UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION III
1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103

DATE: December 4, 2014

SUBJECT: Technical Support Document for the District of Columbia State Implementation

Plan Revisions for Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone , 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide

, and 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality
Standards and Air Pollution Emergency Episode Plan

FROM: Emlyn Vélez

- Rosa, Environmental Engineer \ s \

Office of Air Program Planning

TO: File for SIP Docket

- EPA

- R03

- OAR

- 2014

- 070 1

THRU: Cristina Fernández, Associate Director \ s \

Office of Air Program Planning

I . INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action on submittal s made by the District of Columbia (hereafter “the District”) to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2) infrastruct ure requirements for the 2008 o zone national ambien t air quality standard (NAAQS or standard), the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) NAAQS, and the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) NAAQS. This technical support document (TSD) provides EPA’s rationale for proposing approval of the District’s infrastructure submittals.

II . BACKGROUND

On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone based
on 8

- hour average concentrations. EPA revised the level of the 8

- hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm.

On February 9, 2010 (75 FR 6474), EPA est ablished a new 1

- hour primary NAAQS for
NO 2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb). This is based on a 3

- year average of the 98 th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1

- hour daily maximum concentrations.2

On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for the 1

- hour primary SO 2 at a level of 75 ppb , based on a 3

- year average of the annual 99 th percentile of 1

- hour daily maximum concentrations.

III . EPA’s REQUIREMENTS

Pursuant to section 110(a) of the CAA, states are require d to submit state implementation plans (SIPs) that provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS. Section 110(a) of the CAA imposes the obligation upon stat es to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS. States typically have met many of the basic program elements required in section 110(a)(2) of the CAA through earlier SIP submissions in connection with previous standards of the same pollutan t. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA lists specific elements that states must meet or continue to meet in these SIP submissions. The requirements include SIP infrastructure elements such as requirements for modeling, monitoring, and emissions
inventories that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. To satisfy CAA section 110(a), s tat es must provide “infrastructure SIP submissions” or provide a certification that the existing SIP contains provisions addressing relevant infrastructure SIP elements from sections 110(a)(2)(A) through (M) of the CAA.

IV . SUMMARY OF S TATE SUBMITTAL S

On June 6, 2014, June 13, 2014 , and July 17, 2014 , the District provided three separate
submittal s to satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS

, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, respectively

. Each submittal addresses the following infrastructure element s for the applicable NAAQS : Section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(I), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) of the
CAA. The infrastructure submittals did not address section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertains to the nonattainment requ irements of part D, Title I of the CAA, since this element is not required to be submitted by the 3

- year submission deadline of CAA section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate process. The June 13, 2014 submittal also includes the District’s Ai r Quality Emergency Episode Plan to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR part 5 1 , subpart H and section 110(a)(2)(G)

.

V . E PA’s COMPLETENESS DETERMINATIONS OF STATE SUBMITTALS

EPA evaluated each of the submittals for technical and administrative completeness, in
accordance with 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. EPA found that each of the submittals is technically incomplete for the portions of the infrastructure elements in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II),3

(D)(ii), and (J) relating to the permitting p rogram for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), because the District has not adequately addressed the requirements of part C of T itle I of the CAA for having a SIP

- approved PSD program. EPA found the remainder of the SIP
submittals to be adminis tratively and technically complete. On July 21, 2014 and November 4, 2014, EPA sent letters to the District Department of Environment (DDOE) notifying the District
of these determinations for each of the applicable NAAQS . As a result of these incompleteness findings, EPA is not taking rulemaking action on the PSD

- related portions of section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) for the for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, until the District through DDOE sub mits a SIP to address the PSD permit program requirements of part C of T itle I of the CAA

.

EPA recognizes, however, that the District of Columbia is already subject to a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) containing the Federal PSD program 1 to correct th e SIP deficiency
and that DDOE would not have to take further action for the FIP

- based permitting process to continue operating. Thus, EPA anticipates that there will be no adver se consequences to DDOE
from the s e incompleteness finding s for the PSD

- related portions of section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS. Mandatory sanctions would not apply to the District of Columbia under CAA section 179
because the failure to submit a PSD SIP is neither with respect to a submission that is required
under CAA T itle I part D, nor in response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5). In addition, EPA is not subject to any further FIP duties from our finding of incompleteness
because ther e is already the FIP implementing the Federal PSD program for DDOE which addresses the SIP deficiency. In addition, EPA is also not taking rulemaking action at this time on the portion of the infrastructure SIP submittals which address 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for 2008 ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS. EPA will take later rulemaking action on these submittals regarding 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). However, i n this action, EPA is proposing approval of the remainder of the submittals to address infrastructure requirement s for the 2010
NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

VI. EVALUATION OF STATE SUBMITTALS

This section describes EPA’s rationale for taking action on the complete portions of the infrastructure SIP revisions submitted by the District in addressing the implementation of the
2010 NO 2 , 2008 ozone

, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS with the exception of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)

.

1 On August 7, 1980 (45 FR 52676, at 52741). EPA disapproved a number of states SIPs for PSD purposes, including the District of Columbia, and incorporated by reference portions of the Federal PSD provisions in 40 CFR 52.21 into the implementation plans for those states. This FIP was subsequently amended to reflect amendments to the Federal PSD rule, on March 10, 2003 (68 FR 11316, at 11322) and December 24, 2003 (68 FR 74483, at 74488). At present, the PSD FIP, incorporated by reference in the District S IP in 40 CFR 52.499, specifically contains the provisions of 40 CFR 52.21, with the exception of paragraph (a)(1).4

A . Section 110(a)(2)(A)

To satisfy section 110(a)(2)(A), the states have to identify existing EPA

- approved SIP provisions or new provisions that the states have adopted and submitted for EPA approval that limit emissions of pollutants relevant to the subject NAAQS, including precursors of the relev ant NAAQS pollutant, where applicable. EPA has determined that the District has established regulations applicable to the 2008 ozone, the 2010 NO 2 , and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS that include enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means or techniques, as well as schedules and timetables for compliance to meet the applicable requirements of the CAA. For the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the Dis trict controls direct emission of the ozone precursors, nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (V OC). T able s 1 , 2, and 3 list all enforceable
emission limitations and schedules that are contained in the District’s approved SIP , as codified in 40 CFR 52.470(c) for each of the applicable NAAQS

. EPA notes there are no longer any electric generating units (EGUs , i.e., power plants ) located within the District, and as such, EPA’s cap

- and

- trade program, the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule, for SO 2 and NOx is not applicable to the District. See 76 F R 48208 (August 8, 2011).

Table 1. Pollution Control Measures for 2008 Ozone NAAQS in the District of Columbia

Control Measures District Regulation State
Effective
Date EPA’s Approval into SIP

POINT SOURCE MEASURES

Point

– NOx RACT 20 DCMR section 805 4/16/2004 12/28/2004, 69 FR 77645,
69 FR 77647
Point

– Non

- CTG VOC
RACT 20 DCMR section 715 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Point

– NOx SIP Call 20 DCMR chapter 10 12/8/2000 12/22/2000, 65 FR 80783
Point

– Opacity 20 DCMR section 606 3/15/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431
Point

– Nitrogen Oxide
Emissions 20 DCMR section 804 3/15/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431

AREA SOURCE MEASURES
Area

– Surface Cleaning/ Degreasing for Machinery/ Automobile Repair 20 DCMR section 718 11/26/2004 12/23/2005, 69 FR 76855

Area

– Graphic Arts Controls 20 DCMR sections 710,
716 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Area

– Reformulated Consumer Products Rule,
Phase I 20 DCMR sections 719 to
737 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Area

– Reformulated Consumer Products Rule, Phase II*5

Area

– Industrial Adhesives
and Sealants Rule* 20 DCMR sections 743 to
749 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Area

– Portable Fuel Containers Rule, Phase I 20 DCMR sections 751 to
758 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Area

– Solvent Cleaning Operations Rule 20 DCMR sections 763 to
769 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Area

– Reformulated Industrial Cleaning Solvents 20 DCMR sections 770
and 771 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Area

– Architectural and
Industrial Maintenance Coatings Rule* 20 DCMR sections 773 to
778 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992

Area

– Stage I & II Vapor Recovery Nozzle (since 1977) 20 DCMR section 704 (Stage I);
20 DCMR section 705 (Stage II) 2/1/1985

(varies) 10/27/1999, 64 FR 57777

Area

– Seasonal Open Burning Restrictions 20 DCMR section 604 2/1/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431

Area

– Miscellaneous VOCs 20 DCMR section 700 12/30/2011 4/29/2013, 78 FR 24992
Area

– Storage of Petroleum
Products 20 DCMR sections 701.1
to 701.13 3/15/1985 10/27/1999, 64 FR 57777

Area

– Control of VOC Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment 20 DCMR section 702 3/15/1985 10/27/1999, 64 FR 57777

Area

– Terminal Vapor Recovery

– Gasoline or VOC 20 DCMR sections 703.2,
703.3 3/15/1985 10/27/1999, 64 FR 57777

Table 2. Pollution Control Measures for 2010 NO 2 NAAQS in the District of Columbia

Control Measures District Regulation State
Effective
Date EPA ’s Approval into SIP

POINT SOURCE MEASURES Nitrogen Oxide Emissions 20 DCMR section 804 3/15/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431

NOx RACT 20 DCMR section 805 4/16/2004 12/28/2004, 69 FR 77645,
69 FR 77647
NOx SIP Call 20 DCMR chapter 10 12/8/2000 12/22/2000, 65 FR 80783
Minor New Source Review (NSR) 20 DCMR sections 200 4/29/1997 7/31/1997, 62 FR 40937;

ONROAD MEASURES6

High

- Tech (Enhanced) Inspections and
Maintenance Parts of 18 DCMR
sections 4, 6, 7, 11, 26,
and 99 (varies) 6/11/1999, 64 FR 31498; 4/10/1986, 51 FR 12322

Table 3. Pollution Control Measures for 2010 SO 2 NAAQS in the District of Columbia

Control Measures District Regulation State
Effective
Date EPA’s Approval into SIP

POINT and AREA SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES Title V permit condition to
shut down two electric generating units (EGUs) in
2012 Regional Haze Plan at
40 CFR section 52.470(e) 10/27/2011 2/2/2012, 77 FR 5191

Seasonal Open Burning
Restrictions 20 DCMR section 604 2/1/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431

Sulfur Content of Fuel Oil 20 DCMR section 801 3/15/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431
Sulfur Content of Coal 20 DCMR section 803 3/15/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431
Sulfur Process Emissions 20 DCMR section 803 3/15/1985 8/28/1995, 60 FR 44431
Minor New Source Review (NSR) 20 DCMR sections 200 4/29/1997 7/31/1997, 62 FR 40937;

ONROAD CONTROL MEASURES

High

- Tech (Enhanced) Inspections and
Maintenance Parts of 18 DCMR chapters 4, 6, 7, 11, 26, and 99; 20 DCMR
section 915 (varies) 6/11/1999, 64 FR 31498; 4/10/1986, 51 FR 12322; 7/20/2000, 65 FR 44981

EPA acknowledges that emissions limitations and other control measures needed to attain the NAAQS in areas designated nonattainment for that NAAQS will be due on a different
schedule from the section 110 infrastructure elements and thus EPA will review and a ct upon any such submissions for nonattainment areas within the District separately as necessary

.

Additionally , EPA is not proposing in this action to approve or disapprove any existing District provisions with regard to excess emissions during startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) of operations at a facility. EPA believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary to the CAA a nd existing EPA guidance (August 11, 1999 Steven Herman and Robert Perciasepe Guidance Memorandum, “State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown”), and EPA is addressing such state regulations in a separate rulemaking action. See 78 FR 12460 (February 22, 2013) (proposed rulemaking on SSM SIP provisions) and 79 FR 55920 (September 17, 2014)7

(supplemental proposed rulemaking on affirmative defense provisions for malfunctions)

. In the meantime, EPA encourages any state having a deficient SSM provision to take steps to correct it as soon as possible.

Also in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing District’s rules with regard to director’s discretion or variance prov isions. EPA believes that a number of states have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, and EPA is addressing such regulations in separate rulemaking action

. See 78 FR 12460 and 79 FR
55920. In the meantime, EPA encour ages any state having director’s discretion or variance provisions which are contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.

Based upon EPA’s review of the District’s infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2008 ozone, the 2010 NO 2 , and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

B

. Section 110(a)(2)(B)

To satisfy section 110(a)(2)(B), states need to provide statutory or regulatory provisions that provide the authority and responsibility to perform air quality monitoring activities in accordance with EPA’s requirements. EPA concurs with t he District that it has the authority to conduct ambient air quality monitoring under the Distri ct of Columbia Air Pollution Control Act of 1984 (APCA) (D.C. Official Code § 8

- 101.05(a)(1) (2013 Repl.)). The District’s authority under the APCA is then delegated to DDOE under the District Department of the Environment Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C. Official Code § 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.)). The District’s most relevant existing EPA

- approved SIP provisions regarding air quality monitoring activities are found in 20 DCMR section 400

. As required by these provisions , public reporting of air pollution levels are based on the results of air quality monitoring.

DDOE monitors air quality for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS at appropriate locations, in accordance with EPA’s ambient air quality monitoring net work requirements

. See EPA’s Ambient Monitoring Technology Informati on Center (AMTIC) website; 40 CFR p art 53 ; 40 CFR p art 58 ; and 40 CFR 51.190. DDOE is responsible for operating and maintaining the District’s air quality monitoring stations and send s c ollected air samples to EPA

- approved laboratories for analysis. DDOE performs quality

- assurance checks and submits the data to EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) quarterly, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. Thus, EPA finds that the District has established and currently operates appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and upon request, makes such data available to EPA.8

The District provides information to EPA regarding a ir quality monitoring activities, including a description of its compliance with EPA’s m onitoring requirements and an explanation of any proposed changes to the air monitoring network. DDOE submits annually to EPA an air quality monitoring network plan and a periodic network assessment every five years,
consistent with 40 CFR 58.10. In each annual network plan, DDOE provides notification to EPA of any proposed changes to the monitoring network or the measurement methods, consistent with the applicable requirements in 40 CFR 58.14. EPA Region III ’s Region al Administrator sends a
letter annua lly to the District indicating whether the Network Plan and any proposed changed to the network meet all applicable monitoring requirements. The District ’ s 2014 Annual Ambient
Air Monitoring Network P lan was approved by EPA on a N ovember 21 st

, 2014 letter to DDOE

. EPA’s approval of t he District’s 201 4 Network Plan confirms that the District’s air monitoring program continues to meet F ederally established monitoring and data assessment criteria for the respective pollutants.

Based upon EPA’s review of the District’s infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(B) for the 2008 ozone, the 2010 NO 2 , and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

C

. Section 110(a)(2)(C)

T his infrastructure element consists of three sub

- elements: Enforcement; state

- wide regulations of new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of majors sources; and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications within areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS.

The District provisions that provide for enforcement of the emission limits and control

measures previously identified to satisfy CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) inclu de the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements f ound in certain sections of 20 D CM R Chapters 1 and 5, all of which have been approved into the District SIP.

Consistent with 4 0 CFR 51.160 through 5 1 .164, t he Dis trict’s minor preconstruction permitting program i s codified in Title 20 DCMR chapter 2 and approved into the District SIP.
The District’s minor permitting program appl ies to all regulated pollutants under the CAA, including ozone, NO 2 , and SO 2 , regardless of nonattainment stat u s. This satisfies the subelement for preconstruction of the construction and modification of minor s tationary sources and the minor modification of major stationary sources.

As explained earlier, EPA has determined that the portion s of the District’s infrastructure
SIP submittals addressing the subelement of section 110(a)( 2)(C) related to the PSD permitting requirements under part C of T itle I of the CAA are technically incomplete. As a result, EPA is9

not taking rulemaking action on the PSD

- related portions of the submittals for section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. EPA does not anticipate any adverse consequences to the District, as the Federal PSD rules fully address this requirement through EPA’s FIP which covers the District

.

With respect to 110(a)(2)(C) and a PSD permit program , EPA interprets the CAA to require each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for a new or revised NAAQS that demonstrates that the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program meeting the current requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants. Because the District is subject to EPA’s FIP for PSD which implements 40 CFR 52.21, the PSD program currently in place through the FIP covers all regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs) as appropriate.

On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision addressing the application of PSD permitting requirements to GHG emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency , 134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said that EPA m ay not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source is a major source required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court also said that EPA could continue to require that PSD permits, otherwise required based on emissions of polluta nts other than GHGs, contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best Available Control Technology (BACT). In order to act consistently with its understanding of the Court’s decision pending further judicial action to effectuate the d ecision, EPA is not continuing to apply EPA regulations that would require that SIPs include permitting requirements that the Supreme Court found impermissible. Specifically, EPA is not applying the requirement that a state’s SIP

- approved PSD program requ ire that sources obtain PSD permits when GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above the major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant emissions increase and a significant net emissions incre ase from a modification ( e.g. 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v)). EPA anticipates a need to revise Federal PSD rules in light of the Supreme Court opinion. In addition, EPA anticipates that many states will revise their existing SIP

- approved PSD programs in light of the Supreme Court’s decision. The timing and content of subsequent EPA actions with respect to the EPA regulations and state PSD program approvals are expected to be informed by additional legal process before the United
States District Court for the D istrict of Columbia Circuit. At this juncture, EPA is not expecting states to have revised their PSD programs for purposes of infrastructure SIP submissions and is only evaluating such submissions to assure that the state’s program correctly addresses GHG s consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision.

Because the District is subject to the PSD FIP, the PSD permitting program within the District continues to require that PSD permits (otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs) con tain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of BACT. The FIP implementing 40 CFR 52.21 may currently contain provisions that are no10

longer necessary in light of the Supreme Court decision. However, the FIP will automatically update when or if EPA updates 40 CFR 52.21.

Meanwhile, t he F IP contains the necessary PSD requirements at this time, and the application of those requirements is not impeded by the presence of other previously

- approved provisions regarding the permitting of sources of GHGs that EPA does not consider necessary at this time in light of the Supreme Court decision. Accordingly, the Supreme Court decision does
not affect our determination that the P SD FIP for the District addresses the deficiency in the District’s SIP for 1 10(a)(2)(C) and part C of T itle I of the CAA.

Based upon EPA’s review of the District’s infrastructure SIP submittals for the three NAAQS, EPA finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2008 ozone, the 2010 NO 2 , and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS , with the exception of the portions related to
PSD for which the District is subject to a FIP

.

D

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

1

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

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) addresses any emissions activity in one state that contributes

s ignificantly to nonattainment, or interferes with maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. EPA sometimes refers to these requirements as prong 1 (significant contribution to nonattainment) and prong 2 (interference with maintenance). The District’s June 6, 2014, June 13, 2014, and July 17, 2014 infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS respectively include a component to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) relating to interstate transport. However, EPA will take later, separate action with respect to this element for these NAAQS.

EPA believes the statutory language in the CAA supports our ability to approve the District’s infrastructure SIP submittals for the 200 8 ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS while taking later, separate action on the portions of the SIP submittals which address
the District ’s obligation to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)

. Section 110(k)(3) of the CAA authorizes EPA to approve a plan in full, disapprove it in full, or approve it in part and disapprove it in part, depending on the extent to which such plan meets the requirements of the
CAA. This authority to approve the stat es’ SIP revisions in separable parts was included in the 1990 Amendments to the CAA to overrule a decision in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit holding that EPA could not approve individual measures in a plan submission without either approving or disapproving the plan as a whole. See S. Rep. No 101

- 228, at 22, 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3385, 3408 (discussing the express overruling of Abramowitz v. EPA , 832 F.2d 1071 (9 th Cir. 1987)). As such, EPA interprets its authority under section 110(k)(3), as affo rding EPA the discretion to approve or conditionally approve individual elements of the District’s11

infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS, separate and apart from any action with respect to the requirements of se ction 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to each NAAQS. EPA views discrete infrastructure SIP requirements, such as the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), as severable from the other infrastructure elements and interprets section 110(k)(3) as allowi ng it to act on individual severable measures in a plan
submission.

2

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

The infrastructure e lement in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i )(II) requires SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required of any other state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or from interfering with measur es required of any other state to protect visibility in Class I areas. EPA sometimes refers to these requirements as prong 3 (interference with PSD) and prong 4 (interference with visibility protection).

Prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires states SIPs to have provisions prohibiting
emissions that would interfere with measures required to be in any other state SIP under part C of the CAA to prevent significant deterioration of air quality. Because part C of T itle I of the
CAA requires a state’s PSD program to address all pollutants subject to regulation under the CAA, EPA interprets prong 3 to mean that infrastructure SIP submissions should provide SIP provisions containing a comprehensive PSD permitting program. As explained earlier, EPA has determined that the portion s of the District’s infrastructure SIP submittals for addressing the subelement in section 110(a)(2)( D ) (i)(I) related to the PSD permitting requirements under part C
of T itle I of the CAA are technically incomple te. As a result, EPA is not taking rulemaking
action on the PSD

- related portions of the submittals for section 110(a)(2)( D ) (i)(I) for the 2010
NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. EPA does not anticipate any adverse consequences to the District from this lack of full approval, as the Federal PSD rules fully address this requirement through EPA’s FIP for the District

.

Prong 4 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (II) requires that SIP s contain adequate provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from emitting air pollutants in amounts which will interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other sta te under part C of T itle I of the CAA to protect visibility. EPA interprets prong 4 to be pollutant

- specific, such that an infrastructure SIP submission need only address potential interference with protection of visibility cause d by the pollutant, inclu ding precursors, to which the subject NAAQS applies. Further

, EPA interprets prong 4 to be satisfied for any relevant NAAQS by confirmation that the states has an approved Regional H aze SIP that fully satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308 or 51.309. 2 The District’s Regional Haze

2 Because of the impacts on visibility from the interstate transport of pollutants, EPA has interpreted this provision12

Program to address visibility impairment requirements in Class I areas was fully approved into the District SIP by EPA. See 77 FR 5191 ( February 2, 2012 ) . The District’s Regional Haze SIP is consistent with EPA’s requireme nts in 40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309, addressed any contribution

to visibility impairment related to emissions of SO 2 , NO 2 , and ozone precursors , and included

measures to address emissions that would interfere with reasonable progress goals of neighboring state s set to protect Class I areas.

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)( D)(i)(II) for visibility protection for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

3

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

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) is satisfied when an infrastructure SIP ensure s compliance with the applicable requirements of section 126(a), 126(b), 126(c), and 115 of the CAA.

Under section 126(a)(1) of the CAA 3 , each SIP must contain provisions requiring each new or modified major source , that is either (a) subject to PSD unde r CAA T itle I part C

, or (b)
that may significantly contribute to levels of pollution in excess of a NAAQS in any other region outside of the state in which the source is located, to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from the source

. Because the District lac ks a SIP

- approved PSD program, EPA has determined that the portion s of the District’s infrastructure submittals for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS addressing the subelement in section 110(a)(2)( D ) (ii) related to the PSD permitting requirements are technically incomplete. Thus,
EPA is not taking rulemaking action on the PSD

- related portions of the submittals for section 110(a)(2)(D)( i i) for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAA QS.

EPA concurs with the assertions in the three infrastructure SIP submissions that it currently has no pending obligations pursuant to CAA sections 126(b) and (c) for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, or the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. EPA also concurs with the District’s statement s in the three infrastructure SIP submittals that there are no findings under
CAA section 115 against the District with respect the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, or the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. EPA also finds that the District ’ s SIP has adequate

of CAA section 110 a s requiring states to include in their SIPs measures to prohibit emissions that would interfere with the reasonable progress goals set to protect Class I areas in other states. See 76 FR 52388 (August 22, 2011) (disapproval of a portion of New Mexico SIP related to 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and promulgation of FIP to address deficiency) and 76 FR 491 (January 5, 2011) (proposed action on same).

3 EPA notes that the requirement in CAA section 126(a)(2) was a one

- time obligations on states that does not apply

to EPA’s review of infrastructure SIP submissions.13

provisions insuring future compliance with the requirements of sections 126 (b), 126 (c), and 115 of the CAA, as may be necessary.

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds that the District ’s infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS meet the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) , with exception of the PSD

- related portions for which the District’s SIP
submissions are i ncomplete

.

E

. Section 110(a)(2)(E)

1

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

For section 110(a)(2)(E)(i), the infrastructure SIP submission should provide necessary assurances that the state has adequate personnel and funding to implement the relevant NAAQS.
As indicated in each of the three infrastructure SIP submissions, DDOE is responsible for carrying out any SIP obligations for implementation of the NAAQS, including the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. In accordance with 40 C FR part 51, subpart M, the District has identified t he Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee (MWAQC) and the Interstate Air Quality Council (IAQC) as parti cipating organizations in planning and developing SIP provisions for the District . A copy of the inter

- organizational agreements between MWAQC and DDOE was approved into the District ’s SIP in the approved
infrastructure SIP revision for the 2008 lead standard. See 78 FR 62455 ( October 22, 2013 )

.

At present, the District states it fulfills its SIP obligation s by virtue of having adequate personnel and funding through the CAA sections 103 and 105 grant processes (Federal grant funds), the District’s local match, the District Department of Transportation (DDOT), and the District Department of Motor Vehicle motor vehicle inspection fees. These funding resources

were available as of the date of th e infrastructure SIP submissions and are expected to be adequate for five years following the submissions. DDOE anticipates both adequate personnel and funding to meet any changes in the implementation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010
NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

In accordance with 40 CFR part 51, subpart L, the District has adequate authority to carry out its SIP obligations under state law pursuant to the District APCA ( D.C. Official Code section
8

- 101.05(b)(5)(2013 Repl.)) and its delegation of authority to DDOE under the District Department Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C. Official Code section 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.)).

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(E)(i) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.14

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

Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires SIPS to include approved provisions that comply with requirements of CAA section 128 with respect state boards. The District is in compliance with the applicable requirements of section 128 through its conflict of interest provisions in the D.C.
Official Code section 1

- 1161.01, 1

- 1162.23, 1162.24 and 1162.25, which have been approved
into the District SIP. See 78 FR 62455 ( October 22, 2013 )

. EPA finds that the D istrict has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS,
and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

3

. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii)

Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires the infrastructure SIP to provide necessary assurances that, when the state relies on any local or regional government for implementation of the SIP, it has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of the SIP. As indicated in the
infrastructure SIP submissions, t he District does not rely on localities for implementation of the
SIP f or any of the applicable NAAQS. T hus, EPA finds that the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) are not applicable to the District

. EPA finds the infrastructure SIP submissions for the three NAAQS meet obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(E) (iii) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
2010 NO 2 NAAQS

, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

F

. Section 110(a)(2)(F)

1

. 110(a)(2)(F)(i) and (ii)

To satisfy section s 110(a)(2)(F) (i) and (ii) , states need to provide statutory or regulatory provisions to perform stationary source monitoring and emissions reporting in accordance with
EPA’s re gulations

. Specifically, EPA’s source monitoring requirements are contained in 40 CFR 52.212, and EPA’s requirements for periodic reporting of emissions requirements are provided in 40 CFR 51.211, 40 CFR 51.321 through 51.323, and 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. EPA notes that in practice, the reporting requirements of 40 CFR 51.321 have been superseded by 40 CF R 51.45(b) for electronic submission of emissions reports.

EPA concurs with the District ’s statement in each of the three infrastructure SIP
submittals that it has the adequate authority to conduct stationary source monitoring and to require periodic repo rting under the District APCA ( D.C. Official Code s ection s 8

- 101.05(a)(1) and (a)(2) (2013 Repl.) ) . This authority is delegated to DDOE under the District Department of the Environment Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C. Official Code s ection 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.)). In accordance with 40 CFR 51.212, the District’s s pecific source monitoring requir ements
, including periodic testing and inspection requirements, are found throughout the District’s SIP

-15

approved provisions of 20 DCMR chapter 1, chapter 2, c hapter 3, s ection 307, and c hapter 5,

s ection 502. Th ese regulations are included a nd codified in the District SIP in 40 CFR 52.4 7 0(c)
and are applicable to the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. The
relevant allowable tests methods are referenced in the District SIP and are specifically listed in
the infrastructure SIP submittals for each of the applicable NAAQS.

Consistent with EPA’s source emissions reporting requirements, t he District’s SIP

approved provisions of 20 DCMR chapter 2 require sources to submit to DDOE emissions and
emissions

- related data on an annual basis. The District complies with 40 CFR 51.45(b) by submitting emissions inventory data to EPA’s National Emissions Inventory (NE I) System. In the submittals, the District provides the necessary assurance that it will make any necessary changes to emissions inventory reporting relevant to the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, respectively as required

.

2

. 110(a)(2)(F)(iii)

Section 110(a)(2)(F)(iii) is satisfied by the states having provisions in place that provide for correlation of source emission reports with applicable emission limitations or standards and provide public availability of such reports. The District has the authority to review emissions reports submitted by sources under the District APCA (D.C. Official Code section 8

- 101.05(a)(1) and (b)(3)(2013 Repl.)). DDOE air quality inspectors correlate the emissions data with any applicable emissi ons limitations or standards. Data reported would reflect the applicable test methods and averaging periods used consistent with the applicable emissions limitations and standards, as required by permits. The District’s source emissions reports are
avail able for public inspection through the District’s normal administrative procedures, such as described under the District’s Freedom of Information Act (D.C. FOIA) (D.C. Official Code
section 2

- 532 et seq . (2013 Repl.)).

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(F) (i), (ii) and (iii) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

G

. Section 110(a)(2)(G) and the District’s Air Quality Emergency Plan

Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide authority comparable to that of the EPA Administrator under section 303 of the CAA and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. Specifically, CAA section 303 provides authority to the EPA Administrator to seek a court order to restrain any source from causing or contributing to emissions that present an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, or the envir onment.16

The District has the authority to implement SIP

- approved provisions under the District
APCA in D.C. Official Code section 8

- 101.05(b)(5) (2013 Repl.), which is delegated to DDOE through the District Department of the Environment Establishment Ac t of 2005 (D.C. Official
Code 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.)). T he District has authority comparable to EPA’s imminent and substantial endangerment authority in CAA section 303 under the SIP

- approved provisions in 20
DCMR c hapter 4, s ection 4 01.

EPA’s requirements for contingency plans to implement the state’s emergency episode authority are found in 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (40 CFR 51,150 through 51.153). Subpart H includes criteria for classification of areas into priority regions, based on ambient air concentrations of the particular pollutant being addressed. The currently applicable priority classification for regions in each state are incorporated into the SIPs. Contingency plan requirements are specified in 40 CFR 51.51 and 51.152, and an ex ample of a plan is provided in appendix L to 50 CFR part 51.

To address these requirements in 40 CFR part 51, subpart H , the District submitted to EPA as a SIP revision on June 13, 2014 its Air Quality Emergency Episode Plan (Emergency Plan) to be approved into the District’s SIP. As specified in 40 CFR 52.471 a nd indicated in the District’s submittal , the entire District is part of the National Capital Interstate Air Qu ality Control Region , which is classified as a Priority I region for particulate matter, sulfur oxides (SOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and ozone and as a Priority III region for NO 2 . Therefore, as required by subpart H, the District is required to have a cont ingency plan for particulate matter, SOx, CO, and ozone. EPA notes that there are no applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 51, s ubpart H for NO 2 , and consequently also no applicable contingency plan requirements under CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for the District , as Priority III regions are not required to have emergency episode plans

.

The District’s Emergency Plan establish es criteria for determin ing t he exi stence of an emergency episode and provides contingency measures for all pollutants, in cluding particulate matter, SOx, CO, and ozone

. The District’ s Emergency Plan specifies four levels of episodes: internal episode watch, alert, warning, and emergency

. A declaration of an emergency episode would be provided by the District’s Mayor. The Emergency Plan refers to the Mayor’s authority
under 20 DCMR c hapter 4, s ection 401 to restrain any source from causing or contributing to emissions that present an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, or
the environment or to take other action as may be necessary. The plan also relies on the District’s Response Plan (December 2008, as amended) for any specific actions to be taken. The Response Plan is a living document that outlines policies and procedures that reflect the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s National Response Framework (NRF).17

EPA finds that the District’s Emergency Plan satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H for contingency plans for particulate matter, SOx, CO, and ozone and is proposing to approve the plan pursuant to section 110 of the CAA for the District’s SIP in the rulemaking action which also proposes approval of the District’s three infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 N AAQS

.

EPA finds the infrastructure SIP submittals for the three NAAQS therefore meet requirements in CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and
2010 SO 2 NAAQS because the District’s approved SIP will address EPA’s applicable requirements for contingency plans and because the District has imminent and substantial endangerment authority similar to section 303 of the CAA

.

H

. Section 110(a)(2)(H)

Section 110(a)( 2)(H) requires that SIPs provide for revision of the plan from time to time as may be necessary to take account of revisions of the NAAQS or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining the standards and to revise the plan whenever EPA finds that the SIP is substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any additional requirements under the CAA.

Through its infrastructure SIP submittals for the three NAAQS , the District has demonstrated that it has adequ ate authority to revise its SIP as necessary under the District
APCA in D.C. Official Code section 8

- 101.05(b)(5) (2013 Repl.)

, which is delegated to DDOE under the District Department of the Environment Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C. Official
Code section 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.)). As necessary, the District submits revisions to its SIP for EPA approval to account for revisions of primary and/or secondary NAAQS or to adopt improved or more expeditious control methods for attainment of such standards, or in the event
that EPA finds the SIP to be substantially inadequate to either attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any additional requirements.

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(H) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

I

. Section 110(a)(2)(I)

The District ’s infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, respectively, did not include or address CAA section 110(a)(2)( I ). EPA does not expect infrastructure SIP submissions to address this element

, because n onattainment area plans required under part D of Title I of the CAA are required on a18

different schedule from section 110(a)(2) infrastructure elements of the CAA and thus, will be reviewed and acted upon through a separate process.

J

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

Section 110(a)( 2)(J) requires SIPs to meet the applicable requirements of CAA section 121 and 127, as well as part C of T itle I of the CAA. EPA interprets this infrastructure el e ment to contain four separable sub

- elements: consultation with identified officials on cert ain air agency actions as listed under CAA section 121 ; public notification; prevention of significant deterioration, and visibility protection.

1

. Sub

- element: Consultation (CAA Section 121)

Consistent with the consultation requirements of CAA s ection 121

, the District assures
that it has an established consultation proces s for consultation with general

- purpose local governments, designated organizations of elected officials of local governments, and Federal land manager s as appropriate. The consultation process takes place through MWAWC according to a set of bylaws that are reviewed and adopted annually, as previously discussed for section 110(a)(2)(E). The District has the authority for such consultation processes under the
District APC A in D.C. Official Code section 8

- 101.05(a)(3) and (b)(5) (2013 Repl.), which is delegated to DDOE through the District Department of the Environment Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C. Official Code section 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.)).

The District’s i nteragenc y and public consultation provisions specifically associated with the transportation conformity process, are included in 20 DCMR c hapter 15, sections 1506 and
1507. Additionally, consultation with Federal land managers take s place separately as required
b y CAA section 169A and 40 CFR 51.308 , as specified in the District’s SIP approved Regional
Haze SIP. See 77 FR 5191 (February 2, 2012).

2

. Sub

- element: Public Notification (CAA Section 127)

To satisfy this sub

- element, the District must ensure that DDOE regularly notifies the public of instances or areas in which the new or revise d NAAQS are exceeded ; advises the public of the health hazards associated with such exceedances; and enhances public awareness of measures that can prevent such exceedances and of ways the public can participate.

The District assures that the general public is regularly notified of and educated about NAAQS exceedances. In accordance with Title 20 DCMR c hapter 4, s ection 400 and 40 CFR 51.285, the District is required, in c oordination with MWCOG, to ensure air pollution levels are reported to the public. Additionally, the District relies on Clean Air Partners, a non

- organization19

that works with businesses, organizations, and individuals to raise awareness and reduce air pol lution through voluntary activities. Clean Air Partners provides air quality forecasts and related information to the public.

3

. Sub

- element: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (CAA Title I, Part C)

Approvability of this sub

- element is intrinsically related to approvability of the state agency’s PSD program, in accordance with part C of T itle I of the CAA. As explained earlier, EPA has determined that the portion s of the District’s infrastructure SIP submittals for addressing the subelement in section 110(a)(2)(J) related to the PSD permitting requirements under part C of T itle I of the CAA are technically incomplete. As a result, EPA is not taking rulemaking action on the PSD

- related portions of the submittals for section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS , and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. EPA does not anticipate any adverse consequences to the District from this lack of full approval, as the Federal PSD rules fully address this requir ement through EPA’s FIP for the District

.

4. Sub

- element: Visibility Protection

With regard to visibility protection, EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C of Title I of the CAA (sections 169A and 169B). In the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the visibility and regional haze program re quirements under part C do not change. Thus, EPA finds that there are no new applicable visibility protection obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS is effective, and accordingly there are no applicable infrastructure requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

EPA does note that we approved the District’s R egional H aze SIP on February 2, 2012 (77 FR 5191 ). Therefore, EPA previously found the District ’s SIP addressed visibility protection
and re gional haze program requirements under part C of T itle I of the CAA.

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, with the exception of the PSD

related requirements for which we previously found the District’s infrastructure SIP submissions incomplete

.

K

. Section 110(a)(2)(K)

To satisfy section 110(a)(2)(K), states need to provide the authority and responsibility to perform air quality modeling to predict the effect o n ambient air quality of any emissions of any20

air pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated and to provide such modeling results to EPA upon request.

The infrastructure SIP submissions provide that the District has the authority to conduct air quality modeling in order to assess the effect o n ambient air quality from relevant pollutant
emissions under the District APCA in D.C. Official Code s ection 8

- 101.05(a)(1) and (b)(3) (2013 Repl.), which is delegated to DDOE under the District Department of the Environment Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C . Official Code section 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.))

. The District
commit ted to continue to submit to EPA the air q uality modeling data as part of permitting and NAAQS implementation, as outlined in 20 DCMR c hapter 3, s ection 303.

Based upon EPA’s review of th e infrastructure SIP submittals for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(K) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

L

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

Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to require the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required by the CAA, a fee sufficient to cover: (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application fo r such a permit; and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit, until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by E PA's approval of a fee program under T itle V of the CAA.

In its infrastructure SIP submittals, t he District satisfies section 110(a)(2)(L) by explaining that its approved Title V permitting program provides for collection of adequate permitting fees, cons istent with 40 CFR 70.9 and 40 CFR p art 70, a ppendix A. EPA approved the District’s Title V program on August 7, 1996 (60 FR 40101) and approved amendments to the program on April 16, 2003 (68 FR 18548). The District’s Title V p rogram permitting fees

pro visions are found in 20 DCMR c hapter 3, s ections 305 and 307. The District’s Title V program fees are used to fund permitting (including reviewing and acting upon permit applications) and implementation and enforcement of permit terms for new and existing major stationary sources of air pollution.

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittal s for the three NAAQS , EPA
finds the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.21

M

. Section 110(a)(2)(M)

To satisfy the infrastructure element in CAA section 110(a)(2)(M), the SIP should provide for consultation with affected local political subdivisions. According to its three
infrastructure SIP submissions, t he District has the authority for consultation with local entities
under the District APCA in D.C. Official Code section 8

- 101.05(a)(3) and (b)(5) (2013 Repl.), which is delegated to DDOE through the District Department of the Environment Est ablishment Act of 2005 (D.C. Official Code section 8

- 151.07 (2013 Repl.)). The consultation process takes place through MWAWC according to a set of bylaws that are reviewed and adopted annually. Additionally, the District’s interagency and public consult ation provisions specifically associated with the transportation conformity process are included in 20 DCMR c hapter 15, s ections 1506 and 1507. Finally, as specified under the Administrative Procedure Act (D.C. Official Code

s ection 2

- 505) and the Distric t Department of Environment Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C.
Official Code s ection 8

- 151.07(3) (2013 Repl.), each SIP undergoes a public notice and hearing

process before its submission to EPA

. According to the infrastructure SIP submissions, l eaders of po litical subdivisions may participate in this public process.

Based on our review of the infrastructure SIP submissions for the three NAAQS, EPA
finds t hat the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(M) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

V I I

. RECOMMENDED AGENCY ACTION

EPA finds that the District’ s infrastructure SIP submittal s dated June 6, 2014, June 13, 2014, and July 17, 2014 for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, the 2008 8

- hour ozone NAAQS,
and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, respectively, meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) of the CAA for the applicable NAAQS as specified above with the exception of the PSD requirements in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D) and (J) . The District’s infrastructure submittals for the three NAAQS did not address section 110(a)(2)(I) pertaining to the nonattainment requirements of part D, T itle I of the CAA because this element is not required to be submitted by the 3

- year submission deadline of CAA section 110(a)(1) and will be addressed in a separate process where necessary . EPA is not taking rulemaking action on the portions of the submittals specifically addressing CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) pertaining to the PSD permitting requirements of part C
of T itle I of the CAA

, because EPA has deemed the submissions incomplete regarding the PSD elements due to the EPA FIP for PSD permit ting requirements for the District

. Finally, EPA will
take later separate action on the portions of the three infrastructure SIP submissions which
address CAA section 110(a)(2) (D)(i)(I) regarding transport of emissions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS

, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.22

EPA also finds that the District’s Air Quality Episode Emergency Plan, submitted on June 13, 2014 as a separate SIP revision submittal, satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR part 5 1

, subpart H for all applicable pollutants and section 110 of the CAA

, including specifically section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

.

Thus, i t is recommended that a notice of proposed rulemaking be prepared approving the relevant portions of the District ’s June 6, 2014, June 13, 2014, and July 17, 2014 SIP revision
submittal s

.