultural burning is considered.

The commission's proposed §111.209(a)(4)(A) and (B) will not prohibit any landclearing activity that is authorized under the current rule. The proposed amendment to the rule would remove the requirement of practical alternative in attainment areas. The commission thanks ECAT for its comments and welcomes suggestions on any future rule proposals concerning agricultural burning.

EPA commented that a comparison of Texas' revisions to §111.203 and §111.209 to current SIP-approved rules (including those currently under EPA consideration) seem to relax outdoor burning in some areas. EPA is concerned that a relaxation on outdoor burning would make it difficult for some areas to remain in attainment due to potential increases in direct emissions of particulate matter and other pollutants such as nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and sulfur dioxide. EPA stated that the proposal does not show noninterference with any of the Clean Air Act requirements, particularly with regard to FCAA, §110(l). EPA commented that the Texas SIP does not include §111.203 to §111.221, but instead an earlier approved version of rules including §§111.101, 111.103, 111.105, and 111.107. EPA pointed out that the remaining sections not in the SIP are currently under EPA review and have not yet been approved.

EPA suggested that the commission provide an explanation on how the amendments to §111.203 and §111.209, and how §§111.101, 111.103, 111.105, and 111.107 would not interfere with any of the FCAA requirements. EPA also commented that there must be an opportunity for notice and public comment.

The 79th Legislature in 2005 amended THSC, §382.018(a), making it subject to the Local Government Code, §352.082, which classified certain types of outdoor burning, as designated in this rulemaking, as a Class C misdemeanor. 30 TAC §111.209 was amended accordingly to prohibit the burning of household refuse in a limited demographic area. The amendment to §111.209 would be more restrictive than current outdoor burning rules, which do not criminalize or prohibit outdoor burning in the specified area. The commission does not expect any increases in outdoor burning in the specified area and, therefore, this rulemaking would not constitute a relaxation of the Texas SIP. The commission made no changes to §111.209 in response to this comment.

Through the enactment of SB 1710, the 79th Legislature in 2005 amended THSC, §382.018(b) and (d). The current rules under revision (§111.203 and §111.209) require consideration of practical alternatives, incorporate all of the controls in §111.219, and do not make a distinction between areas of attainment and nonattainment. The adopted rules, however, make a distinction between allowable burning in areas of attainment and nonattainment. Section 111.209(4)(A) still incorporates all of the controls in §111.219. Section 111.209(4)(B) is subject to the controls in §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7), is subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town and that are consistent with TCAA, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments, and no longer require consideration of practical alternatives.

THSC, §382.018(b) allows burning in areas that meet the NAAQS without requiring prior commission approval or consideration of practical alternatives. During proposal of the regulation, 30 TAC §111.209 was amended to authorize on-site outdoor burning in attainment areas without consideration of practical alternatives and incorporated §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7). For areas in attainment, §111.209(4)(B) is subject to the controls in §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7), and is subject to any local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town and that are consistent with TCAA, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments. For areas of nonattainment, §111.209(4)(A) is subject to the air control measures in §111.219. Section 111.219 will maintain the necessary controls on outdoor burning in nonattainment areas, such as delineating appropriate burn times, weather conditions, distances from sensitive receptors, prohibitions against burning certain materials, and prohibitions on burns within corporate limits of a city. Areas in attainment will also be subject to the controls in §111.219, with the distinction that controls on allowable outdoor burning within the corporate limits of a city will be delegated to local authorities to enact ordinances consistent with the TCAA. The removal of practical alternatives in areas of attainment was specified by the legislature in the amendments made to THSC, §382.018(b). The removal of practical alternatives in areas of attainment will not constitute a relaxation of the SIP as the consideration was primarily for a demonstration of economic feasibility rather than a control on outdoor burn emissions. Controls on outdoor burn emissions remain in place because they are included in the requirements in §111.219, particularly with regard to areas in nonattainment so as not to constitute a relaxation of the SIP. The commission has adopted regulations to conform with the changes made to the statute without compromising controls on allowable outdoor burning.

THSC, §382.018(d) was amended to allow for outdoor burning of plant growth generated from specific residential properties on designated sites outside of a municipality and in counties with a population less than 50,000. Section 111.209 currently does not allow for burning on designated sites. The amendment to §111.209 for designated sites requires mandatory notice to the commission prior to the burn, and requires supervision by a fire department employee. Only three counties in nonattainment areas meet the requirements for designated site burns (Hardin, Rockwall, and Chambers). The commission anticipates changes to the adopted rule would consolidate currently authorized outdoor burning rather than increasing it. Burning of domestic waste, including plant growth, is already authorized in these counties for private residences when collection of domestic waste is not provided or authorized by the local government having jurisdiction. To the commission's best available knowledge, no residential properties outside of the municipalities in these counties are provided with domestic waste collection by the local government having jurisdiction. The adopted rules are not expected to result in an increase in outdoor burning as the counties that were previously conducting outdoor burns will be permitted to continue doing so, but with the requirement that the burns be conducted on a designated site and conducted within the requirements in §111.209. The additional controls, such as the required presence of a fire department employee supervising each burn, impose limits on the frequency and number of outdoor burns and, therefore, would not relax the SIP. The commission made no changes to the rules in response to this comment.

Through the enactment of HB 39 and SB 1710, the 79th Legislature in 2005, amended THSC, §382.018(a)-(e), and §111.203 and §111.209 were amended accordingly to conform to the statutes. Sections 111.101, 111.103, 111.105, 111.107, 111.205, and 111.207 were not proposed to be amended as HB 39 and SB 1710 did not affect these sections. Additionally, §§111.101, 111.103, 111.105, and 111.107 were repealed on August 21, 1996, and replaced with §§111.201-111.221 (64 FR 57983). The sections under EPA consideration for approval have now been amended (§111.203 and §111.209); therefore, there has only been a SIP revision for these sections and consideration or revisions of other sections in Chapter 111 would be outside the scope of SB 1710 and HB 39. In response, a new section, DEMONSTRATING NONINTERFERENCE UNDER FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT, SECTION 110(l), has been incorporated in the rule preamble.

The commission held a stakeholder meeting on September 26, 2005, in Austin and gained input from county and local law enforcement agencies, city governments, land developers, and utility companies. The amendments and public hearing notice were published in the Texas Register on February 10, 2006, and the public hearing was held on March 7, 2006, to obtain comment.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The amendments are adopted under THSC, §382.002, relating to Policy and Purpose, Texas Clean Air Act (TCAA), §382.011, which authorizes the commission to administer the requirements of the TCAA; §382.012, which provides the commission the authority to develop a comprehensive plan for the state's air; §382.017, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules consistent with the policy and purposes of the TCAA; §382.018, which authorizes the commission to control outdoor burning; and §382.085, which prohibits unauthorized air emissions; and Texas Water Code, §5.103 and §5.105, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules.

The adopted amendments implement THSC, §§382.002, 382.011, 382.017, and 382.018.

§111.209.Exception for Disposal Fires.

Except as provided in Local Government Code, §352.082, outdoor burning is authorized for the following:

(1) domestic waste burning at a property designed for and used exclusively as a private residence, housing not more than three families, when collection of domestic waste is not provided or authorized by the local governmental entity having jurisdiction, and when the waste is generated only from that property. Provision of waste collection refers to collection at the premises where the waste is generated. The term "domestic waste" is defined in §101.1 of this title (relating to Definitions). Wastes normally resulting from the function of life within a residence that can be burned include such things as kitchen garbage, untreated lumber, cardboard boxes, packaging (including plastics and rubber), clothing, grass, leaves, and branch trimmings. Examples of wastes not considered domestic waste that cannot be burned, include such things as tires, non-wood construction debris, furniture, carpet, electrical wire, and appliances;

(2) diseased animal carcass burning when burning is the most effective means of controlling the spread of disease;

(3) veterinarians in accordance with Texas Occupations Code, §801.361, Disposal of Animal Remains;

(4) on-site burning of trees, brush, grass, leaves, branch trimmings, or other plant growth, by the owner of the property or any other person authorized by the owner, and when the material is generated only from that property:

(A) in a county that is part of a designated nonattainment area or that contains any part of a municipality that extends into a designated nonattainment area; if the plant growth was generated as a result of right-of-way maintenance, landclearing operations, and maintenance along water canals when no practical alternative to burning exists. Such burning is subject to the requirements of §111.219 of this title (relating to General Requirements for Allowable Outdoor Burning). Commission notification or approval is not required; or

(B) in a county that is not part of a designated nonattainment area and that does not contain any part of a municipality that extends into a designated nonattainment area; this provision includes, but is not limited to, the burning of plant growth generated as a result of right-of-way maintenance, landclearing operations, and maintenance along water canals. Such burning is subject to local ordinances that prohibit burning inside the corporate limits of a city or town and that are consistent with the Texas Clean Air Act, Chapter 382, Subchapter E, Authority of Local Governments, and the requirements of §111.219(3), (4), (6), and (7) of this title. Commission notification or approval is not required.

(5) at a site designated for consolidated burning of waste generated from specific residential properties. A designated site must be located outside of a municipality and within a county with a population of less than 50,000. The owner of the designated site or the owner's authorized agent shall:

(A) post at all entrances to the site a placard measuring a minimum of 48 inches in width and 24 inches in height and containing, at a minimum, the words "DESIGNATED BURN SITE - No burning of any material is allowed except for trees, brush, grass, leaves, branch trimmings, or other plant growth generated from specific residential properties for which this site is designated. All burning must be supervised by a fire department employee. For more information call {PHONE NUMBER OF OWNER OR AUTHORIZED AGENT}." The placard(s) must be clearly visible and legible at all times;

(B) designate specific residential properties for consolidated burning at the designated site;

(C) maintain a record of the designated residential properties. The record must contain the description of a platted subdivision and/or a list of each property address. The description must be made available to commission or local air pollution control agency staff within 48 hours, if requested;

(D) ensure that all waste burned at the designated site consists of trees, brush, grass, leaves, branch trimmings, or other plant growth;

(E) ensure that all such waste was generated at specific residential properties for which the site is designated; and

(F) ensure that all burning at the designated site is directly supervised by an employee of a fire department who is part of the fire protection personnel, as defined by Texas Government Code, §419.021, and is acting in the scope of the person's employment. The fire department employee shall notify the appropriate commission regional office with a telephone or electronic facsimile notice 24 hours in advance of any scheduled supervised burn. The commission shall provide the employee with information on practical alternatives to burning. Commission approval is not required;

(6) crop residue burning for agricultural management purposes when no practical alternative exists. Such burning shall be subject to the requirements of §111.219 of this title and structures containing sensitive receptors must not be negatively affected by the burn. When possible, notification of the intent to burn should be made to the appropriate commission regional office prior to the proposed burn. Commission notification or approval is not required. This section is not applicable to crop residue burning covered by an administrative order; and

(7) brush, trees, and other plant growth causing a detrimental public health and safety condition burned by a county or municipal government at a site it owns upon receiving site and burn approval from the executive director. Such a burn can only be authorized when there is no practical alternative, and it may be done no more frequently than once every two months. Such burns cannot be conducted at municipal solid waste landfills unless authorized under §111.215 of this title (relating to Executive Director Approval of Otherwise Prohibited Outdoor Burning), and shall be subject to the requirements of §111.219 of this title.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 29, 2006.

TRD-200603522

Robert Martinez

Acting Division Director, Environmental Law Division

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Effective date: July 19, 2006

Proposal publication date: February 10, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 239-5017