GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA District Department ofthe Environment 

# ***

Office ofthe Director

March 12, 2012

Shawn M. Garvin Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Mail Code 3RAOO 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
Subject: Comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0476 on the District of Columbia's 2008 Ozone Nonattainment Boundary

On December 9,2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sent its recommendation to Mayor Gray about the nonattainment boundary for the District of Columbia ("District") for the revised 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 8-hour ozone. EPA indicated that additional information regarding the appropriate nonattainment area boundary could be submitted.
Through this letter, the District Department ofthe Environment (DDOE) would like to reaffirm and further clarify the District's stance onthe area's nonattainment boundary.

• On March 11,2009, the District's Mayor recommended that the nonattainment

area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, "should include at a minimum the entire Washington DC-MD-V A MSA." Itwas also stated that, "the District supports the idea ofusing larger combined statistical areas (CSA) instead ofthe MSA, based

on sound science, for mitigating ozone."

• On February 3, 2012, in a letter to EPA's Docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR2008-0476), DDOE indicated that, "we share concern over ozone transport that lead the states ofMaryland, Connecticut, and Delaware to urge EPA to establish large nonattainment areas as a way to ensure that upwind states are held accountable for their contribution to the high ozone levels that are measured throughout the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States."

In the March 2009 letter, the District highlighted the fact that, as a non-industrial jurisdiction with a small number ofpollution sources, based on 2002 emissions estimates, the District's sources contributed less than ten percent ofozone precursor emissions released in the Washington DC-MD-V A nonattainment area. Projections for 2009 showed emissions reductions in the District due to controls, but without a proportionate improvement in ambient air quality. Analyses by the Ozone Transport Commission

greenforward H M H DISTRICT

# --------------------------~---------------------**~** DEPARTMENT OFTHE ENVIRONMENT 1200 First St. NE, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 200021 Tel: (202) 535-2650 1 web:ddoe.dc.govDistrict ofColumbia Comments to Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-HQ-2008--0476 Page 2
(OTC) since the 1990s identified transported pollution as a key contributor to ozone problems throughout the Ozone Transport Region (OTR).

DDOE would like to take this opportunity to stress the need for additional controls for addressing transport. Under EPA's current proposal, most ofthe areas upwind ofthe District would be classified as a "marginal" or an "attainment" area, which means that no additional controls would be required. Without additional controls to reduce transported pollution, it is unlikely that the District will achieve the 2008 ozone standard by the 2015 attainment date.

DDOE urges EPA to address long-range transport by considering a larger multijurisdictional ozone nonattainment boundary that includes the District. At a minimum, the boundary for the nonattainment area has to be redefined to account for the expanded urban corridor and EPA should reconsider designating 

### the Washington-BaltimoreNorthern Virginia DC-MD-VA-WV CSA as the nonattainment area boundary.
Large Nonattainment Area Boundary

A super-regional nonattainment boundary that encompasses all contributing states would get at the heart ofthe nonattainment issues in District and throughout the OTR. As EPA stated in the five-factor analysis that accompanied the December 9,2011, letterto Mayor Grayl, "atthis point in the designation process, EPApreliminarily agrees with the District ofColumbia that an appreciable part ofthe air quality problem within the District ofColumbia is due to emissions outside its borders." The District cannot solve its air quality problems without a reduction in transported pollution from the contributing states.

Based on an analysis conducted by EPA for the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), emissions from states listed in the table below contribute significantly to the District's

ozone air quality problem. For example, in 2012, EPA'sianalysis indicated that the cumulative contribution atthe District's air monitors could be in the range of49 parts per billion (Ppb) to 52 ppb from states with individual contribution ofat least 0.7 parts per billion (Ppb) or at least one percent ofthe NAAQS. Together, in 2012, the contributing states listed inthe table below are expected to contribute at least 74 percent or 56.6 ppb of76.9 ppb base case average, at the highest reading ozone monitor in the District.
Although different OTC states may offer different super-regional boundaries, based on various factors such as unique meteorology ortopography or air quality contributions, the District urges EPAto take a broader view ofthe ozone problem to determine which states contribute most commonly to nonattainment issues throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Northeastern regions ofthe United States.

1 The EPA analysis that accompanied the December 9,2011, letter to Mayor Gray was titled, "District of Columbia Area Designations for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards."District ofColumbia Comments to Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-HQ-2008-0476 Page 3



### States with < 

### 0.7 ppb contribution to the District's air monitors Stat • (>
COB 

### Dis • with> O.7ppb %ofNAAQS) ribution

# to the lriet's monitors Alabama NewHampshire Illinois Arkansas North Dakota Indiana Connecticut Oklahoma Kentucky Florida Rhode Island Maryland Georgia South Carolina Michigan

Iowa South Dakota New Jersey Kansas Texas New York Louisiana Vermont Ohio

Maine Delaware Pennsylvania Massachusetts Missouri Tennessee

Minnesota North Carolina Virginia Mississippi Wisconsin West Virginia

Nebraska
According to the Clean Air Act (CAA) §182(b), states andjurisdictions added to the nonattainment areathat are not currently in nonattainment would be required to adopt a SIP as well as the following control programs: Major source Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT); New Source Review (NSR); Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (11M); Stage II gasoline vapor recovery.
Also, CAA §176 requires transportation conformity in nonattainment areas. Extending nonattainment area requirements to additionaljurisdictions would create regulatory parity while providing opportunity for the District to achieve its air quality improvement goals for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, as well as future NAAQS that maybe even more stringent.

CSANonattainment Area Boundary

Because ofurban sprawl inthe Washington-Baltimore area, as noted inthe District's March 2009 letter, DDOE urges EPA to reevaluate its approach for establishing a nonattainment boundary by accounting for the expanded urban corridor. EPA should reconsider designating the Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia DC-MD-VA-WV CSA as the nonattainment areaboundary.

Based on Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) and U.S. Census Bureau classifications, a CSA nonattainment boundary for the Washington-Baltimore would bring additional counties into the nonattainment area as listed inthe table below. With the CSA as the nonattainment boundary, the newly addedjurisdictions would be required to adopt above mentioned control measures, bothnon-mobile and mobile controls, asDistrict ofColumbia Comments to Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-HQ-2008-0476 Page 4
applicable. The District understands that the CSA counties in column three ofthe table belowthat are considered part ofthe Ozone Transport**R~gion** 

### (OTRi may already comply with the requirements ofCAA 

### §184, and thesejulrisdictions need to implement controls such as the major source RACT and vehicle I/Miprograms.



### State Counties/Citiesin ExistingNonattainment

Areas asproposed by EPA Additional

( c

### ountieslCitiesfortbe

IcASnonattainment boundary:**~** 

### uasbington-Baltimore­**.~** 

### ortbemVirginia

### DC:. MD·VA':WV CSA* DC Washington, D.C. 1 MD Calvert Countyl Queen Anne's Countyz"· Charles Countyl St. Mary's County 4 Frederick Countyl Montgomery Countyl Prince George's Countyl Anne Arundel CountyZ ! Baltimore CityZ Baltimore CountyZ Carroll CountyZ Harford CountyZ Howard CountyZ VA Arlington Countyl Clark Countyl Fairfax Countyl Fauquier Countyl Loudoun Countyl Spotsylvania Countyl' Prince William Countyl Stafford Countyl" City ofAlexandrial Warren Countyl City ofFairfaxl City ofFredericksburgl." City ofFalls Churchl Frederick Count:i City ofManassasl**Ci~** ofWinchester J City ofManassas Parkl CuJlpeper County4 WV nla Jeiferson Countyl Hampshire CountyJ Part ofWashmgton-Arhngton-AlexandnaDC-MD-VA-WV MSA , 1. Baltimore-Towson MD MSA2; Winchester VA-WV MSA3;

Lexington ParkMD or Culpeper V A Micropolitan Areas4

•• These areas are part ofFredericksburg nonattainment area (which also includes portions ofCaroline County)

••• This area is part ofthe Upper Eastern Shore nonattainrnent area under the 1997 NAAQS

2 According to CAA §184(a), the OTR includes the State ofMaryland and the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area that includes the District ofColumbia, which includes parts ofVirginia butnot West Virginia. However, the District is not clear on whether Virginia counties that are not in the Washington DC-MD-VA nonattainment area are technically still part ofthe OTR.District ofColumbia Comments to Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-HQ-2008-D476 Page 5

DDOE is appreciative ofEPA's five-factor analysis in support ofits December 2011 boundary recommendation for the District. However, DDOE questions several ofthe conclusions drawn by EPA.

First, EPA should consider revisiting its interpretation or'use ofthe term "nearby" to delineate nonattainment boundaries for the ozone NAAQS (i.e., such as one county out from a violating monitor, as EPA has typically used as a basis for whether ornot to include a county in a nonattainment area). Itis widely aoknowledged that precursor emissions ofozone travel distances much farther than previously believed.

Itappears that EPA made determinations about which cotmty should be linked to which nonattainment area in the Washington-Baltimore corridot based on "Maryland's recommendations." DDOE does not agree with EPA's apparent interpretation of Maryland's recommendation. In their March 10, 2009, letter to EPA, Maryland stated that they only recommended the existing nonattainment structure, "ifEPA is confident that strong national rules will be in place three years in advance ofMaryland's attainment date," orby 2011. In the alternative, Maryland advocated for a large regional nonattainment area. EPA has not been able to follow thrCl>ugh with strong national controls.

Ofparticular note is EPA's weight onMaryland's**suppo~ed** recommendations for a couple ofcounties (Prince George's County and Frederick County). The analyses appear to indicate that the two counties could be included as part ofat least two different nonattainment areas. Perhaps, upon further reconsideration ofMaryland's recommendations, and since numerous counties could realistically be included in more than one nonattainment area in the Washington-Baltimore CSA, EPA will agree that it would be appropriate to develop a larger nonattainment area that encompasses CSA boundary.
Finally, EPA should consider more heavily weighting the influence ofthe entire region's mobile sector emissions. In EPA's analysis, "traffic and commuting patterns" are rarely mentioned as factors that influenced EPA's preliminary boundary decisions. The mobile sector (on-road and off-road) is a major contributorto emissions in urban areas such as the Washington and Baltimore metropolitan areas and controls on the mobile sector provide local air quality benefit.

The Metropolitan Planning Organization's (MPO) travel demand modeling recognizes the undeniable influence ofmobile emissions fromjurisdictions surrounding the region's current nonattainment areas. This is indicated by the regionally-determined "model area," which is the transportation analysis zone (TAZ) used in air quality conformity assessments for the National Capital region's transportation planning. Please see the map inAttachment A. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the emissions from these exurban counties contribute to the National Capital region's air quality. Mobile sector control programs in some ofthese counties create local benefits and would be very appropriate.District ofColumbia Comments to Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-HQ-2008-0476 Page 6

This can be achieved by including the exurban counties as part ofthe nonattainment area with CSA as the boundary.

In summary, based on EPA's analyses, the District's air quality is significantly impacted by the transported air pollution from outside its boundaries. The District cannot attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS without the precursor pollution reductions in contributing jurisdictions. DDOE encourages EPA to address transport by considering a larger multijurisdictional ozone nonattainment boundary that includes the District. Alternately, DDOE urges EPA to reconsider designating the Washington-Baltimore area by using CSA boundary.

Ifyou wish to discuss these issues further, please do not hesitate to contact me at (202) 535-2615, or Ms. Cecily Beall, Associate Director ofthe Air Quality Division, at (202) 535-2626.

Thank you for consideration ofour comments.

ophe A.G. Tulou, Director District Department ofthe Environment 1200 First Street, NE, 5th Floor Washington, DC 20002

cc: Diane Esher, Director, Air Protection Division, EPA Region III Cecily Beall, Associate Director, Air Quality Division, DDOE

EnclosureDistrict ofColumbia Comments to Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-HQ-2008-0476 Page 7

ATTACHMENT A



### EXHIBIT 1 Washington, D.C.- Maryland

- Virginia Planning Areas

Model Area 8-Hour Ozone NonattainmentArea PMB Nonattainmenl Area

___..... Winter CO Maintenance Area

3

Source: "Air Quality Conformity Determination ofthe 2011 Constrained Long Range Plan for the Washington Metropolitan Region" (November 16, 2011); found at: http://www.mwcog.org/store/item.asp?PUBLICAnON ID=424