Z~ON 1 

' A 'z 

a Q 

S ED STq . 

~~~TqC PRO l EG~`O ' 

Memorandum 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 1 

5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 

Boston, MA 02109-3912 

Date: July 10, 2012 

Subject: Technical Support Document (TSD) for the Massachusetts Submittals to Fulfill 

the Requirements for 1997 and 2006 PM2,5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards Infrastructure Portion of the Clean Air Act Under Section 110(a)(2) 

From : Alison Simcox, Environmental Scientist W 

Thru : Anne Arnold, Manager ~Af,~ 

Air Quality Planning Unit 

To: Docket for Massachusetts Section 110 PM2,5 Infrastructure Submittals 

(EPA-ROI-OAR-2009-0459 and EPA-ROI-OAR-2011-0323) 

A. INTRODUCTION 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action on certain submittals made by 

Massachusetts to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2) requirements relating to the 

1997 and the revised 2006 fine particulate matter (PMZ.5) national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). This technical support document (TSD) gives EPA's analysis of the Massachusetts 

submissions with respect to section 110(a)(2). 

B. BACKGROUND 

Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), states are required to submit SIPs 

that provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement (the infrastructure) of a new 

or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of the NAAQS. Section 

110(a)(2) lists the specific infrastructure elements that must be incorporated into the SIPs, 

including, for example, requirements for emission inventories, prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD), air pollution control measures, and monitoring that are designed to assure 

attaimnent and maintenance of the NAAQS. EPA refers to the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(A)-(C), (D)(ii), (E)-(H), and (J)-(M) as the "infrastructure" SIPs. Additionally, EPA 

refers to the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) as the "interstate transport" SIPs. EPA 

provided separate guidance to states on each type of SIP, infrastructure and interstate transport, 

and these actions may be on separate tracks and timelines. 
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

On July 18, 1997, EPA published new NAAQS for PM (62 FR 38652). This included a new 

annual and a new 24-hour NAAQS for particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (denoted PM2.5). The annual PM2,5 standard was set at 15 

micrograms per cubic meter (pg/m3) based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 

concentrations, and the 24-hour PM2.5 standard was set at 65 ~Ig/m3 based on a 3-year average of 

the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations . 

Thus, states were required to submit "infrastructure" SIPs for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS to EPA no 

later than June 2000. However, intervening litigation over the 1997 PM2.5 (and 8-hour ozone) 

NAAQS created uncertainty about how to proceed, and many states did not provide the required 

"infrastructure" SIP submissions for these newly promulgated NAAQS. 

On March 4, 2004, Earthjustice submitted a notice of intent to sue related to EPA's failure to 

issue findings of failure to submit related to the infrastructure requirements for the 1997 PM2.5 

(and 8-hour ozone) NAAQS. With regard to the 1997 PM2,5 NAAQS, EPA entered into a 

consent decree with Earthjustice, which required EPA to complete a Federal Register notice 

announcing EPA's determinations pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(B) of the Act as to whether each 

state had made complete submissions to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 

PM2,5 NAAQS by October 5, 2008. 

On October 17, 2006, EPA published revised standards for PM (71 FR 61144). For PM2.5, the 

annual standard of 15 pg/m was retained, and the 24-hour standard was revised to 35 Pg/m3 . For 

PMIO, the annual standard was revoked, and the 24-hour standard (150 pg/m3) was retained. As 

required by section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, 110(a)(2) ("infrastructure") submittals were due 

within three years of promulgation of the revised 24-hour PM2.5 standard (i .e ., by September 21, 

2009). 

Massachusetts submitted a certification letter for the 1997 PMZ,5 standards on April 4, 2008 . On 

October 22, 2008, EPA published findings concerning whether states had made the 110(a)(2) 

submissions for the 1997 PM2.5 standards (73 FR 62902). In the October 2008 action, 

Massachusetts received a "finding of failure to submit" a SIP addressing section 110(a)(2)(C) 

and (J) pertaining to the Part C PSD permit program. However, this requirement has already 

been addressed by a FIP that remains in place, and therefore, the finding of failure action did not 

trigger any additional FIP obligations. 

Massachusetts submitted a certification letter for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on September 21, 

2009. On September 8, 2011, EPA published findings concerning whether states had made the 

110(a)(2) submissions for the 2006 PM2.5 standards. (76 FR 55577). MA did not receive a 

finding for the 2006 NAAQS because it had submitted the certification letter . 

Additional information 
3 

EPA is currently acting upon SIPs that address the infrastructure requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(1) and (2) for ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS for various states across the country. Commenters 

on EPA's recent proposals for some states raised concerns about EPA statements that it was not 

addressing certain substantive issues in the context of acting on those infrastructure SIP 

submissions. Those commenters specifically raised concerns involving provisions in existing 

SIPs and with EPA's statements in other proposals that it would address two issues separately 

and not as part of actions on the infrastructure SIP submissions: (i) existing provisions related to 

excess emissions during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction ("SSM") at sources, that 

may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions; and (ii) 

existing provisions related to "director's variance" or "director's discretion" that purport to permit 

revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits with limited public process or without requiring 

further approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA. EPA notes that there are two other 

substantive issues for which EPA stated in other proposals that it would address the issues 

separately: (i) existing provisions for minor-source new source review ("minor source NSR") 

programs that may be inconsistent with the requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations that 

pertain to such programs; and (ii) existing provisions for Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's "Final NSR 

Improvement Rule," 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 

2007) ("NSR Reform") . 

As noted above, for the 1997 PM2.5 (and also for the 1997 8-hour ozone) NAAQS, states must 

provide a SIP submission, or provide a certification that addresses sections 110(a)(2)(A) through 

(M), with the exception of the portion of 110(a)(2)(C) pertaining to a permit program in Part D 

Title I of the CAA, 3 of 4 prongs of (D)(i), and 110(a)(2)(I) (nonattainment area plan under Part 

D) . 

The four prongs of 110(a)(2)(D)(i) refer to EPA's subdivision of (D)(i) into four "interstate 

transport prongs," two under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and two under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) . The two 

prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) are: (prong 1) contribute significantly to nonattainment in any 

other state with respect to any such national primary or secondary NAAQS, and (prong 2) 

interfere with maintenance by any other state with respect to the same NAAQS. The two prongs 

under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) are (prong 3) interfere with measures required to be included in the 

applicable implementation plan for any other state under part C to prevent significant 

deterioration (PSD) of air quality or (prong 4) to protect visibility . 

To help states meet this statutory requirement, EPA issued guidance on October 2, 2007 entitled 

"Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards," which listed the basic elements that 

states must include in their 110(a) SIPs. 

On September 25, 2009, EPA issued an updated guidance document entitled Guidance on SIP 

Elements Required Under Sections I10(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2,5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which clarifies expectations for certain 

elements to meet the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA for both the 1997 

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Specifically, guidance is provided for satisfying the section 
4 

110(a)(2)(D) requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, as well as guidance for satisfying the 

section 110(a)(2)(G) requirements that addresses both the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

C. STATE SUBMITTALS 

Pursuant to the October 2, 2007 EPA guidance for addressing the SIP infrastructure elements 

required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2), there are 14 components that must be included in the 

SIPs that Massachusetts submitted for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. These are as follows: 

Section 110(a)(2)(A) Emission limits and other control measures . 

Section 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient air quality monitoring/data system. 

Section 110(a)(2)(C) Program for enforcement of control measures. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) Interstate transport. 

Section 11 0(a)(2)(E) Adequate resources. 

Section 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary source monitoring system. 

Section 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency power. 

Section 110(a)(2)(H) Future SIP revisions. 

Section 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with government officials . 

Section 110(a)(2)(J) Public notification. 

Section 110(a)(2)(J) Prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and visibility protection. 

Section 110(a)(2)(K) Air quality modeling/submission of such data. 

Section 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees . 

Section 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/participation by affected local entities . 

As noted above, Massachusetts provided a submittal dated April 4, 2008 to satisfy the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and a submittal dated 

September 21, 2009 for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

In this action for Massachusetts, as further described under "Evaluation of State Submittals," we 

are only addressing prong 3 of 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (i .e ., interference with PSD) for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has previously decided that it can take action on different parts of an 

infrastructure SIP for a given NAAQS without taking concurrent action on all subsections. This 

is the case with section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) . 

We are proposing to approve the submittals from Massachusetts for the following 110(a)(2) 

elements: section 110(a)(2)(B), (C) (enforcement program), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J) 

(consultation), (J) (public notification), (K), (L), and (M) . 
5 

We are proposing to conditionally approve the Massachusetts' submittals for 110(a)(2) elements 

110(a)(2)(A) and E(ii) (state boards and conflict of interest provisions), and to disapprove the 

state's submittals for elements (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to the state's PSD program, 

as well as (D)(ii), which relates to interstate and international pollution abatement. However, 

Massachusetts is already subject to a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for PSD, and so EPA 

has no additional FIP obligations under section 110(c) . Furthermore, the state will not be subject 

to mandatory sanctions as a result of this disapproval. 

For elements that are conditionally approved, Massachusetts will have one year from final 

rulemaking to remedy the deficiencies described below under "Evaluation of State Submittals ." 

If the state remedies the deficiencies prior to the one-year deadline, EPA will publish a 

rulemaking to convert the conditional approval to an approval. If the state does not remedy the 

deficiencies within the allowed one-year period, the conditional approval will become a 

disapproval. The rules proposed for conditional approval are (A) and E(ii) (state boards and 

conflict of interest provisions) . 

D. EVALUATION OF STATE SUBMITTAL 

As noted above, Massachusetts provided submittals for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

However, the demonstrations submitted by the state for how it is meeting many of the section 

110(a)(2) elements are substantively identical for both of the PMZ.5 NAAQS. Therefore, unless 

otherwise noted, the following evaluation of each element pertains to both standards. 

1 . Section 110(a)(2)(A) : Emission limits and other control measures: 

This requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limits and other control measures, means or 

techniques, schedules for compliance and other related matters. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element : 

M.G.L. c 21A, s. 8. Organization of departments; powers, duties and functions. 

M.G.L. c.lll, s.142A-142N. These statutes, collectively referred to Massachusetts Pollution 

Control Laws, provide MA DEP with broad authority to prevent pollution or contamination of 

the atmosphere and to prescribe and establish regulations to prevent pollution or undue 

contamination of the atmosphere . 

M.G.L. c. 21A, s. 18. MA DEP's fee statute . 

MA DEP Regulations: In accordance with the above-referenced authority, MA DEP adopted 

310 CMR 6.00, Ambient Air Quality Standards for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This 

regulation sets a state 1-hour ozone standard and a PM standard, but it has not been updated to 

include an 8-hour ozone standard and a PM2.5 standard . 
6 

MA DEP also adopted regulations to control air pollution at 310 CMR 7.00. Air Pollution 

Control. With a few exceptions (for regulations that EPA did not require be part of the federallyenforceable SIPs), these regulations have been submitted to EPA and incorporated into the 

Massachusetts SIP, as detailed in the numerous MA DEP SIP revisions submitted since the 

original 1971 PM SIP and 1972 Ozone SIP and approved by EPA as part of the SIP in 40 CFR 

Part 52, Subpart W. 

Other MA DEP regulations that have been adopted and incorporated in the SIP include: 

310 CMR 60.00. Air Pollution Control for Mobile Sources. 

310 CMR 4.00. Timely Action & Fee Schedule Regulations . 

EPA analysis : Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that all emission limits, control measures and other 

related matters in the SIP be enforceable. All of the MA regulations listed above that were 

required to be part of the federally enforceable SIP have been approved by EPA (see Appendix) . 

However, the current SIP-approved 310 CMR 6.00 (Ambient Air Quality Standards) does not 

reflect the most recent annual and 24-hour PM NAAQS. Massachusetts has submitted a letter to 

EPA on July --, 2012, committing to take action to meet requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(A) by 

a date no later than one year from conditional approval of Massachusetts' PM2.5 infrastructure 

submissions . Therefore, we are proposing to conditionally approve Massachusetts' 110(a) 

submissions for infrastructure element 110(a)(2)(A) . 

2. Section 110(a)(2)(B) : Ambient air quality monitoring/data system 

This requires SIPs to include provisions to provide for establishment and operation of ambient 

air quality monitors, collecting and analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data 

available to EPA upon request. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element : 

M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142B-D. These statutes give MA DEP the authority to maintain and operate 

air sampling stations and devices, and to require, for the purpose of conducting a continuing 

inventory of air pollution sources of emissions, any person to register with MA DEP and provide 

emissions information. 

MA DEP regulations relating to this authority include: 

310 CMR 7.12. Source Registration . 

310 CMR 7.13. Stack Testing . 

310 CMR 7.14. Monitoring Devices and Reports. 
7 

310 CMR 7.00: Appendix C. Operating Permit Program. 

310 CMR 7.00: Appendix A. Emissions Offsets and Nonattainment Review. 

MA DEP collects and reports ambient air quality data for 03, S02, NOZ, Pb, CO, PM1o and 

PM2.5 . These data are reviewed and validated before being sent to the EPA air quality system 

(AQS), no later than 90 days after the end of a calendar quarter. 

On January 28, 1980, MassDEQE [now MA DEP] submitted to EPA pursuant to 40 CFR § 

52 .370 (13), a comprehensive air quality monitoring plan to meet requirements of 40 CFR part 

58 . 

[Note: the most recent plan for Massachusetts, the 2011 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan, 

was submitted on August 24, 2011 and was approved by EPA on September 7, 2011 .] 

EPA analysis : Massachusetts meets the requirements to establish, operate, and maintain an 

ambient air monitoring network, collect and analyze the monitoring data, and make the data 

available to EPA upon request. We conclude that Massachusetts' infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) . 

3 . Section 110(a)(2)(C) : Programs for Enforcement, PSD, and NSR 

This requires states to have a plan that includes a program providing for enforcement of all SIP 

measures and the regulation of modification and construction of any stationary source within the 

areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that NAAQS are achieved, including a program 

to meet PSD and nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) requirements. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element: 

M.G.L. c 111, s.2C. Pollution violations ; orders of department of environmental protection. 

This statute authorizes MA DEP to issue orders enforcing air pollution control regulations . 

M.G.L. c. 111, s 142A-N. Massachusetts Pollution Control Laws authorize MA DEP to adopt 

regulations to control pollution or contamination of atmosphere, and enforce such regulations 

and issue penalties. 

M.G.L. c.21A, s.16. Administrative Penalties Act. 

MA DEP regulations adopted pursuant to these authorities include: 

310 CMR 5.00. Administrative Penalties. 

310 CMR 7.02. Plan Approval and Emission Limitations List . 

310 CMR 7.52. Enforcement Provisions . 
310 CMR 7.00 : Appendix C. Operating Permit and Compliance Program. 

With respect to the permit program requirement, MA DEP submitted a NSR Equivalency 

Determination to EPA-Region 1 on December 30, 2005 . 

EPA analysis : 

Massachusetts has legal authority under M.G.L. c 111 and 310 CMR 7 .52 to enforce the state's 

air-pollution regulations, which include SIP-approved regulations necessary to assure that 

NAAQS are achieved, including PSD and NSR programs. 

NSR and PSD permitting: 

As discussed previously, we are not evaluating nonattainment-related provisions, such as the 

nonattainment NSR program required by part D in 110(a)(2)(C) and measures for attainment 

required by section 11 0(a)(2)(1), as part of the infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 

NAAQS because these submittals are required beyond the date (3 years from NAAQS 

promulgation) that section 110 infrastructure submittals are required . 

PSD programs apply in areas that are meeting the NAAQS or are unclassifiable (referred 

to as areas in attainment). PSD applies to new major sources and major modifications at existing 

sources. 

Massachusetts does not have an approved PSD SIP, and has long been subject to a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP). Between 1982 and 2003, Massachusetts implemented that FIP 

through a delegation agreement. Massachusetts rescinded the delegation agreement in 2003 . 

However, effective April 11, 2011, EPA Region 1 granted the MA DEP full delegation authority 

to implement and enforce the Federal PSD program (76 FR 31241). 

Major Source PM2.5 PSD rules 

On May 16, 2008, EPA promulgated the final "Implementation of the New Source Review 

(NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers PM2.5)" (73 FR 28321). 

That action established NSR applicability for PM2,5 precursor pollutants, established major 

source thresholds and significant emissions rates for PM2.5 and its precursors, and laid out a road 

map for states to use in transitioning to addressing condensable particulate matter . In this rule, 

states were required to submit revised SIPs to EPA in May 2011 . 

On October 20, 2010, EPA promulgated the final "Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)-Increments, Significant Impact 

Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)" (75 FR 64864). That action 

amended the requirements PM2.5 under the PSD program by adding maximum allowable 

increases in ambient pollutant concentrations ("increments") and two screening tools, known as 

the Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and a Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC) for 

PM2.5 . The SILs for PM2.5 were also added to two other NSR rules that regulate the construction 

and modification of any major stationary source located in an attainment or unclassifiable area, 
9 

where the source's emissions may cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS. In this final 

rule, states were required to submit revised SIPs to EPA for approval by July 20, 2012. 

The approvability of a state's PSD program in its entirety is essential to the full approvability of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) . Until a state provides such a program, its infrastructure SIP is not 

fully approvable with respect to CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) . Therefore, Massachusetts's 

infrastructure SIP is not approvable with respect to this element. However, the state is not subject 

to mandatory sanctions solely as a result of this type of infrastructure SIP disapproval, for the 

reason that the SIP deficiencies are neither with respect to a submittal that is required under 

part D nor in response to a SIP call under section 110(k)(5) of the CAA. Moreover, the 

requirements for which the state is subject to the FIP is already satisfied by the FIP, and so EPA 

has no additional FIP obligations under section 110(c) . 

Minor Source Permitting: 

In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Massachusetts' Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 standards with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a 

program in the SIP that regulates the modification and construction of any stationary source 

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are achieved. EPA did not reevaluate Massachusetts' minor 

source program at this time, and therefore, is not proposing to approve or disapprove the 

Massachusetts existing minor NSR SIP program itself to the extent that it may be inconsistent 

with EPA's regulations governing this program. EPA maintains that the CAA does not require 

that infrastructure SIPs address existing provisions concerning minor NSR programs. We 

articulated our position in a number of infrastructure SIP final actions taken in 2011, noting in 

the preambles for those actions that existing provisions for minor source new source review 

programs may be dealt with separately, outside the context of acting on the infrastructure SIP 

submission of a state. 

Greenhouse Gas (GHQ) PSD Permitting : 

On June 3, 2010, EPA promulgated the final "Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V 

Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule" (75 FR 31514). This rule, known as "the Tailoring Rule" 

established thresholds that phase in the applicability of PSD requirements to GHG sources, 

starting with the largest GHG emitters, and was designed to relieve the overwhelming 

administrative burdens and costs associated with the dramatic increase in permitting burden that 

would have resulted from applying PSD requirements to GHG emission increases at or above the 

mass-based statutory thresholds of 100 or 250 tons per year generally applicable to all PSDregulated pollutants starting on January 2, 2011 . However, EPA recognized that even after it 

finalized the Tailoring Rule, many SIPs with approved PSD programs would, until they were 

revised, continue to apply PSD at the statutory thresholds, even though the states would not have 

sufficient resources to implement the PSD program at those levels . 

Consequently, on December 30, 2010, EPA promulgated the final "Limitation of Approval of 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas EmittingSources in State Implementation Plans" (75 FR 82536), which narrowed EPA's approval of 

previously approved SIPs that apply PSD to GHG emissions increases from sources emitting 
10 

GHGs below the Tailoring Rule thresholds. The rule allowed EPA to withdraw its previous 

approvals of state programs to the extent that the SIPs applied PSD to increases in GHG 

emissions from GHG-emitting sources below the Tailoring Rule thresholds. Portions of the PSD 

programs regulating GHGs from GHG-emitting sources with emission increases at or above the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds remained approved. The effect of EPA narrowing its approval in this 

manner is that the provisions of previously approved SIPs that apply PSD to GHG emissions 

increases from sources emitting GHGs below the Tailoring Rule thresholds have the status of 

having been submitted by the state but not yet acted upon by EPA. 

As noted above, Massachusetts is subject to a PSD FIP, and its infrastructure SIP is not 

approvable with respect to this element. However, the state is not subject to mandatory sanctions 

solely as a result of this type of infrastructure SIP disapproval, for the reason that the SIP 

deficiencies are neither with respect to a submittal that is required under part D nor in response 

to a SIP call under section 110(k)(5) of the CAA. Moreover, the requirements for which the state 

is subject to the FIP are already satisfied by the FIP, and so EPA has no additional FIP 

obligations under section 110(c) . 

For these reasons, we conclude that Massachusetts' infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2,5 NAAQS meet the enforcement and minor NSR requirements, but not the PSD 

requirements, of section 110(a)(2)(C) . Notwithstanding our conclusion that the Massachusetts 

SIP does not meet the PSD requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C), the state is not subject to 

mandatory sanctions as a result of this disapproval. 

4. Section 110(a)(2)(D) : Interstate transport and Interstate and International pollution 

abatement 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) is divided into two components, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). In 

addition, EPA has subdivided Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) into four "prongs," two under 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and two under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) . The two prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) are 

(prong 1) contribute significantly to nonattainment in any other state with respect to any such 

national primary or secondary NAAQS, and (prong 2) interfere with maintenance by any other 

state with respect to the same NAAQS. The second two prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) are 

(prong 3) interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan 

for any other state under part C to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or (prong 4) to 

protect visibility. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) addresses interstate and international pollution abatement, and requires 

SIPs to include provisions insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to 

interstate and international pollution abatement. 

Herein, we are only addressing prong 3 of 110(a)(2)(D)(i) as well as section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for 

Massachusetts' 110(a) submission for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has previously 

decided that it can take action on different parts of an infrastructure SIP for a given NAAQS 

without taking concurrent action on all subsections. This is the case with section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) . 
11 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet 

components of 110(a)(2)(D) : 

Revision to the Massachusetts State Implementation Plan - 

The Massachusetts SIP revision addressing the Interstate Air Pollution Transport Requirements 

of Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) relating to the 1997 PM2.5 and ozone standards, was 

submitted to EPA on January 31, 2008. In that SIP revision, MassDEP relied upon its adoption 

of 310 CMR 7.32, the Massachusetts Clean Air Interstate Rule (MassCAIR), to address its 

contribution to downwind nonattainment areas, as required by EPA's remanded-but-stilleffective Clean Air Interstate Rule. MassDEP continues to implement the MassCAIR program. 

EPA has not issued new regulations or guidance regarding how states should address transport in 

connection with the 2006 PM2.5 standard . MassDEP will submit a separate transport SIP to EPA 

to address this issue once EPA has provided the necessary guidance. 

In the meantime, Massachusetts is not contributing significantly to non-attainment in any other 

state, as all areas that are downwind of Massachusetts are attaining the 2006 PMZ,5 NAAQS. 

MassDEP is addressing visibility pursuant to its Regional Haze SIP. In December 2011, 

Massachusetts submitted its final Regional Haze SIP to EPA. In February 2012, MA DEP 

proposed a supplement to this SIP, addressing Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) and 

low sulfur fuel oil requirements. On May 24, 2012 (77 FR 30932), EPA proposed approval of 

Massachusetts' December 2011 submittal and through parallel processing, also proposed 

approval of the proposed SIP supplement. 

As noted above, Massachusetts is subject to a PSD FIP, and effective April 11, 2011, EPA 

Region 1 granted the MA DEP full delegation authority to implement and enforce the Federal 

PSD program (76 FR 31241). 

For the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA found that Massachusetts failed to submit a SIP 

addressing Section 110(a)(2)(C) (the Part C PSD permit program), but this requirement has 

already been addressed in a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) that remains in place and that the 

finding will, therefore, not trigger any additional FIP obligation. 

EPA analysis : 

Regarding 110(a)(2)(D)(i), we are herein only addressing prong 3 of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (i .e, 

PSD). 

We also note that for prong 4 (protect visibility) Massachusetts submitted its final Regional Haze 

SIP to EPA in December 2011 . In February 2012, MA DEP proposed a supplement to this SIP, 

addressing Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) and low sulfur fuel oil requirements . On 

May 24, 2012 (77 FR 30932), EPA proposed approval of Massachusetts' December 2011 

submittal and through parallel processing, also proposed approval of the proposed SIP 

supplement. 
12 

In today's action, for 110(a)(2)(D)(i), we are addressing only the requirement that pertains to 

preventing sources in Massachusetts from emitting pollutants that will interfere with measures 

required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in other states for the 2006 PM2,5 

standard . On August 15, 2006, EPA issued guidance entitled "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 PMZ,5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards." The 

2006 guidance states that the PSD permitting program is the primary measure that each state 

must include to prevent interference with other state's programs to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality in accordance with section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) . 

As discussed under (3) of this TSD on section 110(a)(2)(C), Massachusetts is currently subject to 

a PSD FIP. A state's infrastructure SIP submittal cannot be considered for approvability with 

respect to prong 3 until EPA has issued final approval of that state's PSD SIP or, alternatively, 

has issued final approval of a SIP that EPA has otherwise found adequate to prohibit interference 

with other states' measures to prevent significant deterioration of air quality. Because 

Massachusetts's SIP is deficient in this regard, it cannot be approved with respect to prong 3 . 

However, as noted above, and consistent with EPA's findings with respect to the 1997 ozone and 

PMz,s NAAQS, this disapproval will not trigger any sanctions or additional FIP obligation. 

Regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), which relates to interstate and international pollution 

abatement, as noted above, Massachusetts is subject to a PSD FIP . States relying on the federal 

PSD program requirements of 40 CFR 52.21(q), which provide for notification of affected state 

and local air agencies, to satisfy this requirement have programs that are considered technically 

deficient and not approvable. Although these programs are considered deficient and these states 

have not "submitted" anything to EPA, EPA is not required to take further action with respect to 

notification under this element, for the reason that the federal rules represent a FIP that fully 

addresses the notification issue. In addition, mandatory sanctions do not apply because the 

deficiencies are neither with respect to a submittal that is required under CAA title V, part D, nor 

in response to a SIP call under section 110(k)(5) of the cAn. . Thus, Massachusetts remains 

obligated to adopt and submit a PSD program for EPA approval that applies to all regulated NSR 

pollutants . Until the state provides such a program, its infrastructure SIP is not approvable with 

respect to section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) . 

Therefore, we are proposing to disapprove Massachusetts' submissions for infrastructure element 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) . 

5. Section 110(a)(2)(E) : Adequate resources 

Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires states to provide (i) necessary assurances that the state will have 

adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out the SIP (and is not 

prohibited by any provision of federal or state law from carrying out the SIP or portion thereof), 

(ii) requires that the state comply with the requirements respecting state boards under section 

128, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional 

government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any SIP provision, the state 

has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such SIP provision. 
13 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element: 

M.G.L. c 21A, s. 8. Organization of departments; powers, duties and functions . This statute 

mandates that in no event shall the department authorize implementation of any plan, strategy or 

technology less protective of the environment than required by any applicable federal statute. 

M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142A-N and the accompanying regulations. These statutes and regulations 

provide MA DEP with sufficient authority to carry out implementation of the plan. 

M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142E. Cooperation by, and Authority of Department over, other Agencies, 

Commissioners, Authorities, or Political Subdivisions with Respect to Air Pollution. 

M.G.L. c 21A, s. 8. Organization of departments; powers, duties and functions. 

In Section X of the Massachusetts 1971 SIP for PM, the Bureau of Air Use Management 

provided details that it had adequate personnel and funding to carry out implementation of the 

original SIP . This resource finding has been updated in subsequent SIP submissions related to 

PM and ozone. MA DEP has continued to add staff and programs since that time and currently 

has adequate personnel and funding to implement the existing SIP . 

EPA analysis : 

Massachusetts' M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142A-N and accompanying regulations provide adequate 

authority for the state to carry out its SIP obligations with respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 

NAAQS. The state receives sections 103 and 105 grant funds through its Performance 

Partnership Grant along with required state matching funds to provide funding necessary to carry 

out Massachusetts' SIP requirements. In this action, EPA proposes to find that Massachusetts' 

resources meet the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i). 

With regard to section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), Massachusetts does not have a board or body that 

approves permits or enforcement orders under the CAA. Congress added section 128 in the 1977 

amendments as the result of a conference agreement. Titled "State boards," section 128 

provides in relevant part : (a) Not later than the date one year after August 7, 1977, 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 members of such board or body or the head of an 

executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. 

We note three relevant considerations for implementing section 128 . 

First, section 128 must be implemented through SIP-approved, federally enforceable provisions . 

Second, subsection 128(a)(1) applies only to states that have a board or body that is composed of 

multiple individuals and that, among its duties, approves permits or enforcement orders under the 
14 

CAA. It does not apply in states that have no such multi-member board or body, and where 

instead a single head of an agency approves permits or enforcement orders under the CAA. 

Third, subsection 128(a)(2), which requires that SIPs contain adequate provisions for disclosure 

of potential conflicts of interest, applies to all states, regardless of whether the state has a multimember board or body that approves permits or enforcement orders under the CAA. 

Massachusetts currently does not have a multi-member board or body that approves permits or 

enforcement orders under the CAA. Instead, permits and enforcement orders are approved by the 

Commissioner of MA DEP or his/her designee. Thus, we propose that Massachusetts currently is 

not subject to the requirements of subsection 128(a)(1) . However, Massachusetts is subject to the 

requirements of section 128(a)(2), but did not demonstrate in their April 2008 or September 2009 

110(a) submittals that they have met these requirements . Subsequently, on July --, 2012, 

Massachusetts submitted a letter to EPA committing to address this issue by a date no later than 

one year from conditional approval of the state's PM2.5 Infrastructure submittals. Therefore, we 

are proposing to conditionally approve Massachusetts' submissions with respect to section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) . 

Finally, with respect to section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii), Massachusetts has not assigned responsibility 

for carrying out portions of the SIP to any local government, agency, or other instrumentality . 

Massachusetts' SIP therefore meets the requirements for this element. 

6. Section 110(a)(2)(F) : Stationary source monitoring system 

This requires states to establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary sources and to 

submit periodic emission reports. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element: 

M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142A-D. These statutes give MA DEP the authority to maintain and operate 

air sampling stations and devices and to require, for the purpose of conducting a continuing 

inventory of air pollution sources of emissions, any person to register with MA DEP and provide 

emissions information. 

MA DEP regulations relating to this authority include: 

310 CMR 7.12. Source Registration . 

310 CMR 7.13. Stack Testing. 

310 CMR 7.14. Monitoring Devices and Reports. 

Chapter 66: Section 1 . Public inspection and copies of records; presumption; exceptions . 

310 CMR 3.00. Public Records Access Regulations. 
15 

EPA analysis : EPA has reviewed the above Laws and Regulations and has determined that MA 

DEP's submittals meet the requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(F) . These regulations have 

been approved into the Massachusetts SIP (see Appendix). 

7. Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency power 

This requires states to provide for authority to address activities causing imminent and 

substantial endangerment to public health, including contingency plans to implement the 

emergency episode provisions in their SIPs. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element. MA DEP also noted that the state expects to be classified as a Priority III region and, 

therefore, an emergency episode plan for PM2,5 is not required . 

M.G .L. C.111, s.2B-C. Air Pollution Emergencies. These statutes authorize the Commissioner 

of MA DEP to determine that a condition or impending condition of the atmosphere in the 

commonwealth or in any part thereof constitutes a present or reasonably imminent danger to 

health, and may, with the approval of the governor, declare an air pollution emergency and cause 

the fact to be made known to the public . 

MA DEP regulations relating to this authority are at 310 CMR 8.00, Prevention & Abatement of 

Air Pollution Episodes & Emergencies. These regulations prevent ambient air concentrations of 

pollutants subject to a NAAQS from reaching levels that would constitute significant harm to 

public health, consistent with the significant harm levels and procedures for state emergency 

episode plans established by EPA in 40 CFR Part 51 .150. 

The requirement for a state to submit an emergency episode plan is based on a priority region 

classification . For PMZ.5, the classification scheme that EPA is planning to propose would 

require states with a 24-hour PM2.5 concentration above 140 .5 ug/m3 (using the most recent three 

years of data) to develop an emergency episode plan. States that do not meet this threshold 

would be classified as Priority III and would not be required to develop an emergency episode 

plan for PM2.5 . Massachusetts is likely to be classified as a Class III Priority Area based on its 

monitored data And, if that classification is assigned, Massachusetts would not be required to 

adopt an Emergency Episode Plan for PM2,5. 

MA DEP forecasts predicts concentrations of PM2,5 statewide throughout the year and issues 

alerts to the public when concentrations are expected to reach unhealthy levels using the Air 

Quality Index and will continue to do so. 

EPA analysis : 

For PM2,5, EPA's guidance dated September 25, 2009 provides clarification that states that have 

air quality control regions identified as either Priority I, Priority IA or Priority II by the 

"Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes" rules at 40 CFR 5 1 .150 must develop 

emergency episode contingency plans. The guidance recommends that until EPA establishes 

significant harm levels (SHL) for PM2,5, states should establish their own SHL levels based on 
16 

EPA's February 12, 2007 issue paper on setting priority and emergency action levels and also 

consider the recommended levels set forth in Attachment B of the September 25, 2009 guidance. 

States would be required to develop emergency episode plans for any area that has monitored 

and recorded 24-hour PM2.5 levels greater than 140.4 pg/m3 since 2006. A state that has never 

exceeded this level since 2006 is considered to be Priority III in accordance with the guidance, 

may certify that it has appropriate general emergency powers to address PM2.5 -related episodes, 

and is not required to adopt specific emergency episode plans at this time, given the existing 

monitored levels . 

Massachusetts' April 2008 and September 2009 submittals state that they expect to be classified 

as a Priority III region and, therefore, an emergency episode plan for PM2.5 is not required . Airquality monitors in Massachusetts show that PM2.5 levels for the past three years are below the 

140.5 Pg/m3 threshold. Massachusetts has, therefore, met the requirements of CAA Section 

110(a)(2)(G) for both the 1997 and 2006 standards . 

8. Section 110(a)(2)tH) : Future SIP revisions 

This requires states to have the authority to revise their SIPs in response to changes in the 

NAAQS, availability of improved methods for attaining NAAQS, or in response to an EPA 

finding that the SIP is substantially inadequate . 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element: 

M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142A-N. These statutes allow MA DEP to amend its air pollution control 

regulations from time to time. 

EPA analysis : Massachusetts' submittals for both the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 standards affirm 

that the SIP may be revised should EPA find that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain a 

standard or to comply with any additional requirements under the CAA. Therefore, the state's 

submittals meet the requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(H) . 

9. Section 110(a)(2)(1) : Areas designated nonattainment and meet the applicable 

requirements of Part D. 

As noted above, this action does not address infrastructure elements related to section 

110(a)(2)(I) . 

10. Section 110(a)(2)(J) : Consultation with government officials; Public notification ; and 

PSD and visibility protection 

Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires states to provide a process for consultation with local governments 

and Federal Land Managers carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements pursuant to 

Section 121 relating to consultation . Section 127 requires that the state notify the public of any 

NAAQS exceedences, advise the public of health hazards associated with such pollution, and 
17 

include measures to enhance public awareness of measures that can be taken to prevent 

exceedances . 

Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires states to meet applicable requirements of Part C related to 

prevention of significant deterioration and visibility protection. EPA interprets this section 110 

provision on visibility as not being "triggered" by a new NAAQS because the visibility 

requirements in part C are not changed by a new NAAQS. 

MA DEP's response to Section 110(a)(2)(J) : The state listed the following provisions to meet 

this element: 

M.G.L. c. 21A, s. 8. Organization of departments ; powers, duties and functions . 

M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142E. Cooperation by, and Authority of Department over, other Agencies, 

Commissioners, Authorities, or Political Subdivisions with Respect to Air Pollution. 

M.G.L. c. 30A. Massachusetts Administrative Procedures Act. This statute requires MassDEP 

to provide notice and public comment and hearing prior to adoption of any regulations. 

Executive Order No. 145. This order requires MassDEP to provide notice to the Local 

Government Advisory Committee, through the Massachusetts Municipal Association, to solicit 

input on the impact on local government. 

Massachusetts SIP Steering Committee, established pursuant to the Clean Air Amendments of 

1990, provides for consultation . 

M.G.L. c. 30A requires MassDEP to provide notice and public comment and hearing prior to 

adoption of any regulations. 

Pursuant to its PSD Program Delegation Agreement, MassDEP returned delegation of the PSD 

Program to EPA on February 23, 2003 . Under the terms of the Performance Partnership 

Agreement between EPA Region 1 and MassDEP, EPA continues to administer the PSD 

program with the cooperation and assistance of MassDEP. MassDEP anticipates that this 

arrangement will continue for purposes of implementing PSD for sources of PM2.5 until 

MassDEP adopts a state PSD regulation. As noted above, Massachusetts is subject to a PSD 

FIP, and effective April 11, 2011, EPA Region 1 granted the MA DEP full delegation authority 

to implement and enforce the Federal PSD program (76 FR 31241). 

MassDEP is addressing visibility issues in its Regional Haze SIP. In December 2011, 

Massachusetts submitted its final Regional Haze SIP to EPA. In February 2012, MA DEP 

proposed a supplement to this SIP, addressing Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) and 

low sulfur fuel oil requirements. On May 24, 2012 (77 FR 30932), EPA proposed approval of 

Massachusetts' December 2011 submittal and through parallel processing, also proposed 

approval of the proposed SIP supplement. 

EPA analysis: 
18 

EPA finds that Massachusetts' 110(a) submittals meets the requirements of CAA Section 

110(a)(2)(J) for consultation with government officials. 

MA DEP is one of the state partners participating in EPA's AIRNOW and Enviroflash Air 

Quality Alert programs. (See www.airnow.gov) MA DEP's submittals meet the requirements of 

CAA Section 110(a)(2)(J) for public notification. 

Regarding the requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) that the SIP meet the applicable requirements 

of part C of title I of the CAA, EPA has evaluated this requirement in the context of section 

110(a)(2)(C) with respect to permitting (see discussion under (3) of this TSD). 

As discussed under (3) and (4) above, Massachusetts is currently subject to a PSD FIP. The 

approvability of a state's PSD program in its entirety is essential to the approvability of CAA 

sections 110(a)(2)(J) . Until the state provides such a program, its infrastructure SIP is not 

approvable with respect to CAA section 110(a)(2)(J) . Therefore, we propose to disapprove 

Massachusetts's infrastructure SIP with respect to the PSD sub-element of 110(a)(2)(J) . 

However, as noted above, this disapproval does not impose any sanctions or new FIP 

obligations. 

With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility protection, EPA recognizes that states 

are subject to visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C of the CAA. In the 

event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the visibility and regional haze program 

requirements under part C do not change. Thus, we find that there is no new visibility obligation 

triggered under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. 

In December 2011, Massachusetts submitted its final Regional Haze SIP to EPA. In February 

2012, MA DEP proposed a supplement to this SIP, addressing Best Available Retrofit 

Technology (BART) and low sulfur fuel oil requirements . On May 2, 2012, MA DEP requested 

parallel processing of its proposed haze supplement. On May 24, 2012 (77 FR 30932), EPA 

proposed approval of Massachusetts' December 2011 submittal and through parallel processing, 

also proposed approval of the proposed SIP supplement. 

As a result of the above analysis, EPA is proposing to approve Massachusetts' 110(a) submittals 

as meeting the requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(J) for the portions related to consultation 

with government officials, public notification, and to disapprove with respect to PSD. 

11 . Section 110(a)(2)(K) : Air quality and modeling/data 

This requires that SIPs provide for performing air-quality modeling for predicting effects on air 

quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant and submission of such data to EPA upon 

request. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element: 
19 

M.G.L. c. 111, s. 142B-D. These statutes give MA DEP the authority to maintain and operate 

air sampling stations and devices and to require, for the purpose of conducting a continuing 

inventory of air pollution sources of emissions, any person to register with MA DEP and provide 

emissions information. 

310 CMR 7.02. Plan Approval and Emission Limitations. 

EPA analysis : A review of MA DEP laws and regulations shows that MA DEP has broad 

powers to conduct air quality modeling. Therefore, Massachusetts's infrastructure submittals 

meet the requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(K) . 

12. Section 110(a)(2)(L) : Permitting fees 

This requires SIPs to require each major stationary source to pay permitting fees to cover the cost 

of reviewing, approving, implementing and enforcing a permit, until such time as the SIP fee 

requirement is superseded by EPA's approval of the state's Title V operating permit program. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element : 

M.G.L. c.21A, s.18. This statute authorizes MA DEP to promulgate regulations establishing 

fees . 

310 CMR 4.00. Timely Action & Fee Schedule Regulations. These regulations set permit and 

compliance fees, including fees for Operating Permits (Title V). 

EPA analysis : 

EPA's full approval of Massachusetts title V program became effective on [date] . Before EPA can 

grant full approval, a state must demonstrate the ability to collect adequate fees . Massachusetts' title 

V program included a demonstration the state will collect a fee from title V sources above the 

presumptive minimum in accordance with 40 CFR 70.9(b)(2)(i). Massachusetts collects sufficient 

fees to administer the title V permit program . Massachusetts' submittals meet the requirements of 

CAA Section 110(a)(2)(L) . 

13. Section 110(a)(2)(M) : Consultation/participation by affected local entities 

This requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local 

political subdivisions affected by the SIP. 

MA DEP's response to this requirement: The state listed the following provisions to meet this 

element : 

M.G.L. c. 30A. Massachusetts Administrative Procedures Act. This statute requires MA DEP 

to provide notice and public comment and hearing prior to adoption of any regulations. 

Executive Order No. 145 requires MA DEP to provide notice to the Local Government 
20 

Advisory Committee, through the Massachusetts Municipal Association, to solicit input on the 

impact on local government. 

EPA analysis : Based upon EPA's review of the April 2008 and September 2009 submittals, 

Massachusetts' public participation requirements and procedures fulfill the requirements for 

consultation with local political subdivisions affected by the plans and, therefore, meet the 

requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(M) . 

Conclusions and Recommended Agency Action 

EPA's analysis of Massachusetts' infrastructure submittals for the 1997 and 2006 PM2,5 NAAQS 

concludes that Massachusetts' submittals meet the following 110(a)(2) elements : section 

110(a)(2)(B), (C) (enforcement program), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J) (consultation), (J) 

(public notification), (K), (L), and (M). We recommend that a rulemaking be prepared proposing 

full approval of these elements. 

Our review also indicates that the submittals do not meet all requirements of 110(a)(2)(A) and 

E(ii) (state boards and conflict of interest provisions). However, Massachusetts has committed to 

addressing the noted deficiencies . Therefore, we recommend that a rulemaking be prepared 

proposing conditional approval of these elements. 

In addition, we are proposing to disapprove the state's submittals for sub-elements 110(a)(2)(C), 

(D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to the state's PSD program, as well as (D)(ii), which relates to 

interstate and international pollution abatement. However, Massachusetts is already subject to a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for PSD, and so EPA has no additional FIP obligations under 

section 110(c) . Furthermore, the state will not be subject to mandatory sanctions as a result of 

this disapproval. 
Appendix 

EPA-Approved Massachusetts Air Quality Regulations 

for PMZ,5 and Other Air Pollutants 

State Citation Title / Subject State Effective EPA Approval Explanations 

Date Date 

_310 Standards 07/25/1990 10/04/2002 Adopted PM 10 as the criteria 

CMR6.04(PDF) 67 FR 62184 pollutant for particulates . 

(1 pg, 105K) 

310 CMR 7.00 Definitions. 11/15/1993 02/01/1995 

PDF (38 pp, 05/11/1994 60 FR 6027 

199K) 07/30/1993 10/15/1996 

61 FR 53628 

02/17/1993 09/03/1999 

64 FR 48297 

07/30/1996 04/11/2000 

65 FR 19323 

01/11/1995 04/11/2000 

03/29/1995 65 FR 19323 

07/25/1995 12/18/2000 

08/09/2000 65 FR 78974 

09/11/2000 

07/25/1990 10/04/2002 

67 FR 62184 

12/01/2006 07/31/2008 Addition of the term, "Boston 

73 FR 44654 Metropolitan Planning 

Organization ." [See: Electronic 

Docket Number EPA-ROI-OAR2006-1018 at www.regulations.gov 

l 

310 CMR 7.00 

~ Appendix A. 

~ PDF (23 pp, 

a 223K) 

Emission Offsets 07/1 5/94 and 10/27/2000 Approving 1990 CAAA revisions and 

and Nonattainment 04/14/95 65 FR 64360 general NSR permit requirements . 

Review. 

i 310 CMR 7.00 Emission Banking, 02/09/1994 08/08/1996 Except 310 CMR 7.00 Appendix 

1, Appendix B Trading and 03/29/1995 61 FR 41335 B(3)(e)5 .h . 

'PDF (19 pp, Averaging . 

k 93K) 

r 

Regulations Regulation 1 01/27/1972 05/31/1972 

for the Control General Regulations 37 FR 10841 

of Air to Prevent Air 

Pollution (PDF) Pollution. 
(2 pp, 109K) 

Regulations Regulation 1 08/28/1972 10/28/1972 

for Prevention Introduction . 37 FR 23085 

And / or 

Abatement of 

Air Pollution 

Episode and 

' Air Pollution 

; Incident 

Emergencies 

PDF (2 pp, 

109K) 

Regulations Regulation 2 Plans 02/01/1978 03/15/1979 Regulation 2 is now known as 310 

for the Control Approval and 44 FR 15703 CMR 7.02 . 

of Air Emission 

Pollution (PDF) Limitations. 

(15 pp, 126K) 

Regulations Regulation 2 08/28/1972 10/28/1972 

for Prevention Definitions . 37 FR 23085 

And/ or 

I Abatement of 

Air Pollution 

Episode and 

Air Pollution 

Incident 

Emergencies 

PPF (2 pp, 

109K) 

310 CMR 7 .02 Plans Approval and 06/06/1994 04/05/1995 

PDF (4 Emission 60 FR 17226 

pp,113K) Limitations. 

Regulations Regulation 3 06/01/1972 10/28/1972 

for the Control Nuclear Energy 37 FR 23085 

of Air Utilization Facilities . 

Pollution (PDF) 

(19 pp, 93K) 

310 CMR 7 .03 Plan Application 02/17/1993 09/03/1999 

PDF (1 pg, Exemption 64 FR 48297 

105K) Construction 

Requirements. Paint 

Spray Booths 310 

CMR 7.03(13) 

Regulations Regulation 4 Fossil 01/27/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 4 is now known as 310 
3 

for the Control 

of Air 

Fuel Utilization 

Facilities . 

37 FR 23085 CMR 7.04 

~ Pollution (PDF) 

~ (19 pp, 93K) 

Y 

~ Regulations 

7 for the Control 

~ of Air 

Pollution (PDF) 

(2 pp, 106K) 

310 CMR 7.05 

PDF (12 pp, 

130K) 

Regulations 

for the Control 

of Air 

s Pollution (PDF) 

~ (2 pp, 107K) 

310 CMR 7 .07 

PDF (3 pp, 

111K) 

' Regulations 

for the Control 

of Air 

Pollution (PDF) 

(2 pp, 157K) 

310 CMR 7.08 

PDF (19 pp, 

233K) 

. Regulations 

for the Control 

of Air 

Pollution (PDF) 

(1 pg, 105K) 

Regulations 

for the Control 

of Air 

Pollution (PDF) 

(1 pg, 105K) 

~ Regulations 

~ for the Control 

) of Air 

Regulation 5 Fuels 

Fuels All Districts 

Regulation 6 Visible 

Emissions . 

Open Burning. 

Regulation 8 

Incinerators . 

Incinerators . 

Municipal Waste 

Combustors 310 

CMR 7.08(2) . 

Regulation 9 Dust 

and Odor. 

Regulation 10 Noise. 

Regulation 11 

Transportation 

Media. 

08/31/1978 03/07/1979 Regulation 5 is now known as 310 

44 FR 12421 CMR 7.05 . 

Portions of Regulation 5 have been 

replaced with the approval of 310 

CMR 7.05 

02/11/1986 11/25/1986 

51 FR 42563 

08/28/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 6 is now known as 310 

37 FR 23085 CMR 7.06 

09/28/1979 06/17/1980 

45 FR 40987 

08/28/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 8 is now known as 310 

37 FR 23085 CMR 7 .08 

01/11/1999 09/02/1999 

64 FR 48095 

12/09/1977 09/29/1978 Regulation 9 is now known as 310 

43 FR 44841 CMR 7.09 

06/01/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 10 is now known as 310 

37 FR 23085 CMR 7.10. 

06/01/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 11 is now known as 310 

37 FR 23085 CMR 7.11 . This regulation restricts 

idling . 
¢ Pollution (PDF) & 

~ (2 pp, 107K) 

310 CMR 7 .12 

~ PDF (2 pp, 

106) 

Inspection 06/28/1990 03/21/1996 The 06/28/1990 and 09/30/1992 

Certificate, Record 09/30/1992 61 FR 11556 submittals deal with the permitting 

Keeping and 07/15/1994 process. The 07/15 /1994 submittal 

Reporting . develops 7.12 to comply with 

emission statement requirements . 

~ Regulations Regulation 13 Stack 06/O1 /1972 

~ for the Control Testing. 

~ of Air a 

^ Pollution (PDF) 

k (19 pp, 93K) 

10/28/1972 Regulation 13 is now known as 310 

37 FR 23085 CMR 7 .13 . 

310 CMR 7.14 Monitoring Devices 11/21/1986 03/10/89 

PDF (1 pg, and Reports 01/15/1987 54 FR 10147 

' 105K) 

Regulations Regulation 15 . 

for Prevention Asbestos 

And/or 

Abatement of 

Air Pollution 

Episode and 

Air Pollution 

Incident 

Emergencies 

08/28/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 15 is now known as 310 

37 FR 23085 CMR 7.15 

310 CMR 7.16 Reduction of Single- 12/31/1978 09/16/1980 

g PDF (7 pp, Occupant Commuter 05/16/1979 45 FR 61293 

120K) Vehicle Use . 

310 CMR 7.1 7 Conversions to Coal 01/22/1982 06/09/82 

PDF (2 pp, 47 FR 25007 

107K) 

310 CM R 7.18 Volatile and 10/07/1999 10/04/2002 

PDF (63 pp, Halogenated 67 FR 62179 

267K) Organic Compounds 

' 310 CMR 7.19 Reasonably 11/19/1999 12/27/2000 

® PDF (28 pp, Available Control 65 FR 81743 

222K) Technology (RACT) 

for Sources of 

Oxides of Nitrogen 

(NOx) 

, 310 CMR 7 .24 Organic Material 08/09/2000 12/18/2000 

PDF (36 pp, Storage and 09/11/2000 65 FR 78974 

192K) Distribution . 
; 310 CMR 7.25 

~ PDF (19 pp, 

F228K) 

Best Available 

Controls for 

Consumer and 

Commercial 

Products . 

310 CMR 7.27 NOx Allowance 

s PDF (37 pp, Program 

~ 224K) 

' 310 CMR 7.28 NOx Allowance 

u PDF (28 pp, Trading Program 

~ 102K) 

~ 310 CMR 7.30 Massport/Logan 

~ PDF (7 pp, Airport Parking 

170K) Freeze . 

310 CMR 7.31 City of Boston/East 

PDF (5 pp, Boston Parking 

164K) Freeze . 

310 CMR 7.32 Massachusetts Clean 

PDF (67 pp, Air Interstate Rule 

247K) (Mass CAIR). 

310 CMR 7.33 City of Boston/ 

PDF (8 pp, South Boston 

' 124K) Parking Freeze . 

310 CMR 7 .36 Transit System 

PDF (12 pp, Improvements . 

133K) 

310 CMR 7 .37 High Occupancy 

PDF (8 pp, Vehicle Lanes. 

123K) 

310 CMR 7.38 Certification of 

PDF (8 pp, Tunnel Ventilation 

57K) Systems in the 

Massachusetts 

Regulation 

Metropolitan Boston 

Air Pollution Control 

5 

07/30/1996 04/11/2000 

65 FR 19323 

11/19/1999 12/27/2000 

65 FR 81743 

03/30/2007 12/03/2007 

72 FR 67854 

12/26/2000 03/12/2001 

66 FR 14318 

12/26/2000 03/12/2001 

66 FR 14318 

03/30/2007 12/03/2007 

72 FR 67854 

07/30/1993 10/15/1996 

61 FR 53628 

12/09/1991 10/04/1994 

59 FR 50495 

12/01/2006 07/31/2008 

73 FR 44654 

12/09/1991 10/04/1994 

59 FR 50495 

07/12/2006 02/15/2008 

[See : Electronic Docket Number 

EPA-ROI-OAR-2007-0401 at 

www.regulations .gov ] 

Applies to the parking of motor 

vehicles on Massport property. 

Applies to the parking of motor 

vehicles within the area of East 

Boston . 

[See : Electronic Docket Number 

EPA-ROI-OAR-2007-0401 at 

www.regulations .qov ] 

Applies to the parking of motor 

vehicles within the area of South 

Boston, including Massport property 

in South Boston . 

Transit System Improvement 

Regulation for Boston Metropolitan 

Area. 

Amendments to Transit System 

Improvements Regulation. [See : 

Electronic Docket Number EPA-R01-

OAR-2006-1018 at 

www.regulations .gov ] 

High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes 

Regulation for Boston Metropolitan 

Area. 

Tunnel Ventilation Certification 

73 FR 8818 Regulation for Boston . 

And Massachusetts Regulation 

Filing, dated december 13, 2005, 
, Filing (PDF) (2 District . 

pp, 11 9K) 

substantiating December 30, 2005, 

State effective date for amended 

310 CMR 7 .38. 

[See : Electronic Docket Number 

EPA-ROI-OAR-2006-06411 at 

www.regulations .ctov ] 

` 310 CMR 7.40 Low Emission 12/24/1999 12/23/2002 "Low Emission Vehicle Program" 

PDF (20 pp, Vehicle Program 67 FR 78179 (LEV II) except for 310 CMR 

199K) 7.40(2)(a)5, 310 CMR 7.40(2)(a)6, 

310 CM R 7 .40(2)(c)3, 310 CMR 

7.40(10), and 310 CMR 7.40(12). 

' Regulations Regulation 50 09/14/1974 02/04/1977 Regulation 50 is now known as 310 

for the Control Variances . 42 FR 6812 CMR 7.50 

of Air 

Pollution (PDF) 

(2 pp, 106K) 

Regulations Regulation 51 08/28/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 51 is now known as 310 

for the Control Hearings Relative To 37 FR 23085 CMR 7.51 

of Air Orders and 

Pollution (PDF) Approvals . 

(1 pg, 105K) 

Regulations Regulation 52 08/28/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 51 is now known as 310 

for the Control Enforcement 37 FR 23085 CMR 7.52 

of Air Provisions . 

Pollution (PDF) 

(1 pg, 104K) 

Regulations Regulation 8 02/22/1972 10/28/1972 Regulation 8 is now Known as 310 

for Prevention Emission Reduction 37 FR 23085 CMR 8.00 

And / or Plans (ERP) 

Abatement of 

Air Pollution 

Episode and 

Air Pollution 

Incident 

Emergencies 

; PDF (2 pp, 

106K) 

310 CMR 8.02 The Prevention 07/25/1990 10/04/2002 8.02 Definitions; 8.03 Air Pollution 

and 8 .03 (PDF) and/or Abatement 67 FR 62184 Episode Criteria 

' (5 pp, 11 8K) of Air Pollution 

Episode and Air 

Pollution Incident 

Emergencies . 
~ 310 CMR 

~ 60.02 (PDF) 

~ (18 pp, 1 85K) 

Regulations for the 05/14/1999 

Enhanced Motor 

Vehicle Inspection 

and Maintenance 

Program. 

11/15/2000 Replaces requirements for I/M tests 

65 FR 68898 with enhanced I/M test 

requirements . 

~ 540 CMR 4 .00 Periodic Annual 

~ PDF (24 pp, Staggered Safety 

200K) and Combined 

05/13/1999 11/15/2000 Revises Requirement for Inspection 

65 FR 68898 and Enforcement of I/M Program . 

Safety and 

Emissions 

inspection of all 

Motor Vehicles, 

Trailers, Semitrailers and 

converter Dollies .