Mr. James 1 Palmer, Jr. 

Regional tiministrator 

United States Environmental 

Protection igency - Region 4 

61 Forsyth St reet, SW 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8909 

Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection 

Bob Martinez Center 

2600 Blair Stone Road 

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400 

December 13,2007 

Charlie Crist 

Covernor 

Jeff Kottkmp 

Lt. Governor 

Re: Air Program: Adequacy of Florida's 8-hour Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) with 

Respect to Section 110(a)(l) and (2) of Clean Air Act 

Dear Mr. Palmer: 

In accordance with EPA's October 2,2007, memo, "Guidance on SIP 

Elements Required Under Sections 1 1 O(a)(l) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and 

PM2.5 Natiord Ambient Air Quality Standards," I hereby confirm that to the best of 

my knowledge the elements required by sections 110(a)(l) and (2) of the Clean Air 

Act for implementation of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard have either been approved 

into Florida ' s SIP by EPA, or are addressed in recent Florida SIP submissions 

currently under review by EPA. 

With respect to the generally applicable SIP elements under section 1 10 of the 

Clean Air Act, the state has addressed these elements in individual SIP revisions over 

the years, ad we are not aware of any current SIP deficiencies related to any of these 

items. Likewise, we are not aware of any SIP deficiencies reIated to implementation 

of the 8-hour ozone standard that have not been addressed in previously approved or 

currently pelding SIP revisions. Relevant actions are summarized below. 

On .4pril30, 2004, EPA designated the entire State of Florida as 

'2ln~lassifiahle/attainrnent~~ for the 8-hour ozone standard. On October 12,2007, EPA 

approved Florida's SIP for implementation of the Clean Air Interstate Rule, thereby 

satismng the April 25,2005, EPA finding with respect to the ozone and PMz.5 

"attainment J nd maintenance" requirements of section 1 1 O(a)(2)@)(i)(I). On July 6, 

2007, we sut~mitted a proposed SIP revision intended to satisfy the remainder of that 

same finding with respect to the "prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and 

visibility protection7' requirements of section 1 10(a)(2)@)(i)(II). In that SIP 

submittal, we noted that amendments to Florida's PSI) rules had been adopted to make 
Mr. James I. l ' tlmer, Jr 

Page 2 

December 14, 2007 

those rules cc )I 1 sistent with EPA's November 29,2005, "Final Rule to Implement the 

8-Hour Ozom National Ambient Air Quality Standard-Phase 2." Specifically, those 

rule amendm rlts require that PSD permit applicants and the department treat nitrogen 

oxides (NOx r its an ozone precursor pollutant in various provisions of the PSD rules. 

We submitted lhose rule amendments to EPA as a proposed SIP revision on October 

19, 2007. 

On A111 il30,2004, EPA also promulgated a "phase 1" rule for implementation 

of the 8-hour <zone standard, including requirements at 40 CFR 51.905 related to 

transition fiow the 1-hour standard to the 8-hour standard. Among the provisions of 

40 CFR 5 1.91 is a requirement that states with areas initially designated attainment 

for the 8-hour dandard and subject to the 1-hour maintenance plan provisions of 

section 175A 1 lf the Clean Air Act submit 8-hour maintenance plans in accordance 

with section I I O(a)(l) of the Act. The phase 1 implementation rule was vacated by 

the U. S. Cou 1 i of Appeals for the District of Columbia on December 22,2006, but on 

June 8,2007, [he court granted an EPA request that the rule be vacated "only to the 

extent that th court has sustained challenges to it." We are currently evaluating the 

impact of thc o decisions on Florida's SIP obligations. 

In a rut. ent conference call, EPA st& requested that we address the 

"emergency 1.1~ )wers7' provisions of section 110(a)(2)(G) in this submittal. This section 

of the Clean '\ ~r Act requires that states "provide for authority comparable to that in 

section 303 ar I 1 adequate contingency plans to implement such authority." Section 

303 of the Ac provides the EPA Administrator with authority to seek injunctive relief 

in the case oi an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare" 

and, where CI 11 action is not practicable, authority to issue emergency orders "as may 

be necessary I, protect public health or welfare or the environment." We believe the 

following stat tes give the state comparable authority: 

403.1 . Injunctive relief, remedies.- 

(1) 'I '' : department may institute a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction to 

seek JI ~unctive relief to enforce compliance with this chapter or any rule, regulation, 

perrnlt certification, or order; to enjoin any violation specified in s. 403.16l(l); and to 

seek In lunctive relief to prevent irreparable injury to the air, waters, and property, 

inclucii ig animal, plant, and aquatic life, of the state and to protect human health, saf&y, 

and M ~~hlfare caused or threatened by any violation. 

And, i, ~r emergency orders: 

120.5 1 a (2)(n) If an agency head finds that an immediate danger to the public health, 

safet! x welfare requires an immediate final order, it shall recite with particularity the 

facts I tderlying such finding in the final order, which shall be appealable or enjoinable 

fiom 1 e date rendered. 
Mr. James I. PJmer, Jr. 

Page 3 

December 14. 2007 

Sectioil 1 lO(a)(Z)(G) also requires that states provide contingency plans to implement the 

emergency powers. On April 15, 1996, Florida submitted a SIP revision consisting of a large 

number of rule recodifications and repeals, among which was the repeal of Florida 

Administratit e Code Rule 62-273, "Air Pollution Episodes." This rule was originally adopted to 

implement thc requirements of 40 CFR Part 5 1, Subpart H; specifically, the contingency plan 

requirements at 40 CFR 5 1.152. In the SIP submittal, we requested exemption fkom the 

requirements of 40 CFR 5 1.152 pursuant to EPA' s authority at 40 CFR 5 1.1 52(d) to approve 

such exemption. The basis for the state's request was that, while most urbanized areas of the 

state could be classified as Priority 1 for ozone, all such areas were classified as attainment, and 

all former 1-h lur ozone nonattainrnent areas had approved air quality maintenance plans. In 

addition, we pointed out that air pollutant concentrations at significant harm levels had not been 

recorded in Fldda for many years, if ever. The SIP submittal was approved by EPA June 16, 

1999 (64 FR 72346). 

If you have any questions on this letter or need additional information, please contact me 

at (850) 4884 114 or Larry George of my staffat (850) 921-9555. Thank you for your continued 

support of our efforts to &lly implement the Clean Air Act in Florida. 

JOG{ ~ahn, Director 

Division of Air Resource Management 

JK'W 

cc: Dick \ tihutt, Chief, lPir Planning Branch, EPA Region 4