VIa E-Mail August 19, 2011 Ms
. Cecily Beall Ms
. Jessica Da niels Distri ct Department of the Environment Air Q uality Division 1200 First Street, NE , 5th Floor Washi ngton , DC 20002 Re: Comments on Proposed Ru lemaking to Regulate the I nterstate Transport of Nitroge n Oxide Emissions from Non-Electric Generating Unit Sources and Proposed Revision of the District's State Implementation Plan To Whom 

### It May Concern : The District Department of the Environment (DDOE) i s proposing to replace chapter 10, title 20 of the District of Col umb ia Municipal Regulations (DCMR) with a new set of ru les relating to non-electrica l generating unit (no n-EGU) limits on nitrogen oxide (N Ox) emissions. In accordance with DDO E's Notice of Public Hearing on Air Quality Issues , the United States General Services Administration (GSA) , Heating Operation and Transmission Division (HOTD) hereby submits comme nts on the proposed regulation
. Comment 1 Th e proposed rul e does not allow for emissions trading as a form of com pli ance. Because the Clean Air Act, as amended, co ntempl ates a market-based cap and trade approach to em issions red u ction, GSA requests t hat the proposed rule be ame nd ed to provide regu lated entities the ability to purchase NOx emission allowances from brokers or other EGU or non-EG U so urces regu l ated under the Clean Air Act as a means of offsetti ng any NOx emissions exceeding the cap set forth in proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1001
. 1
. Comment 2 The proposed rule does not provide for exceptions from the overall NOx emission s cap for start-up, shut-down and malfunction events. GSA believes that these em i ssions sho uld not be included in the overall cap , but sho uld instead be separately reported for the purpose of confirming t he occurrence , duration and causes of such events.

1Comment 3 GSA requests that the proposed rule be revised to apply generally to any non-EGU that meets the applicable size requirement. In particular, GSA requests that proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1001
. 1 be revised to appl y an em issions limit for any boiler, combu stion turbine or combined cycle system that has a maximum design heat input of greater than two hu ndred fifty million British thermal units (MMBtu) per hour
. Because another sim ilar non-EGU may be established in the future , t he p roposed rule has the potential to un constitution all y discriminate against the Federal Government. See Moses Lake Homes. I n c. v . G rant Cou nty , 365 U .S. 7 44 (196 1). Comment4 Proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1002.2(a) requires that testing " (b]e con ducted using methods approved by the Department and acceptabl e to EPA. " To adequately budget for this requirement, GSA requests that the testing methods mentioned in p roposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1002
.2(a) be specifically delineated
. Comment 5 Proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1002
.2(c) requ i re s that emissions testing " (d]emonstrate that the NOx emissions do not exceed the maximum allowabl e NOx emission limit specified in 

### § 1001
. 1 of this chapter." In this context , GSA would like further guidan ce on DDOE 's interpretation of the term "testing ." If testing is synonymous with monitoring , GSA proposes that the subject provision be deleted and/or merged i nto proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1002
. 1
. If t esti ng is given its common meaning, it Is not cl ear to GSA how testing of an emi ssions system coul d demonstrate that a q u an tity of NOx h ad been em itted. It wou ld seem to GSA that the emissions monitoring system sh o ul d be used to demonstrate e mi ssio ns volume , and that emissions testing shou ld demonstrate that the e mi ssions mo n itoring system is functioning properly
. GSA requests that the proposed rule be revi sed a nd/or clarified accord ingl y . Comment 6 Proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1003.1(b) requires retention of " (o]th er information deemed necessary by the Department
...." To avoid potential confusion and simplify compliance effo rts , GSA requests that such i nformation be specifically delineated
. Comment 7 Proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1004.1 states that " [t]here shall be a presumption that any excess emissions identified during a control pe ri od that occu rred during the entire period and constitutes one hu ndred fifty-three (153) days of violations (representing the2number of days in a control period) , unless the NOx source can demonstrate, to the satisfaction ofthe Department. that a lesser number of days of violation should apply." a) With regard to the presumption of a 153 day violation, GSA believes it would be virtually impossible for GSA to release 25 tons of NOx in a month, let alone a single day. GSA believes that a rule that presumes violation when a violation is essentially impossible violates DC's prohibition on arbitrary regulations. This presumption could also result in a fine that is unreasonably large if only a minor violation has occurred. GSA accordingly proposes that this provision be revised to avoid such concerns. b) If the above-referenced penalty presumption language is retained , GSA proposes that the standard for determining the number of violations be tied directly to the data generated pursuant to proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1 002
. This would provide an objective standard, as opposed to DDOE 's seemingly subjective standard. c) If the above-referenced penalty presumption language is retained, GSA requests that this language be clarified. In particular, it is unclear whether the second occurrence of the word "that" is extraneous to the intent of the proposed provision
. CommentS Since violations are computed on a daily basis, GSA suggests that proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1004 be revised to base violations on a daily emissions limit, as opposed to a 153-day limit. This would avoid many of the issues highlighted in Comment 7
. Alternatively, DDOE could base penalties on the number of days that GSA is out of compliance with the 25 ton limit , or such penalties could be strictly based on the extent to which the applicable limit is exceeded
. Comment9 It is unclear to GSA how proposed 20 DCMR § 1004.1 (b) relates to proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1004.1(a)
. These provisions could be read to impose multiple violations in a day, or just one violation for each excess ton . GSA also questions whether the Clean Air Act authorizes tonnage-based penalties
. GSA requests that the interplay of these provisions be clarified
. Comment 10 GSA requests clarification of the term " New Unit Set-Aside Equivalent" present in proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1001
. 1
. GSA also requests guidance on the purpose of this oneton limit. 3Comm ent 1 1 GSA understands that the DDOE would like to make this emission cap effective by the next ozone season . This short window will not allow GSA sufficient time to property review potential avenues to achieve compliance with the proposed revision
. Accordingly, GSA requests that the DDOE extend the compliance date of the proposed rule
. Comment 1 2 GSA has a cogeneration system that consists of a boi ler and two turbines
. The cogeneration boiler and the turbines are each under the 250 MMBtu/hr thresh old
. but exceed the threshold when operating in concert . GSA requests that DDOE clarify the language in the proposed rule to clearty state whether the turbines are subject to the proposed revision when they are operating independently of the boiler
. More broadly , GSA requests clarification of whether the overall 

### NOx limit applies only to the boilers that meet the requirements of proposed 20 DCMR 

### § 1000
. 1 , or whether that limit applies to the Central Heating and Refrigeration Plant broadly
. Thank you in advance for your consideration of GSA's concerns . If you have any questions about these comments, please contact George Korvah at (202) 690-9719
. Sincerely,
Dave Mbonu, PhD. Director, GSA-Heating Operations and Transmission Division 13th & C Streets, SW., (W PSA) Washington , DC 20407

4