UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION Ill 

1650 Arch Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029 

The Honorable Keith A. Anderson, Director 

District Department of the Environment 

1200 First Street NE, 5th Floor 

Washington, D.C. 20002 

Dear Director Anderson: 

AUG 1 5 2013 

On July 18, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the 

District of Columbia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the District Department of the Environment 

(DDOE). The SIP revision addresses the infrastructure elements specified in section 110(a)(2) ofthe 

Clean Air Act (CAA) which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 lead national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in the District of Columbia. EPA has determined that the 

submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing it to prepare a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPR). 

If members of your staffhave any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Emlyn Velez-Rosa, 

Office of Air Program Planning, the principal contact for this rulemaking, at (215) 814-2038, or velezrosa.emlyn@epa. gov. 

cc: Cecily Beall, Associate Director, 

Air Quality Division 

Sincerely, r 

~~~ Diana Esher, Director 

Air Protection Division 

n 

~J Printed on 100% recycled/recyclable paper with 100% post-consumer fiber and process chlorine free. 

Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474 
SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST 

(In accordance with 40 CFR Part 51 - App. V) 

SIP Submitted by: District Department of the Environment 

Date Submitted: August 8, 2013 

Subject: Section 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) Requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS in the Current District of Columbia State 

Implementation Plan 

Completeness Review 

Completed by: Emlyn Velez-Rosa 

Date Completed: July 30, 2013 

Administrative Materials 

'ErJ.Lv"'-' ~~ ~ 7/9o/',3 

ACCEPTABLE 

I EP~QUIREMENT 1- STATE SUBMITTAL I (X) I 

1. A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his 

~esignee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision 

hereof. 

1. A letter dated July 18, 2013 was submitted by Keith A. I X 

Anderson, Director of District Department of the Environment 

(DDOE) of District of Columbia (D.C.). 

~- Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code 2. Not a regulatory change. The submittal is a request for full I X 

pr body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, or consent approval of the 110(a)(2) State implementation plan (SIP) 

agreement in final form. That evidence shall include the date infrastructure requirements for implementation of the 2008 lead 

bfadoption or final issuance as well as the effective date ofthe national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Applicable 

fplan, if different from the adoption/issuance date. regulations listed in the submittal are already in DC's code 

Check to see if the regulation, permit, order or consent decree and/or have been approved into the D.C. SIP. 

has a sunset or expiration date. If so it is not acceptable as a 

SIP submission. 

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority 

under State law to ado_pt and implement the plan. 

3. D.C. has the necessary legal authority under the Title 20 of 

the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR). 

X 

~- A copy of ~ctual regu_lation, or docum~nt submitted _for . 4. Not a regulatory change. ~he submittal is a r~quest for full 

:approval and mcorporat10n by reference mto the plan, mcludmg approval ofthe 110(a)(2) SIP mfrastructure reqmrements for I X 

!indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan, implementation of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. State regulations 

!where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official have been previously approved for the D.C. SIP and are being 
EPA REQIDREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) 

14. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air 4. The SIP revision addresses the required section 110(a)(2) X 

jquality standards, prevention of significant deterioration SIP elements, which relate to the general information and 

increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and authorities that constitute the "infrastructure" of the lead air 

visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved quality management program. 

and implemented. 

5. Modeling information required to support the proposed 5. Contained in the current D.C. SIP. The authority to perform X 

evision, including input data, output data, models used, air quality modeling is discussed in the SIP revision. 

~bient monitoring data used, meteorological data used, 

justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of 

models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the 

!determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis. 

6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are 6. Emissions limitations for lead are contained in the current X 

based on continuous emission reduction technology. D.C. SIP, and are discussed in the SIP revision. 

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work 7. Control measures for lead are contained in the current D.C. X 

practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, SIP, and are discussed in the SIP revision. 

where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how 8. Compliance and enforcement strategies for lead are X 

compliance will be determined in practice. contained in the current D.C. SIP, and are discussed in the SIP 

reVISIOn. 

9. Special economic and technological justifications required by 9. No special justifications are required. X 

any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, 

explain why.) 

10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a 10. Not applicable. X 

maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant 

~AAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation.