SUBJECT: 

FROM: 

TO: 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION Ill 

1650 Arch Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029 

Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality 

PSD/NNSR SIP Revision Requests 

David Talley ~ w, ·1/J}h Ill (I rv 

Permits and TectW{~al ssessment Branch 

Air Protection Division 

;~/ /' 

Kathleen Cox, Associate Director/ }vV '-i 

Office of Permits and Air Toxics 

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 

Virginia; Prevention of Significant Deterioration and N onattainment New Source Review; 

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.s) 

I. Background 

EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP), 

submitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) on August 25, 2011. 

These revisions pertaining to Virginia's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and 

nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) programs incorporate preconstruction permitting 

regulations for fine particulate matter (PMzs) into the Virginia SIP. A previous PSD program 

approval of Virginia's Chapter 80, Article 8 regulations was provided to the Commonwealth as a 

"limited approval" for reasons that will not deny this action as being fully approved. In addition, 

EPA is approving these revisions and portions of other related submissions for the purpose of 

determining that Virginia has met its statutory obligations with respect to the infrastructure 

requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) which relate to Virginia's PSD permitting program and 

are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.s National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the 2006 PM2.s NAAQS, and the 2008 lead NAAQS. 

EPA is approving these revisions in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

II. Summary of Action 

The SIP revision submitted by V ADEQ consists of amendments to the major NSR permitting 

regulations of Articles 8 and 9 of 9V AC5 Chapter 80. The revision fulfills the federal program 

requirements established by the EPA rulemaking actions discussed above. The amendments 

establish the major source threshold, significant emission rate and offset ratios for PMz.s, and 
establish an allowance for interpollutant trading for offsets and NSR applicability to PM25 

precursor pollutants, pursuant to the May 2008 NSR PM25 Rule. In addition, the amendments 

add maximum allowable increases in ambient pollutant concentrations (increments) pursuant to 

the October 2010 PSD PMz.s Rule. Several minor administrative revisions were made as well. 

Virginia's proposed SIP revision does not include the "grandfathering" and presumptively 

approvable interpollutant trading ratio provisions that have subsequently been 

repealed/reconsidered. 

The amendments submitted by V ADEQ for approval into the SIP were adopted by the State Air 

Pollution Control Board on June 10, 2011, and effective on August 17,2011. They include 

revisions to the general definitions under Chapter I 0 of 9V ACS (specifically 9V ACS-1 0-30), as 

well as to Articles 8 (PSD) and 9 (nonattainment NSR) under Chapter 80 of9VAC5. The 

following regulations under Article 8 are revised: 9VAC5-80-1615 (Definitions), 9VAC5-80-

!635 (Ambient Air Increments), and 9VAC5-80-1765 (Sources Affecting Federal Class I Areas 

-Additional Requirements). Under Article 9, the regulations at 9VAC5-80-2010 (Definitions) 

and 9VAC5-80-2120 (Offsets) have been amended. The revisions submitted by Virginia also 

include SILs pursuant to the October 20, 2010 PMz.s PSD Rule (See 9VAC5-80-1715 (Source 

Impact Analysis)). EPA is taking no action with respect to the SILs. For further discussion, see 

below. 

III. Analysis 

A. PM2.s 

Fine particles in the atmosphere are made up of a complex mixture of components. Common 

constituents include sulfate (S04); nitrate (N03); ammonium; elemental carbon; a great 

variety of organic compounds; and inorganic material (including metals, dust, sea salt, and other 

trace elements) generally referred to as "crustal" material, although it may contain material from 

other sources. Airborne particulate matter (PM) with a nominal aerodynamic diameter of2.5 

micrometers or less (a micrometer is one-millionth of a meter, and 2.5 micrometers is less than 

one-seventh the average width of a human hair) are considered to be "fine particles" and are 

also known as PMz.s. "Primary" particles are emitted directly into the air as a solid or liquid 

particle (e.g., elemental carbon from diesel engines or fire activities, or condensable organic 

particles from gasoline engines). "Secondary" particles (e.g., sulfate and nitrate) form in the 

atmosphere as a result of various chemical reactions. 

The health effects associated with exposure to PM2.5 include potential aggravation of respiratory 

and cardiovascular disease (i.e., lung disease, decreased lung function asthma attacks and certain 

cardiovascular issues). Epidemiological studies have indicated a correlation between elevated 

PM2.5 levels and premature mortality. Groups considered especially sensitive to PM2.

5 exposure 

include older adults, children, and individuals with heart and lung diseases. For more details 

regarding health effects and PMz.s see EPA's Web site at 

http://v.ww.epa.gov/oarlparticlepollution/ (see heading "Health and Welfare"). 

On July 18, 1997, EPA revised the NAAQS for PM to add new standards for fine particles, using 

PM25 as the indicator. Previously, EPA used PM10 (inhalable particles smaller than or equal to 

I 0 micrometers in diameter) as the indicator for the PM NAAQS. EPA established health-based 

2 
(primary) annual and 24-hour standards for PM2.s, setting an annual standard at a level of I 5 

micrograms per cubic meter (!lg/m3

) and a 24-hour standard at a level of 65 11g/m3 ( 62 FR 

38652). At the time the 1997 primary standards were established, EPA also established welfarebased (secondary) standards identical to the primary standards. The secondary standards are 

designed to protect against major environmental effects of PM2.s, such as visibility impairment, 

soiling, and materials damage. On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the primary and secondary 

NAAQS for PM2.s. In that rulemaking, EPA reduced the 24-hour NAAQS for PM2.s to 35 11g/m3 

and retained the existing annual PM2.s NAAQS of IS 11g/m3 (71 FR 61236). 

1. Implementation of NSR Requirements for PM2.5 - the NSR PM2.5 Rule 

After EPA promulgated the NAAQS for PM2.5 on October 23, 1997, the Agency issued a 

guidance document written by John Seitz entitled "Interim Implementation of New Source 

Review Requirements for PMz.s" (Seitz Memo). The Seitz Memo was designed to help states 

implement NSR requirements pertaining to the new PM2.s NAAQS in light of technical 

difficulties posed by PMz.s at that time. Specifically, the Seitz Memo stated: "PMw may 

properly be used as a surrogate for PMz.s in meeting NSR requirements until these difficulties are 

resolved." 

EPA also issued a guidance document entitled "Implementation of New Source Review 

Requirements in PMz.s Nonattainment Areas" (the "2005 PM2.5 Nonattainment NSR Guidance"), 

on April 5, 2005, the date that EPA's PMz.s nonattainment area designations became effective for 

the 1997 NAAQS. This memorandum provided guidance on the implementation of the 

nonattainment major NSR provisions in PM2.s nonattainment areas in the interim period between 

the effective date of the PMz.s nonattainment area designations (April 5, 2005) and EPA's 

promulgation of final PMz 5 nonattainment NSR regulations. Besides re-affirming the 

continuation of the PMw Surrogate Policy for PM2.5 attainment areas set forth in the Seitz Memo, 

the 2005 PM2.5 nonattainment NSR Guidance recommended that until EPA promulgated the 

PM2.5 major NSR regulations, "States should use a PM10 nonattainment major NSR program as a 

surrogate to address the requirements of nonattainment major NSR for the PMz.s NAAQS." 

On May 16, 2008, EPA finalized a rule (the NSR PM2.5 Rule) to implement the 1997 PM2.s 

NAAQS, including changes to the NSR program (73 FR 28321 ). The 2008 NSR PMz.s Rule 

revised the NSR program requirements to establish the framework for implementing 

preconstruction permit review for the PMz.s NAAQS in both attainment and nonattainment areas. 

The 2008 NSR PM2.s Rule required that major stationary sources seeking permits must directly 

satisfy the PMz.s requirements, as of the effective date of the rule, rather than relying on PMw as 

a surrogate, with two exceptions. The first exception was a "grandfathering" provision in the 

Federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(l)(xi). This grandfathering provision applied to 

sources that had applied for, but had not yet received, a final and effective PSD permit before the 

July 15, 2008, effective date of the May 2008 final rule. The second exception was that states 

with SIP-approved PSD programs could continue to implement the Seitz Memo's PMw 

Surrogate Policy for up to three years (until May 2011) or until the individual revised state PSD 

programs for PMz.s are approved by EPA, whichever came first. For additional information on 

the NSR PM2.5 Rule, see (73 FR 28321). On February II, 2010, EPA proposed to repeal the 

grandfathering provision for PM2.s contained in the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 

3 
52.21 (i)(l )(xi) and to end early the PM10 Surrogate Policy applicable in states that have a SIP 

approved PSD program (75 FR 6827). In support of this proposal, EPA explained that the PM2.s 

implementation issues that led to the adoption of the PM10 Surrogate Policy in 1997 have been 

largely resolved to a degree sufficient for sources and permitting authorities to conduct 

meaningful permit-related PM2.5 analyses. The repeal of the grandfathering rule was finalized on 

May 18, 2011 (76 FR 28646). 

The 2008 NSR PM2.s Rule also established the following NSR requirements to implement the 

PM2.

5 NAAQS: (1) Require NSR permits to address directly emitted PM2.s and precursor 

pollutants; (2) establish significant emission rates for direct PM2.s and precursor pollutants 

(including sulfur dioxide (S02) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx)); (3) establish PM2.s emission 

offsets; and (4) require states to account for gases that condense to form particles (condensables) 

in PM2.s emission limits. 

Additionally, the 2008 final rule authorized states to adopt provisions in their nonattainment 

NSR rules that would allow major stationary sources and major modifications locating in areas 

designated nonattainment for PM2.s to offset emissions increases of direct PM2.5 emissions or 

PM2.s precursors with reductions of either direct PM2.

5 emissions or PM2.s precursors in 

accordance with offset ratios contained in the approved SIP for the applicable nonattainment 

area. The inclusion, in whole or in part, of the interpollutant offset provisions for PM2.s is 

discretionary on the part of the states. In the preamble to the 2008 final rule, EPA included 

preferred or presumptive offset ratios, applicable to specific PM2.5 precursors that states may 

adopt in conjunction with the new interpollutant offset provisions for PM2.s, and for which the 

state could rely on the EPA's technical work to demonstrate the adequacy of the ratios for use in 

any PM2.s non attainment area. Alternatively, the preamble indicated that states may adopt 

their own ratios, subject to the EPA's approval, that would have to be substantiated by modeling 

or other technical demonstrations of the net air quality benefit for ambient PM2.s 

concentrations. The preferred ratios were subsequently the subject of a petition for 

reconsideration, which the Administrator granted. EPA continues to support the basic policy 

that sources may offset increases in emissions of direct PM2.s or of any PM2.s precursor in a 

PM2.

5 nonattainment area with actual emissions reductions in direct PM2.s or PM2.s precursors 

in accordance with offset ratios as approved in the SIP for the applicable nonattainment area. 

However, we no longer consider the preferred ratios set forth in the preamble to the 2008 final 

rule for PM2.5 NSR implementation to be presumptively approvable. Instead, any ratio 

involving PM2.

5 precursors adopted by the state for use in the interpollutant offset program for 

PM2.s nonattainment areas must be accompanied by a technical demonstration that shows the 

net air quality benefits of such ratio for the PM2.s nonattainment area in which it will be 

applied. 

2. PSD PMz.s Rule 

On October 20,2010 (75 FR 64865), EPA promulgated the final "Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.s)- Increments, 

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)" (PSD PMz.s 

Rule). That rulemaking finalized certain program provisions under the regulations to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality due to emissions ofPMz.s (i.e., under the PMz.s PSD 

4 
regulations). This final rule supplemented the final implementation rule for PMz.s, known as the 

Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule (CAFPIR) that we promulgated on April25, 2007 

(72 FR 20586), and the PM2.5 NSR Implementation Rule that we promulgated on May 16, 2008 

(73 FR28321). Together, these three rules established a regulatory framework for 

implementation of a PM25 program in any area. This final rule established increments, SILs, and 

an SMC for PMz.s to facilitate ambient air quality monitoring and modeling under the PSD 

regulations for areas designated attaimnent or unclassifiable for PM25• Below is a brief 

discussion of Increments, SILs, and SMCs. A more detailed discussion can be found in the 

preamble to the final PSD PMz.s Rule. 

a. Increments 

An increment is the maximum allowable level of ambient pollutant concentration increase that is 

allowed to occur above the applicable baseline concentration in a particular area. As such, an 

increment defines "significant deterioration." The October 2010 rulemaking established 

increments for PMz.spursuant to the legal authority contained in section 166(a) of the CAA for 

pollutants for which NAAQS are promulgated after 1977. As discussed in that final rulemaking 

action, the increments for PM25 became applicable on October 20, 2011 in order to comply with 

section 166(b) of the Act. This final rule did not revoke the annual increments for particulate 

matter less than I 0 micrometers (PM10) as proposed under Option 1 in the 2007 notice of 

proposed rulemaking. Thus, we retained the 24-hour and annual PMw increments in addition to 

adding PM25 increments. 

b. Significant Impact Levels (SILs) 

The October 20 I 0 rulemaking also established SILs for PMz.s for evaluating the impact a 

proposed new source or modification may have on the NAAQS and PSD increments for PM2.5. 

It is EPA's longstanding policy to allow the use of the SILs as de minimis thresholds under the 

NSR programs at 40 CFR 51.165(b) and part 51, Appendix S, to determine whether the predicted 

ambient impact resulting from the emissions increase at a proposed major new stationary source 

or modification is considered to cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS. We have also 

allowed the SILs under the PSD program to determine: (I) When a proposed source's ambient 

impacts warrant a comprehensive (cumulative) source impact analysis; (2) the size of the impact 

area within which the air quality analysis is completed, and (3) whether the emissions increase 

from a proposed new major stationary source or major modification is considered to cause or 

contribute to a violation of any NAAQS. The SILs for PMz.s were developed by scaling the 

existing PM10 SILs using a PMz.s-to-PMw NAAQS ratio. 

c. Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC) 

Finally, the October 2010 rulemaking established the SMC for PM2.s as 4 !J.glm3 PM2_5 (24-hour 

average). EPA and its delegated reviewing authorities use the PM25 SMC to determine when it 

may be appropriate to exempt a proposed new major stationary source or major modification 

from the ambient monitoring data requirements under the PSD rules. Similarly, states with EPAapproved PSD programs that adopt the SMC for PMz.s may use the SMC, once it is part of an 

approved SIP, to determine when it may be appropriate to exempt a particular major stationary 

5 
source or major modification from the monitoring requirements under their State PSD programs 

(See 40 CFR 51.166(i)(S)). . 

The revisions submitted by the State of Virginia to address the new PSD requirements for PM2.s 

pursuant to the EPA's October 20,2010 final rule include the new regulatory text at 40 CFR 

51.166(k)(2), concerning the implementation of "significant impact levels" (SILs) for PMn 

(See, 9VACS-80-1715 (Source Impact Analysis)). We stated in the preamble to the 2010 final 

rule that we do not consider the SILs to be a mandatory SIP element, but regard them as 

discretionary on the part of regulating authority for use in the PSD permitting process. 

Nevertheless, the PMz.s SILs are currently the subject oflitigation before the U.S. Court of 

Appeals (D.C. Circuit). In response to that litigation, the EPA has requested that the Court 

remand and vacate the regulatory text in the EPA's PSD regulations at paragraph (k)(2) so that 

the EPA can make necessary rulemaking revisions to that text. 

In light of EPA's request for remand and vacatur and our acknowledgement of the need to revise 

the regulatory text presently contained at paragraph (k)(2) of sections 51.166 and 52.21, we do 

not believe that it is appropriate at this time to approve that portion of the State's SIP revision 

that contains the affected regulatory text in the State's PSD regulations, specifically new 

paragraph A.2 of9VAC5-80-1715. Instead, we are taking no action at this time with regard to 

that specific provision contained in the SIP revision. 

B. Infrastructure 

Whenever a new or revised NAAQS is promulgated, section 110(a) of the CAA imposes 

obligations upon states to submit SIP revisions that provide for the implementation, maintenance, 

and enforcement of the new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of 

such NAAQS - the so called infrastructure SIP revisions. Although states typically have met 

many of the basic program elements required in section IIO(a)(2) through earlier SIP 

submissions in connection with previous PM standards, states (including all the EPA Region 3 

states) were still required to submit SIP revisions that address section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.s NAAQS. In addition to the August 2011 SIP submission, Virginia has previously 

submitted SIP revisions addressing requirements set forth in CAA Section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 

and 2006 PMz.s NAAQS, including those II O(a)(2) requirements related to Virginia's PSD and 

NSR permitting program. Because these SIP submissions addressed Virginia's compliance with 

CAA Section 110(a)(2), these SIP submissions are referred to as infrastructure SIP submissions. 

By submissions dated July 10,2008, September 2, 2008, and April!, 2011, Virginia provided 

infrastructure SIP submissions which identified how its SIP met several of the obligations set 

forth in CAA Section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Each of these 

submissions addressed numerous obligations pursuant to 11 O(a)(2), including portions of 

IIO(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) and (J) relating to Virginia's PSD permit program for the 1997 and 2006 

PMz.s NAAQS. On October 11, 2011, EPA took final action on all portions of these submittals, 

except for the portions that addressed the obligations set forth in IIO(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) and (J) 

relating to Virginia's PSD permit program and the portions of IIO(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) relating to 

visibility (See 76 FR 62635). By this action, EPA is addressing the portions of Virginia's 

submissions dated July 10, 2008, September 2, 2008 and April I, 2011 which address the 

obligations set forth at CAA Sections II O(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) and (J) relating to the Virginia's 

6 
PSD permit program for the 1997 and 2006 PMz.s NAAQS. 

By letters dated November 13,2007 and December 13, 2007, Virginia also submitted SIP 

revision requests addressing several requirements ofCAA Section 110(a)(2), including all of 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 ozone and PMzs NAAQS (November submittal), and 

11 O(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS (December submittal). By this action, EPA is 

also addressing the portions of Virginia's December 2007 submittal which address the 

obligations set forth at CAA Sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) relating to the Virginia PSD permit 

program, as well as approving the November 13, 2007 submittal. Based on the November 2007 

and December 2007 submissions, the above described submissions and previous SIP submittals, 

EPA is making a determination that Virginia has met its obligations relating to the PSD permit 

program pursuant to CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, as well as all 

of 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 PMzs NAAQS. 

Additionally, on March 9, 2012, Virginia submitted an infrastructure SIP to address the CAA 

section 110(a)(2) requirements for the 2008lead NAAQS. Unlike PMz5 , there have been no 

new PSD program requirements associated with the 2008 lead NAAQS. Based on this submittal, 

as well as all of the above described submissions, EPA is also making the determination that 

Virginia has met its obligations relating to the PSD permit program pursuant to CAA sections 

11 O(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) for the 2008 lead NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA requires each state's implementation plan to "include a 

program to provide for the enforcement of the measures described in [ CAA Section 

11 O(a)(2)(A)), and regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary source 

within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to ensure that national ambient air quality 

standards are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C [PSD], and D 

[nonattainment NSR)." Similarly, CAA Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires that for each NAAQS the 

State's SIP "meet the applicable requirements of .... part C of[Subchapter I) (relating to 

prevention of significant deterioration of air quality ... )." As stated earlier, Virginia's PSD and 

nonattainment programs are currently operating under a limited SIP approval. However, EPA 

has previously determined that this limited approval will not impair Virginia's ability to enforce 

its PSD and nonattainment NSR provisions in a manner consistent with federal requirements 

(See Section III, below). With the addition of the PMz.s requirements described above, 

Virginia's nonattainment NSR and PSD programs contain all ofthe emission limitations and 

control measures and other program elements required by 40 CFR 51.165 and 40 CFR 51.166 

related to the PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, Virginia's SIP meets the statutory obligations relating 

to its PSD permit program set forth at CAA Sections 110(a)(2)(C) and (J) for the 1997 and 2006 

PM25 NAAQS, as well as the 2008 lead NAAQS. 

CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires each state's implementation plan to include provisions 

which will prevent emissions from interfering with the measures required by another state for 

implementing PSD. Each state's SIP must, under 40 CFR 51.166(k)(1), include a source impact 

analysis which requires the owner/operator of each proposed source or modification to 

demonstrate that the allowable emissions increase from the proposed project will not "cause or 

contribute to air pollution in violation of: (1) Any national ambient air quality standard in any air 

quality control region (emphasis added)." The requirements set forth at 40 CFR 51.166(k)(l) are 

7 
consistent with, and sufficient to meet, the requirements set forth at CAA Section 11 O(D)(i)(Il). 

In Virginia, the equivalent requirement is codified at 9V AC5-80-1715, and this requirement is 

incorporated into the SIP and is applicable to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997 and 2006 PM2.s 

NAAQS, and the 2008 lead NAAQS. Therefore, the previously approved SIP revisions, together 

with the incorporation of the PM2.s requirements described above and the relevant portions of 

Virginia's September 2008, April2011 and March 2012 infrastructure SIP submittals, support 

the finding that Virginia has met its statutory obligations under CAA Section 110(a)(2)(C), 

(D)(i)(II) and (J) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.s NAAQS, as well as the 2008 lead NAAQS. 

Similarly, in light of the relevant portions of the November 2007 and December 2007 

submissions, and because Virginia's SIP includes a provision consistent with 40 CPR 51.166(k) 

and sufficient to meet the requirements set forth at CAA Section 11 O(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS, Virginia has demonstrated that it has met the portion of CAA Section 11 O(D)(i)(II) 

which pertain to its PSD permit program for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Additionally, Virginia 

has met its obligations with respect to the visibility requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for all 

relevant NAAQS by virtue of its Regional Haze SIP, which EPA took final action to approve on 

March 23,2012 (77 FR 16397). 

IV. Recommended Agency Action 

I find that the proposed revisions are consistent with Federal regulations, and incorporate 

required program elements into Virginia's PSD and nonattainment NSR programs. Additionally, 

I find that the August 25, 2011 submittal, in conjunction with the previously submitted 

infrastructure SIP revisions support a finding that Virginia has met its obligations with respect to 

CAA section 110(a)(2) as discussed above. Therefore I recommend approval of the proposed 

revisions to the Virginia SIP. 

8