STATE OF CONNECTICUT

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

January 7, 2011

David Conroy, Chief, Air Programs Branch

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1

5 Post Office Square- Suite 100 (Mail Code OEP05-2)

Boston, MA 02109-3912

Re: Request to Withdraw a Portion of Connecticut’s PMzslnfrastructure Adequacy

Determination

Dear Mr. ~:(r~)~y:

Section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires all states to submit plans to

implement, maintain and enforce all new and revised national ambient air quality standards

(NAAQS), including the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS adopted by the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2006. Resultantly, on September 18, 2009, the

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) submitted an adequacy

determination demonstrating that Connecticut’s State Implementation Plan (SIP) fully satisfies

13 of the 14 required CAA Section 110(a)(1) and (2) infrastructure elements for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS (September 2009 Adequacy Determination).

The State of Connecticut has taken extraordinary steps to reduce in-state emissions of primary

PM2.~ and precursors to PM2.~. Connecticut was one of the first states to adopt annual limits for

both nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide emissions from power plants and other large industrial

sources. Connecticut has also adopted motor vehicle emission standards for light and medium

duty vehicles that are more stringent than the federal standards. Our efforts notwithstanding,

DEP recognizes and values our partnership with EPA; many federal programs have also

furthered our clean air goals such as low sulfur fuel standards for gasoline and diesel fuel, and

heavy duty diesel engine standards. Clearly our record demonstrates that Connecticut is a

national leader in the pursuit of clean air. Unfortunately, we are a leader by necessity because of

the impact of interstate transport of air pollution. Ultimately, it is up to EPA to address the

damaging effects of interstate air pollution transport and to implement those provisions of the

CAA intended to assure clean air for all of Connecticut’s citizens.

Attachment A to this correspondence fulfills a commitment by DEP in the September 2009

Adequacy Determination to revisit our analysis of whether Connecticut’s SIP prevents emissions

from Connecticut that would otherwise significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with

maintenance of the 2006 PM2.s NAAQS in downwind states as required by the Clean Air Act.

Based on Connecticut’s efforts to reduce PM2.s emissions described above, compliance with the

NAAQS was achieved in 2009 throughout the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut (NY/NJ/CT)

nonattainment area. We anticipate that 2010 air monitoring data, once fully quality assured, will

continue to demonstrate that air quality complies with the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Notwithstanding

(Printed on Recycled Paper)

79 Ehn Street  ̄ Hartford, CT 06106-5127

www.ct.gov/dep

A~ Equal Opportu~it3, Employer
David Conroy

January 7, 2011

Page 2

this belief and based on EPA’s air quality modeling, Connecticut recognizes that emissions from

Connecticut may still interfere with maintenance of this standard at several monitoring locations

specified in Attachment A. Therefore by this letter, DEP is voluntarily withdrawing the portion

of the PM2.5 SIP that addresses the CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) interstate transport

provisions. By doing so, DEP anticipates that EPA will work to expedite a rulemaking finalizing

the much needed Transport Rule to reduce interstate transport of air pollution in the eastern

United States.

Due to the health impacts associated with PM2.5 and the public health benefits associated with

the implementation of a strong Transport Rule, please contact me immediately if DEP can be of

any further assistance in helping EPA take steps towards sustaining our continued progress

towards healthy PM2.5 and ozone air quality in Connecticut and other states which are heavily

impacted by emissions from upwind areas.

Sincerely,

Anne Gobin

Chief, Bureau of Air Management

Enc(1)
Attachment A

Adequacy of Connecticut’s PM2.s SIP in Meeting the Clean Air Act’s Transport Provisions

DEP’s PM2.5 adequacy determination letter1 fully addressed all but one of the 14 infrastructure elements

required by CAA Section 110(a)(1) and (2). The remaining element, relating to the interstate transport

provisions of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), was addressed by noting that EPA had previously

approved DEP’s Transport SIP submission for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and by indicating DEP’s intent to

"revisit the analysis concerning Connecticut’s significant contribution to any nearby state 24-hour PM2.~

nonattainment areas once EPA has made final nonattainment designations for the 2006 PM2.s NAAQS."

DEP fulfills its commitment to re-evaluate Connecticut’s impact on downwind states in the discussion

below.

EPA’s technical modeling analysis2, performed in support of the proposed Transport Rule3, indicates that

Connecticut emissions sources significantly contribute to 24-hour PM2.5 nonattainment and/or

maintenance concerns at three monitors in New York City and one monitor in northern New Jersey. Peak

modeled impacts at those monitors from Connecticut emissions (0.7 gg/m3 or 2% of the NAAQS) were

greater than the 1% (0.35 gg/m3) threshold used by EPA to identify a state’s significant contribution to a

downwind state’s nonattainment and/or maintenance problems. EPA’s future year modeling, including

reductions from the proposed Transport Rule and other adopted federal and state measures, show

implementation of these programs is essential to achieving significant improvements in PM2.5 air quality.

Although EPA’s analysis indicates the potential for residual nonattainment and/or maintenance issues in

2014 at two of the monitors impacted by emissions from Connecticut, actual monitoring data from 2007-

2009 show compliance with the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS at those same monitors, as well as throughout the

entire NY/NJ/CT nonattainment area. DEP anticipates that 2010 air monitoring data 4, when fully quality

assured, will remain compliant with the NAAQS, minimizing the potential for any future nonattainment

and/or maintenance problems at the monitors of concern.

Measured compliance with the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS has been achieved, in part, through state and federal

regulations implementing the 2005 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) which was remanded to EPA by the

D.C. Circuit Court in December 2008. As exemplified by the air quality improvements noted above, it is

of critical importance to public health in Connecticut that these emission reductions be preserved through

finalization of a strong interstate Transport Rule to replace CAIR.

September 18, 2009 letter Amey Marrella (CTDEP) to Ira Leighton (EPA-1) on CTDEP website at

http://www.ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/air/particulate matter/pm25planning/sept09pm2 5 infrastructure ltr to .epa.pdf

2 EPA Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document for the Transport Rule (June, 2010), on EPA website at

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/transport/pdfs/TR AQModeling_TSD.pdf (see Appendix D tables at pages D-15 and

D-23).

3

75 Fed. Reg. 45210 (August 8, 2010), Federal Implementation Plans To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine

Particulate Matter and Ozone; Proposed Rule

4 DEP recognizes that actual monitoring data reflects implementation of numerous state and federal air quality

programs, including the 2005 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and that EPA guidance precludes DEP from relying

on emission reductions attributable to CAIR in its present analysis.