Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/01/21/2015-00640/approval-and-promulgation-of-air-quality-implementation-plans-district-of-columbia-infrastructure
Timestamp: 2018-04-25 01:13:39
Document Index: 222131690

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 51', 'art 51', 'art 51', 'art 51', 'art 51', 'art 51', 'art 51', 'art 51', 'art 51']

2865-2871 (7 pages)
FRL-9921-70-Region 3
IV. Summary of EPA's Rationale for Proposing Approval
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2015-00640 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2015-00640
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve portions of three State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submittals from the District of Columbia (hereafter “the District”) pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA). Whenever new or revised national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) are promulgated, the CAA requires states to submit a plan for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such NAAQS. The plan is required to address basic program elements, including, but not limited to, regulatory structure, monitoring, modeling, legal authority, and adequate resources necessary to assure attainment and maintenance of the standards. These elements are referred to as infrastructure requirements. The District has made three separate submittals addressing the infrastructure requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS. One of the infrastructure submittals also includes the “Revised Air Quality Emergency Plan for the District of Columbia” for Start Printed Page 2866satisfying EPA's requirements for air quality emergency episodes. In this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve, in accordance with the requirements of the CAA: The three infrastructure SIP submissions with the exception of the portions of the submittals addressing transport of pollution and the portions of the submittals addressing the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting requirements; and the District's Air Quality Emergency Plan which also meets EPA's requirements for air pollution prevention contingency plans.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0701 by one of the following methods:
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0701, Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0701. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone based on 8-hour average concentrations. EPA revised the level of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm. On February 9, 2010 (75 FR 6474), EPA established a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for the 1-hour primary SO2 at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations.
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements, and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the submission. The content of such SIP submission may also vary depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already contains.
More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for “infrastructure” SIP requirements related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned earlier, these requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements, and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
The District through the District Department of the Environment (DDOE) submitted three separate revisions to its SIP to satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the different NAAQS. On June 6, 2014, DDOE submitted a SIP revision addressing the infrastructure requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. On June 13, 2014, DDOE submitted an infrastructure SIP revision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On July 17, 2014, DDOE submitted an infrastructure SIP revision for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Each of the infrastructure SIP revisions addressed the following infrastructure elements for the applicable NAAQS: Section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(I), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) of the CAA. The three infrastructure SIP submittals do not address section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertains to the nonattainment requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA, because this element is not required to be submitted by the 3-year submission deadline of CAA section 110(a)(1) and will be addressed in a separate process, if necessary.
In addition, the June 13, 2014 SIP submittal includes the “Revised Air Quality Emergency Plan for the District of Columbia,” which the District is requesting EPA to approve into the SIP to address EPA's requirements for preventing air pollution emergency episodes which are located in 40 CFR Start Printed Page 2867part 51, subpart H and section 110(a)(2)(G) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(G), among other things, requires state SIPs to provide adequate contingency plans to implement a state's authority similar to section 303 of the CAA regarding imminent and substantial endangerment authority. The entire District is part of the National Capital Interstate air quality control region, which is classified as a Priority I region for particulate matter, sulfur oxides (SOX), carbon monoxide (CO), and ozone and as a Priority III region for NO2. See 40 CFR 52.471. Therefore, in accordance with 40 CFR part 51, subpart H, the District submitted its Air Quality Emergency Plan with contingency measures for all pollutants, including particulate matter, SOX, CO, and ozone.
EPA is acting upon the District's SIP submissions that addresses the infrastructure requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions “within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),” and these SIP submissions are to provide for the “implementation, maintenance, and enforcement” of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that “[e]ach such plan” submission must address.
As another example, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to the PSD program requirements in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program requirements contained in part C and EPA's PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and NSR pollutants, including Green House Gases (GHGs). By contrast, structural PSD program requirements do not include provisions that are not required under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2013 PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional provisions are types of provisions EPA considers irrelevant in the context of an infrastructure SIP action.
For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA's review of a state's infrastructure SIP submission focuses Start Printed Page 2869on assuring that the state's SIP meets basic structural requirements. For example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor new source review program and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a state's existing minor source program (i.e., already in the existing SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations that pertain to such programs.
With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (SSM); (ii) existing provisions related to “director's variance” or “director's discretion” that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's “Final NSR Improvement Rule,” 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (NSR Reform). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission even if it is aware of such existing provisions.[10] It is important to note that EPA's approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submission should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three specific issues just described.
In accordance with 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, EPA found that each of the infrastructure SIP submittals is technically incomplete for the portions of the infrastructure elements in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) relating to the permitting program for PSD, because the District has not adequately addressed the requirements of part C of Title I of the CAA for having a SIP-approved PSD program. EPA found the remainder of the SIP submittals to be administratively and technically complete. EPA sent letters to DDOE in July 21, 2014 and November 4, 2014 notifying the District of these determinations for each of the applicable NAAQS.[14] As a result of Start Printed Page 2870these incompleteness findings, EPA is not taking rulemaking action on the PSD-related portions of section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) for the District's infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, until the District through DDOE submits a SIP to address the PSD permit program requirements of part C of Title I of the CAA.
EPA recognizes, however, that the District of Columbia is already subject to a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) containing the Federal PSD program [15] to correct the SIP deficiency and that DDOE would not have to take further action for the FIP-based permitting process to continue operating. Thus, EPA anticipates that there will be no adverse consequences to DDOE from these incompleteness findings for the PSD-related portions of section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. Mandatory sanctions would not apply to the District under CAA section 179 because the failure to submit a PSD SIP is neither (1) with respect to a submission that is required under CAA Title I part D, or (2) in response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5). In addition, EPA is not subject to any further FIP duties from our finding of incompleteness for these SIP submittals because there is already the FIP implementing the Federal PSD program for DDOE which addresses the SIP deficiency.
In addition, EPA is also not taking rulemaking action at this time on the portion of the infrastructure SIP submittals which address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. EPA will take later rulemaking action on these submittals regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing approval of the remainder of the submittals to address infrastructure requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for proposing to approve these portions of the District's infrastructure SIP submittals may be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this proposed rulemaking action which is available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0701.
As mentioned previously, on June 13, 2014, the District also submitted a SIP revision addressing EPA's contingency plan requirements in 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (40 CFR 51.150 through 51.153) and in CAA section 110(2)(G). Section 110(a)(2)(G), among other things, requires state SIPs to provide adequate contingency plans to implement the state's authority similar to section 303 of the CAA, regarding imminent and substantial endangerment authority. Pursuant to 40 CFR part 51, subpart H, the District is required to have a contingency plan for particulate matter, SOX, CO, and ozone. EPA notes that there are no applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 51, subpart H for NO2, and consequently no applicable contingency plan requirements under CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for NO2 for the District, as Priority III regions are not required to have emergency episode plans.
EPA finds that the District's Emergency Plan satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H with respect to contingency plans for all applicable pollutants. In this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve into the SIP the “Revised Air Quality Emergency Plan for the District of Columbia,” pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, and is also proposing that the three infrastructure SIP submittals for the applicable NAAQS meet the applicable contingency plan requirements in CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for approving the “Revised Air Quality Emergency Plan for the District of Columbia” into the District's SIP because it meets requirements in CAA section 110 and 40 CFR part 51, subpart H is provided in our TSD accompanying this proposed rulemaking action. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
EPA is proposing to approve the District's infrastructure submittals dated June 6, 2014, June 13, 2014, and July 17, 2014 for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, respectively, as meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA, including specifically section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) for the three NAAQS with the exception of the requirements related to the PSD permitting program of part C, Title I of the CAA in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J), and with the exception of the transport requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA is not taking action on the portions of the three infrastructure submittals intended to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for transport or on the portions of the three infrastructure SIP submittals addressing the PSD related requirements in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J). EPA will take later separate action on section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for transport for the three NAAQS.
EPA is also proposing to approve as a SIP revision the “Revised Air Quality Emergency Plan for the District of Columbia,” submitted on June 13, 2014, as it satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H for all applicable pollutants and section 110 of the CAA, including specifically section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Start Printed Page 2871Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
In addition, this proposed rulemaking action, pertaining to the District of Columbia's section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 2008 ozone, the 2010 NO2, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and to the District of Columbia's contingency plan for the prevention of air pollution episodes, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
12. EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See “Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule,” 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has previously used its authority under section 110(k)(6) of the CAA to remove numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062, November 16, 2004 (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
14. Letters regarding EPA's completeness determinations are included in the docket for this rulemaking action.
15. On August 7, 1980 (45 FR 52676, at 52741), EPA disapproved a number of states SIPs for PSD purposes, including the District and incorporated by reference portions of the Federal PSD provisions in 40 CFR 52.21 into the implementation plans for those states. This FIP was subsequently amended to reflect amendments to the Federal PSD rule on March 10, 2003 (68 FR 11316, at 11322) and December 24, 2003 (68 FR 74483, at 74488). At present, the PSD FIP, incorporated by reference in the District SIP in 40 CFR 52.499, specifically contains the provisions of 40 CFR 52.21, with the exception of paragraph (a)(1).
[FR Doc. 2015-00640 Filed 1-20-15; 8:45 am]