SUSANA MARTINEZ Governor

JOHN A SANCHEZ Lieutenant Governor



### June 11, 2015

Mr. Ron Curry Regional Administrator . ,-- ,,-;· C\;

-- \ 0 ('\)l NEW**MR®l~Q~,·:;,\ ·~'SEC.** 

## ENVIRONMENT\Jj-)d~A_'j_~'t"M~NT 15 J\JN 25 P\"\ 

## f>: \ 4

Harold Runnels Building 1190 Saint Francis Drive (87505) PO Box 5469, Santa Fe, NM 87502-5469 Phone (505) 827-2990 Fax (505) 827-1628
www.nmenv.state.nm.us



### U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 1445 Ross Ave, Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733 RYAN FLYNN Cabinet Secretary

BUTCH TONGATE Deputy Secretary



### Subject: Proposed revision to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Air Quality to address infrastructure requirements of Section 11 0( a)(2)(A)-(M) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to implement the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (S0 2 ) 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

Dear Mr. Curry:

I am writing on behalf of Governor Susana Martinez to request approval of the attached documentation which is proposed to serve as the basis for a revision to the New Mexico SIP. Specifically, I am submitting documentation for the recently adopted S0 2 

### Infrastructure SIP, adopted pursuant to Title I ofthe CAA Amendments of 1990. The S0 2 

### i-SIP applies exclusively to Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, New Mexico.

The Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (Air Board) adopted the S0 2 

### infrastructure SIP at its regular monthly meeting on April 30, 2015, following a public hearing held the same evening. The public hearing was held in accordance with state law and the public hearing requirements of 40 CFR 51.102.

To facilitate your review, one hard copy of this SIP submittal and one exact duplicate in electronic form are enclosed. I believe that the submitted materials provide adequate documentation to support the requested SIP revision.

To facilitate your review and processing, the following materials arc enclosed:
1) SIP Completeness Checklist pursuant to 40 CFR 51, Appendix V;
2) hearing record;
3) comments and responses;

### 4) the S02 infrastructure SIP adopted by the Air Board; and
5) other supporting documentation.

Your favorable consideration of this request is appreciated. If you have any questions, please contact Mary Lou Leonard, Director of the Albuquerque Environmental Health Department (EHD), at (505) 768-2631.

etary New Mexico Environment Department

cc: Honorable Susana Martinez, Governor, State of New Mexico Jeffrey Kendall, General Counsel, NMED Michael Vonderheide, Director, Environmental Protection Division, NMED Richard Goodyear, Chief, Air Quality Bureau, NMED Kelsey Curran, Chair, Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board Danny Nevarez, Deputy Director, Albuquerque EHD Margaret Nieto, Control Strategies Manager, Air Quality Program, EHD

# Attachment B
Attachment B contains copies of the following:
Notice of Intent to Present Technical Testimony, with supporting exhibits, filed April 14, 2015, regarding Air Board hearing on proposed SO2 Infrastructure SIP.BEFORE THE ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO ADOPT A STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) FOR SULFUR DIOXIDE (SOz) TO ADDRESS SECTIONS 110(a)(1) AND (2) OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(1) AND (2) HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE 

### "SOz INFRASTRUCTURE SIP"

Air Quality Program, Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque, Petitioner AQCB Petition No. 2015-1

CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO PRESENT TECHNICAL TESTIMONY 

### en :r:- 

### -o :::0



# ... -o :X 

## iS?



# ... \D
Pursuant to 20.11.82 NMAC, 

### Rulemaking Procedures -Air Quality Control Board, the
City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program (EHD) hereby

submits its Notice of Intent (NO I) to present technical testimony in this proceeding.

1. The person for whom the witness will testify.

Air Quality Program, Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque, New

Mexico.

2. The name and qualifications of each technical witness.

Ed Merta. Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator, Control Strategies
Division, Air Quality Program, Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque, New

Mexico. J.D. (Natural Resources Certificate), University ofNew Mexico; M.A. (and "ABD")
History, Harvard University; M.A. History, Ohio University; B.A. International Studies, Ohio

Notice of Intent Page 1 of 1 0 

# ., % -.j: ::;6 0 %:;o 

### :C. IT! ITIC"') ::c:ro 

### );!< r-fTI 'if:it:!J 

### > 

## r:;c :z::State University. Employed by the City of Albuquerque's Environmental Health Department

since October 2014. Previously employed by the following organizations: New Mexico

Renewable Energy Industries Association (law clerk school, temporary, 2014); WildEarth

Guardians (intern, 2014); Western Resource Advocates (intern, 2013); Department ofFamily

and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine (2007 to 2011 );

Health Sciences Library and Informatics Center, University ofNew Mexico (1998 

### to 2007).

Chief responsibility is 

### to facilitate promulgation of air quality regulation through the
Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board for implementation within the City

of Albuquerque and the County of Bernalillo, including research, drafting and editing of

technical and legal documents, hearing preparation, testifying, and submittal, through the New

Mexico Records Center and Archives and the New Mexico Environment Department, to the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval.



### Isreal Tavarez, P.E. Environmental Health Manager, Permitting Division, Air Quality
Program, Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque, New Mexico. M.S. Chemical
Engineering, New Mexico State University; B.S. Chemical Engineering, NMSU. Registered

Professional Engineer (New Mexico). Employed by the City of Albuquerque's Environmental

Health Department, Air Quality Program for 18 years. Previously employed by the State ofNew
Mexico, Air Quality Bureau (1994-1996).

Mr. Tavarez's primary responsibility is 

### to manage the air quality stationary source permitting program which includes reviewing and approving all air quality stationary source permits to ensure the permits are issued in accordance with local, state and federal regulations.

Notice of Intent Page 2 

### of 10Damon Reyes. Environmental Health Manager, Enforcement and Compliance Division,

Air Quality Program, Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque, New Mexico.

B.S. in Environmental Science, College of Santa Fe, May 2001. Trained in extensive array of
manufacturing and industrial technologies, related air pollution control approaches. Employed by
City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program, for ten years. Previously employed by Air Quality Bureau, New Mexico Environment Department (2002 to
2005), Pueblo Office of Environmental Protection, All Indian Pueblo Council (2000 to 2002),
Philips Semiconductor (1998 to 2000).

Main responsibilities include: overseeing enforcement and compliance actions and
bringing them to resolution; reviewing inspection reports that have designated a source as out of
compliance, to determine if an enforcement action can be pursued; drafting penalty calculations

and notices of violation.

Dan Gates. Quality Assumnce Section Supervisor, Air Quality Progmm, Environmental

Health Department, City of Albuquerque, New Mexico. B.A. Architecture, University ofNew

Mexico. Employed by the City of Albuquerque for 20 years. Four years with the Wastewater
Utility Division and 16 years with the Environmental Health Department's Air Quality Program.

Mr. Gates oversees the Progmm's quality assurance activities including data quality

management, data validation, and the monitoring equipment auditing program. 

### Mr. Gates also

evaluates all the air monitoring data prior to submission to the EPA and works closely with EPA
Regional staff to ensure that the Air Quality Program's Air Monitoring data meets all applicable

federal requirements.

Notice of Intent Page 3 of 10

### 3. Summary and Estimated Duration of Testimony

Mr. Merta's written testimony is attached as AQP Exhibit 8. Presentation of that
testimony is expected to take approximately ten minutes or less. Mr. Merta will testify that the
proposed sulfur dioxide (S02) NAAQS Infrastructure State Implementation Plan ("Infrastructure
SIP") should 

### be adopted and approved for submittal to EPA as a proposed revision to the New

Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP). It is estimated that the hearing will take one hour or

less. This petition to the Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board is
supported by EHD for the following reasons.

A. Section llO(a)(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires each state, within

three years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, to submit an Infrastructure SIP

to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the new or revised

standard. This Infrastructure SIP is a compilation of elements that demonstrates how a

state, or a local air authority within a state, will implement, maintain and enforce the

revised NAAQS. Section 11 O(a)(2) of the CAA lists the required elements that comprise

the Infrastructure SIP. These include: enforceable emission limitations and control

measures, air quality monitoring and modeling, a permitting program, adequate funding

and personnel, authority under state law to carry out the plan, emissions reporting,

emergency powers, public participation, and fee collection.

B. The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (Air Act), NMSA 1978,

Sections 74-2-4 and 74-2-5.B(l) [1967 as amended through 2007] authorizes and requires

the Air Board to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend, and repeal air quality regulations.

The Air Act, NMSA 1978, Section 74-2-5.B(2), also authorizes and requires the Board to
adopt air quality plans (SIPs). Similarly, the Board is authorized and required to adopt,
promulgate, publish, amend, and repeal air quality regulations and adopt plans under:

Notice of Intent Page 4 of 10City of Albuquerque Ordinances, Section 9-5-1-4(B); Bernalillo County Ordinances,

Section 30-33(b). Local ordinances also require regulations and plans to be adopted only

after a hearing of the Board, per: City of Albuquerque Ordinances, Section 9-5-1-6;

Bernalillo County Ordinances, Section 30-35.

C. On June 22,2010, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson promulgated a revised
NAAQS for S02, effective August 23, 2010 [75 Fed. Reg. 35,520 (June 22, 201 0)].

Based on its review of the air quality criteria for oxides of sulfur and the previous
primary NAAQS for oxides of sulfur as measured by S0 2 , EPA made revisions to the
primary S02 NAAQS in order to provide requisite protection of public health.
Specifically, EPA has established a new 1-hour standard at a level of75 parts per billion
(ppb), based on the 3-year average of the 99th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-

hour daily maximum concentrations, to replace the previous 24 hour and annual primary

S0 2 standards. EPA also established S0 2 ambient air monitoring and reporting
requirements to support implementation of and compliance with the new NAAQS.

D. Under the CAA, an Infrastructure SIP for the 2010 S0 2 NAAQS was required to be submitted to EPA by June 23, 2013. The delay in submitting it resulted

from personnel turnover in the Air Quality Program of the Environmental Health
Department, City of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Because of this delay, EPA has asked

that it be finalized and submitted as soon as possible be made a priority.

E. EHD circulated a Stakeholder/EPA Review Draft of the proposed

Infrastructure SIP from December 24, 2014 to January 30, 2015. Notice of the circulation

of this draft is attached as AQP Exhibit 2. Comments on this draft were received from the
Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority (ABCWUA), shown as AQP

Exhibit 3a. EHD's response to these comments is shown as AQP Exhibit 3b. Comments

Notice of Intent Page 5 of 10were also received from EPA, shown as AQP Exhibit 4a. EHD's response to these

comments is shown as Exhibit 4b. Following circulation of the Stakeholder/EPA Review
Draft, EHD formulated the Public Review Draft, Exhibit 1. This draft displays changes

made from the Stakeholder/EPA review draft in the form of strikethroughs for deleted

text and underlines for addition of text.



### F. The rulemaking for adoption of the proposed Infrastructure SIP and
approval of its submittal to EPA is being carried out in accordance with federal and state
procedural requirements and with 20.11.82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures --Air
Quality Control Board. Consistent with the provisions of these legal authorities, EHD

circulated the Public Review Draft, AQP Exhibit 1, with EHD's petition for rulemaking

to the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (Air Board), which is

shown as AQP Exhibit 1 a. Notice of the petition is attached as AQP Exhibit 

### 1 b. Draft

minutes of the Air Board meeting at which the Air Board approved EHD's request for a hearing on the proposed Infrastructure SIP is shown as AQP Exhibit 6. Notices of the
hearing, scheduled for April30, 2015, are shown as AQP Exhibits 6a, 6b, and 6c. The

draft agenda for the April30 Air Board meeting and hearing is shown as AQP Exhibit 

### 7.

G. Adoption of the Public Review Draft, as amended by staff proposed floor
amendments, AQP Exhibit 

### 9, will fulfill all local obligations under federal law and allow

submission of the Infrastructure SIP 

### to EPA. Further background on the origins,
formulation, and contents of the proposed Infrastructure SIP is available in AQP Exhibits



### lOa to 

### IOd.

Notice of Intent Page 6 of 10

### 4. Text of Recommended Revisions to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan

The Division recommends adoption of the proposed S02 NAAQS Infrastructure SIP; as

shown in the Public Review Draft, AQP Exhibit 1; as amended by Staff Proposed Floor
Amendments, AQP Exhibit 9.



### 5. List and Description of Exhibits

The Division has attached the following exhibits to this Notice of Intent:

Exhibit Number Title of Exhibit

AQP Exhibit 1/la/1b

AQP Exhibit 2 { 1} Public Review Draft showing proposed "S0 2 Infrastructure

SIP" (changes from Stakeholder & EPA Review Draft are indicated as strikethroughs and use of red font)
{ 1 a} Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for S02 to

address Sections 11 O(a)(1) and (2) of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42

U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(1) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S0 2 Infrastructure

SIP," as filed February 20, 2015
{ 1

b} text of email notice of petition to "Air Quality Control Board

Announce" List Serve, February 20,2015

Notice of Stakeholder and EPA review: text of email sent December 24,

2014 to the "Air Quality Control Board Announce" List Serve, informing
recipients that Stakeholder Review Draft is available for comment
(revisions to contents of Stakeholder Review Draft are indicated in Public

Review Draft- see AQP Exhibit 3b, below)

Notice of Intent Page 7 of 1 0AQP Exhibit 3a

AQP Exhibit 3b

AQP Exhibit 4a

AQP Exhibit 4b

AQP Exhibit 5 Comments on Stakeholder Review Draft from Albuquerque Bernalillo
County Water Utility Authority (ABCWUA), January 26,2015

EHD response to ABCWUA comments

Comments on Stakeholder Review Draft from EPA, received as letter via

U.S. mail, January 30,2015

EHD response to EPA comments

Draft minutes of Air Quality Control Board Meeting, March 11, 2015
(during which petition for rulemaking was presented).

AQP Exhibits 6 

### albic Notices of rulemaking hearing, including:

AQP Exhibit 7 {6a} legal advertisement of hearing 

### in Albuquerque Journal,

3/15/2015;
{6b} legal advertisement of hearing in New Mexico Register,

3/16/2015;
{ 6c} text of email notice to "Air Quality Control Board

Announce" List Serve

Draft agenda of Air Quality Control Board meeting and hearings,

scheduled to be held April30, 2015

Notice of Intent Page 8 of 10AQP Exhibit 8

AQP Exhibit 9

AQP Exhibit 1 Oa

AQP Exhibit 1 Ob

AQP Exhibit 1 Oc

AQP Exhibit lOd Direct Testimony by Ed Merta, Air Quality Program, in support of
adoption ofS0 2 Infrastructure SIP, to be presented at hearing on AQCB

Petition No. 2015-1

Staff proposed floor amendments to Public Review Draft (amended text is

indicated by strikethroughs and use of red font)

Final EPA rule setting new S02 NAAQS, Federal Register, June 22,2010

S02 attainment designation letter from Ron Curry, Region 6
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to New Mexico

Governor Susana Martinez, February 7, 2013

EPA Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a){2),
September 2013

City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, 2014 Annual

Network Review for Ambient Air Monitoring



### 6. Reservation of Rights

This Notice of Intent to Present Technical Testimony is based on EHD's Petition for
Regulatory Change of February 20,2015. EHD reserves the right to call any person to testify and

Notice of Intent Page 9 of 10to present any exhibit in response to another notice of intent or public comment filed in this

matter or to any testimony or exhibit offered at the public hearing. EHD also reserves the right to

call any person as a rebuttal witness and to present any exhibit in support thereof.

Respectfully submitted,

Ed Merta Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator Air Quality Program Environmental Health Department One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 (505) 768-2660

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that on Apri114, 2015, an original and 15 copies ofthis Notice oflntent 

### to present technical testimony (NOI), with attached exhibits, were delivered to the following person for filing.

Andrew Daffern Air Quality Control Board Liaison Air Quality Division Environmental Health Department One Civic Plaza, NW, Room 3023 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103

And that on April14, 2015 a copy of this NOI, with attached exhibits, was sent by email to the Attorney for the Board, Felicia Orth.

# ~) fi1Jd

Ed Merta Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator Air Quality Program Environmental Health Department

Notice of Intent Page 10 of 10

# 0

(; Ex. #1. Public Review Draft

- S02 Infrastructure SIP; [1 a.] Petition to Adopt S02 Infrastructure SIP; [1 b.] Email notice sent to "AQCB Announce" list serve, 2-20-2015

Ex. #2. Notice of Stakeholder and EPA review, sent to 

# j

"AQCB Announce" list serve, 12-24-2014

Ex. #3a. Comments on EPA/Stakeholder Review Draft from ABCWUA, 1-26-2015; [3b.] AQP response to ABCWUA comments

Ex. #4a. Comments on EPA/Stakeholder Review Draft from EPA, 1-30-2015; [4b] AQP response to EPA comments

Ex. #5. Draft minutes of Air Quality Control Board Meeting, 3-11-2015

Ex

. #6a/b/c. Notices of Proposed Rulemaking: [Sa.) Abq Journal , 3-15-2015; [6b.] NM Register, 3-16-2015; [6c.] Email notice sent to "AQCB Announce" list serve, 3-16-2015

Ex

. #7. Draft agenda of Air Quality Control Board meeting and hearings, scheduled to be held on 4-30-2015

Ex. #8. Direct Testimony by Ed Merta, AQP, in support of adoption of S02 infrastructure SIP, to be presented at hearing on AQCB Petition No. 2015-1

Ex. #9. Staff proposed floor amendments to Public Review Draft (amended text is indicated by strikethroughs and use of red font)

Ex. #1 Oa. Final EPA rule, S02 NAAQS 201 0; [1 Ob.] S02 attainment designation from EPA, 2-7-2013; [10c

. ] EPA iSIP guidance; [10d.] COA 2014 Annual Network Review8TAK£HOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12tQ4/2Ql4212012015 

# ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY

2 

# AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

3

4

5 

# State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Air Quality

6

7

8 

# To Address Infrastructure Requirements of

9 

# Section 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) of the Clean Air Act

Io 

# (CAA) to Implement the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide

II 

# (S0 2 ) 

# National Ambient Air Quality Standard

I2 

# (NAAQS)

I3

I4

I5

'I6

I7

I8

I9

20

2I
22 

# Adopted [MONTH & 

# DATE, 2015]

23 

### Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, Chair
24 

### Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 1 ofll 

# - c.n -rt M CD N C>

-u 3::**~** w**~** 

### ....

- I



### - i- '**-~** j I "):>
r2 3 STAKliHObDBR PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12A24A29142/2012015



### ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT

4 

### Ed Merta, Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator 5 

### Control Strategies Section, Air Quality Program (AQP) 6 

### Principal Author, Editor, SIP Submittal 7 8 

### Margaret Nieto, Control Strategies Manager, AQP 9 

### Project Oversight 10 11 

### Air Quality Monitoring and Assurance Section, AQP 12 

### Air Monitoring and Data Program Information 13 14 

### Regulatory Development Committee, AQP 15 

### Peer Review 16 17 18

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 2 ofll2 3 AAMNP 4 AQCA 5 AQCB 6 AQP 7 AQS 8 CAA 9 CFR 10 EPA 11 Fed. Reg. 12 GHG 13 iSIP 14 NAAQS 15 NEI 16 

### NM 17 NMAC 18 NMSA 19 PM2.S 20 PSD 21 ROA 22 SIP 23 SLEIS 24 so2 25 26 STl'.Kli:HOLDI!R PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as ofl212412914212012015



### LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (also referred to as "Air Act") Air Quality Control Board (also referred to as "Air Board") Air Quality Program Air Quality System Clean Air Act Code of Federal Regulations Environmental Protection Agency Federal Register Greenhouse gasses Infrastructure State Implementation Plan National Ambient Air Quality Standards National Emissions Inventory New Mexico New Mexico Administrative Code New Mexico Statutes Annotated Particulate Matter 2.5 Prevention of Significant Deterioration Revised Ordinances of the City of Albuquerque State Implementation Plan State and Local Emissions Inventory System Sulfur Dioxide

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 3 ofllSTAKiil-IObDSR: PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of ll/24f:lQl42/20/2015

2 

### Introduction 

### 3 4 

### A State Implementation Plan (SIP) identifies how the state will attain and maintain the primary and 5 

### secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The SIP 6 contains statutes, regulations,**source~specific** 

### requirements, non-regulatory items such as plans and 7 inventories, and in some cases additional requirements promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection 8 

### Agency (EPA). The initial SIPs for states were approved by EPA in 1972. 3 7 Fed. Reg. 10,842-10,906 9 (May 31, 1972). A state may revise its SIP with EPA approval as necessary. The federally enforceable 10 

### SIP for New Mexico (including Bernalillo County) is compiled in 40 C.P.R. Part 52, Subpart GG, II 

### subsections 1620-1640. 12 

### 13 Sections 110(a)(l) and 110(a)(2) of the CAA require that, within three years of EPA promulgation of a 14 

### new or revised NAAQS, each State must submit a plan known as an "infrastructure SIP, (iSIP). 15 

### "Infrastructure," in this context, means the programs, policies, activities, resources and authority by which 16 the state wilt attain, maintain, and enforce the new NAAQS. The iSIP describes these elements in detail. 1 

### 17 Section 11 O(a)(l) of the CAA addresses the timing requirement for the submissions of any iSIP revisions, 18 

### while Section 110(a)(2) lists the required elements that comprise the iSIP. 19 20 

### On June**2~** 

### 2010, the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, 21 

### promulgated a new NAAQS for sulfur dioxide ("S0 2 ") 

### [referred to below as the "20 10 S02 NAAQS"], 22 

### effective August 23,2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 35,520-35,603 (June 22, 2010). Based on its review of the air 23 quality criteria for oxides of sulfur and the primary NAAQS for oxides of sulfur as measured by S0 2 , 24 

### EPA made revisions to the primary S0 2 

### NAAQS in order to provide the requisite protection of public 25 

### health. Id. 

### Specifically, EPA replaced the former 24-hour and annual standards with a new short-term 26 standard based on the 3-year average ofthe 99th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily 27 maximum S0 2 concentrations. ld 

### EPA set the level of this new standard at 75 ppb. ld 28 

### 29 The City of Albuquerque's Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program (AQP) 2

, 

### has 30 recommended that Bernalillo County be designated with an attainment status of "unclassifiable" in regard 31 to the revised S0 2 

### NAAQS, pending the availability of air quality monitoring data necessary for an "in 32 attainment" designation? See 

### CAA Section 1 07( d). On July 25, 2013, EPA designated certain areas of the 33 United States as nonattainment for the new 1-hour S0 2 

### NAAQS. 78 Fed. Reg. 47,191-47,205 (SPA-Aug. 34 5, 2013). Albuquerque-Bernalillo County was not designated as one of these nonattainment areas. Id. 

### 35 EPA has stated that it will address designations for all other areas in future actions. Id. 36 

### 3

7 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has not yet incorporated the 20 I 0 S0 2 

### NAAQS into the regulations 38 

### implementing the CAA. 20.11.8 NMAC, Ambient Air Quality Standards. It 

### plans to do so in a future rule39 making. 40

1 More infonnation on the SIP process is available at http:l/epa.gov/airgualit,y/urbanair/siP§tatusl.

2 "Air Quality Program" is now the correct tenn referring to the air pollution control agency for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. This tenn replaces the tenn "Air Quality Division," which was used in documents previously submitted to EPA.

3 Letter from AI Annendariz, EPA Region 6 Administrator, to Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico (June 2, 2011). Letters cited in this iSIP submission are available upon request from the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program.

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page4 ofllSTAK:&:HObDJiR PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12J24.QQ142f20f2015



### 1 The matrix in the main body ofthis document, below, outlines the requirements of Sections 110(a)(2)(A) 2 through (M) ofthe CAA [codified at U.S.C. 42 § 

### 7410, 

### State Implementation Plans For National Primary 3 

### And Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards] and addresses how Albuquerque·Bernalillo County, New 4 Mexico will implement, maintain and enforce the 2010 

### 80 2 

### NAAQS. 5 6 

### Legislative authority for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's air quality program is codified in the New 7 Mexico Air Quality Control Act (Air Act), Chapter 74, 

### Environmental Improvement, Article 2, 

### Air 8 

### Pollution, of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978 (NMSA 1978). Section 4 of this statute authorizes 9 the creation of a "local authority" by a New Mexico county or municipality meeting certain criteria if the 10 

### county or municipality adopts an ordinance providing for the local administration and enforcement of the 11 

### Air Act. Albuquerque and Bernalillo County meet these statutory criteria in the Air Act. The City of 12 

### Albuquerque and Bernalillo County each adopted parallel ordinances by which they accepted the 13 authority delegated by the Air Act, established the Joint Air Quality Control Board (Air Board), and 14 specified that the Air Board shall adopt regulations consistent with the Air Act and shall adopt a plan for 15 the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution throughout Bernalillo County. These 16 parallel ordinances provide that the Albuquerque Environmental Health Department is the administrative 17 agency of the Air Board. The AQP is part 

### ofthe Environmental Health Department. The Albuquerque and 18 

### Bernalillo County ordinances are codified at Revised Ordinances of the City of Albuquerque (ROA) §§ 

### 9- 19 5-1 to -99 and Bernalillo County Ordinance 94-5 §§ 

### 1 to -20 [codified at Art. II, Ch. 30, §§ 

### 30-31 to 47. 20 21 

### With eertain e:Keeplioas,**dise~:~ssed** 

### below, the Slate stannes,**regt~lations,** 

### pE)Iieies end programs eited in 22 

### this iSIP submission are part oftke approved Albuquerque Bernalillo Got:1nty elemeats oHhe**Ne¥~'** 

### 23 

### MeKieo SIP 

### and thus EU'e 

### elted 

### in 40 CPR 

### Part 52;**St~bpart** 

### 00, 

### Sl:fbseetioAs i2.1fi20 to 

### lfi20. 24 25 

### The fello·Ning legel BtltkOFities do Rot 

### e1:1rrently appear ia the 

### CFR eodifieatioa of the SIP. 

### Tln1s, 26**Aleuqt:~erque** 

### Bernalillo CottRty is 

### fequestiag; as part of this iSIP 

### suemissiea, that ePA 

### approtte them iAle 27 

### the CFR. The full ieKt of 

### these legal attthorities is atteeheEI as BA 

### eMhieit to this iSIP suemissioa. 28 

### 29 • 

### Certaia pFOvisions of the state 

### Air Aet 

### relates to 

### eeat:rol of SO,. are aot eiteEI 

### iA the CFR 30 

### eedifieation efthe 

### New Mettieo SIP. AlbuqueFE}tle Bemalilla CouA'f 

### is**iaelt~ding** 

### these 'NMSA 31 previsioas with this iSIP 

### Sl:femissiea. The)' ftf'e: 

### NMSA 1978 §§ 

### 74 l 

### S:t MEI74 2 

### 12.1. 32 

### 33 • 

### The regulations te 

### iFRplemeat CAA 

### pFOgmms in Bernalillo CotHK;y are eadifieEI in the New 34 

### Mexieo AEimiaistr&ti¥e Code (WM:P.C), speeifieally Title 29,**~melfisl** Pt'61eefk:m, 

### Chapter 35 I I. ARINIJW"fl:le Belwfllille CeWity Ail" 

### Qlmlily CenlF81 

### BfNwJ. Certaia 

### 'NMAG pro¥isiORS**~elated** 36 le eORkel of**SO;~** ftf'e Rot 

### eurreati)' eiteEI in the GFR eodifieatioa oftke New MeKieo SIP. 37**AlhttEJtierqt~e** 

### Bernalillo GoaRly is inel1:1diag the 

### Rill teKt 

### of 

### these NM,"'£ pFO";isioas with 

### this 38 

### iSIP Sl:femissioa. They are: 29.11.47 NMl\G 1 EmiS6ienslR¥eltlef'Y'**R:efr~il'emems;** 

### 29.11.62 39 NMAC, 

### Aeid R-em; 

### 20.11.(;9 NMAC; l2£Nhelegietiil fflesle Desll'liCIINs; 

### 20. I 1.71 NMAG, 40 Allm#eipel &lkl JfiMie l:.endjiU!i; 

### 20.11.89 NMAC, AEijwJie6191'jl :.fll'9eedUI"es Admillislflalivoe 

### 41**E~** Hetill'ings by the Direelar'; 

### 29.11.81 NMAC, AdjwlieelfN'Y**~** Air Qutllily 

### 42 

### CfHflf'al**B~** 

### 11Rd 20.11.82 NMAC, 

### BuleNking**Jl:lteeed~** 

### A;,. QNBUty C9ll1FBI /Jetwtl.. 43 

### 44 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has already submitted the following legal authorities with earlier SIP 45 submissions now awaiting EPA approval. The full text of these authorities is not included in this iSIP 46 submission but they are described in the main body of this document, addressing the required elements of 47 CAA § 

### 110(a)(2). 48 

### 49 • The 

### GFR eodifieatian efthe New 

### Mettiea SIP eites to**a~:~tdatea** 

### nRioRS eftertain Albuquerque 50 

### and Bernalillo County ordinances have been amended and re-codified since g[jgjnal EPA 

### 51 a1mroval as part of the New Mexico SIP. To account for these changes in these ordinances since
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page Sofll2 3 4 5 6 ST, 6 .KiiWOLDBR PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of l2f24J2Ql42/20/2015

the most recent EPA approval 

### ohke State BoEI:Fds SIP, 64 Fed. Reg. 29,235-29,240 (June I, 1999), and demonstrate that local law conforms to federal standards, the Air Board has approved

a proposed revision to the State Boards SIP element that would incorporate into the**~SIP** all currently effective applicable ordinances, policies, and programs. 4 This SO.z iSIP document will refer throughout to the existing, most current local ordinances.

7 • The Air Board has approved proposed revisions to the following regulations in response to EPA 8 rulemaking related to PM2.5: 20.11.41 NMAC. Construction Permits; 20.11.42 NMAC, 9 

### Operating Permits; 20.11.60 NMAC, 

### Permitting in Nonattainment Areas; 20.11.61 NMAC, 10 

### Prevention of Significant Deterioration. 5 II 12 13

4 Letter from Ryan Flynn, New Mexico Environment Secretary, to Ron Curry, EPA Region 6 Administrator (July 26, 20 13).

5 !d.

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 6 ofll2 3**~'-R-PUBL!C** REVIEW DRAFT 

### as ofl2124120142t20i20l5



### Albuquerque-Bernalillo County 110(a)(2) Required SIP Elements for Sulfur Dioxide**~** 

## ..**n£:0,~C,~ole eri)i~sJonLlifiijbitiolls** **'8l14~lltlier control** **.ti1eas~s,.** 

### tri,efiiiSi'or·



## · .ffi ·' '**~4t8!ec9npmi~,ili~ll)iyesi~'!cl];~}f~~r~~K~al)leiwftiti~,;~4~· sj~J)~I(fgq~)g{~i:weJI~~;.~H~u~~~rru,p~tirit(t#l)le.s:for:cgJ:ripliW:lge;••as**  

### ·**'<orJapp:r:opr.i'ate;to,~eet** 

### the\apj:Hicabte.re,quifemerits·bftnis. ·· · ·

Control measures generally. Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's enforceable emission limitations and other control measures are authorized by the Air Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 

### 74-2-1 to -17, together with the Albuquerque Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, ROA §§ 

### 9-5-l-1 to -99 and the parallel Bernalillo County Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, 94-5 §§ 

### 1 to -20 [collectively referred to as the "Air Act and Ordinances"]. The Air Act and Ordinances authorized creation of the AlbuquerqueBernalillo County Joint Air Quality Control Board and the Air Quality Program of the City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-4; ROA §§ 

### 9-5-1-3 to -4; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 §§ 

### 3 and 4. The Air Act and Ordinances empower the Air Board to adopt, promulgate, pubJish, amend and repeal regulations consistent with the Air Act to attain and maintain NAAQS and prevent or abate air pollution. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-5; ROA § 

### 9-5-1-4; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 4. The Air Act and Ordinances also designate the City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department as the air pollution control agency for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County, with authority to enforce the air quality regulations of the Board. NMSA 1978, § 

### 74-2-b.l; ROA § 

### 9-5-l-5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 54.

The City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County adopted parallel ordinances by which they accepted the authority delegated by the Air Act, established the Air Board, and specified that the board shall adopt regulations consistent with the Air Act and adopt a plan for the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution. ROA §§ 

### 9-5-1-1 to -99 and Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 4.For additional discussion of these ordinances and their role in satisfying EPA requirements for the New Mexico SIP, see Element E(ii) of this iSIP.

The regulations authorized by the Air Act and Ordinances and duly adopted by the Air Board are codified at 20.11 NMAC. The Air Board has promulgated rules that control emissions of sulfur dioxide and other criteria pollutants, including rules providing for emission limits, control measures, permits, fees, marketbased control techniques, and compliance schedules. 20.11 NMAC, partsl to 2, 5 to 8, 40, 41, 43, 46, 47, 49, 60 to 61, Ql.to 68, 71, 80 to 82, and 90.**~pt** as 

### indicated in the 

### lntroduction-ef.#t.P.:rOOe-ureettt,the-aeoYe parugmphs describing emission-liffi.it5 and 

### oontrol pro'>·isions as they 

### relate to CA/\ 

### Section II 0 

### requirements have been submitted to and appro¥ed by 

### EPA into the New Mexico SIP, codified-The record of EPA's approval of specific New Mexico statutes·, local ordinances, local regulations. and other enforceable documents into the New Mexico SIP is available at 40 CFR Part 52 Sub art GG, Sections 1620-1640. +

6 This iSIP report is divided into "elements,'' each addressing requirements under a specific provision of the CAA. This element addresses the requirements of CAA § II O(a)(2)(A), and thus may be referred to as "Element A" of the iSIP. Other portions of this iSIP use the same naming convention for individual iSIP elements.**-Albuq~:~:e«jue** Bernalillo Col:laty has submitted SIP re•lisions appl;·ing to the following**reg~:~lations** afl6-is awaiting EPA appro•,•al: 2Q.ll NMAC, Pans I, 41, 47, 6Q, and{; I. EPA reeently, by direct final rule, approved SIP re'<'isions a@eti'flg2Q.II.l and 2Q.t**1.47l>JM~ed.** R&g. 5471 5475 (Feb. 2, 2Ql5).

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 7 of21**~.PUBLLC;_REVIEW** DRAFT**~s** of**12J24.Q014£;y_Q12Ql~**

Alb!tquermte-Bernalillo Countv has submitted certain proposed revisions to its permitting regulations to EPA and is awaiting EPA approval of these revisions. 8 If such approval should be granted. the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County portion of the New Mexico SIP would be updated accordingly. Aside from these proposed revisionsAccordingly, AQP has an EPA-approved air pennitting program with related control strategies for both major and minor sources, thus ensuring that all applicable requirements
are included in the source's pennit. 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart GG, Section 1620(c).
Startup. shutdown and malfunction; director's discretion. Albuffi!ergue-Bernalillo County's regulation on this subject is 20.11.49 NMAC, Excess Emissions. which EPA approved in 20 I 0. 75 Fed. Reg. 5698-5701 (Feb. 4, 2010). Under this regulation, AQP does not exempt from enforcement excess emissions that

occur during start-up, shutdown, maintenance, or malfunction. Emissions in excess of pennit or regulatory limits are presumptive violations, subject to affinnative defenses with the burden of proof on the respondent. 20.11.49 NMAC, Excess Emitm-ifms. The statutes, ordinances, and regulations governing AQP's enforcement and maintenance of the NAAQS do not contain "director's discretion" provisions that purport to pennit revisions to SIP approved emissions limits with limited public process or without requiring further approval by EPA. 20.11.49 NMAC. while previously approved by EPA as meeting CAA requirements, is now subject to a new proposed EPA rllle that. when finalized, may require revision ofthe regulation. 79 Fed. Reg. 55,920-55.956 (Sept 17. 2014). AQP will work withj::PA in this regulatory process to take whatever action may be reQ!!ired to comply with federal law.

AQP is authorized to conduct monitoring of ambient air quality: "[T]he local agency

... shall develop facts and make investigations consistent with the [state] Air Quality Control Act." NMSA 1978, 74-2- 5.l(B); ROA 

### § 9-5-1-5(8) (similar); Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 

### § 5(B). Monitoring develops facts and investigates Bernalillo County air quality. Thus, the Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to conduct its monitoring program. Monitoring is also mandated by EPA regulations. Therefore, under both state statute and federal regulations, AQP has the obligation and authority to monitor air quality for 

### S0 2 at appropriate locations in accordance with EPA's ambient air quality monitoring network requirements, 40 CFR parts 53 ("Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods") and 58 ("Ambient Air Quality Surveillance"). AQP's monitoring program implements the following specific federal regulatory requirements:

• providing for submission of data to EPA's Air Quality System in a timely manner, 40 CFR part 58;

• providing EPA with annual monitoring network plans, 40 CFR part 58.10 ("Annual monitoring network plan and periodic network assessment");

• obtaining EPA's approval of any planned changes to monitoring sites or to the network plan, 40 CFR 5 8.14 ("System Modification").

8 Albuguergue-Bemalillo Count\ has submitted SIP revisions applying to the following regulations and is awaiting EPA approval: 20.11 NMAC, Parts, 41. 60, and 6l.ln addition. EPA recently. by direct final rule, approved SIP revisions affecting 20.11.1 and 20.11.47 NMAC. 80 Fed. Reg. 5471-5475 (Feb. 2, 20ill

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 8 ofll**STAK~HObG-ER-PUBLIC** REVIEW DRAFT as of 12'24QQH2120i2015



### Pursuant to the above authority, AQP maintains a monitoring network throughout Bernalillo County to
assess ambient concentrations for all of the NAAQS, including S0 2 • 

### All monitors are subjected to the

. quality assurance requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A. Monitors are located at sites that have



# I

I met the minimum siting requirements of Part 58, Appendix E. All data is submitted to EPA's Air Quality

System (AQS) in accordance with the schedule prescribed by 40 CFR Part 58.

As 

### part of its responsibility for maintaining the monitoring network, AQP submits for EPA review an 

### Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan (AAMNP). 40 CFR § 58.1 0. This document describes how AQP has complied with monitoring requirements and explains any proposed changes. AQP submitted its 2014 AAMNP on July 10.2014 

### and received notification of EPA 

### approval on 

### February 3, 2015. is awaiting ePl\ approval ofthe-p.J.art; 9 

### While EPA 

### has not made an official designation for 

### BernaJillo County of attainment or nonattainment, ambient air guality data reQorted in 

### the 2014 11-AMl'lP**sho~y_esLS.Q;J~yel?.** 

### less than**LQty~Qf.lh~_~QlQ~OJ_~A~S_,**
EPA's most recent approYal ofAQP's Al\MNP was in**2013.'{)-Th~ffi** 

### EPA-approved 20HJ AAMNP described ongoing activities for monitoring S0 2 : the 

### 20 !4**AA~~tes.-Pff-{fie** AAMNPs, 

### tihese activities comply with EPA requirements for the State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) network and the National Core Multi-Pollutant Monitoring Stations (NCore) network.
AQP determined in 2011 that it was not required to install new monitors under the revised 1-hour 2010 S0 2 

### NAAQS. 11 

### However, in an effort unrelated to the revised S02 NAAQS, AQP began S0 2 monitoring under the NCore program in 2010. Because this monitoring had only recently begun at the time EPA finalized the 2010 S0 2 

### NAAQS, AQP recommended in 2011 that Albuquerque-Bernalillo County receive
an attainment/nonattainment designation of"unclassifiable." Once AQP's monitoring has gathered sufficient data, AQP will be able to make a new designation recommendation to EPA regarding reclassification of-Albuquerque Bernalillo Count)''"-.,Jo "attainment."



### EPA has stated that it will defer action on Albuquerque-:Bemalillo County's 20Jj_designation recommendation until a future dateY

Air dispersion modeling performed in combination with the above described monitoring of ambient air pollutant concentrations is discussed later in this iSIP submission, in the section addressing requirements ofCAA § 

### ll0(a)(2)(K).

### :t,-~;l9~~)~)!(ij: 

### .**Jt~~!'J9~j~:P~W~,r.~9~~Ytge f~,t·;e~o.r,cem~t·9~the;IIleas~s**  .in §

### llO(a)(2)(~),. I·**.:~** -: X> • ..:(. · · .;_; :: , 

### ,.and:r.iguianoncof1:the.modtfication and construction of**any~** 

### stationary so.urce 

### within

9 better from-fl.anny-Nevarei':;-f)eputy-9i-FeaGF,AlbuquerttHe En'lironmental Health**~~-ttl** Mafk Hansen. Associated Director for Air Programs, Acting, EPl•, Region 6 (July**1~41Letter** from Mark Hansen. Associate Director for Air Programs. Acting, EPA Region 6,**tq__DanllYN~.Y£lJ~b. D~putv**  Director, Albuquerque**t:.uviron!IIenmLH~Jth** Department (Februarv 3, 20Ul

H**~as-l~!>sociate** Direetor for Air, EPA RegioR 6, to Danny t'Je't•arel!, Def)uty Directer, AllnlquerE}ue Hrwironmental Health Department (March-l-2.-W+:l+. ·

11 Letter from Susana Martinez, Governor ofNew Mexico, to AI Armendariz, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6 (May 24, 2011). All of the information in this paragraph is based on this letter. '

12 Letter from Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6, to Susana Martinez, Governor ofNew Mexico (Feb. 7, 2013).

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 9 ofll**s:f-.A.K..[~R-PUI3LIC** REVIEW DRAFT as of !2124l20142i20'2015

Enforcement: The Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to enforce emission limits and control
measures satisfying Element A of this infrastructure SIP, above. The statutes, regulations, and ordinances establishing the emissions limits and control measures described in Element A, coupled with air quality permits issued by AQP, set forth the boundaries beyond which regulated entities in AlbuquerqueBernalillo County can expect enforcement action. The Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to pursue enforcement through administrative compliance orders or commencement of civil actions. NMSA 1978, § 74-2-12 and 12.1; ROA § 9-5-1-99 and Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 §§ 13 and 14. AQP carries out such enforcement as the local air pollution control agency established for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. ROA § 9-5-1-5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 5. These ordinances were authorized under the Air Quality Control Act, NMSA 1978, § 74-2-4.

As discussed in the Introduction to this document, some of the above cited legal authorities are missing .ft:e.mthe Code of Federal Regulations Of have been revised since they 'Nere originally**approved~~** Ne•..,· Mexico SIP at 40 CF'R Part 52, Subpart GG, subsections 52.1620 to 1620. This iSIP submission, along with earlier**sub~ll** incorporate revised or missing legal authorities into**t~R:,** thus helping to-e.fat#y-ettfeR."'erneffiauthority fur-4e**NAAQS.-¥lease-ref-eF--te~** Introduction fef additional details.

Preconstruction PSD Permitting of Major Sources: Under the general statutory authority discussed in Element A of this iSIP, above, the Air Board and AQP have the authority to implement a comprehensive Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit program not only for S0 2 but for all regulated New Source Review (NSR) pollutants. This authority is implemented in regulations codified at 20.11.61 NMAC, 

### Prevention of Significant Deterioration, setting forth PSD requirements for all sources in areas designated in attainment or unclassifiable for a NAAQS. 13

. Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's comprehensive PSD program for all NSR pollutants has been previously approved into the New Mexico SIP by EPA. 58 Fed. Reg. 67,330 (Dec. 21, 1993) (initial approval); 72 Fed. Reg. 20,728 (Apr. 26, 2007) (approving SIP revisions for EPA's 2002 reforms to the NSR rules); 77 Fed. Reg. 58,032(Sept. 19, 2012) (concerning the 1997 and 2008 Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.s NAAQS).
Albuquerque Bernalillo County has the authority to issue permits under its PSD program to sources of Greenhouse Gasses (GHGs). 20.11.61.7(CCC) NMAC. Pursuant to EPA's Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, EPA has approved Albuquerque Bernalillo County's PSD provisions for greenhouse gasses into the New Mexico SIP. 76 Fed. Reg. 81,836 (Dec. 29, 2011).

In addition to the above PSD approvals, EPA requires that an iSIP submission address whether an air agency has submitted any PSD program revisions, regarding any NSR pollutant, for which the submission deadline has passed as of the date for EPA's proposed approval of an iSIP submission. This iSIP addresses the foregoing requirement as follows.

13 For other regulations governing issuance of permits that may apply to a facility subject to PSD requirements, 

### see 20.11.41 NMAC, 

### Construction Permits; 20.11.42 NMAC, 

### Operating Permits. For the regulation governing pennitting for sources located in nonattainment areas, 

### see 20.1 I .60, 

### Permitting in Nonattainment Areas.

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 10 ofllAlbuquerque Bernalillo County has submitted PSD-related regulatory revisions to EPA in response to EPA's rulemaking amending the PSD requirements for particulate matter 2.5 (PM 2 .s) found at 75 Fed. Reg. 64,863 (Oct. 20, 2010). Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's PSD revisions were transmitted to EPA via a letter from New Mexico Environment Secretary Ryan Flynn to EPA Region 6 Administrator Ron Curry on July 26, 2013. These revisions amended 20.11.42 NMAC, 

### Operating Permits; 20.11.60 NMAC, 

### Permitting in Non-Attainment Areas; and 20.11.61 NMAC, 

### Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration. The revisions addressed specific requirements of 40 CFR §§ 51.165, 51.166, and 52.21.

Note that certain of the above New Mexico regulatory revisions relating to EPA's PM2.5 rulemaking were vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on January 22,2013. 

### Sierra Club v. EPA, 105 F.3d 458 (D.C. Cir. 20 13}. This court decision applies to two regulatory provisions that Albuquerque:. Bernalillo County would otherwise have adopted. One such provision, not yet part of the NMAC, would have been inserted by amendment at 20.11.61.15(B)(2) NMAC (regarding Significant Impact Levels). Another vacated provision has been submitted by the Air Board to EPA and appears at 20.11.61.28 NMAC (regarding Significant Monitoring Concentration). AQP will respond promptly to any future EPA initiatives regarding these vacated provisions.
Regulation of minor sources and minor modifications: Per 40 CFR sections 51.160 through 51.164, the Air Board has approved preconstruction regulations applicable to modification and construction of stationary minor sources emitting**~NAAQS** pollutants. 20.11.41]i:\1A(, 

### Construction Permits. Thi§es-e preconstruction regulations also appl@ to minor modification of major sources emitting**~NAAQS** pollutants.ld. EPA has previously approved these provisions into the New Mexico**SIP,~** 69 Fed. Reg.**78,312-78Jj~J** (Dec. 30, 2004).,-;- and is currently**reviewinll~r:tainJ~~yjsions** that Albuquerqueliern?lillo Countv has ado11ted to 20.11.41 NMAC.

Contributions to nonattainment; interference with maintenance, per§ 11 O(a)(2)(0)(i)(l): AlbuquerqueBernalillo County has sufficient control measures in place to ensure that sources emitting sulfur dioxide do not interfere with another state's maintenance of the 2010 S0 2 NAAQS or contribute to a state's nonattainment of that NAAQS. See the other portions of this iSIP for descriptions of AlbuquerqueBernalillo's control measures along with related legal authority and programs. AQP has determined that this infrastructure will be sufficient to avoid negatively impacting NAAQS attainment and maintenance in other states in view of the following factors.
1) 

### The relative scarcity of major SO] sources in Albuquerque-Bernalillo County. AlbuquerqueBernalillo County has only two major S0 2 sources. One is the Albuquerque Southside Water Reclamation Plant Reclamation the Bernalillo Water

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 11 ofll

### Utility Authority. The other is the Tijeras Plant, a cement production facility operated by the GCC Rio Grande Portland Cement Corp, Inc. (Tijeras Plant).
2) 

### The minimal amount of emissions from those sources. The Tijeras Plant is permitted to emit 

### MlZ .8 tons per year of oxides of sulfur. According to data available to AQP. this facility's reported actual emissions averaged only 20.66 tons of 

### S0 2 

### per vear from 20 II to 2QJJ._,_ Reported emissions
were approximately 16.52 tons per**~yj** 

### in 20 11_,20.84 tpy for 2012. and 24.63 tpy for 2013. 14 

### The Water Reclamation Plant is permitted to emit**ill~:!** I, I 03.4 I 

### tons per year of S0 2 • 

### According to data available**to~** from the State and Local Emissions Inventory (SLEIS) system, 

### this facility's reported actual emissions averaged only 58.6684.34297S tons ofS0 2 

### per year from 20112 to 2013. Reported emissions were approximately 7.3 tpv in 2011, 75.23 tpv in 20!2,_and 93.46 tpy in 2013. 15 The Tijeras Plant is permitted to emit 123 tons per year of oxides of sulfur. /\ceording to data from the SLEIS system, this faeilit)·'s reported actual emissions averaged on!)· 

### 22.739425 tons of**SOJ-~** year from 

### 20 1120 12 to 

### 20 13. In Bernalillo County as a whole, monitoring of ambient air quality indicates that the design value for S0 2 

### in parts 

### per billion was 4.6 parts 

### per billion (ppb) for the period 2011 to 2013 --i.e. less than 10% of the**I~_p_pQ_2010** 

### S0 2 

### NAAQS. Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program, Ambient Air Monitoring Section, 2014 Annual Network Review for Ambient Air Monitoring (submitted to EPA July 10, 2014;**EP~nroval** 

### received February 3. 2015).

--··-·-- --- 

### 3) 

### The relatively large geographic distance between those sources and other states. Given the small overall level of S0 2 

### emissions from Bernalillo County, AQP has determined that these emissions will be widely dispersed over the large geographic distance between their sources and the borders of neighboring states:The approximate distance from Bernalillo County's border to the border of neighboring states, in a straight line, is as follows: 125 miles to Arizona; 120 miles to Colorado; 190 miles to Texas;

Interference with prevention of significant deterioration: As noted above in Element C of this iSIP, Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has a comprehensive EPA-approved PSD program and has submitted necessary proposed revisions to EPA. Thus, the PSD program includes measures to prevent interference with PSD measures in other states.

Interference with protection of visibility: With respect to the visibility element of§ 110 {a)(2)(D)(i)(Il), Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has a regional haze program in place that fully meets the requirements of 40 CFR § 51.309 and has been approved by EPA into the New Mexico SIP. 77 

### Fed. Reg. 71,119 (Nov. 29, 2012). In its approval action, EPA found that the regional haze SIP element and its associated rules "meet the requirements ofthe [CAA] and comply with the provisions of 40 CFR § 51.309, thereby meeting requirements for reasonable progress for the 16 Class I areas covered by the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission Report for approval ofthe plan through 2018." /d. 

### EPA's approval of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's regional haze SIP element {as well as regional haze 

### SIP provisions for the states of New Mexico, W omin and Utah , was recent} u held b the Tenth Circuit:., 

### Wild Earth**~** 2012 and 2013 emissions data for the Tijeras Plant are from the State and Local Emissions Inventory System {SLEIS). 20 II emissions data from this source is preliminary. The 2011 emissions amount, 16.52 tpv, is a preliminarv calculation that has been reported by the source but not yet entered into SLEIS. This situation arose because the source originally over-reported its 20 II e1nissigns. AQP has been working with the source to com ct the**error_m1d_~nter._'!..final,** verified amount for actual enli.ssionsjQto SLEIS.

15 Emissions data are fiom SLEIS.



### Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 12 ofll

### Guardians v. EPA, 770 FJd 919 (lOth Cir. 2014). By having this EPA-approved regional haze SIP element in place, Albuquerque-Bernalillo County meets the requirements of§ 110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(ll), prohibiting interference with protection of visibility in other states. Albuquerque Bernalillo County regulations implementing the Regional Haze SIP are codified at 20.11.5 NMAC, 

### Visible Air Contaminants; 20.11.20 NMAC, 

### Fugitive Dust Control; 20.11.21 NMAC, 

### Open Burning; 20.11.22 NMAC, 

### Wood Burning; 20.11.46 NMAC, 

### Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Inventory Requirements: Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program; 20.11.65 NMAC, 

### Volatile Organic Compounds; 20.11.66 NMAC, 

### Process Equipment; 20.11.67 NMAC, 

### Equipment, Emissions, Limitations; 20.11.71 NMAC, 

### Municipal Solid Waste Landfills; 20.11.100 NMAC, 

### Motor Vehicle Inspection- Decentralized; 20.11.102 NMAC, 

### Oxygenated Fuels; 20.11.103 NMAC, 

### Motor Vehicle Visible Emissions; and 20.11.104 NMAC, 

### Emission Standards for New Motor Vehicles. EPA approval ofthe Regional Haze SIP followed previous regional haze SIP submissions by Albuquerque-Bernalillo County on December 26, 2003 and September 10, 2008. 

### See 77 Fed. Reg. 24,768 (Apr. 25, 2012) (proposing approval of Albuquerque Bernalillo County regional haze SIP and describing history of regional haze rule and related earlier SIP submissions by Albuquerque-Bernalillo County).
Compliance regarding interstate pollution abatement: As described above in this Element of the iSIP and in Element C, Albuquerque Bernalillo County has submitted proposed PSD revisions for EPA review. If EPA should approve these revisions. the result would bh when combined with earlier:. EP**~J!Jmrov~J§_** of PSD provisions. a fully_iipA approved PSD permitting program.that 'Nil!, along with earlier EPA approvals of the PSD program, satisfy EPA requirements for PSD pennitting. Thus, the PSD program will-would include provisions that satisfy the interstate pollution abatements of the CAA, § 126(a), and

are consistent with 40 CFR § 51.166(q)(2)(iv), requiring notification of other air agencies whose jurisdictions may be affected by emissions from an outside source. The regulation requiring such notice is codified at 21.11.61.2l(C)(4) NMAC.
Regarding CAA, § 126(b) and (c), no sources within Albuquerque-Bernalillo County are subject to an active finding under these provisions with respect to 

### S0 2 • If such findings should occur in the future, AQP will consult with EPA Region VI.
Compliance regarding international air pollution: Regarding CAA, § 115, no sources within Albuquerque-Bernalillo County are subject to an active finding under Section 115 with respect to S02.

Organization responsible for the SIP: The Air Act and Ordinances designate the Air Board and the Environmental Health Department as the responsible authorities for implementing federal air quality standards in Albuquerque Bernalillo County. NMSA 1978 § 74-2-5 and 5.1; ROA §§ 9-5-1-4 and -5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 §§ 4 and 5. The Air Act and Ordinances designate AQP as the air pollution control agency for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County, for this purpose empowering AQP to carry out a variety of functions including monitoring, compliance, enforcement, and developing and presenting proposed plans and rules to the Air Board for adoption and promulgation. NMSA 1978 § 74-2-5.1; ROA § 9-5-1-5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 5. For purposes of these provisions, the Air Board and AQP are the sole that and enforci the EP SIP

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 13 ofll

### provisions related to the 2010 S02 NAAQS.

Resources (i.e. personnel & 

### funding) available to carry out the SIP: As of the date of this iSIP submission, the Air Board and AQP have adequate funding and personnel to carry out the functions described in this document addressing the 2010 S0 2 

### NAAQS. Funding and personnel for activities related to the 2010 S0 2 

### NAAQS will be provided through pennit fees, general funds from the City of Albuquerque, and funds provided under the CAA, §§ 

### 103 and 105 grant process. AQP expects these sources to provide adequate 

# I funding for the five years following this iSIP provisionsubmission. AQP does not anticipate the need for

additional resources to implement the plan for the 2010 S0 2 

### NAAQS, beyond those which have been utilized for the preparation of the plan, for SIP revisions submitted to EPA, and for other current programmatic demands. Should EPA determine that AQP lacks adequate personnel to carry out the SIP, EPA may issue a finding with respect to that deficiency, which AQP would have a legal obligation to correct. Authority to carry out the SIP: The Air Board and AQP have adequate authority under statutes, rules, and regulations to carry out SIP obligations with respect to the 2010 S0 2 

### NAAQS. The Air Act and Ordinances authorize the Air Board to adopt plans, emission standards and rules and to modify, reverse or sustain pennits issued by AQP. NMSA § 

### 74-2-5 and -7. In addition, the AQP has authority under the Air Act and Ordinances to issue permits under the Air Board's regulations and to enforce applicable laws, regulations, standards, and compliance schedules, and seek injunctive relief. NMSA 1978 § § 

### 7 4-2-5.1 -7, -12, -12.1; ROA §§ 

### 9-5-1-5,-7, and 98 and 99; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 §§ 

### 5, 7 and 13 and 14. This legal framework empowers AQP to carry out administrative assessments, inspections, issuance of penalties for permit violations, and appropriate litigation. !d. 

### To act under the foregoing legal provisions, AQP has full authority under state law, and city and county ordinances to carry out all SIP obligations relating to the 2010 S0 2 • 

### NAAQS. ROA §§ 

### 9-5-1-1 to -99; and Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 §§ 

### 1 to -20.

To comply with the provisions ofCAA Section 128 regarding state and local board composition and conflicts of interests, the City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County have implemented a number of ordinances and policies. EPA has previously approved these measures into the New Mexico SIP. 64 Fed. Reg. 29,235 (July 1, 1999). In the years following EPA's approval, the ordinances and policies have been revised. Accordingly, Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has submitted to EPA proposed revisions to the New Mexico SIP to account for changes in the local ordinances and policies. These proposed SIP revisions are intended to comply with the state and local board requirements of CAA Section 128. 16



### These proposed SIP revisions will incorporate the following ordinances, other laws, and policies into the New Mexico SIP:

• ROA §§ 

### 2-6-1-1 to 2-6-1-5 ("Public Boards, Commissions, and Committees"); 3-3-1 to 3-3-13 ("Conflict of Interest"); 9-5-1-1 to 9-5-1-99 ("Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance'') 9-5-6- 1 to 9-5-6-3 ("Metropolitan Environmental Health Advisory Board");

• City of Albuquerque, NM, Charter, Article XII, Section 4 ("Conflict of Interest");

16 Letter from Ryan Flynn, New Mexico Environment Secretary, to Ron Curry, EPA Region 6 Administrator (July 26, 2013).

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 14 of21&+AK·bHGb9eR-PUBLI<;;_REVIEW DRAFT 

### as of 1;?;124.'201 '12·20!2015



### • City of Albuquerque, City Code of Conduct, 300 ("Conditions of Employment"); 301 ("Code of Conduct") (from City of Albuquerque Personnel Rules and Policies);

• Bernalillo County, NM Ordinances§§ 2-126 to 2-136 ("Code of Conduct"); 30-31 to 30-47 ("Joint Air Quality Control Board"); 42-36 to 42-39 ("Metropolitan Environmental Health Advisory Board")

NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-4 provides that the Air Board be comprised of at least a majority of members who represent the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subject to or who appear before the Board on issues related to the CAA or Air Act.
Additionally, Air Board members are required to recuse themselves from rulemakings where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned or ifthe Air Board member: (1) has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party; (2) is related to a party within a third degree of relationship, (3) 

### is an officer, director or trustee of a party or interested participant in the proceeding; or (4) 

### has a financial interest in the proceeding or has any other conflict. 20.11.82.14 NMAC.

Air Board members are also required to recuse themselves from adjudicatory proceedings, such as permit reviews where the Air Board member: ( 1) 

### has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or the outcome of the proceeding; (2) has personal knowledge of disputed facts concerning the proceeding; (3) 

### is related to a party within the third degree of relationship; ( 4) 

### is an officer, director or trustee of a party or interested participant in the proceeding; (5) has a financial interest in the proceeding or facility that is the subject of the proceeding or has any other conflict of interest; ( 6) or has performed prosecutorial or investigatory functions in connection with a permitting action at issue in the proceeding. 20.11.81.12(BX3)(a).

Pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 

### 74-2-4, local authority to implement the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act has been established for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County, through the adoption of these jurisdictions' respective Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinances which created the Air Board and authorize local administration by the City of Albuquerque Department of Environmental Health. ROA §§ 9-5-1-l to -99; and Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5, §§ 1 

### to -20. The New Mexico Environment Department and the state Environmental Improvement Board retain jurisdiction and control for administration of the Air Quality Control Act with respect to any failure to act by a local authority. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-4(D).

·aD ·. 

### enlissioll'liffiitanori.s

# ~!!Lp~rJ·,··.**wljic~~Pbfis~siii1i~** · : ' ·

the Air Board

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide 

### Infrastructure SIP Page 15 ofll

# I**HAKEHOLDC'-R-PUBLI<;;~REVIEW** DRAFT as of 12i24**2(H-4~i2Qi20** 15



### any person emitting any air contaminant" to conduct monitoring of such emissions, install equipment appropriate for such monitoring, use monitoring methods prescribed by the Air Board, maintain related records, and submit reports regarding the emissions. NMSA § 

### 74-2-5(C)(6). Consistent with 40 CFR § 

### 51.212, Albuquerque-Bernalillo County regulations provide that stationary sources may be subject to periodic inspection and emissions testing. 20.11.41.22 NMAC (inspection and testing related to construction permits); 20.11.42.12 NMAC (inspection and testing related to operating permits); 20.11.49.15 NMAC (inspection and testing related to excess emissions); 20.11.60.27 NMAC (testing and inspection related to pennitting in nonattainment areas); 20.11.61.12 to 20.11.61.20 NMAC (testing and prevention Jelated to pennitting for prevention of significant deterioration); and 20.11.90 NMAC, 

### Source Surveillance: Administration and Enforcement. These source monitoring requirements authorize AQP to identify allowable test methods which a source must use. The requirements do not contain any provision that would prevent the use of any credible evidence.

Source reporting: Consistent with 40 CFR §§ 

### 51.211, 51.321 to 51.323, and 40 CFR part 51, subpart A, Albuquerque-Bernalillo County provides that stationary sources may be required to periodically report emissions and emissions-related data. These provisions are contained in the NMAC regulations cited in the .paragraph above. In addition, stationary sources may be required to maintain and report emissions inventories according to a prescribed schedule, in a format established by AQP. 20.11.4 7 NMAC, 

### Emission Inventory Requirements. To facilitate gathering and reporting of emissions data by sources, Albuquerque-Bernalillo County establishes specific requirements for maintaining records and reporting emissions, including provisions relating to content of records and AQP inspections. 20.11.90 NMAC, 

### Source Surveillance: Administration and Enforcement. AQP is current with its submittals to the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) database; the 20 

# u;; data for larger sources was submitted to EPA on December 309, 2011J-.

Correlation of source reports with emissions limitations and standards: Pursuant to the NMAC provisions cited above and consistent with 40 CFR § 

### 51.116, AQP is able to use emissions data gathered and reported by sources to analyze "the relationship between measured or estimated amounts of emissions and the amounts of such emissions allowable under the applicable emission limitations or sources." 40 CFR § 

### 51.116(c). 

### See also 20.11.90.13(C) NMAC ("Emission data obtained by the director shall be correlated with applicable emission limitations and other control measures

... ").By means of such correlation,AQP is able to track progress toward maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies, identify sources and general emission levels, and determine compliance with state and EPA requirements.
Availability of emission reports by sources: Emission data obtained under the above-cited provisions are made available to the public during normal business hours. 20.11.90.13(C) NMAC.**:iJ·~:f4tl~H~>.'<~!,~;D:_:,t~vi~~·;fQr ,!\lm~9~-~oJ!lRitfj11>I~,~oAhat**  

### in

.. 

# RM$ection**303•[~tion. ~6Q3**  

### >of 

### this.**:,;f:~,.:.:** ·.**~::,.:** . :

..**~[!it1eLancJla4~~t~;~p.tj,fi~.¢f:Pl.@S,t9··4nPl~~tmt** 

### such.authoritY.

. · Authority to respond to emergency episode: The Air Act and Ordinances provide AQP with authority to address air quality emergencies. Upon a finding that any owner/operator of a source or combination of air emission sources presents an imminent and substantial endangennent to the public health or welfare or the environment, the Director of the Environmental Health Department may bring a civil suit seeking to restrain the source ofthe air contaminants. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-lO(A); ROA § 

### 9-5-1-lO(A); Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 1 O(A). If such a civil suit is not a practicable means of promptly protecting public health or welfare or the environment, the Director may issue orders necessary for such protection on a temporary basis, pending litigation and court-ordered action. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-1 O(B); ROA § 

### 9-5-1- lO(B); Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### lO(B).

Contimzencv olan to irnolement emeraencv eoisode authoritv: The Director of the Environmental Health

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 16 of21**s:f-AK~HGL~ER** f:l1J2LIS::_REVIEW DRAFT as of**12.'2~i20l42f20i201~**



### Department formulates and administers an emergency action plan approved by the Air Board to address
source emissions that cause pollutant concentrations to reach levels constituting an imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons. 20.11.6 NMAC, 

### Emergency Action Plan. Consistent with 40 CFR § 

### 51, Subpart H, 

### Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes, the Air Board has adopted the 

### Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan for Bernalillo County that covers air pollution episodes and the occurrence of an emergency due to the effects of the pollutants on the health of persons. 56 Fed. Reg. 38,074 (Aug. 21, 1991); 40 CFR § 

### 52.1639.

SIP revision to account for NAAQS revisions: the Air Board has the authority to adopt new regulations and to amend or repeal regulations in order to attain and maintain the NAAQS and prevent or abate air pollution throughout Bernalillo County. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-5; ROA § 

### 9-5-1-4; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 4. To assist the Board with all NAAQS revisions, AQP has authority to develop and present to the Board a plan for the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2- S.l(H); ROA § 

### 9-5-1-5(1); Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 5(1). Because these provisions allow for changes as necessary to the 81P 

### local air quality regulations and programs, they provide the legal basis for the Air Board and AQP to revise the submit proposed SIP revisions for EPA review in order to accommodate EPA revisions of a NAAQS. Nothing in New Mexico's statutory or regulatory authority prohibits Albuquerque-Bernalillo County from revising regulations an_Q_prograrns for**su..PJ:n~sion** 

### as proposed the-SIP revisions in the event of a revision to the NAAQS.

SIP revision to account for EPA finding of inadeguacy: the above cited provisions also provide the legal basis for the Air Board and AQP to submit proposed revisions ofe the SIP for EPA reviewjn the event the EPA Administrator finds the SIP to be substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS or otherwise meet all applicable CAA requirements.

CAA § 

### 110 (a)(2)(1) is not being addressed in this infrastructure SIP submittal. According to EPA's interpretation of the CAA, this element does not need to be addressed in the context of an infrastructure SIP submission. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections llO(a)(l) and llO(aX2)," September 2013, p.Sl, available at http://www .epa.gov/air/urbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html.

Consultation with identified officials on certain actions: Section 121 of the CAA requires a SIP to provide for consultation with local subdivisions and with federal land of

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 17 of21**£TAKEHOLD{:~R** PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of**~2.t20]Ql~**



### certain SIP elements affecting those entities. Albuquerque-Bernalillo County meets this requirement because all SIP revisions undergo public notice and hearing, which provides for comment by the interested members of the public, including local political subdivisions and federal land managers affected by a SIP revision. In particular, the Air Act provides that, "no regulations or emission control requirement shall be adopted until after a public hearing by

... the local board" and that, "at the hearing

.

. . the local board shall allow all interested persons reasonable opportunity to submit data, views, or arguments orally or in writing and to examine witnesses testifying at the hearing." NMSA 1978, § 

### 74-2- 6(B) and (D); 

### see also ROA § 

### 9-5-1-6(B) and (D); Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 6(B) and (D).

To implement these consultation requirements, the Air Board has adopted several regulations establishing
a process for consultation with local political subdivisions and federal land managers. One such regulation, governing the rule making process, provides notice of SIP revisions to 

### affected persons and organizations and affords them an opportunity to participate in the revision process. 20.11.82 NMAC, 

### Rulemaking Procedures --Air Quality Control Board. Other such regulations are those programs implementing permitting in nonattainment areas and for Prevention of Significant Deterioration, which provide for public participation and notification of affected persons. 20.11.60.23 NMAC, (requiring consultation with federal land manager on major source permits in nonattainment areas that affect visibility in federal Class I areas); 20.11.60.26 NMAC (providing for public participation and notification
on major source permits in nonattainment areas, including consultation with federal land managers); 20.11.61.21 and 20.11.61.24 NMAC (providing for public participation and notification on major source permits subject to prevention of significant deterioration requirements, including federal land managers). Additionally, public participation and notification provisions are incorporated in regulations governing adjudicatory decisions by the Air Board: 20.11.81.14(0) and 20.ll.81.14(I) NMAC (providing specific procedural requirements for public notification and hearing). Further public participation and notification provisions apply regarding issuance of construction permits, 20.11.41.14, 20.11.41.15, and 20.11.41.16 NMAC (providing for public participation and notification at various stages of the construction permitting process). Collectively, the foregoing provisions ensure that there will be an established process for consultation with local political subdivisions and federal land managers, as well as persons affected by the actions specified in CAA § 

### 121.

In 

### addition to the above consultation requirements, Albuquerque Bernalillo County's SIP-approved Transportation Conformity and General Conformity rules require that interagency consultation and opportunity for public involvement be provided before making transportation conformity determinations and before adopting proposing for EPA 

### review applicable SIP revisions on transportation related SIP elements. 20.11.3.1 05, 20.11.3.112, and 20.11.4 NMAC.

Consistent with 40 CFR § 

### 51, subpart M, the Air Act, Ordinances and regulations identify the Air Board and AQP as the organizations responsible for developing, implementing, and enforcing the SIP. NMSA §§ 74-2-5 to 74-2-14; ROA §§ 9-5-1-4 and -5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 §§ 4 and 5; 20.11.1 through 20.11.104 NMAC. These legal authorities also describe particular responsibilities of the Air Board and AQP in carrying out these functions, including enacting regulations, issuing and modifying permits, modeling air dispersion patterns, monitoring ambient air quality, conducting inspections and compliance testing, undertaking enforcement actions, and providing for participation in the regulatory process. In addition, regulations identify local and federal government entities that are consulted in SIP revisions related to transportation conformity and general conformity determinations in federally mandated transportation planning. 20.11.3 and 20.11.4 NMAC.

Public notification: Consistent with CAA, Section 127, and 40 CFR § 

### 51.285, AQP makes available to the public information on instances or areas in which the measured value of regulated pollutants exceeds the values set forth in the NAAQS. AQP makes air quality data from Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's monitorin network available via EPA's Air Quali S stem Data Mart website at
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 18 ofll**STAKI:::IiOLD~R PUBUC~REVIEW**  DRAFT as of**l~-i.Mi20-l-42!20i2QJ2**


### http://www.epa.goy/airdata. Additionally, as required by grants under CAA Section lOS, AlbuquerqueBernalillo County must submit monitoring data to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) within 90 days after the end of a quarter. AQP's website provides information to the public on current air quality conditions in AQP's jurisdiction, using the EPA's color-coded Air Quality Index (AQI) to show current concentrations of criteria pollutants. This AQI information appears at http://www.cabq.gov/airguality/todays-status/air- , quality-index. The AQI information covers health effects potentially associated with varying levels of specific pollutants. By this means, AQP advises the public of potential health hazards associated with measured values for sulfur dioxide and other NAAQS pollutants that may at times exceed the concentrations specified in the NAAQS.
AQP's website also provides links to additional EPA web-based information tools on criteria pollutant emission sources, past air quality data trends, and forecasts of future air quality conditions. These EPA resources, including, for example, AIRNow, AirData, and AirCompare, are linked at http:/1\V\-\w.cabq.gov/airquality/download-air-data. By linking to these EPA resources, AQP further advises the public about criteria pollutants, local air quality conditions and the potential health hazards that may arise from such conditions.

In 

### addition to the above measures, AQP and the Air Board promote public awareness of measures that can prevent instances in which measured values of criteria pollutants exceed values specified in the NAAQS. Promotion of such awareness occurs by offering specific information on how the public can participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve air quality. In particular, AQP and the Air Board follow specific procedures, mandated by regulations, to inform the public of: ( 1) procedures for members of the public to petition the Air Board for a rulemaking proceeding, 20.11.82.18 NMAC, Rule making Procedures --Air Quality Control Board 

### (providing that "any person" may petition the Air Board for rulemaking); (2) time and place of upcoming rulemaking proceedings, 20.11.82.19 NMAC; (3) procedures for members of the public to participate in rulemakings, 20.11.82.19 NMAC; ( 4) procedures for members of the public to participate in the permitting process, 20.11.41.14 to 20.11.41.16 NMAC (public participation in construction permits); 20.11.42.13 NMAC (public participation in operating permits); 20.11.60.26 NMAC (public participation in permitting in nonattainment areas); 20.11.61.21 NMAC (public participation in permitting for prevention of significant deterioration); and 20.11.81 NMAC, Adjudicatory Procedures-- Air Quality Control Board. 

### The foregoing regulations require that notices of proceedings be published by particular methods (e.g. in a newspaper of general circulation), thus providing interested members of the public an opportunity to be heard during rulemaking and permitting.
AQP and the Air Board further promote the above forms of pub lie participation by providing links on the AQP website to important information about such participation. This web-based information includes: the content of relevant regulations; notices of proceedings; Air Board and AQP contact information; description of the process for filing air quality complaints; descriptions of permitting and compliance programs; information on environmental justice issues; and access to full text documents on completed, ongoing or upcoming regulatory proceedings, such as petitions, notices of intent, public comments, and public review drafts of proposed regulations. The foregoing information is available through the AQP website at http://www.cabg.gov/airguality (see especially http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/publicinvolvement-in-environmental-programs and http://v.ww.cabq.gov/airguality/air-quality-control-board).

Prevention of significant deterioration: EPA has stated that the requirements for this sub-element of an iSIP are the same as the requirements to satisfy Element C of an iSIP, which must comply with CAA 

### § 110(a)(2XC). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(aX2) (Sept. 2013), available at http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html. Accordingly, please refer to the discussion of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's PSD program in Elements Cofthis iSIP for a description of how the Albuquerque Bernalillo County PSDprogram satisfies iSIP requirements. Additional

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 19 ofll**bTAKbHOLD6~PUBLIC** REVIEW DRAFT as of 42124i20**14~i2Q!1_QJj_**



### discussion of PSD programs appears in Element D.
Visibility protection: EPA has stated that state and local air agencies do not need to address this subelement in an iSIP submittal, because a NAAQS revision does not change visibility requirements or impose new visibility protection requirements. Therefore, this iSIP submittal does not address the visibility sub-element. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections llO(aXl) and 110(aX2)," (Sept. 2013), available at http://wwv.·.epa.gov/airlurbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html.

Authority to conduct air quality modeling: The Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to "develop facts and make investigations and studies" consistent with the Act. NMSA 1978, § 

### 74-2-5.1 (A); ROA § 

### 9-5- 1-5(B); and Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 5(B). These legal provisions provide AQP with necessary authority to develop air quality assessments and conduct modeling to predict the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated. AQP follows EPA guidelines for air dispersion modeling. 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix W. AQP utilizes air quality modeling or requires sources to conduct such modeling under the following regulations: 20.11.3.1 05 NMAC (for consultation in the local transportation conformity process); 20.11.4.159 NMAC (for consultation in determining transportation conformity of federal actions); 20.11.41.13 NMAC (for inclusion in construction permit applications); 20.11.42.12 NMAC (for inclusion in operating permit applications); 20.11.60.25 NMAC (for permitting in nonattainment areas); 20.11.61.17 NMAC (to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in attainment areas).

' 

### Authority to provide modeling data to EPA: AQP has authority to provide modeling data to EPA upon request and will do so when AQP receives such a request. This authority derives from provisions in the Air Act and Ordinattces that require AQP to present

.. a plan for the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution" to the Air Board. NMSA 1978 § 

### 74-2-S.l(H); ROA § 

### 9-5-1-5(1); Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 5(1). The Air Board, in tum, approves regulations implementing the air pollution control plan, consistent with standards in the CAA and the New Mexico Air Act. NMSA § 

### 74-2-5; ROA § 

### 9-5-1-4; Bernalillo County Ord. 94-5 § 

### 4. These legal provisions require and authorize development and adoption of plans to attain and maintain the NAAQS

-- including generation of modeling data to be ru:..ovided to EPA. AQP agrees to**share~** 

### modeling data upon request with EPA to assure that Albuquerque Bernalillo County's EPA-approved portion of the New Mexico SIP functions as the above referencedse laws intend.

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 20 ofll'" i' • 

## .I Cliapter.];

The Air Board has approved regulations providing for fees to cover reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon permit applications, as well as implementing the terms and conditions of a permit under the CAA and the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act. 

### See 20.11.2 NMAC (on air quality related fees in general); 20.11. 7.12 NMAC (fees for petitions for variances); collectively 20.11.13 NMAC; 20.11.14 NMAC; 20.11.17 NMAC and 20.11.22 NMAC (fees related to fugitive dust control); 20.11.40.13 NMAC and 20.11.40.14 NMAC (fees for source registrations); 20.11.41.12 NMAC; 20.11.4l.l3 NMAC; 20.11.41.16 NMAC; 20.11.41.23 NMAC; 20.11.41.32 NMAC (construction permit fees); 20.11.42.12 NMAC and 20.11.42.13 NMAC (operating permit fees); 20.11.81.8 NMAC and 20.11.81.14 NMAC (fees for adjudicatory proceedings); 20.11.100.20 NMAC; 20.11.100.23 NMAC; 20.11.100.24 NMAC; 20.11.100.29 NMAC; 20.11.100.33 NMAC; 20.11.100.35 NMAC; 20.11.100.35 NMAC; 20.11.101.18 NMAC; 20.11.101.28 NMAC; 20.11.104.111 NMAC (fees for motor vehicle standards and inspections).

### i~1~1.9(a.}<2)Jl\fl 

## .

,, -,;-,, :1 

## rro,yide'.fpr consulpiti9n and .parttQipation by local political subdivisions affected by



### ·. llicFplan. · ·

The Air Quality Control Act and implementing regulations provide for consultation with local political subdivisions affected by the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County elements of the New Mexico SIP. For a detailed description of these provisions, please see the information in element J, above, of this iSIP.

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 21 of2l

### ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO

# COUN'ItY:~ .. , .. 1

# ~._I;**T:\LJI:EA:..~** . AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD 

## 15 FEB 20 PH 2: 3i ' 

### IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO ADOPT A STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) FOR SULFUR DIOXIDE (SOl) TO ADDRESS SECTIONS 110(a)(1) AND (2) OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(1) AND (2) HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE 

### "S0 1 

### INFRASTRUCTURE SIP"

Air Quality Program, Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque, Petitioner AQCB Petition No. 2015-1

Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for SOl to address Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(1) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "SOl Infrastructure SIP".

1. The City of Albuquerque, by and through the Air Quality Program (AQP)

of the Environmental Health Department, asks the Albuquerque- Bernalillo County Air
Quality Control Board (Air Board) to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to address

Sections llO(a)(l) and (2) of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(l)

and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S0 2 

### Infrastructure SIP". If adopted, this new SIP will

be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a proposed revision

to the current SIP. This Petition includes a request for a hearing on these matters and
permission to provide a court reporter and hearing officer for the hearing. As grounds,

Petitioner states the following:

2. The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (Air Act), NMSA 1978,

Sections 74-2-4 and 74-2-S.B(l) [1967 as amended through 2007] authorizes and requires

the Air Board to adopt, amend, or replace air quality regulations and to adopt air quality
plans (SIPs) under NMSA 1978, Section 74-2-5.B(2).

1

### ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO

# COUN'ItY~ .. ' II h

.. li 

### Tt\LJI:EA:.. •. AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD 

## 15 FEB 20 PH 2: 3i ' 

### IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO ADOPT A STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) FOR SULFUR DIOXIDE (SOl) TO ADDRESS SECTIONS 110(a)(1) AND (2) OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(1) AND (2) HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE 

### "S0 1 

### INFRASTRUCTURE SIP"

Air Quality Program, Environmental Health Department, City of Albuquerque, Petitioner AQCB Petition No. 2015-1

Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 

### S01 to address Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Ad (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(1) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "SOl Infrastructure SIP".

1. The City of Albuquerque, by and through the Air Quality Program (AQP)

of the Environmental Health Department, asks the Albuquerque- Bernalillo County Air
Quality Control Board (Air Board) to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to address

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(l)

and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S02 Infrastructure SIP". If adopted, this new SIP will

be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a proposed revision

to the current SIP. This Petition includes a request for a hearing on these matters and
permission to provide a court reporter and hearing officer for the hearing. As grounds,

Petitioner states the following:

2. The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (Air Act), NMSA 1978,

Sections 74-2-4 and 74-2-5.B(1) [1967 as amended through 2007] authorizes and requires

the Air Board to adopt, amend, or replace air quality regulations and to adopt air quality
plans (SIPs) under NMSA 1978, Section 74-2-5.B(2).



### 1

### 3. On June 22,2010, EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson, promulgated a new

national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for S02, effective August 23, 2010 [75

Fed. Reg. 35,520 (June 22, 2010)]. Based on its review of the air quality criteria for

oxides of sulfur and the primary NAAQS for oxides of sulfur as measured by sulfur

dioxide (S02), EPA made revisions to the primary S02 NAAQS in order to provide
requisite protection of public health. Specifically, EPA has established a new 1-hour

standard at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), based on the 3-year average of the 99th
percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations, to replace

the existing 24 hour and annual primary S0 2 standards. EPA also established S02

ambient air monitoring and reporting requirements to support implementation of and
compliance with the new NAAQS.

4. Pursuant to Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of the CAA, each State is
required to submit a plan, known as an "infrastructure SIP," to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a newly promulgated or revised
NAAQS within 3 years of promulgation of a new or revised standard. Section 110(a)(l)

of the CAA addresses the timing requirement for the submissions of any "Infrastructure

SIP" revisions, while Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA lists the required elements that
comprise the "Infrastructure SIP". Therefore, this plan or "Infrastructure SIP" addressing

the requirements of Sections 110(a)(2)(A)--(M) of the CAA was due June 3, 2013. This

"Infrastructure SIP" is a compilation of elements that demonstrates how AlbuquerqueBernalillo County will implement, maintain and enforce the revised S02 NAAQS,
including: enforceable emission limitations and control measures, air quality monitoring and
modeling, a pennitting program, adequate funding and personnel, authority under state law to



### 2

### carry out the plan, emissions reporting, emergency powers, public participation, and fee

collection.

5. It is anticipated that the hearing will take approximately 

### 1 hour or less.

6. The Public Review Draft for the proposed "S02 Infrastructure SIP" is

attached as AQP Exhibit 

### #1.

Respectfully submitted,

DannyN ez Deputy Director Environmental Health Department City of Albuquerque One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023 Albuquerque NM, 871 03 (505) 768-2706

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that a copy of this Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to address Sections llO(a)(l) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(l) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S0 2 

### Infrastructure SIP" was delivered to the following person on February 20, 2015.
Andrew Daffern Air Quality Control Board Liaison Environmental Health Department One Civic Plaza, NW, Room 3023 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103
and that a copy was provided by email to:
Felicia Orth, Attorney to the Air Quality Control Board.

Danny Nevarez Deputy Director Environmental Health Department City of Albuquerque



### 3From: Cjty of Albygyeraye-Ajr Oyality prooram Daffern Andrew To: Subject: Public Review Draft, 502 Infrastructure SIP Friday, February 20, 2015 4:48:17 PM Date:

[]



### Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Sulfur Dioxide (S02) to address sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

# * 7410(a)(1) and ( 2) hereafter referred to as the "S02 Infrastructure SIP"

Click here to view a copy of this petition.

Click here to view a copy of the Public Review 

## UJ:a.ft.

This petition was filed on February 20, 2015 and the request for a hearing will be an item on the Air Quality Control Board Draft Agenda for the meeting scheduled for Wednesday, March 11, 2015, at 5:30p.m., in the Vincent E. Griego Chambers, Basement Level, City Hall.

Please send comments on the Public Review Draft by April 1, 2015 to:

Ed Merta Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator 1 Civic Plaza NW Room 3023, 3rd floor Albuquerque NM 8702 (505) 768-2660 emerta@cabq.govForward email 

# •

This email was sent to adaffern@cabq.gov by emerta@cabg.goy : Update profjle/Emajl Address • Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscrjbeTM ! prjyacy poljcy.

City of Albuquerque i One Civic Plaza NW : Albuquerque ' NM : 87102From: City of Albuqyeraue-Ajr Oyality program Daffern. Andrew To: Subject: EPA

- Stakeholder Review Draft, S02 Infrastructure SIP Wednesday, December 24, 2014 12:04:32 PM Date:



### Dear community stakeholders:

I am the Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator for the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program. I administer the process of writing new air quality regulations affecting air pollutant sources throughout Bernalillo County, under authority delegated pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act and the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act.

I'm writing to you today to request your input on a new draft regulatory document, the proposed Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (iSIP) for the 

### 2010 sulfur dioxide (S0 2 ) 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The draft S0 2 

### iSIP is available for viewing at this link.

The Air Quality Program is required to submit this iSIP to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in response to EPA rulemaking. In 

### 2010, EPA promulgated a new NAAQS for sulfur dioxide. Within three years of such promulgation, state and local air quality control agencies must submit
an iSIP to EPA, describing the programs and legal authorities that the agency has in place to meet

### and maintain the new NAAQS. This iSIP does not create any new regulations or any new legal authority. Rather, it describes the regulatory framework as it currently exists, in order to certify to EPA that Bernalillo County is capable of meeting the NAAQS and thus complying with its legal obligations under the Clean Air Act and the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act.

The Air Quality Program is circulating this draft for feedback from interested stakeholders as part of the regulatory process. We would appreciate receiving in writing any comments you may have
on the above-linked draft. Comments must be submitted by no later than January 30, 2015. We regard such written feedback as essential to the regulatory process and to promoting the public interest.

Review comments can be submitted to me at my City of Albuquerque email address, emerta@cabq.gov.

This email was sent to adaffern@cabq.gov by emerta@cabg.gov 1 Update Profile/Email Address ' Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscriberM i Privacy Policy.

City of Albuquerque l One Civic Plaza NW i Albuquerque ' NM : 87102

## ~ Albuquc'rque Bernalillo County

### ~Water 

## Utility Authority

Chair Klarissa J. Pena City of Albuquerque Councilor. District 3
Vice Chair Maggie Hart Stebbins County of Bernalillo Commissioner, District 3

Richard J. Berry City of Albuquerque Mayor

Art De La Cruz County of Bernalillo Commissioner, District 2
Rey Garduno City of Albuquerque Councilor, District 6
Trudy E. Jones City of Albuquerque Councilor, District 8

Debbie O'Malley County of Bernalillo Commissioner, District 1

Ex-Officio Member Pablo R. Rael Village of Los Ranchos Board Trustee

Executive Director Mark S. Sanchez

Website www.abcwua.org January 26, 2015

Mr. Ed Merta Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program (AQP) l Civic Plaza NW, Rm 3023, 3rd Floor Albuquerque, NM 871 02

Re: Water Authority Comments on Proposed Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure State Implementation Program (SOz iSIP)

Dear Mr. Merta:

Thank you for providing the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority (Water Authority) with the AQP's proposed new draft Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure State Implementation Program (SOz iSIP) for our review and comment. We understand that the SOz iSIP is required to document local efforts to assure compliance with the EPA's 2010 S02 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) in Bernalillo County.

We appreciate the objective and generally business-friendly approach that the AQP has taken on this iSIP. The Water Authority appreciates the AQP's willingness to make confident statements in the iSIP that the Bernalillo County area will likely be deemed in compliance with the EPA's 2010 S02 NAAQS. The Water Authority will continue to do careful work in our operations to minimize S02 emissions from our operations. Our relatively minor SOz emissions from the biogenic fuels (digester gas) that we capture and use to offset consumption of fossil fuels in our Southside Water Reclamation Plant are a net benefit the community and the environment. Recovery and combustion of biogenic fuels at publically owned treatment works (POTWs) is

now a common cost-saving and environmentally protective best practice in many communities in the U.S.

As requested, we have reviewed AQP's proposed S02 iSIP and have the following comments that are outlined below following AQP' s iSIP section headings and order.

INTRODUCTION
Pg. 4 of 20, last sentence.

Comment: Rather than just sometime in the "future", please consider adding something to the effect of mentioning the general time line precedents for incorporating the 2010 S02 NAAQS into the 20.11 NMAC and other regulations & statutes. PU Rnx**';(,t~ 1\li)I!IJUI.~tquf.',**  NM**H/10~** r)th ;gq won www.abcwua.orgMr. Ed Merta January 26, 2015 Page 2

§ 110(a)(2)(A)

Edit recommendation: "It plans to do so in a future rule-making when Bernalillo County'sjinal S02 compliance status determination becomes clear from the EPA.
Pg. 8 of 20, top paragraph regarding Startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM): director's discretion:

Comment: We understand that Bernalillo County and New Mexico may potentially be facing a SSM SIP call from EPA. However, we encourage AQP not to prematurely voluntarily surrender local SSM authorities in this S02 iSIP before the final scope of the SIP call is better known. We don't want to give an impression that the AQP' s existing SSM requirements are too lenient. The NMED' s proposed S02 iSIP has not mentioned SSM, so it is not clear why the AQP has proposed addressing SSM in the S02 iSIP. Therefore, please consider deleting this whole SSM section in order to continue to maintain AQP's local authority on affirmative defenses and other SSM issues as much as possible.

Jf the AQP is unwilling to delete the whole SSM section, please consider the following edit to the last sentence in that paragraph.

Edit recommendation: "The statutes, ordinances, and regulations governing AQP's enforcement and maintenance of the NAAQS clearly support NAAQS compliance.

§ II O(a)(2)(B)
Pg. 9 of 20, 2"d paragraph, last sentence:

Comment: The Water Authority applauds the AQP's good work on monitoring and maintaining 

### so2 attainment in the county that allows your confidence in being able to recommend reclassification as "attainment".

§ IIO(a)(2)(C)
Top of Pg. 11 of 20, first couple of sentences.

Comment: "

... 20.11.41, Construction Permits. These preconstruction regulations also apply to minor modification of major sources emitting NAAQS pollutants. /d. EPA has approved these provisions into the New Mexico SIP." The EPA's approval of 20.11 NMAC Part 41 in the NM SIP appears to conflict with AQP's statements made previously in footnote 7 on pg. 7 of 20 which states, ' 0 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has submitted SIP revisions applying to the following regulations and**~** awaiting EPA approval: 20.11 NMAC, Parts I, 41_, 47, 60, and 61."

Please clarify those sections for consistency.Mr. Ed Merta January 26, 2015 Page 3

§ 110(a)(2)(D)
Pg. I I of 20, 2 00 to la.'Ot paragraph.

Comment: The emissions numbers in this paragraph contain at least a few errors that

we can recognize. Please check all numbers. since GCC's seem too low. Since the GCC plant S02 permitted allowable emissions are an order of magnitude higher, please consider mentioning GCC before mentioning the Water Authority. We also recommend using the most recent numbers available to the AQP, e.g .• from CY 2013 SLEIS.

Edit recommendations:

2) The minimal amount of emissions from those sources. The Tijeras Plant is permitted to emit 

# m 1,41 7.fi tons per year of oxides of sulfur. According to data from the SLEIS system, this facility's reported actual emissions averaged only 22.739425 (?, thi.\ SCC/J/.1 /ikl'l_y /00 fmr. [lfea.le c/icck) tOnS of S02 per year from 20112012 to 2013. The Water Reclamation Plant is permitted to emit I ,103.41 123.4 tons per year of S02. According to data from the State and Local Emissions Inventory (SLEIS) system, this facility's reported actual emissions averaged only 84.342975 93.5 tons of so2 per year in 2013.

In Bernalillo County as a whole, monitoring of ambient air quality indicates that the design value for so2 in parts per billion was 4.6 for the period 20 II to 2013

-- i.e. less than 10% of the 75 ppb 2010 S02 NAAQS.

§ 110(a)(2)(F)
Pg. 15 of 20, 2nd to last paragraph, last sentence

Comment: Please consider mentioning the 20 13 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) information that may have been submitted to the EPA in December 2014. That would be more recent than the 2012 NEI info submitted in December 2013 when discussing AQP being current with NEI submittals.

Thank you again for the opportunity to review and comment. Please let me know if you have related questions regarding our comments and suggestions for edits to AQP's proposed draft S02 iSIP. Please feel free to contact me or Charles S. Leder (331-6021) if you have related questions or suggestions.

Charles S. Leder, P.E., ABCWUA

# CITY OF ALBUQVERQ!)E

PO Box 1293

Albuquerque

New Mexico 87103

www.cabq.gov 

### February 20,2015

Mr. John M. Stomp III, P.E. Chief Operating Officer Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority PO Box 568 Albuquerque NM 87103

Re: Response by Air Quality Program to ABCWUA Comments on Proposed S02 iSIP

Dear Mr. Stomp:

Thank you for your comments on our proposed S0 2 Infrastructure SIP. We value input from our stakeholders and appreciate the time taken to review the draft. Please find our responses below.

ABCWUA COMMENT 1


### Introduction, Pg. 4 of 20, last sentence.

Comment: Rather thanjust sometime in the "future", please consider adding something to the effect of mentioning the general time line precedents for incorporating the 2010 S02 NAAQS into the 20.11 NMAC and other regulations & 

### statutes.

Edit recommendation: "It plans to do so in a future rule-making 

### when Bernalillo County's final S02 compliance status determination becomes clear from the EPA.
AQP RESPONSE



### The timing of a revision to 20.11 NMAC to incorporate the 2010 S0 2 

### NAAQS in local regulations is unrelated to a "compliance status determination" from EPA. The 20 I 0 S0 2 NAAQS as enacted in the Code of Federal Regulations is already in effect at the federal level and Albuquerque-Bernalillo must demonstrate compliance. Inclusion or noninclusion of the NAAQS in the NMAC does not change the need to comply with federal law pending the NMAC revision. AQP intends to propose revision of 20.11.8 NMAC to incorporate federal air quality standards as early as possible in light of other necessary regulatory changes still pending.

ABCWUA COMMENT 2


### § 110(a)(2)(A)
Pg. 8 of 20, top paragraph regarding Startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM): director's discretion:Comment: We understand that Bernalillo County and New Mexico may potentially be facing a SSM SIP call from EPA However, we encourage AQP not to prematurely voluntarily surrender local SSM authorities in this S02 iSIP before the 2

final scope of the SIP call is better known. We don't want to give an impression that the AQP' s existing SSM requirements are too lenient. The NMED' s proposed S02 iSIP has not mentioned SSM, so it is not clear why the AQP has proposed addressing SSM in the S02 iSIP. Therefore, please consider deleting this whole SSM section in order to continue to maintain AQP' s local authority on affirmative defenses and other SSM issues

as much as possible.

lfthe AQP is unwilling to delete the whole SSM section, please consider the following edit to the last sentence in that paragraph.

Edit recommendation: "The statutes, ordinances, and regulations governing AQP's enforcement and maintenance of the NAAQS 

### clearly support NAAQS compliance.
AQP RESPONSE
AQP believes that the S0 2 iSIP must expressly address SSM at least in some form, rather than omit any mention of SSM, because EPA's September 2013 Guidance treats SSM provisions as a SIP control measure that should be addressed under CAA 

### § 110(a)(2)(A). 

### See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections llO(a)(l) and 110(a)(2)," September 2013, pp. 19-21, available at http: I I \VWW. epa. go vI air /urha nair Is i psta 1us/i n frastruc 

### lure. h tm 

### l.

The paragraph referred to in the comment describes Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's

excess emissions regulation, 20.11.49 NMAC, in its current form. AQP does not intend a description of an existing regulation to equate in any way to surrender of local authority. Rather, AQP wishes the description to convey authority that already exists and that EPA has previously found legally adequate. 

### See 75 Fed. Reg. 5698-5701 (February 4, 2010) (approving existing version of 20.11.49 NMAC).

In AQP' s view, EPA's Guidance document on preparation of an iSIP submission does not indicate that a descriptive passage in an iSIP necessarily alters the content or meaning of a local regulation such as 20.11.49 NMAC. 

### See EPA Guidance, pp. 19-21. Rather, the purpose of an iSIP submittal is generally to describe a state's (or in this case, local authority's) existing legal and programmatic framework for implementation of a revised NAAQS. A state may submit, or be required by EPA to submit, a proposed revision of a regulation as part of its iSIP submittal if doing so is necessary to implement the NAAQS.

However, AQP is not proposing a revision of20.11.49 NMAC with this iSIP submission. AQP does not intend any language in its draft iSIP to indicate intent to carry out such a revision. Rather, AQP is only describing the regulation that currently exists, as previously approved by EPA.
AQP agrees that, pending EPA finalization of a new proposed rule on SSM, the excess emissions regulation in its current form has not yet been found legally inadequate or otherwise lacking authority or validity. AQP has revised the language of the iSIP language to capture this situation more clearly.3

At the same time, AQP notes that it is bound to comply with federal law on excess emissions. This law is being determined by yet-to-be-finalized EPA rulemaking. See 79 Fed. Reg. 55,920 (September 17, 2014); 78 Fed. Reg. 12,460 (February 22, 2013). AQP will continue to work with EPA on this matter to comply with federal air quality law.

ABCWUA COMMENT 3
§ 11 O(a)(2)(B)
Pg. 9 of 20, 2nd paragraph, last sentence:

Comment: The Water Authority applauds the AQP's good work on monitoring and maintaining S02 attainment in the county that allows your confidence in being able to recommend reclassification as "attainment".
AQP RESPONSE
AQP did not intend to suggest in the iSIP draft that it was recommending to EPA an air quality designation for sulfur dioxide. Such recommendations for EPA designations (as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable) take place outside of the iSIP submittal process. As the iSIP draft indicates, AQP has recommended to EPA that Bernalillo County be designated as "unclassifiable" under the 2010 NAAQS for sulfur dioxide. See Letter from Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico, to EPA Region 6 Administrator Alfredo Armendariz, May 24, 2011, available at http://w\\'w.epa.gov/so2designations/recletters/R6 

### NM Albuquerque**req~df.**
At a future date, when appropriate monitoring data becomes available, AQP expects to make a new recommendation to EPA regarding the air quality designation for Bernalillo County concerning the 2010 S0 2 NAAQS. Only in such a future recommendation would AQP change its current recommendation of"unclassifiable."

However, in hopes of avoiding potential confusion on this subject, AQP has revised the draft iSIP submittal to use different language regarding a future recommendation.

ABCWUA COMMENT 4
§ 110(a)(2)(C)
Top of Pg. 11 of 20, first couple of sentences.

Comment: "

... 20.11.41, 

### Construction Permits. These preconstruction regulations also apply to minor modification of major sources emitting NAAQS pollutants. ld EPA has approved these provisions into the New Mexico SIP." The EPA's approval of 20.11 NMAC Part 41 in the NM SIP appears to conflict with AQP' s statements made previously in footnote 7 on pg. 7 of 20 which states, "AI buquerque-Bemalillo County has submitted SIP revisions applying to the following regulations and [is] awaiting EPA f!Pproval: 20.11 NMAC, Parts \ 41, 47, 60, and 61."

Please clarify those sections for consistency.4

AQP RESPONSE
AQP has amended the language referred to in the comment to indicate that AQP is still awaiting approval regarding revisions to 20.11.41 NMAC. This change will accomplish the clarification for consistency requested by the comment

ABCWUA COMMENT 5


### § 110(a)(2)(D)
Pg. 11 of 20, 2nd to last paragraph.

Comment: The emissions numbers in this paragraph contain at least a few errors that

we can recognize. Please check all numbers, since GCC's seem too low. Since the GCC plant S02 permitted allowable emissions are an order of magnitude higher, please consider mentioning GCC before mentioning the Water Authority. We also recommend using the most recent numbers available to the AQP, e.g., from CY 2013 SLEIS.

Edit recommendations:
2) The minimal amount of emissions from those sources. The Tijeras Plant is permitted to**emit~** 

### 1,417.8 tons per year of oxides of sulfur. According to data from the SLEIS system, this facility's reported actual emissions averaged only 22.739425 tons of S0 2 per year(?, 

### this seems likely too low. please check) from 2011,2012 to 2013. The Water Reclamation Plant is permitted to emit l, l 0 3. 4 

### 1123.4 tons per year of S0 2 • According to data from the State and Local Emissions Inventory (SLEIS) system, this facility's reported actual emissions averaged only 84.34 2975 

### 93.5 tons of S0 2 per year 

### in 2013.

In Bernalillo County as a whole, monitoring of ambient air quality indicates that the design value for S02 in parts per billion was 4.6 for the period 2011 to 2013 --i.e. less than 1 0% of the 7 

### 5

ppb 2010 

### S02 NAAQS.

AQP RESPONSE

The comment correctly points to errors in the iSIP draft. AQP regrets the errors and appreciates the comment. AQP has revised the draft to correct the errors accordingly. AQP's revised version uses emissions and ambient air monitoring data from 2011 to 2013 in order to provide as complete a description as possible of the S0 2 profile of Bernalillo County.

ABCWUA COMMENT 6

§ 11 O(a)(2)(F)
Pg. 15 of20, 2nd to last paragraph, last sentenceComment: Please consider mentioning the 2013 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) information that may have been submitted to the EPA in December 2014. That would be more recent than the 2012 NEI info submitted in December 2013 when discussing AQP being current with NEI submittals.
AQP RESPONSE
AQP has updated its iSIP draft to indicate submission of2013 NEI data to EPA. 5

Thank you again for your comments. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely, 

# 4f1Yu(**~** 

# V'ft7f,

Ed Merta Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator Air Quality Program Environmental Health Department City of Albuquerque One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023 Albuquerque, NM 87103 (505) 768-2660 emcrta@.cabq.gov

cc: John Walser, Air Planning Section, U.S. EPA, Region 6 Margaret Nieto, Control Strategies Supervisor, AQP Danny Nevarez, Deputy Director, Environmental Health DepartmentUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGIONS 1445 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 1200 DALLAS TX 75202·2733



### Ms. Margaret Nieto Control Strategies Supervisor Environmental Health Deparbnent City of Albuquerque P.O. Box 1293, One Civic Plaza NW 3n1 

### Floor. Room 3023 Albuquerque, NM 87103

## ~JAN 

# 3 0 2015

RE: 

### Proposed 2010 S02 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Dear Ms. Nieto:

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft 11 

### State Implementation. Plan (SIP) Infrastructure Checklist for the 2010 S02 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)." We appreciate the efforts of you and your 

### staff to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements of sections 11 O(a)(1) and (2) as they pertain to the 2010 S02 

### s air quality standards. Our review is based upon our September 13,2013 "Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(l) and 110(a)(2)." This document can be obtained from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency website htt,p://www .epa.gov/oaqpsOO 1/urbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html.

Enclosed are general and specific comments on the 

### draft checklist. We appreciate the work of you and your staff to protect air quality in Albuquerque-Bernalillo County and look forward to continuing our work with you. If you have any questions or need additional clarification, please contact me at (214) 665-7242 or Mr. John Walser of my staff at (214) 665-7128.

Enclosure

cc: EdMerta Environmental Health Department City of Albuquerque Sincerely yours,

Guy R. 

### Donaldson Chief Air 

### Planning Section

lntemetAddress{UAL) • http:/JwWw,epa.gov/reglone Reoyclld/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% PostcOII8UI'I'Ier, PI'OCess Chlorine Free Recycled Paper2



### Enclosure

EPA Comments on the draft Albuquerque "State Implementation Plan (SIP) Infrastructure Submission for the 2010 S02 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)"

General Comment 1



### An 

### approvable infrastructure SIP should demonstrate the State has the necessary authority to 

### implement the subject Standard and in some instances those authorities should be part of the SIP. As appropriate, and discussed in the 2013 guidance, providing updated Albuquerque statutes and regulations for inclusion into the SIP to address implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the National Ambient Air 

### Quality Standards is 

### required. However, the following regulations are not needed for this submission and should be removed/withdrawn from the submitta1 1 :



### • 20.11.47 NMAC, Emissions Inventory Requirements (revisions previously submitted to EPA on May 6, 2008, November 6, 2009 and October 18, 2002). EPA already has 

### approved these rule revisions into the SI,P.

• 20.11.62 NMAC Acid Rain (the Acid Rain program is part of the Title IV CAA requirements and should not be submitted for inclusion into 

### the SIP).

• 20.11.69 NMAC, Pathological Waste Destructors. 

### These are not necessary for submission with the iSIP.

• 20.11.71 NMAC, Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. These are 

### not necessary for submission with the iSIP

. 

# • Additionally, it is not necessary to incorporate the following Air Quality Program internal "procedures" into the SIP and EPA prefers they not be 

### submitted for inclusion in the SIP:

• 20.11.80 NMAC, Adjudicatory Procedures -Administrative Enforcement Hearings by the Director.

• 20.11.81 NMAC, Adjudicatory Procedures- Air Quality Control Board, and

• 20.11.82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures- Air Quality 

### Control Board.
Additionally, we note that EPA approved Albuquerque regulations and statutes are found in 40 CFR 52.1620 (c) and (e).

General Comment 2


### Page 9 of the submittal states 

### "This iSIP submission, along with earlier submissions to EPA, will incorporate revised or missing legal authorities into the CFR.', After receiving a SIP revision, EPA reviews and takes action on whether or not to approve, disapprove, conditionally approve or partially approve a revision into the SIP. It is not correct to defmitively say that EPA will incorporate authorities

1 Please note that submitting only a copy of a· rule for inclusion into the SIP Is not sufficient. Each rule revision for Inclusion into the SIP must go through the**proce~** of public noticing. and public hearing- similar to the ISIP submission. Therefore,
even If the rules mentioned In General Comment 1 were to be included Into the SIP, they were not properly public noticed and discussed in the submission.3 

### into the CFR. Please delete any reference or statement(s) in the submission that are phrased this way.

General Comment 3



### EPA acknowledges that the tenn "Air Quality Program,., is now the correct term referring to the air pollution control agency for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County as stated in footnote 2 on Page 4 of the proposed submission. ·

# CITY OF ALBUQ!)ERQ!)E

PO Box 1293

Albuquerque

New Mexico 87103

www.cabq.gov February 20, 2015

Mr. Guy Donaldson Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 1445 Ross Ave, Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733

Re: Response by Air Quality Program to EPA Comments on Proposed S02 iSIP

Dear Mr. Donaldson:

Thank you for your comments on our proposed S02 Infrastructure SIP. Please find our responses below.

EPA General Comment 1:

An approvable infrastructure SIP should demonstrate the State has the necessary authority to implement the subject Standard and in some instances those authorities should be part ofthe SIP. As appropriate, and discussed in the 2013 guidance, providing updated Albuquerque statutes and regulations for inclusion into the SIP to address implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards is required. However, the following regulations are not needed for this submission and should be removed/withdrawn from the submittal 1 :

- 20. 11.4 7 NMAC, Emissions Inventory Requirements (revisions previously submitted to EPA on May 6, 2008, November 6, 2009 and October 18,2002). EPA already has approved these rule revisions into the SIP.

- 20.11.62 NMAC Acid Rain(theAcid Rain program is part ofthe Title IV CAA requirements and should not be submitted for inclusion into the SIP).

- 20.11.69 NMAC, Pathological Waste Destructors. These are not necessary for submission with the iSIP.

- 20.11.71 NMAC, Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. These are not necessary for submission with the iSIP.

### Additionally, it is not necessary to incorporate the following Air Quality Program internal ''procedures" into the SIP and EPA prefers they not be submitted for inclusion in the SIP:

- 20.11.80 NMAC, Adjudicatory Procedures -Administrative Enforcement Hearings by the Director.

- 20.11.81 NMAC, Adjudicatory Procedures -Air Quality Control Board, and

- 20.11.82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures -Air Quality Control Board.
Additionally, we note that EPA approved Albuquerque regulations and statutes are found in 40 CFR 52.1620 (c) and (e). 2

1 Please note that submitting only a copy of a rule for inclusion into the SIP is not sufficient. Each rule revision for inclusion into the SIP must go through the process of public noticing and public hearing

-- similar to the iSIP submission. Therefore, even if the rules mentioned in General Comment I were to be included into the SIP, they were not properly publicly noticed and discussed in the submission.
AQP Response to General Comment 1:


### AQP agrees with this comment. AQP will not include with its iSIP submittal any of the NMAC rules listed in the comment. AQP has revised the text of its iSIP draft to remove references to submitting those rules for EPA review and approval into the New Mexico SIP. Based on EPA's comment, AQP has also determined that submission for incorporation into the SIP of two New Mexico statutes, NMSA §§ 

### 74-2-5.1 and 74-2-12.1, is not necessary. AQP is thus revising the iSIP draft to remove language referring to submission ofthose statutes.

In reference to footnote I of EPA General Comment I, AQP notes that the footnote refers to a draft iSIP document that AQP submitted to EPA for review and comment prior to beginning the process of public notice and public hearing. AQP will follow all legal requirements for public notice and public hearing for this iSIP submittal once that process begins.

EPA General Comment 2:


### Page 9 of the submittal states {'This iSIP submission, along with earlier submissions to EPA, will incorporate revisedormissinglegalauthorities into the CFR. 

### "Afterreceivinga SIP revision, EPA reviews and takes action on whether or not to approve, disapprove, conditionally approve or partially approve a revision into the SIP. It 

### is not correct to definitively say that EPA will incorporate authorities into the CFR. Please delete any reference or statement(s) in the submission that are phrased this way.
AQP Response to General Comment 2:


### AQP agrees with this comment. AQP has revised the language of its iSIP draft in accordance with the comment.

EPA General Comment 3:3

EPA acknowledges that the term "Air Quality Program" is now the correct term referring to the air pollution control agency for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County as stated in footnote 2 on Page 4 of the proposed submission.
AQP Response to General Comment 2:
AQP thanks EPA for this comment.

Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,

Ed Merta Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator Air Quality Program Environmental Health Department City of Albuquerque One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023 Albuquerque, NM 87103 (505) 768-2660 cmertar(vcabq. gov

cc: John Walser, Air Planning Section, U.S. EPA, Region 6 Margaret Nieto, Control Strategies Supervisor, AQP Danny Nevarez, Deputy Director, Environmental Health Department

## ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD Vincent E. Griego Chambers Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Government Center One Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque, NM 87102

DRAFT MINUTES- March 11, 2015 Regular Meeting

AQCB MEMBERS PRESENT Kelsey Curran, CIH (CITY), Chair Jens Deichmann, Ph.D. (COUNTY) Robert Goldstein, M.D. (COUNTY) Augustine Grace III, P.E. (CITY) Ms. Deborah 

### L. Stover (COUNTY) Lenton Malry, Ph.D. (BCPC LIAISON) Ms. Mary Lou Leonard, Director 

### Mr. Danny Nevarez, Deputy Director, EHD Ms. Margaret Nieto, EH Manager and AQCB Secretary Ms. Felicia Orth, Air Board Attorney and Hearing Officer Ms. Carol Parker, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Damon Reyes, EH Manager 

### AQCB MEMBERS ABSENT Mr. Cale Swanson, EH Supervisor Ms. Jane Cudney-Black (CITY), Vice Chair Dona Upson, M.D. (CITY) Mr. Isreal Tavarez, EH Manager



### VISITORS PRESENT EHD STAFF PRESENT Jim Peck, COA, Enviromnental Planning Commission Mr. Andrew Daffern, AQCB Liaison 

### Mr. Fabian Macias, Air Quality Official 

### Mr. Ed Merta, Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator Mikaela Renz- Whitmore, COA, Planning Department



### DRAFT MEETING MINUTES CALL TO ORDER

Item #1

Item #2 The meeting was called to order by Chair Kelsey Curran at 5:34p.m. on March 11,2015 with five voting Board members present: Jens Deichmann, Augustine Grace, Kelsey Curran, Deborah Stover, and Robert Goldstein; and one non-voting member present: Lenton Malry. Not present were voting members Jane CudneyBlack and Dona Upson.


### Approval of Agenda (Chair)

A motion to approve the agenda was made by Member Deichmann and seconded by Member Grace. The motion was approved unanimously by a vote of 5-0.


### Approval of February 11, 2015 Meeting Minutes (Chair)

A motion to approve the February 11, 2015 meeting minutes was made by Member Deichmann and seconded by Member Stover. The motion was approved unanimously by a vote of 5-0.

Page 1

### PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no public comment.



### ACTION ITEMS

Item #3

Item #4 

### Request for a Hearing in the Matter of the Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for S02 to address Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(1) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S02 Infrastructure SIP" (AQCB Petition No. 2015-1)

-- Ed Merta, M.A., J.D., Esq., Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator

The Request for a Hearing was presented by Ed Merta, AQ Regulation Development Coordinator. Member Deichmann moved to grant the hearing request. The motion was seconded by Member Stover and unanimously approved by vote of 5-0.


### Request for a Hearing in the Matter of the Petition to Amend 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and Submit the Adopted 20.11.61 NMAC to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for Proposed Incorporation into the New Mexico State Implementation Plan for Air Quality (SIP) (AQCB Petition No. 2015-2) --Ed Merta, M.A., J.D., Esq., Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator

The Request for a Hearing was presented by Ed Merta, AQ Regulation Development Coordinator. Member Grace moved to grant the hearing request. The motion was seconded by Member Deichmann and unanimously approved by vote of 5-0.



### REPORTS Air Program Report. Staff available for questions.

OTHER BUSINESS

Item #5 Presentation: ABC to Z 

### (Comprehensive Plan I 

### Unified Development Ordinance)-- Mikaela Renz-Whitmore, Planner, COA Planning Department and Russell Brito, Planning Manager, COA Planning Department

ABC to Z (Comprehensive Plan I Unified Development Ordinance) was presented by Mikaela Renz- Whitmore, Planner, COA Planning Department. Ms. RenzWhitmore answered questions from the Board in a lively discussion about the process. Danny Nevarez added that the Air Quality Program is working with the Planning Department on outreach to the Air Quality stakeholder community.

• Chair Curran brought to the Board's attention a planned bike-sharing program for downtown Albuquerque that is scheduled to start May 15, 2015, as reported in the Albuquerque Journal. After discussion, various Board members expressed an interest in learning more details about the new program and if appropriate, sending a letter of encouragement and support for the program. Chair Curran
Page2suggested that the item be included on the next meeting agenda for a possible presentation as well as taking action on sending a letter of support if that is the Board's inclination.

• Chair Curran noted that the date of the next Board meeting in April has been changed from April 8 to April 30 at 5:30.

• Member Deichmann reminded the Board that Board elections will be held at the April Board meeting.

ADJOURNMENT

Chair Kelsey Curran adjourned the meeting at 6:58p.m.

NEXT SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING AND HEARING: April 30, 2015 

### -moved from April 8, 2015.

SUBMITTED:

Ms. Margaret Nieto date Board Secretnry/Env. Health Manager, Control Strategies Section, Air Quality Program, Environmental Health Department.

Page 3 READ AND APPROVED:

Kelsey Curran, CIH date Chair Albuquerque- Bernalillo County Air Quality Control BoardAlbuquerque Joumal Legal Notices

# fou~NAl 

# LEGALS
Search legals

...

HOME NEWS SPORTS BUSINESS VENUE OBITUARIES OPINION POLITICS LIVING CLASSIFIEDS JOBS AUTOS

Walmart Logistics is Hiring Management Talent! 

### Area Manager, Floor (Grocery) Los Lunas, NM Walmart Distribution Center #6084 To apply or for more lnformalion about care opportunities with Walmart, please click he

## Walmart~'~ S•v'l'**MOA~ty** llv• f»Hf'l" j

SEARCH RESULTS

NOTICE OF HEARING AND DATE CHANGE FOR REGULAR MEETING ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD The Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (Air Board) will hold a public hearing on April 30, 2015 at 5:30p.m. in the Vincent E. Griego Chambers located in the basement level of the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Government Center, One Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque. NM. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the matter of AQCB Petition No. 2015-1, to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Sulfur Dioxide (S02) to address Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. Sections 7410(a)(1) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S02 Infrastructure SIP". The regularly scheduled meeting date on AprilS, 2015 has been changed to April30, 2015. The proponent of this regulatory action is the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program. The hearing will consider whether to adopt the S02 Infrastructure SIP and submit it to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a proposed revision to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan. An Infrastructure SIP is required by the U.S. Environmental Protection agency to demonstrate compliance with a newly issued National Ambient Air Quality Standard. An information sheet with further details on the subject matter of the hearing is available at: : http:lfwww.cabq.gov/airquality/air-quality-control-board/documentsl. %20information%20Sheet%20-%20S02.pdf Following the hearing, the Air Board at its regular monthly meeting is expected to consider adopting the proposed Infrastructure SIP for S02. The Public Review Draft of the S02 Infrastructure SIP may be reviewed during regular business hours at the Environmental Health Department, One Civic Plaza. NW, Suite 3023, Albuquerque, NM 87102. Copies ofthe Public Review Draft may be obtained by contacting Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board Liaison, at (505) 768-2601 or adaffern@cabq.gov. The Public Review Draft can also be found on the Air Quality Program web site at http:lfwww.cabq.gov/airqualitylair-quality-control-board/documents/ S02%20iSIP%20Public%20Review"/o20Draft.pdf. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with NMSA 74-2-6: Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, Section 9-5-1-6, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearing [ROA 1994]; Bernalillo County Ordinance, Section 30-35, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearings [Ord. No. 94-5, Section 6, 2-2-94]; and 20.11.82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures-Air Quality Control Board: and other applicable procedures. All interested persons will be given a reasonable opportunity at the hearing to submit relevant evidence, data, views and arguments, orally or in writing, to introduce exhibits, and to examine witnesses. Persons wishing to present technical testimony must file with the Air Board a written notice of intent (NO I) to do so by 5:00p.m. on April14, 2015. The NOI shall: (1) identify the person for whom the witness(es) will testify: (2) identify each technical witness that the person intends to present and state the qualifications of the witness, including a description of their education and work background; (3) include a copy of the direct testimony of each technical witness and state the anticipated duration of the testimony of that witness: (4) include the text of any recommended modifications to the proposed regulatory change: (5) list and attach an original and 15 copies of all exhibits anticipated to be offered by that person at the hearing, including any proposed statement of reasons for adoption of rules; and (6) be served on the petitioner. if the document is an NOI filed by any person other than the petitioner. The NOI must be filed in hard copy form (original plus 15 copies of all documents) by 5:00p.m. on April14, 2015, with Andrew Daffern. Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Environmental Health Department, One Civic Plaza, NW. Suite 3023, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102. Any member of the general public may present non-technical testimony at the hearing. No prior notification is required to present non-technical testimony. Any member of the public may also offer exhibits in connection with non-technical testimony, as long as the exhibit is not unduly repetitious of the testimony. A member of the general public who wishes to submit a non-technical written statement for the record in lieu of oral testimony shall file the written statement prior to the hearing, or submit it at the hearing. Written statements submitted prior to the hearing may be directed to the**httDI/Ie~als.aboioumal.com/le~als/show/341** 065[ 418/2015 I :54· 59 PMI Daily Legal Notices:

?

### F-<';~;VJ~~~

### ~~-~L~). 

# .. Today 

# J

> 

### _! » Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sdt

2 3 't

6 7 8 9 10 l1

12 13 14 15 16 17 lH

1 q 20 21 22 23 24 .JL;

JiJ 27 28 29 30

Select date
Latest News:Albuquerque Joumal Legal Notices Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Andrew Daffern, at the above contact information. NOTICE FOR PERSON WITH DISABILITIES OR SPECIAL NEEDS: If you have

a disability or require special assistance to participate. including translation/inter-pretation service, or review of any agendas, minutes, or other public meeting documents, please contact Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board liaison, by April 16, 2015, at (505) 768-2601, or adaffern@cabq.gov.TTY users requiring special assistance may call the New Mexico Relay at 1-800-659-8331. Journal: March 15, 2015 [4.**~** • PUBUSHEp ON· SUN MARCH 15 2015

Privacy Policy & Copyright© 1997- 2015 Albuquerque Journal: Albuquerque. New Mexicoo Contact Us 1 Call the Journal: 505-823-3800 1 About Us/Media Info 1 Place an ad: 505-823-44441 Weatherline: 505-821-1111

Albuquerque Journal Subscriber Services Submit a news lip I Place a classified ad I Advertise in the Journal I Subscribe to newspaper**httn)~"''als.abqionmHI com/le••"1'/'how/34106~14/R/20**  15**1·~4 ~9**  PM]

### New Mexico Register / Volume XXVI, Number 5 / March 16, 2015 191 

# Notices of Rulemaking and Proposed Rules

ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD NOTICE OF HEARING AND DATE CHANGE FOR REGULAR MEETING
The Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (Air Board) will hold a public hearing on April 30, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. in the Vincent E. Griego Chambers located in the basement level of the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Government Center, One Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque, NM. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the matter of AQCB Petition No. 2015-2, to amend 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Signi fi cant Deterioration , and submit the adopted 20.11.61 NMAC to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for proposed incorporation into the New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP). The regularly scheduled meeting date on April 8, 2015 has been changed to April 30, 2015.
The proponent of this regulatory action is the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program.
The hearing will consider whether to adopt the proposed amended version of 20.11.61 NMAC, in order to bring the regulation into compliance with standards in the Code of Federal Regulations. An information sheet with further details on the subject matter of the hearing is available at http://www.cabq. gov/airquality/air-quality-control-board/ documents/3.%20Information%20sheet%20 -%20Part%2061.pdf.
Following the hearing, the Air Board at its regular monthly meeting is expected to consider adopting the proposed amendments to 20.11.61 NMAC.

The Public Review Draft of the amended 20.11.61 NMAC may be reviewed during regular business hours at the Environmental Health Department, One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023, Albuquerque, NM 87102. Copies of the Public Review Draft may be obtained by contacting Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board Liaison, at (505) 768-2601 or adaffern@cabq.gov. The Public Review Draft can also be found on the Air Quality Program web site at:http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/air-qualitycontrol-board/documents/Part%2061%20 Public%20Review%20Draft.pdf. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with NMSA § 74-2-6; Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, Section 9-5-1-6, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearing [ROA 1994]; Bernalillo County Ordinance, Section 30-35, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearings [Ord. No. 94-5, Section 6, 2-2-94]; and 20.11.82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures—Air Quality Control Board ; and other applicable procedures.
All interested persons will be given a reasonable opportunity at the hearing to submit relevant evidence, data, views and arguments, orally or in writing, to introduce exhibits, and to examine witnesses. Persons wishing to present technical testimony must fi le with the Air Board a written notice of intent (NOI) to do so by 5:00 p.m. on April 14, 2015. The NOI shall:
(1) identify the person for whom the witness(es) will testify; (2) identify each technical witness that the person intends to present and state the quali fi cations of the witness, including a description of their education and work background; (3) include a copy of the direct testimony of each technical witness and state the anticipated duration of the testimony of that witness; (4) include the text of any recommended modi fi cations to the proposed regulatory change; (5) list and attach an original and 15 copies of all exhibits anticipated to be offered by that person at the hearing, including any proposed statement of reasons for adoption of rules; and (6) be served on the petitioner, if the document is an NOI fi led by any person other than the petitioner.

The NOI must be fi led in hard copy form (original plus 15 copies of all documents) by 5:00 p.m. on April 14, 2015, with Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Environmental Health Department, One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102.
Any member of the general public may present non-technical testimony at the hearing. No prior noti fi cation is required to present non-technical testimony. Any member of the public may also offer exhibits in connection with non-technical testimony, as long as the exhibit is not unduly repetitious of the testimony. A member of the general public who wishes to submit a non-technical written statement for the record in lieu of oral testimony shall fi le the written statement prior to the hearing, or submit it at the hearing. Written statements submitted prior to the hearing may be directed to the Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Andrew Daffern, at the above contact information.

NOTICE FOR PERSON WITH DISABILITIES OR SPECIAL NEEDS : If you have a disability or require special assistance to participate, including translation/interpretation service, or review of any agendas, minutes, or other public meeting documents, please contact Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board liaison, by April 16, 2015, at (505) 768-2601, or adaffern@cabq.gov.TTY users requiring special assistance may call the New Mexico Relay at 1-800-659-8331.

### ALBUQUERQUEBERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD NOTICE OF HEARING AND D ATE CHANGE FOR REGULAR MEETING
The Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (Air Board) will hold a public hearing on April 30, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. in the Vincent E. Griego Chambers located in the basement level of the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Government Center, One Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque, NM. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the matter of AQCB Petition No. 2015-1, to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) to address Sections 110(a) (1) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. Sections 7410(a)(1) and (2) hereafter referred to as the “SO2 Infrastructure SIP”. The regularly scheduled meeting date on April 8, 2015 has been changed to April 30, 2015.
The proponent of this regulatory action is the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program.
The hearing will consider whether to adopt the SO2 Infrastructure SIP and submit it to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a proposed revision to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan. An Infrastructure SIP is required by the U.S. Environmental Protection agency to demonstrate compliance with a newly issued National Ambient Air Quality Standard. An information sheet with

### ALBUQUERQUEBERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD 

### AQP Exhibit 6b

### New Mexico Register / Volume XXVI, Number 5 / March 16, 2015 192 further details on the subject matter of the hearing is available at: http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/air-quality-controlboard/documents/3.%20Information%20 Sheet%20-%20SO2.pdf
Following the hearing, the Air Board at its regular monthly meeting is expected to consider adopting the proposed Infrastructure SIP for SO2.

The Public Review Draft of the SO2 Infrastructure SIP may be reviewed during regular business hours at the Environmental Health Department, One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023, Albuquerque, NM 87102. Copies of the Public Review Draft may be obtained by contacting Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board Liaison, at (505) 768-2601 or adaffern@cabq.gov. The Public Review Draft can also be found on the Air Quality Program web site athttp://www.cabq.gov/airquality/air-qualitycontrol-board/documents/SO2%20iSIP%20 Public%20Review%20Draft.pdf.
The hearing will be conducted in accordance with NMSA § 74-2-6; Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, Section 9-5-1-6, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearing [ROA 1994]; Bernalillo County Ordinance, Section 30-35, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearings [Ord. No. 94-5, Section 6, 2-2-94]; and 20.11.82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures—Air Quality Control Board ; and other applicable procedures.
All interested persons will be given a reasonable opportunity at the hearing to submit relevant evidence, data, views and arguments, orally or in writing, to introduce exhibits, and to examine witnesses. Persons wishing to present technical testimony must fi le with the Air Board a written notice of intent (NOI) to do so by 5:00 p.m. on April 14, 2015. The NOI shall:
(1) identify the person for whom the witness(es) will testify; (2) identify each technical witness that the person intends to present and state the quali fi cations of the witness, including a description of their education and work background; (3) include a copy of the direct testimony of each technical witness and state the anticipated duration of the testimony of that witness; (4) include the text of any recommended modi fi cations to the proposed regulatory change; (5) list and attach an original and 15 copies of all exhibits anticipated to be offered by that person at the hearing, including any proposed statement of reasons for adoption of rules; and (6) be served on the petitioner, if the document is an NOI fi led by any person other than the petitioner.

The NOI must be fi led in hard copy form (original plus 15 copies of all documents) by 5:00 p.m. on April 14, 2015, with Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Environmental Health Department, One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102.
Any member of the general public may present non-technical testimony at the hearing. No prior noti fi cation is required to present non-technical testimony. Any member of the public may also offer exhibits in connection with non-technical testimony, as long as the exhibit is not unduly repetitious of the testimony. A member of the general public who wishes to submit a non-technical written statement for the record in lieu of oral testimony shall fi le the written statement prior to the hearing, or submit it at the hearing. Written statements submitted prior to the hearing may be directed to the Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Andrew Daferrn, at the above contact information.

NOTICE FOR PERSON WITH DISABILITIES OR SPECIAL NEEDS : If you have a disability or require special assistance to participate, including translation/interpretation service, or review of any agendas, minutes, or other public meeting documents, please contact Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board liaison, by April 16, 2015, at (505) 768-2601, or adaffern@cabq.gov.TTY users requiring special assistance may call the New Mexico Relay at 1-800-659-8331.

Notice of rulemaking
The Human Services Department (the Department), Medical Assistance Division (MAD), recently promulgated proposed amendments to 8.321.2 Section 10 of the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC). To ensure that adequate time is available for the public to submitcomments, the Department is repromulgating 8.321.2 Section 10 NMAC Behavioral Health Specialized Services Section 10 Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). The register and the proposed amendments will be available March 16, 2015, on the HSD website: http://www.hsd.state.nm.us/ LookingForInformation/registers.aspx or at:http://www.hsd.state.nm.us/public-noticesproposed-rule-and-waiver-changes-andopportunities-to-comment.aspx.
If you do not have Internet access, a copy of the proposed rule may be requested by contacting MAD at (505) 827-7743.
The Department fi nalized Section 10 of 8.321.2 NMAC January 1, 2014, with the minimum of detail as it developed the service. The Department has completed a lengthy study and discussion of ABA services and is now promulgating amendments to this section of the rule. Throughout this section of the rule, the Department refers to ABA billing instructions. The Department is proposing to include more detailed information in the rule while continuing to have other information contained in the ABA Billing Instructions as appropriate. The Department has posted for public comment the proposed amendments and the ABA billing instructions.
In addition, the Department is receiving comments on its proposed ABA fee schedule rates and State Plan Amendment 15-001, Attachment 4-19-B. The increase in expenditures to the Medicaid Program, including managed care plans, is anticipated to be $1.5 million which can be viewed on the New Mexico Human Services Department website at: http://www.hsd. state.nm.us/providers/fee-for-service.aspx. At the page, accept the terms and conditions of using the site, scroll down to Proposed Fee Schedules or Rates, then see the posting titled: Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) fee schedule rates 5.2015.
A public hearing to receive testimony on this proposed rule will be held in Hearing Room 1, Toney Anaya Building, 2550 Cerrillos Road Santa Fe, NM on April 14, 2015, 11 a.m. Mountain Daylight Time (MDT).
Interested parties may submit written comments directly to: Human Services Department, Of fi ce of the Secretary, ATTN: Medical Assistance Division Public Comments, P.O. Box 2348, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504-2348. Recorded comments may be left by calling (505) 827-1337. Electronic comments may be submitted to madrules@state.nm.us Written, electronic and recorded comments will be given the same consideration as oral testimony made at the public hearing. All comments must be received no later than April 14, 2015, 5:00 p.m. MDT.
If you are a person with a disability and you require this information in an alternative 

### NEW MEXICO HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEDICAL ASSISTANCE DIVISIONFrom: To: Subject:

Date: Citv of Albuqyeraue-Ajr Oyality program Daffern. Andrew Notice of Hearing on 502 iSIP and Date Change for Regular Meeting, Albuquerque Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board Monday, March 16, 2015 4:02:31 PM

The Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board (Air Board) will hold a public hearing on April 30, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. in the Vincent E. Griego Chambers located in the basement level of the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Government Center, One Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque, NM. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the matter of AQCB Petition No. 2015-1, to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Sulfur Dioxide (S02) to address Sections 110(a)(l) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. Sections 7410(a)(1) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S02 Infrastructure SIP". The regularly scheduled meeting date on April 8, 2015 has been changed to April30, 2015.

The proponent of this regulatory action is the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program.

The hearing will consider whether to adopt the S02 Infrastructure SIP and submit it to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a proposed revision to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan. An Infrastructure SIP is required by the U.S. Environmental Protection agency to demonstrate compliance with a newly issued National Ambient Air Quality Standard. An information sheet with further details on the subject matter of the hearing is available at:**http://www.cabq.~oy/ajrqualjty/air-quality** -controlboard/documents/3.%20Information%20Sheet%20-%20S02.pdf
Following the hearing, the Air Board at its regular monthly meeting is expected to consider adopting the proposed Infrastructure SIP for S02.

The Public Review Draft of the S02 Infrastructure SIP may be reviewed during regular business hours at the Environmental HealthDepartment, One Civic Plaza , NW, Suite 3023, Albuquerque, NM 87102. Copies of the Public Review Draft may be obtained by contacting Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board Liaison, at (505) 768-2601 or adaffern@cabq.gov. The Public Review Draft

can also be found on the Air Quality Program web site athttp:Uwww.cabq.goy/ajrqualjty/air-quality-controlboardldocuments/S02%20jSJP%20Publjc%20Reyjew%20Draft.pdf.

The hearing will be conducted in accordance with NMSA § 74-2-6; Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, Section 9-5-1-6, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearing [ROA 1994]; Bernalillo County Ordinance, Section 30-35, Adoption of Regulations, Notice and Hearings [Ord. No. 94-5, Section 6, 2-2- 94]; and 20.11.82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures-Air Quality Control Board; and other applicable procedures.

All interested persons will be given a reasonable opportunity at the hearing to submit relevant evidence, data, views and arguments, orally or in writing, to introduce exhibits, and to examine witnesses. Persons wishing to present technical testimony must file with the Air Board a written notice of intent (NOI) to do so by 5:00 p.m. on April14, 2015. The NOI shall:
(I) identify the person for whom the witness(es) will testify; (2) identify each technical witness that the person intends to present and state the qualifications of the witness, including a description of their education and work background; (3) include a copy of the direct testimony of each technical witness and state the anticipated duration of the testimony of that witness; (4) include the text of any recommended modifications to the proposed regulatory change; (5) list and attach an original and 15 copies of all exhibits anticipated to be offered by that person at the hearing, including any proposed statement of reasons for adoption of rules; and (6) be served on the petitioner, ifthe document is an NOI filed by any person other than the petitioner.

The NOI must be filed in hard copy form (original plus 15 copies of all documents) by 5:00p.m. on April14, 2015, with Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Environmental Health Department, One Civic Plaza, NW, Suite 3023, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102.
Any member of the general public may present non-technical testimony at the hearing. No prior notification is required to present non-technical testimony. Any member of the public may also offer exhibits in connection with non-technical testimony, as long as the exhibit is not unduly repetitious of the testimony. A member of the general public who wishes to submit a non-technical written statement for the record in lieu of oral testimony shall file the written statement prior to the hearing, or submit it at the hearing.Written statements submitted prior to the hearing may be directed to the Air Quality Control Board Liaison, Andrew Daffern, at the above contact information.

NOTICE FOR PERSON WITH DISABILITIES OR SPECIAL NEEDS: If you have a disability or require special assistance to participate, including translation/interpretation service, or review of any agendas, minutes, or other public meeting documents, please contact Andrew Daffern, Air Quality Control Board liaison, by April 16, 2015, at (505) 768-2601, or adaffern@cabq.gov. TTY
users requiring special assistance may call the New Mexico Relay at 1-800-659-8331.

This email was sent to adaffern@cabq.gov by emerta@cabg.qoy ' Update profile/Email Address

. Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscrjbeTM i Privacy policy.

City of Albuquerque · One Civic Plaza NW Albuquerque : NM 87102

### ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

Chair, Kelsey Curran, CIH, City Jens Deichmann, PhD, County Augustine Grace, PE, City Jllce Chair, Ms. Jane Cudney-Biack, City Robert Goldstein, MD, County Ms. Deborah L. Stover, County Dona Upson, MD, City Non-voting members: BCPC Liaison-Lentoa Malry, PhD; COA/EPC Liaison-James Peck. Margaret Nieto, Secretary to the Board

' Date: April30, 2015 (Wednesday) Location:

Time: 5:30p.m. Vincent E. Griego Chambers**~--** 

# ---- 1 Albuqueoque-Bemalillo County

. General inquiries regarding this agenda may be directed to Andrew Dqffern (505) 768- Government Center 

### i 2601 (adqffern@cabq.gov). One Civic Plaza NW I Fo·r·d· ocum··· e

.. n. ts related. to eac. h agenda item, please

.. g. o to h. ttp

.. ://www

.. ca. bg

.. g.ovtairgualitv. /air- Albuquerqu_ e NM 87102**LJd.~ality~colltrol-board/eyentslapril-30-20 15-air.jjual~tl:·~ontJ:ol-boarcJ~meetillS**  __ _____ _ . _ _ _ '

______ _ 

### Regular Monthly Meeting Draft Agenda

CALL TO ORDER



### Item #1 Approval of Agenda (Chair)



### Item#2 Approval of March 11, 2015 Meeting Minutes (Chair)



### PUBLIC COMMENT

ACTION ITEMS



### Item #3

Item #4 Election of Chair and Vice Chair for 2015-2016 (Chair) Nominations are as follows:

• Chair: Ms. Kelsey Curran,

• Vice Chair: Ms. Jane Cudney-Black

Selection of Board members to serve as non-voting Advisory Member and Alternate to Mid.:. Region Council of Governments (MRCOG) Transportation Program Task Group (TPTG) and Transportation Coordinating Committee (TCC) (Chair)

• Advisory Member:

• Alternate:



### OTHER BUSINESS



### Item#S BICI, Albuquerque's Downtown Pilot Bike Share presentation by Lola Bird, Executive Director, DowntownABQ MainStreet Initiative, and Valerie Hermanson, Transportation Planner, Mid-Region Council of GovernmentsItem#6 Discussion on possible action to send a letter of support for the Bike Sharing Program to Mayor Berry and City Council, City of Albuquerque; Bernalillo County Commissioners, and Dewey Cave, Exec. Director of the MRCOG



### HEARINGS

• In the Matter of the Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for S02 to address Sections 110(a)(l) and (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a)(l) and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S02 Infrastructure SIP" (AQCB Petition No. 2015-1)- Ed Merta, Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator,

• In the Matter of the Petition to Amend 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and Submit the Adopted 20.1l .6[NMAC to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for Proposed Incorporation into the New Mexico State Implementation PI for Air Quality (SIP) (AQCB Petition No. 2015-2)- Ed Merta, Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator,



### ACTION ITEMS 

### (coot' d.)

Item #7 Decision on the Matter of the Petition to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for S0 2 to address Sections llO(a)(l) and 

### (2) of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410(a (1) 

### and (2) hereafter referred to as the "S02 Infrastructure SIP" (AQCB Petition No. 2015-1)**·2·~~{**
Item #8 Decision on the Matter of the Petition to Amend 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and Submit the Adopted 20.11.61 NMAC to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for Proposed Incorporation into the New Mexico State Implementation Plan for Air Quality (SIP) (AQCB Petition No. 2015-2)



### REPORt'S Air Program Report. Staff available for questions.



### ADJOURNMENT

NEXT SCHEDULEDBOARDMEETING/HEARING: May 13-14,2015

Members of the public who wish to address the Board, may do so by signing up with the Board Clerk and indicating either the agenda item they intend to address, or whether they wish to make a general public comment. Sign up must occur prior to the Board's consideration of each item. Each person will be given up to two minutes to speak.

••Notice to persons with disabilities: 

### If you have a disability and require special assistance to participate in this process, please call 311 (Voice) and special assistance will be made available to you to receive any public meeting documents, including agendas and minutes. 7TY users may request special assistance by calling /-800-659- 8331 .••

### 1 ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO ADOPT A STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) FOR SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO 2 

### ) TO ADDRESS SECTIONS 110(a)(1) AND (2) OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT (CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7410(a)(1) AND (2) HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “SO 2 

### INFRASTRUCTURE SIP” AQCB Petition No. 201 5-1 Air Quality Program, Environmen tal Health Department, City of Albuquerque, Petitioner

DIRECT TESTIMONY OF ED MERTA

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the Board. My name is Ed Merta. I am
the Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator with the Air Quality Program,
Control Strategies Division, City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department. I
am here to testify in the matter of the Petition to Adopt a State Implementation Plan (or
“SIP”) for Sulfur Dioxide (or “ SO 2 

### ”), Air Quality Control Board Petition No. 2015-1. In
support of my testimon y, I now move that the Notice of Intent and its Exhibits, which are
listed as AQP Exhibits 1 through 10d and include my full written testimony, be adopted

while under oath and ad mitted into the record.
In this petition, the City of Albuquerque, by and through the Air Quality Program

of the Environmental Hea lth Department (EHD), asks the Albuquerque - Bernalillo
County Air Q ualit y Control Board (Board) to adopt a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to
address Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. §
7410(a)(1) and (2), hereafter referred to as the “SO 2 

### Infr astructure S IP ”. EHD also asks 

### AQP Exhibit 8

### 2

the Board to approve submission of the SO 2 

### Infrastructure SIP to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Age ncy (EPA) as a proposed revision to the current, overall New Mexico State
Implementation P lan for air quality.

I am te stifying in favor of this proposed rulemaking, for the following reasons.

The CAA, Sections 108 and 109, requires the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards, or “NAAQS,” for sulfur dioxide
and other specific pollutants, known as criteria pollutants. EPA must review the NAAQS
for each of these pollutants every five years, in light of scientific data. Based on that data,
EPA must decide whether and how to revise the NAAQS to protect public health or

welfare

. If EPA does revise a NAAQS, state and local air quality jurisdictions have certain
resulting legal obligations under the CAA. In particular, sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)
of the CAA requir e ea ch state or local jurisdiction to submit a plan, known as an

“Infra structure SIP ,” to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of
a newly promulgated or revised NAAQS within three years of promulgation of a new or

revised standard. Se ction 110(a)(1) of the CAA establishes the three year deadline for

submission of an Infrastructure SIP.
In connection with that deadline, I must note that the proposed SO 2 

### Infra structure SIP was due in June of 2013. The delay in submitting it resulted from personnel turnover
in the Air Quali ty Program of the Albuquerque Environmental Health Department.
Because of this delay, EPA has asked that it be finalized and submitted as soon as
possible.

### 3 Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA lists the required elements that comprise an
Infrastructure SIP. These elements demonstrate how a state or local air quality
jurisdiction w ill implement, maintain and enforce the revised NAAQS. The elements

include: e nforce able emission limitations and control measures, air quality monitoring and
modeling, a permitting program, adequate funding and personnel, authority under state law to
carry out the plan, emissions reporting, emergency powers, public participation, and fee

collection.
I should note that the Clean Air Act and its federal implementing regulations also
impose procedural requirements on the adoption of state and local revisions to an overall
State Implementation Plan. Adoption of the SO 2 

### Infrastructure SIP qualifies as such a
revision. In particular, Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act require
reasonable notice and public hearing in adoption of an Infrastructure SIP. Additional specific
procedural requirements under these provisions are laid out in the Code of Federal
Regulations, 40 CFR § 51.102 and 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix V, paragraph 2.1(g). 

### In addition to the above federal provisions, state and local law is also applicable
to the proposed S O 2 

### Infrastructure SIP. The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (Air
Act), NMSA 1978, Sections 74-2-4 and 74-2-5.B(1) [1967 as amended through 2007]

authorizes and

requires the Air Board to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend, and repeal
air quality

regulations. The Act, NMSA 1978, Section 74-2-5.B(2), also authorizes and
requires the Air B oard to adopt air quality plans, including Infrastructure SIPs. Under.
NMSA 1978, Section 74-2-6(B), a public hearing of the Board must be held before any
regulation or emissi on control requirement can be adopted. Similarly, the Board is
authorized and required to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend, and repeal air quality
regulations and a dopt plans under: City of Albuquerque Ordinances, Section 9-5-1-4(B);

### 4

Bernalillo County Ordinances, Section 30-33(b). Local ordinances also require
regulations and plans to be adopted only after a hearing of the Board, per: City of
Albuquerque Ordinances, Section 9-5-1-6; Bernalillo County Ordinances, Section 30-35.

To demonst rate compliance with federal, state, and local procedural provisions, EHD
is presenting the following: as AQP Exhibit 1, the Public Review Draft; as AQP Exhibit 1a,
EHD’s petition for this rulemaking; as AQP Exhibit 1b, EHD’s email notice of the petition;
as AQ P Exhibit 2, EHD’s email notice of the opportunity to review and comment upon the
EPA/Stakeholder Review Draft of the proposed Infrastructure SIP; as AQP Exhibit 5, draft

minutes of t he Board’s March 11, 2015 meeting, at which the Boa rd approved EHD’s request

for t his hearing; as AQP Exhibits 6a, 6b, and 6c, legal notices for this hearing; as AQP
Exhibit 7, the draft agenda for the Board meeting and hearings scheduled for April 30, 2015. 

### The rulemaking for the proposed Infrastructure S IP has been undertaken in accordance
with the local regulation governing rulemaking proceedings, 20.11.82 NMAC,
Rulemaking Procedures

-- Air Quality Control Board

. The proposed sulfur dioxide Infrastructure SIP was made necessary when EPA

issued a new f

ederal standard for that pollutant. On June 22, 2010, EPA Administrator

Lisa Jac kson promulgated a new NAAQS for SO 2 

### , effective August 23, 2010 [75 Fed.
Reg. 35,520 (June 22 , 2010) ]. Based on its review of the air quality criteria for oxides of
sulfur and the primary NAAQS for oxides of sulfur as measured by sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

### ),

EPA made re visions to the primary SO 2 

### NAAQS in order to provide requisite protection
of public health. Specifically, EPA has established a new one-hour standard at a level of
75 parts per billion (ppb), based on the three-year average of the 99th percentile of the
yearly distribution of one-hour daily maximum concentrations. This standard is more
stringent than the old st andard, which it entirely replaced. The old standard was measured

### 5

in parts per million, rather than billion, and it specified 24 hour and annual SO 2 

### concentrations, rather than one hour concentrations. In conjunction with the new
standard, EPA also established SO 2 

### ambient air monitoring and reporting requirements to
support implementation of and compliance with the new NAAQS. Further details on

EPA’s standard and its ra tionale are available in the text of EPA’s final rule, shown as
AQP Exhibit 10a.
The proposed S O 2 

### Infrastructure SIP addresses all the elements required under the

Clean Air Act. The details of how the Infrastructure SIP does so are contained in the

Public Re view Draft, shown as AQP Exhibit 1. EHD began the process of formulating

the Public Review Dr aft by first circulating a Stakeholder/EPA Review Draft of the
proposed Infrastructure SIP

-- an initial version of the document that was made available
by electronic mail to both EPA and to stakeholders from December 24, 2014 to January
30, 2015. Notice of the circulation of this draft is attached as AQP Exhibit 2. The Public

Review Draft reflects comments received on the EPA/Stakeholder Review Draft from the
Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority (ABCWUA). ABCWUA’s
comments are shown as AQP Exhibit 3a, and EHD’s responses are shown as AQP

Exhibit 3b. The Public Review Draft also reflects comments received from EPA on an

earlier stak eholder review draft. EPA’s comments are shown as AQP Exhibit 4a, and
EHD’s responses ar e shown as AQP Exhibit 4b. The Public Review Draft displays

chan ges made from the Stakeholder/EPA review draft in the form of strikethroughs for
deleted text and underlines for addition of text. Further background on the preparation of
an Infrastructure SIP is available in EPA’s guidance document on that subject, shown as
AQP Exhibit 10c.

### 6 At this hearing, t he Environmental Health Department is recommending some

minor additional floor amendments to the Public Review Draft. Most of these

amendments clarif

y certain language by referring more explicitly to the Environmental
Health Department, rather than merely the Air Quality Program on its own, as the
administrative agency for the Air Board, duly authorized by the precise language of the
state Air Qualit y Control Act and local ordinances. These changes can be seen in AQP
Exhibit 9, pages 4, 5, 7, and 13. There are two additional minor amendments on page 14
of AQP Exhibit 9. The first makes a minor correction regarding the source of legal
authority for the S tate Implementation Plan. The second responds to comments received

from EPA on the ea rlier stakeholder review draft. Those comments asked that the draft
make more clear EPA’s ultimate authority to approve or disapprove SIP submissions.
Although the new federal SO 2 

### standard is more stringent than the old, the Air
Quality Program is well positioned to meet it. As shown in the Public Review Draft, AQP
Exhibit 1, pag es 11 and 12, only two major sources of sulfur dioxide emissions are
present in our

air quality jurisdiction. Ambient air quality in Bernalillo County, as
monitored since 2010, shows SO 2 

### levels that more than meet the new standard. The most
recent available data, for 2013, shows that local SO 2 

### levels were at less than 10% of the

allowable level under the new standard. Further details on local SO 2 

### air quality are
available in the 2014 Annual Network Review for Ambient Air Monitoring, shown as
AQP Exhibit 10d.
In the future, EPA will formally designate Albuquerque and Bernalillo County as
in or out of attainment for the new standard. This hasn’t happened yet because EHD’s Air
Quality P rogram is still in the process of working with EPA to gather, verify, and submit

### 7

all of the air monitoring data that EPA requires for such a designation. Once that formal
process is complete, EPA will then review the data and issue an attainment/nonattainment
designation. Current indications are that our local area will be in attainment. Having an
EPA-approve d Infrastructure SIP in place will demonstrate that the federally enforceable
regulatory f

ramework exists to maintain that status. Further information on EPA’s future
plans for attainment/nonattainment designations under the SO 2 

### standard are available in a
2013 letter from the EPA Region 6 Administrator to the Governor of New Mexico,
shown as AQP Ex hibit 10b.
Finally, E HD anticipates no adverse impact on the regulated community here in
Albuquerque and Bernalillo County as a result of the Infrastructure SIP being adopted.

The Infr astructure SIP does not create new local regulations. It merely demonstrates to
EPA that necessary state and local legal authority, programs, and resources are in place to

meet the new f

ederal standard for SO 2 

### . That concludes my testimony, and I stand with my colleagues from the EHD Air
Quality Program for questions.STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 1 of 21 

# ALBUQUERQUE-BERNALILLO COUNTY 1 

# AIR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD 2

3

4 

# State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Air Quality 5

6

7 

# To Address Infrastructure Requirements of 8 

# Section 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) of the Clean Air Act 9 

# (CAA) to Implement the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide 10 

# ( SO 2 

# ) National Ambient Air Quality Standard 11 

# (NAAQS) 12

13

14

15

16

17 

# Adopted 18 

# [MONTH & DATE , 2015]April 30, 2015 19

20

21



## _________________________ 22 

## Xxxxxxx XxxxxxxKelsey Curran, CIH , Chair 23 

## Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board 24 

### AQP Exhibit 9STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 2 of 21 

### ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT 1 2 3 

### Ed Merta, Air Quality Regulation Development Coordinator 4 

### Control Strategies Section, Air Quality Program (AQP) 5 

### Principal Author, Editor, SIP Submittal 6 7 

### Margaret Nieto, Control Strategies Manager, AQP 8 

### Project Oversight 9 10 

### Air Quality Monitoring and Assurance Section, AQP 11 

### Air Monitoring and Data Program Information 12 13 

### Regulatory Development Committee, AQP 14 

### Peer Review 15 16 17 18STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 3 of 21 

### LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 1 2 AAMNP Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan 3 AQCA New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (also referred to as ―Air Act ‖) 4 AQCB Air Quality Control Board (also referred to as ―Air Boar d‖ ) 5 AQP Air Quality Program 6 AQS Air Quality System 7 CAA Clean Air A ct 8 CFR Code of Federal Regulations 9 EPA Environmental Protection Agency 10 Fed. Reg. Federal Register 11 GHG Greenhouse gasses 12 iSIP Infrastructure State Implementation Plan 13 NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 14 NEI National Emissions Inventory 15 NM New Mexico 16 NMAC New Mexico Administrative Code 17 NMSA New Mexico Statutes Annotated 18 PM 2.5 Particulate Matter 2.5 19 PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration 20 ROA Revised Ordinances of the City of Albuquerque 21 SIP State Implementation Plan 22 SLEIS State and Local Emissions Inventory System 23 SO 2 Sulfur Dioxide 24 25 26STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 4 of 21 1 Introduction 2 3 A State Implementation Plan (SIP) identifies how the state will attain and maintain the primary and 4 secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The SIP 5 contains statutes, regulations, source-specific requirements, non-regulatory items such as plans and 6 inventories, and in some cases additional requirements promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection 7 Agency (EPA). The initial SIPs for states were approved by EPA in 1972. 37 Fed. Reg. 10,842-10,906 8 (May 31, 1972). A state may revise its SIP with EPA approval as necessary. The federally enforceable 9 SIP for New Mexico (including Bernalillo County) is compiled in 40 C.F.R. Part 52, Subpart GG, 10
su bsections 1620-1640. 11 12 Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of the CAA require that, within three years of EPA promulgation of a 13 new or revised NAAQS, each State must submit a plan known as an ―infrastructure SI P‖ ( iSIP). 14 ―Infrastructure ,‖ i n this context, means the programs, policies, activities, resources and authority by which 15 the state will attain, maintain, and enforce the new NAAQS. The iSIP describes these elements in detail. 1 16 Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA addresses the timing requirement for the submissions of any iSIP revisions, 17 while Section 110(a)(2) lists the required elements that comprise the iSIP. 18 19 On June 22, 2010, the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, 20 promulgated a new NAAQS for sulfur dioxide (― SO 2 ‖) [referred to below as the ―2010 SO 2 NAAQ S‖] , 21 effective August 23, 2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 35,520-35,603 (June 22, 2010). Based on its review of the air 22 quality criteria for oxides of sulfur and the primary NAAQS for oxides of sulfur as measured by SO 2 , 23 EPA made revisions to the primary SO 2 NAAQS in order to provide the requisite protection of public 24 health. Id

. Specifically, EPA replaced the former 24-hour and annual standards with a new short-term 25 standard based on the 3-year average of the 99 th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily 26 maximum SO 2 concentrations. Id

. EPA set the level of this new standard at 75 ppb. Id

. 27 28 The City of Albuquerque’s Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program (AQP) 2

, has 29 recommended that Bernalillo County be designated with an attainment status of ―unclassifiable ‖ in regard 30 to the revised SO 2 NAAQS, pending the availability of air quality monitoring data necessary for an ―in 31 attainment ‖ designation. 3 S ee CAA Section 107(d). On July 25, 2013, EPA designated certain areas of the 32 United States as nonattainment for the new 1-hour SO 2 NAAQS. 78 Fed. Reg. 47,191-47,205 ( EPA Aug. 33 5, 2013). Albuquerque-Bernalillo County was not designated as one of these nonattainment areas. Id

. 34 EPA has stated that it will address designations for all other areas in future actions. Id

. 35 36 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has not yet incorporated the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS into the regulations 37 implementing the CAA. 20.11.8 NMAC, Ambient Air Quality Standards . It plans to do so in a future rule38 making. 39

1 More information on the SIP process is available at http://epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/

.

2 ―Air Quality Program ‖ is now the correct term referring to the local air pollution control agency for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County (within the City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department), established under NMSA 1978 § 74-2-4 . This term replaces the term ―Air Quality Division, ‖ which was used in documents previously submitted to EPA.

3 Letter from Al Armendariz, EPA Region 6 Administrator, to Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico (June 2, 2011). Letters cited in this iSIP submission are available upon request from the City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program.STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 5 of 21 1 The matrix in the main body of this document, below, outlines the requirements of Sections 110(a)(2)(A) 2 through (M) of the CAA [codified at U.S.C. 42 § 7410, State Implementation Plans For National Primary 3 And Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards ] and addresses how Albuquerque-Bernalillo County, New 4 Mexico will implement, maintain and enforce the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. 5 6 Legislative authority for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County’s air quality program is codified in the New 7 Mexico Air Quality Control Act (Air Act), Chapter 74, Environmental Improvement , Article 2, Air 8 Pollution , of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978 (NMSA 1978). Section 4 of this statute authorizes 9 the creation of a ―local authority ‖ by a New Mexico county or municipality meeting certain criteria if the 10 county or municipality adopts an ordinance providing for the local administration and enforcement of the 11 Air Act. Albuquerque and Bernalillo County meet the se statutory criteria in the Air Act. The City of 12 Albuquerque and Bernalillo County each adopted parallel ordinances by which they accepted the 13 authority delegated by the Air Act, established the Joint Air Quality Control Board (Air Board), and 14 specified that the Air Board shall adopt regulations consistent with the Air Act and shall adopt a plan for 15 the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution throughout Bernalillo County. These 16 parallel ordinances provide that the Albuquerque Environmental Health Department is the administrative 17 agency of the Air Board. The AQP is part of the Environmental Health Department. The Albuquerque and 18 Bernalillo County ordinances are codified at Revised Ordinances of the City of Albuquerque (ROA) §§ 9- 19 5 -1 to -99 and Bernalillo County Ordinance 94-5 §§ 1 to -20 [codified at Art. II, Ch. 30, §§ 30 -31 to 47

. 20 21 For the sake of simplicity, this document will use the terms ―Air Quality Program ‖ or ―AQ P‖ throughout 22 this document as a shorthand reference for the longer term ―City of Albuquerque, Environmental Health 23 Department, Air Quality Program .‖ In all instances of such usage, the terms ―Air Quality Program ‖ a nd 24 ―AQ

P‖ r efer to the organizational unit within the Environmental Health Department (i.e. the ―air agency ,‖ 25 ―Department ,‖ o r ―EHD ‖, 2 0.11.1.7 NMAC, General Provisions ; or the ―local agency ‖, NMSA 1978 § 26 74-2-5.1) that carries out air quality regulation duties and powers of the Department under the legal 27 authorities discussed in the above paragraph. 28 29 With certain exceptions, discussed below, the state statutes, regulations, policies and programs cited in 30 this iSIP submission are part of the approved Albuquerque-Bernalillo County elements of the New 31 Mexico SIP and thus are cited in 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart GG, subsections 52.1620 to 1620. 32 33 The following legal authorities do not currently appear in the CFR codification of the SIP. Thus, 34 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County is requesting, as part of this iSIP submission, that EPA approve them into 35 the CFR. The full text of these legal authorities is attached as an exhibit to this iSIP submission. 36 37

 Certain provisions of the state Air Act related to control of SO 2 are not cited in the CFR 38 codification of the New Mexico SIP. Albuquerque-Bernalillo County i s including these NMSA 39 provisions with this iSIP submission. They are: NMSA 1978 §§ 74 -2-5.1 and 74-2-12.1. 40 41

 The regulations to implement CAA programs in Bernalillo County are codified in the New 42 Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC), specifically Title 20, Environmental Protection , Chapter 43 11, Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board . Certain NMAC provisions related 44 to control of SO 2 are not currently cited in the CFR codification of the New Mexico SIP. 45 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County is including the full text of these NMAC provisions with this 46 iSIP submission. They are: 20.11.47 NMAC, Emissions Inventory Requirements ; 20.11.62 47 NMAC, Acid Rain ; 20.11. 69 NMAC, Pathological Waste Destructors ; 20.11.71 NMAC, 48 Municipal Solid Waste Landfills ; 20.11.80 NMAC, Adjudicatory Procedures

-- Administrative 49 Enforcement Hearings by the Director ; 20.11. 81 NMAC, Adjudicatory Procedures

-- Air Quality 50 Control Board ; and 20.11. 82 NMAC, Rulemaking Procedures

-- Air Quality Control Board

. 51STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 6 of 21 1 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has already submitted the following legal authorities with earlier SIP 2 submissions now awaiting EPA approval. The full text of these authorities is not included in this iSIP 3 submission but they are described in the main body of this document, addressing the required elements of 4 CAA § 110(a)(2). 5 6

 The CFR codification of the New Mexico SIP cites to outdated versions ofCertain Albuquerque 7 and Bernalillo County ordinances have been amended and re-codified since original EPA 8 approval as part of the New Mexico SIP. To account for these changes in the se ordinances since 9 the most recent EPA approval of the State Boards SIP, 64 Fed. Reg. 29,235-29,240 (June 1, 10 1999), and demonstrate that local law conforms to federal standards, the Air Board has approved 11 a proposed revision to the State Boards SIP element that would incorporate into the CFR SIP all 12 currently effective applicable ordinances, policies, and programs. 4 This SO 2 iSIP document will 13 refer throughout to the existing, most current local ordinances. 14 15

 The Air Board has approved proposed revisions to the following regulations in response to EPA 16 rulemaking related to PM2.5: 20.11.41 NMAC, Construction Permits; 20.11.42 NMAC, 17 Operating Permits ; 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in Nonattainment Areas ; 20.11.61 NMAC, 18 Prevention of Significant Deterioration

. 5 19 20 21 22

4 Letter from Ryan Flynn, New Mexico Environment Secretary, to Ron Curry, EPA Region 6 Administrator (July 26, 2013).

5 Id

.STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 7 of 21 

### Albuquerque-Bernalillo County 1 

### 110(a)(2) Required SIP Elements for Sulfur Dioxide 2 3 § 110(a)(2)(A) 6 Include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions or emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of this Chapter.
Control measures generally

. A lbuquerque

- Bernalillo County’s enforceable emission limitations and other control measures are authorized by the Air Act , NMSA 1978 , § § 74

- 2

- 1 to

- 17 , together with the Albuquerque Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, ROA §§ 9

- 5

- 1

- 1 to

- 99 and the parallel Bernalillo County Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance, 94

- 5 §§ 1 to

- 20 [collectively referred to as the ―Air Act and Ordinance s‖ ] . The Air Act and Ordinances authorized creation of the Albuquerque

Bernalillo County Joint Air Quality Control Board and the Air Quality Program of the City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 4 ; ROA §§ 9

- 5

- 1

- 3 to

- 4 ; Bernalillo County Ord

. 94

- 5 §§ 3 and 4

. The Air Act and Ordinances empower the Air Board to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend and repeal regulations consist ent with the Air Act to attain and maintain NAAQS and prevent or abate air pollution. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 5 ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 4; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 4

. The Air Act and Ord inances also designate serve as the legal basis for establish ment of the City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department as the air pollution control agency for Albuquerque

Bern alillo County and administrative agency of the Air Board , with authority to enforce the air quality regulations of the Board. NMSA 1978 , § 74

- 2

- 5.1 ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 5 4

. The City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County adopted parallel ordinances by which they accepted the authority delegated by the Air Act, established the Air Board, and specified that the board shall adopt regulations consistent with the Air Act and adopt a plan for the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution. ROA § § 9

- 5

- 1

- 1 to

- 99 and Bernalillo County Ord

. 94

- 5 § 4

. For additional discussion of these ordinances and their role in satisfying EPA requirements for the New Mexico SIP, see E lement E(ii) of this iSIP.
The regulations authorized by the Air Act and Ordinances and duly adopted by the Air Board are codified at 20.11 NMAC. The Air Board has promulgated rules t hat control emissions of sulfur dioxide and other criteria pollutants , including rules providing for emission limits, control measures, permits, fees, market

based control techniques, and compliance schedules. 20.11 NMAC , parts 1 to 2 , 5 to 8, 40, 41, 43, 46, 47, 49, 60 to 61, 63 to 68 , 71 , 80 to 82 , and 90

. Except as indicated in the Introduction of this document, the above paragraphs describing emission limit s and control provisions as they relate to CAA Section 110 requirements have been submitted to and approved by EPA into the New Mexico SIP , codified The record of EPA’s approval of specific New Mexico statutes, local ordinances, local regulations, and other enforceable documents into the New Mexico SIP is available at 40 CFR Part 52, Subp art GG, Sections 1620

- 1640. 7

6 This iSIP report is divided into ―elements, ‖ each addressing requirements under a specific provision of the CAA. This element addresses the requirements of CAA § 110(a)(2)(A), and thus may be referred to as ―Element A ‖ of the iSIP. Other portions of this iSIP use the same naming convention for individual iSIP elements.

7 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has submitted SIP revisions applying to the following regulations and is awaiting EPA approval: 20.11 NMAC, Parts 1, 41, 47, 60, and 61. EPA recently, by direct final rule, approved SIP revisions affecting 20.11.1 and 20.11.47 NMAC. 80 Fed. Reg. 5471-5475 (Feb. 2, 2015).STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 8 of 21 Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County has submitted certain proposed revisions to its permitting regulations to EPA and is awaiting EPA approval of these revisions

. 8 If such approval should be granted, the Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County portion of the New Mexico SIP would be updated accordingly. Aside from these proposed revisions Accordingly , AQP has an EPA

- approved air permitting program with related control strategies for both major and minor sources, thus ensur ing that all applicable requirements are included in the source's permit. 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart GG, Section 1620(c).
Startup, shutdown and malfun c tion; director’s discretion

. Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County’s regulation on this subject is 20.11.49 NMAC, Excess Emissions , which EPA approved in 2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 5698

- 5701 (Feb. 4, 2010). Under this regulation, AQP does not exempt from enforcement excess emissions that occur during start

- up, shutdown, maintenance, or malfunction. Emissions in excess of permit or regulatory limits are presumptive violati ons, subject to affirmative defenses with the burd en of proof on the respondent

. 20.11.49 NMAC , E xcess Emissions

. The statutes, ordinances, and regulations governing AQP’s enforcement and maintenance of the NAAQS do not contain ―director’s discretion ‖ p rovisions that purport to permit revisions to SIP approved emissions limits with limited public process or without requiring further approval by EPA. 20.11.49 NMAC , while previously approved by EPA as meeting CAA
re quirements, is now subject to a new proposed EPA rule that, when finalized, may require revision of the regulation

. 79 Fed. Reg. 55,92 0

- 55,956 (Sept. 17, 2014). AQ P will work with EPA in this regulatory process to take whatever action may be required to comply with federal law

. § 110(a)(2)(B) Provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems,

and procedures necessary to monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality; and upon request, make such data available to the Administrator.
AQP is authorized to conduct monitoring of ambient air quality : ―[T]he local agency

. . . shall develop facts and make investigations consistent with the [state] Air Quality Control Act. ‖ NMSA 1978, 74

- 2

- 5.1(B); ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 5(B) (similar); Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 5(B). Monitoring develops facts and investigates Bernalillo County air quality. Thus, the Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to conduct its monitoring program.
Monitoring is also mandated by EPA reg ulations. Therefore, under both state statute and federal regulations, AQP has the obligation and authority to monitor air quality for SO 2 at appropriate locations in accordance with EPA’s ambient air quality monitoring network requi rements, 40 CFR parts 5 3 (―Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Meth ods‖ ) and 58 (―Ambient Air Quality Surveillanc e‖ ). AQP’s monitoring program implements the f ollowing specific federal regulatory requirements :

• providing for submission of data to EPA’s Air Quality System in a timely manner , 40 CFR part 58;

• provid ing EPA with annual monitoring network plans , 40 CFR part 58.10 (―Annual monitoring network plan and periodic network assessment ‖) ;

• obtain ing EPA’s approval of any planned changes to monitorin g sites or to the network plan, 40 CFR 5 8.14 (―System Modificati on‖)

.

8 Albuquerque-Bernalillo County has submitted SIP revisions applying to the following regulations and is awaiting EPA approval: 20.11 NMAC, Parts, 41, 60, and 61.In addition, EPA recently, by direct final rule, approved SIP revisions affecting 20.11.1 and 20.11.47 NMAC. 80 Fed. Reg. 5471-5475 (Feb. 2, 2015).STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 9 of 21 Pursuant to the above authority, AQP maintains a monitoring network throughout Bernalillo County to assess ambient concentrations for all of the NAAQS , including SO 2 . All monitors are subjected to the quality assurance requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A. Monitors are located at sites that have met the minimum siting requirements of Part 58, Appendix E. All data is submitted to EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) i n accordance with the schedule prescribed by 40 CFR Part 58.
As part of its responsibility for maintaining the monitoring network, AQP submits for EPA review an Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan (AAMNP)

. 40 CFR § 58.10 . This document describes how AQP has complied with monitoring requirements and explains any proposed changes. AQP submitted its 2014 AAMNP on July 10, 2014 and received notification of EPA approval on February 3, 2015. is awaiting EPA approval of the plan

. 9 While EPA has not made an official designation for Bernalillo County of attainment or nonattainment, ambient air quality data reported in t he 2014 AAMNP showed SO 2 levels less than 10% of the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.
EPA’s most recent approval of AQP’s AAMNP was in 2013. 10 Th e is EPA

- approve d 201 4 3 AAMNP described ongoing activities for monitoring SO 2 ; the 2014 AAMNP also describes such activities

. Per the AAMNP s , t T hese activities comply with EPA requirements for the State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) network and the National Core Multi

- Pollutant Monitoring Stations (NCore) network.
AQP determined in 2011 that it was not re quired to install new monitors under the revised 1

- hour 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. 11 However, in an effort unrelated to the revised SO 2 NAAQS, AQP began SO 2 monitoring under the NCore program in 2010. Because this monitoring had only recently begun at the time EPA finalized the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, AQP recommended in 2011 that Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County receive an attainment/nonattainment designation of ―unclas sifiable. ‖ Once AQP’s monitoring has gathered sufficient data, AQP will be able to make a new designation recommendation to EPA regarding reclassification of Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County

. . to ―attainment .‖

EPA has stated that it will defer action on Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County’s 2011 designation
recom mendation until a future date

. 12
Air dispersion modeling performed in combination with the above described monitoring of ambient air pollutant concentrations is discussed later in this iSIP submission, in the section addressing requirements of CAA § 110(a)(2)(K).
§ 110(a)(2)(C) Include a program to provide for enforcement of the measures in § 110(a)(2)(A),

and regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary source within

9 Letter from Danny Nevarez, Deputy Director, Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, to Mark Hansen, Associated Director for Air Programs, Acting, EPA Region 6 (July 10, 2014)Letter from Mark Hansen, Associate Director for Air Programs, Acting, EPA Region 6, to Danny Nevarez, Deputy Director, Albuquerque Environmental Health Department (February 3, 2015).

10 Letter from Thomas Diggs, Associate Director for Air, EPA Region 6, to Danny Nevarez, Deputy Director, Albuquerque Environmental Health Department (March 12, 2014).

11 Letter from Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico, to Al Armendariz, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6 (May 24, 2011). All of the information in this paragraph is based on this letter.

12 Letter from Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6, to Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico (Feb. 7, 2013).STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 10 of 21 the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required in Parts C and D of this Subchapter.

Enforcement : The Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to enforce emission limits and control
measures satisfying Element A of this infrastructure SIP , above . The statutes, regulations, and ordinances establishing the emissions limits and control measures described in Element A , coupled with air quality permi ts issued by AQP , set forth the boundaries beyond which regulated entities in Albuquerque

Bernalillo County can expect enforcement action . The Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to pursue enforcement through administrative compliance orders or commencement of civil actions. NMSA 1978, § 74

- 2

- 12 and 12.1 ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 99 and Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 §§ 13 and 14 . AQP carries out such enforcement as the local air pollution control agency established f or Albuquerque and Bernalillo County

. ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 5. These ordinances were authorized under the Air Qu ality Control Act, NMSA 1978, § 74

- 2

- 4.
As discussed in the Introduction to this document, some of the above cited lega l authorities are missing from the Code of Federal Regulations or have been revised since th ey were originally approved into the New Mexico SIP at 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart GG, subsections 52.1620 to 1620 . This iSIP submission, along with earlier submissions to EPA, will incorporate revised or missing legal authorities into the CFR, thus helping to clarify enforcement authority for the NAAQS. Please refer to the Introduction for additional details.
Preconstruction PSD Permitting of Major Sources : Under the general st atutory authority discussed in E lement A of this iSIP, above, t he Air Board and AQP have the authority to implement a comprehensive Prevention of Significant Deterioration ( PSD ) permit program not only for SO 2 but for all regulated New Source Review (NSR) pollutants . This authority is implemented in regulations codified at 20.11.61 NMAC, Preventio n of Significant Deterioration , setting forth PSD requirements for all sources in areas designated in attainment or uncl assifiable for a NAAQS

. 13
Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County’s comprehensive PSD program for all NSR pollutants has been previously approved into the New Mexico SIP by EPA

. 58 F ed. R eg. 67,330 (Dec. 21, 1993) (initial approval) ; 72 Fed. Reg. 20,728 (Apr. 26, 2007) ( approving SIP revisions for EPA’s 2002 reforms to the NSR rules ); 77 Fed. Reg. 58,032 (Sept. 19, 2012) ( concerning the 1997 and 2008 Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS).
Albuquerque Bernalillo County has the authority to issue permits under it s PSD program to sources of G reenhouse Gasses ( GHGs ) . 20.11.61.7 ( CCC ) NMAC. Pursuant to EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, EPA has approved Albuquerque Bernalillo County’s PSD provisions for greenhouse gasses into the New Mexico SIP . 76 F ed. R eg. 81,836 (Dec. 29, 2011)

. In addition to the above PSD approvals, EPA requires that an iSIP submission address whether an air agency has submitted any PSD program revisions , regarding any NSR pollutant, for which the submission deadline has passed as of the date for EPA’s proposed approval of an iSIP submission. This iSIP addresses the foregoing requirement as follows.

13 For other regulations governing issuance of permits that may apply to a facility subject to PSD requirements, see 20.11.41 NMAC, Construction Permits ; 20.11.42 NMAC, Operating Permits . For the regulation governing permitting for sources located in nonattainment areas, see 20.11.60, Permitting in Nonattainment Areas

.STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 11 of 21 Albuquerque Bernalillo County has submitted PSD

- related regulatory revisions to EPA in response to EPA’s rulem aking amending the PSD requirements for particulate matter 2.5 (PM 2.5 ) found at 75 Fed. Reg. 64,863 ( Oct

. 20, 2010). Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County’s PSD revisions were transmitted to EPA via a letter from New Mexico Environment Secretary Ryan Flynn to EPA Region 6 Administrator Ron Curry on July 26, 2013 . These re visions amended 20.11.42 NMAC, Operating Permits ; 20.11.60 NMAC, Perm itting in Non

- Attainment Areas ; and 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevent ion of Significant Deterioration

. The revisions addressed specific requirements of 40 CFR §§ 51.165, 51.166, and 52.21.

Note that certain of the above New Mexico regulatory revisions relating to EPA’s PM 2.5 rulemaking were vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on January 22, 2013. Sierra Club v. EPA , 705 F.3d 458 (D.C. Cir. 2013)

. This court decision applies to two regulatory provisions that Albuquerque

Bernalillo County would otherwise have adopt ed. One such provision, not yet part of the NMAC, would have been inserted by amendment at 20.11.61.15 ( B ) (2) NMAC ( regarding Significant Impact Levels )

. Another vacated provision has been submitted by the Air Board to EPA and appears at 20.11.61.28 NMAC (reg ar ding Significant Monitoring Concentration). AQP will respond promptly to any future EPA initiative s regarding these vacated provisions.
Regulation of minor sources and minor modifications : Per 40 CFR sections 51.160 through 51.164, the Air Board has ap proved preconstruction regulations applicable to modification and construction of stationary minor sources emit ti ng a NAAQS pollutant s . 20.11.41 NMAC , Construction Permits

. Th is ese preconstruction regulation s also appl ies y to minor modification of major sources emitting a NAAQS pollutant s

. Id

. EPA has previously approved these provisions into the New Mexico SIP , . 69 F ed. R eg. 78,31 2

- 78,31 5 3 (Dec

. 30, 2004) , . and is currently reviewing certa in revision s that Albuquerque

Bernalillo County has adopted to 20.11.41 NMAC.

§ 110(a)(2)(D) C ontain adequate provisions

-

(i) prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will: (I) contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other State with respect to any such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard, or (II) interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other State under Part C of this Subchapter to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility, (ii) insuring compliance with the applicable requirements of CAA Sections § 126 and 115 [Sections 7426 & 7415 of this Title] (relating to interstate and international pollution abatement).
Contributions to nonattainment; interference with maintenance, per § 110(a)(2)(D ) (i)(I) : Albuquerque

Bernalillo County has sufficient control measures in place to ensure that sources emitting sulfur dioxide do not interfere with another state’s maintenance of the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS or contribute to a state’s nonattainment of that NAAQS. See the other portions of this iSIP for descriptions of Albuquerque

Bernalillo’s control measures along with related legal authority and programs. AQP has determined that this infrastructure will be sufficient to avoid negatively impacting NAAQS attainment and maintenance in other states in view of the following factors.
1) The relative scarcity of major SO 2 sources in Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County

. Albuquerque

Bernalillo County has only two major SO 2 sources. One is the Albuquerque Southside Water Reclamation Plant (Water Reclamation Plant), operated by the Albuquerque Bernalillo County WaterSTAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 12 of 21 Utility Authority. The other is the Tijeras Plant, a cemen t prod uction facility operated by the GCC Rio Grande Portland Cement Corp , Inc. (Tijeras Plant).
2) The minimal amount of emissions from those sources

. The Tijeras Plant is permitted to emit 1,417.8 tons per year of oxides of sulfur. Accordi ng to data av ailable to AQP , this facility’s reported actual emissions averaged only 20

. 6 6 tons of SO 2 per year from 2011 to 2013. Reported emissions were approximately 16.52 tons per year (tpy) in 2011, 20.84 tpy for 2012, and 24.63 tpy for 2013. 14 The Water Reclamation Plant is permitted to emit 123 .4 1,103.41 tons per year of SO 2 . According to data available to AQP from the State and Local Emissions Inventory (SLEIS) system , this facility’s reported actual emissions averaged only 58.6 6 84.342975 tons of SO 2 p er year from 201 1 2 to 2013

. Reported emissions were approximately 7.3 tpy in 2011, 75.23 tpy in 2012, and 93.46 tpy in 2013. 15 The Tijeras Plant is permitted to emit 123 tons per year of oxides of sulfur. According to data from the SLEIS syste m, this facilit y’s reported actual emissions averaged only 22.739425 tons of SO 2 per year from 2011201 2 to 2013

. In Bernalillo County as a whole, monitoring of ambient air quality indicates that the design value for SO 2 in parts per billion was 4.6 parts per billion (ppb) for the period 2011 to 2013

-- i.e. less than 10% of the 75 ppb 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, Air Quality Program, Ambient Air Monitoring Section, 2014 Annual Network Review for Ambient Air Monitoring (submitted to EPA July 10, 2014 ; EPA approval received February 3, 2015 ).
3) The relatively large geographic distance between those sources and other states . Given the small overall level of SO 2 emissions from Bernalillo County, AQP has determined that t hese emissions will be widely dispersed over the large geographic distance between their sources and the borders of neighboring states. The approximate distance from Bernalillo County’s border to the border of neighboring states, in a straight line, is as follows: 125 miles to Arizona; 120 miles to Colorado; 190 miles to Texas.
Interference with prevention of significant deterioration : As noted a bove in Element C of this iSIP , Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County has a comprehensive EPA

- approved PSD program and has submitted necessary proposed revisions to EPA. Thus, the PSD program includes measures to prevent interference with PSD measures in other states.

Interference with protection of visibility : With respect to the visibility element of § 1 10 (a)(2)(D)(i)(II), Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County has a regional haze program in place that fully meets the requirements of 40 CFR § 51.309 and has been appr oved by EPA into the New Mexico SIP

. 77 F ed. R eg. 71,119 ( Nov

. 29, 2012 ) . In its approval action , EPA found that the regional haze SIP element and its associated rules ―meet the requirements of the [CAA] and comply with the provisions of 40 CFR § 51.309, thereby meeting requirements for reasonable progress for the 16 Class I areas covered by the Gran d Canyon Visibility Transport Commission Report for approval of the plan throug h 2018.‖ Id

. EPA’s approval of Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County’s regional haze SIP element (as well as regional haze SIP provisions for the states of New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah) , was recently upheld by the Tenth Circuit

. , Wild Earth

14 2012 and 2013 emissions data for the Tijeras Plant are from the State and Local Emissions Inventory System (SLEIS). 2011 emissions data from this source is preliminary. The 2011 emissions amount, 16.52 tpy, is a preliminary calculation that has been reported by the source but not yet entered into SLEIS. This situation arose because the source originally over-reported its 2011 emissions. AQP has been working with the source to correct the error and enter a final, verified amount for actual emissions into SLEIS.

15 Emissions data are from SLEIS.STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 13 of 21 Guardians v. EPA, 770 F.3d 919 (10 th Cir. 2014). By having this EPA

- approved region al haze SIP element in place, Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County meets the requirements of § 110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(II) , prohibiting interference with protection of visibility in other states. Albuquerque Bernalillo County

r egulations implementing the Regional Haze SIP are codified at 20.11.5 NMAC, Visible Air Contaminants ; 20 .11.20 NMAC, Fugitive Dust Control ; 20.11.21 NMAC , Open Burning ; 20.11. 22 NMAC, Wood Burning ; 20.11. 46 NMAC, Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Inventory Requirements: Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program ; 20.11.65 NMAC, Volatile Organic Compounds ; 20.11. 66 NMAC, Process Equipment ; 20.11.67 NMAC, Equipment, Emissions, Limitations ; 20.11.71 NMAC , Mu nicipal Solid Waste Landfills ; 20.11.100 NMAC , Motor Vehi cle Inspection

- Decentralized ; 20.11.102 NMAC , Oxygenated Fuels ; 20.11.103 NMAC , M otor Vehicle Visible Emissions ; and 20.11.104 NMAC , Emission St andards for New Motor Vehicles

. EPA approval of the Regional Haze SIP followed previous regional haze SIP submissions by Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County on December 26, 2003 and September 10, 2008. See 77 F ed. R eg. 24,768 (Apr

. 25, 2012) (proposing approval of Albuquerque Bernalillo County regional haze SIP and describing history of regional haze rule and related earlier SIP submission s by Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County).
Compliance regarding interstate pollution abatement : As described above in this Element of the iSIP and in Element C , Albuquerque Bernalillo County has submitted proposed PSD revisions for EPA review. If EPA should approve these revisions, the result would be , whe n combined with earlier EPA appro vals of PSD provisions, a fully EPA a pproved PSD permitting program. that will , along with earlier EPA approvals of the PSD program , satisfy EPA requirements for PSD permitting

. Thus, the PSD program will would include provisions that satisfy the interstate pollution abatements of the CAA, § 126(a) , and are consistent with 40 CFR § 51.166(q)(2)(iv), requiring notification of other air agencies whose jurisdictions may be affected by emissions from an outside source

. The regulation requiring such notice is codified at 21.11.61.21 ( C ) (4) NMAC.
Regarding CA A , § 126(b) and (c), no sources within Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County are subject to an active finding under these provisions with respect to SO 2 . If such findings should occur in the future, AQP will consult with EPA Region VI.
Compli ance regarding international air pollution : Regarding CAA , § 115, no sources within Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County are subject to an active finding under Section 115 with respect to SO 2 . § 110(a)(2)(E)(i) Provide:

(i) necessary assurances that the State (or, except where the administrator deems inappropriate, the general purpose local government or governments, or a regional agency designated by the State or general purpose local governments for such purpose) will have adequate personnel, funding, and aut hority under State (and, as appropriate, local) law to carry out such implementation plan (and is not prohibited by any provision of Federal or State law from carrying out such implementation plan or portion thereof)

. Organization responsible for the SIP : The Air Act and Ordinances designate serve as the legal basis for establishing the Air Board and the Environmental Health Department as the responsible authorit ies for implementing federal air quality standards in Albuquerque Bernalillo County. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 5 and 5.1; ROA §§ 9

- 5

- 1

- 4 and

- 5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 §§ 4 and 5 . The Air Act and Ordinances designate also serve as the legal basis for establishing AQP as the air pollution control agency for Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County, for this purpose empowering AQP to carry out a variety of functions including monitoring, compliance, enforcement, and developing and presenting proposed plans and rules to the Air Board for adoption and promulgation . NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 5.1 ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 5; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 5

. For purposes of these provisions, the Air Board and AQP are the sole organizationsSTAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 14 of 21 that participate in developing, implementing, and enforcing the EPA

- approved SIP provisions related to the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.
Resources (i.e. personnel & funding) available to carry out the SIP : As of the date of this iSIP submission, t he Air Board and AQP have adequate funding and personnel to carry out the functions described in this document addressing the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS . F unding and personnel for activ ities related to the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS will be provided through permit fees, general funds from the City of Albuquerque , and funds provided under the CAA , § § 103 and 105 grant process

. AQP expects th ese sources to provide adequate funding for the five years following this iSIP provision submission . AQP does not anticipate the need for additional resources to impl ement the plan for the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS , beyond those which have been utilized for the preparation of the plan, for SIP revisions submitted to EPA , and for other current programmatic demands . Should EPA determine that AQP lacks adequate personnel to carry out the SIP, EPA may issue a finding with respect to that deficiency, which AQP would have a legal obligation to correct. Authority to carry out the SIP : The Air Board and AQP have adequate authority under statutes, rules , ordinances, and regulations to carry out SIP obligations with respect to the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

. The Air Act and Ordinances authorize the Air Board to adopt plans, emission standards and rules and to modify, reverse or sustain permits issued by AQP. NMSA § 74

- 2

- 5 and

- 7

. In addition, the AQP has authority under the Air Act and Ordinances to issue permits under t he Air Board’s regulations and to enforce applicable laws, regulations, standards, and compliance schedule s , and seek injunctive relief. NMSA 1978 §§ 74

- 2

- 5.1

- 7,

- 12,

- 12.1 ; ROA §§ 9

- 5

- 1

- 5,

- 7, and 98 and 99 ; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 §§ 5, 7 and 13 and 14. This legal framework empowers AQP to carry out administrative assessments, inspections, issuance of penalties for permit violations, and appropriate litigation

. Id

. To act under the foregoing legal provisions, AQP has full authority under state law, and city and county ordinances to carry out all SIP obligations relating to the 2010 SO 2 . N AAQS. ROA §§ 9

- 5

- 1

- 1 to

- 99; and Bernalillo County Ord

. 94

- 5 §§ 1 to

- 20

. § 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) (ii) requirements that the State comply with the requirements respecting State

boards under CAA Section 128 [Section 7428 of this Title], and

To com ply with the provisions of CAA S ection 128 regarding state and local board composition and conflicts of interests , the City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County have implemented a number of ordinances and policies. EPA has previously approved these measures into the New Mexico SIP. 64 F ed. R eg. 29,235 (July 1, 1999). In the years following EPA ’s approval, th e ordinances and policies have been revised. Accordingly, Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County has submitted to EPA propo sed revisions to the New Mexico SIP to account for changes in the local ordinances and policies

. These proposed SIP revisions are intended to comply with the state and local board requirements of CAA Section 128. 16
These proposed SIP revisions will , if approved by EPA, incorporate the following ordinances , other laws, and policies into the New Mexico SIP:

 ROA §§ 2

- 6

- 1

- 1 to 2

- 6

- 1

- 5 (―Public Bo ards, Commissions, and Committees ‖) ; 3

- 3

- 1 to 3

- 3

- 13 (―Conflict of Interest ‖) ; 9

- 5

- 1

- 1 to 9

- 5

- 1

- 99 (―Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinanc e‖ ) 9

- 5

- 6

- 1 to 9

- 5

- 6

- 3 (―Metropolitan Environmental Health Advisory Boar d‖) ;

16 Letter from Ryan Flynn, New Mexico Environment Secretary, to Ron Curry, EPA Region 6 Administrator (July 26, 2013).STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 15 of 21  City of Albuquerque, NM, Charter, Ar ticle XII, Section 4 (― Conflict of Interest ‖ );

 City of Albuquerque, City Code of Conduct, 300 (―Conditions of Employment ‖) ; 301 (―Code of Conduct ‖) (from City of Albuquerque Personnel Rules and Policies);

 Bernalillo County, NM Ordinances §§ 2

- 126 to 2

- 136 (―Code of Conduct ‖ ); 30

- 31 to 30

- 47 (―Joint Air Quality Control Boar d‖ ); 42

- 36 to 42

- 39 (―Metropolitan Environmental Health Advisory Boar d‖ )

NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 4 provides that the Air Board be comprised of at least a majority of members who represent the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subje ct to or who appear before the B oard on issues related to the CAA or Air Act.
Additionally, Air Board members are required to recuse themselves from rulemakings where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned or if the Air Board member: (1) has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party; (2) is related to a party within a third degree of relationship, (3) is an officer, director or trustee o f a party or interested participant in the proceeding; or (4) has a financial interest in the proceeding or has any other conflict . 20.11.82.14 NMAC

. Air Board members are also required to recuse themselves from adjudicatory proceedings, such as permit

r eviews where the Air Board member: (1) has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or the outcome of the proceeding; (2) has personal knowledge of disputed facts concerning the proceeding; (3) is related to a party within the third degree of relati onship; (4) is an officer, director or trustee of a party or interested participant in the proceeding; (5) has a financial interest in the proceeding or facility that is the subject of the proceeding or has any other conflict of interest; (6) or has perfor med prosecutorial or investigatory functions in connection with a permitting action at issue in the proceeding. 20.11.81.12(B)(3)(a).
§ 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) (iii) necessary assurances that, where the State has relied on a local or regional

government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the State has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provision.

Pursuant to NMSA 1978 , § 74

- 2

- 4, local authority to implement the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act has been established for Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County, through the adoption of these jurisdictions’ respective Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinances which creat ed the Air Board and authoriz e local administrat ion by the City of Albuquerque Department of Environmental Health. ROA § § 9

- 5

- 1

- 1 to

- 99; and Bernalillo County Ord

. 94

- 5 , §§ 1 to

- 20. The New Mexico Environment Department and the state Environmental Improvement Board retain jurisdiction and control for administration of the Air Quality Control Act with respect to any failure to act by a local authority. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 4(D).
§ 110(a )(2)(F) Require, as may be prescribed by the Administrator:

(i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sour ces, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions

- related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the State agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this Act [Ch apter], which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection;STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 16 of 21 Source monitoring : The state Air Act provides that regulations adopted by the Air Board may ―require any person emitting any air contaminant ‖ to conduct monitoring of such emissions, install equipment appropriate for such monitoring, use monitoring methods prescribed by the Air Board, maintain related records, and submit reports regarding the emissions. NMSA § 74

- 2

- 5(C)(6). Consistent with 40 CFR § 51.212, Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County regulations provide that stationary sources may be subject to periodic inspection and emissions testing. 20.11.41 .22 NMAC (inspection and testing related to construction p ermits ) ; 20.11.42 .12 NMAC (inspection and testing related to operating permits) ; 20.11.49 .15 NMAC (inspection and testing related to excess e missions ); 20.11.60 .27 NMAC (testing and inspection related to permitting in nonattainment a reas ) ; 20.11.61.12 to 20.11.61. 20 NMAC (testing and prevention related to permitting for p reventio n of significant d eterioration ) ; and 20.11.90 NMAC , Source Surveillance: Administration and E nforcement . These source monitoring requirements authorize AQP to identify allowable test methods which a source must use . The requirements do not contain any provision that would prevent the use of any credible evidence.
Source reporting : Consistent with 40 CFR §§ 51.211, 51.321 to 51.323, and 40 CFR part 51, subpart A, Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County provides that stationary sources may be required to periodic ally report emissions and emissions

- relate d data. These provisions are contained in the NMAC regulations cited in the paragraph above. In addition, stationary sources may be required to maintain and report emissions inventories according to a prescribed schedule, in a format established by AQP. 20.11.47 NMAC , Emission Inventory Requireme nts

. To facilitate gathering and reporting of emissions data by sources, Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County establishes specific requirements for maintaining records and reporting emissions, including provisions relating to content of records and AQP inspection s . 20.11.90 NMAC, Source Surveillance: Administration and Enforcement

. AQP is current with its submittals to the National Emissions Inventory ( NEI ) database ; the 201 3 2 data for larger sources was submitted to EPA on December 30 9 , 201 4 3

. Correlation of source reports with emissions limitations and standards : Pursuant to the NMAC provisions cited above and consistent with 40 CFR § 51.116, AQP is able to use emissions data g athered and reported by sources to analyze ―the relationship between measured or estimated amounts of emissions and the amounts of such emissions allowable under the applicable em ission limitations or sources. ‖ 40 CFR § 51.116(c). S ee also 20.11.90.13(C) NMAC (―Emission data obtained by the director shall be correlated with applicable emission limitations and other control measures . . . ‖)

. By means of such correlation, AQP is able to track progress toward maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies, identify sources an d general emission levels, and determine compliance with state and EPA requirements.
Availability of emission reports by sources : Emission data obtained under the above

- cited provisions are made available to the public during normal business hours. 20.11. 90.13(C) NMAC.
§ 110(a)(2)(G) P rovide for authority comparable to that in CAA Section 303 [Section 7603 of this

Title] and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority.
Authority to respond to emergency episode : The Air Act and Ordinances provide AQP with authority to address air quality emergencies. Upon a finding that any owner/operator of a source or combination of air emission sources presents an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare or the environment, the Director of the Environmental Health Dep artment may bring a civil suit seeking to restrain the source of the air contaminants. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 10(A) ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 10(A); Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 10(A ). If such a civil suit is not a practicable mea ns of promptly protecting public health or welfare or the environment, the Director may issue orders necessary for such protection on a temporary basis, pending litigation and court

- ordered action

. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 10 (B) ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 10(B); Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 10 (B)

.STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 17 of 21 Contingency plan to implement emergency episode authority : The Director of the Environmental Health Department formulates and administers an emergency action plan approved by the Air Board to address
sour ce emissions that cause pollutant concentrations to reach levels constituting an imminent and substantial endangerment to t he health of persons. 20.11.6 NMAC , Emergency Action Plan

. Consistent with 40 CFR § 51, Subpart H, Prevention of Air Pollution Emerge ncy Episodes , the Air Board has adopted the Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan for Bernalillo County that covers air pollution episodes and the occurrence of an emergency due to the effects of the pollutants on the health of persons. 56 F ed. R eg. 3 8,074 (Aug

. 21, 1991); 40 CFR § 52.1639

. § 110(a)(2)(H) P rovide for revision of such plan:

(i) from time to time as may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) except as provided in Paragraph (3)(C), whenever the Administrator finds on the basis of information available to the Administrator that the plan is substantially inadequate to attai n the NAAQS which it implements, or to otherwise comply with any additional requirements established under this Act.

SIP revision to account for NAAQS revisions : the Air Board has the authority to adopt new regulations and to amend or repeal regulations in order to attain and maintain the NAAQS and prevent or abate air pollution throughout Bernalillo County . NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 5 ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 4; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 4

. To assist the Board with all NAAQS revision s , AQP has authori ty to develop and present to the Board a plan for the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 5.1(H) ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 5(I); Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 5(I)

. Because t hese provisions allow for changes as necessary to t he SIP local air quality regulations and programs , they provide the legal basis for the Air Board and AQP to revise the submit proposed SIP revisions for EPA review in order to accommodate EPA revision s of a NAAQS. Nothing in New Mexico’s statutory or regulatory authority prohibits Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County from revising regulations and programs for submission as proposed the SIP revisions in the event of a revision to the NAAQS.

SIP revision to account for EPA finding of inadequacy : the above cited provisions also provide the legal basis for the Air B oard and AQP to submit propose d revis ion s of e the SIP for EPA review in the event the EPA Administrator finds the SIP to be substantially inadequate to attain the N AAQS or otherwise meet all applicable CAA requirements.
§ 110(a)(2)(I) In the case of a plan or plan revision for an area designated as a nonattainment area,

meet the applicable requirements of part D (relating to nonattainment areas);

CAA §110 (a)(2)(I) is not being addressed in this infrastructure SIP submittal. According to EPA’s interpretation of the CAA, this element does not need to be addressed in the context of an infrastructure SIP submission. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

― Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2), ‖ September 2013, p.51, available at http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html.
§ 110(a)(2)(J) M eet the applicable re quirements of CAA § 121 [Section 7421 of this Title]

(relating to consultation), CAA Section 127 [Section 7427 of this Title] (relating to public notification), and Part C of this Subchapter ( relating to prevention of significant deterioration of air quality and visibility protection);STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 18 of 21 Consultation with identified officials on certain actions : Section 121 of the CAA requires a SIP to provide for consultation with local political subdivisions and with federal land managers regarding adoption of certain SIP el ements affecting those entities . Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County meets this requirement because a ll SIP revisions undergo public notice and hearing, which provides for comment by the interested members of the public, including local political subdivisions and federal land managers affected by a SIP revision

. In particular, t he Air Act provides that, ―no regulations o r emission control requirement shall be adopted until after a public hearing by

. . . the local board ‖ and that , ―at the hearing

.

. . the local board shall allow all interested persons reasonable opportunity to submit data, views, or arguments orally or i n writing and to examine witnesses testifying at the hearing

. ‖ NMSA 1978, § 74

– 2

– 6(B) and (D) ; see also ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 6(B) and (D); Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 6(B) and (D)

. To implement these consultation requirements, t he Air Board has adopted several regulations establishing
a process for consultation with local political subdivisions and federal land managers. One such regulation , govern ing the rule making process , provide s notice of SIP revisions to affected persons and organizations and affo rds them an opportunity to participate in the revision process. 20.11.82 NMAC , Rulemaking Procedures

-- Air Quality Control Board

. Other such regulations are those programs implementing permitting in nonattainment areas and for Prevention of Sig nificant Deterioration, which provide for public p articipation and notification of affected persons. 20.11.60.23 NMAC , ( requiring consultation with federal land manager on major source permits in nonattainment areas that affect visibi lity in federal Class I areas); 20.11.60.26 NMAC (providing for public participation and notification on major source permits in nonattainment areas, including consultation with federal land managers); 20.11.61.21 and 20.11.61.24 NMAC (providing for public participation and not ification on major source permits subject to prevention of significant deterioration requirements, including federal land managers). Additionally, public participation and notification provisions are incorporated in regulations governing adjudicatory decis ions by the Air Board : 20.11.81 .14 ( G ) and 20.11.81.14 ( I ) NMAC (providing specific procedural requirements for public notification and hearing) . Further public participation and notification provisions apply regarding issuance of construction permits, 20.11.41 .14 , 20.11.41.15 , and 20.11.41.16 NMAC (providing for public participation and notification at various stages of the construction permitting process). Collectively, the foregoing provisions ensure that there will be an established process for consultation with local political subdivisions and federal land managers, as well as persons affected by the actions specified in CAA § 121.
In addition to the above consultation requirements, Albuquerque Bernali l l o County ’ s SIP

- approved Transportation Conformity and General Conformity rule s require that interagency consultation and opportunity for public involvement be provided before making transportation conformity determinations and before adopting proposing for EPA review applicable SIP revisions on transportation related SIP element s. 20.11.3 .105 , 20.11.3.112 , and 20.11.4 NMAC

. Consistent with 40 CFR § 51 , subpart M , the Air Act, Ordinances and regulations identify the Air Board and AQP as the organizations responsible for developing, implementing, and enforcing the SIP. NMSA § § 74

- 2

- 5 to 74

- 2

- 14; ROA § § 9

- 5

- 1

- 4 and

- 5; Bernalillo County Ord

. 94

- 5 § § 4 and 5 ; 20.11.1 through 20.11.104 NMAC

. These legal authorities also describe particula r responsibilities of the Air Board and AQP in carrying out these functions , including enacting regulations, issuing and modifying permits, modeling air dispersion patterns, monitoring ambient air quality, conducting inspections and compliance testing, und ertaking enforcement actions, and providing for participation in the regulatory process

. In addition, regulations identify local and federal govern ment entities that are consulted in SIP revisions related to transportation conformity and general conformity determinations in federally mandated transportation planning. 20.11.3 and 20.11.4 NMAC.

Public notification : Consistent with CAA , Section 127 , and 40 CFR § 51.285, AQP makes available to the public information on instances or areas in which the measured value of regulated pollutants exceedsSTAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 19 of 21 the values set forth in the NAAQS

. AQP mak es a ir quality data from Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County ’s monitoring network available via EPA’s Air Quality System Data Mart website at http://www.epa.gov/airdata

. Additionally, as required by grants under CAA Section 105 , Albuquerque

Bernalillo County must submit monitoring data to EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) within 90 days after the end of a quarter

. AQP’s website provides information to the public on current air quality conditions in AQP’s jurisdiction, using the EPA’s color

- coded Air Quality Index (AQI) to show current concentrations of criteria pollutants. This AQI information appears at http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/todays

- status/air

quality

- index

. The AQI information covers health effects potentially assoc iated with varying l evels of specific pollutants. By this means, AQP advises the public of potential health hazards associated with measured values for sulfur dioxide and other NAAQS pollutants that may at times exceed the concentrations specified in the NAAQS

. AQP’s website also provides links to additional EPA web

- based information tools on criteria pollutant emission sources, past air quality data trends , and forecasts of future air quality conditions . These EPA
resources , including, for example, AIRNo w, AirData, and AirC ompare , are linked at http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/download

- air

- data . By linking to these EPA resources, AQP further advises the public about criteria pollutants, local air quality conditions and the potential health hazards that may arise from such conditions.
In addition to the above measures, AQP and the Air Board promote public awareness of measures t hat ca n prevent instances in which measured values of criteria pollutants exceed values specified in the NAAQS. Promotion of such awareness occurs by offering specific information on how the public can participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve air quality

. I n particular, AQP and the Air Board follow specific procedures, mandated by regulations, to inform the public of : (1) p rocedure s for members of the public to petition the Air Board for a rulemaking proceeding , 20.11.82.18 NMA C , Rulemaking Procedures

-- Air Quality Control Board (providing that ―any per son‖ may petition the Air Board for rulemaking); (2) time and place of upcoming rulemaking proceedings , 20.11.82.19 NMAC; (3) procedures for members of the public t o participate in rulemakings, 20.11.82.19 NMAC ; (4) p rocedures for members of the public to participate in the permitting process, 20.11.41.14 to 20.11.41.16 NMAC (public participation in construction permits) ; 20.11.42.13 NMAC (public participation in operating permits) ; 20.11.60.26 NMAC (public participation in permitting in nonattainment a reas ) ; 20.11.61.21 NMAC (public participation in permitting for p revention of significant deterioration) ; and 20.11.81 NMAC , Adjudicatory Procedures

-- Air Quality Control Board

. The foregoing regulations requi re that notices of proceedings be published by particular methods (e.g. in a newspaper of general circulation), thus providing interested members of the public an opportunity to be heard during rulemaking and permitting

. AQP and the Air Board further promote the above forms of public participation by providing links on the AQP website to important information about such participation. This web

- based information includes: the content of relevant regulations; notices of proceed ings; Air Bo ard and AQP contact information; description of the process for filing air quality complaints; descriptions of per mitting and compliance programs; information on environmental justice issues; and acces s to full text documents on completed, ongo ing or upcoming regulatory proceedings, such as petitions, notices of intent, public comments, and public review drafts of proposed regulations. The foregoing information is available through the AQP website at http://www.cabq.gov/airquality (see especially http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/public

involvement

- in

- environmental

- programs and http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/air

- quality

- control

- board ).
Prevention of significant deterioration : EPA has stated that the requirements for this sub

- element of an iSIP are the same as the requirements to satisfy Element C of an iSIP, which must comply with CAA § 110(a)(2)(C). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ―Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 1 10(a)(2) ( Sept

. 2013 ) , available at http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html

. Accordingly, please refer to theSTAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 20 of 21 discussion of Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County’s PSD program in Element s C of this iSIP for a description of how the Albuquerque Bernalillo County PSD program satisfies iSIP requirements. Additional discussion of PSD programs appears in Element D.
Visibility protection : EPA has stated that state and lo cal air agencies do not need to address this sub

element in an iSIP submittal , because a NAAQS revision does not change visibility requirements or impose new visibility protection requirements

. Therefore, this iSIP submittal does not address the visibility sub

- element. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ―Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) ,‖ ( Sept

. 2013 ) , available at http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/sipstatus/infrastructure.html

. §110(a)(2)(K ) P rovide for:

(i) the performance of such air quality modeling as the Administrator may prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which the Administrator has established a NAAQS, and (ii) the sub mission, upon request, of data related to such air quality modeling to the Administrator;
Authority to conduct air quality modeling : The Air Act and Ordinances authorize AQP to ―develop fac ts and make investigations and studie s‖ consistent with the Act. NMSA 1978, § 74

– 2

– 5.1(A) ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 5(B); and Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 5(B) . Th ese legal provision s provide AQP with necessary authority to develop air quality assessments and conduct modeling to predict the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated

. AQP follows EPA guidelines for air dispersion modeling

. 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix W. AQP utilizes air quality modeling or requires sources to conduct such modeling u nder the following regulations: 20.11.3 .105 NMAC (for consultation in the local transportation conformity process) ; 20.11.4.159 NMAC (for consultation in determining transportation conformity of federal actions) ; 20.11.41 .13 NMAC (for inclusion in construction permit applications) ; 20.11.42 .12 NMAC (for inclusion in operating permit applications); 20.11.60.25 NMAC (for per mitting in nonattainment areas) ; 20.11.61.17 NMAC (to prev ent significant deterioration of air quality in attainment areas).

Au thority to provide modeling data to EPA : AQP has authority to provide modeling data to EPA upon request and will do so when AQP receives such a request

. Th is authority derives from provisions in th e Air Act and Ordinances that require AQP to present ―a plan for the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution ‖ to the Air Board. NMSA 1978 § 74

- 2

- 5.1(H) ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 5(I); Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 5(I)

. The Air Board, in turn, approve s regulations implementing the air po llution control plan, consistent with standards in the CAA and the New Mexico Air Act . NMSA § 74

- 2

- 5 ; ROA § 9

- 5

- 1

- 4; Bernalillo County Ord. 94

- 5 § 4

. T he se legal provisions require and authorize development and adoption of plans to attain and maintain the NAAQS

-- including generation of modeling data to be provided to EPA . AQP agrees to share s modeling data upon request with EPA to assure that Albuquerque Bernalillo County’s EPA

- approved portion of the New Mexico SIP functions as the above referenced se laws intend

. § 110(a)(2)(L) R equire the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the

permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under this Act [Chapter], a fee sufficient to cover

— (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit ( not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action),STAKEHOLDER PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT as of 12/24/20142/20/2015

AQP Exhibit 9, Staff Proposed Floor Amendments ( shown in red font ) Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Sulfur Dioxide Infrastructure SIP Page 21 of 21 until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee program under Title V [Subchapter V of this Chapter];
The Air Board has approved regulations providing for fees to cover reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon permit applications, as well as implementing the terms and conditions of a permit under the CAA and the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act. See 20.11.2 NMAC (on air quality related fees in general); 20.11.7.12 NMAC (fee s for petition s for variance s ); collectively 20.11.13 NMAC; 20.11.14 NMAC; 20.11.17 NMAC and 20.11.22 NMAC (fees related to fugitive dust control); 20.11.40.13 NMAC and 20.11.40.14 NMAC (fees for source registration s ); 20.11.41.12 NMAC; 20.11.41.13 NMAC; 20.11.41.16 NMAC; 20.11.41.23 NMAC; 20.11.41.32 NMAC (construction permit fees ); 20.11.42.12 NMAC and 20.11.42.13 NMAC ( operating permit fees) ; 20.11.81.8 NMAC and 20.11.81.14 NMAC (fees for adjudicatory proceedings); 20.11.100.20 NMAC; 20.11.100.23 NMAC; 20.11.100.24 NMAC; 20.11.100.29 NMAC; 20.11.100.33 NMAC; 20.11.100.35 NMAC; 20.11.100.35 NMAC; 20.11.101.18 NMAC; 20.11.101.28 NMAC; 20.11.104.111 NMAC (fees for motor vehicle stand ards and inspections).
§ 110(a)(2)(M) P rovide for consultation and participation by local political subdivisions affected by

the plan.
The Air Quality Control Act and implementing regulations provide for consultation with local political subdivisions a ffected by the Albuquerque

- Bernalillo County elements of the New Mexico SIP. For a detailed description of these provisions, please see the information in element J, above, of this iSIP.

1

### :=~ 

# -- GPO



### Tuesday, 

### June 22, 2010



## Part II


# Environmental Protection Agency

40 CFR Parts 50, 

### 53, and 58 Primary National Ambient Air 

### Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide; Final Rule35520 Federal Register/Val. 75, No. 119/Tuesday, June 22, 2010/Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 50, 53, and 58 [EPA-HO-OAR-2007-0352; 9160-4]
RIN 2060-A048 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA}. ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Based on its review of the air quality criteria for oxides of sulfur and the primary national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for oxides of sulfur
as measured by sulfur dioxide (S02), EPA is revising the primary S02 NAAQS to provide requisite protection of public health with an adequate margin of safety. Specifically, EPA is establishing a new 1-hour 

### so2 standard at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb}, based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The EPA is also revoking both the existing 24-hour and annual primary 80 2 standards. DATES: This final rule is effective on August 23, 2010. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0352. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30a.m. to 4:30p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-17 44 and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is (202) 566-1742. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael 

### J. Stewart, Health and Environmental Impacts Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail code C504-06, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone: 919-541- 7524; fax: 919-541-0237; e-mail: stewart.michael@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION; Table of Contents

The following topics are discussed in this preamble: I. Background

A. Summary of Revisions to the S0 2

Primary NAAQS B. Statutory Requirements C. Related S02 Control Programs D. History of Reviews of the Primary

NAAQS for Sulfur Oxides E. Summary of Proposed Revisions to the

S0 2 Primary NAAQS F. Organization and Approach to Final S0 2

Primary NAAQS Decisions II. Rationale for Decisions on the Primary Standards A. Characterization of S02 Air Quality 1. Anthropogenic Sources and Current

Patterns of SOz Air Quality 2. S0 2 Monitoring B. Health Effects Information 1. Short-Term (5-Minute to 24-Hour) S02

Exposure and Respiratory Morbidity Effects
a. Adversity of Short-Term Respiratory

Morbidity Effects 2. Health Effects and Long-Tenn Exposures

to so2 3. SOrRelated Impacts on Public Health C. Human Exposure and Health Risk

Characterization D. Approach for Determining Whether To

Retain or Revise the Current Standards E. Adequacy of the Current Standards 1. Rationale for Proposed Decision 2. Comments on the Adequacy of the

Current Standards
a. Comments on EPA's Interpretation of the

Epidemiologic Evidence b. Comments on EPA's Interpretation of the

Controlled Human Exposure Evidence
c. Comments on EPA's Characterization of

SOz-Associated Exposures and Health Risks 3. Conclusions Regarding the Adequacy of

the Current 24-Hour and Annual Standards F. Conclusions on the Elements of a New

Short-Tenn Standard 1. Indicator
a. Rationale for Proposed Decision b. Comments on Indicator
c. Conclusions on Indicator 2. Averaging Time
a. Rationale for Proposed Decision b. Comments on Averaging Time
c. Conclusions on Averaging Time 3. Fonn
a. Rationale for Proposed Decision b. Comments on Form
c. Conclusions on Form 4. Level
a. Rationale for Proposed Decision b. Comments on Level
c. Conclusions on Level 5. Retaining or Revoking the Current 24-

Hour and Annual Standards
a. Rationale for Proposed Decision b. Comments on Retaining or Revoking the

Current 24-Hour and Annual Standards c. Conclusions on Retaining or Revoking the Current 24-Hour and Annual Standards G. Summary of Decisions on Primary

Standards Ill. Overview of the Approach for Monitoring and Implementation IV. Amendments to Ambient Monitoring and Reporting Requirements A. Monitoring Methods 1. Requirements for S01 Federal Reference

Method (FRM)
a. Proposed Ultraviolet Fluorescence S02

FRM and Implementation b. Public Comments
c. Conclusions on Ultraviolet Fluorescence

S02 FRM and Implementation 2. Requirements for Automated S0 2

Mlllhods
a. Proposed Performance Specifications for

Automated Methods b. Public Comments c. Conclusions for Performance

Specifications for S02 Automated Methods B. Network Design 1. Approach for Network Design
a. Proposed Approach for Network Design b. Alternative Network Design
c. Public Comments 2. Modeling Ambient S02 Concentrations 3. Monitoring Objectives
a. Proposed Monitoring Objectives b. Public Comments
c. Conclusions on Monitoring Objectives 4. Final Monitoring Network Design 5. Population Weighted Emissions Index
a. Proposed Use of the Population

Weighted Emissions Index b. Public Comments
c. Conclusions on the Use of the

Population Weighted Emissions Index 6. Regional Administrator Authority
a. Proposed Regional Administrator

Authority b. Public Comments
c. Conclusions on Regional Administrator

Authority 7. Monitoring Network Implementation
a. Proposed Monitoring Network

Implementation b. Public Comments
c. Conclusions on Monitoring Network

Imp Iemen tation C. Data Reporting 1. Proposed Data Reporting 2. Public Comments 3. Conclusions on Data Reporting V. Initial Designation of Areas for the 1-Hour S02NAAQS A. Clean Air Act Requirements 1. Approach Described in Proposal 2. Public Comments B. Expected Designations Process VI. Clean Air Act Implementation Requirements A. How This Rule Applies to Tribes B. Nonattainment Area Attainment Dales 1. Attaining the NAAQS 2. Consequences of a Nonattainment Area

Failing To Attain by the Statutory Attainment Date C. Section llO(a)(l) and (2) NAAQS

Maintenance/Infrastructure Requirements 1. Section 110(a)(1)-(2) SubmissionFederal Register/Val. 75, No. 119/Tuesday, June 22, 2010/Rules and Regulations 35521

D. Attainment Planning Requirements 1. SOz Nonattainment Area SIP

Requirements 2. New Source Review and Prevention of

Significant Deterioration Requirements 3. General Conformity E. Transition From the Existing S0 2

NAAQS to a Revised S0 2 NAAQS VII. Appendix T-Interpretation ofthe Primary NAAQS for Oxides of Sulfur and Revisions to the Exceptional Events Rule A. Interpretation of the NAAQS for Oxides

of Sulfur 1. Proposed Interpretation of the Standard 2. Comments on Interpretation of the

Standard 3. Conclusions on Interpretation of the

Standard B. Exceptional Events Information

Submission Schedule VIII. Communication of Public Health Information IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory

Planning and Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act C. Regulatory Flexibility Act D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation

and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of

Children From Environmental Health & Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use I. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act ]. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions

To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations References I. Background A. Summary of Revisions to the S02 Primary NAAQS

Based on its review of the air quality criteria for oxides of sulfur and the primary national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for oxides of sulfur
as measured by sulfur dioxide (S02l. EPA is making revisions to the primary S0 2 NAAQS so the standards are requisite to protect public health with
an adequate margin of safety, as appropriate under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA). Specifically, EPA is replacing the current 24-hour and annual standards with a new short-term standard based
on the 3-year average of the 99th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily maximum 

### so2 concentrations. EPA is setting the level of this new standard at 75 ppb. EPA is adding data handling conventions for 

### so2 by adding provisions for this new 1-hour primary standard. EPA is also establishing requirements for an SOz monitoring network. These new provisions require monitors in areas where there is an increased coincidence of population and S02 emissions. EPA is also making conforming changes to the Air Quality Index (AQI). B. Statutory Requirements

Two sections of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA) govern the establishment and revision of National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAAQS. Section 108 of the Act directs the Administrator to identify and list air pollutants that meet certain criteria, including that the air pollutant "in his judgment, cause[s) or contribute[s) to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare" and "the presence of which in the ambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile
or stationary sources." CAA section 108(a)(l)(A) and (B). For those air pollutants listed, section 108 requires the Administrator to issue air quality criteria that "accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public health or welfare which may be expected from the presence of [a] pollutant in ambient air • " *" Section 108(a)(2).

Section 109(a) of the Act directs the Administrator to promulgate "primary" and "secondary" NAAQS for pollutants for which air quality criteria have been issued. Section 109(b)(l) defines a primary standard as one "the attainment and maintenance of which in the judgment of the Administrator, based on [the air quality) criteria and allowing an adequate margin of safety, are requisite to protect the public health." 1 Section 109(b)(l). A secondary standard, in turn, must "specify a level of air quality the attainment and maintenance of which, in the judgment of the Administrator, based on [the air quality) criteria, is requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence of

t The legislative history of section 109 indicates that a primary standard is to be set at "the maximum permissible ambient air level • • • which will protect the health of any (sensitive! group of the population," and that for this purpose "reference should be made to a representative sample of persons comprising tho sensitive group rather than to a single person in such a group." S. Rep. No. 91-1196, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. 10 {1970). See also American Lung Ass'n v. EPA. 134 F. Jd 366, 369 (DC Cir. 1998) ("NAAQS must protect not only average healthy individuals, but also 'sensitive citizens' -children, for example, or people with asthma, emphysema, or other conditions rendering them particularly vulnerable to air pollution. If a pollutant adversely affects the health of these sensitive individuals, EPA must strengthen the entire national standard."!; Coalition of Battery Recyclers Ass'n v. EPA, No. 09-1011 (DC Cir. May 14, 2010) slip op. at 7 (same). such pollutant in the ambient air." z Section 109(b)(2) This rule concerns exclusively the primary NAAQS for oxides of sulfur.

The requirement that primary standards include an adequate margin of safety is intended to address uncertainties associated with inconclusive scientific and technical information available at the time of standard setting. It is also intended to provide a reasonable degree of protection against hazards that research has not yet identified. Lead Industries Association v. EPA, 647 F.2d 1130, 1154 (DC Cir 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1042 (1980); American Petroleum Institute v. Castle, 665 F.2d 1176, 1186 (DC Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1034 (1982). Both kinds of uncertainties
are components of the risk associated with pollution at levels below those at which human health effects can be said to occur with reasonable scientific certainty. Thus, in selecting primary standards that include an adequate margin of safety, the Administrator is seeking not only to prevent pollution levels that have been demonstrated to be harmful but also to prevent lower pollutant levels that may pose an unacceptable risk of harm, even if the risk is not precisely identified as to nature or degree. The CAA does not require the Administrator to establish a primary NAAQS at a zero-risk level or at background concentration levels, see Lead Industries Association v. EPA, 647 F.2d at 1156 n. 51, but rather at a level that reduces risk sufficiently so as to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety.

In addressing the requirement for a margin of safety, EPA considers such factors as the nature and severity of the health effects involved, the size of the at-risk population(s), and the kind and degree of the uncertainties that must be addressed. The selection of any particular approach to providing an adequate margin of safety is a policy choice left specifically to the Administrator's judgment. Lead Industries Association v. EPA, 647 F.2d at 1161-62.

In setting standards that are "requisite" to protect public health and welfare, as provided in section 109(b), EPA's task is to establish standards that
are neither more nor less stringent than necessary for these purposes. In so doing, EPA may not consider the costs of implementing the standards. Whitman v. American Trucking

2 EPA is currently conducting a separale review of the secondary SO, NAAQS jointly with a review of the secondary NO, NAAQS (see http://**••~vw.epa.gov/ttn/naaqslstandardslno2sa2sec/** index.html for more information).

### This rest of this Federal Register is available at:

Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide
Regulations.gov document EPA

- HQ

- OAR -2007-0352-1453
It may take a few minutes for the full screen below to appear.
After the screen appears, click on pdf icon in the box at the right to see the published Federal Register.

You can see the rest of t

he documents in the docket by clicking on “Open Docket Folder”.

# .. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGIONS 1445 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 1200

DALLAS, TEXAS 75202

- 2733

February 7, 

### 2013 Ofllce of the Regional**Admi~JI~r**



### The Honorable Susana Martinez Governor of New Mexico State Capitol, Room 400 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 w


## ...,., 

# ,.., co N



### ......
:;: 

# ..

.
J _,-.j :J**~-'**

'


### ..**~** 

# - -i-; 'to•-<._ ;-rt\ 

### :._o

rn 

### Dear Governor Martinez: '{!:.

--i :I: 

### Thank you for your recommendations dated May 24, 2011, and June 6, 2011, on air quality designations for the state of New Mexico for the 2010 revision to the primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for sulfur dioxide. Reducing levels of sulfur dioxide pollution is an important part of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's commitment to a clean, healthy environment. Exposure to S0 2 can cause a range of adverse health effects, including narrowfug of the airways which can cause difficulty breathing and 

### increased asthma symptoms. This letter is to notify you of the EPA's preliminary intentions regarding your recommended designations.

On June 3, 2010, the EPA strengthened the health-based or "primary" standard 

### for**S~** 

### by establishing a standard for 1-hour average S02 concentrations at a level of 75 parts per billion. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to complete the initial designations process within two years of promulgating a new or revised standard. If the Administrator has insufficient information to make these designations, the EPA has the authority to extend the designation process by up to one year. On July 27, 2012, the EPA announced that it had insufficient information to complete the designations for the 1-hour so2 standard within two 

### years and extended the designations deadline to June 3, 2013

. At this time, the EPA is proceeding with designating as nonattainment most areas in locations where existing monitoring data from 2009-2011 indicate violations of the 1-hour S02 standard. The EPA intends to address the designations for all other areas in separate future actions. With input from a diverse group of stakeholders, the EPA has developed a comprehensive implementation strategy for these future actions that focuses resources on identifying and addressing unhealthy levels of**S~.** 

### The strategy is available at: http://www.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/implement.html. The EPA will continue. to work closely with you and our other partners at the state, tribal and local levels to ensure health-protective, commonsense implementation of the 1-hour so2 standard.

The EPA's review of the most recent monitored air quality data from 2009-2011 shows no violations of the 2010**S~** 

### standard in any areas in New Mexico. Consequently, the EPA is not yet prepared to propose**designat~on** 

### action in New Mexico and is therefore currently deferring action to designate areas in New Mexico. The EPA expects to be able to proceed with designation action in New Mexico once additional data are gathered pursuant to our comprehensive implementation strategy. In a separate future action or actions, the EPA will notify you of our intended designations for these areas, and seek public comment on these actions, no later than 120 days prior to promulgating any final designations.

This paper Is printed with vegetable-oM-based Inks and Is 1 00-percent postc:onsumer recyded material, chlorine-free..proceased and recyclable.We look forward to a continued dialogue with you and your staff as we work together to implement the 2010 primary S02 standard. For additional information regarding initial designations on the S02 standard, please visit our website at www.epa.gov/so2designations. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (214) 665-2100, or have your staff contact Mr. Guy Donaldson of my staff at (214) 665-7242, or via email at donaldson.guy@epa.gov.

cc: 

### Mr. F. David Martin Secretary, New Mexico Environment Department

Ms. Mary Rose Environmental Protection Division Director, New Mexico Environment Department

# ~s. Mary Lou Leonard Director, City of Albuquerque Environmental Health DepartmentUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711



### SEP'13 2013 OFFICEOIF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS

MEMORANDUM



### SUBJECT:

FROM:



### TO: Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP} Elements under Clean Air Act Sections llO(a}(l) and**110(a)~(2)** 

# l

StephenD. Page, Director 

# M\ (J..A tt.fr.-

Office of Air Quality Planning an Standards
Regional Air Directors, Regions 1 - 10

The purpose of this memorandum is to distribute non-binding guidance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the requirements of certain provisions of the Clean 

### Air Act (CAA) titled, "Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(l) and 110(a)(2)."

Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of the CAA direct each state to develop and submit to the EPA a plan that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 1 Moreover, section 110(a)(1) requires that each state make a new SIP submission within 3 years after promulgation of a new or revised primary or secondary NAAQS, for approval into the existing SIP to assure that the SIP meets the applicable requirements for such new or revised NAAQS. This type of SIP submission is commonly referred to as an "infrastructure SIP."

The attached guidance, developed with the benefit of extensive written comments from state and local air agencies on a draft version, provides advice on the development of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008

ozone NAAQS, the 2010 nitrogen dioxide NAAQS, the 2010 sulfur dioxide NAAQS, and the 2012 fine particulate matter (PM 2 .s) NAAQS, as well as infrastructure SIPs for new or revised NAAQS promulgated in the future. This guidance does not address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which

concerns interstate pollution transport affecting attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The EPA expects to issue guidance in the future with respect 

### to section 11 0( a)(2)(D)(i)(I).

Section llO(a)(l) directs each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission to the EPA within 3 years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, 2 after reasonable notice and public hearing. 3 Section

1 These CAA sections and this guidance may also apply, as appropriate under the Tribal Authority Rule in 40 CFR Part 49, to
an Indian tribe that receives a determination of eligibility for treatment as a state for purposes of administering a tribal air quality management program under section 11 O(a) of the CAA. This memorandum and the guidance uses the term "air agency" to refer to a state or tribe that develops and submits an infrastructure SIP, except when quoting or paraphrasing a CAA section or EPA regulation that uses the term "state."

2 The Administrator may specify a shorter period.

Internet Ack:lress (UAL) • http://www.epe..gov RecyclediRecyclebla • Printed wnh Vegetable 011 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postoonsumer)11 O(a)(2) specifies the substantive elements that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address, as appropriate, for EPA approval. Many of the elements listed in section 11 0( a)(2) relate to the general information and authorities that constitute the basic structural requirements for a SIP needed for an air agency's overall air quality management program to be effective- elements that have been required to be in place since the initial SIPs were submitted in response to the CAA of 1970. Other elements listed in section 110(a)(2) relate to SIP requirements that have been added in successive amendments to the CAA since 1970. Although the 110(a)(2) requirements do not explicitly distinguish among the different criteria pollutants or different NAAQS, the structural SIP provisions needed to meet these requirements may depend on the particular new or revised NAAQS whose promulgation has triggered the requirement for a new infrastructure SIP submission. For example, a new or revised NAAQS may be accompanied by new ambient monitoring requirements tailored to that NAAQS or new prevention of significant deterioration program requirements. Overall, the requirement for a new infrastructure SIP submission provides an opportunity for the air agency, the public and the EPA to review the basics of the air quality management program in light of each new or revised NAAQS.

We acknowledge that air agencies continue to express concerns about the EPA's issuance oftimely guidance to assist their efforts to implement a new or revised NAAQS. Our goal in providing the attached guidance document is to provide 

### air agencies with recommendations in order to develop infrastructure SIPs that will meet the CAA requirements for recently promulgated NAAQS. The EPA will work to assist air agencies in the development and completion of these infrastructure SIPs so they may be submitted as soon as possible.

The attached guidance is also intended to provide comprehensive recommendations for infrastructure SIPs for new or revised NAAQS promulgated in the future. Our expectation is that this guidance will help to address the timeliness concerns expressed by air agencies and serve as guidance to address infrastructure SIP requirements for future NAAQS. As a result, the EPA intends that 

### air agencies may continue to rely on this guidance for preparing infrastructure SIP submissions necessary for future NAAQS revisions, until such time as this guidance is supplemented or replaced by future guidance. Moreover, as air agencies and the EPA develop and act upon infrastructure SIP submissions through notice-and-comment rulemaking, the EPA anticipates that additional clarity will be provided about the best means to meet the statutory requirements.
Although this guidance provides recommendations for the development and review of infrastructure SIPs for multiple NAAQS, we are not recommending whether an air agency should or should not make

a single infrastructure SIP submission to address requirements for more than one NAAQS simultaneously. Air agencies should consult with the appropriate EPA Regional Office for advice regarding combining infrastructure SIP submissions for multiple NAAQS.

Please share this guidance with the 

### air agencies in your Region.



### For Further Information

If you have any questions concerning this guidance, please contact 

### H. Lynn Dail, at (919) 541-2363, dail.lynn@epa.gov, or Lisa Sutton, at (919) 541-3450, sutton.lisa@epa.gov.

Attachment

3 The EPA's rules provide that a public hearing must be offered by the air agency, but is only required if a request is made.

# Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements u nder Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)
September 2013

### i

List of Selected Acronyms and Abbreviations

AERMOD A merican M eteorological S ociety/ EPA Regulatory Model AMTIC Ambient Monitoring Technology Information Center AQI Air Quality Index CAA Clean Air Act CMAQ Community Multi

- scale Air Quality [Model] CAMx Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions CFR Code of Federal Regulations CSAPR Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule EPA Environmental Protection Agency EGU Electric generating unit FIP Federal i mplementation p lan FR Federal Register GHG Greenhouse gas es IBR Incorporation by r eference NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NO 2 

### Nitrogen dioxide NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPS National Park Service NSR New Source Review OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Pb Lead PM 2.5 

### F ine particulate matter
ppm Parts per million PSD Prevention of significant deterioration RAVI Reasonably Attributable Visibility Impairment SHL Significant harm level SIP State implementation plan (also, if indicated by the context, a tribal implementation plan) SO 2 

### Sulfur dioxide SSM Startup, shutdown , and malfunction TAR Tribal Authority Rule TIP Tribal Implementation Plan UBR Unavoidable breakdown rule μg/m 3 

### Micrograms per cubic meter

### ii

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

........................................................................................................................... 1 II. General Guidance on Infrastructure SIPs

.......................................................................... 4 Which e lements of CAA 110(a)(2) a ffect i nfrastructure SIPs?

......................................... 4 Developing and Submitting an Infrastructure SIP Submission

......................................... 5 Certifications

................................................................................................................... 7 Determining Completeness of an Infrastructure SIP Submission

.................................... 10 Effect of a Federal Implementation Plan on an Infrastructure SIP

.................................. 12 III. Guidance on Individual Infras tructure SIP Elements

.................................................... 18 Element A – Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission L imits and O ther C ontrol M easures

......... 18 Element B – Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient A ir Q uality Monitoring/D ata S ystem

........ 22 Element C – Section 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for E nforcement of C ontrol M easures and for C onstruction or M odification of S tationary S ources.

............... 23 Elements D(i)(I) and (II) – Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate P ollution Transport

......... 30 Element D(ii) – Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate P ollution A batement and I nternational A ir P ollution

.................................................................................. 35 Element E – Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate R esources and A uthority, C onflict of I nterest, and O versight of L ocal G overnments and R egional A gencies

............... 39 Element F – Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary S ource M onitoring and R eporting

............ 45 Element G – Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency E pisodes

............................................... 47 Element H – Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP R evisions

......................................................... 51 Element I – Section 110(a)(2)(I): Plan R evisions for N onattainment A reas

.................... 52 Element J – Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with G overnment O fficials, P ublic N otification, and PSD and V isibility P rotection

.................................................. 52 Element K – Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air Q uality M odeling and S ubmission of M odeling D ata

................................................................................................... 55 Element L – Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting F ees

........................................................ 56 Element M – Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and P articipation by A ffected L ocal E ntities

..................................................................................................... 56

### 1



### Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)

I. Introduction

Under Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2), each state 1 

### is required to submit a state implementatio n plan ( SIP ) 2 

### that provides for the implementation, maintenance,
and enforcement of each primary or secondary national ambient air quality standard ( NAAQS ). Moreover, section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) require each state to make this new SIP
submissio n within 3 years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. 3 

### This type of SIP submission is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure SIP.”

Section 110(a)(1) generally directs each state to submit an infrastructure SIP to the U.S.
Environmental Protect ion Agency after reasonable notice and public hearing. 4 

### Section 110(a)(2) specifies the substantive elements these submi ssions need to address, as applicable, for th e EPA ’s approval. The subsections of section 110(a)(2) list a variety of requirements, some of which address authority, some of which address substantive requirements, and some of which consist of a combination of authority and substantive requirements. The conceptual purpose of an

1 These CAA sections and this guidance may also apply, as appropriate under the Tribal Authority Rule (TAR) in 40 CFR part 49 , to an Indian tribe that receives a determ ination of eligibility for treatment as a state for purposes of administering a tribal air quality m anagement program under section 110(a) of the CAA

. Tribes should look to the TAR and engage their respective EPA Regional O ffices in discussing how this guidance may impact the development and approvability of their tribal implementation plans ( TI Ps )

. We encourage states to provide outreach and engage in discussions with tribes about their SIPs as they are being developed.

2 In the CAA and in this guidance , “ plan ,” “SIP,” and “T IP” may, depending on context, refer either to (i) all or part of the e xisting state (or tribal) implementation plan ( i.e. , the collection of all submission s previously approved by the EPA as me eting CAA requirements) or (ii) a submission that adds to or modifies the existing plan as directed by section 110 (a) (l).

3 The Admin istrator may specify a shorter period.

4 The EPA rules provide that a public hearing must be offered by the air agency but is only required if a request is made.

### 2

infrastructure SIP submission is to assure that the air agency’s 5 

### SIP contains the necessary structural requirements for the new or revised NAAQS, whether by establishing that the SIP already contains the necessary provisions, by making a substan tive SIP revision to update the SIP, or both. Overall, the infrastructure SIP submission process provides an opportunity for the responsible air agency , the public , and the EPA to review the basic structural requirements of the air agency’s air quality man agement program in light of each new or revised NAAQS.

This non

- binding guidance 6 

### provides recommendations for air agencies’ development
and the EPA's review of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 ozone primary and secondary NAAQS, 7 

### the 2010 primary nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 

### ) NAAQS, 8 

### the 2010 primary sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

### ) NAAQS, 9 

### and the 2012 primary fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 

### ) NAAQS , 10 

### as well as

5 This guidance uses the term “air agency” to generally refer to a state, territory, or tribe that develops and submits an infrastructure SIP or TIP, except when quoting or paraphrasing a CAA section or a EPA regulation that uses the term “state.”

6 None of the recommendations contained in this guidance are binding or enforceable against any perso n, and no part of the guidance or the guidance as a whole constitutes final agency action that could injure any person or represent the consummation of agency decision making. Only final actions taken to approve or disapprove SIP submissions that implement any of the recommendations in this guidance would be final actions for purposes of CAA section 307(b). Therefore, this guidance is not judicially reviewable. This document is not a rule or regulation, and the guidance it contains may not apply to a partic ular situation based upon the individual facts and circumstances. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulation, or other legally binding requirement and is not legally enforceable. The use of non

- mandatory language such as “guidance , ” “recommend , ” “may , ” “ should,” and “can” is intended to describe the EPA’s policies and recommendations. Mandatory terminology such as “must” and “required ” is intended to describe controlling legal requirements under the terms of the CAA and the EPA regulations. N either such language nor anything else in this document is intended to or does establish legally binding requirements in and of itself.

7 The EPA revised the levels of the primary and secondary 8- hour ozone standards to 0.075 parts per million (ppm). 40 CFR 50.15. 73 FR 16436 (Mar ch 27, 2008 ).

8 The EPA revised the primary NO 2 standard by adding a 1

- hour level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), while retaining the previous annual primary and secondary standards. 40 CFR 50.11(b) and (f). 75 FR 6474 (Feb ruary 9, 2010 ) . The EPA has also recently reviewed the air quality criteria and the secondary NAAQS for nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides and retained the current NO 2 and SO 2 secondary standards, 77 FR 20218 (Apr il 3, 2012)

. 9 On June 2, 2010, the EPA established a new 1

- hour SO 2 standard at a level of 75 ppb. 40 CFR 50.17. This rule also provided for the automatic future revocation of the previous annual and 24

- hour SO 2 NAAQS for most areas following 1 year after designat ion under the new NAAQS. 40 CFR 50.4(e). The previous 3

- hou r secondary standard remain s in place indefinitely. 40 CFR 50.5. 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010 ). The EPA has also recently reviewed the air quality criteria and the secondary NAAQS f or nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides and retained the current NO 2 and SO 2 secondar y standards, 77 FR 20218 (Apr il 3, 2012)

. 10 The EPA revised the annual PM 2.5 standard by lowering the level to 12.0 micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ). 78 FR 3086 (Jan uary 15, 2013 ).

### 3

infrastructure SIPs for new or revised NAAQS promulgated in the future. As a result, air agencies may continue to re ly on this guidance for developing infrastructure SIPs for future new or revised NAAQS until this guidance is supplemented or replaced by future guidance . This guidance does not address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which concerns interstate pollution transp ort affecting attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The EPA expects to issue guidance in the future with respect to this section of the CAA

.

Section II of this document provides general guidance for the development of infrastructure SIPs, and section I II presents guidance on the individual elements (and sub

elements ) that constitute an infrastructure SIP.

### 4

II. General Guidance on Infrastructure SIPs

Which e lements of CAA 110(a)(2) a ffect i nfrastructure SIPs?

Infrastructure SIP elements are addressed in portions of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. Under this section, states are required to develop and maintain an air quality management
program that meets various basic structural requirements, including, but not limited to :

e nforceable emiss ion limitations ; an ambient monitoring program ; an enforcement program ; air quality modeling capabilities ; and adequate personnel, resources , and legal authority.

Although, as stated in section I of this document, infrastructure SIPs are required to be
sub mitted within 3 years after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA interprets
section 110(a)(2) to exclude two elements that could not be governed by the 3- year submission
deadline of section 110(a)(1). Both t hese elements pertain to part D, i n title I of the CAA, which addresses SIP requirements and submission deadlines for designated nonattainment areas for a NAAQS. Therefore, the following elements are considered by the EPA to be outside the scope of infrastructure SIP actions: (1) section 1 10(a)(2)(C) to the extent that it refers to permit programs (known as “nonattainment new source review”) under part D; and (2) section 110(a)(2)(I) in its entirety , which addresses SIP revisions for nonattainment areas. Both t hese elements pertain to
SIP r evisions that collectively are referred to as a nonattainment SIP or an attainment plan, which would be due by the dates statutorily prescribed under subparts 2 through 5 under part D, extending as far as 10 years following area designations for some eleme nts. Because the CAA directs states to submit these plan elements on a separate schedule, the EPA does not believe it is necessary for states to include these elements in the infrastructure SIP submission due 3 years after adoption or revision of a NAAQS. While an infrastructure SIP submission is not expected to meet the requirements for a nonattainment SIP, the scope of an infrastructure SIP does not
exclude geographical areas that have been designated nonattainment for the new or revised NAAQS or an earlier NAAQS for the same pollutant. Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) reflect the congressional intent that each air agency have an air quality program, covering all

### 5

geographical areas of the state, that includes the specified air agency authorities, requireme nts, and activities.

T he infrastructure SIP submission requirement does not move up the date for any required submission of a part D plan for areas designated nonattainment for the new NAAQS

. However , in order to cover all parts of the state or area of Indian country, an infrastructure SIP submission may reference pre

- existing SIP emission limits or other rules contained in part D plans for the predecessor to the relevant new or revised NAAQS. It may also include recently adopted emission limits that are intended to be part of the not

- yet -submitted part D plan for the new or revised NAAQS. To avoid confusion about the legal effect of the EPA’s action on an infrastructure SIP submission, we intend to make clear in each final action that EPA approval of the infrastructure SIP submission is solely with regard to whether the submission meets particular infrastructure SIP required elements (as opposed to nonattainment SIP elements). This means that the EPA may approve a submission as meeting the air agency’ s obligation under
section 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) stemming from the particular new or revised NAAQS, without necessarily determining whether the submission meets the applicable requirements for
nonattainment SIPs under part D of title I of the CAA for the same or any other NAAQS

. An approval on this basis will make the referenced or newly submitted SIP emission limits or other rules federally enforceable , and will make clear that the re has been no disapproval of an applicable required SIP submission and th us that there is no federal implementation plan ( FIP ) obligation stemming from CAA section 110(a)(1) or (2). 11



### Developing and Submitting an Infrastructure SIP Submission

Upon the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the infrastructure SIP process
should begin with the air agency’s review of the adequacy of its existing SIP provisions for

11 In general, a finding by the EPA that an air agency has failed to submi t a complete SIP or an action by the EPA to disapprove a SIP or SIP element initiates a FIP obligation, if the submission is required by the CAA. Mandatory sanctions would not apply under CAA section 179 because the failure to submit a SIP is neither with respect to a submission that is required under CAA title I part D nor in response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5). Some of the sections of this guidance document address FIP implications on individual elements more specifically.

### 6

purpose of meeting the infrastructure SIP requirements for the new or revised NAAQS. In order to develop an infrastructure SIP submission, an air agency may cite existin g EPA -approved provisions and/or adopt new or revised statutory authorities and regulations , as necessary, in order to address each element of the infrastructure SIP. Further, with respect to a given NAAQS, an air agency may elect to make multiple submissions; each addressing some but not all elements
or sub

- elements of section 110(a)(2) so long as those submissions meet all of the infrastructure requirements in the aggregate. An air agency may also elect to make one submission to address
infrastructure SIP requirements for multiple NAAQS, if it represents the submission as such during its adoption process and in its transmittal to the EPA. Of course, such a submission to address multiple NAAQS should establish how the air agency believes that the SIP meets each of the requirements of section 110(a)(2), as applicable, for each of the relevant NAAQS.

It is important that the SIP submission demonstrate the authority of the responsible air agency (or agencies, if responsibility for implementation is shared , e.g. , between state and local agencies) to implement the new or revised NAAQS that has triggered the need for the infrastructure SIP submission. This can be an issue for approval if an older underlying legal authority enumerates specific ambient standards by pollutant, indicator, averaging period, level, and/or date of promulgation but does not include the new or revised NAAQS in its list. Air agencies are encouraged to discuss any situations of this type with their respective EPA Regional
Office s

. We encourage each air agency to consult with the appropriate EPA Regional Office, to consider the completeness of the submission, and to consider how the submission satisfies the applicable EPA regulations governing approval of i nfrastructure SIP submissions in 40 CFR part 51 ("Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementation Plans"). The regulations are referenced in this document, some with overlapping provisions across subparts,
and include the following :

• Subpart A – Air Emissions Reporting Requirements

• Subpart F – Procedural Requirements

• Subpart G – Control Strategy

• Subpart H – Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes

### 7

• Subpart I – Review of New Sources and Modifications

• Sub part J – Ambient Air Quality Surveillance

• Sub part K – Source Surveillance

• Sub part L – Legal Authority

• Sub part M – Intergovernmental Consultation

• Sub part O – Miscellaneous Plan Content Requirements

• Sub part P – Prot ection of Visibility

• Sub part Q – Reports Once the air agency has made one or more infrastructure SIP submissions, the EPA will evaluate the submission(s) for completeness. The EPA's criteria for determining completeness of a SIP submission are codified at 40 CFR part 51 appendix V and are discussed in a later subsection of this guidance. An air agency’s familiarity with the EPA 's regulatory completeness criteria will benefit the air agency during the process of developin g an approvable submission.

The EPA’s review can be expedited if a SIP submission include s a detailed explanation
of how the existing EPA -approved SIP in combination with any newly submitted provisions

meets each of the applicable requirement s of section 1 10(a)(2). The EPA expects the submissions to include a description of the correlation between each infrastructure element and an equivalent set of statutory, regulatory, and/or non

- regulatory provisions, as appropriate , that

are part of or (for some elemen ts) are referred to by the existing SIP or the new submission

. (Refer to section III for more detail on submission requirements for each individual element .)
When an air agency’s i nfrastructure SIP submission more clearly identifies the CAA element(s)
bein g met by the SIP and how they are met , the EPA can mo re easily determine whether the
submission is complete and approvable with respect to that element.

Certifications

Where an air agency determines that the provi sions in or referred to by its existing EPA

approved SIP are adequate with respect to a given infrastructure SIP element (or subelement) even in light of the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the air agency may make a SIP submission in the form of a certification. This type of infrastructu re SIP submission may, e.g. ,

### 8

take the form of a letter to the EPA from the Governor or her/his designee containing a "certification" (or declaration) that the already

- approved SI P contains or references provisions that satisfy all or some of the requiremen ts of section 110(a)(2) , as applicable, for purposes of implementing the new or revised NAAQS. In such a case, the submission would not need to include a paper copy of the relevant pre

- existing provisions ( e.g. , rules or statutes). 12 

### Rather, the
certificati on submission should provide citations to the state, local, or tribal statutes, regulations,

or non

- regulatory measures, as appropriate, in or referenced by the already EPA

- approved SIP that meet particular infrastructure SIP element requirements and shoul d include an explanation as
to how those existing provisions meet the relevant requirements. The air agency should consult with its EPA Regional Office on the wording of this type of infrastructure SIP submission prior to making its submission. As for any other SIP submission, an air agency (unless the EPA has approved a request for parallel processing) would need to provide reasonable notice and

12 In contrast, w h ere an air agency’s infrastructure SIP submission seeks the EPA’s approval of or references a new provision ( e.g. , a rule or statute) that has not already been approved , or submitted for approval, into the SIP, a complete SIP submission should include at least one hard copy and an exact duplicate electronic version of the adopted provisions (unless otherwise agreed to by the air agency and the Regional Office). Memorandum dated April 6, 2011, from Janet McCabe, titled “Regional Consistency for the Administr ative R equirements of State Implementa ti on Plan s and the Use of Letter Notices .” The EPA is investigating means to provide for states a method to transmit SIP submissions electronically with no requirement for paper copy submissions.

### 9

o pportunity for comment prior to submitting a certification SIP submission to the EPA. 13 

### Th is
"reasonable notice and public hearing" requirement for approvable infrastructure SIP
submissions appear s at sections 110(a) (1) and the introductory text of section 110(a)(2) , and it has much the same wording as the more general ly applicable procedural requirement at
section 110(l ) of the CAA ("Plan Revisions")

. See CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l). Compliance with this procedural requirement is verified through a n additional certification by
the air agency that a public hearing (if one was re quested ) was held in accordance with the EPA ' s regulatory procedural requirements for public hearings. 14 

### See 40 CFR 51.102 and 40 CFR part 51, appendix V , paragraph 2.1(g).

13 The EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 51 appendix V provide that a public hearing must always be offered and that a hearing must be held if requested. The EPA has received comment that when all of the elements in an existing infrastructure SIP were previousl y subject to a public comment process, including the opportunity for public hearing(s), when they were first submitted for the EPA's approval and incorporation into the SIP, no public comment requirements should apply to a “certification” infrastructure su bmission . The EPA believes this suggested interpretation is inconsistent with the plain text of secti on 110(a)(1) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(1) first provides that “[e]ach State shall, after reasonable notice and public hearings , adopt and submi t to the Administrator, within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a [primary NAAQS] (or any revision thereof) ... a plan [ i.e., infrastructure SIP] which provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcemen t of such primary standard.” The clause “after reasonable notice and public hearings” is most naturally read as imposing that procedure on the immediately following phrase, “adopt and submit,” the direct object of which is the infrastructure SIP itself. Th e suggested interpretation would instead apply the phrase “after reasonable notice and public hearings” to SIP revisions submitted before the promulgation of the new or revised primary NAAQS, despite the complete absence of a reference to those e arlier SIP revisions in section 110(a)(1). Any possible residual ambiguity is removed by the last sentence of s ection 110(a)(1), which requires an infrastructure SIP for a secondary NAAQS to be considered (unless a separate public hearing is provided) “at the hearin g required by the first sentence of this paragraph.” The only possible interpretation of this sentence is that there must be an opportunity for public hearing for the infrastructure SIPs for both the primary and secondary NAAQS. This is a reasonable interp retation because it inform s the public that the SIP is being revised and allow s for comment as to whether the air agency ’s earlier approved regulations also satisfy the relevant obligation stemming from the promulgation of the new or revised NAAQS. Further more, the next footnote explains that the EPA has recently clarified procedures for providing notice and opportunity for comment that reduce the burden on air agencies while still assuring adequate notice to the public.

14 Additional guidance regarding how an air agency may submit a SIP or a SIP revision can be fo und in a memorandum dated April 6, 2011, from Janet McCabe, Deputy Assistan t Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation, to Reg ional Administrators, titled " Regional Consistency for the Administrati ve Requirements of State Implementation Plans a nd the Use of 'Letter Notices'." Refer also to a memorandum dated Nov. 22, 2011, jointly from Janet McCabe, Deputy Assistan t Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation, and Becky Weber, Director, Air and Wa ste Management Division, Region 7, to Air Division Dir ectors, Regions 1- 10, titled " Guidelines for Preparing Letters Submitting State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to EPA and for Preparing Public Notices for SIPs. " These guidance memos identify certain streamlining approaches that are available to an air agency, depending on the situation.

### 10

As with any SIP submission, the EPA’s review can be expedited if a SIP certification
submission includes a detailed explanation of how the existing SIP meets each of the applicable requirement s of section 110(a)(2). This should include a description of the correlation between each infrastructure element and an equivalent set of statutory, regulatory, and/or non

- regulatory provisions, as appropriate , that are part of or are referenced by the existing SIP. When an air agency’s i nfrastructure certification sub mission more clearly identifies the CAA element(s) being met by the SIP and how they are met , the EPA can mo re easily determine whether the
submission is complete and approvable with respect to that element.

Determining Completeness of an Infrastructure SI P Submission

Section 110(k)(2) directs the EPA to take final action on a SIP submission within 1 year after the submission is determined to be complete under section 110(k)(l) . If the EPA makes an affirmative finding that a SIP subm iss i on is complete, the date of the finding establishes the

" completeness date " for the submi ssion. I f , however, the EPA makes no affirmative completeness finding, then the submission is deemed complete by operation of law on the date
6 months after the submi ssion date. A finding that an infrastructure SIP submi ssion is complete does not necessarily mean that the submi ssion is approvable ; the completeness review only
addresses whether the air agency has provided information sufficient to commence formal EPA review for approvability. Refer to 40 CFR part 51 appendix V ("Criteria for Determi ning the Completeness of Plan Submissions " ).

Historically, when reviewing infrastructure SIP submissions, the EPA has operated on the
basis that the elements and sub

- elements of section 110(a)(2) for a given NAAQS are, for the most part, severable. 15 

### The EP A may elect to make a finding of failure to submit in whole or in part, based upon whether a state has made a complete infrastructure SIP submission for the
relevant elements of section 110(a)(2). For a state that has not made any infrastructure SIP

15 See, e.g., 76 FR 81371 (Dec ember 28, 2011 ), “ Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; T exas; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for the 1997 Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS , Final Rule,” where the EPA approved severable portions of infrastructure SIP revisions submitted by Texas

.

### 11

submis sion , the EPA generally will make a finding with respect to all of the relevant elements. 16


### For a state that has made a SIP submission but whose submission is incomplete for some of the relevant elements, the EPA generally will issue a finding of failure to submit only with respect to those elements. This separation makes clear what mandatory EPA duty subsequently exists with respect to each element or subelement. If the EPA has made separate findings as to the completeness of submissions for two or more ele ments ( and sub

- elements ) , the 12

- month statutory deadline for EPA action to approve or disapprove the elements for which the air agency has made a complete submission and the 24

- month statutory deadline for EPA action to promulgate FIPs for incomplete elem ents would apply separately. The EPA intends to continue its practice of acting on infrastructure SIP elements together or separately, as appropriate.

Any SIP submission is deemed by operation of law to be complete six months after submission, unless the EPA has before that date made an affirmative finding that the submission is complete or incomplete. A ny inconsistency between the scope of the submission as descri b ed
in the pre- submission public notice of the SIP submission and the actual submission, or b etween the description of the scope of the submission in the transmittal letter to the EPA and the actual substantive coverage of the submission can create ambigu ity as to which infrastructure SIP elements in fact have been submitted and thus are capable of becoming complete by operation of law ( and triggering a deadline for the EPA ’s action) and which have in fact not yet been
submitted. 17 

### To provide clarity for all parties, air agencies should be very clear and accurate in the wording of their public notices and transmittal letters. It is also advisable for the air agency to discuss this wording with its EPA Regional Office before submissi on. On its part, an EPA Regional Office , in receipt of a submission with any inconsistencies of the type described , should consider steps it can take or ask the air agency to take prior to the six

- month point in order to avoid the creation of ambiguity or an incorrect result as to which SIP elements have actually

16 Under the TAR, a tribe is not subject to deadlines for certain planning requirements (including submission of infrastructure SIPs). See 63 FR 7254 (Feb. 12, 1998) for more information.

17 The EPA’s experience is that the existence of a FIP for PSD or regio nal haze may increase the risk of such inconsistencies occurring inadvertently. FIP

- related aspects are discussed in more detail in the next section of this guidance.

### 12

been submitted and are complete and consequently subject to a statutory deadline for the EPA
action.

Section 2.3 of 4 0 CFR part 51 appendix V waives certain completeness requirements if
the EPA has granted an air agency request for parallel processing of the submission. Under the parallel processing approach, the EPA proposes to approve a draft SIP submission so that final approval can be given more quickly after the final adoption of any new measures as state, local, or tribal law and conclusion of the public comment process normally required for any SIP submission. The EPA intends to grant requests for parallel processing of infrastructure SIP submissions if (1) the only missing elements of complet eness are final state adoption of rules or other provisions and/or conclusion of the public comment process for the SIP submission, including evidence thereof as specified in section 2.3 of appendix V, and (2) the schedule provided by the air agency for th e conclusion of the adoption process and/or the public comment process for the SIP submission is reasonably expeditious

. 18 

### In such a case, the EPA generally would also either make a finding of completeness for the submission or allow it to become complete by operation of law. If both these conditions are not met, the EPA will not grant the parallel processing request. However, the EPA generally will not make a finding of failure to submit a complete SIP but may be required to do so if under a court order.

Ef fect of a Federal Implementation Plan on an Infrastructure SIP

The CAA directs states to submit SIPs to the EPA for approval. In some cases, and for various reasons, the EPA may have previously determined that an air agency had not satisfied a
SIP requirem ent , and so accordingly promulgated a FIP to address the gap in the SIP. The infrastructure SIP process can be affected when an air agency is currently subject to a FIP that is related to an infrastructure SIP element. Therefore, this section describes the potential impact of
pre- existing FIPs on the infrastructure SIP process. This explanation is relevant not only for air

18 With regard to the 1992 EPA Memorandum from John Calcagni, Air Quality Management Divis ion, OAQPS, to EPA Air Division Directors, Regions I through X, “State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,” October 29, 1992, note that the EPA no longer considers the section titled “Requests for Paral lel Process to Meet Act Deadlines” to be its guidance for infrastructure SIPs that are submitted with requests for parallel processing.

### 13

agencies that currently have a FIP in effect but also for air agencies that may be subject to a FIP
in the future.

The EPA ’s obligation to promulgate a FIP is set out in section 110(c) of the CAA. A FIP may be triggered if the EPA takes any of the following actions: (1) the EPA find s that a state has
failed to make a required SIP submi ssion ; (2) the EPA find s that a required submi ssion was incomplete; or ( 3) the EPA disapproves a required SIP submi ssion in whole or in part . If the EPA takes one of these actions, section 110(c) obligates the EPA to promulgate a FIP within 2 years of the action , a deadline that is commonly refer red to as a " FIP clock ." In order to remove the
EPA's FIP obligation, the state must make a SIP submission that meet s the applicable CAA requirements and is approved by the EPA prior to the EPA’s promulgation of a FIP

. Whenever
the EPA promulgates a FIP fo r a state air agency , the FIP rulemaking will identify the specific
CAA provisions that required the promulgation of the FIP, and the FIP will be codified in the appropriate section of 40 CFR part 52.

Under the T AR , a tribe is not subject to deadlines for planning requirements (including submission of infrastructure SIPs)

. 19 

### In general, the concept of failure to submit a complete implementation plan does not apply in tribal situations, and there is no FIP clock started if a tribe
has not submitted an infras tructure T IP. Under the T AR , in the absence of an approved tribal implementation plan the EPA will promulgate a FIP for one or more infrastructure SIP elements when and if it is necessary and appropriate to do so. For example, the EPA has promulgated new

s ource review FIPs to govern permitting of sources in Indian country.

If the EPA has promulgated a FIP, then this means that the EPA has previously determined that the air agency’s SIP did not meet some CAA requirement as of the date of promulgation of that FIP. While the intent and effect of the FIP is to achieve the same air quality protection as the SIP should have achieved, it is the EPA’s interpretation of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) that the EPA cannot give “credit” for the FIP when determining whether an air agency has met any later obligations under these sections.

19 See 63 FR 7254 (February 12, 1998) for more information on the TAR.

### 14

As an example of a FIP that affects the infrastructure SIP submission process, we note that, for various reasons, several states do not have EPA

- approved major source preconstruction
p ermit programs in their SIPs for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) as required by part C of title I of the CAA. The EPA has promulgated a set of PSD rules which establish authority for the EPA (or an air agency to which the EPA has delegated au thority to administer the federal PSD program) 20 

### to issue preconstruction permits to major stationary sources in any area not covered by a PSD program in a SIP. 21 

### The EPA has also promulgated FIPs for each area
without a SIP

- approved PSD program, indicating that this set of federal PSD rules applies in that

area. 22 

### Such a PSD FIP may be relevant to infrastructure Element C, Element J, Element D(i)(II),
and the portion of Element D(ii) related to notification to other states. As another example, the EPA has pro mulgated full or partial FIPs to address reasonably attributable visibility impairment (RAVI) and regional haze for some air agencies. 23 

### A RAVI FIP or a regional haze FIP may be
relevant to Element D(i)(II). These linkages are further discussed in the secti on pertaining t o each of these elements.

The infrastructure SIP process will vary to some extent depending on whether or not the air agency’s SIP submission purports to , and actually does , satisfy infrastructure SIP requirements that are currently being me t by means of a FIP, as explained in the following paragraphs.

Consider an air agency that is currently subject to a FIP that is relevant to certain infrastructure SIP elements makes a submission and states in a general way in the transmittal
letter that the submission satisfies all elements of CAA section 110(a)(2), or if it specifically states that the submission satisfies the elements to which the FIP is relevant, the EPA would

20 The EPA is planning on extending the opportunity for delegation of new source review permitting to qualified tribes.

21 See 40 CFR 52.21 ; Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality.

22 See , e.g ., 40 CFR 52.738 for the PSD program applicable to sources in Illinois.

23 Some of these regional haze FIPs relied o n the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule ( CSAPR), which was subsequently vacated by the U.S. Court Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. EME Homer City Generation, L.L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The Supreme Court has accepted the EPA’s petition for it to review the D.C. Circuit’s decision. Air agencies should consult with their EPA Regional Offices regarding the current status of this litigation and the implications i f any for infrastructure SIP submissions.

### 15

evaluate whether the submission, in fact, contains existing or new substanti ve provisions to
address the section 110(a)(2) requirement presently covered by the FIP. If the submission does not substantively address the elements or sub

- elements presently covered by the FIP, then the EPA Regional Office should encourage the air agenc y to clarify its intentions as to which elements have been submitted. The air agency might then clarify that it has made no submission for certain elements, in which case the EPA would not make a finding of complete submission
for those elements and those elements could not become complete by operation of law. (The EPA may make a finding of failure to submit for those elements.) In the absence of such a clarification, the EPA Regional Office should determine that the air agency has failed to make a complete submission for those elements. Such a finding generally would create an obligation for the EPA to adopt a FIP within 24 months. However, based on the PSD FIP example and to the
extent that the SIP deficiency is addressed by continuing to implement the exi sting PSD FIP, the EPA would have no additional FIP obligation under section 110(c) and the air agency would not have to take any further action for the current FIP

- based permitting process to continue operating. Mandatory sanctions would not apply under C AA section 179 because such a finding
of failure to submit a complete SIP wa s made neither with respect to a submission that is required under CAA title I part D nor in response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5).

To provide further clarity, consider how the following t hree scenarios may prompt
differ ing EPA actions.

First scenario. Under this scenario, the transmittal letter for the infrastructure SIP
submission makes clear that the submission is not intended to satisfy certain elements that can be addressed by continuing to apply the FIP. In this situation, the EPA would make a completeness finding that extends only to the SIP elements actually submitted by the air agency , and a finding that other relevant applicable elements were not submit ted. 24 

### The EPA would be required to take
action only on the elements that were submitted , within 12 months after those elements have been determined to be complete. The overall infrastructure SIP would not be approvable with

24 If, instead, the submission that clearly addressed only some required elements has become complete at the 6

- month point by operation of law, the EPA would still consider the air agency to not have made a complete submission for the missing elements.

### 16

respect to the element s that wer e not submitted, and thus the EPA could only partially approve
the overall infrastructure SIP

. 25



### Second scenario. Under the second scenario, suppose the air agency ma kes a SIP
submission that reference s the existence of a PSD FIP and assert s that the exist ence of the FIP i s a sufficient basis for EPA approval of the submission with respect to these elements. The EPA would not consider the existence of the PSD FIP, even if referenced in the submission, as meeting completeness or approvability criteria for these elements. This is because a FIP is not a state plan and thus cannot serve to satisfy the state ’s obligation to submit a SIP. The EPA’s action on the SIP submission would indicate that the air agency has not met the underlying statutory obligations in s ection 110(a)(2) with respect to Elements C and J . However, when the SIP deficiency is be ing addressed by the existing PSD FIP, the EPA would have no additional FIP obligation under section 110(c) and the state would not have to take any further action for
the current FIP

- based permitting process to continue operating. In this example, t he EPA may be able to approve a state

- developed SIP later , if the air agency develops and submits a SIP meeting
all statutory and regulatory requirements relevant to Elements C and J.

Third scenario. Under this scenario, the transmittal letter for the infrastructure SIP submission explicitly or implicitly indicates that the submission is intended to satisfy all required elements (including the elements that may be add ressed by continuing to apply the existing PSD FIP), and the 6- month point has passed without any clarification by the air agency or any finding by the EPA Regional Office regarding completeness. In this situation, the EPA will generally
treat the submissi on as having been intended to address all the required elements and to be complete for all elements . The 12

- month clock for EPA action on the submission would apply to all elements and the EPA would proceed to disapprove the submission for the same element s with respect to the subject NAAQS that were previously addressed in the context of earlier NAAQS by the FIP. However, similar to the first scenario in which the SIP deficiency has

25 Note : Because an infrastructure SIP is not a required plan submission under part D of title I of the CAA, disapproval of (or a finding of failure to submit) an infrastructure SIP or element thereof does not trigger mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179, unless the submission was required in response to a SIP call under section 110(k)(5) of the CAA.

### 17

already been addressed, to the extent that the existing FIP addresses the deficiency, the EPA would have no additional FIP obligation under section 110(c) and the state would not have to take any further action for the current FIP

- based permitting process to continue operati o ns

. As in the first scenario, the EPA may be able to approve a state

- developed SIP later , if the air agency develops and submits a SIP meeting all statutory and regulatory requirements relevant to
Elements C and J

.

For some state air agencies and some sources in Indian country, there are RAVI or regional haze FIPs in place that may be relevant to the subelement of Element D(i)(II) related to interference with measures by another state to protect visibility. This subelement is sometimes referred to as the “visibility transport” prong or simply, as “prong 4.” Wh ile fully approved RAVI and regional haze SIPs can be relied upon in satisfying this subelement, as explained later in this document, it may be possible in some cases for the element to be satisfied even if there is a FIP in place. Air agencies in this sit uation should read the section on Element D(i)(II) and
consult with their respective EPA Regional Office s on this aspect of their infrastructure SIP
submission.

If a new submission in fact does address the substance of the element or subelement covered by a FIP, the EPA would review the submission and may approve the infrastructure SIP. The EPA may also withdraw the FIP that had been addressing that element or subelement for previous NAAQS , if all relevant CAA requirements are met by the SIP.

### 18

III. Guidance on Individual Infrastructure SIP Elements

The EPA interprets section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) to require infrastructure SIP
submissions to meet the elements of section 110(a)(2), as applicable. As described in s ection II , the EPA interp rets th e portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that pertains to a permitting program that applies to nonattainment NSR within nonattainment areas, and the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(I) that pertain to the specific requirements for attainment plans for des ignated
nonattainment areas , to be outside the scope of the infrastructure SIP requirements because of the separate statutory schedules for area designations and submission of attainment plans provided elsewhere in the CAA. With respect to the remaining el ements of section 110(a)(2),
subsections (A) through (M), the CAA imposes an obligation on states to address those elements, as appropriate, within the 3- year infrastructure SIP submission deadline . This section provides recommendations to air agencies abo ut how to make infrastructure SIP submissions to meet these remaining relevant elements, as applicable.

Element A – Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission L imits and O ther Control M easures
Each such plan shall – (A) include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable

re quirements of this Chapter. To satisfy Element A, an air agency’s submission should identify existing EPA -approved SIP provisions or new SIP provisions that the air agency has adopted and submitted for EPA approval that limit emissions of pollutants releva nt to the subject NAAQS, including precursors of the relevant NAAQS pollutant where applicable. Emissions limitations and other control

measures needed to attain the NAAQS in areas designated nonattainment for th at NAAQS will
be due on a different schedule f rom the section 110 infrastructure elements and will be reviewed and acted upon with regard to approvability for the specific purposes of such an attainment plan
under CAA title I part D through a separate process at a later time

. See “ Which e lements of CAA

### 19

110(a)(2) a ffect i nfrastructure SIPs? ” in section II of this guidance for additional discussion of
this distinction.

There are two issues that relate to Element A for which we are providing general guidance. The se are whether air agencies would need to correct the following in order for the EPA to approve their infrastructure SIP submissions: (1) previously approved emissions limitations that may treat startup, shutdown , and malfunction (SSM) events inconsistently with the CAA as interpreted by our long standing guidance on excess emissions (the EPA’s SSM Policy) and more recently by multiple courts; and (2) previously approved SIP provisions for

" director ' s variance" or "director's discretion " that purport to allow revisions to or exemptions
from SIP emi ssion limit ation s with limited public process or without requiring further approval by the EPA. 26 

### The guidance provided here is consistent with the EPA interpretations articulated in provisions in several recent EPA final actions on SIPs

. 27 , 28



### In recent inf rastructure SIP actions, the EPA has drawn an important distinction with respect to SSM issues and director’s discretion issues in this particular context. The EPA does not interpret section 110(a)(2) to require air agencies and the EPA to address potentia lly deficient

26 For further description of EPA ' s SSM Policy , see , e.g., a memorandum dated September 20, 1999, titled, " State Impl ementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown, " from Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. Also, the EPA issued a proposed action on February 12, 2013, titled “State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Start up, Shutdown and Malfunction.” This rulemaking responds to a petition for rulemaking filed by the Sierra Club that concerns SSM provisions in 39 states’ SIPs. It clarifies and restates the EPA’s SSM SIP policy.

27 See , e.g., a SIP call issued to Utah ( 72 FR 21639, Apr. 18, 2010 ) concerning treatment of malfunction events under Utah's "unavoidable breakdown rule" (UBR). The EPA determined that Utah’s SIP was substantially inadequate because its UBR allowed operators of CAA

- regulated facilities to avoid enforc ement actions when they suffer an unexpected and unavoidable equipment malfunction. In this SIP call, the EPA called on Utah to promulgate a new UBR that conforms to the EPA’s interpretation of the CAA. Litigants maintained that the SIP call was arbitrary and capricious and asked the Tenth Circuit Court to vacate it. The Court denied the petition for review of the Utah SIP call. U.S. Magnesium, LLC v. EPA, U.S. Court of Appeals, No. 09- 1269, January 14, 2011.

28 As another example that presents the EPA's po sition on infrastructure SIPs with respect to this issue, see the preamble language in the final rule published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2011 (76 FR 41075) , "Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; Indiana; Michigan; Minnesota; Ohio; Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 1997 8

- Hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards." In section II of the preamble, the E PA described at length the position summarized in this guidance regarding existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of SSM and existing provisions related to "director's variance" or "director's discretion."

### 20

pre- existing SIP provisions of these types in the context of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission. The EPA considers this a reasonable interpretation of the CAA in such a context.
The EPA notes that it has alternative tools in the CAA t o address existing SIP deficiencies of this type, in appropriate circumstances.

However , any “new” provisions in the infrastructure SIP submission that are relevant to SSM ( e .g., any newly created enforcement discretion provisions, affirmative defense prov isions, or special emissions limitation s that apply during SSM periods but that have not already been approved by the EPA) should be consistent with the EPA’s policy on what types of SSM provisions are permissible in SIPs under the CAA. For instance, new provisions as part of an approvable SIP submi ssion can not allow a n air director the discretion to determine whether an instance of excess emissions is a violation of an emission limitation, because such a
determination could bar the EPA and citizens from enforcing applicable requirements . Similarly, new provisions in a SIP for the exercise of enforcement discretion with regard to SSM events may only apply to state or tribal government personnel so that they do not limit enforcement by
th e EPA or citizens. E xcess emissions , including those occurring during SSM periods, might prevent attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and compliance with other applicable CAA requirements . The EPA view s all periods of excess emissions as violations of t he applicable
emission limitation. Therefore, if an infrastructure SIP contains provisions that have not already been approved by the EPA , and that impermissibly exempt from enforcement excess emissions that may occur at a facility during SSM periods or th at otherwise are inconsistent with the EPA’s interpretation of the CAA as outlined in its SSM P olicy, the EPA will not propose to fully approve the submission as meeting section 110(a)(1) and (2) requirements

. With regard to “director’s discretion” to rev ise emission limits, any " new " provisions in
the infrastructure SIP submission ( i.e., provisions that have not already been approved by the
EPA ) should be consistent with the EPA' s interpretation of the CAA as expressed in its polic y regarding director ' s d iscretion

. 29

29 See 77 FR 34309 and 34311 (June 11, 2012 ). “ Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee; 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24

- Hour Fine Particulat e National Ambient Air Quality Standards , Proposed Rule.”

### 21

The EPA will continue to consider for approval, as it has in recent final SIP actions, 30 

### SIPs that provide for a limited affirmative defense to civil penalties for excess emissions occurring during properly demonstrated and documented malfunction periods.

In summary, the EPA in recent final actions on infrastructure SIP submissions has
maintain ed that the CAA does not require that new infrastructure SIP submissions address
existin g potentially inadequate provisions concerning SSM or director's discretion in order to be approved as meeting the CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) requirements tr iggered by the new or revised NAAQS

. The EPA’s stated position has been that it can approve an infrastructure SIP submission, even if the infrastructure SIP may incorporate by reference previously approved SIP provisions that are or may not be consistent with the EPA’s SSM Policy and its policy on
director’s discretion to revise emission limits. The EPA articulated this position in a number of infrastructure SIP actions taken in 2011, noting in the preambles for those actions that existing provisions for SS M and director ' s discretion may be dealt with separately, outside the context of acting on a n air agency ’s new infrastructure SIP submission. 31 

### However, if an air agency submits
an infrastructure SIP submission that would create a new SIP provision related to SSM that is inconsistent with the EPA’s interpretation of the requirements of the CAA, the EPA may disapprove it. We intend to continue this practice and affirm it as part of this guidance.

30 See 75 FR 68989 at 68992 (Nov ember 10, 2010 ) , “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas: Excess Emissions During Startup, Shutdown, Maintenance, and Malfunction Activities.” In Luminant Generation Co. v. EPA, No. 10- 60934, 2012 WL 4841615 (5 th Cir. 2012), the Court upheld the EPA’s approval of an affirmative defense for malfunctions and disapproval of an affirmative defense provision in a SIP submission that pertained to “planned activities,” which included startup, shutdown, and maintenance. The EPA disapproved this provision, in p art because it provided an affirmative defense for maintenance. The Court rejected challenges to the EPA’s disapproval of this provision, holding that under Chevron step 2, the EPA’s interpretation of the CAA was reasonable. See also the Federal Register n otice signed on February 12, 2013, restating the EPA’s policy on affirmative defense provisions and proposing 36 SIP calls to correct affirmative defense and other SSM

- related SIP provisions.

31 As one example of preamble language that presents the EPA's po sition on infrastructure SIPs with respect to this issue, see the final rule published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2011 (76 FR 41075), "Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; Indiana; Michigan; Minnesota; Ohio; Wis consin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 1997 8- Hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards." In section II of the preamble, the EPA described at length the position summarized here regarding existing provisions related to excess emi ssions during periods of SSM and existing provisions related to "director's variance" or "director's discretion."

### 22

Element B – Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient A ir Quality Monitoring/Data S ystem
Each such plan shall – (B) p rovide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures ne cessary to –

(i ) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator

.

To meet Element B requirements, the best practice for a n air agency submitting an
infrastructure SIP would be to submit, for inclusion into the SIP (if not already part of the SIP), the statutory or regulatory provisi ons that provide the air agency or official with the authority and responsibility to perform the actions listed in the bullets below along with a narrative explanation of how the provisions meet the requirements of this element. 32



### • Monitor air quality for t he relevant NAAQS pollutant(s) at appropriate locations in

a ccordance with the EPA's ambient air quality monitoring network requirements. See the EPA's Ambient Monitoring Technology Information Center (AMTIC) web site , 40 CFR part 53 ("Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods") , and 40 CFR part 58 ("Ambient Air Quality Surveillance")

. See also 40 CFR 51.190 (referencing 40 CFR part 58). 33



### • Submit dat a to the EPA' s Air Quality System (AQS) in a timely manner in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. Under 40 CFR part 58, sub part B ("Monitoring Network") , for example, see 40 CFR 58.16 ("Data submittal and archiving requirements" ).

• Provide to the EPA Regional Office infor mation regarding air quality monitoring activities, including a d escription of how the air agency has complied with monitoring requirements, a nd an explana tion of any proposed changes to the network

.

32 The EPA recognizes that some air agencies may have general authorizing provisions that do not specifically enumerate specific activities but do implicitly authorize the air agency to perform such activities, in which case inclusion of those provisions would meet the intent of this best practice.

33 Note that despite the recent reorganization of 40 CFR part 58 without a corresponding conforming update of the

cross

- reference to part 58 in 40 CFR 51.190 , all requirements under part 58 must still be met.

### 23

Submission of annual monitoring network plan s consistent with the EPA' s ambient air monitoring regulations is one way of providing this information

. Under 40 CFR part 58, subpart B, see , e.g. , 40 CFR 58.10 ("Annual monitoring network plan and periodic network assessment" ).

• Obtain the EPA ’s approval of any planned changes to monitoring sites or to the network plan , consistent with applicable requirements in 40 CFR 58.14 (“System Modification”)

. If an air agency chooses not to include the relevant statute or regulation in its SIP, then the air agency should provide a reference or citation to the authority provision s along with a narrative explanation of how the provisions meet the requirements of this element, as well as a copy of the relevant authority to accompany the SIP a s required by 40 CFR 51.231.
For any new or revised NAAQS, the infrastructure SIP submission should provide assurance that the state will meet changes in monitoring requirements related to the new or revised NAAQS.

Element C – Section 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for E nforcement of Control M easures and for C onstruction or M odification of Stationary S ources.
Each such plan shall – (C) i nclude a program to provide for the enforcement of the measures descri bed in subparagraph (A), and regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that national ambient air quality standards are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D of this Subchapter

. This element consists of three sub

- elements ; enforcement, state

- wide regulation of new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources ; and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C ( i.e ., the major source

### 24

PSD program). 34 , 35 

### While this section outlines the gene ral requirements for approvability of an infrastructure SIP with respect to Element C, air agencies previously subject to FIPs with respect to this element for major source PSD in the context of earlier NAAQS have the option , as discussed in more detail be low and in Section II: “ Which e lements of CAA 110(a)(2) a ffect
i nfrastructure SIP s? ”, to remain subject to those FIPs as the remedy for infrastructure SIP
deficiencies for a new or rev i sed NAAQS

.

Enforcement : To satisfy this subelement, an infrastructure S IP submission should identify the statutes, regulations, or other provisions in the existing SIP (or new provisions that are submitted as part of the infrastructure SIP to be incorporated into the SIP) that provide for
enforcement of those emission limits and control measures that the air agency has identified in its submission for purposes of satisfying Element A (Emissions limits and other control measures).

Regulation of minor sources and minor modifications : To satisfy the subelement for preconstruction regulation of the modification and construction of minor stationary sources and the minor modification of major stationary sources, an infrastructure SIP submission should identify the existing EPA

- approved SIP provisions and/or include ne w provisions that govern the minor

source pre- construction program that regulates emissions of the relevant NAAQS pollutant(s). The EPA rules addressing SIP requirements for pre

- construction regulatory programs that apply
to minor sources and minor modific ations are at 40 CFR sections 51.160 through 51.164

.

34 The terms " major " and " minor " categorize a stationary source or a modification of a stationary source , for NSR applicability purposes, in terms of an annual emissions rate (tons per year) or change in annual emission rate for a pollutant. The pre

- construction minor NSR program g enerally applies to minor stationary source s and minor modification projects a t major stationary sources. A major “stationary source” is defined in the applicable PSD or nonattainment NSR regulations. Some air agencies exempt small minor sources and modifications from pre

construction regulatory requirements.

35 As explained in sect ion II of this document, the EPA considers evaluation of permit provisions that implement CAA title I part D (the major source nonattainment NSR program) to generally be outside the scope of infrastructure SIP actions . Hence, to address the sub

- element reg arding major source permitting, only the major source permitting program applicable in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable is an issue. In contrast, because part D does not impose any special requirements for permitting of minor sources in nonattainment areas, the infrastructure SIP due 3 years after a new or revised NAAQS should address Element C with regard to minor sources in unclassifiable, attainment, and nonattainment areas, without regard to designation.

### 25

Preconstruction PSD permitting of major source s: 36 

### To satisfy the subelement regarding the PSD program required by CAA title I part C, an infrastructure SIP submission should demonstrate that one or more air agencies has the authority to implement a comprehensive PSD permit program under CAA title I part C, for all PSD

- subject sources located in areas that are designated attainment or unclassifiable for one or more NAAQS. The infrastructure SIP
submission should also identify the existing SIP provisions that govern the major source PSD program. As explained in more d etail below, to be approvable the infrastructure SIP submission should also address any new or revised PSD permit ting program requirements for which the deadline for SIP submissions has passed as of the date of EPA’s proposed action on the
infrastructure s ubmission

. The SIP permitting provisions that implement CAA title I part C (the PSD program) govern preconstruction review and permitting of any new or modified major stationary sources of air pollutants regulated under the CAA (as well as any precursors to the forma tion of those pollutants when identified for regulation by the Administrator) in areas designated as attainment or unclassifiable. The EPA rules providing the minimum requirements for approvable PSD programs can be found generally at 40 CFR 51.166 (general provisions for PSD programs approved in SIPs) and 40 CFR 51.307 (specific provisions pertaining to new source review for potential impacts on air quality related values in Class I areas).

The EPA interprets Element C to mean that each infrastructure SIP submission for a particular NAAQS would need to demonstrate that the air agency has a complete PSD permit ting program in place covering the requirements for all re gulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHG), in order to demonstrate that the SIP meets Element C. 37



### Element C requires that each infrastructure SIP contain a permit ting program “as required by part C.” CAA title I part C is applicable to all pollutants subject to regulation under the CAA.
See , e.g. , CAA section 165(a)(4). There is no specific language in the last clause of Element C

36 The discussion here of the PSD por tion of Element C also applies in full to the PSD portion of Element J.

37 See , e.g. , 77 FR 64737 (Oct ober 23, 2012 ) , “Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Nevada; Infrastructure Requirements for Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter.”

### 26

that restricts its application to only those provisions of CAA title I part C that pertain to the particular new or revised NAAQS addressed by the particular infrastructure SIP action. Because the scope of CAA title I part C is comprehensive (covering all pollutants subject to regulation under the CAA, including GHG), the EPA likewise reads the unrestricted referenc e to CAA
title I part C in Element C to mean that this provision has the same scope as CAA title I part C itself. Thus, an infrastructure SIP submission for any one of the recently revised NAAQS must
be “ comprehensive ” in that it would need to meet all CAA title I part C requirements for other regulated NSR pollutants as well.

The broad scope of Element C with respect to major source PSD permitting raises the question of how the EPA will proceed when the timing of requirements for multiple , related SIP
submissions ( e.g. , for mandatory PSD SIP revisions) impact s the ability of the air agency and the
EP A to address certain substantive issues in the infrastructure SIP submission in a reasonable
fashion. It is appropriate for the EPA to take int o consideration the timing of related requirements for SIP submissions in determining what an air agency can reasonabl y be expected
to have addressed in an infrastructure SIP submission for a NAAQS at the time when the EPA

acts on such submission. The EPA does not consider it reasonable to interpret Element C to require the EPA to propose to disapprove an air agency’s infrastructure SIP submission because
the air agency had not submitted a PSD permit ting program revision that was not yet due as of
the date of EPA’s proposed action. Because it would be unreasonable to propose such a disapproval, the EPA likewise does not consider it reasonable to take final disapproval action
under such circumstances . In other words, the EPA interprets these CAA sections to allow the EPA to approve an infrastructure SIP submission for the major source PSD permitting
subelement of Element C (and Element J) provided that the EPA has already approved or is simultaneously approving the air agency’s SIP submission(s) 38 

### with respect to all structural PSD permit ting program revision requirement s that were due under the EPA regulations or the CAA
on or before the date of the EPA’s proposed action on the infrastructure SIP submi ssion. To adopt a different approach , by which the EPA could not act on an infrastructure SIP or at least

38 These submissions may be submitted separately or together with the infrastructure SIP submission on which the EPA is proposing action.

### 27

could not approve an infrastructure SIP whenever there was any impending revision to the PSD permit ting program regulations required by another collat eral rulemaking action , would result in regulatory gridlock and make it impracticable or impossible for the EPA to act on infrastructure
SIPs if the EPA had recently revised its PSD permitting regulations but the submission required by such revisions was n ot yet due

. The EPA believes that such an outcome would be an
unreasonable reading of the statutory process for the infrastructure SIPs contemplated in
sections 110(a)(1) and (2).

Consequently, the EPA generally plans to proceed as follows. The EPA may propose to approve an infrastructure SIP submission with respect to the major source PSD permitting
subelement of Element C if the air agency has submitted, in a timely manner, all st ructural PSD permitting program provisions for which the SIP submission deadline has passed as of the date of the proposed approval. 39 

### Subject to consideration of public comments on the proposed action, the EPA believes it may proceed to fully approve an infrastructure submission with respect to
Element C if all such structural PSD permitting program submissions have been or are being simultaneously fully approved into the SIP. The EPA does not intend to treat any structural PSD permitting program requirement for which the SIP submission deadline falls after the date of the EPA’s proposed action on the infrastructure SIP as a required criterion for approval of the infrastructure SIP. The PSD permitting program revisions treated in this manner may include not only those related to the new or revised NAAQS whose promulgation has triggered the need for a new infrastructure SIP submission but also those related to any other regulated NSR pollutants as required by CAA title I part C and 40 CFR part 51.166. 40



### If an air agency lacks a PSD permitting program in its existing EPA

- approved SIP addressing all regulated NSR pollutants, and it is already subject to a FIP, then major stationary

39 Structural PSD pro gram provisions include provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and NSR pollutants, including GHG. Structural PSD program provisions do not include provisions which under 40 CFR 51.166 are at the option of the air agency, such as the option for air agencies to provide grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2012 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

40 See , e.g. , “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Mississippi: New Source Review – Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards ,” 77 FR 59095 (Sept ember 26, 2012) , a recent infrastructure SIP approval action that address ed a state’s PSD SIP status with respect to the 200 8 PM 2.5 NSR Rule.

### 28

sources within its jurisdiction are subject to the federal PSD permitting requirem ents in 40
CFR 52.21 . Some air agencies are subject to a FIP for PSD permitting of all regulated NSR pollutan ts, and fewer air agencies are subject to a FIP for PSD permitting that is limited to particular pollutants (such as GHG). For sources subject to a pre

- existing FIP for PSD permitting, either the EPA Regional Office issue s PSD permits or , in instances wher e federal authority is delegated by the EPA Regional Office to it, the state or local air agency issue s the PSD permits under the FIP (and tribes might be delegated in the same manner in the future)

. The EPA recognizes that some states have indicated a preference to operate under an EPA

administered PSD permitting program. M any air agencies have for some time been delegated the authority to implement a PSD FIP program. Other states have implemented their SIP -approved
PSD permitting program. When a n area is already subject to a FIP for PSD permitting (whether

or not a state, local, or tribal air agency has been delegated federal authority to implement the PSD FIP), the air agency may choose to continue to rely on the PSD FIP to have permits issued pursuant to the FIP. If so, the EPA could not fully approve the infrastructure SIP submission with respect to Element C; however, the EPA anticipates that there would be no adverse consequences to the air agency or to sources from this lack of full approval of the infrastructure SIP.
M andatory sanctions would not apply under CAA section 179 because the failure to submit a
PSD SIP is neither with re spect to a submission that is required under CAA title I part D, nor in response to a SIP call unde r CAA section 110(k) (5). This relationship between a pre

- existing FIP and the EPA’s action on an infrastructure SIP element is also explained in section II of this
document.

The EPA has maintain ed that the CAA allows the EPA to approve infrastructure SIP
submission s that do not implement the NSR Reform R ules promulgated mainly in 2002

. 41 

### We
articulated this position in a number of infrastructure SIP final actions taken in 2011, noting in the preambles for those actions that existing SIP provisions for PSD programs that have not

41 The NSR rules have undergone a series of improvements over many years. Significant reforms were promulgated in a rulemaking commonly referred to as the "2002 NSR Reform Rules," which were published in the Federal Register at 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002).

### 29

addressed the NSR Reform R ules may be dealt with separately, outside the context of acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP. 42



### Air agencies may wish to reduce the need to amend their major source PSD rules after each new or revised NAAQS by writing them so that their coverage of pollutants and NAAQS automatically updates with the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, and/or so that the specific PSD program requirements automatically update to stay matched with the federal PSD program requirements in 40 CFR 52.21. Depending on state or tribal law provisions, it may be possible to do one or both of these through the use of “rolling” incorporation by reference (IBR). An advantage of the rolling IBR approach is that it enables air agencies to quickly implem ent requirements of the CAA that may be immediately applicable to regulated sources upon the effective date of the new or revised NAAQS and before the deadline for air agencies to make infrastructure SIP submissions to the EPA. For example, one of the PSD program requirements is the requirement under section 165(a)(3) of the CAA that a permit applicant show it will not cause or contribute to a violation of any NAAQS. This requirement generally 43 

### applies to any NAAQS in effect on the date a PSD permit decisio n is issued and is not deferred until an infrastructure SIP submission is due. Where permissible under state or tribal law, a rolling IBR approach is advisable to enable air agencies to implement this type of CAA requirement immediately upon the effective date of a NAAQS, thus ensuring that there is a mechanism in place for regulated sources in the state or an area of Indian country to meet CAA requirements resulting from a new or revised NAAQS as soon as it become s applicable.

42 As one example of the preamble language that presents the EPA's position on infrastructure SIPs with respect to the issue of NSR Reform, see the final rule published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2011, "Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; Indiana; Michigan; Minnesota; Ohio; Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 1997 8

- Hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards." 76 FR 41075. In section II of the preamble, the EPA applied the described position to existing provisions for PSD programs in light of the "NSR Reform Rules" that we promulgated mainly in 2002; see 67 FR 80186 (Dec. 31, 2002).

43 In some circumstances, th e EPA has authorized “grandfathering” of pending PSD permit applications. See 78 FR 3086, January 15, 2012.

### 30

Elements D(i)(I) and (II) – Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate Pollution T ransport
Each such plan shal l – (D) contain adequate provisions – (i) pro hibiting, consistent with the provisions of this subchapter , any source or other type of emissions activit y within the S tate from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which wil l –

(I) c ontribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other S tate with respect to any such national primary or secondary a mbient air quality standard, or

(II) i nterfe re with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other S tate under part C of this subchapter to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility

.

Section 110(a)(2) (D)(i) contains two subsec tions : (D)(i)(I) and (D)(i)(I I ).
S ection 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) addresses any emissions activity in one state that contributes significantly to nonattainment, or interferes with maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. The EPA sometimes refers to these requ irements as prong 1 (significant contribution to nonattainment) and prong 2 (interference with maintenance). Neither
prong 1 nor prong 2 is addressed in this guidance. This guidance does not modify any prior statements by the EPA with respect to prongs 1 and 2 and does not address, discuss, or in any way alter any requirements set forth in either prong.

Element D(i)(II) requires SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required of any other state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or from interfering with measures required of any
other state to protect visibility (referring to visibility in Class I areas). The EPA sometimes refers to these requirements under subsection 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as prong 3 (interference with PSD) and prong 4 (interference with visibility protection). The EPA interprets section 110(a)(2) to require air agencies to address prong 3 and prong 4 as part of each infrastructure SIP su bmission.

Prong 3 : Under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II ), SIPs would need to have provisions prohibiting emissions that would interfere with measures required to be in any other air agency’s

### 31

SIP under part C of the CAA to prevent significant deterioration of a ir quality. Because part C requires an air agency’s PSD permit ting program to address all pollutants subject to regulation under the CAA, the EPA interprets prong 3 to mean that the infrastructure SIP submission should have provisions to prevent emissions of any regulated pollutant from interfering with any other air agency’s comprehensive PSD permitting program, in addition to the new or revised NAAQS that is the subject of the infrastructure submission. Moreover, the i nfrastructure SIP should address the potential for such interference by sources throughout the jurisdiction of the air
agency.
One way to meet prong 3 (” interference with PSD ”) , specifically with respect to those
in

- state sources and pollutants that are s ubject to PSD permitting, is through an air agency’s confirmation in its infrastructure SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications are subject to a comprehensive EPA

- approved PSD permitting program in the SIP that applies to all regulate d NSR pollutants and that satisfies the requirements of the EPA’s PSD implementation rule(s), as discussed above for purposes of Element C. This is because in order to be approved by the EPA, a major source PSD permitting program would need to fully
consid er source impacts on air quality in other states.

In

- state sources not subject to PSD for any one or more of the pollutants subject to regulation under the CAA because they are in a nonattainment area for a NAAQS related to those particular pollutants may also have the potential to interfere with PSD in an attainment or unclassifiable area of another state. The EPA cannot ignore this potential when reviewing an infrastructure SIP for this prong. The EPA will consider and may rely on an air agency’s EPA

appr oved nonattainment NSR provisions in determining whether a SIP satisfies prong 3 with respect to sources located in areas subject to nonattainment NSR for any one or more pollutants

### 32

and thus not subject to PSD permitting for those NAAQS pollutants. 44 

### SIP r evisions to address nonattainment NSR requirement s for any new or revised NAAQS are, however, due on a separate timeframe under section 172(b) of the CAA and are not subject to the timeframe for
submission of infrastructure SIPs under section 110(a)(1). Th erefore, a fully approved nonattainment NSR program with respect to any previous NAAQS may generally be considered by the EPA as adequate for purposes of meeting the requirement of prong 3 with respect to sources and pollutants subject to such program. Als o, if an air agency makes a submission indicating that i t issues permits pursuant to 40 CFR part 51 a ppendix S in a nonattainment area because a nonattainment NSR program for a particular NAAQS pollutant has not yet been approved by the EPA for that area, that permitting program may generally be considered by the EPA as adequate for purposes of meeting the requirements of prong 3 with respect to sources and pollutants subject to such program. Such reliance for infrastructure purposes would not constitute
ap proval under CAA title I part D, and the EPA will explain this in the preambles to any proposed or final actions that rely on this rationale to support the conclusion that prong 3 is
satisfied

. For an air agency without an EPA

- approved major source PSD pr ogram and/or, where required, an EPA

- approved nonattainment NSR program, it may still be possible for the EPA to also find, given the facts of the situation, that other SIP provision s and/ or physical condition are adequate to prohibit interference with other air agencies’ measures to prevent significant deterioration of air quality.

Prong 4 : Under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), an infrastructure SIP submission cannot be approved with respect to prong 4 (visibility transport) until the EPA has issued final ap proval of
SIP provisions that the EPA has found to adequately address any contribution of that state ' s

44 Refer, e.g., to a memorandum issued by William T. Harnett, Director, OAQPS/AQPD, " Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8

- Hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards," dated August 15, 2006. According to that 2006 Harnett memo, in section 5, “[t]he implementation of a PSD and NNSR permitt ing program in each state serves to prevent significant deterioration in neighboring states and thus largely satisfies the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) of the CAA.” Nevertheless, nonattainment

- related provisions, although identified in secti on 110(a)(2) of the CAA, are considered by the EPA to be outside the scope of infrastructure SIP actions, as discussed in section II of this guidance.

### 33

sources to impacts on visibility program requirements in other states. The EPA interprets this prong to be pollutant

- specific, such that the infrastructu re SIP submission need only address the potential for interference with protection of visibility caused by the pollutant (including precursors) to which the new or revised NAAQS applies. Carbon monoxide does not affect visibility, so an infrastructure SIP for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need only state this fact in order to meet prong 4. S ignificant impacts from lead ( Pb ) emissions from stationary sources are expected to be limited to short distances from the source and most, if

not all, Pb stationary sources are located at distances from Class I areas such that visibility impacts would be negligible. Although Pb can be a component of coarse and fine particles, Pb generally comprises a small fraction of coarse and fine particles. Furt hermore, when evaluating
the extent to which Pb could impact visibility, Pb

- related visibility impacts were found to be insignificant ( e.g., less than 0.10 percent). 45 

### Although we anticipate that Pb emissions will contribute only negligibly to visibility impairment in Class I areas, the air agency’s submission of an infrastructure SIP for a new or revised Pb NAAQS should include an explanation in support of the air agency’s conclusion (and, if appropriate, should include control measures in its submission to limit impacts in other states).

One way in which prong 4 may be satisfied for any relevant NAAQS is through a n air agency’s confirmation in its infrastructure SIP s ubmission that it has an approved regional haze SIP that fully meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308 or 51.309. 40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309 specifically require that a state participating in a regional planning process include all measures
needed to achieve its apportionment of emission reduction obligations agreed upon through that
process. See , for example, 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3)(ii). A fully approved regional haze SIP will
ensure that emissions from sources under an air agency’s jurisdiction are not interfer ing with

measures required to be included in other air agencies’ plans to protect visibility

. However, if the air agency has submitted a 5- year progress report SIP that indicates that the regional haze SIP is deficient with respect to ensuring reasonable p rogress toward natural visibility conditions in a

45 Memorandum from Mark Schmidt, OAQPS, “Ambient Pb’s Contribution to Class I Area Visibility Impairment,” June 17, 2011.

### 34

Class I area in another state, the infrastructure SIP submission w ould need to explain how nevertheless the overall SIP satisfies prong 4.

After the next round of regional haze SIPs become due in 2018, the EPA may find it appropriate to supplement the guidance provided here regarding the relationship between regional haze SIPs and prong 4.

A number of air agencies do not have fully approved regional haze SIPs in place and instead have FIPs in place , which cannot be relied upon to satisfy prong 4. 46 

### T he presence of a regional haze FIP does not ne ce ssarily require disapproval of the infrastructure SIP for prong 4. A state air agency may elect to satisfy prong 4 by providing , as an alternative to relying on its regional haze SIP alone, a demonstration in its infra s tructure SIP submission that emissions within its jurisdiction do not interfere with other air agencies’ plans to protect visibility. Such a n infrastructure SIP submission would need to include meas ures to limit visibility -impairing pollutants and ensure that the reductions conform with any mutually agreed regional haze reasonable progress goals for mandatory Class I areas in other states. 47



### If the EPA determines the SIP to be incomplete or partially disapproves an infrastructure SIP submission for prong 4, a FIP obligation will be created. I f a FIP or FIPs are already in effect
that correct all regional haze SIP deficiencies , there will be no additional practical consequences from the partial disappro val for the affected air agency , the sources within its jurisdiction , or the

46 Some approved regional haze SIPs have relied on the fact that electric generating units (EGUs) in the state must comply with a FIP previously promulgated by the EPA as part of the CSAPR to satisfy best achievable retrofit technology requi rements for EGUs. In this limited way, if a regional haze SIP of this type has itself been approved by the EPA, it is possible for FIP provisions to be taken into account by the EPA in determining whether an infrastructure SIP may be approved for prong 4.

47 As examples of the possibility that an infrastructure SIP submission can satisfy prong 4 even though the regional haze SIP has not been fully approved, see : (i) “Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; State of Colorado; Interstate Trans port of Pollution Revisions for the 1997 8

- Hour Ozone and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: ‘Interference With Visibility’ Requirement – Final Rule”, 76 FR 22036 (April 20, 2011); and (ii) “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky; 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards – Final Rule,” 78 FR 14681 (March 7, 2013). In the first action, the EPA approved the infrastructure SIP submission with respect to prong 4 without having approved a regional haze SIP, based on the state’s demonstration that it does not interfere with other states’ measures to protect visibility through their regional haze SIPs. In the second proposed action, the EPA approved Kentucky’s submission with respect to prong 4 based on the partial approval of its regional haze SIP and its CSAPR SIP.

### 35

EPA. The EPA will not be required to take further action with respect to prong 4 because the FIP already in place would satisfy the requirements with respect to prong 4

. In additi on, unless the infrastructure SIP submission is required in response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5), mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179 would not apply because the deficiencies are not with re spect to a submission that is required under C AA title I part D. Nevertheless, the EPA continues to encourage all air agencies that may be subject to full or partial FIP s for regional haze requirements to consider adopting additional SIP provisions that would allow the EPA to fully approve the regional haze SIP and thus to withdraw the FIP and approve the infrastructure SIP with respect to prong 4.

Element D(ii) – Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution A batement and International A ir P ollution

Each such plan shall – (D) contain adequate provisions – (ii) insuring compliance with the applicable requirements of sections 126 and 115 (relating to interstate and international pollution abatement)

. Element D(ii) is satisfied when an infrastructure SIP e nsures compliance with the applicable requirements of CAA sections 126(a), 126(b) and (c), and 115.

Interstate Pollution Abatement : Sec. 126. (a ) Each applicable implementation plan shall – (1) require each major proposed new (or modified) source –

(A) subject to part C (relating to significant deterioration of air quality) or (B) which may significantly contribute to levels of air pollution in excess of the national ambient air quality standards in any air quality control region outside the State in which such source intends to locate (or make such modification), to provide written notice to all nearby States the air pollution levels of which may be affected by such source at least sixty days prior to the date on which commencement of construction is to be permitted by the State providing notice, and (2) identify all major existing stationary sources which may have the impact described in paragraph (1) with respect to new or modified sources and provide notice to all nearby States of the identity of such sources not later than three months after the date of enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977.

### 36

Under section 126(a)(1) of the CAA , each SIP would need to c ontain provisions requiring

ea ch new or modified major source required by CAA title I part C to be subject to PSD to no tify neighboring air agencies of potential impacts from the source. Consistent with EPA’s interpretation of part C with respect to the requirements of Element C, t he notification requirements apply to potential impacts from all PSD

- regulated pollutants, no t only the new or revised NAAQS for which the infrastructure SIP submission is being made. Section 126(a)(1) also requires that each SIP contain provisions requiring each new or modified major source to provide similar notification if it may significantly contribute to levels of pollution in excess of a NAAQS in any air quality control region outside of the state in which the source i s locate d.

Air agencies with PSD programs that have been approved into their SIPs should already have a regulatory provision in place, consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iv) , which requires the permitting authority to notify air agencies whose lands may be affected by emissions from that

source. Inasmuch as the information that the permitting authority provides to other air agencies is submitted by the source to the permitting authority, the EPA considers the notification by the permitting authority to satisfy the requirement of CAA section 126(a)(1)(A) that a new or modified major source subject to part C notify neighboring air agencies of its potential downwind impact.

A s tate that is subject to a FIP for its PSD program may not have an infrastructure SIP
that satisf ies Element D(ii) with respect to section 126(a)(1) of the CAA, depending on the scope of the gap in the SIP that led to the PSD FIP. Where some or all pollutants in a state are subject to a PSD FIP, the EPA may f ind the infrastructure SIP submission to be incomplete with respect
to Element D(ii) and could not fully approve the infrastructure SIP submission with respect to
Element D(ii) if the approved SIP has no other provision meeting the notification requirement s of section 126(a)(1) . Nonetheless, as noted above, the EPA anticipates that there would be no adverse consequences to the air agency or to sources within its jurisdiction from this lack of full approval . The EPA would not likely be required to take further action with respect to notification under this element, because the federal PSD rules should fully address the notif ication issue through the requirements of 40 CFR 52.21(q) and 40 CFR 124.10(c)(vii) and thus satisfy the FIP

### 37

requirement triggered by the disapproval of the infrastructure SIP

. 48 

### In addition, unless the infrastructure SIP submission is req uired in response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5), mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179 would not apply because the deficiencies are not with re spect to a submission that is required under CAA title I part D.

The EPA notes that the requirement stated in CAA section 126(a)(2) was a one

- time obligation on states that does not apply to the EPA’s review of infrastructure SIP submissions.

Interstate Pollution Abatement : Section 126

... (b) Any State or political subdivision may petition the Administrator for a finding that any major source or group of stationary sources emits or would emit any air pollutant in violation of the prohibition of section 110(A)(2)(D)(ii) or this section. Within 60 days after receipt of any petition under this subsection and after public hearing, the Administrator shall make such a finding or deny the petition. (c) Notwithstanding any permit which may have been granted by the State in which the source is located (or intends to locate), it shall be a violation of [this section and] the applicable implementation plan in such State –

(1) for any major proposed new (or modified) source with respect to which a finding has been made under subsection (b) to be constructed or to operate in violation of [this section and] the prohibition of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) or this section, or

(2) for any major existing source to operate more than three months after such finding has been made with respect to it. The Administrator may permit the continued operation of a source referred to in paragraph (2) beyond the expiration of such three

- month period if such source complies with such emission limitations and compliance schedules (containing increments of progress) as may be provided by the Administrator to bring about complia nce with the requirements contained in section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) as expeditiously as practicable, but in no case later than three years after the date of such finding. Nothing in the preceding sentence shall be construed to preclude any such source from being eligible for an enforcement order under section 113(d) after the expiration of such period during which the Administrator has permitted continuous operation.

48 40 CFR part 124, including 124.10(c)(vii), provides for EPA notificat ion to states whose lands may be affected by emissions from the source and applies to all federal PSD permits issued in accordance with 40 CFR 52.21.

### 38

Please note that the EPA has concluded that the cross

- reference in CAA section 126(b) to
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) is a scrivener’s error and that Congress intended to refer to
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). See Appalachian Power Co. v. EPA, 249 F.3d - 1032, 1040 -44 (D.C. Cir. 2001). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), in short, prohibits any source or emissions activity in a s tate from emitting any amount of air pollutant which will contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state. (42 U.S.C. § 7410.)

The required content of an infrastr ucture SIP with respect to E lement D(ii) is affected by
sections 126(b) and 126(c) of the CAA only if : (1) the Administrator has , in response to a petition, made a finding under section 126(b) of the CAA that emissions from a source or

sources within the air agency’s jurisdiction emit prohibited amounts of air pollution relevant to the new or revised NAAQS for which the infrastructure SIP submission is being made ; and (2)
under section 126(c) of the CAA, the Administrator has required the source or sources to cease construction, cease or reduce operations, or comply with emissions limitations and compliance schedule requirements for continued operation

. Where appropriate, the EPA recommends that an infrastructure SIP submission concerning section 126(c) incl ude a statement to the following
effect: “ No source or sources within the state [or tribal area] are the subject of an active finding
under section 126 of the CAA with respect to the particular NAAQS at issue. ” Otherwise, where a source or sources within the air agency’s jurisdiction are subject to such a finding and there are substantive SIP requirements imposed by the Administrator under section 126(c) of the CAA,
then we encourage the air agency to consult with its EPA Regional Office.

International Air Pollution : Sec. 115. (a) Whenever the Administrator, upon receipt of reports, surveys or studies from any duly constituted international agency has reason to believe that any air pollutant or pollutants emitted in the United States cause or contribute t o air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare in a foreign country or whenever the Secretary of State requests him to do so with respect to such pollution which the Secretary of State alleges is of such a nature, the Administrator shall give formal notification thereof to the Governor of the State in which such emissions originate. (b) The notice of the Administrator shall be deemed to be a finding under section 110(a)(2)(H)(ii) which requires a plan revision with respect to so much of the applicable implementation plan as is inadequate to prevent or eliminate the endangerment referred to in subsection (a). Any foreign country so affected by

### 39

such emission of pollutant or pollutants shall be invited to appear at any public hearing associated with any revision of the appropriate portion of the applicable implementation plan.

Section 115 of the CAA authorizes the Administrator to require a state to revise
its SIP under certain conditions to alleviate international transport into another country. Because of the appearance of the phrase “applicable requirements of section[]...115” in
Element D(ii), the EPA interprets this requirement to be NAAQS

- specific. That is, when acting on an infrastructure SIP submission for a ne w or revised NAAQS, the EPA will look to whether the Administrator has made a finding with respect to emissions of the particular NAAQS pollutant and its precursors , if applicable. Where appropriate, the EPA recommends that infrastructure SIP submission requirements concerning section 115 include a statement to the following effect: "There are no final findings under section 115 of the CAA against this state [or tribal area] with respect to the particular NAAQS at
issue." If there are one or more final find ings under section 115 of the CAA, then we encourage the air agency to consult with its EPA Regional Office.

Element E – Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate R esources and Authority, C onflict of I nterest, and O versight of Local G overnments and Regional A gencies

Each such plan shall – ( E) provide (i) necessary assurances that the S tate (or, except where the Administrator deems inappropriate, the general purpose local government or governments, or a regional agency designated by the S tate or general purpose local governments for such purpose) will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under State (and, as appropriate, local) law to carry out such implementation plan (and is not prohibited by any provision of F ederal or S tate law from carrying out such implementation plan or portion thereof), (ii) requirements that the S tate comply with the requirements respec ting State boards under section 128 , and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the S tate has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the S tate has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provision

.

### 40

Sube lement (i) : T he SIP should provide n ecessary assur ances 49 

### that the air agency has adequate personnel and funding to implement the relevant NAAQS. In accordance with the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 51, subpart M (“Intergovernmental Consultation”), the
infrastructure SIP submission should identify the organizations that will participate in developing, implementing, and enforcing the EPA

- approved SIP provisions related to the new or revised NAAQS and thus require resources for doing so. The infrastructure SIP submission should identify the r esponsibilities of such organizations and include related agreements among the organizations. For compliance with section 110(a)(2)(E), see 40 CFR 51.240 ("General plan requirements" ). Also, in accordance with the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 51, subpart O (“Miscellaneous Plan Content Requirements”), the infrastructure SIP submission should describe
the resources that are available to these organizations for carrying out the SIP. Resources to be
described should include: (1) those availabl e to these organizations as of the date of infrastructure SIP submission; (2) those considered necessary during the 5 years following infrastructure SIP submission; and (3) projections regarding acquisition of the described resources. For compliance with s ection 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to resources, see 40 CFR 51.280 ("Resources" ). Further, the infrastructure SIP submission should assure that the responsible state, local, and/or regional agencies , or a tribal authority, have adequate authority under statutes, rules, and regulations to carry out SIP obligations with respect to the relevant NAAQS. See th e EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 51, subpart L ("Legal Authority") and subpart O. In accordance with the EPA's regulations at sub part L, the infrastructure SIP submission should show that the responsible org anizations have the legal authority to carry out the provisions identified in the SIP
submission.

49 As with any SIP submission, the EPA’s review can be expedited if a SIP submission for this element inclu des a detailed explanation of how the existing SIP (supplemented by any new provisions included in the submission) meets each of the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) . This should include a description of the correlation between the requir ements of this element and an equivalent set of statutory, regulatory, and/or non

regulatory provisions, as appropriate. When an air agency’s infrastructure submission more clearly identifies e ach CAA element being met by the SIP submission and explains ho w i t is met, the EPA can more easily determine whether the submission is complete and approvable with respect to that element.

### 41

I n accordance with 40 CFR 51.231 , the infrastructure SIP submission should identify the provisions of law or regulations that the air agency determines provide the necessary authority , and the air agency should submit copies of those laws or regulations with the infrastructure SIP
submission. If an official, legal copy of a particular law or regulation has already been provided to the EPA in an earlier SIP submission, that copy only needs to be referenced with sufficient specificity to avoid ambiguity, rather than a new copy submitted. 50 

### For compliance with

se ction 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to legal authority, see 40 CFR 51.230 and 40 CFR 51.231

. Having reviewed and approved air agency SIP submissions with respect with this element, the EPA expects that it would be unusual for air agencies to need to make SIP revisions
rega rding personnel, funding, or legal authority in order to satisfy this subelement. However, for any new or revised NAAQS, the air agency should explain in the infrastructure SIP submission how resources and personnel and legal authority are adequate and pro vide any additional assurances needed to meet changes in resource requirements by the new or revised NAAQS.

Subelement (ii) :
State Boards : The infrastructure SIP submission (possibly in combination with earlier submissions already approved by the EPA) wou ld need to include the statutory or regulatory provisions that impose the requirements mandated by CAA section 128 pertaining to certain boards, bodies, and personnel involved in approving permits or enforcement orders. Because CAA
section 110(a)(2)(e)(ii) directs states to “provide requirements that the state comply with the

50 Refer to a memorandum dated November 22, 2011, jointly from Janet McCabe, Deputy Assistan t Administrator, Office of Air and R adiation, a nd Becky Weber, Director, Air and Wa ste Management Division, Region 7, to Air Division Dir ectors, Regions 1- 10, titled " Guidelines for Preparing Letters Submitting State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to EPA and for Preparing Public Notices for SIP s. "

### 42

requirements respecting state boards under section 128,” 51 

### the provisions that implement CAA
section 128 would need to be contained within the SIP. That is, the EPA would not approve an infrastructure SIP submission that only provides a narrative description of existing air agency laws, rules, and regulations that are not approved into the SIP to address CAA section 128

r equirements. If an existing rule regarding conflict of interest and disclosure requirements has been adopted under the authority of a state or tribal law, the rule would need to be included in the SIP submission, but the authorizing law would not. If the s tate or tribal law is self

- executing and there is no rule that could be included in the SIP, then the law would need to be incorporated into the SIP. Inclusion of an existing law in the SIP does not prevent the state legislature or tribal
council from amen ding that law at a later date as a matter of state law, although eventually the
EPA

- approved SIP will need to be updated with any such amendment in order to revise the federally enforceable SIP.

All air agencies are subject to the provisions of CAA sectio n 128 . However, if there is no board or body authorized to approve permits or enforcement orders under the CAA, then a negative declaration to that effect may serve to satisfy the "board or body" requirements under paragraph (a)(1) of CAA section 128. It i s the EPA’s stated interpretation that a multi

- member board or body that has authority under state or tribal law to hear appeals of CAA permits or

51 

### Sec. 128. (a) Not later than the date one year after the date of the enactment of this section, each applicable implementation plan shall contain requirements that – (1) any board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this Act shall have at least a majority of members who represent the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subject to permits or enforcement orders under this Act, and

(2) any potential conflicts of interest by mem bers of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. A State may adopt any requirements respecting conflicts of interest for such boards or bodies or heads of executive agencies, or any other entities which are more stringent than the requirements of (paragraphs (1) and (2), and the Administrator shall approve any such more stringent requirements submitted as part of an implementation plan.

### 43

enforcement orders is considered to have authority to “approve” those permits or enforcement
orders . Accordin gly, the requirements of section 128(a)(1) related to public interest and limitations on sources of income are applicable to such a board or body and would need to be met through provisions incorporated into the SIP. 52 , 53



### The provisions of section 128(a)(2), which concern disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, would need to be substantively met by provisions incorporated into the SIP, regardless of whether it is a board, some other body, or the head of an executive agency that has responsibility for a pproving permits or enforcement orders in that state or an area of Indian country. It is the EPA’s stated interpretation that a multi

- member board or body that has authority under state or tribal law to hear appeals of CAA permits or enforcement orders is considered to have authority to “approve” those permits or enforcement orders. Accordingly, the requirement of section 128(a)(2) related to disclosure is applicable to such a board or body and
would need to be met through provisions incorporated into the S IP.

In 1978, the EPA issued a guidance memorandum recommending ways air agencies could meet the requirements of section 128, including suggested interpretations of certain terms
in section 128. 54 

### EPA has not issued further guidance or regulations of general applicability on the subject since that time. However, as part of its actions on s everal infrastructure SIP submissions, the EPA has more recently proposed certain interpretations of section 12 8 as applied to these specific submissions, invited comment on these interpretations, and finalized its actions. Within those actions, EPA has thus provided additional interpretation of the terms of
section 128 given specific facts and circumstances, consi stent with the statutory requirements.

52 The EPA expressed this interpretation in a proposed action on the infra structure SIP for Arizona. June 27, 2012.

“ Partial Approval and Disapproval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Arizona: Infrastructure Requirement for Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter. ” 77 FR 38239. This action was finalized on Nov ember 5, 2012, 77 FR 66398

. 53 “Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Hawaii Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8

- Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Mat ter National Ambient Air Quality Standards.” 77 FR 47530 (August 9, 2012). The EPA’s action on the infrastructure SIP for Arizona referenced the proposal for this action on the infrastructure SIP for Hawaii.
54 See Memorandum from David O . Bickart to Regional Air Directors, "Guidance to States for Meeting Conflict of I nterest Requirements of Section 128 ," Suggested Definitions, March 2, 1978.

### 44

See , e.g., EPA's proposed (77 FR 44555, July 30, 2012) and final (77 FR 66398, November 5, 2012) actions on an infrastructure SIP submission from Arizona. Unlike the recommendations of the 1978 guidance memorandum, in this action the EPA interpreted the term “state board” to exclude an individual official. As in the 1978 guidance memorandum, in this action the EPA interpreted the requirement regarding representation of the public interest and limitations on income to apply to a board that does not issue permits and compliance orders but does hear appeals of permits and compliance orders. The EPA notes that air agencies in different jurisdictions may have very different organizational structures and very different alloca tions of authorities and responsibilities with respect to permits and enforcement orders. Thus, the EPA recommends that air agencies consult with their respective EPA Regional Office s about the most appropriate method for assuring that the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128 are met in that jurisdiction under the relevant facts and circumstances.

Sube lement (iii) : T he infrastructure SIP submission should provide necessary

assurances 55 

### that the state retains responsibility for ensuring ad equate implementation of SIP obligations with respect to relevant NAAQS. A state may authorize a local or regional agency to carry out the SIP or a portion of the SIP within th at agency ' s jurisdiction, if the SIP demonstrates that the local agency has the necessary legal authority. However, in these cases the infrastructure
SIP submission needs to also provide assurances that the state air agency retains responsibility
for ensuring adequate implementation of the SIP. Under subpart L, see 40 CFR 51.232 ("Assignment of legal authority to local agencies" ).

55 As with any SIP submission, the EPA’s review can be expedited if a SIP submission for this element includes a detailed explanation of how the existing SIP meets each of the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(i)

. This should include a description of the correlation between the requirements of this element and an equivalent set of statutory, regulator y, and/or non

- regulatory provisions, as appropriate, that are part of the existing SIP. When an air agency’s infrastructure submission more clearly identifies each CAA element being met by the SIP submission and explains how the element is met, the EPA can more easily determine whether the submission is complete and approvable with respect to that element.

### 45

Element F – Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary S ource M onitoring and R eporting

Each such plan shall – (F) require, as may be prescribed by the Administrator – (i) t he installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationar y sources to monitor emissions from such sources,

(ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions

related data from such source s, and

(iii) correlation of such reports by the S tate agency with any emission limitations or st andards established pursuant to this Chapter , which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection

. Sube lement (i) : The EPA’s rules regarding how SIPs would need to address requirements for source monitoring are contained in 40 CFR 51.212 (“Testing, inspection, enforcement, and compliance”). This EPA regulation requires SIPs to provide for a program of periodic testing and inspection of stationary sources, to provide for the identification of allowable test methods, and
to exclude any provision that would prevent the use of any credible evidence of noncompliance.
The infrastructure SIP submiss ion should describe the air agency’s program for source testing, reference the statutory authority for the air agency’s program, and certify the absence of any provision preventing the use of any credible evidence.

Sube lement (ii) : To address periodic reporting requirements, t he infrastructure SIP
submission should include air agency requirements providing for periodic reporting of emissions
and emissions

- related data by sources to the air agency, as required by the following emissi ons reporting requirements: 40 CFR 51.211 (“Emissions reports and recordkeeping”) ; 40 CFR
sections 51.321 thro ugh 51.323 (“Source Emissions and State Action Reporting”) ; and the EPA’s Air Emissions Reporting Rule, 40 CFR part 51, subpart A (“Air Emissions Reporting Requirements”). 56 

### We note that the section 51.321 requirement that emissions reports from states
be m ade through the appropriate EPA Regional Office has been superseded in practice, as these data are now to be reported electronically through a centralized data portal pursuant to 40 CFR

56 40 CFR sections 51.321 through 51.323 nominally address emission reporting but merely cross

- reference to subpart A.

### 46

51.45(b), which refers to the website http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief for the latest information on data reporting procedures

. However, states should consult with the appropriate EPA Regional Office as they prepare and submit these data. All states have existing periodic source reporting of emissions and emission inventory reporting practices. Thus for any new or revised NAAQS, t he infrastructure SIP may be able to certify existing authority and commitments and provide any additional assurance needed to meet changes in reporting and inventory requirements associated with the new or revised NAAQS.

Sube lement (iii) : The infrastructu re SIP submission should reference and describe existing air agency requirements that have been approved into the SIP by the EPA, or include air agency requirements being newly submitted, that provide for the following: (1) correlation 57 

### by the air agency o f emissions reports by sources with applicable emission limitations or standards ; and (2) the public availability of emission reports by sources. Under 40 CFR part 51 s ubpart G, 40 CFR 51.116 ("Data availability" ) , contains the requirements for correlating data. Correlation with applicable emissions limitations or standards is relevant only for those repo rts of source emissions that reflect the test method(s) and averaging period(s) specified in applicable emission limitations or standards. Thus, source reports of annual, ozone season, or summer day emissions used by the air agency to create the annual and triennial emission inventory submission to the
EPA under 40 CFR part 51 subpart A in general would not need to be correlated with specific
emission li mitations or standards, as many sources do not have applicable emission limitations defined for those averaging periods. However, if the sources have applicable emissions limitations that are defined for these averaging periods, then they would need to be correlated.

57 As defined in 40 CFR 51.116 (c), the term "correlated" means "presented in such a manner as to show the relationship between measured or estimated amounts of emissions and the amounts of such emissions allowable under the applicable emission limitations or other measures."

### 47

Element G – Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency P owers
Each such plan shall – (G) p rovide for authority comparable to that in section 303 and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority

. Sec tion 303 of the CAA provides authority to the EPA Administrator to seek a court
order to restrain any source from causing or contributing to emissions that present an " imminent
and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare, or the environment. " The E PA has interpreted section 110(a)(2)(G) as impos ing two basic requirements for purposes of an
infrastructure SIP submission.

To meet Element G requirements, t he best practice for a n air agency submitting an
infrastructure SIP would be to submit, for incl usion into the SIP (if not already part of the SIP), the statutory or regulatory provisions that provide the air agency or official with authority comparable to that of the EPA Administrator under section 303 ( see , e.g. , 40 CFR 51.230(c) ), along with a narrative explanation of how they meet the r equi rements of this element

. 58 

### If an air agency chooses not to include the relevant statute or regulation in its SIP, then the air agency
should provide a reference or citation to the authority provision s , along with a narrative explanation of how the provisions meet the requirements of this element, as well as a copy of the relevant authority to accompany the SIP as required by 40 CFR 51.231.

T he air agency is also required to submit, for approval into the SIP (if not already part of the SIP), a n adequate contingency plan to implement the air agency’s emergency episode authority. This ca n be met by submitting a plan that meets the applicable requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (40 CFR 51.150 through 51.153) (“Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes”) for the relevant NAAQS if the NAAQS is covered by those regulations

.

The EPA’s subpart H regulations provide specific ambient levels for contingency plan purposes for most NAAQS. In the case of the 2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS, for which the EPA has not

58 The EPA recognizes that some air agencies may have general authorizing provisions that do not specifically enumerate specific activities but do implicitly authorize the air agency to perform such activities, in which case inclusion of those provisions would meet the intent of this best practice.

### 48

yet promulgated regulations that provide the ambient levels to classify different priority levels,
th e EPA has recommended these levels through guidance. 59



### Subpart H includes criteria for classification of areas into priority regions, based on ambient air concentrations of the particular pollutant being addressed. The currently applicable priority classifications for regions for each state can be found in 40 CFR part 52 subparts B through DDD ( see sections titled “Classification of Regions”). As noted above, the air agency ’s
infrastructure SIP submission would need to include the contingency plan, i f one is required and has not yet been approved by the EPA. If an area is classified as a Priority I, IA, or II region for a specified pollutant, then the infrastructure SIP should contain an emergency contingency plan meeting the specific requirements of 40 CFR 51.151 and 51.152, as appropriate, with respect to that pollutant. For such areas, the infrastructure submission should demonstrate that the air agency’s existing EPA

- approved SIP already contains an adequate contingency plan, if that is the

case; o therwise, the submission should include the substantive SIP revisions necessary to meet the emergency contingency plan requirements with respect to that pollutant.

Specifically, if an a rea is classified as a Priority I region for a specified pollutant, th e area’s contingency plan (with respect to that pollutant) would need to include provisions that trigger actions to prevent air quality concentrations from reaching a “significant harm level” (SHL), which represents an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health. See 40 CFR
51.151 and the more detailed explanation below. Each implementatio n plan for a P riority I, IA, or II region would need to include a contingency plan that provides for taking certain specified actions. Specifically, 40 CFR sections 51.152(b) and (c) state that:
(b) Each contingency plan for a Priority I region must provide for the fol lowing: (1) Prompt acquisition of forecasts of atmospheric stagnation conditions and of updates of such forecasts as frequently as they are issued by the National Weather Service. (2) Inspection of sources to ascertain compliance with applicable emission control action requirements.

59 See a memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, OAQPS, to Regional Air D ivision Directors, Regions I through X, “Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

. ” (September 25, 2009).

### 49

(3) Communications procedures for transmitting status reports and orders as to emission control actions to be taken during an episode stage, including procedures for contact with public officials, major emission sources, publ ic health, safety, and emergency agencies and news media. (c) Each plan for a Priority IA and II region must include a contingency plan that meets, as a minimum, the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this sectio n. Areas classified as Priorit y III do not need to develop episode plans. To satisfy a Priority I, IA, or II region's contingency plan requirements under 40 CFR 51.152(b)(1) regarding forecasts of atmospheric stagnation conditions, an infrastructure SIP submission may cite existing ambient monitoring and forecasting networks (such as AIRNow ). 60



### Areas that maintain air quality at ambient levels lower that the concentrations listed in
sections 51.150(b), (c), and (d), with respect to the pollutants lis ted, are classified as Priority III regions. These areas are subject to the requirements of CAA E l ement G. However, according to 40 CFR 51.152(c), areas c lassified as Priority III regions are not required to develop emergency episode plans, which the EPA has interpreted to mean the contingency plans otherwise required
under E lement G.

In a final rulema king signed on December 14, 2012, to revise the PM 2.5 

### NAAQS, t he
EPA retained the pre

- existing level of 500 μ g/m 3 

### , 24

- hour average, for the Air Quality Index (AQI) value of 500 and did not establish an SHL for PM 2.5 

### . 61 

### In addition, there is currently no

es tablished SHL for Pb. For those pollutants for which there is an SHL, the SHL is an important part of air pollution Emergency Episode Plans . Even in the absence of an SHL, the EPA believes that the central components of a contingency plan would be to reduc e emissions from the source(s) at issue (if necessary by curtailing operations of Pb or PM 2.5 

### sources) and public communication as needed. In addition, if an air agency believes, based on its inventory of Pb or

60 The EPA, in partnership with National Oc eanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA ) , National Park Service ( NPS ) , and tribal, state, and local agencies , developed the AIRNow w eb site ( see http://www.airnow.gov ) to provide easy public access to national air quality information. The w ebsite offers daily AQI forecasts as well as real -t ime AQI conditions for over 300 cities across the U .S. and provides links to more detailed s tate and local air quality

w ebsites.

61 See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013), “National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter.” The published version is posted at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-01-15/pdf/2012-30946.pdf

.

### 50

PM 2.5 

### sources and historic ambient monitoring data, that it does not need a more specific contingency plan beyond having authority to restrain any source from causing or contributing to an imminent and substantial endangerment, then the air agency could provide such a detailed rationale as part of it s SIP submission. Additionally, because smoke from fires has the potential to be the cause of extremely high levels of PM 2.5 

### , t he EPA recommends that air quality -triggered
responses incorporated into an Emergency Episode Plan for PM 2.5 

### be developed through a collaborative process working with s tate and t ribal air quality, forestry , and agricultural agencies,
f ederal land management agencies, private land managers , and the public.

An episode in which concentrations of NO 2 

### or SO 2 

### approach the SHL is likely to be due to a single facility's equipment malfunction. Accordingly, as part of a SIP to satisfy a Priority I region's contingency plan requirements, an infrastructure SIP submission for an NO 2 

### NAAQS or
an SO 2 

### NAAQS may specify the facility

- specific or equip ment

- specific measures to be taken in
the event of an air pollution emergency.

In accordance with 40 CFR 51.152(d)(1) and (2) , the Administrator may either : (i) exempt portions of a Priority I, IA, or II region that have been designated as attainment or
unclassifiable under section 107 of the CAA from the requirements of 40 CFR 51.152 to develop an emergency episode contingency plans, or (ii) limit the requirements pertaining to emiss ion control actions in Priority I regions to certain areas or to certain major sources

. Air agencies interested in such an exemption or limitation in appropriate circumstances should contact their respective EPA Regional Office s.
Appendix L to 40 CFR part 51 provides example regulations that air agencies could use to develop contingency plans and inform decisions concerning air pollution emergency episodes. The example r egulations provided in appen dix L reflect generally recognized ways of preventing air pollution from reaching levels that would cause imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons located within affected areas. States with Priority I, IA, or II areas are directed by sub part H to have emergency episode contingency plans that contain alert levels for
SO 2 

### , PM 10 

### , carbon monoxide, NO 2 

### , and ozone, but air agencies are not required to adopt the appendix L example regulations.

### 51

Element H – Section 110(a)(2)(H): S IP Revisions

Each such plan shall – (H) p rovide for revision of such plan – (i) f rom time to time as may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and

(ii) except as provided in paragraph (3)(C), whenever the Administrator finds on the basis of information available to the Administrator that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain the national ambient air quality standard which it implements or to otherwise comply with any additional requirements established under this chapter.
To demonstrate that the requirements under Element H are met, the best practice for a n air agency submitting an infrastructure SI P would be to submit, for inclusion into the SIP (if not already part of the SIP), 

### the statutory or regulatory provisions that provide the air agency or official with the authority to perform the following actions along with a narrative explanation of how they meet the requirements of this element : (1) revise its section 110 plan from time to time as may be necessary to take into account revisions of such primary or secondary NAAQS or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of at taining such standards; and (2) revise the plan in the event the Administrator finds the plan to be substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS or otherwise meet all applicable CAA requirements. 62



### If an air agency chooses not to include the relevant statute or regu lation in its SIP, then the air agency should provide a reference or citation to the authority provision s , along with a narrative explanation of how the provisions meet the requirements of this element, as well as a copy of the relevant authority to accomp any the SIP as required by 40 CFR 51.231. More information may be found u nder 40 CFR part 51, subpart F ("Procedural Requirements") , specifically, 40 CFR 51.104 ("Revisions" ).

62 The EPA recognize that some air agencies may have general authorizing provisions that do not specifically enumerate specific activities but do implicitly authorize the air agency to perform such activities, in which case inclusion of those provisions woul d meet the intent of this best practice.

### 52

Element I – Sectio n 110(a)(2)(I): Plan R evisions for Nonattainment A reas
Each such plan shall – (I) i n the case of a plan or plan revision for an area designated as a nonattainment area, meet the applicable requirements of part D of this subchapter (relating to nonattainment areas)

. As noted earlier in this document, the EPA does not expect infrastructure SIP
submissions to address sub section 110(a)(2)(I). The specific SIP submissions for designated nonattainment areas, as required under CAA title I part D, are s ubject to a different submission
schedule 63 

### than th ose for section 110 infrastructure elements and will be reviewed and acted upon through a separate process. Air agencies do not need to address Element I in an infrastructure SIP submission. For clarity’s s ake, to better inform the public comment process on the SIP submission, the air agency may wish to clearly state that Element I is not being addressed
and reiterate in the infrastructure SIP submission that , according to the EPA’s interpretation of
the CAA this element does not need to be addressed in the context of an infrastructure SIP
submission.

Element J – Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with G overnment O fficials, P ublic Notification, and PSD and V isibility P rotection

Each such plan shall – (J) m ee t the applicable requirements of section 121 (relating to consultation), section 127 (relating to public notification), and part C (relating to prevention of significant deterioration of air quality and visibility protection)

.... This element contains four separable sub

- elements: consultation with identified officials on certain air agency actions; public notification; prevention of significant deterioration; and visibility protection.

Consultation with identified officials on certain actions :

63 These elements are typically referred to as nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements and are due by the dates prescribed under subparts 2 through 5 of part D, extending as far as 10 years following designatio n for some elements.

### 53

Sec. 12 1. In carrying out the requirements of this Act requiring applicable implementation plans to contain – (1) any transportation controls, air quality maintenance plan requirements or preconstruction review of direct sources of air pollution, or

(2) any measu re referred to – (A) in part D (pertaining to nonattainment requirements), or (B) in part C (pertaining to prevention of significant deterioration), and in carrying out the requirements of section 113(d) (relating to certain enforcement orders), the S tate shall provide a satisfactory process of consultation with general purpose local governments, designated organizations of elected officials of local governments and any Federal land manager having authority over Federal land to which the State plan app lies, effective with respect to any such requirement which is adopted more than one year after the date of enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 as part of such plan. Such process shall be in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Admin istrator to assure adequate consultation. The Administrator shall update as necessary the original regulations required and promulgated under this section (as in effect immediately before the date of the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990) to ensure adequate consultation. Only a general purpose unit of local government, regional agency, or council of governments adversely affected by action of the Administrator approving any portion of a plan referred to in this subsection may petition for judicial review of such action on the basis of a violation of the requirements of this section.

The infrastructure SIP submission would need to show that there is an established proce ss for consultation with general

- purpose local governments, designated orga nizations of elected officials of local governments, and any federal land manager having authority over federal land to which the plan applies, consiste nt with CAA section 121 , which lists the specific types of
actions for which such consultation is required

. If the relevant statute is self

- executing such that
there is no associated regulation or other documents such as a m emorandum of u nderstanding , then the statute would need to be included in the SIP. If a regulation or other document meeting
the C AA requirements exists, then the regulation or other document would need to be included in
the SIP submission , and the authorizing statute should be referenced but the statute is not required to be part of the EPA

- approved SIP. Under the requirements of 40 CFR 51.240 , the SIP
would need to identify organizations “ that will participate in developing, implementing , and enforcing the plan and the responsibilities of such organizations. ” The plan should also include

### 54

any related agreements or memoranda of understanding among the organizations. See subpart M ("Intergovernmental Consultation")

.

Public Notification :

Section 127. (a) Each State plan shall contain measures which will be effective to notify the public during any calendar [year] on a regular basis of instances or areas in which any national primary ambient air quality standard is exceeded or was exceeded during any portion of the preceding calendar year to advise the public of the health hazards associated with such pollution, and to enhance public awareness of the measures which can be taken to prevent such standards from being exceeded and the ways in which the public can participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve air quality. Such measures may include the posting of warning signs on interstate highway access points to metropolitan areas or television, radio, or press notices or information. (b) The Administrator is authorized to make grants to States to assist in carrying out the requirements of s ubsection (a).

The infrastructure SIP submission would need to show that the air agency does the following: regularly notifies the public of instances or areas in which the new or revised primary NAAQS was exceeded; advises the public of the health hazards associated with such
exceedances ; and enhances public awareness of measures that can prevent such exceedances and of ways in which the public can participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve air quality. 40 CFR 51.285 ("Public notification" ) , repeats the language of CAA section 127.

Prevention of significant deterioration : The approvability of an air agency’s PSD program is essential to the approvability of an infrastructure SIP submission with respect to CAA
section 110(a)(2)(J). The requirements for Element J in relation to a comprehensive PSD permitting program are the same as described earl ier in th is document with respect to Element C. Generally, every PSD

- related requirement of Element C applies, including the requirement that
the PSD permitting program address all regulated pollutants. Please refer to that section.

Visibility protection : Under 40 CFR part 51 subpart P, implementing the visibility requirements of CAA title I, part C, states are subject to requirements for RAVI, new source review for possible impacts on air quality related values in Class I areas, and r egional h aze planning. Specific requirements stemming from these CAA sections are codified at 40 CFR

### 55

part 51 subpart P. However, when the EPA establishes or revises a NAAQS, the se requirements
under part C do not change. The EPA believes that there are no new vis ibility protec tion requirements under part C as a result of a revised NAAQS. Therefore, there are no newly applicable visibility protection obligations pursuant to Element J after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Air agencies do not need to address the visibi lity subelement of Element J in an infrastructure SIP submission. For clarity’s sake, to better inform the public comment process on the SIP submission, the air agency may wish to clearly state that the visibility subelement of
Element J is not being addre ssed , and reiterate in the submission that according to EPA’s interpretation of the CAA this element does not need to be addressed.

Element K – Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality M odelin g and S ubmission of Modeling Data

Each such plan sha ll – (K) provide f or – (i) t he performance of such air quality modeling as the Administrator may prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which the Administrator has established a national ambient air quality standard, and

(ii) the submission, upon request, of data related to such air quality modeling to the Administrator

. T o meet Element K, t he best practice w ould be for an air agency to submit, for inclusion
into the SIP (if not already part of the SIP) , the statutory or regulatory provisions that provide the air agency or official with the authority to perform the following actions along with a narrative explanation of how the provisions meet the requirements of this element 64 

### : (1) conduct air quality mode ling to predict the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated, and (2) provide such modeling data to the EPA Administrator upon request.

64 The EPA recognizes that some air agencies may have general authorizing provisions that do not specifically enumerate specific activities but do implicitly authorize the air agency to perform such activities, in which case inclusion o f those provisions would meet the intent of this best practice.

### 56

If an air agency chooses not to include the relevant statute or regulations in its SIP, then the air agency should provide a reference or citation to the authority provision s , along with a narrative explanation of how th ey meet the requirements of this element , as well as a copy of the relevant authority to accompany the SIP as required by 40 CFR 51.231

.

Element L – Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting F ees
Each such plan sha ll – (L) r equire the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under this chapter , a fee sufficient to cove r –

(i) t he reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and

(ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator' s approval of a fee program under subchapter V of this chapter

. Currently, every state has an EPA

- approved fee program under CAA title V. However, this fee program is not required to be part of the EPA

- approved SIP. The infrastructure SIP
should provide citations to the regu lations providing for collection of permitting fees under the
state’s EPA

- approved Title V permit program

. These citations to the EPA

- approved title V regulations will not cause the title V program to be treated as part of the EPA

- approved SIP, and
the EPA will not re

- review the title V program itself in the context of reviewing infrastructure
SIP submissions

. See 40 CFR 70.9 ("Fee determination and certification") and 40 CFR part 70, appendix A (" Approval Status of State and Local Operating Permits Programs" ). If the state
title V program fees cover all CAA permitting, implementation , and enforcement for new and modified major sources as well as existing major sources, this reference to the t itle V program will satisfy this element. If a state’s approved title V permit program fees do not cover the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon applications for PSD and NNSR permits for major

### 57

sources 65 

### (along with the reasonable costs of implementing a nd enforcing the terms and conditions of PSD and NNSR permits), then the air agency should contact its Regional Office regarding what needs to be in the submission to fulfill this Element.

E lement M – Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and P articipation by A ffected Local E ntities

Each such plan sha ll – (M) p rovide for consultation and participation by local political subdivisions affected by the plan. To satisfy Element M , the SIP should provide for consultation with affected local political subdivisions. As part of an infrastructure SIP submission, an air agency may simply identify its policies or procedures that allow and promote such consultation. For example, the infrastructure SIP submission may cite a policy wherein the air agency, befo re adopting or amending a plan, policy, or program, will consult with the regional planning coalition composed of local political subdivisions potentially affected by the action and explain how such information is used in the development of a SIP submission to the EPA for approval into the SIP. The normal public hearing process prior to adoption and submission of a SIP revision may also be cited as a component of the provisions for consultation, since leaders of political subdivisions have the opportunity t o participate in that public process.

For Further Information If you have any questions concerning this guidance, please contact Mr. H. L ynn Dail, by telephone at (919) 541- 2363, or by email at dail.lynn@epa.gov , or Ms. Lisa Sutton, by telephone at (919) 541- 3450 or by email at sutton.lisa@epa.gov

.

65 Substantive NNSR provisions will not be reviewed as part of the EPA’s action on the infrastructure SIP submission. See discussion in Section II, “Which e lements of CAA 110(a)(2) a ffect i nfr astructure SIPs ?”

### 1 Albuquerque Environmental Health Department (EHD)

Air Quality Programs (AQP) Ambient Air Monitoring Section 201 4 Annual Network Review for Ambient Air Monitoring
Under 40 CFR, Part 58, Subpart B, The City of Albuquerque Air Quality Programs ( AQ P) is requir ed to submit an annual monitoring network review to the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) regional office in Dallas, Texas. Our objective, when preparing the report , is to optimally apply limited resources to best protect public health.

Th e network plan describes the framework of the local air quality surveillance system, presents monitoring results over the past three years, provides comparisons to National standards, and discusses future plans. The annual monitoring network plan must be made available for public inspection for at least 30 days prior to formal submission to EPA. (Anticipated da tes are May 30 – June 30, 2014.)
This document shows the current network configuration and proposed changes for 2014. It represents the commitment of the AQ P to effectively protect the health of the citizens of Albuquerque-Bernalillo County 1 

### through ambient air monitoring, by using the best affor dable technology, and by communicating the data collected as quickly and
accura tely as possible.
Two monitoring sites, 2ZH North Valley (AIRS 35-001-1013) and 2ZT Taylor Ranch (AIRS 35 -001-0027) were shut down in 2013 with EPA Approval. Those sites housed four monitors (two Ozone , one PM10 and one PM2.5) but w e continue to meet our minimum requirements for each criteria pollutant.
Additional monitor and site cutbacks are proposed for the upcoming year, developed in consultation with EPA Re gion VI to better align the network with minimum network requirements. Changes will be discussed by pollutant in each section.
Population Statistics Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, including Rio Rancho and Los Lunas is the State‟s largest Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The US Census Bureau estimates the 2013 population of the metropolitan statist ical area (MSA) which includes portions of the adjacent c ounties of Sandoval, Valencia, and Torrance a s approximately 902,797 (43.3 % of the Sta te). http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html# As the regional center for employment, advanced education, retail commerce, and medical treatment, Albuquerque experienc es non-local commuter traffic. The junction of major Interstate 25 (north/south) and Inter state 40 (east/west), adds significant heavy transport traffic between the port of Los Angeles and the E ast Coast, and between Denver, El Paso, and the US-Mexico Border. However, this t raffic is less significant when compared major metropolitan areas.

1 Excluding Native American and Pueblo Lands within the County. 

### AQP Exhibit 10d

### 2

The map in Figure 1 shows the physical location of all current monitoring sites cu rrently operated by

the Air Quality Programs. Three si tes are within the city limits o f Albuquerque . Three other sites (2ZV - South Valley, 2ZW Westside, and 2ZF - Foothills) are in B ernalillo County.

Figure 1: Albuquerque Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network

Table 1 shows the curr ent network configuration and lists the monitoring equipment operated at ea ch site. Column 1 is the “AQS Site ID#,” a unique identification number assigned to each monitoring site in the network. The AQS (Air Quality System) is a national air monitor ing database maintained by the EPA. Data collected from monitoring sites are input into the AQS database within 90 days following the end of each calendar quarter. < http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/aqsdatamart/access.htm 

### > Column 2 gives the local site designation, name, location, and “affiliation.” Site longit ude and latitude are in columns 3 and 4. Columns 5 through 9 list the monitors at each site and their associated parameters. Site photographs accompany the hard-copy version of this re port on CD. During the public review period monitoring site photographs can be downloaded from the City of Albuquerque – Air Quality Programs website http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/
Proposed changes to the network are discussed in the next section, by pollutant.

### 3

Table 1 Albuquerque 201 3 Ambient Air Monitoring Network

### 4

Table 1 - Co ntinued

*Siting criteria are not good for PM SLA MS but the site is necessary for AQI.

### 5

Summary of changes Changes proposed for the upcoming year were developed in consultation with EPA Region VI, to better align the network with minimum network requirements.

Ground Level Ozone (O3) Based on population, Table D-2 of Appendix D to Part 58, 40 CFR specifies a minimum of two (2) SL AMS ( State and Local Air Monitoring Stations) ozone monitors.

Current

– Currently the AQ P exceeds the minimum requirements with five (5) ozone monitors, all c ategorized as SLAMS.
The MSA expe riences high levels of Ozone during the summer and non-attainment is a serious consider ation. Our declaration in 2013 did not show an exceedence of the standard but the matter must be re-examined every year. There was great concern about 2013 but we expe rienced very unusual weather patterns. Table 2 shows that for the first time in many y ears Ozone levels dropped instead of rising.

Table 2: Ozone Design Value, ppm

Future – Two Ozone monitors at 2ZN SE Heights (AIRS 35-001-0024) and at 2ZW Westside (A IRS 35-001-0032) are proposed to shut down in 2014.

PM 2.5 

### According to Table D-5 of Appendix D to Part 58, 40 CFR two SLAMS PM 2.5 

### sites (3 monitors) are required in Albuquerque.

Current

– AQ P operates four PM 2.5 

### monitoring sites in Albuquerque-Bernalillo County with five (5) tot al monitors, all of which are identified as SLAMS.

The 2 ZM site (35-001-0023) operates a Partisol 2025 sequential sampler with 2.5 micron inlet cutof

f to re cord 24-hour averages PM 2.5 

### on a 1/3 schedule. This sampler is a Federal Refe ren ce Method (FRM) and is comparable to the NAAQS. In the coming year this will be switched to a newer Partisol 2025i.
Beginning January 2012 and continuing through the present, two BAM 1020 continuous monitors have been used at site (35-001-0023) to report PM 10 -2 .5 

### on an hourly basis. The PM 2.5 

### BAM is collocated with the previously mentioned Partisol 2025 FRM.

### 6

Three additional sites monitor PM 2.5 

### continuously. 2ZF and 2ZN, and 2ZV are SLAMS and are NA AQS comparable. The data from these monitors are used for the Air Quality Index (AQ I) and report hourly averages that are sent to EPA‟s AIRNOW web page for real-time Air Quality particulate mapping.

The 2013 98 th 

### percentile data in Table 3 show slight decrease over prior years. While it was an active Western fire season in general, we were fortunate in that there were fewer significant smoke intrusions into the Albuquerque airshed. However, it should be noted that the long r ange forecast for the 2014 fire season is very poor.

Future –The 2ZN Southeast Heights (AIRS 35-001-0024) continuous PM2.5 monitor is proposed to shut down in 2014. In conjunction with the Ozone discontinuation above, the Southeast He ights monitoring site will be closed.

Table 3: PM 2.5 

### Design Value, ug/m3

PM 10 

### PM data is used by the AQI to accurately portray PM in neighborhoods, to enforce our local dust control regulation, and to issue high wind advisory and health alerts. High PM values are the most common cause of AQI warning days in Albuquerque.
Because of terrain, extremely dry climate, and unusual weather patterns, Bernalillo Co frequently

has very different conditions in various parts of the airshed. Prevailing westerly winds are the assumed weather pattern but that is only true during certain seasons of the year and varies widely from site to site. East canyon winds accelerate down-slope on the Sandia Mountain at speeds up to 65 miles per hour, blasting the NE quadrant of the city before slowing and dispersing. East winds can also affect South Valley (AQS 35-001-0029 SV) with silt particulates from the outflow of the dry Tijeras Canyon. The Rio Grande river valley experiences North-South flow with a diurnal pattern. The west side of the city has very fine soils and large tracts of native vegetation are being removed for development. The combination of these factors can produce high PM levels wi th any wind direction and the manifestation varies from area to area.

Current

– Over the past year the AQP monitored PM 10 

### at four sites with a total of 6 monitors. At this t ime, three of the sites and five monitors are NAAQS comparable.
The NCore Site 2ZM (AQS 35-001-0023) operates a continuous FEM that produces data used for both PM 10 

### and PM 10 -2.5 

### .

### 7

The AQP operates two PM 10 

### FRMs (1/1 & 1/6) and a continuous monitor at 2ZS (35- 001-0029) all of which are NAAQS comparable.
The North Valley sit e 2ZH (AQS 35-001-1013) was shut down at the end of March, 2013 with EPA‟s concur

rence. The status of the PM10 monitor at 2ZV (AQS 35-001-0029) was upgraded to SLAMS starting 1/1/2011 after site remediation and as of this year it has 3-years of valid data.
The AQP operates a PM10 a continuous monitor at 2ZW (AQS 35-001-0032) however, the PM siting criter ia for site 2ZW are not met, and PM10 data is not be compared to the NAAQS. The continuous monitor is denoted “Special Purpose” and is used for AQI and to issue Health Advisories. As a result, data from that site does not appear in Table 5. Data from the special purpose monitor is also being archived to characterize th e PM background prior to anticipated development.
Table 4 calculates the design values for each comparable PM10 site in the Albuquerque Network that has suffic ient historical data. (Reference PM10 SIP Development Guideline, US EPA-450/2-86-001, June 1987). Using the highest single monitor design value, the Network Desi gn value is 105.7 ug/m3 which is 70% of the NAAQS or in the low rang e. Based on population, 40CFR, Part 58, Table D-4 of Appendix D specifies two- to -four sites as the minimum requirement for low concentration MSAs.

Table 4. PM 10 

### Design Values, ug/m3

Table 5 shows that concentrations are stable at two sites (2ZM and 2ZS) after a notably bad year in 2011. A change of ownership and source remediation near the 2ZS site also helped. At 2ZV, in addition to anthropogenic sources (unpaved streets and shoulders),

### 8

some agriculture, and the outflow of a dry riverbed with light sandy soils, the area is vulnerable to hig h winds fr om almost any direction. Note that this is not a small localized affec t. Depending upon direction and magnitude, a high wind event can impact the whole South Vall ey.

Table 5 : PM 10 

### Data Trends

a Sites 35-001-0023 and 0029. The continuous monitors are BAM 1020s. b Site 35-001-0026 is middle scale and Industry impacted. The monitor is a TEOM.



### Future Our meteorologist notes that soil moisture is extraordinarily low this year. After a winter with almost no measurable precipitation Albuquerque has already experienced two major dust storms caused by Haboobs in other states, though in all fairness they will occur here as well if the weather patterns don‟t shift.
In the coming year the continuous PM 10 

### monitor at 2ZS Singer (35-001-0026) is proposed to replace one Filter-based monitor as the “collocate. ” The 1/6 filter-based FRM will be discontinued.

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Current

– The AQP did not monitor SO2 until late 2010. While there are large sources in the state, none a re close to Albuquerque and emissions are reduced by dispersion over distance. Table 6 shows that thus far the SO2 monitor is measuring only trace levels, less than 10% of the NAAQS

.
Table 6 : SO2 De sign Value, ppb

Future –No changes are planned for SO2 in the coming year.

### 9

Oxides of Nitrogen Current

– The AQP monitors NO, NO 2 

### , NOx , and NOy 2 

### at 2ZM ( AQS 3 5 -001-0023), the NCore locati on. Suspected NOx sources include mobile (both on and off road), the Airport, and na tural gas combustion for hot water and residential heating in winter months. Howeve r, Table 7 shows that NO 2 

### levels are low. (Annual 98 th 

### percentile 1-hour values avera ged over 3 years = 48 ppb compared to a standard of 100.)
Table 7: NO2 Design Value, ppb

Associated with the new NO 2 

### NAAQS is a requirement to monitor NO 2 

### Roadway emissions. A new site will have to be located and built-up since none of the current sites are within 50-meters of the nearest traffic lane. The AQP identified several potential sites and pa rticipated in a national pilot program with passive sampling. The worst-case data from that study showed Albuquerque well within NAAQS annual limits and with a high statistically probability of staying below the 1-hour standard. As a result, Albuquerque is on the “b uild and hold” list with an anticipated start date of 1/1/2017.

Future –No changes are planned for Oxides of Nitrogen in the coming year.

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Current

–Albuquerque/Bernalillo County remains in maintenance status for CO until 2016.
The AQP currently operates two (2) CO monitors. One for NCore and the other is for CO Maintena nce . Both run year around.

Table 8 : CO Design Value, ppm

2 NOy envelopes all Oxides of Nitrogen, and are the most likely to be involved in the formation and breakdown of Ozone.

### 10

The hourly high value over the past 3 years is 2.7 ppm (2ZV, 2012 and 2013) which is 8 % of the hourly NAAQS (35 ppm ). The 8 -hour high average is 1.7 ppm (2ZV, 2011) which is 19% of the 8 -hour NAAQS (9 ppm). Because of the low CO concentrations, both monitors are now „high sensitivity.‟

Future –No changes are planned for CO in the coming year. CO monitors will continue to operate y ear around at the CO Maintenance site (AQS 35-001-0029), and at the designate d NCore site (AQS 35-001-0023).

Lead (Pb ) Current

– A TSP (Total Suspended Particulate) monitor was installed and operational by December 18, 2011. Lead data is only available for 2 years at this point so a design value cannot be calcula ted; however the values for 2012 and 2013 are an average of 6.7% of the NAAQS and a ttainment issues are not anticipated.

Table 9: Lead De sign Values

Future –No changes are planned for Lead in the coming year.

PM 2.5 

### Chemical Speciation Current

– CFR Part 58 regulations require th e operati on of a speciation sampler at approved NCore sites. The Del Norte ( AQS 35 -001-0023) site in Albuquerque operates a MetOne Super

Sass and a URG sampler for EC/OC (Elemental and Organic Carbon). Speciation filter s are sent to RTI, the EPA national analysis contractor in North Carolina, and data is repo rted by the contractor to the AQS. The AQP also uses this data in local studies to correlate with data from other samplers.
Both samplers now operate on the full 1/3 schedule.

Visibility Current

– Albuquerque-Bernalillo County does not have any Class I areas 3 

### . It exhibits good visibility much of the year but does experience a brown cloud in winter months, particularly during temperature inversions. For that reason, the AQP currently operates a Nephalometer

and an Aethelometer at one site, (AQS 35-001-0023).

3 AQCR 152 includes the Albuquerque MSA and has two Class 1 areas that may be impacted by the Albuquerque airshed, just as we were impacted by the fires in 2011 - 2013.

### 11

Community Scale Monitoring (CSM) Current

– The AQ P has participated previously in CSM studies, but there were none in the past year.

National Core Monitoring Network (NCore) The NCore site has been fully operational and compliant since the 2010 start-up date. Individual NCore inst ruments have been addressed in the appropriate sections above. The 2ZM site also has NCore compliant meteorology.

### 12

Albuquerque – Bernalillo County Network

Table 10 shows the 2013 network before the changes proposed in this review.

Table 10: Albu querque-Bernalillo Co 2013 Air Monitoring Network

### 13

Figure 2: Albuquerque Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network After Review