MR QUALITY PLANNING MEMORANDUM AND STANDARDS

SUBJECT: Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 11 0(a)(l) and (2)

for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM25)National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS)

FROM: William T. Hamett, Director tJLA/Y)74ft1’Q±

Air Quality Policy Division (C539-0l)

TO: Regional Air Division Directors, Regions I-X

The purpose ofthis memorandum is to provide guidance on addressing the

“infrastructure” elements for State Implementation Plans (SIPs) required under sections

11 0(a)(l) and ii 0(a)(2) ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5NAAQS (71 FR

61144). On December 18, 2006, EPA revised the 24-hour average PM2.5primary and secondary

NAAQS from 65 micrograms per cubic meter (jig/in 3)to 35 jig/m 3.Under sections 1 l0(a)(l)

and ll0(a(2) ofthe CAA, after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, each state is required

to submit a plan to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement ofthat

NAAQS.

States are required to address basic SIP requirements (see Attachment A), to assure

attainment and maintenance of the standards. By law, SIPs to address sections 110(a) (1) and

1 l0(a)(2) are to be submitted by states within 3 years after promulgation of a new or revised

standard. In many cases the section 11 0(a)(2) SIPs for the 1997 PM2.5NAAQS may already beadequate to implement the 2006 24-hour PM2,5NAAQS. Many ofthe required section 1 i0(a)(l)and 11 0(a)(2) SIP elements relate to the general information and authorities that constitute the

“infrastructure” of a state’s air quality management program, and these have been in place since

the initial SIPs were submitted in response to the 1970 Clean Air Act. However, it is still the

responsibility of each state to make this determination for each new or revised NAAQS.

Determining Completeness of State Submittals - As required by section 11 O(a)(1), states will have to review and revise, as appropriate, - their existing particulate matter SIPs to ensure that they are adequate to address the 2006 24-hour

PM2.5NAAQS. States should, in consultation with EPA Regional Offices, refer to applicable

EPA regulations governing SIP submittals in 40 CFR Part 51 — e.g., Subpart H (“Prevention of

Although the rule for the revised PM2,5standard has an effective date of December 18, 2006, the rule was signed

by the Administrator and publically disseminated on September 21, 2006. Therefore, the deadline for submittal of

110(a) SIPs for the 2006 24-hour PM2,5NAAQS is September 21, 2009 based on the siature date.

Internet Mdress (URL) • http:llww’w,epa.gøv

Recycled/Recyclable • Punted wh VeetabIe Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (MInimum 25% Postconsumer)
g 

p

g 

q

(

)(

)

infrastructure elements as applicable for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5NAAQS. For purposes ofthe

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, in cases where a state believes that it meets the requirements ofsections l l0(a)(l) and I 1O(a)(2) without further revision of its SIP, EPA believes it isappropriate for the state to submit a certification letter without holding an additional public

hearing. Because prior submissions for infrastructure requirements will have met the statutory

requirements for notice and public hearing, EPA believes that such process is not required now.

The public will have an opportunity to review the certification when EPA takes action on thesubmittal through the notice-and-comment rulemaking process.

In order for EPA to determine that a submittal fora SIP is complete, the submittal must

affirmatively address all required elements/sub-elements, and should include documentation

demonstrating a correspondence between each infrastructure element and an equivalent statestatutory or regulatory authority in the existing or submitted SIP. At a minimum, a completesubriuission is a letter from an appropriate state official (i.e., Governor or designee) certifyingcompliance with each element and with a specific description of how compliance with each

element is achieved, Submissions lacking a detailed explanation for how the state’s SIP meetseach applicable requirement ofsection 11 0(a)(2) should be deemed incomplete. Submissions

that address some hut not all elements/sub-elements should not be deemed complete fbr the

unaddressed elements/sub-elements, but will result in findings offailure to submit for only the

unaddressed elements/sub-elements. After EPA makes a finding of failure to submit, the state

would oniy be required to submit those elements that were found not to have been submitted in

order for EPA to make a determination that the SIP is folly complete. Letters stating that the

state will submit a SIP revision some time in the future are not complete.

A finding that the submittal is complete does not mean that the submittal is approvable

because the completeness review only addresses whether the state has provided information

sufficient to warrant formal EPA review for approvability. Once EPA determines a SIP

submission to be complete , or after six months when that submission is deemed complete byoperation oflaw, EPA has up to 1 year to take action on (i.e., to approve or disapprove) thesubmission. EPA must promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the state if EPA

takes any ofthe following final actions associated with the required SIP: (1) determines that a - -state has failed to make a SIP submission, (2) determines that has made an incompletesubmission, or (3) disapproves a SIP submission. Any ofthese actions starts a two year FIPclock. In order to stop or rescind a FIP, the state must submit, and EPA must approve, a SIP

submission that meets the applicable requirements.
Section 11 0(a)(2)(D)(i)(l) specifically provides that each state’s SIP must contain

adequate provisions to prohibit air pollutant emissions from within the state that significantly

contribute to nonattainment ofthe NAAQS in any other state. Therefore, the state’s submission

must explain whether or not emissions from the state have this impact and, ifso, address the

impact.

The state’s conclusion must be supported by an adequate technical analysis. Information to

support the state’s determination with respect to significant contribution to nonattáinment mightinclude, but is not limited to, information concerning emissions in the state, meteorologicalconditions in the state and the potentially impacted states, monitored ambient concentrations in

the state and the potentially impacted states, the distance to the nearest area that is not attainingthe NAAQS in another state, and air quality modeling. The EPA believes that it would be

appropriate for states to make this assessment by considering the impact of current or future

emissions on nearby nonattainment areas, and evaluating the air quality impact and potential

mitigation strategies. 2Using these kinds of evaluations, it is EPA’s intention to complete a ruleto address interstate pollution transport in the eastern half of the continental United States.

EPA is cuirently working on a new rule to replace the CAIR rule that will address issues

raised by the court in North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (DC. Cir. 2008). That new rule will

assist states with obligations to address interstate transport that significantly contributes to

nonattainment in another state. However, all states must submit complete 110 SIPs at this timethat address the requirements ofsection II 0(a)(2)(D) Lbr the 2006 24-hour PM2.5NAAQS, and

states cannot wait for the CAIR replacement rule without getting a finding of failure to submit atthis time. In addition, even ifthe CAIR rule were not remanded by the court, states cannot relyon the current CAIR rule for this submission for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5NAAQS because the

CAIR rule does not address this NAAQS.

2. SIP Submissions from States pertaining to the 9nterferc with maintenance”

requirement of section 1 1O(a)(2)(D)(i).

Section 11 0(a)(2)(D)(i)(1) specifically provides that each state’s SIP must contain

adequate piovisions to piohihit an pgiiutant emissions flom within thG state that mteifcic with

maintenance ofthe NAAQS in any other state. States’ submissions must address this

independent requirement ofthe statute. This provision requires evaluation of impacts on areas of

other states that are meeting the 2006 24-hour PM2.5NAAQS, not merely areas formerly

2 If assessing future emissions the state should attempt to represent future year that is no further in the future than

the year in which attainment of the NAAQS is required in the downwind state. In most cases we expect theattainment date to be no later than 5 years from the date of nonattainment designations. Since designations are

expected to be issued in 2009, the inaxinum attainment date would be 2014.
g 

, 

g

and the potentially impacted states, monitored ambient concentrations in the state and the

potentially impacted states, and air quality modeling.

Using these kinds of evaluations, it is EPA’s intention to complete a rule to address interstate

pollution transport in the eastern halfofthe continental United States. However, all states must

submit complete 110 SIPs at this time that address the requirements ofsection 1 l0(a)(2)(D) for

the 2006 24-hour PM2,5NAAQS and states cannot wait for the CAIR replacement rule without

getting a finding offailure to submit at this time.

3. SIP submissions pertaining to the “prevention of significant deterioration”

requirement of section 11 O(a)(2)(D)(i).

Section 11 0(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) contains a requirement fbr all states to submit SiPs that

contain adequate provisions prohibiting “.... any source or other type of emission activity within

the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will interfere with measures required

to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other state .. ..to prevent significantdeterioration of air quality ...“

EPA believes this requirement is satisfied for PM2,5if a state’s SIP includes

preconstruction review programs fbr major sources that satisi’ the requirements of 40 CFR51.1 65(h)(I) and 40 CFR 51 166 (i.e., New Source Review for major stationary sources locating

in attainment areas when the source will cause or contribute to a violation ofthe NAAQS, and

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), respectively). Unless the area has known

outstanding permit program deficiencies, it is not necessary, at this time, for states to make a SIPsubmission containing rule changes specifically to address section 11 0(a)(2)(D)(i)(ll) fbr the2006 24-hour PM2,5NAAQS. Ifthis is the case, the state can submit an appropriate certificationas described previously in this guidance.

All areas are currently required to have some form of preconstruction permitting program

for PM2.5 This program may include a transitional program or a program that conforms with the

minimum requirements of EPA’s May 2008 final rule on implementation ofthe NSR program

for PM2,5. 73 Fed. Reg. 28321. In this action, EPA issued new final rules for certain

PM25 preconstruction permitting programfor attabrnent and nonattainment

areas. States are currently required to revise their preconstruction review permit programs toincorporate these new requirements into an approved SIP by May 2011. However, this provision

under the May 2008 rules has been challenged and is now under a petition for reconsiderationwhereby EPA has agreed to reconsider the schedule for revising state PSD programs for PM. 2.5Accordingly, EPA may revise the schedule for submitting the revised PSD SIPs for EPAapproval. For the present time, however, the deadline for adopting and submitting PM2.5 SIPs for

NSR/PSD is May 2011. Thus, states are not required to adopt the May 2008 rules for the
EPA to implement PSD in accordance with the federal PSD program, which provides for theautomatic protection of any new N AAQS that EPA may promulgate. These states must ensure

that their delegation agrcenent clearly authorizes them to implement the federal PSD program

requirements as amended iMayQ0$. If a delegation agreement is deficient in this regard, thestate should work with EPA to modii’ the agreement to enable implementation ofPM2.5

requirements.

In addition to the PSD permitting program, a state’s SIP may include additional measures

as necessary to prevent air pollution in excess ofthe PSD increment that defines significant

deterioration for each area. 40 CFR 51.166(a). However, EPA has not yet established PSD

increments for PM25.Without these components of a PSD program, it is difficult for states to

deteimine if additional measures are needed to prevent significant deterioration within the state.Likewise, a neighboring state cannot determine whether its SIP would interfere with suchadditional measures in another state’s SIP. However, notwithstanding the absence of PSD

increments for PM25,EPA believes that at this time states may continue to rely on their existing

PSD and NNSR permitting programs to prevent significant deterioration of air quality within

their own boundaries and in adjacent states until such increments are established.

4. SIP Submissions from States pertaining to the “protect visibility” requirement ofsection 1 1O(a)(2)(D)(i).

Section 11 0(a)(2)(D)(i)(H) also contains a requirement for all states to submit SIPs that

contain adequate provisions prohibiting “... any source or other type of emission activity within

the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will interfere with measures requiredto he included in the applicable implementation plan for any other stat.e ....to protect visibility.”

EPA believes this requirement can be satisfied by an approved SIP addressing reasonably

attributable visibility impairment (RAW), ifrequired, and an approved SIP addressing regional

haze. EPA promulgated regulations in 1980 to address RAVI in Class I areas that is caused bythe emissions of air pollutants from one source, or a small number ofsources. See 45 FR 80084(December 2, 1980) and current 40 CFR 51.300 — 51.307. A state must take specified steps toaddress RAW after a Federal Land Manager at any time certifies that RAVI exists at a specific

--Class1Area.40-CFR5L302(c)(l).- - - - Under the 1980 iegulations, 35 s’tates and the U.S. Virgin Islands were required to submit

SiPs to address RAVI. EPA issued FIPs to address the requirements ofRAVI for those states

that had failed to submit SiPs. See 50 FR 28544 (July 12, 1985) and 52 FR 45132 (November24, 1987). EPA is not aware of any certification by a Federal Land Manager of existing RAW

that remains unaddressed by a currently approved SIP or FIP. Accordingly, we believe that

states for which EPA has approved into the state’s current SIP some or all RAVI elements,
visibility in Class I areas. See 64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999) and current 40 CFR 51 .308 -51.309.Regional haze is visibility impairment that is produced by a multitude ofsources and activities

which emit visibility-impairing pollutants and their precursors and which are located across a

broad geographic area. States are currently under an obligation to submit SIPs that contain

measures to address regional haze, including a long-term strategy to address visibility

impairment for each Class I area which may he affected by emissions from a state. These SIP

submissions were due on December 17, 2007. In January 2009, EPA found that 37 states, theDistrict of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands had failed to make all or palt ofthe requiredSIP submissions to address regional haze. See 74 FR 2392 (January 15, 2009). These findings

require EPA to issue FIPs within 2 years, by January, 2011, unless the states submit SIPs andEPA approves them before that date. States that intend to rely on the required regional haze SIPs

to satisfy this element oftheir section 110(a) SIP but have not formally indicated, this intention in

a SIP submission, or have not yet submitted the regional haze SIP, may receive an additionalfinding of failure to submit this element oftheir section 110(a) SIP. EPA will be able to fully

approve the submittal as satisfying section 11 0(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) only after we have taken final

action approving the regional haze SIP.Guidance for Satisfying the Section 1 1O(a)(2)(G) Requirement

To address the section 11 0(a)(2)(G) element, states with air quality control regions

identified as either Priority I, Priority IA, or Priority II by the “Prevention ofAir Pollution

Emergency Episodes” rules at 40 CFR 51.150, mi,st develop emergency episode contingency

plans. Currently, those regulations do not specifically address PM2,5.

Until the Agency finalizes changes to the emergency episode regulations to establish for

PM2,5specific levels for classifying areas as Priority I, IA, and H for PM2,5and to establish asignificant harm level (SHL), EPA recommends that states through their public processes setPriority levels and emergency action levels thr PM2.5necessary to develop emergency episode

plans consistent with the requirements in 40 CFR 5 1.150 through 5 1.153. We furtherrecommend that states consider the levels discussed in the February 12, 2007 EPA issue paper

titled “Revising the Air Quality Index and Setting a Significant Harm Level for PM25”and toAttachment B to this guidance in establishing Priority levels and emergency action levels, - -- including a S-HL— Using the recommendations -in Attachment -B,-for the purposes ofsatis’ing

the requirements ofsection 11 0(a)(2)(G), states would develop emergency episode3plans for any V

area that has monitored and recorded 24-hour PM2,5levels greater than 140.4 ,tg/ln since 2006. V

—i Ifthis level was never exceeded in any area ofthe state, the state can certify that it has

appropriate general emergency powersto addressPM2,5-related episodes, and that no specific

The issue paper can be found at http://’.epa.gov/ttnfcaaa/gen/aQi issue ajDer 020707.pdl
submittals to be complete. It is for this reason that EPA is providing the recommendations in thismemorandum as guidance for states to make submittals to address section 11 0(a)(2)(G). The

SHL, Priority levels, and emergency action levels recommended in Attachment B are relevant

for both the 1997 PM2.5NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5NAAQS. if a state elects not to make a

submittal that addresses section 11 0(a)(2)(G) for the 2006 24-hour PM25 NAAQS in accordance

with the Agency’s recommendations or otherwise meeting the statutory requirements, EPA willhave reason to make a finding offailure to submit for this NAAQS.

For Further Information

If you have any questions concerning this guidance, please contact David SanderS at

(919) 541-3356. Please ensure that the appropriate air agency officials for states in your Region

are made aware ofthis guidance.

Attachments

cc: Brian McLean, OAP

Kevin McLean, OGCMargo Oge, OTAQ

Steve Page, OAQPS

Peter Tsirigotis, OAQPS

Richard Wayland, OAQPSLydia Wegman, OAQPS

‘ Under these conditions the contingency plan portion ofsection 1 l0(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 PM2.NAAQS, for

which we issued a finding for failure to submit in October 2008, may also he resolved (73 FR 62902).
for establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors, collection and analysis ofambient air quality data, and to make these data available to EPA upon request.

Section 1 10(a)(2)(C) - Program for enforcement of control measures: requires SIPs toinclude a program providing for enforcement of all SIP measures and the regulation ofconstruction of new and modified stationary sources as necessary to assure that the NAAQS areachieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D.

Section 110(a)(2)(D) — Interstate transport provisions: requires SrPs to contain adequate

provisions prohibiting emissions generated within the state from contributing significantly to

nonattainment in, or interfering with maintenance by, any other state with respect to the

NAAQS, or from interfering with measures required to be included in the SIP of any other stateto prevent significant deterioration or to protect visibility:Section 1 10(a)(2)(E) - Adequate resources: requires SIPs to provide necessary assurances foradequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out its SIP, to containrequirements addressing potential conflicts of interest, and to provide necessary assurances that

the state retains responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation ofthe SIP where the staterelies on a local or regional government for implementation of any SIP provision.

Section i10(a)(2)(F) - Stationary source monitoring system: requires SIPs to establish a

system to monitor emissions from stationary sources, to submit periodic emissions reports, tocorrelate the emissions reports with the corresponding SIP emission limits and standards, and to

make emissions reports available to the public.Section 110(a)(2)(G) - Emergency episodes: requires SIPs to provide for authority to addressactivities causing imminent and substantial endangerment to public health and to provide forad equate contingency plans to implement such authority.

Section 110(a)(2)(H) -Future SIP revisions: requires SIPs to provide for SIP revisions in

response to changes in the NAAQS, or availability of improved methods for attaining theNAAQS, and in response to an EPA finding that the SIP is substantially inadequate.Section 1 10(a)(2)(J) -Consultation with government officials, public notification, PSD andvisibility protection: requires states to provide a process for consultation with localgovernments and Federal Land Managers carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements;

The specific nonattainment area plan requirements of sections I lO(a)(2)(C) and I 1O(a)(2)(I) are subject to the

timing requirement ofsection 172, not the timing requirement ofsection I IO(a)(l), and therefore not consideredrequired elements ofthe “infrastructure SIP.”
and the submission ofsuch data to EPA upon request.

Section 11O(a)(2)(L) - Permitting fees: requires SIPs to require each major stationary source to

pay permitting fees to cover the cost ofreviewing, acting upon, implementing and enforcing apermit until such fee requirement is superseded by EPA approval of a fee program under title Vofthe Clean Air Act.

Section 11O(a)(2)(M) - Consultation/participation by affected local entities: requires SIPs toprovide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisionsaffected by the SIP.
g

24-hour Level Index Average Classification

..

. Category Values Avcrae QtgIm 3)t * (zg/m)

Good 0-50 0.0-15.4 0.0-15.4

Moderate 51-100 15.5-40.4 155-35.4

Unhealthy fot 101-150 40.5-65.4 35.5-55.4 Sensitive Groups

Unhealthy 151-200 65.5-150.4 55.5-140.4

Very Unhealthy 201-300 150.5-250.4 140.5-210.4 Priority Level II Alert

Hazardous 1 301-400 250.5-350.4 210.5-280.4 Priority Level

t and IA Warning

Hazardous 2 401-500 350.5-500 280.5-350.4 Emergency

• Significant Harm Level (SHL) 350.5

-[ For a discussion of possible revisions to the AQI and SHL, see the EPA issue paper found

at

* Based on historical incidence of 24-hour average coieritrtjQns_using the most recent 3

calendar years of data.

See 40 CFR. Part 51 Appendix L ‘Example Regulations for Prevention of Air Pollution

Emergency Episodes” fbr an example ofthe application of emergency action levels.