1

July 19, 2013

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Mary Jane Rutkowski 

Maryland Department of the Environment

Air and Radiation Management Administration 

1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730

Baltimore, MD, 21230

MaryJane.Rutkowski@Maryland.gov

RE: Comments of the Sierra Club Regarding Baltimore Serious Nonattainment 

Area 0.08 ppm 8-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan

On behalf of the Sierra Club and its thousands of members, activists and employees who 

are physically, aesthetically, and economically harmed by ozone pollution in the Baltimore area, 

I am writing to provide comments on the Maryland Department of Environment’s (“MDE’s”) 

proposed Baltimore Serious Nonattainment Area (“NAA”) 0.08 ppm 8-Hour Ozone State 

Implementation Plan (“Proposed SIP”). As explained in detail below, the Proposed SIP is 

inadequate to bring the Baltimore area into attainment with the 1997 Ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (“NAAQS”); the most recent ambient monitoring data clearly demonstrate

that Baltimore is not attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS, and the Proposed SIP fails to include 

additional enforceable emission reductions that will bring the Baltimore NAA into attainment. 

The Proposed SIP is therefore inadequate to attain and maintain the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 

protect the health of the people of Baltimore, and additional emission limits and controls will be 

needed.

As part of this process, to timely and cost-effectively obtain significant NOx reductions, 

the Sierra Club urges MDE to impose additional emissions limits and cost-effective pollution 

controls on the coal-burning power plants in the Baltimore NAA which still lack 20th century 

pollution control technology. As illustrated below, requiring the three Baltimore area coal plants 

to achieve an emission rate of 0.07 lb/MMBtu for NOx during the ozone season would reduce 

ozone season NOx from these plants by 60% or more than 2,000 tons/year. 

In addition, opportunities to reduce ambient ozone may exist through increased 

investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency. Maryland is in the process of reviewing 

and potentially extending its EmPOWER Maryland energy efficiency targets beyond 2015. 

Maryland therefore has an opportunity to use the ozone NAAQS to help inform and drive its 

post-2015 EmPOWER targets, so that they require levels of energy efficiency that will help 

ensure NAAQS compliance. Maryland should also be actively pursuing long-term contracting 

for renewables to reduce the dispatch of NOx-intensive fossil fuel generation and help bring the 

state into compliance with the ozone standard. 
2

Finally, since MDE has failed to attain the NAAQS by its attainment date of June 15, 

2013 and consequently will be bumped up to “severe” nonattainment status, the Sierra Club 

urges MDE to timely and expeditiously update its SIP pursuant to the “severe” nonattainment 

requirements of Section 182(d) of the Clean Air Act.

1

 

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Sierra Club

The Sierra Club is a nonprofit environmental organization with 600,000 members 

nationwide, including more than 13,000 members in Maryland. The Sierra Club’s mission is to 

explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth; to practice and promote the responsible 

use of the earth’s ecosystems and resources; to educate and enlist humanity to protect and restore 

the quality of the natural and human environment; and to use all lawful means to carry out these 

objectives. The Sierra Club’s membership includes individuals and employees who reside in the 

Baltimore nonattainment area and face continued health risks from the impacts of ozone 

pollution.

B. Legal and Factual Background 

The Clean Air Act (“CAA”) is, at its core, a directive to protect the public from harmful 

air pollution. Indeed, “pollution prevention” is a “primary goal” of the CAA. 42 U.S.C. 

§ 7401(c); see also General Motors Corp. v. EPA, 496 U.S. 530, 532 (1990) (noting that “threats 

to human health were regarded as urgent,” and discussing the need for “expeditious 

establishment of programs to deal with the problem”); U.S. Steel Corp. v. EPA, 605 F.2d 283, 

287 (7th Cir. 1979) (observing that CAA “deadlines were a response to the failure of the states 

to meet prior attainment deadlines and represent Congressional concern over the seriously 

adverse health consequences of continued nonattainment”). Pursuant to this mandate, EPA sets 

NAAQS to protect public health and welfare. 42 U.S.C. § 7409(b). NAAQS designations are 

based on an assessment of whether the concentration of pollutants in the ambient air exceeds the 

standard set by EPA to protect public health and welfare. A nonattainment area is defined as 

“any area that does not meet (or that contributes to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does 

not meet) the [NAAQS] for that pollutant. Id. § 7407(d)(1)(A)(i). The Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990 significantly strengthened requirements for nonattainment areas and 

created a classification process based on the level of the areas’ air pollution problem. 

The CAA defines ground-level ozone as a criteria pollutant. In 1979 EPA promulgated a 

primary NAAQS for ozone of 0.12 parts per million (ppm) on a 1-hour basis. In 1997, EPA 

revised the health-based NAAQS for ozone, setting it at 0.08 ppm averaged over an 8-hour 

timeframe. EPA set the standard based on scientific evidence demonstrating that ozone causes 

 

1 Curiously, MDE stated in its Proposed SIP that, as part of meeting the CAA’s “serious” nonattainment SIP 

requirements, it was required to “[a]dopt state regulations to meet CAA Section 182(d).” 182(d) refers to “severe” 

nonattainment SIP requirements, while 182(c) refers to “serious” nonattainment SIP requirements.
3

adverse health effects at lower ozone concentrations and over longer periods of time than was 

understood when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone standard was set.2 

Ozone has numerous harmful effects on human respiratory systems which include 

inducing asthma attacks in asthmatics and aggravating chronic lung diseases like emphysema 

and bronchitis. EPA, Smog—Who Does it Hurt? 2-3 (available at 

http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/pdfs/smog.pdf). Long-term exposure may result in the 

permanent scarring of lung tissue. EPA, Ozone and Your Health (available at 

http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/pdfs/health.pdf). Exposure to ozone can also lead to 

“chronic, adverse effects on lung development in children from the age of 10 to 18 years....” 

See Gauderman, W. James, et al., The Effect of Air Pollution on Lung Development from 10 to 18 

Years of Age, New Engl. J. Med. 351:11, at 1057 (Sept. 9, 2004). However, the greatest harm 

“may occur later in life, since reduced lung function is a strong risk factor for complications and 

death during adulthood.” Id. at 1063. Specific to Baltimore, the American Lung Association’s 

2013 “State of the Air” Report concluded that of the 2,680,756 residents in the Baltimore 

nonattainment area, there were:

 175,015 adult asthmatics

 56,056 child asthmatics

 123,481 residents with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)

 709,150 residents with cardiovascular disease

 605,415 residents under 18 years old

 342,980 residents 65 years or older.

Declaration of George Aburn, Maryland v. EPA, Case No. 13-1070, ¶ 12 (D.C. Cir. May 30, 

2013) (hereinafter “Aburn Decl.”) (citing American Lung Association, “State of the Air 2013 -

Report Card: Maryland,” available at http://www.stateoftheair.org/2013/states/maryland/). 

Ozone pollution also causes significant damage to the environment. Specific to 

Maryland, excess nitrogen and chemical contaminants from atmospheric deposition impact the 

Chesapeake Bay and its watershed. Too much nitrogen entering the Chesapeake Bay leads to 

eutrophication, a process that causes accelerated growth of algae. Too much algae in the Bay 

blocks sunlight needed for submerged aquatic vegetation to grow. Also, when the algae die, they 

sink to the bottom of the Bay and decompose in a process that depletes the oxygen in the water. 

The Chesapeake Bay Program estimated that approximately one-third of the nitrogen that 

reaches the Chesapeake Bay comes from air deposition. Of that one-third, approximately 60% is 

attributable to NOx. Aburn Decl. ¶ 13. The effects of nitrogen can also be seen in acid rain. NOx

are one of the key air pollutants causing acid deposition, which results in adverse effects in 

aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Acid deposition increases the acidity of water and soils, which

can impair the ability of certain fish and aquatic life to grow, reproduce, and survive. Increases 

in soil acidity can impair the ability of some types of trees to grow and resist disease.

 

2 Based on subsequent scientific evidence, EPA subsequently lowered the 8-hour NAAQS to 0.075 in 2008 and is in 

the process of further revising the NAAQS to ensure that it is set at an appropriately health-protective level.
4

In 2004, EPA designated the Baltimore area as being in “moderate” nonattainment for the 

8-hour 1997 NAAQS. See 69 Fed. Reg. 23,858 (Apr. 30, 2004). The Baltimore Nonattainment 

Area includes Baltimore City and Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, and Howard 

counties.

On February 1, 2012, EPA published notice that the Baltimore 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (“Baltimore NAA”) did not attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by 

Baltimore’s moderate nonattainment date. See 77 Fed. Reg. 4901 (Feb. 1, 2012). EPA 

explained that as a result of failing to attain by its attainment date, Baltimore was reclassified, 

that is “bumped up,” to a 1997 8-hour ozone serious nonattainment area. Id. EPA set the due 

date for Maryland to submit necessary SIP revisions to create a serious nonattainment SIP as no 

later than September 30, 2012 and the attainment date as no later than June 15, 2013. Id. 

Pursuant to section 182(c) of the CAA, a serious nonattainment SIP must contain not only the 

requirements for moderate nonattainment areas, see 42 U.S.C. § 7511a(c), but must also meet the 

following additional requirements:

 Enhanced monitoring (Id. § 7511a(c)(1))

 Attainment and reasonable further progress demonstrations (Id. § 7511a(c)(2))

 Enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance program (Id. § 7511a(c)(3))

 Clean fuel vehicle programs (Id. § 7511a(c)(4))

 Transportation control measures based upon aggregate vehicle mileage and emissions (Id.

§ 7511a(c)(5))

 Limitations on what qualifies as de minimis emissions (Id. § 7511a(c)(6))

 Specified internal offset ratios for sources to avoid new source review requirements (Id.

§ 7511a(c)(7) & (8))

 Inclusion of contingency measures (Id. § 7511a(c)(9))

 A VOC offset ratio of 1.2:1 (Id. § 7511a(c)(10))

On June 17, 2013, two days after EPA’s required attainment date, MDE submitted its 

Proposed SIP revision for attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS, concluding that “[b]ased on the 

attainment demonstration modeling . . ., the weight of evidence data analysis, and the 

supplemental modeling that was completed, MDE is confident that the Baltimore [Nonattainment 

Area] will attain the 8-hour ozone standard by June 15, 2013.” Proposed SIP at 133.

Much of the June 17 Proposed SIP appears to simply restate Maryland’s 2007 attainment 

demonstration, which was disapproved by EPA in 2009. See 74 Fed. Reg. 21,594. Moreover, 

the Proposed SIP is almost entirely comprised of emissions limits and controls that have already 

been fully implemented, including the NOx requirements of the Healthy Air Act. The most 

recent air quality monitoring data unambiguously show that MDE has failed to attain the 

NAAQS by its attainment date of June 15, 2013.3 Consequently, the Baltimore area will be 

bumped up to “severe” nonattainment status.

 

3

Indeed, MDE acknowledges in its Clean Air Progress Report that “[d]espite the[] actions [it has taken], Maryland 

is not meeting ground-level ozone standards. In particular, one monitoring station, in Harford County, records 

significantly higher levels than all other stations in the State.” (May 1, 2013), available

at http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/PressRoom/Pages/Clean_Air_Progress_2013.aspx.
5

II. COMMENTS

A. The Baltimore Serious Area Attainment Demonstration Modeling Is 

Inadequate to Demonstrate Attainment of the NAAQS Because 2012 

Monitored Data Shows Multiple Exceedances of the NAAQS

Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 51.112(a), an attainment demonstration must “demonstrate that 

the measures, rules, and regulations contained in it are adequate to provide for the timely 

attainment and maintenance of the national standard that it implements.” Such a demonstration 

is to be done by modeling but also by “data bases,” including the ambient monitoring database

Air Quality System (AQS), which EPA allows public access to via its AirData webpage. Here, 

the monitored data conclusively demonstrate that the Baltimore area is not attaining the 1997 

ozone NAAQS, and that the results of the modeling, which relies on out-of-date data, must be 

rejected. 

The Proposed SIP stated that its “modeling exercise predicts future year 2012 air quality 

conditions based on the worst episodes in the base year 2002, and applies control measures to 

demonstrate the effectiveness of new control measures in reducing air pollution.” Proposed SIP

at 104. Based on its 2002-forecasted modeling exercise, MDE summarily concluded that “all 

monitors within the Baltimore NAA demonstrated compliance with the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS,” id. at 133, and consequently, that the 1997 ozone NAAQS would be attained by June 

15, 2013.

There is no basis for MDE to use 2002 projections for 2012 air quality conditions when,

at the time of its June 17, 2013 submission, it had full access to the actual 2012 air quality 

conditions for the Baltimore NAA. When actual air quality conditions for 2012 are reviewed, it 

is clear that the Baltimore NAA did not attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS by June 15, 2013, and 

will not be able to attain the NAAQS without additional controls beyond those in the Proposed 

SIP. As the table below illustrates, according to actual data from the 7 monitors in the Baltimore 

NAA, there were 58 exceedances of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in 2012. 

Site ID Address County State

 

Actual 

Exceedances

240030014 Davidsonville Recreation Center, 

3801 Queen Anne Bridge Road

Anne Arundel MD 13

240051007 Padonia Elementary School, 

 9834 Greenside Drive

 Baltimore MD 12

240053001 600 Dorsey Avenue Baltimore MD 7

240130001 1300 W. Old Liberty Road Carroll MD 3
6

Site ID Address County State

 

Actual 

Exceedances

240251001 Edgewood Chemical Biological 

Center (Apg), Waehli Road

 Harford MD 9

240259001 3560 Aldino Road Harford MD 11

245100054 Furley E.S. Recreational Center,

4633 Furley Avenue.

Baltimore (City) MD 3

 TOTAL 58

EPA AirData Database, Baltimore-Towson, MD, 8-hour ozone standard (0.075 ppm), 2012, available at 

http://www.epa.gov/airdata/ad_rep_mon.html

In addition, on May 30, less than three weeks before MDE issued its Proposed SIP 

asserting that the Baltimore area would be timely attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS, George 

Aburn, Director of MDE’s Air and Radiation Management Administration, stated that MDE’s 

Proposed SIP measures “were not sufficient to achieve the 1997 standard as 2012 was a more 

intense year for ozone formation.” Aburn Decl. ¶ 5.

4

 Consequently, Mr. Aburn concluded that 

“[t]he Baltimore region, which was not declared as having clean data and attaining the 1997 

standard, will be reclassified again, this time as severe” and explained that, “[a]s Maryland is one 

of the few areas of the country that was not declared attainment for the 1997 standard, Maryland 

must continue to implement additional measures for NOx and VOC or suffer sanctions.” Id. ¶ 6. 

As MDE apparently recognizes, the Baltimore area was not and is not attaining the 1997 

standard and the Proposed SIP will need to be timely updated to reflect Baltimore’s impending 

“severe” nonattainment status. 

Furthermore, beyond 2012, EPA has acknowledged repeatedly that climate change will 

make ozone problems worse. See e.g. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impactsadaptation/health.html (“Scientists project that warmer temperatures from climate change will 

increase the frequency of days with unhealthy levels of ground-level ozone, a harmful air 

pollutant”). Therefore, MDE’s attainment demonstrations should be using actual 2012 weather, 

or even warmer weather, to demonstrate that the emission limits and other nonattainment SIP 

provisions will attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 

B. The Baltimore Serious Nonattainment SIP Is Inadequate to Demonstrate 

that the Area Will Reach Attainment Because the Measures it Contains Are 

 

4

It should be noted that 2012 was by no means an outlier for NAAQS exceedances for the Baltimore NAA. In 2011,

there were 74 exceedances of the NAAQS in the Baltimore NAA. In 2010, there were 76 exceedances. See EPA 

AirData Database, Baltimore-Towson, MD, 8-hour ozone standard (0.075 ppm), available at 

http://www.epa.gov/airdata/ad_rep_mon.html.
7

Fully Implemented and Have Not to Date Resulted in Attainment of the 1997 

Ozone NAAQS; Additional Measures Are Required

MDE’s Proposed SIP relies exclusively on limits and controls which have already been 

fully implemented, yet the Baltimore area is still not attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Further 

reductions in ozone precursors are therefore required. 

None of the measures identified in the Proposed SIP to achieve attainment of the 8-hour 

NAAQS call for new regulations or requirements beyond 2012. For example, the Healthy Air 

Act, which was a laudable piece of legislation that achieved significant reductions in power plant 

NOx emissions, contains no new requirements for NOx beyond 2012. Consequently, although it

has achieved a 75% reduction in NOx emissions from 2002 levels, the HAA’s regulations are 

nevertheless acknowledged to be “insufficient to reach attainment” with the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS. Aburn Decl. ¶ 4.

Furthermore, Section 172(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act requires that nonattainment SIPs 

“shall provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures (“RACM”) as 

expeditiously as practicable.” 42 U.S.C. § 7502(c)(1). As MDE readily admits, “the [RACM] 

analysis is designed to ensure that the Baltimore 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area is 

implementing all reasonably available control measures in order to demonstrate attainment with 

the 8-hour ozone standard on the earliest date possible.” Proposed SIP at 86.

However, the Proposed SIP does not include any current or recent RACM analysis. 

Instead, the RACM analysis in the Proposed SIP is at least 5 years out of date, requiring that, 

“[a]s the Baltimore region currently expects to reduce ozone levels to 84 ppb during the 2009 

ozone season, any RACM measures must enable the region to meet the 84 ppb standard by April 

1, 2008, the beginning of the 2008 ozone season.” Proposed SIP at 87. Such an improper and 

outdated RACM analysis violates the intent and express requirement of the Clean Air Act, and 

MDE must revise its future SIP submissions to include a current RACM analysis. 

Additionally, the Proposed SIP appears to be missing several of the CAA requirements 

for “serious” nonattainment areas, including enhanced monitoring (42 U.S.C. § 7511a(c)(1)), 

specified internal offset ratios for sources to avoid new source review requirements (Id.

§ 7511a(c)(7) & (8)), and a VOC offset ratio of 1.2 to 1 (Id. § 7511a(c)(10)). To be deemed 

complete, the Proposed SIP must be revised to include these requirements.

As shown above, the most recent monitoring data prove conclusively that the Baltimore 

NAA will not be in attainment by June 15, 2013. Because the Proposed SIP offers no new 

additional regulations or requirements to lower ozone precursor emissions, MDE must revise the 

SIP to reflect the Baltimore NAA’s new “severe” nonattainment status, and include additional 

controls as well as a current RACM analysis.

C. MDE Can Achieve Additional Controls by Requiring Short-Term Limits and 

Cost-Effective Pollution Controls for Coal-Fired Power Plants in the 

Baltimore Nonattainment Area
8

Despite the strides Maryland has made in reducing emissions from large NOx sources, 

there remain readily available local reductions in ozone precursors that Maryland has not availed 

itself of. According to MDE, NOx emissions from power plants and other stationary sources 

constitute nearly 40% of total NOx emissions. See Proposed SIP at 17, Table 2-2. One costeffective and expeditious means of obtaining several thousand tons of ozone season NOx

emissions in the Baltimore area is to impose an emission limit of 0.07 pounds per million British 

thermal units (lb/MMBtu) on each coal-burning electric generating unit in the Baltimore NAA. 

Unlike the Healthy Air Act, which allows for averaging across facilities, this limit should be 

applied on a stack-by-stack basis. Furthermore, the limit should be based on a 24-hour averaging 

time, since averaging over a thirty-day, ozone season, or annual time period does not ensure that 

the NOx reductions are being achieved when they are most needed: namely, on hot, sunny 

summer days. Rather, averaging times longer than 24 hours allows for increased NOx emissions 

at critical times and thereby allow 8-hour ozone averages that violate the NAAQS. The 

compliance date for units with SCR already installed should the beginning of the next ozone 

season. The compliance date for units without SCR should allow no more than 21 months. See 

76 Fed. Reg. at 48,282. 

Three of the six coal-burning power plant units in the Baltimore NAA still do not have 

SCR installed, despite the fact that SCR NOx reduction technology has been around for decades 

and EPA has repeatedly found it to be cost-effective. See, e.g., Appalachian Power v. EPA, 135 

F.3d 791, 815-816 (D.C. Cir. 1998). Congress itself noted that SCR was cost-effective nearly a 

quarter century ago. See id. at 819, quoting S. REP. No. 101-228, at 332-33 (1989). 

A 0.07 lb/MMBtu limit can easily be met with SCR installed. One need look no further 

than the Morgantown power plant, which maintains an average monthly emission rate of 0.03 

lb/MMBtu. Applying the 0.07 lb/MMBtu to the coal plants in the Baltimore NAA, the table 

below illustrates that this limit would lead to over 2,000 tons in potential emissions reductions, 

an almost 60% reduction of total NOx 2012 emissions:

Facility Unit Avg. 2012 

ozone season 

monthly NOx

emission rate 

(lb/MMBtu)

Total 2012 

ozone 

season NOx

emissions 

(tons)

Potential 

Ozone Season 

NOx

Reductions at 

0.07 

lb/MMBtu 

(tons)

NOx Controls

Brandon 

Shores

1 0.11 726 264 SCR, LNB

Brandon 

Shores

2 0.13 892 411 SCR, LNB

CP Crane 1 0.40 573 472 OFA, CM, SNCR

CP Crane 2 0.37 668 541 OFA, CM, SNCR

HA Wagner 2 0.38 475 387 LNB, SNCR

HA Wagner 3 0.07 154 0 LNB, OFA, SCR

TOTAL 3,488 2,077
9

As explained above, a 0.07 lb/MMBtu limit and implementation of SCR across all coal 

plants in the Baltimore NAA would achieve significant reductions in NOx emissions. Since 

utility and other stationary source NOx emissions comprise nearly 40% of the NOx emissions in 

the Baltimore nonattainment area in 2012, Proposed SIP at 17, Table 2-2, a 60% reduction in 

coal plant NOx emissions would be a tremendous step in the Baltimore NAA reaching attainment 

status. Moreover, installation of SCR has been consistently found to be cost-effective, and the 

time is long past for major sources of ozone precursors in the Baltimore NAA to at least have 

installed and be operating the best 20th-century control technology.

D. Maryland Should Pursue Long-term Contracts for Renewables and 

Enhanced Energy Efficiency Targets Under EmPOWER Maryland As a 

Pathway to Reducing Emissions of Ozone Precursors in the State

EPA has promoted the incorporation of energy efficiency and renewable energy policies 

and programs into SIPs as a means of helping states to achieve compliance with ambient air 

quality standards. Maryland is already investigating the possibility for incorporating energy 

efficiency and renewable energy commitments into its nonattainment SIP for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. See EPA, Roadmap for Incorporating Energy Efficiency/Renewable Energy Policies 

and Programs into State and Tribal Implementation Plans: Appendix K: State, Tribal and Local 

Examples and Opportunities (July 2012), at K-15 to K-16. Maryland is also a crossroads with 

regard to its EmPOWER programs and targets and will be making decisions in the coming 

months regarding whether and how to extent the programs beyond 2015. To fully capitalize on 

this opportunity, Maryland should be actively pursuing long-term contracting for renewables and 

setting its post-2015 energy efficiency targets for EmPower MD in a manner that is driven by the 

ability to use efficiency to help the State comply with both the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards.

III. CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, MDE’s Proposed SIP for the Baltimore NAA is inadequate 

to meet the 1997 ozone NAAQS, and as a result, the Baltimore NAA will be bumped up from 

“serious” to “severe” nonattainment. Prolonged nonattainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS will 

harm Baltimore’s citizens, will cause irreparable economic harm to Maryland by subjecting the 

state to increasingly stringent pollution reduction requirements, and could subject Maryland to 

sanctions under the CAA. See 42 U.S.C. § 7511d(a).

Accordingly, MDE should proceed expeditiously with issuance of its nonattainment SIP 

revision based on the “severe” nonattainment SIP requirements found in Section 182(d) of the 

CAA. At the same time, MDE should impose additional emission limits and pollution controls 

on Maryland’s coal-burning power plants, including revised NOx emission limits and the 

installation of SCR as proven, cost-effective NOx reduction technology 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important issue. If you have any 

questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. 
10

Respectfully submitted,

Joshua Berman

Sierra Club Environmental Law Program

50 F St. NW, 8th Floor

Washington, DC 20001

Tel: (202) 650-6062

Email: josh.berman@sierraclub.org

Philip M. Goo

Law Office of Philip M. Goo

1377 K St. SE, Unit 2

Washington, DC 20003

Tel: (404) 583-9451

Email: goolawoffice@gmail.com