L. Preston Bryant

, Jr. Secretary of Natural Resources 

# COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Street address: 629 East Main Street

, Richmond, Virginia 23219

Mailing address : P

. O

. Box 1105, Richmond, Virginia 23218 Fax (804) 698-4500 TDD (804) 698-4021

www

. deq.virginia.gov



## NOV 13 2007

Ms. Judith M. Katz, Director Air Protection Division (3APOO) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029 David K. Paylor
Director

( 804 ) 698-4000
1-800-5 92 -5482

Reference: Certification of §110(a)(2)(D)(i) Requireme n ts for 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5

Dear Ms. Ka t z:

Pursuant to the requirements of § 11 0 of the Clean Air Act, we are officially requesti n g approval of a revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia State Implementation Plan adopted under the aut hori ty of§ 10.1-1185 of the Code of Virginia and submitted in accordance with t he requirements of 40 CFR Part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementat i on Plans).

This r evision consists of a certification that Virginia has met or intends to meet the requirements§ 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the federal Clean Air Act related to interstate pollution transport for t he 8-hour ozone and PM2

. 5 N ational Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Encl o sed are the following:

1. SIP revision.

2

. Certification of public participation activities and compliance with state administrative procedures.3. Record of hearing and summary of testimony.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please let us know.

DKP\RAM\kgs

TEMPLATES \ SIP-PLAN\PLNOO S I P\MISC\ND- S IP .DOC

Enclosures David K. Paylor

### 1 ENCLOSURE 1

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION FOR

CERTIFICATION OF § 110( a )(2)(D)( i ) REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 8

- HOUR OZONE AND PM 2.5 

### NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

This document is being submitted as a revision to the Stat e Implementa t ion Plan (SIP) for the Commonwealth of Virginia to certify that it is meet ing the requirement s of the federal Clean Air Act related to interstate pollution transport for the 1997 8

- hour ozone and PM 2.5 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standards (N AAQS)

. A s discussed below, this SIP submission is consistent with the August 15, 2006 William T. Harnett m emorandum, “Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8

- Hour Ozone and PM 2.5 

### NAAQS

. ”

Section 110(a)(1) of the federal Clean Air Act provides that s tates must adopt and submit SIPs to the EPA within 3 years after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, meeting the provisions of § 110(a)(2). Therefore, SIP s ubmissions address ing the requirements related to § 110(a)(2) for the 8

- hour ozone and the PM 2.5 

### NAAQS were due no later than July 2000. Due to litigation of both the 8

- hour ozone and the PM 2.5 

### NAAQS

, the Commonwealth did not submit a SIP submission to sa tisfy the § 110(a)(2) requirements by July 2000. EPA published a finding of failure to submit in the Federal Register on April 25, 2005 (70 FR 21147) , with an effective date of May 25, 2005. The Federal Register notice started a 2

- year clock that end ed on M ay 25, 2007

, for EPA to issue a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the interstate pollution transport requirements called for under § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) if s tates fail to submit the required SIP submittal

. Note that the Clean Air Interstate Rule ( CAIR ) FIP was promulgated in part to meet this requirement . On A ugust 15, 2006 , a memorandum was issued by William T. Harnett, “Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8

- Hour Ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS

, ” in order to provide guidance to s tates for meet ing the § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements

.

S ection 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the federal Clean Air Act requires each state to submit a SIP that contains adequate provisions: (i ) prohibiting

. . . any source or other type of emissions activity within the State from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will

- (I) contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other State with respect t o any such national primary or secondary air quality standard, or (II) interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other State under Part C to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protec t visibility.



### These specific requirements, and how the Commonwealth has met these requirements, is discussed in detail below.

### 2 Interstate Transport

Virginia is covered by CAIR for annual and seasonal ozone

, and for sulfur dioxide. The Harnett m emorandum advises that s tates covered by CAIR can comply with § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) obligations relating to “significant contribution” and “interference with maintenance” requirements by complying with the CAIR requirements. The

m emorandum advises that that s tates with in the CAIR region need not submit a separate SIP revision t o satisfy the § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements provided that they submit a SIP revision to satisfy CAIR. Virginia submitted a CAIR SIP to EPA on March 30 , 2007 and is therefore not required, as spe lled out in the Harnett memorandum, to make this particular SIP submittal

.

N ew S ource R eview

With respect to n onattainment and p revention of s ignificant d et er ioration (PSD) new
s ource r eview (NSR) , the Harnett m emorandum advises that a s tate may fulfill its § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) require ments by confirm ing that (i) m ajor stationary sources for 8

- hour ozone and PM 2.5 

### are currently subject to nonattainment and PSD NSR permitting programs, and that it is on track to meet the SIP requirements to address the Phase I I ozone implem entation rule requirements; and (ii) m ajor sources are subject to nonattainment and PSD NSR permitting programs implemented in accordance with EPA’s interim guidance calling for use of PM 10 

### as a surrogate for PM 2.5 

### related to the nonattainmen t and PSD NSR program requirements.

Virginia confirms that (i) m ajor stationary sources for 8

- hour ozone and PM 2.5 

### are currently subject to nonattainment and PSD NSR permitting programs, and that it will submit SIPs to address the Phase II ozone implem ent ati on rule requirements ; and (ii)

m ajor sources are subject to nonattainment and PSD NSR permitting programs implemented in accordance with EPA’s interim guidance calling for use of PM 10 

### as a surrogate for PM 2.5 

### related to the nonattainment and PSD NSR pro gram requirements.

Visibility

The Harnett memorandum advises that the § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirement related to protection of visibility is deferred until such time as the state submits its r egional h aze SIP

. Virginia ’s r egional h aze SIP will assess wheth er there is interference with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other

s tate to protect visibi lity.

Conclusion

The Commonwealth of Virginia confirms that it meets requirements of § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the federal Clean Air Act for the 8

- hour ozone and PM 2.5 

### NAAQS

, and does not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interference with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state.

### ENCLOSURE 2

CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES AND COMPLIANCE WITH STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

As required by 40 CFR 51.102(f) and Section 2.1(b) and (d) through (g) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51, the following information regardin g public participation activities and compliance with state administrative procedures is provided.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES

As required by 40 CFR 51.102(a), a hearing to accept public testimony concerning a proposed revision to the Commonwealth o f Virginia State Implementation Plan was held in the First Floor Conference Room, Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia , at 9:00 a.m. on October 17, 2007

. In the State Capital Intrastate Air Quality Control Region, the public was given notice of the hearing in the Richmond Times

- Dispatch on September 13, 2007 (copy attached). Similar notices were placed in at least one paper of general circulation in each of Virginia's other Air Quality Control Regions. As required by Section 2.1(g) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51, the hearing was held in accordance with the information found in the public notice, and according to the state's laws.

The Regional Administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was notified of the hearing, as was each local air pollution control agency which will be significantly impacted by the revision and is located in the affected Air Quality Control Regions. In addition, the District of Columbia, Maryland and Tennessee, which share aff ected interstate Air Quality Control Regions with Virginia, were notified of the hearing. These notifications follow the requirements of 40 CFR Part 51.102(d).

The complete record of the hearings, along with any testimony received and responses thereto, is located at the Office of Air Regulatory Development of the Department of Environmental Quality. The Department contact to access this information is the Director, Office of Air Regulatory Development. A summary of the testimony received and responses thereto is attached.

COMPLIANCE WITH STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

As required by § 2.2

- 4031 of the Code of Virginia, notice of the hearing was given to the

### public in the Virginia Register on October 1, 2007 (copy attached).

TEMPLATES \ SIP

- PLAN \ PLN02 SIP \ MISC \ ND

- SIP

- 2.DOC

### i~icbmon**b ~imes-** **il ispatcl)**  Advertising Affidavit Account Number

3014362

Date P.O Box 85333 Richmond, Virginia 23293-0001 (804) 649-6208 September 20, 2007

COVD DEQ Attn: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE C/0 WATER PERMIT PROGRAMS
629 E MAIN STREET RICHMOND. VA 23219

Date Category

09/13/2007 Legal Notices Description Ad Size

Public Notice

- Air Quality Plan Notice 2x110L**Pubr~e** 

### Notice· ·r Quality Plan Media General Operations, Inc.

Notice of lldlon: The Department of Environmental Quality (OEQ) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on a proposed plan to attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standard for ozone and very fine particulate matter (PM2.S). If adopted, the Commonwealth Intends to submit the plan as a revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) in accordance with the requirements of § llO(a) of the federal Clean Air Act The SIP is the plan developed by the commonwealth In order to fulfill its responsibilities under the federal Clean Air Act to attain and maintain the ambient air quality standards promulgated by the U.S

. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Act. Purpose of notice: DEQ is seeking comments on the overall plan, and on the Issue of whether the pian demonstrates the Commonwealth's compli-
ance with certain federal Clean Air Act requirements related to Interstate pollution transport.

Public comment period: September 13, 2007 to October 17, 2007

. Public hearing: First Floor Conference Room

, VIrginia Department of Environmental Quality, 6291 East Main Street, Richmond, VIrginia, at 9:00 a.m. on October 17, 2007.
Description of proposal: The proposed revision consists of a certification that the Commonwealth is meeting the requirements of § 110(a)(2)(0)(i) of the federal Clean Air Act, whicll
r equires tha t states prevent air pollution that could (I) Impede the ability of other states to meet the national standards, (il) Interfere with prevention of significant deterioration, and (Iii) have a negative effect on visibility.

Federal lnfonnatlon: This notice is being given to satisfy the public participation requirements of federal regulations (40 CFR 51.102). Except as noted below the proposal will be submitted as a revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia SIP un- der § llO(a) of the federal Clean Air Act in ac- cordance with 40 CFR 51.104. It is planned to submit all prov i sions of the proposal as a revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia SIP. Publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch

This is to certify that the attached Public Notice- Air Quali was published by the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Inc. in the City of Richmond, State of Virginia, on the following dates:

09/13/2007

The First insertion being given

... 09/13/2007

Newspaper reference: 0000469171

Sworn to and subscribed before me this

D..'- aJ «< I QJ '.c 'OJ I ...r- --:6 "'>-,

· I"'L.!. • I**::~~~~"8.::** aM**g~ ~~**  g:: :D""g-s**-g~ E-§arg<~**  How to comment DEQ accepts written com- ;:g ..,.,jg.g"' u

...**ot;3:~~~:;!..5~.to::** lii"' ments by e-mail, facslmile transmission and**c:c_:S..,:;wo,g~~"' "'~.,** **., §'l:).xoc:;lii**  postal mail. In order to be considered, written "'

...... 0 "'fi .a

- "' ""' "'1::

... ..., .<; comments must include the full name, address

..., .. 01 E"' 01 E"' in ia"' f!o !!!"'"'"' ' E

.. "'o.,;t: and telephone n umber of the person commenting**~a=~;;;** iii !B ci.**a.]::;~** 0**00 ~~** **;;r-g~~~:i** c: Q.**~.!!!** Ql- oN EM UJ

.. .<.n%:

.... u,..a:: and be received by DEQ by 5:00p

. m. on the last iii o -...."' > 0 .c "'"'

_..., ... E "-!E

- o day of the comment penod. Due to problems**:g~ ~~** **~ol!!:;;!,::])ll~ :Bg~oi=~-g** **o8 ~~**  with the quality of facsimile transmissions,**c...:>~-.... ~**  ;::., o**"'~** o**~** o..**~** :;; o ..., -c**~** u commenters are encouraged to provide the sign- e:£!o..**1;~ ~**  lii

..**:?.:~.,.O"''I':!l..:.** "' 0**o!i:.{~** ed original by postal mail within one week. Both c.S!**'l'lii~ :g·~** **g.,~:;;S:;ji:::J!Z>~io** ;pcl> 0 oral and written comments are accepted at the 01 "'._.!! E"',g**eu..5!~~** 0**"'~** ·..!- :0"' 2 ;;r;

.... public hearing. DEQ prefers that comments be j!: e.e-5,i;!**01 ~** **o101:2.c~** oi;?j**~~ f!~"'**  0 ,.U'> ..,.li! provided in writing along with any suppor:ttng 1 ·-"' .: o.s a.ofi ;;--::¥ _!Elliff ;:::i!"" .;,.:.. documents or exhlbits. All testimony, exh•bits 

## I**~~** >:**-ctl.,&J=~** oi«<Q n10 ,.o.!lf;,..!R{!f:t! and documents received are part of the public :; !)**g'~.f!j!:** 1:

... !:!"c Eiii"Eiii·= .;!!CiS c.o::i record. Please note this proposed plan Is being E ""C!t- §

. :5**"'~=·~ E'co.c,g'f!~**  oi.!::-iiS
c oncurrently reviewed by the U.S. Environmental "'i:l+J;:

.**"~ ~** **~~> §>** **25;~>!E~lE> ~**  .J Protection Agency.**~** oZ**0** >.-..,-c.5!.,

-- _g>

.. ·c5u> 0 -oTHIS IS NOT A -:,**~~..,~ll** ID**~~§~,8~i;.f~.~~r~** ,g,g c.**:gal~~.!:-;:** c,g

... :?t:**g.bfi.5!.S~J:l** ... >**o~~Eo·~aaJ~m~~~~a~~~~~~~5c ~c.o..~c~cE.aE::;a:~<ua:u~a:>VlliiE~**  Total Cost

1 ,17 0.9 1

## GENERAL NOTICES/ERRATA

Volume 24, Issue 2 Virginia Register of Regulations October 1, 2007

245 GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS GENERAL NOTICES/ERRATA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES

2006 Annual Report, Agricultural Stewardship Act
"The Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services announces the availability of the annual report of the Agricultural Stewardship Act entitled "Virginia Agricultural Stewardship Act Annual Report, April 1, 2006 – March 31, 2007: A Positive Approach." Copies of this report can be obtained by contacting Joyce Knight at (804) 786-3538 or email joyce.knight@vdacs.virginia.gov. A written request may be sent to the address below. Copies of the annual report are available without charge.
Agency contact for questions or additional information: Joyce Knight, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Office of Policy, Planning, and Research, 102 Governor Street, Suite 219, P.O. Box 1163, Richmond, VA 23218.

Civil Penalties Matrix
The Board of Agriculture and Consumer Services at its regular meeting on August 16, 2007, adopted a revision to the matrix used to assess civil penalties to animal pounds and shelters for violations under state law. Copies of the revised matrix can be obtained by contacting Jane Martin at (804) 786-2483 or email jane.martin@vdacs.virginia.gov. A written request for a copy of the revised matrix may be sent to Jane Martin, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Animal and Food Industry Services, P.O. Box 1163, Richmond, VA 23218.
Program Contact: Colleen Ca lderwood, DVM, Program Manager, Office of Veterinary Services, telephone (804) 786- 2483, or email colleen.calde rwood@vdacs.virginia.gov.

Notice of Periodic Review of Regulations
The Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services invites comment from the public on 2VAC5-140, Health Requirements Governing the Admission of Livestock, Poultry, Companion Animals, and Other Animals or Birds into Virginia, as part of a periodic review being conducted under Executive Order 36 (06), Development and Review of Regulations Proposed by State Agencies.
Comments on the regulations will be accepted until the close of the comment period on October 22, 2007. Comments should be addressed to Colleen Calderwood, Program Manager, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, P.O. Box 1163, Richmond, VA 23218, telephone (804) 786-2483, FAX (804) 371-2380, or email colleen.calderwood@vd acs.virginia.gov. BOARD OF DENTISTRY

Notice of Periodic Review of Regulations
Pursuant to Executive Order 36 (2006), the Board of Dentistry within the Department of Health Professions is conducting a periodic review of 18VAC60-20, Regulations Governing the Practice of Dentistry and Dental Hygiene.
The board is receiving comment on whether there is a need for amendments for consistency with changes in dental practice and patient care. Regulations for the practice of dentistry and dental hygiene may be viewed online at www.townhall.virginia.gov or www.dhp.virginia.gov or copies will be sent upon request.
Comment begins on October 1, 2007, and ends on October 31, 2007. If any member of the public would like to comment on these regulations, please send comments by the close of the comment period to Elaine J. Yeatts, Agency Regulatory Coordinator, Department of Health Professions, 9960 Mayland Drive, Suite 300, Richmond, VA 23233-1463, email elaine.yeatts@dhp.virginia.gov or FAX (804) 527-4475.

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Public Notice Regarding Air Quality Plan
Notice of action: The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on a proposed plan to attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standard for ozone and very fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ). If adopted, the Commonwealth intends to submit the plan as a revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) in accordance with the requirements of §110(a) of the federal Clean Air Act. The SIP is the plan developed by the Commonwealth in order to fulfill its responsibilities under the federal Clean Air Act to attain and maintain the ambient air quality standards promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Act.
Purpose of notice: DEQ is seeking comments on the overall plan, and on the issue of whethe r the plan demonstrates the Commonwealth’s compliance with certain federal Clean Air Act requirements related to interstate pollution transport.
Public comment period: September 13, 2007, to October 17, 2007.
Public hearing: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, First Floor Conference Room, Richmond, Virginia, at 9 a.m. on October 17, 2007.
Description of proposal: The proposed revision consists of a certification that the Commonwealth is meeting the requirements of §110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the federal Clean Air Act, which requires that states prevent air pollution that could (i) impede the ability of other states to meet the national

## General Notices/Errata

Volume 24, Issue 2 Virginia Register of Regulations October 1, 2007

246 standards, (ii) interfere with prevention of significant deterioration, and (iii) have a negative effect on visibility.
Federal information: This notice is being given to satisfy the public participation requirements of federal regulations (40 CFR 51.102). Except as noted below, the proposal will be submitted as a revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia SIP under §110(a) of the federal Cl ean Air Act in accordance with 40 CFR 51.104. It is planned to submit all provisions of the proposal as a revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia SIP.
How to comment: DEQ accepts written comments by email, facsimile transmission and postal mail. In order to be considered, written comments must include the full name, address and telephone number of the person commenting and be received by DEQ by 5 p.m. on the last day of the comment period. Due to problems with the quality of facsimile transmissions, commenters are encouraged to provide the signed original by postal mail within one week. Both oral and written comments are accepted at the public hearing. DEQ prefers that comments be provided in writing, along with any supporting documents or exhibits. All testimony, exhibits and documents received ar e part of the public record. Please note this proposed plan is being concurrently reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
To review proposal: The proposal and any supporting documents are available on the DEQ Air Public Notices for Plans website (http://www.deq.virginia.gov/air/permitting/planotes.html). The documents may also be obtained by contacting the DEQ representative named below. The public may review the documents between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. of each business day until the close of the public comment period at the following locations:

DEQ Main Street Office 629 E. Main Street, 8th Floor Richmond, Virginia (804) 698-4070 DEQ Southwest Regional Office 355 Deadmore Street Abingdon, Virginia (540) 676-4800

DEQ West Central Regional Office 3019 Peters Creek Road Roanoke, Virginia (540) 562-6700 DEQ South Central Regional Office 7705 Timberlake Road Lynchburg, Virginia (804) 582-5120

DEQ Valley Regional Office 4411 Early Road Harrisonburg, Virginia (540) 574-7800 DEQ Fredericksburg Satellite Office 806 Westwood Office Park Fredericksburg, Virginia (540) 899-4600

DEQ Piedmont Regional Office 4949-A Cox Road Glen Allen, Virginia (804) 527-5020 DEQ Northern Regional Office 13901 Crown Court Woodbridge, Virginia (703) 583-3800 DEQ Tidewater Regional Office 5636 Southern Boulevard Virginia Beach, Virginia (757) 518-2000 Contact for public comments, document requests and additional information: Doris A. McLeod, Air Quality Planner, Air Planning Programs, Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, P.O. Box 1105, Richmond, VA 23218, telephone (804) 698-4197, FAX (804) 698-4510, or email damcleod@deq.virginia.gov.

Water Quality Improvement Study - Dan River Watershed
Purpose of notice: To anno unce a local steering committee meeting on a water quality improvement study by the Department of Environmental Quality for the Dan River watershed in Halifax and Pittsylvania counties in Virginia.
Steering committee meeting: Danville Science Center, 677 Craghead Street, Danville, Virginia, on Tuesday, October 2, 2007, from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Meeting description: This is the second steering committee meeting regarding a study to restore water quality in various streams within the Dan River watershed. We will be discussing the study and the ba sic characteristics of the Dan River watershed.
Description of study: Virginia agencies are working to identify sources of bacteria cont amination in stream segments from the Dan River watershed in Central Virginia. This contamination exceeds water quality standards, which prohibits swimming. The contamination impairs or decreases the quality of the water.
The following is a list of the "impaired" waters, the length of the impaired segment, their lo cation, and the reason for the impairment:
Dan River (42.8 miles), Pitts ylvania County, total fecal coliform; Sandy River (7.21 miles), Pittsylvania County, total fecal coliform; Sandy Creek (9.17 miles), Pittsylvania County, total fecal co liform; Fall Creek (2.3 miles), City of Danville, total fecal coliform; Byrds Branch (2.98 miles), Halifax County, total fecal co liform; Double Creek (8.28 miles), Halifax and Pittsylvania Counties, total fecal coliform.
During the study, DEQ will develop a total maximum daily load, or a TMDL, for the impaired waters. A TMDL is the total amount of a pollutant a water body can contain and still meet water quality standards. To restore water quality, contamination levels have to be reduced to the TMDL
amount. For additional information please contact: Amanda Gray, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 7705 Timberlake Road, Lynchburg, VA 24502, telephone (434)

### ENCLOSURE 3

RECORD OF HEARING AND SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY

As required by 40 CFR 51.102(e), the complete record of the hearing, along with a list of witnesses and the text of the written presentations or summary of the oral presentations, is located at the Office of Air Regulatory Development of the Department of Environmental Quality. The Department contact to access this information is the Director, Office of Air Regulatory Development.

As required by Section 2.1(h) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51, belo w is a summary of the testimony received and responses thereto. Included is a brief statement of the subject, the identification of the commenter, the summary of the comment and the response (analysis and action taken). Each issue is discussed in light o f all of the comments received that affect that issue. All comments have been reviewed and responses developed based on an evaluation of the issues raised in consideration of the overall goals and objectives of the air quality program and the intended pur pose of the document under review.

1. SUBJECT: Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)

.

COMMENTER: Mirant Potomac River LLC

TEXT: DEQ cannot certify compliance with § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) because Virginia has deviated from the federal CAIR by prohibiting the p urchase of CAIR allowances by facilities located in Virginia nonattainment areas. This restriction has no air quality benefit. The restriction prevents the effective implementation of the federal CAIR trading program, thereby preventing the goal of reduc ing interstate transport.

RESPONSE: T he CAIR pro gram was expanded beyond its primary purpose of controlling interstate transport to also meeting nonattainment plan emission control requirements via the establishment of emissions caps for electric genera ting units ; however, this does not mean that Virginia’s certification of compliance with § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) is not valid

. Northern Virginia is part of the metropolitan Washington, D.C. 8

- hour ozone moderate nonattainment area as well as the metropolitan Wa shington D.C. 1997 PM 2.5 

### nonattainment area. This area is a persistent ozone nonattainment area, and as such is one of the most heavily regulated areas in the United States. Requiring compliance with emissions caps will help to improve air quality in the region, as demonstrated by modeling studies. Emission reductions gained from compliance with the caps in nonattainment areas will also have the cobenefit of reducing emissions that would contribute to violations of air quality standards in other states. In no way are these provisions seen as preventing the goal of reducing interstate transport.

The nonattainment provisions included in this program create a regulatory mechanism to impose independent emission caps on affected units to address local air quality needs in nonattainment areas

. No trading activities c an be used to comply with the emissions cap . C ompliance with the emissions cap would not rely on the use of

### allowances under the EPA trading program but would be demonstrated by comparing the a ctual emissions from the source with the emissions cap. The connection between the CAIR trading program and the nonattainment provisions is the use of the number of allowances to establish the emissions caps and the use of the emissions data to determine the amount of emissions to compare with caps. This provides a clear regulatory structure to allow the Commonwealth to address local nonattainment area needs via the nonattainment area requirements without being hampered by regulatory interpretation disput es as to the authority to do so.

The proposed version of the Virginia nonattainment area requirements pro hibited the use of emissions trading to comply with emission limits in nonattainment areas. This provision was included to ensure that Virginia is ab le to meet its obligation to restrict emissions that contribut e to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS with in the Commonwealth, while still providing the affected sources the ability to participate in the regional EPA administered emis sions trading program.

For units in nonattainment areas, provisions were included in the proposed version to automatically convert (by regulation) the CAIR NO X 

### allowances to an emissions limit. Use of allowances

, other than those allocated to the unit or source by the board

, could not be used to comply with the emissions limit in nonattainment areas. Compliance would be demonstrated on an annual basis, based on a comparison of (i) the total NO X 

### emissions (expressed in tons) fro m each EGU during the prece ding control period and (ii) the number of NO X 

### allowances (expressed in tons) allocated for the EGU for the preceding control period

. Every effort was made to ensure that the propos ed nonattainment area requirements would not interfere with parti c ipation by Virginia

- regulated entities in the EPA

administered trading program; but as explained below , EPA found fault in the approach used in the proposal

. EPA acknowledged that states (i) have the flexibility to choose the means to meet the requirements of CAI R, including whether to allow sources to trade or not , and (ii) may exercise certain flexibilities in EPA’s model trading rule and still participate in the EPA

administered trading program. However, EPA related the view that t he proposed nonattainment are a requirements appear ed to allow the state to impose restrictions on a trading program that may affect EPA’s ability to approve Virginia’s e missions t rading regulation and to allow participation in the EPA

- administered trading program.

In order to address EPA's specific concerns, t he provisions related to the emissions limit were revised in the final version to establish a regulatory mechanism to impose annual independent emission caps on affected units to address local air quality needs in nonattainment a reas. The emissions cap would be equivalent to the number of allowances issued to the affected unit for the preceding control period. No trading activities could be used to comply with the emissions cap. Compliance with the emissions cap would not rely on the use of allowances under the EPA trading program but would be accomplished by comparing the actual emissions with the emissions cap

### for the preceding control period. The only connection between the two is the use of the number of allowances to estab lish the emissions caps and the use of the emissions data to determine the amount of emissions to compare with caps. This provision would place no restrictions on participation by any affected unit in the EPA trading program. Compliance with the EPA trad ing program and any nonattainment area caps would be determined separately and in accordance with the terms of the provisions of each. Provisions were also included in the final version to provide the option of allowing compliance to be demonstrated in th e aggregate for all units located at a single source.

Virginia’s position on this issue is supported by recent action of EPA. On September 25, 2007 (72 FR 54385), EPA proposed approval of Virginia’s CAIR program. This was done with the full understandin g that the nonattainment area requirements existed in the state regulations. EPA will not approve a state trading program if a state has a coexisting regulation that will interfere with the administration and implementation of the federal trading program or participation by the affected entities in the federal trading program . The comment period closed on October 25, 2007, and EPA did not receive any comments

— let alone any from the commenter

— indicating that the Virginia program did not meet the requiremen ts of § 110 (a)(2)(D)(i) and its associated regulations. Therefore, certification of Virginia’s compliance with § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) is valid

. It should be noted that the comment letter dated October 17, 2007, and submitted by Mirant contained as an enclosu re a June 18, 2007 letter provided to DEQ from Mirant. This enclosure refers to several attachments, all of which were not provided in this submittal. These comments had been previously submitted as part of the regulatory development process and are not germane to this SIP submittal process.

2. SUBJECT: Establishment of interim significant impact levels (SILs) for annual and 24

- hour averaging periods for PM 2.5 

### and application of these SILs to the Mirant Potomac River Generating Station’s comprehensive p ermit

COMMENTER: City of Alexandria, Virginia

TEXT: Alexandria is concerned with DEQ’s confirmation that major sources in Virginia are subject to nonattainment and PSD NSR permitting programs implemented in accordance with EPA’s interim guidance call ing for use of PM 10 

### as a surrogate for PM 2.5 

### . Additionally, Alexandria is requesting that VDEQ establish interim SILs for annual and 24 hour averaging periods for PM 2.5 

### until the federal guidance on this issue is finalized. Lastly, Alexandria requests th at these SILs be used in a permitting determination for the Mirant Potomac River Power Generating Station.

RESPONSE: Virginia is implementing the EPA’s current guidance regarding the use of PM 10 

### as a surrogate for PM 2.5 

### emissions in the NSR permitting p rogram. Deviating from EPA’s permitting guidance can cause inconsistencies in the applicability of various NSR requirements. Such inconsistencies do not facilitate the execution of the NSR permitting program in a manner conducive to fairness nor to trans parency by the regulated facilities or the public. Therefore, the suggestion that guidance be used

### other than that provided by EPA is not valid

. Currently, the states do not have interim guidance regarding the SILs used in PSD permitting. Since the stat es have no way of knowing what SILs will be set by EPA in its upcoming guidance, setting a state

- specific interim policy in regards to SILs until the EPA guidance is finalized could cause programmatic inconsistencies and could cause the issuance of a permi t on grounds that are unsupported by guidance.

Additionally, t his comment does not address the explicitly stated purpose of the public comment period, which is to certify that the Commonwealth is meeting the general regional transport requirements of § 11 0(a)(2)(D)(i) . While we appreciate the commenter’s concerns, they have no relevant effect on the fact that the Commonwealth is meeting its § 110(a)(2)(D)(i) obligations; nor is this the appropriate venue for addressing those concerns. Therefore, the requ est that interim SIL s be established and use d in evaluating the comprehensive permit for Potomac River Power Generating Station is not valid

.

TEMPLATES \ SIP

- PLAN \ PLN03 SIP \ ASSESSMENT \ ND

- SIP

- 3.DOC