EPA presentation	tables	and	figures

( 1 )	Regional	Haze	overview



## Regional	Haze	Overview

The	EPA’s	Regional	Haze	Rule	set	a	goal	of	2064	to	eliminate	human

- made	visibility	impairment	at	Class	I

areas	such	as	the Haleakala	National	Park	and	Hawaii	Volcanoes National	Park	in	Hawaii.

Regional	Haze	is	visibility	impairment	caused	by	fine	particle	pollution.		This	haze	obscures	the	view	of

scenery	and	objects	at	a	distance,	reducing	the	beauty	of	our	protected	natural	areas.

Congress has set a	national goal	of the	“prevention	of	any	future,	and	the	remedying	of	any	existing,

impairment	of	visibility	in	mandatory	Class	I	Federal	areas	which	impairment	results	from	manma de	air

pollution.”

The	first	phase	of	the	Regional	Haze	program	has three key	requirements:	a pplication	of	Best	Available

Retrofit Technology	at	certain	facilities

, setting	of a Re asonable	Progress	Go al	for	each	Class	I	area,	and

development	of	a long

- term	strategy to	meet	the	Reasonable	Progress G oals

.

( 2 a) Hawaii	Volcanoes Good	Visibility	Day

(4	deciviews)(2 b )	Hawaii	Volcanoes	Bad	Visibility	Day

(19	deciview s )

(2 c)	Hawaii	Volcanoes	“Natural	Conditions”	Target	for	Worst	Days(8	deciviews)

(2 d)	Hawaii	Volcanoes Visibility	Progress	Goals( 3 a ) Haleakala Good	Visibility	Day

( 3 b) Haleakala	Bad	Visibility	Day

( 3 c)	Hal eakala	Visibility	Progress	Goals(4 a ) Causes	of	Haze	at Haleakala(4 b ) Caus es	of	Haze	at	Hawaii	Volcanoes

(5 a)	BART	intro



## Best	Available	Retrofit	Technology	(BART)The	Clean	Air	Act	requires that	certain	categories	of	existing	ma jor	stationary	sources built	between

1962	and	1977	procure,	install,	and	operate	the	“Best	Available	Retrofit	Technology

. ”

BART	determinations	are	made	on	a	case

- by

- case	basis	considering	the	following	factors: (1) The	costs	of

compliance;	(2)	the	energy	and	non

- air	quality	environmental	impacts	of	compliance;	(3)	any	existing

pollution	control	technology	in	use	at	the	source;	(4)	the	remaining	useful	life	of	the	source;	and	(5)	the

degree	of	improvement	in	visibilit y	which	may	reasonably	be	anticipated	to	result	from	the	use	of	such

technology

.

Sources may	be	exempted	from BART,	even	if	they	were	built	in	the	specified	time	period ,	if	they	do	not

cause	or	contribute	to	visibility impairment	at	any	Class	I	area.

Com puter	dispersion	modeling	was	used	to	predict	the	visibility	impact	of	BART

- eligible	sources.	The

EPA	is	proposing	that	a ny source	with	an	impact	less	than	0.5	d eciview does	not cause or	contribute	to

visibility	impairment	at an y Class	I	area.

(5 b) Results	of Subject

- to

- BART	Modeling



## BART	Modeling	Results

Source	and	Unit Class	I	Area Model	Results	for

Visibility	Impact 1

(deciview) Subject	to

BART	or

Exempt

HC&S	Puunene	facility

(Bagasse) Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.059

0.008 Exempt

HC&S	Puunene facility

(Coal) Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.133

0.039 Exempt

Chevron	Refinery Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.021

0.016 Exempt

Tesoro	Refinery Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.025

0.017 Exempt

Hu	Honua	Bioenergy

– Pepeekeo

facility Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.323

0.540 Exempt	due	to

biofuel

conversion.

MECO

– Kahului	facility, Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.232

0.108 Exempt

HELCO	Kanoelehua	Hill Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.808

2.334 Subject	to

BART

HECO

– Waiau	facility Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.083

0.038 Exempt

HECO

– Kahe	facility Haleakala

Hawaii	Volcanoes 0.221

0.132 Exempt

(6 )	Reasonable	Progress	Background

1 CalPuff model, maximum 24

- hour 98 th percentile visibility impact

## Reasonable	Progress

The	EPA	must	ensure	reasonable	progress	is	made	reducing	haze	on	the	worst

days	and	that	haze	does	not	increase	on the	best	days.

In	determining	what	would	constitute	reasonable	progress,	the	CAA	requires

States	to	consider	the	following	four	factors:

•	The	costs	of	compliance;

•	The	time	necessary	for	compliance;

•	The	energy	and	non

- air	quality	environmental	impact s	of	compliance;	and

•	The	remaining	useful	life	of	existing	sources	that	contribute	to	visibility

impairment.

( 7 a )	Maui	EI

Maui Human

- Made Emissions	Inventory

2005 Annual

Emissions 2018 Annual

Emissions

Source	Category NO

x SO 2 NO

x SO 2

Industrial	sources 4,492 4,559 4,597 4,625

Household	and	small	industrial 462 481 548 571

On

- Road	Mobile 2,957 47 758 10

Non

- Road	Mobile 496 57 305 2

Aircraft 310 27 376 33

Agricultural	Burning 298 132 298 132

Wildfires 52 14 52 14

in/near	port Marine 699 569 836 32

Total 9,765 5,887 7,770 5,420

( 7 b)	Pre

- control Emissions	Inventory (Hawaii)

Hawaii	(Big	Island) Human

- Made Emissions	Inventory

2005 Annual

Emissions 2018 Annual

Emissions

Source	Category NO

x SO 2 NO

x SO 2

Industrial	sources 1,036 4,551 1,736 5,266

Household	and	small	industrial 1,849 808 1,882 872

On

- Road	Mobile 3,217 53 839 11

Non

- Road	Mobile 784 95 428 1

Aircraft 177 18 207 21Agricultural	Burning 2 0 2 0

Wildfires 1,712 469 1,712 469

in/near	port	Marine 537 418 546 20

Total 9,314 6,412 7,352 6,661



### ( 8 )	Proposed	Reasonable	Progress	Controls



## Proposed	Reasonable	Progress	Controls

• Human

- made emissions	of	SO 2 on	the	Big	Island	are	projected	to	increase	by	nearly	4%	between

2005	and	2018

.

• A dditional,	federally	enforceable	SO 2 reductions	are	needed	on	the	Big	Island to	ensure	visibility

at	the	Class	I	areas	doesn’t	get	worse.

• EPA	has	identified	the	fuel	oil

- fir ed	boilers	at	Hill,	Shipman	and	Puna	because

o T hey	are	upwind	of	the	Hawaii	Volcanoes	NP,

o They have	high	SO 2 emissions	and lack	modern	pollution	controls.

• EPA	is	proposing	to	cap	total	emissions	at	the	fuel	oil

- fired	boilers	at	Hill,	Shipman	and	Puna	at

3 ,550	tons	of	SO 2 per	year,	beginning	in	January	1,	2018.

o If	HECO	implements	the	Hawaii	Clean	Energy	Bill	on	schedule,	it	should	be	able	to	meet

this	cap	with	no	additional	costs	to	the	ratepayers.

o In	the	worst	case,	i f	the	cap	has	to	be	met only	by	burning a	lower	sulfur	fuel	oil without

any reductions from	energy	conservation	or	renewables ,	HECO	should	be	able	to	meet

this	cap	at	a	cost	of	roughly	$7.9	million/year.



## • Once	this	control	measure	is	in	place,	total	SO 2 emissions	on	Big	Island	will	decrease	by	at	least

17% by	2018

.