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-2014-0701

THRU: Cristina Fernández, Associate Director \s\

Office of Air Program Planning 

I. INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action on submittals made by 

the District of Columbia (hereafter “the District”) to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 

110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS or standard), the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and the 2010 sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) 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 established a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for 

NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb). This is based on a 3-year average of the 98th

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 SO2 at a level of 75 ppb, based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-

hour daily maximum concentrations.

III. EPA’s REQUIREMENTS

Pursuant to section 110(a) of the CAA, states are required 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 states 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 pollutant. 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), states 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 STATE SUBMITTALS

On June 6, 2014, June 13, 2014, and July 17, 2014, the District provided three separate

submittals to satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2010 NO2

NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, respectively. Each submittal 

addresses the following infrastructure elements 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 requirements 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 Air Quality 

Emergency Episode Plan to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H and section 

110(a)(2)(G). 

V. EPA’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 program for Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD), because the District has not adequately addressed the requirements of part C of Title I of 

the CAA for having a SIP-approved PSD program. EPA found the remainder of the SIP 

submittals to be administratively 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 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, until the District through DDOE submits a SIP to address 

the PSD permit program requirements of part C of Title 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 program1to correct the 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 adverse consequences to DDOE 

from these incompleteness findings 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 NO2 and SO2 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 Title 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 there 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 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. EPA will take later rulemaking action on 

these submittals regarding 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). However, in this action, EPA is proposing 

approval of the remainder of the submittals to address infrastructure requirements for the 2010 

NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 NO2, 2008 ozone, and 2010 SO2 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 SIP 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 relevant 

NAAQS pollutant, where applicable. EPA has determined that the District has established 

regulations applicable to the 2008 ozone, the 2010 NO2, and the 2010 SO2 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 District controls direct emission of the ozone precursors, nitrogen 

oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC). Tables 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 SO2 and NOx is not 

applicable to the District. See 76 FR 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 NO2 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 MEASURES
6

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 SO2 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 act 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 and 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 provisions. 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 encourages 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 submittals 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 NO2, and the 2010 SO2 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 the District that it has the authority to 

conduct ambient air quality monitoring under the District 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 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS at 

appropriate locations, in accordance with EPA’s ambient air quality monitoring network 

requirements. See EPA’s Ambient Monitoring Technology Information Center (AMTIC) 

website; 40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR part 58; and 40 CFR 51.190. DDOE is responsible for 

operating and maintaining the District’s air quality monitoring stations and sends collected 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 air quality monitoring activities, 

including a description of its compliance with EPA’s monitoring 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 Regional Administrator sends a 

letter annually 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 Plan was approved by EPA on a November 21st, 2014 letter to DDOE. 

EPA’s approval of the District’s 2014 Network Plan confirms that the District’s air monitoring 

program continues to meet Federally established monitoring and data assessment criteria for the 

respective pollutants.

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)(B) for the 2008 

ozone, the 2010 NO2, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

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

This 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) include the monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements found in certain sections of 20 DCMR Chapters 1 and 

5, all of which have been approved into the District SIP. 

Consistent with 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.164, the District’s minor preconstruction 

permitting program is codified in Title 20 DCMR chapter 2 and approved into the District SIP. 

The District’s minor permitting program applies to all regulated pollutants under the CAA, 

including ozone, NO2, and SO2, regardless of nonattainment status. This satisfies the subelement 

for preconstruction of the construction and modification of minor stationary sources and the 

minor modification of major stationary sources.

As explained earlier, EPA has determined that the portions 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 Title I of the CAA are technically incomplete. As a result, EPA is 
9

not taking rulemaking action on the PSD-related portions of the submittals for section 

110(a)(2)(C) for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 may 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 pollutants 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 decision, 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 require 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 increase 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 District 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 GHGs 

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) contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of 

BACT. The FIP implementing 40 CFR 52.21 may currently contain provisions that are no 
10

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, the FIP 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 PSD FIP for the District addresses the deficiency in the 

District’s SIP for 110(a)(2)(C) and part C of Title 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 NO2, and the 2010 SO2 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 

significantly 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 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 

ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 2008 ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO2 and SO2

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 states’ 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 (9th Cir. 1987)). As such, EPA interprets its authority under section 110(k)(3), as affording 

EPA the discretion to approve or conditionally approve individual elements of the District’s 
11

infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS, 

separate and apart from any action with respect to the requirements of section 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 allowing it to act on individual severable measures in a plan 

submission. 

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

The infrastructure element 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 measures 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 Title 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 portions 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 Title 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)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 

NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 SIPs 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 state under part C of Title 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 caused by the pollutant, including 

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 Haze 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 provision 
12

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 requirements in 40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309, addressed any contribution 

to visibility impairment related to emissions of SO2, NO2, and ozone precursors, and included 

measures to address emissions that would interfere with reasonable progress goals of 

neighboring states set to protect Class I areas. 

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittals 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 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

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

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) is satisfied when an infrastructure SIP ensures 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 CAA3, each SIP must contain provisions requiring each 

new or modified major source, that is either (a) subject to PSD under CAA Title 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 lacks a SIP-approved PSD program, EPA has 

determined that the portions of the District’s infrastructure submittals for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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)(ii) for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2

NAAQS. 

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 NO2

NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, or the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA also concurs with the 

District’s statements in the three infrastructure SIP submittals that there are no findings under 

CAA section 115 against the District with respect the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS, or the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA also finds that the District’s SIP has adequate 

 

of CAA section 110 as 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 submittals for the three NAAQS, EPA 

finds that the District’s infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 

ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 incomplete.

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 NO2

NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. In accordance with 40 CFR part 

51, subpart M, the District has identified the Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee 

(MWAQC) and the Interstate Air Quality Council (IAQC) as participating 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 obligations 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 the 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 

NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 submittals 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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 District has met 

its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 

and the 2010 SO2 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, the District does not rely on localities for implementation of the 

SIP for any of the applicable NAAQS. Thus, 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 NO2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

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

 1. 110(a)(2)(F)(i) and (ii)

To satisfy sections 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 regulations. 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 CFR 

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 reporting under the District APCA (D.C. Official Code sections 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 section 8-151.07 (2013 Repl.)). 

In accordance with 40 CFR 51.212, the District’s specific source monitoring requirements, 

including periodic testing and inspection requirements, are found throughout the District’s SIP-
15

approved provisions of 20 DCMR chapter 1, chapter 2, chapter 3, section 307, and chapter 5, 

section 502. These regulations are included and codified in the District SIP in 40 CFR 52.470(c) 

and are applicable to the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO2 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, the District’s SIPapproved 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 (NEI) 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 NO2

NAAQS, and 2010 SO2 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 emissions 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 

available 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 submittals 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 NO2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO2 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 environment. 
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 Act of 2005 (D.C. Official 

Code 8-151.07 (2013 Repl.)). The District has authority comparable to EPA’s imminent and 

substantial endangerment authority in CAA section 303 under the SIP-approved provisions in 20 

DCMR chapter 4, section 401. 

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 example 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 and indicated in the 

District’s submittal, the entire District is part of the National Capital Interstate Air Quality 

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 NO2. Therefore, as 

required by subpart H, the District is required to have a contingency plan for particulate matter, 

SOx, CO, and ozone. EPA notes that there are no applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 

51, subpart H for NO2, 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 establishes criteria for determining the existence of an 

emergency episode and provides contingency measures for all pollutants, including 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 chapter 4, section 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 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. 

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 NO2 NAAQS, and 

2010 SO2 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 adequate 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 submittals 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 NO2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

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

The District’s infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO2

NAAQS, and 2010 SO2 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 nonattainment area plans required under part D of Title I of the CAA are required on a 
18

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 Title I of the CAA. EPA interprets this infrastructure element 

to contain four separable sub-elements: consultation with identified officials on certain 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 section 121, the District assures 

that it has an established consultation process for consultation with general-purpose local 

governments, designated organizations of elected officials of local governments, and Federal 

land managers 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 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 Establishment Act of 

2005 (D.C. Official Code section 8-151.07 (2013 Repl.)). 

The District’s interagency and public consultation provisions specifically associated with 

the transportation conformity process, are included in 20 DCMR chapter 15, sections 1506 and 

1507. Additionally, consultation with Federal land managers takes place separately as required 

by 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 revised 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 chapter 4, section 400 and 40 CFR 

51.285, the District is required, in coordination with MWCOG, to ensure air pollution levels are 

reported to the public. Additionally, the District relies on Clean Air Partners, a non-organization 
19

that works with businesses, organizations, and individuals to raise awareness and reduce air 

pollution 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 Title I of the CAA. As explained earlier, 

EPA has determined that the portions 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 Title 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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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.

 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 requirements 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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

EPA does note that we approved the District’s Regional Haze SIP on February 2, 2012 

(77 FR 5191). Therefore, EPA previously found the District’s SIP addressed visibility protection 

and regional haze program requirements under part C of Title I of the CAA. 

Based upon EPA’s review of the infrastructure SIP submittals 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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, with the exception of the PSDrelated 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 on ambient air quality of any emissions of any 
20

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 on ambient air quality from relevant pollutant 

emissions under the District APCA in D.C. Official Code section 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 

committed to continue to submit to EPA the air quality modeling data as part of permitting and 

NAAQS implementation, as outlined in 20 DCMR chapter 3, section 303.

Based upon EPA’s review of the 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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 for 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 EPA's approval of a fee 

program under Title V of the CAA.

In its infrastructure SIP submittals, the District satisfies section 110(a)(2)(L) by 

explaining that its approved Title V permitting program provides for collection of adequate 

permitting fees, consistent with 40 CFR 70.9 and 40 CFR part 70, appendix 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 program permitting fees 

provisions are found in 20 DCMR chapter 3, sections 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 submittals 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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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, the 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 Establishment 

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 consultation provisions specifically associated 

with the transportation conformity process are included in 20 DCMR chapter 15, sections 1506 

and 1507. Finally, as specified under the Administrative Procedure Act (D.C. Official Code

section 2-505) and the District Department of Environment Establishment Act of 2005 (D.C. 

Official Code section 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, leaders 

of political subdivisions may participate in this public process.

Based on our review of the infrastructure SIP submissions for the three NAAQS, EPA 

finds that the District has met its obligations pursuant to 110(a)(2)(M) for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS, the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

VII. RECOMMENDED AGENCY ACTION

EPA finds that the District’s infrastructure SIP submittals dated June 6, 2014, 

June 13, 2014, and July 17, 2014 for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

and the 2010 SO2 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, Title 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 Title I of the CAA, because EPA has deemed the submissions incomplete regarding the PSD 

elements due to the EPA FIP for PSD permitting 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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 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 51, 

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 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

Thus, it 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 

submittals.