# ~JL OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR 

## (rJ1'q.0

## ff!. 

# A STATE Of MONTAN

BRlJ\N SCIIWEITZER JOH B IIL.INGER GOVg({ OR LT. GOVERNOR 

# 8 

# F

September 30, 2009

Carol Rushin Acting Regional Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VIII, 8P-AR 1595Wynkoop SI. Denver, CO 80202-1129 Dear Ms. Rushin: As you are aware, EPAfinalized a revision to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for lead on November 12,2008. Pursuantto 42 USC §7407, Congress directs governors to submit a list ofareas designating as nonattainment, attainment, or unclassifiablewith respectto a new or revised NAAQS. Such lists of designated areas ordinarily would be due no later than one year following the promulgation ofa newor revised standard, or November 12, 2009. However, as a result of a court-ordered schedule pursuant to a lawsuit regarding the lead NAAQS, the due date for submission ofthese lists is October 15, 2009. 73 FR 66963 at 67031. Montana designates all 56 counties in the state attainment or unclassifiable for the revised lead NAAQS. Based on the analysis in the enclosed technical memorandum and associated attachments, Montana's designation is appropriate for all counties. The memorandum also describes the significant change in circumstances regarding Ilead emissions and attainment status for East Helena, Lewis and Clark County, Montana, one oftwo existing nonattainment areas in the United States for the former 1978 NAAQS. We anticipate working with you as we continue to meet the challenge of maintaining Montana's statuswith regard to the revised lead standard. Ifyou have any questions regarding this action, please contact M. Eric Merchant. the Department's Air Quality Policy and Planning Supervisor, by telephone at (406) 444-1457 or by email at emerchant@mt.gov. Sincerely,

Enclosure REC IVED c: Richard Opper, Director, Department of Environmental Quality U.S. EPARegion8 RA'aOfllca Dave Klemp, Chief, Air Resources Management Bureau M. Eric Merchant, Air Resources Management Bureau 

# OCT 082009

STATE CAPITOL • P.D: Box 200 '01 • HEl.l::. A. Mo T

.... AS 620-0801 TELEPHONE: 406-444-3111 • fAX: 06·444-5529 • WEBSITE: WWW.MT.COY1.00+-----­ /­ f,SARCO amellef'allu_IdcMn -1
-----------------1

NMOS.Roling 3-Manl/lAvenIQlI 00**.I----...---~--~--__"T--___,c__--r_--~--...,....-** ........-----___,..__-_f ·1999-1 1999-2 1999-3 1999-4 2000-1 2000-2 2000-3 2Q00-4 2001-1 2001-2 2001-3 2001-4 YEAR

- CALENDAR QUARTER Figure 1

*************************************************** 

### 2001 Pb Review Rolling 3-Month Averages
Old RR • Prickl Pear 1.10...----.....-;;;;

Jan-01 Fet>-Ol Mar-01 Apr.Q1 May-O1 Jun-01**Ju~Ol** AU9-01 Sep-01 Ocl-Ol Nov-01 DevOl Ending Month

Figure2 2.0

M E 1.5 

## m 2­ c: o '-_e 1.0 c: QJ o c: o 

### o c: CO QJ 0.5 ::lE

0.90 M E 0.80 

## m 2. 0.70 c: o 0.60



# - :ii 050 o 

## g 0.40 

### o 030 0« 0.20
0.10 0.00 ASARCO Smelter FonnerPb NMOS Shutdown 

## ATTACHMENT 1
1999-2001 Pb Review Quarterly Means

-+- Kennedy Park

.....Firehall Dartman Freid**~OldRR** -Ill- Prickly Pear

## ATTACHMENT 2

Historical E.Helena Pb Review 1998-2001; CalendarQuarter Means Kennedy Dartman Prickly Year Park Firehall Field Old RR Pear 1999-1 0.68 0.41 0.24 0.73 1999-2 0.45 0.30 0.29 0.48 1999-3 1.06 1.12 0.71 0.26 0.97 1999-4 0.40 0.88 0.34 0.90 2000-1 0.61 0.89 0.42 0.75 2000-2 0.24 0.58 0.42 0.57 2000-3 0.64 0.94 0.20 0.91 2000-4 0.59 0.98 0.20 0.88 2001-1 0.26 1.02 2001-2 0.19 0.08 2001-3 0.07 0.07 2001-4 0.06 0.06



### Historical E.Helena Pb Review2000-2001; Rolling 3-Month Means Prickly Year Old RR Pear Jan-01 0.202 0.897 Feb-01 0.256 1.09 Mar-01 0.265 1.036 Apr-01 0.218 0.785 May-01 0.221 0.261 Jun-01 0.172 0.079 Jul-01 0.176 0.071 Aug-01 0.081 0.064 Sep-01 0.071 0.069 Oct-01 0.059 0.059 Nov-01 0.073 0.054 Dec-01 0.054 0.057

### Technical**Memoran~um** 

### StateofMontana - Lead Monitoring Data andAnalysis Supporting attainment/unclassifiabledesignation 

### INTRODUCTION: On November 12, 2008, EPA revised the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for lead, lowering the level ofthe primary (health-based) standard from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter (lJg/m3) ("former NAAQS''), to 0.15 IJg/m3 averaged overa rolling 3­ month period with a maximum (not-to-be-exceeded) form evaluated over a 3 year period ("new NAAQS''). Compliance with theformer primary standard was evaluated on a calendar quarter average. The secondary lead standard has been revised to be identical tothe primary standard. 73 FR 66963. Montana is obliged, pursuantto 42 USC §7407, 

### etseq., to submitto EPA a listof geographic areas thatattain the standard orthatdo notattain the standard orthatare otherwise unclassifiable based on available information. 

### BACKGROUND: Montana is a large state with relatively few large industrial sources ofair pollution. Of the large industrial sources in Montana, no sources emit lead in excess ofthe 1ton per yearthreshold referenced in EPA's promulgation ofthe lead NAAQS according to data submitted by the Department intothe 2007 National Emissions Inventory. East Helena, Montana is a nonattainment area forthe former NAAQS, because itwas the site ofthe now-defunctASARCO facility, a primary lead smelter. ASARCO ceased operations in 2001. The ASARCO facility, including all production units and stacks, has since been razed and dismantled. The main stacks were felled on August 14, 2009 and the remaining small metal stack on September 15, 2009. ASARCO's emitting units and stacks neither emit any air pollutants nor have the potential to do so. Sources in Montana are subject to permit requirements pursuant to Montana's New Source Review and Montana Air Quality Permit requirements. Montana law requires that any proposal modifying the ASARCO facility that has the potential to exceed an amount greaterthan 0.6 tons peryear of lead emissions would be subject to the requirements of the Montana Air Quality Permit rules atARM 17.8.740, 

### etseq. ASARCO also would be prohibited from legally operating the lead smelter withoutfirst applying for and obtaining a major New Source Review permit under the provisions ofARM 17.8.801, 

### et seq. In addition to controlsthat may be required under the Montana Air Quality Permitting program and New Source Review, sources would also be required to comply with control, emission limitations, and monitoring requirements under applicable Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) and New Source Performance Standards that may minimize any lead emissions. These rules, current operating practices, and control equipment make it unlikely that sources in Montana emit lead in amounts thatwould influence Montana's lead NAAQS designation status.

### , 

# . ..

Further, EPA recognizes the ASARCO facility is no longer in operation and thatthe area has subsequently achieved compliance with the revised NAAQS by stating "EPA notes thatthe most recent three years ofavailable monitoring data for East Helena, MT, one oftwo current nonattainment areas, showed no violations ofthe currentstandard, although the monitors were shut down in December 2001 followingthe shutdown ofthe large stationarysource of lead emissions there". 73 FR 66963 at 67031.
Attachment 1ofthis memo sets forth the dramatic decreases in lead in the East Helena area following the shutdown oftheASARCO facility. The graph in Figure 1 (reflecting data contained inAttachment 2) indicates the East Helena Area, even before the shutdown, had come into attainmentwith the former standard. Once ASARCO shut down entirely, the ambient lead levels decreased tosuch an extentthatthe graph represented in Figure 2, using the data contained in Attachment 2 calculated according tothe methodology ofthe new standard, shows the area to be well in attainmentwith the new standard!. This remains true, even in aworst-case scenario: When ASARCO was still operating, historical monitoring data collected during first and fourth quarters of any year generally reflected high concentrations, due in large partto pooratmospheric dispersion. The lastthree rolling averages in Figure 2 show the data in an historically worse dispersion period to be in attainmentwith the new standard. 

### PAST REGULATORYACIlONS RELATING TO LEAD NAAQS:
On September 29, 1983, Montana submitted to EPA the East Helena Lead Control Plan afterambient air monitoring ,indicated violations ofthe former 1978 lead NAAQS in East Helena. On July 9, 1984, EPA approved this submission. 49 FR 27944. However, folloWing implementation ofthe lead control plan, East Helena continued violating the lead NAAQS. On December 2, 1988, EPA notified Montana thatthe East Helena lead control plan was inadequate and required revision. 53 FR 48642. On November 6, 1991, EPA again designated East Helena as nonattainmentfor lead. 56 FR 56694. In 1993, EPA promulgated further requirements for lead control plans. Montana submitted to EPA a series of lead control plans from 1995 to 2000. On June 18, 2001, EPA partially approved and partially disapproved the East Helena lead control plan. 66 FR 32760. Montana was not required to revise the disapproved portions and EPA did not pursue sanctions and Federal implementation plan (FIP) actions pursuantto 42 USC §§741O and 7509a.
In its discussion ofimplementation considerations, EPA notes, "

...it may become necessary in some areas to also implement controls on
...former industrial type sources." EPA will surely indicate circumstances that might, follOWing some period of time, necessitate state evaluation ofthe reasonableness ofimposing controls on former sources. 73 FR 66963 at 67030. 

### EXISTING SOURCE IMPACTANALYSIS:

IThe bars in Figure 2 result from (a) the residual effectofincluding previous data in the rolling 3-month averages, and (b) the gradual cessation of lead-emitting activities ofASARCO following its April 10, 2001 announcement ofcurtailment ofactivities., ... 

# ·.'

Montana has no sources oflead thatwould be anticipated to cause or contribute to a violation ofthe ambientstandard for lead. In its analysis ofavailable monitoring data, EPA concludes that a large percentage ofrecent Pb ambient air concentrations in excess of0.15 IJgjm3 have occurred in locations with active industrial sources of'lead emissions.
Montana conducted athorough analysis, considering topography, meteorology, and emission release characteristics ofpredicted and actual Pb impacts from industrial sources during the development ofthe control plan implemented to reduce emissions at the ASARCO facility and to demonstrate compliance wjth the former 1978 Pb NAAQS. Based on these analyses, Montana agrees with EPA's assumptionthatfacilities emitting less than 1ton ayear oflead are.notsources ofconcern forthe new NAAQS. Montana's worst-case assumption for sources ofthis size is thatthey would consume no more than 50 percent ofthe new NAAQS and that itwould take several sources ofthis size in the same airshed to produce concentrations ofPb in ambient samplers sufficientto·cause 2 concern • 

### CONCLUSION: Accordingly, all 56 Montana counties will attain the revised NAAQS as Montana law continues to require air pollution control measures on lead emitting industrial sources through implementation ofthe federally-enforceable Montana Air Quality Permitting program(s) and related regulations.

2 Demonstration ofAttainment Modeling Report, Revised East Helena, Montana, Lead SIP, CPP Project 90-S-0264, Cermak, Peterka, Peterson, Inc, November 18, 1992.