[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 35 (Monday, February 23, 2015)]
[Page 9456]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03583]



[FRL-9923-16-Region 6]

Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petitions for Objection 
to State Operating Permits for Luminant Generating Company, LLC Steam 
Electric Generating Stations Martin Lake, Monticello, and Big Brown in 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final action.


SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR 
70.8(d), the EPA Administrator signed an Order, dated January 23, 2015, 
denying in part three petitions asking the EPA to object to operating 
permits issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 
to Luminant Generating Company, LLC (Luminant) relating to three coal 
fired steam electric generating stations (SES) located in East and 
Northeast Texas. Title V operating permit number O53 was issued by the 
TCEQ to Luminant for the Martin Lake SES located in Rusk County, Texas. 
Title V operating permit number O64 was issued to Luminant for the 
Monticello SES located in Titus County, Texas, while title V operating 
permit number O65 was issued to Luminant for the Big Brown SES located 
in Freestone County, Texas. The EPA's January 23, 2015 Order responds 
to the three petitions submitted by the Environmental Integrity Project 
(EIP) representing themselves and on behalf of Sierra Club 
(collectively, the Petitioners): the petition addressing the Martin 
Lake permit was received on February 26, 2014, while the petitions 
addressing the Monticello permit and Big Brown permit were both 
received on March 4, 2014. Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the Act 
provide that a petitioner may ask for judicial review of those portions 
of the Orders that deny objections raised in the petitions by the 
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit. Any 
petition for review shall be filed within 60 days from the date this 
notice appears in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 307(b) of 
the Act.

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final Orders, the petitions, 
and other supporting information at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    For Information: Please contact Brad Toups at (214) 665-7258, email 
address: [email protected] or the above EPA, Region 6 address, to view 
copies of the final Orders, petitions, and other supporting 
information. You may view the hard copies Monday through Friday, from 
9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. If you wish to 
examine these documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 
hours before the visiting day. Additionally, the final January 23, 2015 
Order is available electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/region07/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/luminant_response2014.pdf.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA affords the EPA a 45-day period to 
review, and object, as appropriate, to a title V operating permit 
proposed by a state permitting authority. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA 
authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator, within 60 days 
after the expiration of this review period, to object to a title V 
operating permit if the EPA has not done so. Petitions must be based 
only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable 
specificity during the public comment period provided by the state, 
unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise 
these issues during the comment period or unless the grounds for the 
issue arose after this period.
    The EPA received three petitions from the Petitioners, one dated 
February 26, 2014 for the Martin Lake permit, and one each dated March 
3, 2014 for the Monticello and Big Brown permits, to object to 
operating permits issued to Luminant Generating Company, LLC relating 
respectively to facilities located in Rusk, Titus, and Freestone 
counties, Texas.
    The Order issued on January 23, 2015 responds to claim V.A of the 
Martin Lake Petition (pp. 5-9), the Monticello Petition (pp. 5-11) and 
the Big Brown Petition (pp. 7-14) raised by EIP, the Sierra Club having 
withdrawn all of their objections prior to the issuance of the order. 
The EIP requested that the Administrator object to the proposed 
operating permits issued by the TCEQ to Luminant on several bases. The 
three petitions did not raise identical claims; however, three common 
claims are addressed in the issued order. The remaining issues are to 
be withdrawn by the petitioner in accordance with a settlement 
agreement reached on January 22, 2015 between the Petitioner and the 
    The claims are described in detail in Section IV of the Order. In 
summary, the issues raised are that: (1) the Compliance Assurance 
Monitoring (CAM) provisions in the Martin Lake, Monticello and Big 
Brown permits do not assure compliance with the applicable particulate 
matter (PM) emission limit during periods of startup, shutdown, 
maintenance and malfunction; (2) the record supporting the CAM opacity 
indicator ranges for PM for Monticello Units 1, 2 and 3 is deficient 
and not based on reliable data; and (3) the Big Brown permit must be 
revised to ensure that any credible evidence may be used to demonstrate 
noncompliance with applicable requirements.
    Due to significant overlap in the issues raised in the Petitions 
and the similarity of the relevant permit conditions in each of the 
three permits, the EPA is responding to the identified portion of all 
three Petitions in this Order on January 23, 2015. The EPA's rationale 
for denying the addressed claims is described in the Order.

    Dated: February 9, 2015.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2015-03583 Filed 2-20-15; 8:45 am]