# Tr **easur e**  **St ate R**  **esour ce Indus** **try Associa tion**  

# EP **A Additional Information R** **eques ts**  **Pe tition f** **or R econsider** **at ion of EP**  **A’ s SO**  **2** 

# Nona **tta inmen**  **t Designa**  **tion fo**  **r a P ortion**  **of Y ellows** **to ne Coun**  **ty**

**, Mon ta**  **na**

2/18/2014 12/18/2014 2 

### Air quality dat a fr om 2013 (“New Data”) that only became a va ilable after the close of the comment period pr ovide con vincing evidence that Coburn R oad 2010 Data (“ **Coburn 2010** ”) ar e flawed, unreliable, and unr epr esentativ e, and thus EP A should not r ely upon Coburn 2010 t o make a nonattainment designation fo r a portion of Ye llowstone County (“Designation”). **The New Data show that unlik** **e all other surr** **ounding** years: 1. Coburn 2010 does not tr ack upwind peak hourly emissions; 2. Coburn 2010 has dispr oportionately high peak re adings, even when contr olled fo r meteor ology and emissions; 3. Coburn 2010 div erges markedly fr om all other nearby , downwind monitor s; 4. Coburn 2010 pr oduced numer ous, high, outlier re adings in contr as t to all other surr ounding years; 5. Coburn 2010 does not r eflect emission contr ols and limits that ha ve g one into effect since 2008; and 6. Coburn 2010 had an exceptionally high number of quality assur ance failur es associated with the v ery r eadings EP A r elies on t o make the nonattainment designation. Because Coburn 2010 does not meet EP A’ s rigor ous quality assur ance r equir ements or satisfy stakeholder expectations of accur acy and r eliability , the Designation wa s in err or and should be r epealed.• All monitoring data from the Billings area support attainment – **exc ept**  **fo r**  **Coburn 2010**  .

• Pa st and present data for other Billings - area monitors are included with this submission. • MSCC comments provide analysis of data from the other monitors. ( Docket EP A - HQ- OAR - 2012 - 0233 - 0286). 2/18/2014 3 

## Map 1: SO **2** 

## Monit **or s and Major Sour** **ces in Y ellowstone County** 

Lockwood Park Monitor Phillips 66 Billings Refinery PPL Montana – JE Corette We stern Sugar Cooperative MT Sulphur & Chemical Yelp ExxonMobil Billings Refinery

CHS Inc. Refinery **Lockwood Park Monitor Wind R**  **ose (Coburn**  **Ro ad: 2009**  **- 2012)** 

## Chart 1 Series: **Only Coburn 2010**  **Departs Mark edly fr** **om the Upwind Hourly Emission**  **Corr espondence**  **of Surr ounding**  **Ye ar** **s.**



## • Pe ak ambien t concentrations generally track peak hourly emissions fr om sour ces upwind of Coburn R oad

– **ex cept**  **Coburn 2010.** 

## • Lower Coburn peak ambien t r eadings in 2013 align with lower and less fr equen t peak hourly emissions, **unlik e Coburn 2010**  . • PPL hourly emissions of appr ox ima te ly 800 lb /hour ro ughly c orr espond with emission limits of the new Re gional Haz e r equir emen ts effective since April 13, 2013 . PPL 2013 emissions r ef lect these new limits.

2/18/2014 4

## Chart 1a: Coburn **2010 departs**  **mark edly fr** **om the tr end of**  **surr ounding**  **year s tha**  **t tr ack peak hourly**  **PPL emissions.** 

• **Coburn 99th% ambient**  **readings gener** **ally tr** **ack 99th% PPL**  **hourly emissions**  **- exc**  **ept Coburn**  **2010.** • **Coburn 2013 lower**  **99th % is explained**  **by lower peak**  **PPL hourly**  **emissions.** • **Coburn 2010 is inexplicably**  **in verse**  **to lower PPL**  **99th% hourly emissions**  **.** • **Using wind analysis, EP**  **A concluded that**  **Coburn 2010 high readings**  **resulted from**  **emissions at**  **PPL and not**  **from prevailingly downwind**  **sources (**  **see EP**  **A TSD**  **at 8 and 11**  **- 12**  **).** 2/18/2014 5

## Chart 1b: **Re sults**  **from all upwind sour ces show similar discrepancies**  **between Coburn 2010 and peak hourly emissions.**

• **Upwind (southwest) sources**  **include: PPL** **, W estern**  **Sug ar**  **, Phillips 66 and CHS.**  • **Prevailing winds in the**  **Billings area are**  **from the**  **southwest (**  **see Wind Rose**  **on Map 1, Slide 3).** • **Pe ak**  **upwind hourly**  **emissions gener** **ally tr** **ack with peak Coburn**  **readings -**  **exc ept**  **Coburn 2010**  **.** • **Lower 2013 99th% ambient**  **is ag ain**  **ex plained**  **by lower peak**  **hourly emission rate from all upwind sources**  **.** 2/18/2014 6

## Chart 1c: **Coburn 2010 99th% departs**  **mark edly from the trend of**  **surr ounding**  **ye ar**  **s, rising almost 20 ppb from 2009 while**  **PPL hourly emission peaks visibly decline.** 

• **Coburn 99th% annual**  **readings gener** **ally reflect**  **the frequency**  **and magnitude of**  **PPL hourly**  **emission peaks**  **– exc**  **ept Coburn**  **2010.** • **Coburn 2010**  **has higher ambient**  **readings despite**  **peak emissions**  **decline from**  **2008 and 2009.** • **Coburn 2010 anomalies**  **are not**  **ex plained by**  **wind direction**  **or emissions (**  **see Charts**  **2a and 2b and**  **EP A**  **TSD ).**  • **2013 PPL**  **peak hourly emissions**  **ra rely**  **exc eed**  **800 lb**  **/hour and**  **tr ack with lower**  **ambient readings.**  2/18/2014 7

### Chart 1d: **Coburn 2010 99th% ambien**  **t similarly departs**  **mark edly fr** **om PPL**  **daily and rolling 30 -**  **da y emission peaks.** 

2/18/2014 8 • **The black line shows the PPL**  **emissions decline fr** **om 2008**  **- 2013.**  • **2013 PPL**  **peak daily emissions**  **remain under 800**  **lb /hour**  **(meeting the Regional Haze limit) and**  **tr ack with lower**  **ambient readings of 2013.** • **Even though PPL**  **hour s**  **of oper ation increased fr** **om 2012**  **to 2013, peak emissions decreased.** 

## Chart **2a: Coburn**  **2010 has a dispr** **oportionat ely high number of peak**  **re adings during**  **“c onducive”**  **met eor**  **ology and emissions.** 

2/18/2014 9 • **“Conducive” meteorology**  **and emissions =**  **(1 ) winds**  **of 5 to 25 mph; (2) from direction**  **230 -**  **250 o** **, and (3)**  **PPL is**  **oper ating**  **(meaning PPL**  **emissions >100 lb**  **/ hr**  **).** • **Over 90 % of all SO**  **2 readings**  **≥ 60 ppb at**  **Coburn (“peak”**  **readings) occur**  **during conducive**  **conditions from**  **2008 -**  **2013.** • **Coburn 2010 peak**  **readings occur ≈ 3**  **times more frequently**  **when controlled**  **fo r**  **conducive conditions**  **than an**  **y other year** 

**.**2/18/2014 10 

## Chart **2b: Coburn 2010 ine**  **xplicably has highest number of peak readings while e**  **xperiencing lowest number of conducive**  **conditions.**

• Coburn 2010 shows the highest fr equency of r eadings ≥ 60 ppb despit e ha ving the lowest amount of conducive conditions in the six y ear period. • Coburn 2010 has the second fewest daily emissions ≥ 800 lb / hr and y et shows the highest 99th% compar ed to all other y ears. • These anomalies makes Coburn 2010 suspect. • Coburn 2013 has the lowest number of peak r eadings as well as the lowest hours of conducive conditions other than 2010 .

## Chart 3: **Coburn 2010 departs**  **mark edly from other down**  **wind monit**  **or s.** 

• **All f our downwind**  **monitoring sites**  **gener ally**  **tr ack**  **each other**  **– exc**  **ept Coburn**  **2010 .**  • **Coburn resumes**  **gener al**  **tr acking in 2011.**  • **The fo**  **ur monitors are**  **all downwind of**  **PPL and**  **within 3 miles**  **of each other**  **(see Map 1 on**  **Slide 3).** 2/18/2014 11

## Chart 4a: **Coburn 2010 pr oduces an e**  **xc eptional number of high outlier**  **re adings.** 

• **Ye llow**  **line represents a**  **visual outlier boundary**  **fo r**  **ambient readings.** • **Coburn 2010**  **produces five of the seven outlier readings**  **fo r**  **the six -**  **year period .**  • **PPL hourly**  **emission r ate is less than 800**  **lb /hour**  **fo r**  **all but**  **one (non**  **- 2010)**  **outlier case.** • **All outlier points/red diamonds are associat**  **ed with known QA/QC fa**  **ilures ( see**  **Chart 5).**  2/18/2014 12

## Chart 4b: **Re moving**  **Coburn 2010 greatly reduces outlier readings.**

2/18/2014 13 • The r emaining 5 y ears show a mor e re gular r elationship between peak hourly emissions and peak ambient concentrations. • **Coburn 2010**  **departs mark** **edly** fr om the tr ends of the other 5 y ear s and is thus suspect.

## Chart 5: Coburn **2010 has the highest number of QA/QC fa**  **ilures.**

2/18/2014 14

##  The **most fr**  **equent QA/QC f** **ailur es occurred in 2010**  during

2 of the 3 highes t re adings (5 failur es/r eading).  Ev ery r eading above 75 ppb during 2009 - 2011 had at leas t one QA/QC failur e.  Data in 2012 show markedly fewer QA/QC fa ilur es.  Data in 2013 show no QA/QC fa ilur es.  Ave ra ge QA/QC failure ra te per high - end reading :  2009 – 2011 = 2.0  2012 = 0.4  2013 = 0.0 

##  Impr oved dat a quality leads to bette r c orr ela tion with peak emissions and fewer appar en t outlier s . 2/18/2014 15 

# Chart **5 not es:**  **QA/QC has**  **impr oved**  **consider ably**  **since 2010.**

## Chart 6: **Con tinuous pr** **ogr am**  **of emission r eductions**  **in Billings ar ea has**  **re sult**  **ed in r eductions of ambien**  **t SO 2**  

## .

• **Reductions are**  **real, permanent,**  **and enforceable**  **but were not**  **all manif est**  **in 2010.** • **PPL is scheduled**  **to be mothballed in April 2015; any re**  **- start**  **will be subject to MA**  **TS emission controls,**  **which will include the**  **co -**  **benefit of SO**  **2 emission**  **reductions.** 2/18/2014 16

## Chart 7: **Ye llowstone County demonstr** **ate s con**  **tinuous SO**  **2** 

## NAA**QS atta**  **inmen t**  **since July 10,**  **2010.**

• **The daily rolling 3**  **- year**  **design va**  **lue has continually been**  **≤ 75 ppb since July 10,**  **2010. The data**  **enabling this**  **analysis occurred**  **in 2013, after the close**  **of the**  **comment period**  **but before**  **the deadline fo**  **r judicial review .**  • **Most recent**  **calendar -** **year design**  **va lue is 64 ppb (2011**  **– 2013**  **).** • **If the fa**  **ulty Coburn 2010 is removed,**  **EP A has no basis for the**  **2010 SO 2**  **NAAQS nonattainment**  **designation.** 2/18/2014 17

# Analy ses using the New Dat a mor e fully ex pose the

fa ults of Coburn 2010 and the associat ed QA/QC fa ilur es. Because Coburn 2010 does not meet the high sta ndar ds re quir ed fo r a NAA QS designation and does not accur ately r epr esen t the air quality in Ye llows to ne Coun ty , the 2010 SO 2 

# Designation wa s in err or . TSRIA re ques ts that EP

A r econsider and r epeal the SO 2 

# Nonatta inmen t Designation fo r a portion of Ye llows to ne Coun ty and accur ately designate Ye llows to ne Coun ty thr ough its on - going designation pr ocess fo r all other non - designated ar eas of the U .S.

2/18/2014 18