REVISION TO THE VERMONT STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

TO ADDRESS THE INTERSTATE TRANSPORT OF POLLUTANTS 

IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLEAN AIR ACT § I I0(a)(2)(D)(i) 

APRIL 2009 

I . Introduction 

This revision to the Verrnont State Implementation Plan (SIP) demonstrates that 

the State of Vermont has met its obligations to address the interstate transport of air 

pollution from Vermont sources as required by the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and by 

the finding of the U .S . Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that states failed to 

submit SIPs addressing transported air pollution within three years of the 1997 

promulgation of new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone. and 

fine particulate matter (PM,. ;) . 

II . Backbround on SIP Requirement 

A. Clean Air Act Requirements 

On July 18, 1997 . EPA issued the 8-hour ozone and PM,. ; NAAQS . Section 

110(a)(1) of the CAA requires that within three years after EPA promulgates a NAAQS, 

each state must adopt a SIP that provides for the implementation and maintenance of the 

new or revised standard . Implementation of the new NAAQS for ozone and PM, . ; was 

delayed for years due to litigation . EPA did not finalize attainment/nonattaiiustent 

desianations for the ozone standard until June 2004,1 and for the PM2 . ; standard until 

April ?005 .2 Consequently, states were not able to submit SIPs within the three-year time 

frame required by Section 1 IO(a)(1). 

In March 2004. Environmental Defense and the American Lung Association 

initiated legal action agagainst EPA for failu re todetermine whether states had submitted 

SIPs following promulgation of the new NAAQS. As part of a consent decree in that 

action, EPA issued a rule in April 2005 finding that all 50 states had failed to submit SIPs 

satisfying Section 110(a)(?)(D)(i) requirements related to interstate transport."' If EPA 

did not approve a state's SIP as bei11c, i17 compliance with Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) b~- May 

1 The entire state of Vermont is designated as attaimnent irnder the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

I 

Vermont was designated as an attainment aT~ea for the 1997 PM-. ; NAAQS. EPA r-evised the 24-

hour P1V1=, ; NAAQS in Decenmber 2006 and designated Vennont as attainrnent for the revised 

Pivl- ; NAAQS in Decen1ber 2008 . This docunient. however. relates only to the 199 7 NAAQS. 

U.S . EPA, Findirnp of Failure to Submit Section 1 10 State lmplementation Plans for Interstate 

Transport for the National Ambient Air Quality Statndards for S-hour Ozone and PM, ~ ; . 70 Fed . 

Re~. 21147 (April ?5, 2005) . 
25, 2007, EPA may propose a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the state's 

transported air pollution. 

Section 1 10(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act sets out specific requirements for SIPs, and 

Includes Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which pertains to the interstate transport of emissions . 

It requires that SIPs contain provisions adequate to prohibit emissions within a state 

from : 

(1) Contributing significantly to nonattainment in another state, or interfering 

with maintenance of a NAAQS by any other state; or 

quality or to protect visibility. 

B. Transport SIP Guidance 

On August 15, 2006, EPA issued guidance a for states to use as they developed 

SIPs to meet their outstanding obligations under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-hour 

ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. The guidance outlines the four elements states should 

address in their SIPs : 

(1) Significant contribution to nonattainment; 

(2) Interference with maintenance; 

(3) Prevention of significant deterioration; and 

(4) Protection of visibility . 

Sections III through V below present data and information, as suggested in EPA's 

guidance, that demonstrate Vermont meets the interstate transport requirements of 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). 

III. Analysis of Significant Contributions of Nonattainment or Interference With 

Maintenance of 8-hour Ozone and PMZ,; NAAQS 

The Clean Air Act contains a "good neighbor" provision that requires states to 

submit SIPs that include provisions prohibiting emissions of air pollutants which 

"contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interference with maintenance by, any 

other State with respect to any such national primary or secondary ambient air quality 

standard . . . ." CAA § 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) . The modeling conducted by EPA to determine 

which states should be included in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) demonstrates 

that emissions from Vermont do not contribute to nonattainment or interfere with 

' Memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, to Regional Air 

Division Directors, Regions I - X on Guidance for SIP Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding 

Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (Aug. 15, 2006) (hereinafter "Transport SIP Guidance"). 
maintenance of the 1 Q97 8-hour ozone and PM, ; standards .' Furtherniore. there are no 

nonattainment areas in Vermont for these standards . 

A. 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 

In the air quality modeling conducted to support CAIR. EPA utilized two 

different techniques (source apportionment and zero-out modeling) to quantify the impact 

of emissions in specific upwind states on projected downwind nonattaininent areas for 8-

hour ozone . The zero-out and source apportionment modeling techniques provide 

different technical approaches to quantifying the downwind impact of emissions in 

upwind states . Zero-out modeling provides an estimate of downwind impacts by 

calculating the difference between the model estimates from a base case run to the 

estimates from simulation in which the base case man-made emissions are removed from 

a specific State. In source apportionment techniques, the contributions from many 

individual source areas (or categories) to ozone formation are estimated in a single model 

run. Source apportionment modeling tends to show a greater magnitude and frequency of 

contributions than the zero-out modeling, but neither technique is clearly superior to the 

other for evaluatinL, .contributions to ozone from various emissions sources. 

Using the zero-out and source apportionment techniques . EPA determined which 

states contribute significantly to nonattainment in the 40 downwind receptor counties that 

were modeled. Of the 31 states EPA included in its assessment of interstate ozone 

contributions, Vermont was one of six states that EPA found to not make a significant 

contribution to downwind ozone nonattainment.b 

B. PM,.; NAAQS 

State by state zero-out modeling was also used as the modelinc, teclu-iique to 

quantify the contribution from SO, and N0, emission in individual states to future PM, 

nonattaitunent in other states . As part of the zero-out modeling technique_ EPA removed 

the ?010 Base Case anthropogenic emissions of S02 and NOa from 3 7 states in the east 

on a state-by-state basis in different CMAQ modeling runs. EPA then used the modeled 

contribution from each upwind state to PM-) ; at each of the 11 ' 2010 Base year "modeled 

plus monitored" nonattaininent sites in other states . The niaximuna contribution from 

amonL, the set of downwind contributions was then selected as the maximum downwind 

contribution . 

EPA used a criterion of 0 .? ltg/m' for determining whether SO, of NO, emissions 

in a state make a significant contribution to PM, ., nonattainment in another State. Of the 

' U.S . EPA. Office of Air Quality Plammng and Standards . Technical Support Document for the 

Final Cleaii Air Interstate Rule. Air QUality Modeling (March ?005). See aZso U.S . EPA. Office 

of Air Qualit` Plammnp, and Staridards, Clean Air Interstate Rule Emissions Invernton~ Techrnical 

Support Documernt (March ?005) . 

`' Technical Sttpport Document for the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule. Air Qualit~~ ModelinL, at 

36. 
37 states analyzed, EPA found that the maximum downwind contribution of 28 states and 

the District of Columbia was 0.2 pg/m3 or more and therefore make a significant 

contribution to PM2. ; nonattaiiunent in other States . EPA also found that Vermont does 

not make a significant contribution to downwind PM2.5 nonattainment because Vermont's 

maximum downwind contribution was less than 0.05 pig/m3 .7 

IV. Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

As discussed above, states are required to submit SIPs that include provisions 

prohibiting emissions of air pollutants which "interfere with measures required to be 

included in the applicable implementation plan for any other State . . . to prevent 

EPA regulations require each SIP to include a preconstruction review program for 

major sources to satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) . In nonattainment 

areas, the preconstruction review program is known as nonattaimnent new source review 

(NNSR) . In attainment areas, preconstruction review is part of the prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) program. Vermont has an EPA-approved PSD program 

for stationary sources of air pollution that it has successfully implemented for many 

years . Vermont's PSD permitting program requirements are set forth in sections 5-501 

and 5-502 of Vermont's Air Pollution Control Regulations. 8 

EPA's Transport SIP Guidance states that, because . current PSD and NNSR 

permitting programs "require a demonstration that new or modified sources will not 

cause or contribute to air pollution in excess of the NAAQS in neighboring states or that 

sources in nonattainment areas procure offsets, EPA believes that states need not make an 

additional SIP submission containing rule changes or modeling demonstrations" to 

address the above requirement for the 8-hour ozone and PM2 ; NAAQS.' 

EPA's Transport SIP Guidance states that for 8-hour ozone, states need only 

confirm that major sources are currently subject to PSD and NNSR permitting programs 

(as applicable) that implement the 8-hour ozone standard and that the state is on track to 

meet the June 15, 2007 deadline for SIP submissions adopting the requirements of the 

Phase II ozone rule .1° Vermont confirms that major sources in the state are currently 

subject to a PSD permitting program that implements the 8-hour ozone standard . 

Vermont was not required to revise its SIP to adopt the requirements of the Phase II 

' Technical Support Document for the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule, Air Quality Modeling at 

42-43 . 

8 All of Vermont's Air Pollution Control Regulations are available at: 

littl) ://www .arnr .state .vt.us/air/docs/apcre£;s .pdf. 

9 Transport SIP Guidance at 6 . 

" Transport SIP Guidance at 8 . 
ozone rule because its approved PSD progratn already has a threshold for ambient impact 

evaluations of' 50 tpy of- NOa for major sources and 40 tpy of' NOx for major 

modifications . 

EPA's Transport SIP Guidance states that lot- PM^ ; ., states need only confirm that 

major sources are subject to PSD and NNSR perin~itting programs (as applicable) 

implemented in accordance with EPA's interim guidance calling for use of PM,(, as a 

surrogate for PM=,; in the PSD and NNSR pro(,ratns . ~ ~ Vermont confirms that major 

sources in the state are subject to a PSD permitting program that applies PM,(, as a 

surrogate for PM-, ; in accordance with interim EPA ouidance. 

Protection of Visibility 

States are also required to submit SIPs that contain adequate provisions 

prohibiting emissions of air pollutants which "interfere with measures required to be 

included in the applicable implementation plan for any other State . . . to protect 

visibility ." CAA § I10(a)(?)(D)(i)(II) . 

EPA adopted a phased approach to visibility protection. issuing regulations in 

1980 addressing reasonablv attributable visibility impairment and regulations in 1999 

addressing reaional haze. 

12 which require states to submit Re~ional Haze SIPs . 

In response to the requirement to submit Regional Haze SIPs," Vermont has been 

working with MANE-VU (Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union). the regional 

planning orcyanization for the Northeast states, to develop emission reduction/visibilitv 

improvement goals that provide for reasonable progress towards achieving natural 

visibilitv by 2064 in Class 1 areas in the MANE-VU region. The reasonable progress 

aoals for the first ten-year planning period will ensure improvement in visibility for the 

20 percent most impaired days each year, and also ensure no degradation in visibility for 

the 20 percent least impaired days each vear. The. long-term strateav will include 

enforceable emission limitations . compliance schedules and other measures necessary to 

achieve the reasonable progress goals established by the states in which the protected 

areas are located. The emission reduction obli-ations of each state will be based on an 

analysis of monitoring and modeling data through a consultative process with the other 

states, MANE-VU and other regional planning organizations . 

In the Transport SIP Guidance. EPA concluded that it is "preinature to determine 

whether or not State SIPs for 8-hour ozone or PM,. ; contain adequate provisions to 

~- See 40 CF.R . ~~ 5 1 .300-5 1 .308 

'' Vermont submitted a proposed Regiornal Haze SIP to EPA on Jarnuary 15 . 2009 . Vermont ~vill 

submit the final Regional Haze SIP to EPA after resporndirng to comments received from the EPA 

aiid federal land marnaGers. 
hrollibit emissions that interfere with measures in other States' SIN designed to address 

regional haze." 14 Vermont agrees with EPA that "it is not possible at this time to assess 

wllether there is any interference with measures in the applicable SIP for another state 

designed to `protect visibility' for the 8-hour ozone and PM-2,; NAAQS until regional 

haze SIN are submitted and approved." 15 

14 Transport SIP Guidance at 9. 

15 Transport SIP Guidance at 9-10. 
ATTACHMENT A: 

PUBLIC NOTICE OF PROPOSED SIP REVISIONS 

AND 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 40 CFR § 51 .102 

AND APPENDIX V OF 40 CFR PART 51 
NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING 

AND SUBMIT COMMENTS ON PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE 

VERMONT STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

Notice is hereby given that the Air Pollution Control Division is providing the 

opportunity for interested persons to request a public hearing and comment on proposed 

revisions to the Vermont State Implementation Plan (SIP). 

If the Division receives a request for a hearing, the hearing will be held on Monday, 

February 23, 2009, at 6 :00 pm in Stanley Hall Room 100 located on the grounds of the 

State Office Complex at 103 South Main Street, Waterbury, Vermont. 

Those requesting a hearing must call (888) 520-4879. The .deadline to submit a request 

for a hearing is 5 :00 p.m. on February 17, 2009. If no request for a hearing is received 

prior to this date, a Notice of Cancellation of the hearing will be posted on February 18, 

2009, on the Air Pollution Control Division's website at 

Iittp ://www .anr.state .vt .us/air/Planning/htm/DraftRegionaIFlazeSIP .htm. Interested persons 

may also call (888) 520-4879 to determine if the public hearing has been cancelled. 

The Air Pollution Control Division is proposing revisions to the Vermont SIP to address 

federal requirements with respect to (1) regional haze; and (2) the interstate transport of 

pollutants . The regional haze SIP revisions are being proposed to address the 

requirements under the federal Regional Haze Rule, 40 CFR 51 .309. The transport SIP 

revisions are being proposed to address the requirements of Clean Air Act Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the interstate transport of ozone and fine particulate matter 

(PM),5). The proposed regional haze SIP and the proposed interstate transport SIP 

revisions are available on the APCD's website at 

l' .SLatf; .Vt.Us/alr/Plannin,_,/htCl"1/DraftReQ ioncllf-IazcSlP.htill and at tile APCD 

offices located in Waterbury at the State Office Complex, Building 3 South, 103 South 

Main Street. 

If requested, a hearing will be held to receive comments from interested persons 

regarding the proposed revisions. Attendance at the hearing is not necessary to submit 

written comments on the proposed SIP revisions. Written comments on the proposed SIP 

revisions must be received by the Air Pollution Control Division by 5 :00 pm on February 

24, 2009 . 

All written comments must be mailed, faxed, or e-mailed to : 

Corie Dunn 

Air Pollution Control Division 

Building 3 South 

103 South Main Street 

Waterbury, Vermont 05671-0402 

FAX : 802-241-2590 

EMAIL: corie .dunn6~i ;state .vt .Lls 
NOTICE Or CANCELLATION OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED 

REVISIONS TO THE VERMONT STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

Notice is hereby given that the Air Pollution Control Division has cancelled the public 

hearing on the proposed revisions to the Vermont State Implementation Plan (SIP) . 

The public hearing ; has been cancelled because the Division did not receive any requests 

for a hearinc. The deadline to submit a request for a hearin- was 5 :00 p.m. on February 

17, 2009 . 

The Air PolIution Control Division is proposing revisions to the Vermont SIP to address 

federal requirements with respect to (1) regional haze ; and (?) the interstate transport of 

pollutants . The regional haze SIP revisions are being proposed to address .the 

requirements under the federal Regional Haze Rule. 40 CFR 5 1309 . The transport SIP 

revisions are being proposed to address the requirements of Clean Air Act Section 

1 10(a)(?)(D)(i) with respect to the interstate transport of ozone and fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) . The proposed regional haze SIP and the proposed interstate transport SIP 

revisions are available on the APCD's website at 

htth : ~\\ \\ \\ .tinr .statc .Vt .uSLiir'I'lannii1 L!htm"DriftRe`_ic~ntill-Itizel-ll' .htm and at the APCD 

offices located in Waterbury at the State Office Complex. Building 3 South. 103 South 

Main Street . 
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 40 CFR § 51 .102 

AND APPENDIX V OF 40 CFR PART 51 

REGARDING 

PROPOSED REVISION TO VERMONT'S 

STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO ADDRESS 

THE INTERSTATE TRANSPORT OF POLLUTANTS 

Public notice of the proposed revision to the Vermont state implementation plan (SIP) to 

address the interstate transport 

following newspapers: Burlington Free Press, Rutland Herald, Caledonian Record, Times 

Argus, and Vermont Lawyer. The notice provided the opportunity for interested persons 

to request a public hearing and comment on the proposed revisions . The notice further 

stated that if a hearing was requested by February 17, 2009, the hearing would be held on 

February 23, 2009, at 6:00 pm in Stanley Hall Room 100 located on the grounds of the 

State Office Complex at 103 South Main Street, Waterbury, Vermont. 

As required by 40 CFR § 51 .102(f), I hereby certify that the requirements of 40 CFR § 

51 .102(a)-(d) were met and that no public hearing was requested during the notification 

period . In accordance with Section 2 .1(g) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51, 1 further 

certify that the public notice and hearing procedure followed was consistent with the 

information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, as 

applicable . 

Richard A. Valentinetti 

Certifying Officer 
ATTACHMENT B : 

LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMENTS RECEIVED, 

AND VERMONT'S RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 
LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMENTS RECEIVED, 

AND VERMONT'S RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 

n public hearing was not held because no public hearing was requested. 

Thcrefore, there were no witnesses. In addition, no comments on Vermont's proposed 

SIP revisions were received from the public . The only comment submitted was 6rorn the 

U.S . Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 provided by letter dated February 24, 

2009 from Anne E, Arnold, Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit. 

EPA provided the following comment: "In Section V, Vermont should add 

reference to its proposed Regional Haze SIP." In response, Vermont added footnote 13 

to Section V to reference the proposed Regional Haze SIP.