Air Quality Program UpdateOctober 5, 20102Current Schedule for OngoingNAAQS Reviews(Sept 2010)MILESTONEPOLLUTANTNO2PrimarySO2PrimaryOzoneReconsiderationCOPMNO2/SO2SecondaryLeadProposal Jun 26, 2009Nov 16, 2009Jan 6, 2010 Jan 28, 2011Feb 2011 July 12, 2011Nov 2013Final Rule Jan 22, 2010Jun 2, 2010Oct 29, 2010 Aug 12, 2011Oct 2011 Mar 20, 2012Sept 2014NOTE:Underlineddates indicate court-ordered or settlement agreement deadlinesNext Ozone Review: Proposal inJun 2013 and Final in Mar 20143PM10NAAQS Review• Consideration could be given to retaining or revising the currentPM10standard.– CASAC concluded the current standard should be revised to increasepublic health protection.– Staff and CASAC concluded that it is appropriate to retain a 24-houraveraging time.• To the extent it is judged appropriate to revise the current standard:– Staff and CASAC concluded it would be appropriate to consider revisingthe form to the 98th percentile of the annual distribution of 24-hour PM10concentration.– A 98th percentile form would be expected to provide increased stability,relative to the current one-expected-exceedance form.– Potential Range:• Staff: 85μg/m3 to 65μg/m3• CASAC: 75μg/m3 to 65μg/m34Pre-decisional material-- do not quote or citePollutantNAAQSPromulgationDesignationsEffective(approximate date)110(a) SIPsDue(3 yrs afterNAAQSpromulgation)AttainmentDemonstrationDueAttainmentDatePM2.5(2006)Sept 2006Dec 2009Sept 2009Dec 2012Dec2014/2019PbOct 2008Nov 2010/2011(extra time for newmonitors)Oct 2011May2012/2013Nov2015/2016NO2(primary)Jan 2010Feb 2012Jan 2013Aug 2013Feb 2017SO2(primary)June 2010July 2012June 2013Jan 2014July 2017Ozone(all datestentative)Oct 2010Oct 2011(proposed)Oct 2013Feb 2014(to be proposed)Dec 2017(Moderate)COAug 2011Sept 2013Aug 2014Mar 2015Sept 2018PM2.5(2011)Oct 2011Dec 2013Oct 2014Dec 2016Dec2018/2023NO2/SO2SecondaryMar 2012Apr 2014Mar 2015Oct 2015n/aAnticipated NAAQS Implementation Milestones55SO2Designations MilestonesActionDateFinal NAAQS signed June 2, 2010Governors’ recommendations due to EPA June 3, 2011EPA sends out 120-day letter to allStates/Tribes and notifies public via FRFeb. 4, 2012Deadline for States/Tribes to respond toEPA’s modificationsApril 4, 2012Final designations June 3, 20126Designations strategy outlined in finalSO2NAAQS rule:• An area that has both monitoring data and appropriate modelingresults showing no violations would be designated as “Attainment.”• Those with monitored violations will be designated “Nonattainment”and must develop attainment plan in 18 months (approx. Jan 2014)showing compliance in 5 years (approx. Aug 2017).• All others will be designated “Unclassifiable” and must ensureattainment/maintenance under sec. 110(a)(1) plan due June 2013.Would include modeling of significant SO2sources and necessaryemissions controls demonstrating attainment/maintenance by Aug.2017.7Ozone NAAQS Implementation9Proposed Designation Schedules• EPA proposed designation schedules in theJanuary 2010 ozone NAAQS proposal• Primary NAAQS: Proposed acceleratedschedule– Final designations in less than 1 year vs. 2 years– States submit recommendations in 129 days vs. 1 year• Seasonal secondary NAAQS: Took commenton 2 alternative schedules– Same accelerated schedule as for primary standard, or– Traditional 2-year schedule allowed under CAA; Statessubmit recommendations in 1 year.10Designations Assistance• Plan to offer early interaction/assistance to facilitate development ofstates’ recommendations.• Revised designations guidance withdescription of each factor andinformation that might be used to assess.– 5-factors: air quality data, emissions-related data, meteorology,geography/topography, jurisdictional boundaries.– Guidance on qualifying for “ruraltransport area” classification.– Potential for partial counties in certain cases.• Plan to share information addressing designation factors shortlyafter NAAQS are final.– Including ozone source apportionment modeling results which estimatesthe combined impact of multiple factors (emissions, meteorology,geography).– 5-factor TSD template11Boundary Decision Criteria• EPA’s goal is national consistencyin decisions to ensure legallydefensible designations.– CAA Sec 107(d): NAA boundary must contain any area that violatestheNAAQS or that contributesto NAAQS violation in a nearbyarea.• Suggest Census-defined CSA/CBSA is starting point for technicalanalysis; analysis could support smaller or larger area.• Possible decision guides?:– Counties in CSA/CBSA that contribute at least ___ ppb ozone to anyviolating monitor in the CSA/CBSA are “presumed in”?– NAA boundary to include sufficient area (e.g., counties or parts ofcounties) to account for at least ___% of total ozone contribution fromCSA/CBSA counties to violating monitor(s)?– “Nearby” includes any area within CSA/CBSA? Beyond that consideredto be long-range transport?12Classifications• Option 1 is consistent with the approach used for the 1997standard.– Results in largest number of “Marginal” areas (and moderate areas).– Fewer mandatory controls; shorter attainment deadlines with higherprobability of “bump-up.”• Option 2 specifies the Extreme threshold as either the actual DVof the area with the highest DVat the time we designate, or avalue approximately mid-way betweqen the two highest DVs atthe time we finalize the implementation rule.– Results in more areas in higher classifications.– More mandatory controls, but with more time to attain w/o “bump-up.”• Also considering proposing that where states submitted voluntaryreclassification requests underthe 1997 NAAQS we would treatthose requests as applying to this standard unless the state saysotherwise.– Would avoid going through separate reclassification process.420 counties violate 0.070 ppm161 additional counties violate 0.065 ppmfor a total of 58174 additional counties violate 0.060 ppmfor a total of 655Counties With Monitors Violating Proposed Primary 8-hour Ground-level Ozone Standards0.060 - 0.070 parts per million(Based on 2007 – 2009 Air Quality Data)EPA will notdesignate areas as nonattainment on these data, but likely on 2008– 2010 data which are expected to show improved air quality.> 0.060 ppm > 0.065 ppm > 0.070 ppmNotes:1. No monitored counties outside the continental U.S. violate.2. EPA is proposing to determine compliance with a revised primary ozone standard by rounding the 3-year average to three decimal places.83 counties violate 15 ppm-hours424 additional counties violate 7 ppm-hoursfor a total of 507Counties With Monitors Violating ProposedSecondary Seasonal Ground-Level Ozone Standards7 – 15 parts per million - hours(Based on 2007 – 2009 Air Quality Data)EPA will notdesignate areas as nonattainment on these data, but likely on 2008– 2010 data which are expected to show improved air quality.> 7 ppm-hours > 15 ppm-hoursNo monitored counties outside the continental U.S. violate.15Regional Haze16Regional Haze SIP and FIP Deadlines• SIPs were due December 17, 2007• EPA made a finding of failureto submit in January 2009 for 37states, DC, and the Virgin Islands– 14 states had submitted by then, so no findings for those– 16 states on the findings list have submitted since then – so we have 30final SIPS now– 16 (out of 25) from CAIR States (AL, DE, FL, GA, IA, KY, LA, MS, MO, NC,NJ, NY, SC, TN, TX, WV)– 14 (out of 28) from non-CAIR States (AR, CA, CT, KS, MN, ND, NV, NH,OK, OR, RI, UT, VT; NM- Bernalillo County)• FIPs or final approvals of SIPs forstates on the findings list are dueJanuary 2011– We have not taken approval/disapproval action on any states to date– In the CAIR states, we are considering limited approval/deferred limiteddisapproval until Transport Rule is final– EPA-Region 8 is preparing a FIP for Montana– Regions are working diligently with states to submit their SIPs by thedeadline1717Regional Haze SIP and FIP Deadlines (cont.)• We have a consent decree with WildEarthGuardians for 7 states to approve the SIPsor promulgate FIPs by May 2011• Oklahoma, North Dakota, New Mexico, Colorado,Oregon, Idaho, and California• EPA-Region 9 is also working on BARTFIPs for Navajo Generating Station in AZand Four Corners Power Plant in NewMexico – we expect to propose very soon181816 of 25 Final SIPssubmitted from CAIR StatesStatus of Final Regional Haze SIPS(Current as of August 20, 2010)19Proposed Transport Rule• By 2014, EPA modeling projects thatimplementation of the TransportRule, as proposed, combined with other state and EPA actions, wouldreduce 2005 emissions from electric generating units in the coveredstates by:– 6.3 million tons of SO2 per year– 1.4 million tons of NOX per year• 300,000 tons of NOX during ozone season (included in NOXestimate above)• These reductions represent a71% reduction in SO2 and a 52%reduction in NOX. emissions from power plants from 2005 levels in thecovered states.• In the states and DC covered bythe proposed Transport Rule, in 2014,SO2 emissions would be capped at2.5 million tons per year annuallyand NO emissions would be capped at1.4 million tons per year (ozoneseason NOX emissions will be capped at 600,000 tons per year)20Proposed Transport Rule:States Required to Reduce Emissions