1

Technical Support Document

EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0450

Revisions to the Louisiana Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program for the 

PM2.5 Significant Monitoring Concentration (PM2.5 SMC)

Submitted February 27, 2013 as AQ328ft 

Submitted July 22, 2016 as AQ357ft

July 28, 2016

No material in this submittal package was designated as Confidential Business Information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adina Wiley United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, Air Permits Section

(6MM-AP), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-2115.
2

Contents

I. Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................3

II. Background of State Submittal .............................................................................................................3

III. Technical Review of State Submittal.................................................................................................4

A. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the February 27, 2013 SIP Submittal .........................................5

B. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the July 22, 2016 SIP Submittal..................................................9

C. Background of Federal Actions Regarding the PSD PM2.5 SIL and SMC..........................................13

D. Evaluation of the Revisions to the LA PSD Program for the PM2.5 SMC..........................................15

E. Evaluation of the revisions to the Louisiana PSD Program for the PM2.5 SMC with respect to 

section 110(l) of the CAA ........................................................................................................................18

IV. Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................18
3

I. Executive Summary

This Technical Support Document (TSD) reviews two proposed revisions to the Louisiana 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting program in the Louisiana State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). Specifically, this review focuses on regulations establishing the 

significant monitoring concentration (SMC) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). This review will 

determine if the revisions to the Louisiana PSD program submitted on February 27, 2013, and 

revised on July 22, 2016, are consistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and 

EPA’s regulations, policy and guidance for major source permitting of PM2.5.

II. Background of State Submittal

• On February 27, 2013, Secretary Peggy Hatch of the Louisiana Department of Environmental 

Quality (LDEQ), submitted revisions to the Louisiana PSD program adopted on December 

20, 2012 at LAC 33:III.509. The revisions to LAC 33:III.509 had been adopted in response 

to the EPA’s final rule promulgated on October 20, 2010 entitled “Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5) – Increments, 

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC).

o The LDEQ requested that the EPA take no action on the submitted revisions at 

LAC 33:III.509.I.5.a., establishing the PM2.5 SMC at 4 μg/m3 on a 24-hour 

average. 

o On November 15, 2015, the EPA approved the revisions to LAC 33:III.509 

adopted on December 20, 2012 and submitted on February 27, 2013, with the 

exception of LAC 33:III.509.I.5.a. As such, this provision remains before EPA for 

review and action. No other provisions from the February 27, 2013 submittal 

remain before EPA.

• On July 22, 2016, Secretary Chuck Carr Brown, Ph.D. of the LDEQ, submitted revisions to 

the Louisiana PSD program adopted on March 20, 2016, that revise the PM2.5 SMC to a zero 

threshold level.

The EPA will evaluate the revisions to the Louisiana PSD program establishing and revising the 

PM2.5 SMC in this action.
4

III. Technical Review of State Submittal

The February 27, 2013 and July 22, 2016 SIP submittals revising the Louisiana PSD program are

evaluated for compliance with the relevant requirements of the Act and Title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (40 CFR) part 51 – Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal 

of Implementation Plans. These requirements include, but are not limited to the following:

1. §110(a)(2)(C) of the Act which provides:

(C) include a program to provide for the regulation of the modification and construction 

of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that 

national ambient air quality standards are achieved, including a permit program as 

required in parts C and D;

2. §110(l) of the Act which provides:

(l) Plan Revisions. – Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under 

this chapter shall be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. 

The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere 

with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress 

(as defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the chapter.

3. 40 CFR 51.160 – Legally enforceable procedures. The regulatory text of 40 CFR 51.160 

is available on line at Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=07e214c52bbfc82a2781e3e14c7616ca&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.1&idno=40

4. 40 CFR 51.161 – Public availability of information. The regulatory text of 40 CFR 

51.161 is available on line at Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=07e214c52bbfc82a2781e3e14c7616ca&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.2&idno=40

6. 40 CFR 51.166 – Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality. The regulatory text 

of 40 CFR 51.166 is available on line at Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=0dbbe52d31085f8454d6cbf1412e1557&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.7&idno=40.

Other applicable requirements of the Act, 40 CFR part 51, and applicable policy and guidance 

will be identified in the evaluation where appropriate.

Specifically, the February 27, 2013 and July 22, 2016, submittals are first reviewed for 

completeness as a SIP submittal under Part 51, Appendix V. This will be followed by a detailed 

analysis of the submitted revised rules to determine consistency with EPA regulations, guidance 

and whether the submitted provisions interfere with any applicable CAA provisions. This 

analysis produces a written evaluation used to make a determination of whether or not the 

establishment and revisions to the PM2.5 SMC are in agreement with the CAA, other EPA 

policies and guidance.
5

A. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the February 27, 2013 SIP Submittal

The criteria for completeness determination are found in Appendix V to Part 51 - Criteria for 

determining the completeness of plan submissions and are outlined below: 

1.0 Purpose: This appendix V sets forth the minimum criteria for determining whether a 

State implementation plan submitted for consideration by EPA is an official submission 

for purposes of review under § 51.103. 

1.1 The EPA shall return to the submitting official any plan or revision thereof which fails to 

meet the criteria set forth in this appendix V, and request corrective action, identifying 

the component(s) absent or insufficient to perform a review of the submitted plan.

1.2 The EPA shall inform the submitting official whether or not a plan submission meets the 

requirements of this appendix V within 60 days of EPA's receipt of the submittal, but no 

later than 6 months after the date which the State was required to submit the plan or 

revision. If a completeness determination is not made by 6 months from receipt of a 

submittal, the submittal shall be deemed complete by operation of law on the date 6 

months from receipt. A determination of completeness under this paragraph means that 

the submission is an official submission for purposes of §51.103.

The attached checklist outlines the basic criteria included under 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 of Appendix V.

SIP Completeness Checklist for the February 27, 2013 SIP Submittal

Administrative Materials (2.1)

1. The package is sent with a formal submittal letter from the Governor or his or her 

designee requesting EPA's approval of the revision.

The SIP revision was submitted by a letter from Ms. Peggy Hatch, Secretary of the 

LDEQ, dated February 27, 2013. The SIP submittal was received by EPA Region 6 Air 

Permitting Section on March 7, 2013. 

2. Evidence is included that the State has adopted the revision in the State code or body of 

regulations, or that the State has issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter 

document) in final form. This evidence would include the date of adoption or final 

issuance and the effective date of revision, if different from adoption/issuance date.

The revisions to the Louisiana Major PSD program were adopted by the Louisiana 

Department of Environmental Quality on December 20, 2012.

3. Evidence is included that the State has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt 

and implement the revision, e.g., a citation of the appropriate State authority.

The authority to adopt and implement the revisions is the Louisiana Environmental 

Quality Act, R.S. 30:2001 et seq., and in accordance with the provisions of the 

Administrative Procedures Act, R.S. 49:950 et seq.
6

4. A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted for approval and 

incorporation by reference into the SIP including an indication of the changes made to the 

existing approved plan where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official 

State regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official 

indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation 

document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.

The February 27, 2013, submittal included a copy of the official State regulation 

document published in the Louisiana Register.

5. Evidence is included that the State followed all the procedural requirements of its laws 

and/or its constitution in the conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the 

plan. 

The SIP submittal package included a certification demonstrating the SIP submittal was 

developed pursuant to 40 CFR 51.104. 

6. Evidence is included that public notice was given of the proposed changes consistent 

with the procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice, 

(e.g., notarized or certified copies of any public notices published in newspapers). (The 

notice should be at least 30 days prior to the public hearing(s).

Notices of public hearing and comment period for rule revision AQ328ft were published 

in the:

• Louisiana Register on March 20, 2012.

7. A certification is included indicating that public hearing(s) was/were held in accordance 

with the information provided in the public notice(s) and the State's laws and 

constitution, if applicable.

The public hearing for AQ328ft was held on October 31, 2012. The transcript of the 

hearing was included in the February 27, 2013 submittal package. 

8. A compilation of public comments and the State's response is included.

The SIP submittal package did include a compilation of comments and the State’s 

response to comments. LDEQ received one comment letter from EPA Region 6. The 

February 27, 2013, submittal included the comment letters and the response to comments 

summary.
7

Technical Support (2.2)

The State should include the following technical information in its SIP revision request package.

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the revision is included.

The February 27, 2013, submittal revises the Louisiana PSD program to regulate and 

permit emissions of PM2.5 and its precursors under the LA PSD program in all attainment 

areas statewide.

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA 

attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment 

plan for the affected area(s) is included.

The February 27, 2013 revisions to the LA PSD program apply statewide in attainment 

areas.

3. Quantification of the changes in SIP allowable emissions from the affected sources is 

included. (Examples include estimates of changes in current actual emissions from 

affected sources and/or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions 

from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline 

levels and allowable emissions anticipated if the revisions were approved.)

Quantification of “SIP allowable emissions” is not required for the February 27, 2013, 

revisions to the Louisiana PSD permit program. A determination of “allowable 

emissions” consistent with the PSD permitting requirements will be addressed on a 

permit-by-permit basis.

4. Demonstration is included that the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and 

visibility as applicable would be protected if the revision were approved and 

implemented.

The February 27, 2013, revision to the Louisiana PSD permit program was adopted and

submitted consistent with the federal PSD requirements. Adoption of these revised rules 

will protect the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and visibility.

5. FOR REDESIGNATIONS:

a. Is there a fully approved maintenance plan for the primary ambient air quality 

standards for at least 10 years as required by §175A of the Clean Air Act?

Not applicable.

b. Are contingency measures included?

Not applicable.
8

6. Modeling information, if applicable, is required to support the proposed revision. 

Modeling information is not necessary to support the analysis and review of the February 

27, 2013, submitted regulatory provisions. Modeling will be provided on a permit-bypermit basis in accordance with the Louisiana PSD SIP regulations. 

7. Evidence is included where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous 

emission reduction technology (e.g., add-on controls, industrial/process equipment 

designs, reformulated materials, etc.).

Evidence that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction 

technology is not necessary to support the analysis and review of the February 27, 2013, 

submitted regulatory provisions. Emission limitations will be established on a permit-bypermit basis in accordance with the PSD SIP regulations. 

8. Evidence is included indicating that a SIP revision contains emission limitations, work 

practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements to ensure stated emission 

levels.

The February 27, 2013, SIP submittal does not establish emission limitations, work 

practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements. They will be established 

on a permit-by-permit basis according to the applicable Louisiana PSD SIP 

requirements.

9. Compliance/enforcement strategies including how compliance will be determined in 

practice (including at what frequency).

The February 27, 2013, SIP submittal does not establish compliance/enforcement 

strategies. Each PSD SIP permit will separately address compliance/enforcement.

10. As appropriate, special economic and technological justifications are included per 

applicable EPA policies or an explanation why such justifications are not necessary 

should be included. For example, requests for alternative RACT may require such 

justification.

These justifications are not necessary for February 27, 2013, SIP revision.

The February 27, 2013 SIP submittal satisfies the completeness criteria established in 40 

CFR part 51, Appendix V.
9

B. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the July 22, 2016 SIP Submittal

The criteria for completeness determination are found in Appendix V to Part 51 - Criteria for 

determining the completeness of plan submissions and are outlined below: 

1.0 Purpose: This appendix V sets forth the minimum criteria for determining whether a 

State implementation plan submitted for consideration by EPA is an official submission 

for purposes of review under § 51.103. 

1.1 The EPA shall return to the submitting official any plan or revision thereof which fails to 

meet the criteria set forth in this appendix V, and request corrective action, identifying 

the component(s) absent or insufficient to perform a review of the submitted plan.

1.2 The EPA shall inform the submitting official whether or not a plan submission meets the 

requirements of this appendix V within 60 days of EPA's receipt of the submittal, but no 

later than 6 months after the date which the State was required to submit the plan or 

revision. If a completeness determination is not made by 6 months from receipt of a 

submittal, the submittal shall be deemed complete by operation of law on the date 6 

months from receipt. A determination of completeness under this paragraph means that 

the submission is an official submission for purposes of §51.103.

The attached checklist outlines the basic criteria included under 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 of Appendix V.

SIP Completeness Checklist for the July 22, 2016 SIP Submittal

Administrative Materials (2.1)

1. The package is sent with a formal submittal letter from the Governor or his or her 

designee requesting EPA's approval of the revision.

The SIP revision was submitted by a letter from Mr. Chuck Carr Brown, Ph.D., Secretary 

of the LDEQ, dated July 22, 2016. The SIP submittal was received by EPA Region 6 Air 

Permitting Section on July 25, 2016. 

2. Evidence is included that the State has adopted the revision in the State code or body of 

regulations, or that the State has issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter 

document) in final form. This evidence would include the date of adoption or final 

issuance and the effective date of revision, if different from adoption/issuance date.

The revisions to the Louisiana Major PSD program were adopted by the Louisiana 

Department of Environmental Quality on March 20, 2016.

3. Evidence is included that the State has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt 

and implement the revision, e.g., a citation of the appropriate State authority.

The authority to adopt and implement the revisions is the Louisiana Environmental 

Quality Act, R.S. 30:2001 et seq., and in accordance with the provisions of the 

Administrative Procedures Act, R.S. 49:950 et seq.
10

4. A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted for approval and 

incorporation by reference into the SIP including an indication of the changes made to the 

existing approved plan where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official 

State regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official 

indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation 

document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.

The July 22, 2016, submittal included a copy of the official State regulation document 

published in the Louisiana Register.

5. Evidence is included that the State followed all the procedural requirements of its laws 

and/or its constitution in the conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the 

plan. 

The SIP submittal package included a certification demonstrating the SIP submittal was 

developed pursuant to 40 CFR 51.104. 

6. Evidence is included that public notice was given of the proposed changes consistent 

with the procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice, 

(e.g., notarized or certified copies of any public notices published in newspapers). (The 

notice should be at least 30 days prior to the public hearing(s).

Notices of public hearing and comment period for rule revision AQ357ft were published 

in the:

• Louisiana Register on December 20, 2015.

7. A certification is included indicating that public hearing(s) was/were held in accordance 

with the information provided in the public notice(s) and the State's laws and 

constitution, if applicable.

The public hearing for AQ357ft was held on January 27, 2016. The transcript of the 

hearing was included in the July 22, 2016 submittal package. 

8. A compilation of public comments and the State's response is included.

The LDEQ did not receive any public comments on the proposed AQ357ft.
11

Technical Support (2.2)

The State should include the following technical information in its SIP revision request package.

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the revision is included.

The July 22, 2016, submittal revises the Louisiana PSD program to effectively remove the 

PM2.5 significant monitoring concentration (SMC) by setting the SMC to a zero threshold 

in all attainment areas statewide.

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA 

attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment 

plan for the affected area(s) is included.

The July 22, 2016 submittal revises the Louisiana PSD program statewide in all 

attainment areas.

3. Quantification of the changes in SIP allowable emissions from the affected sources is 

included. (Examples include estimates of changes in current actual emissions from 

affected sources and/or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions 

from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline 

levels and allowable emissions anticipated if the revisions were approved.)

Quantification of “SIP allowable emissions” is not required for the July 22, 2016, 

revisions to the Louisiana PSD permit program. A determination of “allowable 

emissions” consistent with the PSD permitting requirements will be addressed on a 

permit-by-permit basis.

4. Demonstration is included that the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and 

visibility as applicable would be protected if the revision were approved and 

implemented.

The July 22, 2016, revision to the Louisiana PSD permit program was adopted and 

submitted consistent with the federal PSD requirements. Adoption of these revised rules 

will protect the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and visibility.

5. FOR REDESIGNATIONS:

a. Is there a fully approved maintenance plan for the primary ambient air quality 

standards for at least 10 years as required by §175A of the Clean Air Act?

Not applicable.

b. Are contingency measures included?

Not applicable.
12

7. Modeling information, if applicable, is required to support the proposed revision. 

Modeling information is not necessary to support the analysis and review of the July 22, 

2016, submitted regulatory provisions. Modeling will be provided on a permit-by-permit 

basis in accordance with the Louisiana PSD SIP regulations. 

7. Evidence is included where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous 

emission reduction technology (e.g., add-on controls, industrial/process equipment 

designs, reformulated materials, etc.).

Evidence that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction 

technology is not necessary to support the analysis and review of the July 22, 2016, 

submitted regulatory provisions. Emission limitations will be established on a permit-bypermit basis in accordance with the PSD SIP regulations. 

8. Evidence is included indicating that a SIP revision contains emission limitations, work 

practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements to ensure stated emission 

levels.

The July 22, 2016, SIP submittal does not establish emission limitations, work practice 

standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements. They will be established on a 

permit-by-permit basis according to the applicable Louisiana PSD SIP requirements.

9. Compliance/enforcement strategies including how compliance will be determined in 

practice (including at what frequency).

The July 22, 2016, SIP submittal does not establish compliance/enforcement strategies. 

Each PSD SIP permit will separately address compliance/enforcement.

10. As appropriate, special economic and technological justifications are included per 

applicable EPA policies or an explanation why such justifications are not necessary 

should be included. For example, requests for alternative RACT may require such 

justification.

These justifications are not necessary for July 22, 2016, SIP revision.

The July 22, 2016, SIP submittal satisfies the completeness criteria established in 40 CFR 

part 51, Appendix V.
13

C. Background of Federal Actions Regarding the PSD PM2.5 SIL and SMC

Under Section 165(a) of the CAA, a major source may not commence construction unless the 

source has been issued a permit and has satisfied certain requirements. Among those 

requirements, the permit applicant must demonstrate that emissions from construction or 

operation of the facility will not cause, or contribute to, air pollution in excess of any increment, 

NAAQS, or any other applicable emission standard of standard of performance. This statutory 

requirement has been incorporated into federal regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(k)(1). Moreover, to 

support this analysis, PSD permit applications must contain air quality monitoring data 

representing air quality in the area affected by the proposed source for the 1-year period 

preceding receipt of the application. This statutory requirement has been incorporated into 

federal regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(m)(ii)-(iv). 

In 2010, the EPA promulgated regulations for SIPs concerning PSD permitting for PM2.5 which 

included two voluntary screening tools: SILs and SMCs. 75 FR 64864 (Oct. 20, 2010). The SILs 

are screening tools that states with PSD SIPs apply in the issuance of a PSD permit to 

demonstrate that the proposed source’s allowable emissions will not cause or contribute to a 

violation of the NAAQS or increment. The SMC has been used to exempt sources from the 

requirement in the CAA to collect preconstruction monitoring data for up to 1 year before 

submitting a permit application in order to help determine existing ambient air quality. 78 FR 

73699 (Dec. 9, 2013). 

Sierra Club filed a petition for review of the PSD regulations containing the PM2.5 SILs and 

SMC with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the Court). 

On January 22, 2013, the Court issued an opinion granting a request from the EPA to vacate and 

remand to the EPA portions of the October 20, 2010, PSD regulations establishing the PM2.5 SIL 

and further vacating the portions of the PSD regulations establishing a PM2.5 SMC. See, Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).

In response to the Court’s decision, the EPA amended its regulations to remove the affected 

PM2.5 SIL regulations from the federal regulations and to replace the existing PM2.5 SMC value 

with a “zero” threshold. 78 FR 73698 (Dec. 9, 2013). In that rulemaking, the EPA removed the 

regulatory text related to the affected PM2.5 SILs at sections 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2). 

Although the Court vacated the PM2.5 SMC provisions in 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 

52.21(i)(5)(i)(c), the EPA did not remove the affected regulatory text, but instead revised the 

concentration for the PM2.5 SMC listed in sections 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) to zero 

micrograms per cubic meter (0 μg/m3

). Because 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(iii) and 40 CFR 

52.21(i)(5)(iii) establish an exemption from air monitoring requirements for any pollutant “not 

listed in paragraph (i)(5)(i),” the EPA explained that it would not be appropriate to remove the 

reference to PM2.5 in paragraph (i)(5)(i). Were the EPA to completely remove PM2.5 from the list 

of pollutants in sections 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) of the PSD regulations, PM2.5 

would no longer be a listed pollutant and the paragraph (iii) provision could be interpreted as 

giving reviewing authorities the discretion to exempt permit applicants from the requirement to 

conduct monitoring for PM2.5, in contravention of the Court’s decision and the CAA. Instead, the 

EPA revised the concentration listed in sections 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) to “0” 

micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3). This means that there is no air quality impact level below 
14

which a reviewing authority has the discretion to exempt a source from the PM2.5 monitoring 

requirements at 40 CFR 52.21(m). 
15

D. Evaluation of the Revisions to the LA PSD Program for the PM2.5 SMC 

The February 27, 2013, SIP submittal included provisions adopted on December 20, 2012, to address the requirements of EPA’s 

October 20, 2010 final rule on PM2.5 Increments SILs and SMC. The LDEQ adopted and submitted new provisions at LAC 

33:III.509.I.5.a., establishing the PM2.5 SMC at 4 μg/m3 on a 24-hour average. The LDEQ did not adopt or submit provisions 

establishing the PM2.5 SIL. 

Because the US Court of Appeals vacated the PM2.5 SMC on January 22, 2013, the LDEQ requested that EPA take no action on the 

submitted provisions at LAC 33:III.509.I.5.a.

The LDEQ has undergone a series of rulemakings to address the Courts decision on the PM2.5 SIL and SMC and the subsequent 

revisions to the federal PSD requirements.

• The LDEQ initially proposed revisions to the PSD program to address the removal of the PM2.5 SIL and SMC on October 10, 

2014 as AQ349. The EPA reviewed and provided comment on these provisions on December 2, 2014 and on January 14, 2015. 

• As a result of significant comments, the LDEQ provided an additional opportunity for public comment on the amended 

proposed revisions, AQ349S. EPA provided comments on May 6, 2015. The LDEQ stopped the rulemaking process at this 

point.

• The LDEQ promulgated another rulemaking to address only the PM2.5 SMC under AQ357ft to revise the adopted PM2.5 SMC 

and set the value to a “zero” threshold. The EPA did not submit a comment on this rulemaking. The LDEQ completed the 

rulemaking process and adopted the revisions to the PM2.5 SMC on March 20, 2016. These revisions were submitted to the 

EPA as a SIP revision on July 22, 2016.

The following evaluation will review the initial adoption and submittal of the PM2.5 SMC at LAC 33:III.509.I.5.a as submitted on 

February 27, 2013 and revised through the July 22, 2016 submittal.
16

Table 1: Analysis of Revisions to LAC 33:III.509

Current LA SIP - Approved on November 5, 

2015.

The italicized provisions were adopted at the 

state level on December 20, 2012, and 

submitted on February 27, 2013. EPA took no 

action on these provisions at the request of the 

state. 

Revisions adopted on March 20, 2016

Submitted on July 22, 2016

EPA’s Analysis of Proposed Revision

LAC 33:III.509(I)(5)

The administrative authority may exempt a 

stationary source or modification from the 

requirements of Subsection M of this Section, 

with respect to monitoring for a particular 

pollutant if:

a) The emissions increase of the pollutant 

from a new stationary source or the net 

emissions increase of the pollutant 

from a modification would cause, in 

any area, air quality impacts less than 

the following amounts:

Carbon 

monoxide

575 

μg/m3

8-hour 

average;

Nitrogen 

dioxide 

14 

μg/m3

annual 

average;

Particulate 

matter

10 

μg/m3

PM10

4 μg/m3

PM2.5

24-hour 

average;

24-hour 

average;

Sulfur 

dioxide

13μg/m3 24-hour 

average;

Ozone No de minimis air quality 

level is provided for 

ozone. However, any net 

increase of 100 tons per 

year or more of volatile 

LAC 33:III.509(I)(5)

The administrative authority may exempt a stationary 

source or modification from the requirements of 

Subsection M of this Section, with respect to 

monitoring for a particular pollutant if:

a) The emissions increase of the pollutant from a 

new stationary source or the net emissions 

increase of the pollutant from a modification 

would cause, in any area, air quality impacts 

less than the following amounts:

Carbon 

monoxide

575 

μg/m3

8-hour 

average;

Nitrogen 

dioxide 

14 

μg/m3

annual 

average;

Particulate 

matter

10 

μg/m3

PM10

0 4

μg/m3

PM2.51

24-hour 

average;

24-hour 

average;

Sulfur 

dioxide

13μg/m3 24-hour 

average;

Ozone No de minimis air quality 

level is provided for 

ozone. However, any net 

increase of 100 tons per 

year or more of volatile 

The PM2.5 SMC was adopted by the state on 

December 20, 2012, and submitted in the

February 27, 2013, SIP submittal. In the cover 

letter the LDEQ requested that EPA not act on 

the PM2.5 SMC provision. Therefore, we have 

taken no action to date on the PM2.5 SMC. 

LDEQ has adopted and submitted revisions to 

the state adopted Louisiana PSD program to set 

the PM2.5 SMC at LAC 33:III.509(I)(5)(a) to 

zero, effectively removing the PM2.5 monitoring 

exemption.

Initially the LDEQ proposed complete removal 

of the PM2.5 SMC by deleting the provision. In 

our January 14, 2015 letter we advised the 

LDEQ to set the SMC to ‘0’ to be consistent 

with the CAA and EPA’s regulations. Setting 

the SMC to ‘0’ removes the exemption whereas 

deleting the SMC entirely removes any 

requirement for monitoring – which is not the 

intent.

The substantive revision adopted on March 20, 

2016 and submitted July 22, 2016, addresses the 

EPA’s comments on January 14, 2015. The

substantive revisions are also consistent with 

EPA’s December 9, 2013 final rule to remove 
17

Table 1: Analysis of Revisions to LAC 33:III.509

Current LA SIP - Approved on November 5, 

2015.

The italicized provisions were adopted at the 

state level on December 20, 2012, and 

submitted on February 27, 2013. EPA took no 

action on these provisions at the request of the 

state. 

Revisions adopted on March 20, 2016

Submitted on July 22, 2016

EPA’s Analysis of Proposed Revision

organic compounds 

subject to PSD would be 

required to perform an 

ambient impact analysis, 

including the gathering of 

ambient air quality data;

Lead 0.1 

μg/m3 

3-month 

average;

Fluorides 0.25 

μg/m3

24-hour 

average;

Total 

reduced 

sulfur

10 

μg/m3

1-hour 

average;

Hydrogen 

sulfide

0.2 

μg/m3 

1-hour 

average;

Reduced 

sulfur 

compounds

10 

μg/m3

1-hour 

average; or 

organic compounds 

subject to PSD would be 

required to perform an 

ambient impact analysis, 

including the gathering of 

ambient air quality data;

Lead 0.1 

μg/m3 

3-month 

average;

Fluorides 0.25 

μg/m3

24-hour 

average;

Total 

reduced 

sulfur

10 

μg/m3

1-hour 

average;

Hydrogen 

sulfide

0.2 

μg/m3 

1-hour 

average;

Reduced 

sulfur 

compounds

10 

μg/m3

1-hour 

average; or 

1. No exemption is available with regard to PM2.5

the vacated PM2.5 SMC from the federal 

requirements.

The provisions for the PM2.5 SMC at 0 μg/m3

are approvable.

. 
18

E. Evaluation of the revisions to the Louisiana PSD Program for the PM2.5 SMC with 

respect to section 110(l) of the CAA

Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act states: 

Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under this Act shall be adopted by 

such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not approve a 

revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable 

requirement of this Act. 

Our analysis indicates that the February 27, 2013 and July 22, 2016, revisions to the Louisiana

PSD program were adopted and submitted as revisions to the Louisiana SIP after reasonable 

notice and public hearing. The initial adoption of the PM2.5 SMC as revised through the July 22, 

2016, submittal ensures that the Louisiana PSD program is consistent with federal PSD 

permitting requirements and does not authorize an exemption from the SIP-approved pre- and 

post-construction PM2.5 monitoring under the Louisiana PSD SIP. Approval of these submitted 

revisions will therefore not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. 

IV. Conclusion

The technical analysis in the preceding sections has compared the applicable sections of the 

CAA and 40 CFRs Parts 51 with the February 27, 2013, and July 22, 2016, Louisiana SIP 

submittals to adopt and revise the PM2.5 SMC. The EPA’s analysis found that LAC 

33:III.509.I.5.a., as revised through the July 22, 2016 submittal appropriately establishes the 

PM2.5 SMC at a zero threshold, consistent with federal requirements and the Court decisions.

As such the EPA should propose approval of the revisions to LAC 33:III.509.I.5.a., as initially 

adopted on December 20, 2012, and submitted on February 27, 2013, and as revised by the 

March 20, 2016 adoption submitted on July 22, 2016.

Because the rulemakings to adopt and revise the PM2.5 SMC are consistent with federal 

requirements and Court decisions it is recommended that EPA pursue a direct final approval.