UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION II AIR PROGRAMS BRANCH

Technical Support Document

for

EPA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

for the

New Jersey State Implementation Plan Revision:

Redesignation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes and Approval of the Associated 

Maintenance Plan for the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particle (PM2.5) Standards

June 2013
2

Table of Contents

I. INTRODUCTION................................................ 3

II. BACKGROUND ................................................ 3

III. REQUIREMENTS FOR REDESIGNATION............................ 5

IV. EPA’S REVIEW OF NEW JERSEY’S REDESIGNATION REQUEST ......... 6

A. Attainment................................................... 6

B. The area has met all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA ........................................................ 11

C. Fully approved SIP under 110(k) of the CAA .......................... 16

D. The air quality improvement must be permanent and enforceable ........... 17

E. The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan under section 175A of the 

CAA ........................................................ 24

V. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................ 33

Appendix A, Projected Emissions and Control Measure Benefits Summary 2007-2025 .... 34

Appendix B – New Jersey Control Measure Description ........................ 41
3

I. INTRODUCTION

This document provides technical review of the State of New Jersey’s December 26, 2012 

request to redesignate the New Jersey portion of the New York-N.New Jersey-Long Island, NYNJ-CT nonattainment area ( “NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area”), and the New Jersey portion of 

the Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area (“PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area”) 

from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

redesignation submittal includes New Jersey’s maintenance plan for the areas to ensure 

continued attainment. 

II. BACKGROUND 

General

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the 

1997 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), including an annual standard of 

15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3

) based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 

concentrations and a 24-hour (or daily) standard of 65 μg/m3 based on a 3-year average of the 

98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained 

the annual average standard at 15 μg/m3 but revised the 24-hour standard to 35 μg/m3, based 

again on the three-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. 

On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, and supplemented on April 14, 2005, at 70 FR 19844, EPA 

designated the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas as nonattainment for the 1997 

PM2.5 air quality standards. In that action, EPA defined the New Jersey portion of the NY-NJ-CT 

(or NNJ) nonattainment area to include Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, 

Morris, Passaic, Somerset, and Union Counties; and defined the New Jersey portion of the PANJ-DE (or SNJ) nonattainment area to include Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties. 

On November 13, 2009, at 74 FR 58688, EPA promulgated designations for the 24-hour 

standard set in 2006, designating the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area and the PA-NJ-DE 

nonattainment area as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The nonattainment 

area boundaries for the NNJ and SNJ nonattainment areas for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS were 

identical to the boundaries for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, containing the same counties as listed 

above. EPA did not promulgate designations for the annual average NAAQS promulgated in 

2006 since that NAAQS was essentially identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

In the final rulemaking action dated November 15, 2010 (75 FR 69589), EPA determined, 

pursuant to CAA section 179(c), that the entire NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area had attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, based upon quality assured, quality controlled, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data for the period of 2007-2009. On May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28782), EPA 

determined that the entire PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area was attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5
4

NAAQS, based upon quality assured, quality controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring 

data for the 2007-2009 and 2008-2010 monitoring periods. 

EPA finalized, on December 31, 2012 (77 FR 76867), the determination that the entire NY-NJCT nonattainment area had attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, based upon quality 

assured, quality controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data that showed that the area 

had monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2007-2009 and 2008-2010 

monitoring periods. On January 7, 2013 (78 FR 882), EPA finalized the determination that the 

PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area had attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, based upon quality 

assured, quality controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data that showed that the areas 

had monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2008-2010 and 2009-2011 

monitoring periods.

The 3-year ambient air quality data for the last three year monitoring periods for the 2007-2009, 

2008-2010, and 2009-2011 indicated no violations for the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 

NAAQS. Preliminary design values for 2010-2012 also indicate no violations for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As a result of the monitoring data continuing to show 

attainment, on December 26, 2012 New Jersey requested redesignation of the NNJ and the SNJ 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 

NAAQS. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to attainment if sufficient, 

complete, quality-assured data is available for the Administrator to determine that the area has 

attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements under 

107(d)(3)(E).

The technical support documents for the determinations of attainment for the NY-NJ-CT and 

PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are 

contained in the docket of this rulemaking.

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR or the 

Transport Rule)

On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which requires significant reductions in emissions of 

SO2 and NOx from electric generating units (EGUs) to limit the interstate transport of these 

pollutants and the ozone and PM2.5 they form in the atmosphere. See 70 FR 25162. The D.C. 

Circuit initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but 

ultimately remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits 

provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). In response to 

the D.C. Circuit’s decision, EPA issued the Transport Rule, also known as CSAPR, to address 

interstate transport of NOx and SO2 in the eastern United States. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 

2011). 

On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision to vacate CSAPR. In that decision, it 

also ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR “pending the promulgation of a valid 

replacement.” EME Homer City, 696 F.3d at 38. The D.C. Circuit denied all petitions for 
5

rehearing on January 24, 2013. EPA and other parties have filed petitions for certiorari to the 

U.S. Supreme Court, but those petitions have not been acted on to date. Nonetheless, EPA 

intends to continue to act in accordance with the EME Homer City opinion. 

As explained in the notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA has proposed that New Jersey has 

demonstrated that the attainment of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS will be 

maintained with or without the implementation of CAIR or CSAPR. New Jersey’s maintenance 

plan does not include the emission reductions from either program in the permanent and 

enforceable Federal and State control measures needed for attainment and continued 

maintenance. Air quality modeling analysis conducted during the CSAPR rulemaking process 

also demonstrated that the counties in the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas will 

have PM2.5 levels below the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in both 2012 and 

2014 without taking into account emissions reductions from CAIR or CSAPR. See “Air Quality 

Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document”, App. B, B-18, B-19. This modeling is 

available in the docket of this rulemaking. 

III. REQUIREMENTS FOR REDESIGNATION

Under the CAA, designations can be revised if sufficient data is available to warrant such 

revisions. Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA identifies five specific requirements that an area 

must meet in order to be redesignated from nonattainment to attainment.

• The area must have attained the applicable NAAQS.

• The area must meet all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the CAA.

• The area must have a fully approved SIP under section 110 (k) of the CAA.

• The air quality improvement must be permanent and enforceable.

• The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA.

EPA has provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for the Implementation of 

title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 (April 16,1992, 57 FR 13498, and supplemented on 

April 28, 1992, 57 FR 18070) and has provided further guidance on processing redesignation 

requests in the following documents:

1. ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Calcagni Memorandum’’);

2. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act (CAA) 

Deadlines,’’ Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 

October 28, 1992; 
6

3.‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation 

to Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, October 14, 1994; and

4. “Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ Memorandum from 

Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, March 2, 2012.

Withdrawn by EPA on June 6, 2013

IV. EPA’S REVIEW OF NEW JERSEY’S REDESIGNATION REQUEST

New Jersey’s redesignation request was evaluated in accordance with the redesignation criteria 

set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act. EPA’s analysis of the effect of the 

January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit Decision Regarding PM2.5 Implementation under Subpart 4 is 

discussed fully in the proposed rulemaking.

A. Attainment

For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA requires EPA to determine that 

the area has attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). In this action for this 

rulemaking, EPA is proposing to determine that the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE 

nonattainment areas are continuing to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 

NAAQS. 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS

An area may be considered to be attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the 

NAAQS as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.7 and Appendix N of part 50, based on 

three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To 

attain this standard, the three-year average of annual means must be less than or equal to 15 

μg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area. The relevant data must be collected and 

quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System 

(AQS). The monitors meet data completeness requirements when “at least 75 percent of the 

scheduled sampling days for each quarter have valid data.” The use of less than complete data is 

subject to the approval of EPA, which may consider factors such as monitoring site 

closures/moves, monitoring diligence, and nearby concentrations in determining whether to use 

such data. 

As previously indicated, EPA has finalized determinations that the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE 

nonattainment areas had attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has also reviewed more 

recent quality-assured data for both NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas. The 

ambient air monitoring data submitted by New Jersey shows PM2.5 concentrations attaining the

annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2009-2011 time period for both nonattainment areas. 
7

Table 1, below, shows the design value by county (i.e. 3-year average) of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations) for the 2009-2011 time period for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the NYNJ-CT PM2.5 nonattainment area monitors. Table 2, below, shows the design value for the 2009-

2011 time period for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area 

monitors. Preliminary design values for the 2010-2012 time period is also shown.

TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE NY-NJ-CT 1997 

ANNUAL PM2.5 AREA (μg/m3)

[The standard is 15.0 μg/m3]

Nonattainment

Area Counties

Annual mean concentrations Preliminary

annual mean 

concentration

2011

3-year annual 

design value

Preliminary

2012

3-year annual 

design value

2009 2010 2011 2012 2009-2011 2010-2012

NEW JERSEY

Bergen

Essex

Hudson

Mercer

Middlesex

Monmouth

Morris

Passaic

Somerset

Union

NEW YORK

Bronx

Kings

Nassau

New York

Orange

Queens

Richmond

Rockland

Suffolk

Westchester

CONNECTICUT

Fairfield

New Haven

9.1

INC

10.8

9.3

8.1

NM

8.1

9.0

NM

11.3

12.7

10.7

9.0

11.6

7.9

9.5

9.8

NM

8.1

9.1

9.4

9.9

8.8

9.2

10.6

9.5

7.4

NM

8.5

8.9

NM

10.6

11.4

9.9

8.7

11.5

8.1

9.4

9.7

NM

8.4

8.8

8.8

9.0

9.8

10.5

11.8

10.3

8.3

NM

8.7

10.1

NM

12.2

11.6

10.3

8.9

12.2

8.6

9.3

10.1

NM

8.8

9.3

10.0

10.0

8.9

9.0

10.9

8.8

8.3*

NM

7.9

9.1

NM

10.7

9.5

9.7

*

11.7

7.8*

8.5

9.4

NM

7.9

*

9.3

9.2

9.2

INC

11.1

9.7

7.9

NM

8.5

9.3

11.4

11.9

10.3

8.9

11.7

8.2

9.4

9.8

NM

8.4

9.1

9.4

9.6

9.2

9.5

11.1

9.5

8.0*

NM

8.4

9.3*

11.2

9.8

9.9

*

11.8

8.2*

9.1*

9.6*

NM

8.4

*

9.4

9.4

INC- All counties listed as INC did not meet 75 percent data completeness requirement for the relevant time period

NM- No monitor located in county

*- Missing 1 or more quarter
8

TABLE 2—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE PA-NJ-DE 1997 

ANNUALPM2.5 AREA (μg/m3)

[The standard is 15.0 μg/m3]

Nonattainment

Area Counties

Annual mean concentrations Preliminary

annual mean 

concentration

2011

3-year annual 

design value

Preliminary

2012

3-year 

annual 

design 

value

2009 2010 2011 2012 2009-2011 2010-2012

NEW JERSEY

Camden

Gloucester

Burlington

DELAWARE

New Castle

PENNSYLVANIA

Bucks 

Chester

Delaware

Montgomery

Philadelphia

9.5

9.3

NM

11.2

10.8

14.1

12.4

10.4

11.1

10.3

10.0

NM

11.7

10.5

13.8

13.5

9.5

11.0

10.1

9.4

NM

10.3

11.5

13.3

12.9

10.3

11.4

9.0

9.4

NM

10.3

10.7

9.8

12.8*

9.7

16.4

9.7

9.3

NM

10.7

10.9

13.7

12.9

10.1

11.2

9.5

9.3*

NM

10.4

10.9

12.3*

13.1*

9.8

13.4

NM- No monitor located in county

*- Missing 1 or more quarters

Air monitoring data indicates that the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas 

continue to meet the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has concluded that NY-NJ-CT and the 

PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas are continuing to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, the statutory criterion for attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (40 CFR 50.7 

and Appendix N of part 50) has been met.

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS

An area may be considered to be attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the 

NAAQS as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and Appendix N of part 50, based on 

three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To 

attain this standard, the 98th percentile 24-hour concentration, as determined in accordance with 

40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than or equal to 35 μg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in 

the subject area over a 3-year period. The relevant data must be collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in EPA’s AQS. The monitors meet data

completeness requirements when “at least 75 percent of the scheduled sampling days for each 
9

quarter have valid data.” The use of less than complete data is subject to the approval of EPA, 

which may consider factors such as monitoring site closures/moves, monitoring diligence, and 

nearby concentrations in determining whether to use such data.

EPA previously finalized determinations that the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas 

had attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as noted in section IIA. EPA has also reviewed 

more recent quality-assured data for both NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas. 

The ambient air monitoring data submitted by New Jersey shows PM2.5 concentrations attaining 

the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2009-2011 time period for both nonattainment areas.

Table 3, below, shows the design value by county for the 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5

concentrations for the 2009-2011 time period for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the NYNJ-CT PM2.5 nonattainment area monitors. Table 4 shows the design value by county for the 

2009-2011 time period for the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area monitors. Preliminary design 

values for the 2010-2012 time period is also shown.
10

TABLE 3—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE NY-NJ-CT 2006 24-

HOUR PM2.5 AREA (μg/m3)

[The standard is 35 μg/m3]

Nonattainment

Area Counties

98th Percentile 24-Hour concentrations Preliminary

98th percentile 

24-hour 

concentration

2011

3-year 24-hour 

design value

Preliminary

2012

3-year 24-

hour design 

value

2009 2010 2011 2012 2009-2011 2010-2012

NEW JERSEY

Bergen

Essex

Hudson

Mercer

Middlesex

Monmouth

Morris

Passaic

Somerset

Union

NEW YORK

Bronx

Kings

Nassau

New York

Orange

Queens

Richmond

Rockland

Suffolk

Westchester

CONNECTICUT

Fairfield

New Haven

27.1

INC

29.2

23.0

21.0

NM

20.9

26.1

NM

27.7

30.0

26.9

25.8

29.0

20.6

26.7

24.6

NM

21.6

27.0

26.4

30.2

25.1

INC

25.9

26.9

19.1

NM

22.7

24.4

NM

28.1

27.0

24.8

20.2

27.0

26.5

25.5

25.5

NM

26.1

26.7

24.2

25.5

23.5

23.9

28.2

27.7

20.5

NM

24.4

25.4

NM

32.9

27.0

24.3

23.1

26.8

20.8

24.7

23.2

NM

21.7

22.7

25.2

27.5

19.2

21.5

24.6

20.5

17.5*

NM

18.2

21.4

NM

25.8

25.1

22.1

*

24.9

20.2*

20.5

22.1

NM

18.7

*

22.5

22.0

25

INC

28

26

20

NM

23

25

NM

30

28

25

23

28

23

26

24

NM

23

25

26

28

23

23

26

25

19*

NM

21

24*

NM

29

24

24

*

26

23*

24*

24*

NM

22

*

24

25

NM- No monitor located in county

INC- All counties listed as INC did not meet 75 percent data completeness requirement for the relevant time period.

*- Missing 1 or more quarters 
11

TABLE 4—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE PA-NJ-DE 2006 24-

HOUR PM2.5 AREA (μg/m3)

[The standard is 35 μg/m3]

Nonattainment

Area Counties

98th Percentile 24-Hour 

concentrations

Preliminary

98th percentile 

24-hour 

concentration

2011

3-Year 24-hour 

design value

Preliminary

2012

3-Year 24-

hour design 

value

2009 2010 2011 2012 2009-2011 2010-2012

NEW JERSEY

Camden

Gloucester

Burlington

DELAWARE

New Castle

PENNSYLVANIA

Bucks 

Chester

Delaware

Montgomery

Philadelphia

25.0

21.9

NM

28.4

25.8

31.1

27.9

27.2

28.6

23.4

21.6

NM

27.9

28.3

35.1

32.8

25.9

28.9

24.3

22.2

NM

24.7

29.7

33.8

28.6

27.6

30.6

19.8

21.8

NM

24.2

28.2

24.1

31.1*

21.8

31.4

24

22

NM

27

28

33

30

27

29

23

22*

NM

26

29

31

31*

25

30

NM- No monitor located in county.

*- Missing 1 or more quarters

Air monitoring data indicates that the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas 

continue to meet the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has concluded that the NY-NJ-CT and 

the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas continue to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, the statutory criterion for attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (40 CFR 

50.13 and Appendix N of part 50) has been met.

B. The area has met all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the CAA

EPA has determined that the NNJ and the SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas have met all SIP 

requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation under section 110 of the CAA 

(General SIP Requirements) and that, upon final approval of the 2007 attainment year emissions 

inventory, as discussed below in this proposed rulemaking, it will have met all applicable SIP 

requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance with CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has proposed to find that all applicable requirements of the 

New Jersey SIP for purposes of redesignation have been approved in accordance with CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). 

1. Section 110 SIP requirements
12

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which 

include enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques, 

provisions for the establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect data on 

ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. The general SIP elements and 

requirements set forth in CAA section 110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to the following: 

- Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing;

- Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor 

ambient air quality;

- Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the implementation of part C 

requirements (Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD));

- Provisions for the implementation of part D requirements for New Source Review (NSR) 

permit programs;

- Provisions for air pollution modeling; and

- Provisions for public and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule 

development.

Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain certain measures to prevent sources 

in a state from significantly contributing to air quality problems in another state. To implement 

this provision, EPA has required certain states to establish programs to address the interstate 

transport of air pollutants in accordance with the NOx SIP Call, October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), 

amendments to the NOx SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 

11222), and CAIR, May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However, the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) 

requirements for a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area’s designation and 

classification in that state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the state. 

Thus, EPA does not believe that these requirements are applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. 

In addition, EPA believes that the other CAA section 110(a)(2) elements not connected with 

nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an area’s attainment status are not 

applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. The area will still be subject to these 

requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that the CAA section 110(a)(2) and part D 

requirements which are linked with a particular area’s designation and classification are the 

relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request, and that CAA section 

110(a)(2) elements not linked in the area’s nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes 

of redesignation. This approach is consistent with EPA’s existing policy on applicability of 

conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See Reading, 
13

Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, 

May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and 

Tampa, Florida final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on 

this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19, 2000) and in the 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR at 53099, October 19, 2001). 

On April 10, 2013 (78 FR at 21296) EPA proposed action on New Jersey’s section 110 

‘‘infrastructure SIPs’’ required under CAA section 110(a)(2) that were submitted by the state. 

New Jersey submitted an infrastructure SIP on February 25, 2008 that addressed the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. On January 20, 2010 the state submitted an infrastructure SIP that addressed the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA will be acting on those SIPs under separate actions.

EPA has reviewed the New Jersey SIP and has concluded that it meets the general SIP 

requirements under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA to the extent they are applicable for purposes 

for redesignating the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Notwithstanding the fact that EPA has not 

yet completed rulemaking on New Jersey’s submittals for the PM2.5 infrastructure SIP elements 

of section 110(a)(2), these requirements are, however, statewide requirements that are not linked 

to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Therefore, 

EPA believes that these SIP elements are not applicable requirements for purposes of review of 

New Jersey’s PM2.5 redesignation request.

2. Title I, part D nonattainment requirements 

Subpart 1 of part D of Title I of the CAA sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements 

applicable to all nonattainment areas. All areas that were designated nonattainment for the 1997 

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under this subpart of the CAA, and the requirements 

applicable to them are contained in sections 172 and 176. 

Section 172 Requirements

Under CAA section172, states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing for timely 

attainment and meet a variety of other requirements. As mentioned, EPA has finalized 

determinations that the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas had attained the 1997 

annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

Notwithstanding that New Jersey’s obligation to submit an attainment demonstration, 

RACT/RACM, RFP, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to the attainment of 

the PM2.5 NAAQS has been suspended due to EPA’s determination that the nonattainment areas 

attained the NAAQS, New Jersey had previously submitted a SIP revision (PM2.5 attainment 

plan) for attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The SIP was submitted to EPA on April 1, 

2009. EPA proposed to approve the PM2.5 attainment plan on December 14, 2012 (77 FR 74421). 

As a result of the determination of attainment, the only remaining requirement to be considered 

is the emission inventory required under CAA section 172(c)(3).
14

The General Preamble for Implementation of Title I also discusses the evaluation of these 

requirements in the context of EPA’s consideration of a redesignation request. The General 

Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating 

redesignation requests when an area is attaining the standard. See General Preamble for 

Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992).

A component of the attainment plan specified under section 172(c)(1) is the requirement to 

provide for the “implementation of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as 

practicable “(RACM). Since RACM is an element of the attainment demonstration, see General 

Preamble (57 FR 13560), for the same reason the attainment demonstration no longer applies by 

its own terms, RACM also no longer applies to areas that EPA has determined have clean air. 

Furthermore, EPA has consistently interpreted this provision to require only implementation of 

such potential RACM measures that could advance attainment1. Thus where an area is already 

attaining the standard, no additional RACM measures are required. EPA’s interpretation that the 

statute requires only implementation of the RACM measures that would advance attainment was 

upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F. 3d 

735, 743-745, 5th Cir, 2002) and by the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 

(Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F. 3d 155, 162-163, D.C. Cir.2002). 

Because attainment has been reached for the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas, no 

additional measures are needed to provide for attainment. CAA section 172(c)(1) requirements 

for an attainment demonstration and RACT/RACM are no longer considered to be applicable 

requirements for as long as the area continues to attain the standard until redesignation. See 40 

CFR 51.1004(c). 

The RFP requirement under CAA section 172(c)(2) is similarly not relevant for purposes of 

redesignation. CAA section 172(c)(2) provides that state implementation plan (SIP) provisions in 

nonattainment areas must require “reasonable further progress.” The term “reasonable further 

progress” is defined in section 171(1) as “such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the 

relevant air pollutant as are required by this part or may reasonably be required by the 

Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable 

date.” Thus, by definition, the “reasonable further progress” provision under requires only such 

reductions in emissions as are necessary to attain the NAAQS. If an area has attained the 

NAAQS, the purpose of the RFP requirement has been fulfilled, and since the area has already 

attained, showing that the State will make RFP towards attainment “[has] no meaning at that 

point.” General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992).

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a comprehensive, accurate, and current 

inventory of actual emissions. As part of the maintenance plan submitted by New Jersey on 

December 26, 2012, and further supplemented on May 3, 2013, the State has submitted an 

 

1 This interpretation was adopted in the General Preamble, see 57 FR 13498, 

and has been upheld as applied to the Clean Data Policy as well as to 

nonattainment SIP submissions. See NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 

2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155 (D.C. Cir 2002) 
15

attainment year inventory that meets this requirement. For purposes of the PM2.5 NAAQS, the 

emissions inventory should address not only direct emissions of PM2.5, but also emissions of all 

precursors with the potential to participate in PM2.5 formation, i.e., SO2, NOX, VOC and 

ammonia (NH3). The 2007 attainment year emissions inventory submitted by New Jersey in the 

December 26, 2012 submission addressed PM2.5 (including condensables), SO2, and NOx 

emissions. The May 3, 2013 submission addressed VOC and NH3. 

The emissions cover the general source categories of point sources, area sources, onroad sources 

and nonroad sources. The proposed approval of the 2007 attainment year emissions inventory in 

this rulemaking action will, when finalized, meet the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3).

EPA’s detailed evaluation of the base year inventories for all pollutants are addressed in section 

VI.E.2.(a), Attainment Emissions Inventory, of the proposed rulemaking, and the additional

Technical Support document entitled, SECTION 1 New Jersey 2007 Base Year Inventory SIP for 

the Northern and Southern New Jersey PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas, Technical Support 

Documentation

Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires the identification and quantification of allowable 

emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an area, and CAA section 172(c)(5) 

requires source permits for the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary 

sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that, since the PSD 

requirements will apply after redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the 

requirement that a nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) program be approved prior to 

redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D 

NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is described in the memorandum from Mary 

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994 entitled, “Part D 

New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.” 

New Jersey has not relied on a part D NSR program to maintain air quality for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Moreover, because the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 

nonattainment areas are being redesignated to attainment by this action, Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) requirements will be applicable to new or modified sources of PM2.5 in the 

area. 

New Jersey currently implements NSR in the thirteen nonattainment counties through the 

“transitional” NSR provisions contained in Appendix S of 40 CFR part 51 and the USEPA 

policy memorandum dated July 21, 2011, concerning interpollutant offsets. The Federal 

provisions and policy memorandum will be superseded once New Jersey revises its Emission 

Offset Rule N.J.A.C. 7:27-18.

New Jersey does not have its own promulgated regulations as part of the SIP for part C 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules. New Jersey is appropriately implementing 

the PSD program through the delegated federal PSD regulations at 40 CFR 52.21. The program 

will become effective in the NNJ and SNJ areas upon redesignation to attainment.
16

Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures necessary to provide for 

attainment of the standard. Because attainment has been reached in the NY-NJ-CT and the PANJ-DE nonattainment areas, no additional control measures are needed to provide for attainment. 

Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2). As 

noted above, EPA believes the New Jersey SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) 

applicable for purposes of redesignation.

CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that SIPs in nonattainment areas “shall provide for the 

implementation of specific measures to be undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further 

progress, or to attain the [NAAQS] by the attainment date applicable under this part. Such 

measures shall be included in the plan revision as contingency measures to take effect in any 

such case without further action by the State or [EPA].” This contingency measure requirement 

is inextricably tied to the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration requirements. 

Because attainment has been reached for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 

contingency measures are not applicable for redesignation. 

Section 176 conformity requirements

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that 

federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable 

SIP. The requirement to determine transportation conformity applies to transportation plans, 

programs and projects that are developed, funded or approved under Title 23 of the United States 

Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act. The requirement to determine general conformity 

applies to all other federally supported or funded projects. State transportation conformity SIP 

revisions must be consistent with Federal transportation conformity regulations relating to 

consultation, enforcement and enforceability that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority 

under the CAA.

EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating a 

redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity rules are still required after 

redesignation and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See 

Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 

(December 7, 1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida). 

C. Fully approved SIP under 110(k) of the CAA

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA requires that for an area to be redesignated the 

Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section 

110(k). 

Upon final approval of New Jersey’s 2007 attainment year emissions inventory, EPA will have 

fully approved the SIPs for the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas for the 1997 annual and 
17

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS under section 110(k) for all requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation.

EPA has proposed to approve the 2007 attainment year emissions inventory (submitted as part of 

its maintenance plan) for the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas as meeting the 

requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the 1997 annual and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, New Jersey will have satisfied all applicable requirements under part D of Title I of 

the CAA.

D. The air quality improvement must be permanent and enforceable

The improvement in air quality must be due to permanent and enforceable reductions in 

emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable Federal air pollution control 

regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). 

EPA has proposed to determine that the air quality improvement in New Jersey in the NNJ and 

SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other state adopted measures.

New Jersey’s redesignation submission cited a number of regulatory programs that provided for 

emission reductions of PM2.5, and PM2.5 precursors NOX, and SO2. New Jersey also included 

control measures for VOCs, which were not considered quantifiable precursors when the 

redesignation request was submitted, as they expected some PM2.5 benefit from the 

implementation of VOC control measures.

The regulatory control measures for PM2.5, and PM2.5 precursors VOCs, NOX, and SO2, included 

in New Jersey’s redesignation submission have been adopted into the SIP, which provided for 

emission reductions from 2002 to 2009, the year modeled for the attainment demonstration for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. New Jersey also included additional measures that were adopted by 

the state, but not yet implemented, that would provide benefit after 2009. From 2002 to 2009, 

statewide emissions decreased significantly: PM2.5 emissions decreased by 34 percent, NOx 

emissions have decreased by 39 percent, and SO2 emissions have decreased by 70 percent.

Tables 5A and 5B below, show the State and Federal control measures, which provide emission 

reductions from 2002 to 2009. The tables also summarize the maintenance plan measures with 

creditable emission reductions that New Jersey is relying on to demonstrate maintenance. 

Additional 2002 to 2009 control measures that support the SIP but were not quantified, or are 

VOC only measures, are also shown.
18

Table 5A - New Jersey’s 2002-2009 Control Measures that Reduce Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in 

New Jersey

Measure Targeted Pollutants Maintenance 

Plan Measure

Affected State 

Rules

NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOC

Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance (IM) Program

X ........... .......... X X NJAC 7:27-15

NOx Budget Program (SIP 

Call)

X ........... X ........... ........ NJAC 7:27-30

Electric Generating Unit 

(EGU) - BL England 

Administrative Consent 

Order (ACO)

X X X ........ ........ NA

EGU - PSEG-Consent 

Decree

X X X .......... X NA

Refinery Consent Decree 

(Sunoco,Valero, 

ConocoPhillips )

X X X X X NA

Industrial, Commercial and 

Institutional Boilers (ICI) 

Boilers, Turbines and 

Engines 2005

X ........ ........ ........ X NJAC 7:27-27.19

Case by Case NOx and 

VOC (Facility Specific 

Emission Limits or FSELs/ 

Administrative Emission 

Limits or AELs)

X ........ ........ X NJAC 7:27-16, 19

Sewage and Sludge 

Incinerators

X ........ ......... ........ NJAC 7:27-19.28

New Jersey Low Emission 

Vehicle (LEV) Program

X X X X X NJAC 7:27-29

Municipal Waste 

Combustors (Incinerators)

X .......... .......... .........

NJAC 7:27-19.13

Asphalt Production Plants X ......... ......... ........ X NJAC 7:27-19.9

ICI Boilers 2009 X ......... ........ ....... X NJAC 7:27-19.7

EGU-High Electric Demand 

Day (HEDD)

X ......... X ........ ......... NJAC 7:27-19.29

Additional New Jersey Measures that Support the SIP 

Stage I and II (Gasoline 

Transfer Operations).

......... ......... ......... X .......... NJAC 7:27-16

Architectural Coatings 2005 ......... ......... ......... X ........... NJAC 7:27-23
19

Consumer Products 2005 ......... ......... ......... X ........... NJAC 7:27-24

Mobile Equipment 

Refinishing (Auto body)

......... ........ ........ X ............ NJAC 7:27-16

Solvent Cleaning ......... ........ ........ X .......... NJAC 7:27-16

Portable Fuel Containers 

2005

......... ........ ........ X .......... NJAC 7:27-24

Mercury Rule X X X ........ .......... NJAC 7:27-27

Diesel Vehicle Retrofit 

Program

......... X ........ ......... .......... NJAC 7:27-32, 14

Consumer Products 2009 ......... ........ ........ X ........... NJAC 7:27-24

Adhesives & Sealants ......... ........ ........ X ........... NJAC 7:27-26

Asphalt Paving (cutback and 

emulsified)

......... ........ ........ X ........... NJAC 7:27-16.19

Control Technology 

Guideline (CTG) Group 1: 

Printing

......... ........ ........ X ............

NJAC 7:27-16.7

Portable Fuel Containers 

2009

......... ........ ........ X .............. NJAC 7:27-24

Nonattainment New Source 

Review (NNSR)

X X X X ............. NJAC 7:27-8

Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD)

X X X X ............... NA

Energy Master Plan X X X X ............... NA

Table 5B - Federal 2002-2009 Control Measures that Reduce Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in New 

Jersey

Measure Targeted Pollutants Maintenance Plan Measure

NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOC

Residential Woodstove 

NSPS 

X X ...... X X

Motor Vehicle Control 

Program (Tier 1 and Tier 2) 

X X X X X

Acid Rain Program X ....... X .......

Nonroad Diesel Engine 

Standards 

X X ....... X X
20

Phase 2 Standards for New 

Nonroad Spark-Ignition 

Nonhandheld Engines at or 

below 19 kW (lawn and 

garden) 

X ........ ........ X X

Phase 2 Standards for Small 

Spark-Ignition Handheld 

Engines at or below 19 kW 

(lawn and garden) 

X ........ ........ X X

Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle 

(HDDV) Defeat Device 

Settlement 

X ........... ........ ........

Gasoline Boats and Personal 

Watercraft, Outboard 

Engines 

X X ........ X X

National Low Emission 

Vehicle Program (NLEV) 

X X ....... X X

Large Industrial SparkIgnition Engines over 19 

kW (>50 hp) Tier 1 and Tier 

2 

X ........... ........ ........ X

Heavy-Duty Highway Rule -

Vehicle Standards and 

Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control 

X X ........ X X

Diesel Marine Engines over 

37 kW Category 1 Tier 2, 

Category 2 Tier 2, Category 

3 Tier 1 

X ....... ......... X X

Recreational Vehicles 

(includes snowmobiles, offhighway motorcycles, and 

all-terrain vehicles) 

X ....... ......... X X

Locomotive Engines and 

Marine CompressionIgnition Engines Less Than 

30 Liters per Cylinder Tier 2 

and Tier 3 

X X ........ X X
21

USEPA Maximum 

Achievable Control 

Technology (MACT) 

Standards including 

Industrial Boiler/Process 

Heater MACT 

......... ....... ......... X X

Tables 6A and 6B show additional post 2009 maintenance plan measures with creditable 

emission reductions, including measures that have been adopted but not yet implemented, that 

New Jersey is relying on to demonstrate maintenance. New Jersey’s submittal also included 

additional measures to provide additional assurance that the improvement in New Jersey’s air 

quality will continue to improve. 

Table 6A - New Jersey’s Post 2009 Control Measures that Reduce 

Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in New Jersey

Measure Targeted Pollutants Maintenance 

Plan Measure

Affected State 

Rules NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOC

Vehicle IM Program 

Revisions

X .......... .......... X X NJAC 7:27-15

Glass Manufacturing X ....... ........ .......... X NJAC 7:27-19.10

EGU – Coal, Oil and Gas 

Fired Boilers

X X X .......... X NJAC 7:27-4.2, 

10.2, 19.4

Low Sulfur Distillate and 

Residual Fuel Strategies

X ....... X .......... X NJAC 7:27-9, 

7:27-27.9

Table 6B - Federal Post 2009 Control Measures that Reduce Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in New 

Jersey

Measure Targeted Pollutants Maintenance Plan Measure

NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOC

Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines MACT 

X X ...... .......... X
22

A complete list of the control measures that New Jersey is relying on to maintain the NAAQS 

beyond the attainment year, 2007 is included in Appendix A, Projected Emissions and Control 

Measure Benefits Summary 2007-2025. A description of New Jersey’s control measures can be 

found in the New Jersey’s March 26, 2009 Attainment Plan SIP submittal, Section 4.0,which is 

included in Appendix B, and/or in the New Jersey rules referenced in the tables in Appendix A.

Additional Supporting Data 

New Jersey also presented data to demonstrate that the decline in PM2.5 concentrations was due 

primarily to permanent and enforceable control measures rather than the country’s economic 

recession that began in 2007 and resulting down turn in energy use. 

Although electricity generation in New Jersey decreased by one percent from 2007 to 2009, 

electricity generation in New Jersey has experienced an overall increase of 5 percent from 2002 

to 2011. In contrast, emission reductions have outpaced generation changes with decreases of 

93, 84 and 72 percent for SO2, NOx and PM2.5, respectively, from 2000-2011, with significant 

emission reductions occurring prior to 2007. From 2007 to 2009, emission reductions for SO2, 

NOx and PM2.5 show decreases of 65, 51, and 46 percent, respectively. A graph summarizing 

New Jersey Electricity sales and consumption since 2000 compared to PM2.5, NOx and SO2

emissions from EGUs is shown below:

 Figure 1

New Jersey also examined the onroad mobile sector to determine if statewide vehicle miles 

traveled (VMT) data declined and whether it was significant enough to affect air quality 
23

compared to emission reductions from “fleet turnover”. “Fleet turnover” refers to the 

replacement of older, more polluting vehicles with newer vehicles that emit pollutants at lower 

levels as a result of the Federal “Tier 2” new vehicle emission standards (began with the 2004 

model year), and further augmented by the California Low Emission Vehicle (LEV)II new 

vehicle emission standards (began with the 2009 model year in New Jersey).

Based on yearly statewide data, VMT declined approximately 3.7 percent in 2008 and 0.5 

percent in 2009 after steady annual VMT increases of about two percent between 1996 and 2006. 

Between 2007 and 2009, emissions of PM2.5 decreased by 23 percent, and NOx by 24 percent. 

An evaluation of onroad emissions data from 2002 to 2009 shows New Jersey emissions of 

PM2.5 decreasing by approximately 39 percent and emissions of NOx decreasing by 

approximately 50 percent, even though VMT increased by 4.5 to 6 percent. This suggests that 

fleet turnover, rather than changes in VMT, had a much greater impact on onroad emissions.

A table summarizing New Jersey VMT trend data since 2000 is shown below:

Figure 2
24

New Jersey has demonstrated that actual enforceable emission reductions are responsible for the 

air quality improvement. EPA has proposed to find that the combination of existing EPAapproved SIP and Federal measures contribute to the permanence and enforceability of reduction 

in ambient PM2.5 levels that have allowed New Jersey to attain the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 

NAAQS.

E. The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan under section 175A of the CAA

For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA requires EPA to determine that 

the area has a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its request to redesignate the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 

nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1997annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, New Jersey submitted a SIP revision to provide for maintenance for at least 10 

years after the effective date of redesignation to attainment. EPA believes this maintenance plan 

meets the requirements for approval under section 175A of the CAA.

1. What is required in a maintenance plan?

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking 

redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate 

continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator 

approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the State must submit 

a revised maintenance plan which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained 

for the 10 years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must contain contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to 

assure prompt correction of any future PM2.5 violations. The Calcagni Memorandum, dated 

September 4, 1992, provides further guidance on the content of a maintenance plan, explaining 

that a maintenance plan should address five requirements: (1) An attainment emissions 

inventory; (2) a maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for 10 years; (3) a 

commitment to maintain the existing monitoring network; (4) verification of continued 

attainment; and (5) a contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations. As is discussed 

more fully below, EPA proposes to find that the New Jersey maintenance plan includes all the 

necessary components and is thus proposing to approve it as a revision to the New Jersey SIP.

2. Analysis of the maintenance plan

The maintenance demonstration must demonstrate effective safeguards of the NAAQS for at 

least 10 years following the redesignation showing that future PM2.5 and precursor emissions 

will not exceed the level of the attainment year.

States are required to submit the following inventory elements to satisfy the redesignation/ 

maintenance plan inventory requirements:
25

Maintenance Plan Attainment Inventory. Maintenance plan provisions include a comprehensive, 

accurate, and current emissions inventory from all point, area, nonroad and onroad mobile 

sources for the PM2.5 nonattainment area. States are required to develop an attainment inventory 

to identify the level of emissions in the area that is sufficient to attain the NAAQS. This 

inventory should include the emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring 

data showing attainment.

Maintenance Plan Interim Year Inventory. At a minimum, emissions should be projected to a 

midpoint year between the attainment year and the endpoint/10-year inventory. This inventory 

provides a summary of controlled emissions for point, area, nonroad and onroad mobile sources 

for the PM2.5 nonattainment area for the interim year inventory.

Maintenance Plan Projected Final Year Inventory. Emissions should be projected from the 

attainment year to at least 10 years into the future. This inventory provides a summary of 

controlled emissions for point, area, nonroad and onroad mobile sources at the endpoint/10-year 

period.

For the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas, 2007 emissions were projected to 2017 and 

2025. New Jersey must demonstrate, with the control programs identified in this SIP, that total 

2017 or 2025 projected emissions do not exceed the 2007 emission levels. 

EPA’s detailed evaluation of the 2007 Attainment and 2017 and 2025 Projection Inventories, 

including evaluating the effect of the D.C. Circuit’s remand of EPA’s implementation rule on the 

maintenance plan, are addressed in section VI.E.2.(a)- (c) of the proposed rulemaking, and the 

document, Section 2, 2007 Attainment and 2017 and 2025 Projection Inventories for the 

Northern and Southern New Jersey, PM 2.5 Redesignation Full Maintenance SIP, Technical 

Support Document, and the document Section 3, Emission Inventory Requirements for the 

Northern and Southern New Jersey, PM 2.5 Redesignation/Maintenance Plan Demonstration 

Checklist

Maintenance Demonstration Thru 2025

CAA section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment to submit a SIP revision 

to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the area “for at least 10 years after the 

redesignation.” EPA has interpreted this as a showing of maintenance “for a period of 10 years 

following redesignation.” See Calcagni Memorandum. Where the emissions inventory method 

of showing maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions during the maintenance 

period will not increase over the attainment year inventory. See Calcagni Memorandum.

As discussed in detail in the proposed rulemaking and in the documents referenced above (i.e. 

Section 2 and Section 3), the State’s maintenance plan submission expressly documents that the 

NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas’ emissions inventories will remain below the attainment 
26

year inventories through at least 2025. 

As explained in the proposal, levels of SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 are projected to decrease 

substantially between 2007 and 2025. EPA believes that it is highly improbable that sudden 

increases would occur that could exceed the attainment year inventory levels in 2025.

Air quality concentrations for PM2.5 are 1 to 2 μg/m3 or more under the NAAQS level, indicating 

a margin of safety in the event of any emissions increase. As shown in tables 1 and 2, for the 

1997 annual NAAQS of 15 μg/m3, the design value for 2009-2011 for the NY-NJ-CT PM2.5 

nonattainment area value was 11.7 μg /m3; and the design value for 2009-2011 for the PA-NJDE PM2.5 nonattainment area was measured at 13.7 μg/m3. As shown in tables 3 and 4, for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 μg /m3, the design value for 2009-2011 for the NY-NJ-CT PM2.5 

nonattainment area was 30 μg /m3; and the design value for 2009-2011 for the PA-NJ-DE PM2.5 

nonattainment area was measured at 33 μg /m3.

Air quality concentrations showed a significant downward trend over time for both the NY-NJCT and PA-NJ-DE PM2.5 nonattainment areas for both the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 

figures below:

Figure 3 

Annual PM2.5 Monitoring Design Value Trends 1999-2011 

Northern New Jersey-New York-Connecticut Nonattainment Area
27

Figure 4

Daily (24-Hour) PM2.5 Monitoring Design Value Trends 1999-2011 

Northern New Jersey-New York-Connecticut Nonattainment Area

Figure 5

Annual PM2.5 Monitoring Design Value Trends 1999-2011 

Southern New Jersey-Philadelphia Nonattainment Area
28

Figure 6 

Daily (24-Hour) PM2.5 Monitoring Design Value Trends 1999-2011 

Southern New Jersey-Philadelphia Nonattainment Area

Additional emissions reductions will occur now, and in the future, from EPA’s Mercury and Air 

Toxics Standards (MATS), New Jersey’s Diesel Retrofit Program, NJDEP’s amended 

Administrative Consent Order with B.L. England, and from New Jersey’s Clean Construction 

Program. 

Federal Mercury and Air Toxics Standards

On December 16, 2011, the EPA promulgated the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) to 

reduce emissions of toxic pollutants from power plants.2

 MATs was updated on March 28, 

20133

. The rule includes emission limits for mercury, particulate matter, SO2, acid gases and 

certain individual metals.

EPA estimates that there are approximately 1,400 units affected by this action, which includes 

approximately 1,100 existing coal-fired units and 300 oil fired units at about 600 power plants. 

There are 73 facilities in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New York and Connecticut that 

could potentially be affected by the MATS. 

 

2 77 Fed. Reg. 9304 (February 16, 2012) 3 78 Fed. Reg 24073 (April 24, 2013)
29

New Jersey expects that MATS will also result in the conversion of most New Jersey sources 

that burn No. 6 fuel oil to gas. The New Jersey coal power plants either already comply with 

MATS (6 units) or will comply by the MATS compliance deadline (2 units). New Jersey 

expects that MATS will result in significant emission reductions from upwind sources, resulting 

in further improvement to the air quality in New Jersey.

Diesel Retrofit Program (N.J.A.C 7:27-32)

The existing rule requires the installation of retrofit emission control technology on garbage 

trucks, commercial buses and publicly owned onroad vehicles and off-road equipment. Due to 

public health impacts, these vehicles were chosen because they operate in residential areas, some 

of which are overburdened urban communities. The retrofits are scheduled to occur between 

2008 and 2015. These rules will reduce the emissions of fine diesel particles. The program 

regulates publicly-owned and certain privately-owned fleets. In 2009, an estimated retrofit 

population of 24,000 onroad vehicles and off-road equipment was expected to be affected by the 

mandatory retrofit program. As of 2012, 18,300 of these onroad vehicles and off-road 

equipment have either been retrofitted or are projected to be retrofitted, since some of the 

vehicles were either retired as a compliance option or exempt from the rule.

New Jersey Clean Construction Program

NJDEP established a voluntary program to reduce harmful diesel particulate emissions from 

nonroad construction equipment operating in New Jersey, with a particular focus on equipment 

used in urban areas. Through this program, retrofit devices are installed on construction 

equipment using funding provided by USEPA under the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act, and the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act. 

The NJDEP and N.J. Department of Transportation (NJDOT) are implementing Governor 

Christie’s 2011 Executive Order #60, which requires a three year pilot program to install 

pollution-control devices on nonroad construction equipment used on selected NJDOT projects. 

The projects on which the pollution control devices will be installed are jointly chosen by the

NJDEP and NJDOT, with preference given to selecting projects in urban areas where cumulative 

exposure to pollution creates a disproportionate impact on the people living in those 

communities. The goal is to install tailpipe particulate retrofits on 175 pieces of nonroad 

construction equipment by Summer 2014. Further details can be found online at: 

http://www.stopthesoot.org/clean2.html. 

B.L. England Administrative Consent Order

On May 18, 2012, NJDEP amended its Administrative Consent Order with B.L. England in Cape 

May County. Under the amended agreement, B.L. England will further reduce all air pollutants 
30

by shutting down one of its coal-fired units (Unit 1) and converting two others to natural gas 

(Unit 2 is currently burns coal and Unit 3 currently burns fuel oil). The agreement commits to 

the cessation of coal-fired Unit 1 by fall 2013 and for the conversion of Units 2 and 3 to natural 

gas by May 2016. Unit 2, which currently only operates during peak demand periods, will be 

shut down by May 2015, to allow for the conversion. Operations will be limited in an effort to 

reduce pollution during the time leading up to the conversion shutdown. The repowering and 

shutdown will reduce NOx emissions by approximately 98 percent, or 2,800 tons per year, and 

will reduce SO2 emissions by approximately 99.9 percent, or 2,800 tons per year. The emission 

reductions from this agreement go beyond those estimated from NJDEP’s performance standards 

for EGUs included in Appendix A. A copy of the Administrative Consent Order can be found 

online at: http://www.nj.gov/dep/docs/20120613104728.pdf.

Monitoring Network

New Jersey has committed to tracking the air quality for continued attainment of the PM2.5 

NAAQS, and will work with EPA prior to making any changes to the existing PM2.5 air 

monitoring network. 

 

The State is obligated to work with EPA each year through the air monitoring network review

process, as required by 40 CFR part 58 to determine: 1) the adequacy of the PM2.5 monitoring 

network; 2) if additional monitoring is needed; and 3) if/when sites can be discontinued or 

relocated. Any changes to the monitoring network, including replacing or moving monitor(s) to 

new locations, as necessary, will be made through the air monitoring network review process. 

This review process undergoes a public comment period, and is subject to approval by the EPA. 

Air monitoring data will continue to be quality assured according to requirements in 40 CFR 58. 

Copies of EPA’s air monitoring network approval letters for New Jersey can be found in the 

technical support documents for the determinations of attainment for the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJDE nonattainment areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which are 

included in the docket of this rulemaking.

EPA has proposed to conclude that the State of New Jersey has met the requirement for 

continuing to operate an appropriate air monitoring network.

Verification of continued attainment

Continued attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the state depends, in part, on the state's efforts 

towards tracking indicators of continued attainment during the maintenance period. New Jersey’s 

plan for verifying continued attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS consists of continued ambient 

PM2.5 air quality monitoring in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 58. New Jersey 
31

will also continue to develop and submit periodic emission inventories as required by the Federal 

Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (codified at 40 CFR 51 Subpart A).

EPA has proposed to approve New Jersey’s plans for verifying continued attainment of the PM2.5 

NAAQS.

Contingency measures in the attainment plan

Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency provision 

as EPA deems necessary to ensure that the state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS 

that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the contingency measures 

to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency 

measures, and a time limit for action by the state. The state should also identify specific 

indicators to be used to determine when the contingency measures need to be adopted and 

implemented. The maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will implement all 

measures with respect to control of the pollutant(s) that were contained in the SIP before 

redesignation of the area to attainment. See section 175A(d) of the CAA.

As required by section 175A of the CAA, New Jersey has included contingency provisions in the 

maintenance plan to address possible future annual PM2.5 air quality problems. New Jersey will 

use the following triggers to determine the cause of elevated levels, and implement contingency 

measures, as necessary, in accordance with the described schedule: 

1. If monitored PM2.5 concentrations in any year exceed the level of the NAAQS, NJDEP 

will perform a data assessment to determine the cause of the violation. This assessment will 

be performed when the annual average PM2.5 concentration for the previous year exceeds 15 

μg/m3 at any New Jersey monitoring site, or when the 98th percentile of the 24-hour average 

daily concentrations exceeds 35 μg/m3 at any New Jersey air monitoring site. NJDEP will 

perform this evaluation within six months of the data certification. New Jersey will work 

with the other states in its shared multi-state nonattainment areas as necessary.

2. If annual or 24-hour PM2.5 design values exceed 15 μg/m3 or 35 μg/m3

, respectively, 

NJDEP will evaluate all appropriate data to determine the cause using the same analyses 

discussed in Item number 1. NJDEP will perform this evaluation within six months of the 

determination of a violation.

3. Based on any findings, New Jersey will make a judgment on whether the violation was 

caused by an exceptional event or a violation of an existing rule or permit. The State will 

rely on one or more of the following contingency measures for any other violation:

- Onroad Vehicle Fleet Turnover: Emission reductions will be achieved from onroad motor 

vehicle fleet turnover from the existing State and Federal rules for motor vehicles. The 
32

turnover of the onroad fleet of cars and trucks will result in additional NOx and PM 

emission reductions each year because the new vehicles have significantly lower 

emission standards than the vehicles they are replacing. The rules for this measure are 

already promulgated and are already being implemented.

- Nonroad Vehicle and Equipment Fleet Turnover: Emission reductions will be achieved 

from nonroad vehicles and equipment fleet turnover from existing Federal rules.The 

turnover will result in additional NOx and PM emission reductions each year because the 

new vehicles and equipment have lower emission standards than the vehicles and 

equipment they are replacing. The rules for this measure are already promulgated and are 

already being implemented.

- Low Sulfur Fuel Rule N.J.A.C. 7:27- 9 (prior to July 2016): The low sulfur fuel rule was 

adopted in August of 2010, with future effective limits in July 2014 and July 2016. If a 

violation occurs prior to the final effective date of the new limits in the rule (July 2016), 

significant additional SO2 emission reductions will be achieved after the new limits are 

implemented. Therefore, this measure can be applied as a contingency measure in the 

event of a violation between the time period of the redesignation to July 2016. The rules 

for this measure are already promulgated, but not yet fully implemented.

- Diesel Retrofit Program, Diesel Inspection and Maintenance Program, N.J.A.C. 7:27- 14 

and 32: Emission reductions will be achieved from New Jersey’s programs and rules for 

diesel retrofits, diesel inspection and maintenance and vehicle idling, that are not 

included in the inventory demonstration in the maintenance plan. These programs 

provide real benefits that are not currently quantified in the inventory. The rules for these 

measures are already promulgated and are already being implemented.

4. If necessary, New Jersey will evaluate the feasibility and applicability of additional 

measures, how they relate to the cause and location of the violation, and if these additional 

measures would correct the violation. These may include:

- New control measures that have been adopted for other purposes

- Residential wood burning strategies

- Fugitive dust reductions at stationary sources

- Lower particulate limits for No. 6 fuel oil-fired boilers 

- Lower particulate limits for stationary diesel engines

- Working with the local metropolitan planning agencies to implement 

transportation control measures 

NJDEP will perform this evaluation within six months of the determination of a violation. If it is 

determined that a new rule is required or appropriate to correct a violation of the NAAQS, 
33

NJDEP will propose a new rule within 18 month, and take final action within 30 months, of the 

determination of a violation. 

New Jersey is relying on existing measures, which are already implemented, or have been 

adopted with future implementation dates, to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS. The 

state has also included a commitment to further evaluate additional measures, if necessary and 

appropriate. EPA has propose to find that the New Jersey maintenance plan includes appropriate 

contingency measures to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation

V. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

EPA has proposed to approve New Jersey’s request to redesignate the NNJ and SNJ areas from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

EPA has determined that the NNJ and SNJ areas meet the requirements for redesignation under 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Specifically, EPA has determined that the areas have: (1) attained the 

applicable NAAQS; (2) met all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA; (3) a fully approved SIP under section 110 (k) of the CAA; (4) permanent and 

enforceable air quality improvement; (5) and a fully approved maintenance plan that provides for 

continued maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
34

Appendix A, Projected Emissions and Control Measure Benefits Summary 2007-2025
35

NNJ Area - Projected Emissions and Control Measures Benefits 2007-2025

Sector Federal or

State Control Measure New Jersey

Administrative Code

USEPA 

Approval Pollutants 2007 Inventory 2025 Inventory

PM2.5 tpy NOx SO2 PM2.5 NOx SO2

POINT SOURCES

Point Source Control Measure Benefits, post 2007

Point Federal/

New

J

EGU-PSE&G Hudson Consent

Decrees NA NA PM, SO2, 

NOx

NA NA NA 1,786 2,015 3,645

Point Federal/

New

J

EGU-PSE&G Mercer Consent

Decrees NA NA SO2 NA NA NA NA NA 12,036

Point New Jersey EGU - Oil and Gas Fired Boilers NJAC 7:27-4.2, 10.2,

19.4 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NA 322 NA

Point New Jersey EGU - Coal-fired Boilers NJAC 7:27-4.2, 10.2,

19.4 8/3/2010 PM, SO2, 

NOx

NA NA NA NA NA NA

Point New Jersey

EGU-High Electric Demand Day

(HEDD) NJAC 7:27-19.29 8/3/2010 SO2, NOx NA NA NA NA NQ NQ

Point Federal ICI Boiler MACT NA NA PM NA NA NA 0 NA NA

Point/Area Federal RICE MACT NA NA PM, NOx NA NA NA 1 72 NA

Point Federal/

New

J

Refinery Consent Decrees (Sunoco,

Valero, and ConocoPhillips) NA NA PM, SO2, 

NOx

NA NA NA NA 1,140 NA

Point New Jersey Asphalt Production Plants NJAC 7:27-19.9 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NA 35 NA

Point New Jersey Case by Case NOx Emission Limit

Determinations (FSELs/AELs) NJAC 7:27-19.13 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Point New Jersey Glass Manufacturing NJAC 7:27-19.10 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NA NA NA

Point/Area New Jersey ICI Boiler Rule 2006 NJAC 7:27-16.8, 

19.7

7/31/2007 NOx NA NA NA NA 43 NA

Point New Jersey ICI Boiler Rule 2009 NJAC 7:27-19.7 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NA 344 NA

Point/Area New Jersey

Low Sulfur Distillate and Residual Fuel

Strategies NJAC 7:27-9 1/3/2012 SO2 NA NA NA NA NA 391

Point New Jersey

Municipal Waste Combustors

(Incinerators) NJAC 7:27-19.13 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Point New Jersey Sewage and Sludge Incinerators NJAC 7:27-19.28 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Total Point Source Control Measure Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 1,787 3,971 16,072

Point Source Emissions, Growth Only NA NA NA 5,031 17,426 19,972

Point Source Emissions Grown and Controlled 4,937 15,827 20,359 3,243 13,454 3,900

AREA SOURCES

Area Source Control Measures Benefits, post 2007
36

Area Federal Residential Woodstove NSPS (Note 1) NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA 238 10 2

Sector Federal or

State Control Measure New JerseyAdministrative Code

USEPA 

Approval Pollutants 2007 Inventory 2025 Inventory

PM2.5 tpy NOx SO2 PM2.5 NOx SO2

Point/Area Federal RICE NA NA NOx, PM NA NA NA 8 0 0

Point/Area Federal/

New

J

Combined RICE and ICI Boiler Rule

2006 NJAC 7:27-19.7 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA 0 599 0

Point/Area New Jersey ICI Boiler Rule2006 NJAC 7:27-19.7 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA 0 21 0

Point/Area New Jersey

Low Sulfur Distillate and Residual Fuel

Strategies NJAC 7:27-27.9 1/3/2012 SO2 NA NA NA 0 0 2,599

Total Area Source Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 245 630 2,601

Area Source Emissions, Growth Only NA NA NA 5,862 16,688 3,757

Area Source Emissions Grown and Controlled 5,499 16,122 4,983 5,616 16,059 1,157

ON-ROAD SOURCES

On-road Source Control Measures

Onroad Federal Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle (HDDV) 

Defeat Device Settlement NA NA NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Onroad Federal Tier 2 Vehicle Program/Low Sulfur

Fuels NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Onroad Federal

Heavy-Duty Highway Rule - Vehicle 

Standards and Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Onroad New Jersey Diesel Idling Rule Amendments NJAC 7:27-14.1, 

14.3

4/14/2009 PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Onroad New Jersey Diesel I/M Program NJAC 7:27-14 PM2.5, NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Onroad New Jersey

New Jersey Low Emission Vehicle

(LEV) Program NJAC 7:27-29

2/13/2008, 

updated

9/28/10 per

CA Waiver

PM, SO2, 

NOx, VOC, NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Onroad New Jersey I/M Program for Gasoline Vehicles NJAC 7:27-15 5/21/2004 VOC, NOx,

CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Total On-road Control Measure Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 2,459 72,839 47

On-road Emissions, Grown and Controlled 3,677 93,385 586 1,218 20,546 539

NON-ROAD SOURCES

On-road Source Control Measures

Nonroad Federal Diesel Marine Engines over 37 kW NA NA NOx, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2
37

Nonroad Federal Large Industrial Spark-Ignition Engines over 

19 kW NA NA NOx, CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Sector Federal or

State Control Measure New JerseyAdministrative Code

USEPA 

Approval Pollutants 2007 Inventory 2025 Inventory

PM2.5 tpy NOx tpy SO2 tpy PM2.5 tpy NOx tpy SO2 tpy

Nonroad Federal

Locomotive Engines and Marine 

Compression-Ignition Engines Less 

Than 30 Liters per Cylinder

NA NA PM, NOx, 

(CO, VOC) NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal Nonroad Diesel Engines NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal

Phase 2 Standards for New Nonroad 

Spark-Ignition Nonhandheld Engines 

at or below 19 kW

NA NA NOx, 

VOC, CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal

Phase 2 Standards for Small SparkIgnition Handheld Engines at or below

19 kW

NA NA NOx, 

VOC, CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal

Recreational Vehicles (includes 

snowmobiles, off-highway 

motorcycles, and all-terrain vehicles)

NA NA NOx, CO, 

HC, NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal Gasoline boats and personal 

watercraft, outboard engines NA NA PM, NOx, CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Total Non-road Control Measure Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 1,655 23,034 9,837

Non-road Source Emissions, Growth Only NA NA NA 3,065 44,848 10,724

Non-road Emissions, Grown and Controlled 2,497 39,457 5,761 1,410 21,814 887

TOTAL CONTROL MEASURE BENEFITS, post 2007 NA NA NA 6,147 100,411 28,557

TOTAL EMISSIONS, GROWN AND CONTROLLED 16,611 164,792 31,689 11,487 71,872 6,482

Notes:

NA = Not Applicable

NQ = Not Quantified, not included in the benefit total

1. Benefits from area source Residential Woodstove NSPS have been added to the "Growth Only" Total, 

as they are accounted for in both the "Growth Only" and "Growth and Controlled" Inventories.

2. Included in total, not quantified individually
SNJ Area - Projected Emissions and Control Measures Benefits 2007-2025

Sector Federal or

State Control Measure

New Jersey

Administrative

Code

USEPA 

Approval Pollutants 2007 Inventory 2025 Inventory

PM2.5 tpy NOx tpy SO2 tpy

PM2.5

tpy

NOx

tpy

SO2 tpy

POINT SOURCES

Point Source Control Measure Benefits, post 2007

Point Federal/ New

Jersey

EGU-PSE&G Hudson Consent

Decrees NA NA PM, SO2, 

NOx

NA NA NA NA NA NA

Point Federal/ New

Jersey

EGU-PSE&G Mercer Consent

Decrees NA NA SO2 NA NA NA NA NA NA

Point New Jersey EGU - Oil and Gas Fired Boilers NJAC 7:27-4.2,

10.2, 19.4 8/3/2010 SO2, NOx NA NA NA NA 30 NA

Point New Jersey EGU - Coal-fired Boilers NJAC 7:27-4.2,

10.2, 19.4 8/3/2010 PM, SO2, 

NOx

NA NA NA NA NA NA

Point New Jersey

EGU-High Electric Demand Day

(HEDD) NJAC 7:27-19.29 8/3/2010 SO2, NOx NA NA NA NA NQ NQ

Point Federal ICI Boiler MACT NA NA PM NA NA NA 1 NA NA

Point/Area Federal RICE MACT NA NA PM, NOx NA NA NA 0 2 NA

Point Federal/ New

Jersey

Refinery Consent Decrees (Sunoco, 

Valero, and ConocoPhillips) NA NA PM, SO2, 

NOx

NA NA NA 50 375 804

Point New Jersey Asphalt Production Plants NJAC 7:27-19.9 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NA 5 NA

Point New Jersey Case by Case NOx Emission Limit

Determinations (FSELs/AELs) NJAC 7:27-19.13 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Point New Jersey Glass Manufacturing NJAC 7:27-19.10 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NA 2.7 NA

Point/Area New Jersey ICI Boiler Rule 2006 NJAC 7:27-16.8,

19.7 7/31/2007 NOx NA NA NA NA 4 NA

Point New Jersey ICI Boiler Rule 2009 NJAC 7:27-19.7 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NA 79 NA

Point/Area New Jersey

Low Sulfur Distillate and Residual

Fuel Strategies NJAC 7:27-27.9 1/3/2012 SO2 NA NA NA NA NA 66

Point New Jersey

Municipal Waste Combustors

(Incinerators) NJAC 7:27-19.13 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Point New Jersey Sewage and Sludge Incinerators NJAC 7:27-19.28 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Total Point Source Control Measure Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 51 497 870

Point Source Emissions, Growth Only NA NA NA 910 5,110 2,225

Point Source Emissions Grown and Controlled 799 4,453 2,035 859 4,432 1,355

AREA SOURCES
39

Area Source Control Measures Benefits, post 2007

Area Federal Residential Woodstove NSPS (Note

1) NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA 255 16 3

Sector Federal or

State Control Measure

New Jersey

Administrative

Code

USEPA 

Approval Pollutants 2007 Inventory 2025 Inventory

PM2.5 tpy NOx tpy SO2 tpy

PM2.5

tpy

NOx

tpy

SO2 tpy

Point/Area Federal RICE NA NA NOx, PM NA NA NA 1 0 0

Point/Area Federal/ New

Jersey

Combined RICE and ICI Boiler Rule

2006 NJAC 7:27-19.7 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA 0 109 0

Point/Area New Jersey ICI Boiler Rule2006 NJAC 7:27-19.7 8/3/2010 NOx NA NA NA 0 4 0

Point/Area New Jersey

Low Sulfur Distillate and Residual

Fuel Strategies NJAC 7:27-9 1/3/2012 SO2 NA NA NA 0 0 584

Total Area Source Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 257 129 587

Area Source Emissions, Growth Only NA NA NA 2,907 3,556 847

Area Source Emissions Grown and Controlled 2,857 3,483 1,129 2,651 3,427 260

ON-ROAD SOURCES

On-road Source Control Measures

Onroad Federal Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle (HDDV) 

Defeat Device Settlement NA NA NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Onroad Federal Tier 2 Vehicle Program/Low Sulfur

Fuels NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Onroad Federal

Heavy-Duty Highway Rule - Vehicle 

Standards and Diesel Fuel Sulfur 

Control

NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Onroad New Jersey Diesel Idling Rule Amendments NJAC 7:27-14.1,

14.3 4/14/2009 PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Onroad New Jersey Diesel I/M Program NJAC 7:27-14 PM2.5, NOx NA NA NA NQ NQ NQ

Onroad New Jersey

New Jersey Low Emission Vehicle

(LEV) Program NJAC 7:27-29

2/13/2008, 

updated

9/28/10 per

CA Waiver

PM, SO2, 

NOx, VOC, NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Onroad New Jersey I/M Program for Gasoline Vehicles NJAC 7:27-15 5/21/2004 VOC, NOx, 

CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Total On-road Control Measure Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 777 21,253 37

On-road Emissions, Grown and Controlled 1,055 26,992 161 278 5,739 124

NON-ROAD SOURCES

On-road Source Control Measures

Nonroad Federal Diesel Marine Engines over 37 kW NA NA NOx, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2
40

Nonroad Federal Large Industrial Spark-Ignition

Engines over 19 kW NA NA NOx, CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Sector Federal or

State Control Measure

New Jersey

Administrative

Code

USEPA 

Approval Pollutants 2007 Inventory 2025 Inventory

PM2.5 tpy NOx tpy SO2 tpy

PM2.5

tpy

NOx

tpy

SO2 tpy

Nonroad Federal

Locomotive Engines and Marine 

Compression-Ignition Engines Less 

Than 30 Liters per Cylinder

NA NA PM, NOx, 

(CO, VOC) NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal Nonroad Diesel Engines NA NA PM, NOx, 

CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal

Phase 2 Standards for New

Nonroad Spark-Ignition

Nonhandheld Engines at or below

19 kW

NA NA NOx, VOC, 

CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal

Phase 2 Standards for Small SparkIgnition Handheld Engines at or 

below 19 kW

NA NA NOx, VOC, 

CO NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal

Recreational Vehicles (includes

snowmobiles, off-highway 

motorcycles, and all-terrain 

vehicles)

NA NA NOx, CO, 

HC, NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Nonroad Federal Gasoline boats and personal 

watercraft, outboard engines NA NA PM, NOx, CO, VOC NA NA NA Note 2 Note 2 Note 2

Total Non-road Control Measure Benefits, post 2007 NA NA NA 398 4,025 3,262

Non-road Source Emissions, Growth Only NA NA NA 713 8,005 3,402

Non-road Emissions, Grown and Controlled 560 6,790 1,642 315 3,980 140

TOTAL CONTROL MEASURE BENEFITS, post 2007 NA NA NA 1,483 25,903 4,755

TOTAL EMISSIONS, GROWN AND CONTROLLED 5,271 41,718 4,966 4,103 17,578 1,879

Notes:

NA = Not Applicable

NQ = Not Quantified, not included in the benefit total

1. Benefits from area source Residential Woodstove NSPS have been added to the "Growth Only"

Total, as they are accounted for in both the "Growth Only" and "Growth and Controlled" Inventories.

2. Included in total, not quantified individually
Appendix B – New Jersey Control Measure Description
42

CONTROL MEASURES

This chapter discusses the particulate matter related control measures implemented, or expected 

to be implemented in New Jersey, in the Northeast/Mid-Atlantic Regions, and nationally. As 

discussed in detail in Chapter 1, oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), in addition to 

direct fine particulate matter (PM2.5), are the precursors of concern for PM2.5 SIP-related activity. 

This chapter focuses on those measures designed to decrease one or more of these pollutants 

specifically. This section explains the terminology related to control measures used throughout 

Chapter 5 (the PM2.5 attainment demonstration chapter); provides a summary of how the control 

measures were identified; and gives a brief synopsis of each control measure considered in 

Chapter 5. A summary of the identified control measures is shown in Table 4.5. The benefits 

from the implementation of these measures, and the benefit calculations, are discussed in the 

State’s attainment demonstration in Chapter 5, contingency plan in Chapter 6, and appendix to 

Chapter 6. Note that this chapter only provides a discussion of control measures not included in 

the baseline (2002) emission inventory. Existing controls, such as the New Jersey inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) program for gasoline vehicles prior to the initiation of mandatory on-board 

diagnostic inspections and pre-2002 reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules are 

not included in this chapter. Those controls are included in the 2002 baseline inventory. In 

addition to addressing PM2.5 emissions, the measures discussed in this chapter are also expected 

to have an impact on controlling regional haze, the primary constituent of which is PM2.5.

Terminology

On The Books (OTB) – “On the Books (OTB)” control measures (State or Federal) are control 

measures that were a) adopted before 2002, but have implementation dates after 2002, or obtain 

additional benefits after 2002, due to turnover of products, equipment, or vehicles (the benefits 

from these measures are not included in the State’s 2002 base year emissions inventory); or b) 

adopted and implemented after 2002. An example of an OTB measure for New Jersey is the 

NOx Budget Program, which went into effect May 1, 1999; a lower NOx emission cap was 

required effective May 1, 2003.

Beyond On The Way (BOTW) – These control measures (state, regional, or Federal) are 

proposed by New Jersey as part of the effort to reach attainment by April 5, 2010.4

On the Books Controls

The following section provides descriptions of the New Jersey and Federal OTB measures that 

are included in the State’s attainment demonstration.

New Jersey

 

4 According to USEPA guidance, areas that have an attainment date of no later than April 5, 2010 must implement 

the emission reductions needed for attainment no later than 2009. Source: USEPA. Guidance on the Use of Models 

and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, United States Environmental 

Protection Agency, October 2005.
43

Pre-2002 with benefits achieved Post-2002 – On the books

New Jersey NOx Budget Program (SIP Call): On September 27, 1994, the Ozone Transport 

Commission (OTC) agreed to develop a regional program to achieve significant reductions in 

NOx emissions from large combustion sources. This program called for the establishment of a 

NOx cap and trade program, as well as the establishment of an emissions cap or “budget” for all 

affected sources that in total must not be exceeded during each control period, beginning in 

1999. The NOx SIP Call is a similar regional NOx reduction measure designed by the USEPA, in 

part, as a result of the Ozone Transport Assessment Group’s (OTAG) final recommendation 

report addressing ozone transport over the Eastern United States.5 New Jersey adopted its NOx

Budget Program6 in 1998. The base emission budget of 17,340 tons of NOx was established for 

the years 1999-2002. This was approximately 65 percent less than 1990 emission levels and was 

termed Phase II. In 2003, the NOx SIP Call replaced Phase III of the OTC’s program with a 

reduction of the base emission budget to 8,200 tons. The NOx SIP Call also expanded the 

geographical area beyond the Ozone Transport Region to the south and the west. The NOx SIP 

Call will continue through the ozone season of 2008, at which point it will be superseded by the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The NOx Budget Program covers primarily electric generating 

units (EGUs) and some non-EGUs. The equipment covered by the NOx Budget Program include 

fossil fuel fired indirect heat exchangers with a maximum rated heat input capacity of at least 

250 million British thermal units (MMBtu) per hour and electric generating units with a rated 

output of at least 15 megawatts (MW). The USEPA approved the State’s NOx SIP Call program 

on May 22, 2001.7

Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR): The Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7503, 

requires new or modified major sources to install the Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) 

control equipment and obtain greater than one for one emission offsets in order to locate in a 

nonattainment area. Thus, the NNSR program provides for continual emission reductions to help 

improve the air quality in the nonattainment area and further downwind. In New Jersey, any 

significant new, reconstructed, or modified significant source is also required to install state of 

the art (SOTA) control technology (similar to Best Available Control Technology (BACT) or 

LAER for major sources). SOTA, which is a minor NSR program, also results in reductions in 

the actual emissions from the facilities. New Jersey’s 

SOTA requirements, denominated in the New Jersey Air Pollution Control Act as “advances in 

the art of air pollution control,” mandate BACT or LAER, as appropriate, if the equipment or 

control apparatus is subject to Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) or Nonattainment 

New Source Review (NNSR) regulations.8

 

5 USEPA. 1998 Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) Final Report. United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Ozone Transport Assessment Group. Accessed from: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/rto/otag/finalrpt/.

6 N.J.A.C. 7:27-31 7 66 Fed. Reg. 28063-66 (May 22, 2001). 8 New Jersey’s Air Pollution Control Act (1954). 
44

Post 2002 – On the books

New Jersey Measures Done Through a Regional Effort

NOx RACT Rule (2006): The NJDEP adopted amendments to N.J.A.C. 7:27-19, Control and 

Prohibition of Air Pollution from NOx, on September 8, 2005. The amendments were based on 

the OTC’s March 6, 2001 model rules to control NOx emissions tied to shortfall measures. The 

OTC model rules were created as the result of the agreement formally set forth in a 

“Memorandum of Understanding Among the States of the Ozone Transport Commission 

Regarding the Development of Specific Control Measures to Support Attainment and 

Maintenance of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards" (MOU), which was 

approved by the OTC on June 1, 2000. Specifically, the New Jersey amendments apply to 

owners and operators of certain stationary sources of NOx emissions, including 

industrial/commercial/institutional (ICI) boilers, combustion turbines, and reciprocating engines. 

Owners and operators of such sources are required to achieve the emission limit specified in the 

rules or to comply instead with alternative requirements, such as an emission averaging plan, an 

alternative maximum allowable emission rate or a plan for phased compliance (repowering or 

use of innovative technology). The amendments also regulate distributed generation9 of 

electricity, consistent with the OTC recommendation in its March 28, 2001 “Resolution of the 

States of the Ozone Transport Commission Concerning the Creation of incentives for Additional 

Distributed Generation of Electric Power.” The USEPA issued final approval of the New Jersey 

SIP revision, including these rule amendments on July 31, 2007.10 The rules became effective 

August 30, 2007.

New Jersey Only Measures

New Jersey Heavy Duty Diesel Rules, Including “Not-To-Exceed” (NTE) Requirements: The 

NJDEP adopted new rules and amendments on October 28, 2001 to N.J.A.C. 7:27-26 that added 

requirements for new heavy-duty diesel vehicles (HDDVs) equipped with model year 2005 and 

newer heavy-duty diesel engines (HDDEs) sold in New Jersey. Specifically, the rulemaking 

required these new HDDEs to be certified as meeting California’s HDDE requirements. These 

requirements include both the federal emission standards applicable to all model year 2004 and 

newer HDDEs, plus a number of testing procedures which the USEPA required for model year 

2007 and newer HDDEs. The NTE test procedure is so called because it is used to demonstrate 

that an engine does not exceed, under a wide variety of operating conditions, an emissions cap of 

1.25 times the Federal Test Procedure emission standard. For this reason, the California 

requirements are often referred to as the NTE requirements. California promulgated these NTE 

requirements to address a temporal gap of two years between the end of the requirements set 

forth in the consent decrees entered into by seven major HDDE manufacturers and the effective 

date of equivalent federal testing requirements. It was anticipated that the adoption of the NTE 

 

9 Distributed generation is a system composed of generation located near the energy consumer’s site that may be 

integrated with the electric grid to provide multiple benefits on both sides of the utility meter. Source: CECA. 

Distributed Generation Facts, Consumer Energy Council of America, 

http://www.cecarf.org/Programs/DG/DGFacts.html. 10 72 Fed. Reg. 41626-41629 (July 31, 2007).
45

requirements by states regulating the majority of HDDEs sold in the United States would 

encourage and provide incentive for engine manufacturers to produce only engines meeting the 

NTE requirements.

On October 25, 2005, the NJDEP adopted new rules, rule amendments, recodifications and 

repeals of rule provisions to clarify and supplement the existing requirements for the sale, for use 

or registration in New Jersey, of certain HDDVs and HDDEs, model years 2007 and later. The 

rulemaking did not impose any new standards for model year 2007 and later HDDEs per se; 

rather, it served to clarify the finer points of the application of CARB-certification requirements 

to model year 2007 and beyond, since CARB’s standards for those model years are significantly 

different from the NTE requirements and standards for model years 2005 and 2006, and were not 

discussed in the NJDEP’s 2001 rulemaking. In addition, a prohibition of the practice known as 

“stockpiling” was added. Stockpiling is the practice of purchasing vehicles and/or engines 

earlier than necessary in order to avoid more stringent emission standards. Finally, the NJDEP 

added provisions that would, in the event that the provisions of the Federal 2007 rule are not in 

effect, require recordkeeping and reporting of the sale, for use in New Jersey, of model year and 

later HDDEs. The Federal 2007 rule was promulgated by the USEPA on January 18, 2001 to 

take effect for model year 2007.

On-Board Diagnostics (I/M) Program for Gasoline Vehicles: A number of changes to New 

Jersey’s I/M program for gasoline vehicles were implemented after 2002. The two program 

changes that materially impacted vehicle emissions were the extension for the new vehicle 

emission inspection from one inspection cycle (i.e., 2 years) to two inspection cycles (i.e., 4 

years) and the initiation of mandatory on-board diagnostic (OBD) inspections for model year 

1996 and newer vehicles. The OBD test largely replaced the dynamometer based Acceleration 

Simulation Mode (ASM5015) exhaust test for these newer vehicles. New Jersey submitted a 

SIP revision that contained the results of performance standard modeling for these I/M program 

changes on November 27, 2002.11 The USEPA subsequently approved this SIP revision.12

Federal

Pre-2002 with benefits achieved Post 2002 – On the books

Residential Woodstove New Source Performance Standards (NSPS): The USEPA New Source 

Performance emission standards for new wood burning stoves13 and fireplace inserts were 

 

11 NJDEP. Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program for the State of New Jersey Revised Performance 

Standard Modeling SIP Revision. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. November 27, 2002. 

Available at http://www.state.nj.us/dep/baqp/sip/4year/4yrexempt_fin.doc.

12 68 Fed. Reg. 7704-06 (February 18, 2003).
46

implemented in 1992. These standards are 7.5 grams of particulate matter per hour for noncatalytic controlled units and 4.1 grams of particulate matter per hour for catalytic controlled 

units. There are no control requirements for fireplace inserts or wood stove units manufactured 

prior to 1992, and these units emit from 30 to 70 grams of particulate matter per hour. The 

USEPA indicates that they do not have any plans to update the NSPS anytime soon. Instead, the 

USEPA is choosing to focus on voluntary wood stove change-out programs, rather than new 

standards.

Acid Rain: Title IV of the Clean Air Act set a goal of reducing annual SO2 emissions by 10 

million tons below 1980 levels. To achieve these reductions, the law required a two-phase 

tightening of the restrictions placed on fossil fuel-fired power plants. Phase I began in 1995, and 

affected 263 units at 110 mostly coal-burning electric utility plants located in 21 eastern and 

mid-western states. An additional 182 units joined Phase I of the program as substitution or 

compensating units, bringing the total of Phase I affected units to 445. Phase II, which began in 

the year 2000, tightened the annual emissions limits imposed on these large, higher emitting 

plants and also set restrictions on smaller, cleaner plants fired by coal, oil, and gas, 

encompassing over 2,000 units in all. The program affects existing utility units serving 

generators with an output capacity of greater than 25 megawatts and all new utility units.

The Clean Air Act also called for a two million ton reduction in NOx emissions by the year 2000. 

This has been superseded with the more stringent NOx caps in CAIR, discussed below.

The Acid Rain Program utilizes an allowance trading system where affected utility units are 

allocated allowances based on their historic fuel consumption and a specific emissions rate. 

Each allowance permits a unit to emit one ton of SO2 during or after a specified year. For each 

ton of SO2 emitted in a given year, one allowance is retired, that is, it can no longer be used. 

Allowances may be bought, sold, or banked. Anyone may acquire allowances and participate in 

the trading system. However, regardless of the number of allowances a source holds, it may not 

emit at levels that would violate Federal or state limits set under Title I of the Clean Air Act to 

protect public health including limits set by SIPs, such as this SIP. During Phase II of the 

program (now in effect), the Clean Air Act set a ceiling (or cap) of 8.95 million SO2 allowances 

for total annual allowance allocations to utilities. 

Tier 1 Vehicle Program: Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §7521, the USEPA promulgated regulations 

which revised the tailpipe standards of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) for 

light duty vehicles and light duty trucks.14 These standards, known as Tier 1, were implemented 

in phases beginning with the 1994 model year. The Tier 1 standards encompassed pollutants 

previously regulated (that is, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter), as well 

as the addition of non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC). The standards themselves are a function 

of vehicle class, pollutant, useful life, engine cycle, and fuel. The Tier 1 rulemaking also 

 13 A wood burning stove is defined as a free standing enclosed wood-burning unit, vented to the atmosphere, and 

designed to provide heat to a home. In contrast, a fireplace insert is defined as a self-enclosed unit that sits within a 

masonry structure, vented to the atmosphere, that is not designed as a primary heating source for a home. The 

USEPA emission standards do not cover masonry-constructed fireplaces without fireplace inserts, but these unique 

fireplaces are thought to account for a very small segment of the wood burning conducted in the New Jersey.

14 56 Fed. Reg. 25724 (June 5, 1991).
47

established new intermediate and full useful life15 levels for air pollution control devices on 

light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, as well as new vehicle weight classes. The regulation 

affected petroleum and methanol-fueled motor vehicles. 

National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV): The NLEV16 program required automobile 

manufacturers to meet more stringent new car standards, starting with the 1999 model year in the 

OTC states and starting with the 2001 model year in the remainder of the nation, except for 

California. New Jersey participated in the NLEV program for the model year 2006, after which 

New Jersey came under the Federal Tier 2 program. New Jersey subsequently adopted the Low

Emission Vehicle II (LEV II) program, which becomes effective for vehicles delivered for sale 

in New Jersey on and after January 1, 2009. 

Tier 2 Vehicle Program/Low Sulfur Fuels: On February 10, 2000, the USEPA promulgated rules 

for its comprehensive Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline program.17 These regulations are designed to 

treat a vehicle and its fuel as a system, resulting in multiple efforts to reduce highway source 

emissions. In addition to requiring new tailpipe emissions standards for all passenger vehicles, 

sport utility vehicles (SUVs), minivans, vans and pick-up trucks, the USEPA simultaneously 

promulgated regulations to lower the sulfur standard in gasoline. These regulations phased in 

between 2004 and 2007.

Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle (HDDV) Defeat Device Settlement: On October 22, 1998, the U.S. 

Department of Justice and the USEPA announced a settlement with seven major diesel engine 

manufacturers to resolve claims that they installed computer software on 1993 through 1998 

model year heavy-duty diesel engines which was designed to disengage the engine’s emission 

control system during highway driving.18 The settlement, involving Caterpillar, Inc., Cummins 

Engine Company, Detroit Diesel Corporation, Mack Trucks, Inc., Navistar International 

Transportation Corporation, Renault Vehicles Industries, S.A., and Volvo Truck Corporation, 

included an $83.4 million total penalty. The settlement also required the manufacturers to offer 

software updates (chip reflash) at no cost to the truck owners at the time of engine rebuild. 

Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle (HDDV) Engine Standards:

19 On July 31, 2000, the USEPA issued a 

final rule for the first phase of its two-part strategy to significantly reduce harmful diesel 

emissions from heavy-duty trucks and buses. This rule finalized new diesel engine standards 

beginning in 2004, for all diesel vehicles over 8,500 pounds. Additional diesel standards and test 

procedures in this final rule began in 2007. This new rule required heavy-duty gasoline engines 

to meet new, more stringent standards starting no later than the 2005 model year. According to 

the USEPA, these new standards require gasoline trucks to emit 78 percent less NOx and 

hydrocarbons, and diesel trucks to emit 40 percent less NOx and hydrocarbons, than current 

models. The second phase of the program required cleaner diesel fuels and cleaner engines, 

 

15 Useful life is the number of years that the vehicle is expected to be in use. 16 For more information on NLEV, see USEPA website at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/lev-nlev.htm. 17 65 Fed. Reg. 6698-746 (February 10, 2000). 18 For more information, see USEPA’s web page on Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Consent Decree Documents at

www.epa.gov/Compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/diesel/condec.html.

19 For more information, see the USEPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality web site at

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/hd-hwy.htm.
48

reducing air pollution from trucks and buses by another 90 percent. The USEPA issued the final 

rule, to take effect in 2006-2007 on January 18, 2001.20 

Nonroad Diesel Engines: In June 1994, the USEPA promulgated regulations to control volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs), NOx and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from diesel-powered 

compression ignition engines at or greater than 50 horsepower (hp), i.e., bulldozers.

21 These 

Tier 1 standards phased in from 1996 to 2000. In October 1998, the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) promulgated regulations to control VOC, NOx and 

carbon monoxide emissions from diesel-powered compression ignition engines for all engine 

sizes.22 This rule includes Tier 1 standards for engines under 50 horsepower (hp) (i.e., lawn 

tractors), Tier 2 standards for all engine sizes, and more stringent Tier 3 standards for engines 

rated over 50 hp. The new Tier 3 standards are expected to lead to control technologies similar 

to those that will be used by manufacturers of highway heavy-duty engines to comply with the 

2004 highway engines standards.23 The new Tier 1 standards were phased in between the years 

1999 and 2000, Tier 2 standards between 2001 and 2006, and Tier 3 between 2006 and 2008. 

Large Industrial Spark-Ignition Engines over 19 kilowatts: Spark-ignition nonroad engines are 

mostly powered by liquefied petroleum gas, with others operating on gasoline or compressed 

natural gas. These engines are used in commercial and industrial applications, including 

forklifts, electric generators, airport baggage transport vehicles, and a variety of farm and 

construction applications. 

In September 2002, the USEPA adopted new standards to regulate these engines.24 The 

emission standards are two-tiered. The Tier 1 standards, which started in 2004, are based on a 

simple laboratory measurement using steady-state procedures. The Tier 2 standards, starting in 

2007, are based on transient testing in the laboratory, which ensures that the engines will control 

emissions when they operate under changing speeds and loads in the different kinds of 

equipment. 

Also included is an option for manufacturers to certify their engines to different emission levels 

to reflect the fact that decreasing NOx emissions tend to increase carbon monoxide emissions 

(and vice versa). In addition to these exhaust-emission controls, manufacturers must take steps 

starting in 2007 to reduce evaporative emissions, such as using pressurized fuel tanks. Tier 2 

engines are also required to have engine diagnostic capabilities that alert the operator to 

malfunctions in the engine’s emission-control system. The rule also includes special standards to 

allow for measuring emissions without removing engines from equipment.

Recreational Vehicles: Recreational vehicles include snowmobiles, off-highway motorcycles, 

and all-terrain-vehicles (ATVs). In September 2002, the USEPA adopted new standards to 

regulate nonroad recreational engines and vehicles.25 The standards that affect PM2.5 emissions 

 

20 66 Fed. Reg. 5002-50 (January 18, 2001). 21 59 Fed. Reg. 31306 (June 17, 1994). 22 63 Fed. Reg. 56968-7023 (October 23, 1998). 23 USEPA. Regulatory Announcement: New Emission Standards for Nonroad Diesel Engines. United States 

Environmental Protection Agency Office of Mobile Sources, EPA420-F-98-034, August 1998. 24 67 Fed. Reg. 68242-447 (November 8, 2002). 25 67 Fed. Reg. 68242-447 (November 8, 2002).
49

are presented in Table 4.1. As shown by this table, only the new standards for off-highway 

motorcycles and ATVs will reduce NOx, a PM2.5 precursor.

Table 4.1: Summary of Emission Standards for Recreational Vehicles

Vehicle Model year Emission standards Phase-in

HC*+NOx

g/km

CO

g/km

Off-highway 

Motorcycle

2006 2.0 25.0 50%

2007 and later 2.0 25.0 100%

ATV

2006 1.5 35.0 50%

2007 and later 1.5 35.0 100%

Federal Compression Ignition Marine Engine Regulations (Commercial Marine Engines):

26,27 In 

1999, the USEPA promulgated regulations for commercial marine diesel engines over 37 

kilowatts (kW), including engines with per cylinder displacement up to 30 liters.28 This rule 

established VOC and NOx emission standards, starting in 2004, for new engines with per 

cylinder displacement up to 2.5 liters. This rule also established standards in 2007 for engines 

with per cylinder displacement between 2.5 and 30 liters.29 The engines covered by this rule are 

divided into two categories: Category 1: rated power at or above 37 kW - specific displacement 

of less than 5 liters per cylinder. These engines are primarily found in fast ferries. Category 2: 

rated power at or above 37 kW - specific displacement greater than or equal to 5, but less than 

30, liters per cylinder. These engines are primarily found in tug and towboats.

Federal Small Spark Ignition Engine Regulations: In July 1995, the USEPA promulgated the first 

phase of its regulations to control emissions from new nonroad spark ignition engines.30 This 

regulation established VOC and carbon monoxide emission standards for all model year 199731

and newer nonroad spark ignition engines that have a gross power output at or below 19 

kilowatts. These engines are used principally in lawn and garden equipment, including, but not 

limited to, lawn mowers, leaf blowers, trimmers, chainsaws, and generators. In March 1999, the 

USEPA promulgated Phase 2 regulations to control emissions from new nonroad spark ignition 

engines.32 These regulations established tighter VOC and NOx standards for non-handheld 

equipment such as lawn mowers and commercial turf equipment. The new standards were 

 

26 For more information, see the USEPA’s regulatory announcement on Emission Standards for New Commercial 

Marine Diesel Engines at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/fr/f99043.pdf. 27 The USEPA has not finalized Tier 2 standards for Category 3 commercial marine engines. The USEPA will 

promulgate final Tier 2 standards for Category 3 engines on or before December 17, 2009. (“Category 3” means 

relating to a marine engine with a specific engine displacement greater than or equal to 30 liters per cylinder). 

Source: 40 C.F.R. §§ 94.1, 94.8; 72 Fed. Reg. 20948-52 (April 27, 2007). 28 64 Fed. Reg. 73300-73 (December 29, 1999).

29 USEPA. Technical Highlights: Organization of Gasoline and Diesel Marine Engine Emission Standards. United 

States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Mobile Sources, EPA420-F-99-046. December 1999. 30 60 Fed. Reg. 34582-657 (July 3, 1995). 31 Ibid; Model year 1997 is defined as “The 1997 model year will run from January 2, 1996 to December 31, 1997.” 32 64 Fed. Reg. 15208-55 (March 30, 1999).
50

phased in between the years 2001 and 2007. In March 2000, the USEPA promulgated additional 

Phase 2 regulations to control emissions from new nonroad spark ignition engines.33 This 

regulation established tighter VOC, NOx, and carbon monoxide standards for handheld 

equipment such as string trimmers (i.e., weed whackers), leaf blowers and chainsaws. The new 

standards were phased in between the years 2002 to 2007. 

Post 2002 – Federal On the Books

Industrial Boiler/Process Heater MACT: On September 13, 2004, the USEPA established a

Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) that applies to industrial, commercial, and 

institutional units firing solid fuel (coal, wood, waste, biomass) which have a design capacity 

greater than 10 MMBtu/hr and are located at a major source of hazardous air pollutants 

(HAPs).34 See the discussion on HAPs under USEPA MACT Standards. This rule was 

subsequently vacated by the courts, triggering the Section 112(j) provisions of the Clean Air Act. 

NJDEP is participating in the National Association of Clean Air Agencies’ (NACAA) efforts to 

develop MACT guidance for use by states and expects to do case-by-case MACT in 2009.

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR): The CAIR was the USEPA’s attempt to address the interstate 

transport of ozone and fine particulate precursors by requiring emission reductions of SO2 and 

NOx. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled (see Chapter 8) that the CAIR does 

not meet these objectives within and the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act and 

remanded it to the USEPA. While the USEPA is working on a replacement program, the 

existing CAIR program remains in place. 

The CAIR expects to obtain these reductions from large electric generating units (EGUs greater 

than 25 MW) through three cap-and-trade programs: ozone season NOx, annual NOx and annual 

SO2. The CAIR ozone season NOx cap and trade program essentially replaces the NOx Budget 

Program with lower caps and an expanded geographical region to the south and west of the NOx

SIP Call region. The CAIR also creates new annual NOx and SO2 cap and trade programs. The 

annual NOx trading program is modeled after the NOx Budget Program, expanded for the entire 

year. New Jersey adopted the new rules for the CAIR NOx Trading Program on July 16, 2007, 

and the USEPA approved these rules on October 1, 2007.35 The new CAIR rules will allow New 

Jersey to allocate NOx allowances to New Jersey sources beginning 2009.

New Jersey did not take any action on the SO2 trading program. There is no allocation of SO2

allowances for CAIR, but instead, CAIR uses the SO2 allowances allocated under the Acid Rain 

Program. CAIR reduces the SO2 emissions from the Acid Rain Phase II level by applying 

increased retirement ratios to the Acid Rain SO2 allowances. Under the CAIR, pre-2010 vintage 

SO2 allowances are worth 1.0 ton of SO2 emission; 2010-2014 vintage SO2 allowances are worth 

0.5 ton of SO2 emissions; and post-2014 vintage SO2 allowances are worth 0.35 ton of SO2

emissions. This effectively reduces SO2 emissions further below the Title IV level without 

creating a new currency. 

 

33 65 Fed. Reg. 24268-314 (April 25, 2000). 34 69 Fed. Reg. 55218-86 (September 13, 2004). 35 72 Fed. Reg. 55666-72 (October 1, 2007).
51

Refinery Enforcement Initiative, Consent Decrees (Sunoco, Valero and ConocoPhillips): The 

USEPA and various state and local agencies have negotiated Consent Decrees with the major 

refineries to elicit emission reductions from five major refinery processes. The processes are 

Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (FCCUs) and Fluid Coking Units (FCUs), Process Heaters and

Boilers, Flare Gas Recovery, Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR), and Benzene/Wastewater. 

The New Jersey refineries with settlements as of March 2008 include Sunoco, Valero and 

ConocoPhillips.

For FCCUs/FCUs, the Consent Decree control requirements generally require the installation of 

wet gas scrubbers for SO2 control, and selective catalytic reduction (SCR), selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR), or other measures to reduce NOx emissions.

For process boilers/heaters, the control requirements for SO2 emissions generally require the 

elimination of burning solids/liquid fuels. For NOx emissions, the control requirements generally 

apply to units greater than 40 MMBtu per hour capacity or larger. In many cases, the Consent 

Decrees establish NOx emission reduction objectives across a number of refineries that are 

owned by the same firm. Therefore, the companies decide which individual boilers/heaters to 

control as well as the control techniques to apply.

The Consent Decrees also included enhanced leak detection and repair programs (e.g., reducing 

the defined leak concentration) and other VOC requirements. The settlements are expected to 

produce additional SO2, NOx, and VOC emissions reductions for flare gas recovery and 

wastewater operations. While the Consent Decrees have various phase-in dates, significant 

emission reductions are expected prior to the summer of 2009. 

Beyond On The Way Controls

The following sections discuss how beyond on the way (BOTW) measures (both regional 

initiatives and state only) were identified and provides descriptions of the BOTW measures 

included in the State’s attainment demonstration. 

Identifying Measures 

New Jersey participated in a wide variety of processes aimed at identifying viable control 

measures that could be implemented to help the State reach its PM2.5 attainment goals. The 

following section briefly discusses those processes, and the measures identified as viable through 

those processes that the State is moving forward to propose.

Regional Activities

New Jersey is an active member of four regional organizations, each with a unique focus with 

respect to either geographic area, air pollution concern or both. These organizations include:
52

The Ozone Transport Commission (OTC), a multi-state organization created under the Clean Air 

Act to advise the USEPA on ozone transport issues and develop and implement regional 

solutions to the ground-level ozone problem in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions.

Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA), a non-profit association of 

ten state and local air pollution control agencies whose mission is to strengthen the skills and 

capabilities of member agencies and to help them work together to prevent and reduce air 

pollution in the Mid-Atlantic Region. 

Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM), a nonprofit association of 

air quality agencies in the Northeast designed to provide scientific, technical, analytical, and 

policy support to the air quality programs of the eight Northeast states. 

The Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU), which was formed by the MidAtlantic and Northeastern states, tribes, and Federal agencies to coordinate regional haze 

planning activities for the region.

All of these organizations had an active role in the technical support work associated with this 

SIP revision. MANE-VU supported the regional inventory work that was utilized in the regional 

attainment modeling effort (see Chapter 5) and was responsible for coordinating the Regional 

Haze effort, which resulted in control measures that will yield PM2.5 reduction benefits (see 

Section 4.3.1.4). The efforts of the OTC and MARAMA identified control measures that would 

result in reductions of ozone, PM2.5, and regional haze. The ozone control measures identified by 

these processes are expected to result in PM2.5 and regional haze benefits due to either shared 

precursors (NOx) or tangent reduction benefits (controls would also result in direct PM2.5 and/or 

SO2 emission reductions). NESCAUM focused on control measures more closely linked with 

PM2.5 and regional haze reductions (mainly low sulfur fuel for industrial, commercial and 

residential facilities). The efforts of these regional organizations are summarized in the 

following sections.

Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)

New Jersey worked with other jurisdictions in the Ozone Transport Region to explore reasonable 

control measures for potentially significant emission reductions. To accomplish this, the OTC 

staff and member jurisdictions formed workgroups to: 1) review mobile, point, and area source 

categories, 2) identify candidate source categories, and 3) consider potential control strategies for 

those source categories to reduce NOx, VOC, and SO2 emissions.

Each OTC workgroup focused on a different sector (mobile/point/area) and compiled a list of 

viable control measures from sources published by the USEPA and various regional associations, 

OTC member state-specific control strategies already in place, and emission control initiatives 

from states outside the Ozone Transport Region, such as California. Then using 2002 emission 

inventories as the base year, the workgroups determined projected 2009 emission reductions 

based on currently existing controls, including Federal rules, adoption of previous OTC model 

rules by member jurisdictions, enforcement settlements, and other state-specific control 

measures, and estimated growth of inventories. Based on the review of the list of control
53

measures and the emission inventories, the workgroups developed a preliminary list36 of 

candidate control measures thought to be most effective in reducing emission levels throughout 

the Ozone Transport Region.

From this preliminary list, the OTC workgroups developed white papers, summarizing key facts 

about the relevant control alternatives. The white papers provided information, such as 

descriptions of source categories and candidate control measures, 2002 base year emissions, 

2009 projected emissions after implementation, preliminary cost estimates, current federal and 

state regulations, methods of implementation, applicability, and geographic impact. Some of the 

papers reflected inter-regional efforts, such as those by the MARAMA for refineries, by the 

NESCAUM for heating oil, and by the super-regional discussions with the Midwest Regional 

Planning Organization (MWRPO) regarding Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) 

boilers and Electric Generating Units (EGUs). Using a scale of recommendations from one 

(definitely recommended) to five (not recommended), the member jurisdictions ranked the 

relative importance of the source categories and control strategies based on a qualitative 

assessment of the information presented in the white papers. After consideration of the 

estimated costs and magnitude of reductions potentially achievable for the selected emission 

sources, the OTC member jurisdictions identified reasonable control measures for a variety of 

source categories. Both during and after the ranking process, the OTC received written 

comments from stakeholders, held public meetings, and interfaced with impacted industries to 

better understand the source categories and how to regulate them effectively. The final list of 

source categories recommended by OTC for member jurisdictions to consider for emission 

reductions are presented in Table 4.2.

The OTC efforts focused on VOC and NOx reductions for the purpose of reducing ozone. New 

Jersey evaluated the control measures identified by the OTC for NOx measures that would have a 

PM2.5 reduction benefit. Although the OTC efforts did not have a primary focus on control 

strategies for direct PM2.5, New Jersey evaluated related direct PM2.5 reduction strategies through 

its Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and Reasonably Available Control 

Measures (RACM) analyses discussed in Sections 4.3.1.5.3 and 4.3.1.5.4, respectively. 

Table 4.2: Final OTC Control Measure Source Categories37, 38

Sector Source Category

 

36 To review the preliminary list of OTC-identified control measures that were further evaluated for potential 

emission reductions, see the OTC web site at http://www.otcair.org/document.asp?fview=Report. 37 Measures that are shaded are expected to have a NOx emission reduction benefit in New Jersey. 38 The following programs that are listed in Table 4.3 are not discussed in New Jersey’s proposed SIP document: 1) 

Regional Fuel based on Reformulated Gasoline Options is not discussed because there is already a mandatory 

program required by Section 211(k) of the Clean Air Act in New Jersey. 2) Cement Plants are not discussed 

because there are no cement plants in New Jersey. 3) Diesel Chip Reflash is not discussed because the OTC states, 

including New Jersey, are considering possible actions to increase the number of chip reflash installations of 

HDDVs in the Northeast.
54

Area Adhesives, Sealants, Adhesive Primers, and Sealant Primers (Industrial)

Area Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving

Area Consumer Products

Area Portable Fuel Containers

Point Asphalt Production Plants

Point ICI Boilers 100 MMBtu/hour or greater

Area and Point ICI Boilers <100 MMBtu/hour

Point Glass Furnaces

Point Cement Plants

Onroad Mobile Diesel Truck Chip Reflash

Onroad Mobile Regional Fuel based on Reformulated Gasoline Options

The shaded categories in Table 4.2 are the OTC measures that have a PM2.5 precursor reduction 

benefit. NESCAUM developed a model rule for diesel chip reflash for state use, which was 

included in the OTC’s final Technical Support Document. New Jersey is still evaluating this 

program and seeks comments on how to best achieve the Federal emission limits. For three of 

the OTC measures (adhesives and sealant, consumer products and portable fuel containers), the 

OTC drafted model rules which NJDEP is using to achieve VOC emission benefits. For the 

remaining measures shown in Table 4.2, the OTC developed emission limits and rule 

specification guidance. The OTC member states signed a Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) (Appendix A1) that addresses emissions associated with high electrical demand days 

(HEDD) to compliment already existing and future cap-and-trade programs with respect to 

electrical generation. This regional HEDD program will address the peak load emissions from 

the electrical generation sector on a daily basis. 

New Jersey and other OTC member jurisdictions have resolved to pursue necessary and 

appropriate rulemakings to implement the emission reduction percentages, emission rates, or 

technologies for the categories listed in Table 4.2 that are consistent with guidelines found in 

OTC Resolution 06-02 adopted on June 7, 2006, and amended on November 15, 2006, found in 

Appendix A2, as well as the High Electrical Demand Days MOU found in Appendix A1. The 

NJDEP expects to implement most measures that are not already adopted starting May 1, 2009 or 

later. A brief summary of all the OTC-identified control measures that have a PM2.5 emission 

reduction benefit is included in the following subsection. For more information about the OTC 

control measure identification process, or the control measures identified for implementation 

through this process, please see Appendix A3.

OTC Identified Beyond on the Way (BOTW) Measures:

Asphalt Production: The NJDEP proposed amendments to its rules at N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.9 in order 

to lower NOx emissions from asphalt production facilities. The proposed amendments, based on 

an OTC model rule, would pursue control measures to achieve at least a 35 percent reduction of 

NOx emissions from asphalt production plants from current levels, with the inclusion of emission 
55

limits based on type of fuel combusted and implementation of Best Management Practices 

(BMP) requirements. The OTC guidance is based on emission rates and percent reductions 

typically achieved from the installation of low NOx burners (LNB) and flue gas recirculation 

(FGR) to reduce NOx emissions from asphalt plants. A low NOx burner reduces NOx by staged 

combustion. In flue gas recirculation, the flue gas is used to assist in cooling the combustion 

temperature, which in turn reduces the NOx generated. The implementation of Best Management 

Practices would allow for substantial reductions in fuel consumption and corresponding 

reductions in the products of combustion, including NOx. Best Management Practices include 

annual combustor tune-ups, effective stockpile management to reduce aggregate moisture 

content, lowering mix temperature, and other maintenance and operational best practices. For 

more details on this future rulemaking, see Appendix A3. 

Glass Manufacturing: New Jersey proposed amendments to its current glass manufacturing rules 

at N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.10. The proposed amendments, based on OTC guidance, would revise the 

NOx emission rates to reduce emissions consistent with the installation of oxy-fuel firing, or 

equivalent measures, at the time of the next furnace re-build. Although several alternative NOx

control technologies exist, including combustion modifications (low NOx burners, oxy-fuel 

firing, oxygen-enriched air staging), process modifications (fuel switching, batch preheat, 

electric boost), and post combustion modifications (fuel reburn, SNCR, SCR), oxyfiring is 

considered the most effective because it not only reduces NOx emissions by as much as 85 

percent, but also reduces energy consumption, increases production rates by 10-15 percent, and 

improves glass quality by reducing defects. In addition, oxyfiring is demonstrated technology 

for the glass industry. Of New Jersey’s 25 glass manufacturing furnaces, five are already 

equipped with oxy-fuel firing and nine are electric. For more details on this future rulemaking, 

see Appendix A3.

Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boiler Rule 2009:

39 ICI boilers combust fuel to 

produce heat and process steam for a variety of applications, including chemical, metals, paper, 

petroleum, and food production industries, and for space heating in office buildings, hotels, 

apartment buildings, hospitals, and universities. Industrial boilers are generally smaller than 

boilers in the electric power industry, and typically have heat inputs in the 10-250 MMBtu/hr 

range; however, industrial boilers can be as large as 1,000 MMBtu/hr or smaller than 1 

MMBtu/hr. Most commercial and institutional boilers have a heat input less than 100 

MMBtu/hr. In New Jersey, 70 percent of the population is smaller than 50 MMBtu/hr. 

Currently, New Jersey ICI boilers are regulated according to size, fuel and boiler type. New 

Jersey’s existing NOx limits generally apply only to ICI boilers at least 50 MMBtu/hr located at 

major sources (i.e., point sources). ICI boilers at minor sources (i.e., area sources) are not 

subject to the maximum allowable emission rates, but are required to adjust the combustion 

process annually in boilers as small as 5 MMBtu/hr, effective as of 2010.

New Jersey proposed amendments to its current ICI boiler rules at N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.7. The 

proposed amendments would revise the NOx emission limits for both point and area source ICI 

boilers. Under the proposed amendments, owners and operators of any ICI boilers as small as 25 

 

39 Some categories have 2009 compliance dates; remainder have 2012 compliance dates.
56

MMBtu/hr would be required to achieve emission limits specified in the rules. For more details 

on this future rulemaking, see Appendix A3.

Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA)

The MARAMA states concentrated their efforts on identifying and analyzing emissions from all 

petroleum refinery processes to help states with refineries develop their SIPs for ozone, fine 

particles, and regional haze. The MARAMA Refinery Technical Oversight Committee (TOC), 

assisted by MACTEC Federal Programs, Inc., evaluated emissions and existing requirements for 

certain sources found at fourteen (14) petroleum refineries in the MARAMA area. Based on that 

preliminary review, the TOC selected catalytic and thermal cracking units, boilers and process 

heaters, flares, equipment leaks, wastewater treatment, storage tanks, and sulfur recovery plants 

for further consideration.

MARAMA evaluated emissions, existing requirements, including recent Consent Decrees from 

10 of the 14 identified refineries, available control technology options, and typical installation 

costs for each category. As a result of this study, MARAMA, assisted by MACTEC Federal 

Programs, Inc., developed three Model Rules for fluid catalytic cracking units, flares and 

enhanced monitoring of equipment leaks at petroleum refineries. As part of its 8-hour ozone 

RACT committal SIP, the State of New Jersey proposed new rules based in part on MARAMA’s 

model rules.40 New Jersey expects that the NOx, SO2, PM, and VOC reductions from these 

measures will also result in PM2.5 reduction benefits. 

A brief summary of all the MARAMA-identified control measures is included in the following 

subsections. For more information about the MARAMA control measure identification process, 

or the control measures identified for implementation through this process, please see Appendix 

A4.

MARAMA-Identified Beyond on the Way (BOTW) Measures:

Refineries - Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (FCCUs): Catalytic cracking units convert middle 

distillate, gas oil and residuum into primarily gasoline, jet and diesel fuels by using a series of 

processing steps that literally “crack” large, heavy molecules into smaller, lighter ones. Heat and 

catalyst are used to convert the heavier oils to lighter products. With fluid catalytic cracking, a 

fluidized catalyst is used in the cracking process. Fluid catalytic cracking unit systems are the 

most widely used cracking process in the MARAMA region and are the largest air contaminant 

emission sources at the refinery. New Jersey has four gasoline-producing refineries with fluid 

catalytic cracking units. These refineries are major facilities with Title V Operating Permits, and 

all emit large quantities of criteria pollutants (SO2, NOx, VOCs, carbon monoxide, and coarse 

particulate matter (PM10)), as well as HAPs. New Jersey currently regulates NOx emissions from 

fluid catalytic cracking units at N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.13. 

MARAMA’s model rule for FCCUs, includes emissions limits for particulate matter, SO2, NOx, 

and carbon monoxide. The MARAMA Technical Oversight Committee chose to recommend the 

 

40 The MARAMA model rules are posted at http://www.marama.org for public review.
57

most stringent limits in recent Consent Decrees or rules in other jurisdictions. Feasible control 

technologies are summarized in Table 2-6 of their Final Report. 

Refineries – Flares: Petroleum refinery flares are intended to be last-resort control devices used 

to safely dispose of flammable waste gases from emergency process upsets, as well as during 

start-up, shutdown and turnaround operations. The combustion of these gases can emit large 

quantities of NOx, SO2, and carbon monoxide into the atmosphere and are believed to be 

underestimated. New Jersey currently regulates VOC emissions from refinery flares at N.J.A.C. 

7:27-16.13.

MARAMA’s model rule for petroleum refinery flares includes the control measures designed to 

reduce NOx, SO2, VOC, and carbon monoxide emissions. Specifically, the model rule includes 

requirements for the owner/operators of refinery flares to operate and maintain a flare gas 

recovery system and to eliminate the flaring of routinely generated refinery fuel gases. Other 

items included in MARAMA’s flare model rule include operational requirements, monitoring 

system requirements, and guidelines for calculating flare emissions. Control technology options 

for flares are summarized in Table 4-5 of the Final Report. 

Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU)

The MANE-VU was tasked with identifying reasonable control measures that would reduce 

emissions from within the MANE-VU region contributing to visibility impairment at Class I 

areas by 2018 or earlier. To accomplish this task, beginning in 2005, the MANE-VU reviewed a 

wide range of potential control measures to reduce emissions from sources contributing to 

visibility impairment in affected Class I areas, including a “master list” of some 900 potential 

control measures, originally developed for 8-hour ozone initiative by the OTC. From this 

extensive list, the MANE-VU developed an interim list of Regional Haze control measures, 

which for regional haze included: beyond-CAIR sulfate reductions from EGUs, low-sulfur 

heating oil (residential and commercial), ICI boilers (both coal and oil-fired), lime and cement 

kilns, residential wood combustion, and outdoor burning (including outdoor wood boilers).

The next step in the regional haze control measure selection process was to further refine the 

interim list. The beyond-CAIR EGU strategy continued to stay on the list since EGU sulfate 

emissions have, by far, the largest impact on visibility in the MANE-VU Class I areas. 

Likewise, a low-sulfur oil strategy, combining low-sulfur heating oil (residential and 

commercial) and the oil-fired ICI boiler sector control measures for #2, #4, and #6 residual oils, 

remained on the list after a NESCAUM-initiated conference with refiners and fuel-oil suppliers 

concluded that such a strategy could realistically be implemented. During MANE-VU’s internal 

consultation meeting in March 2007, member states reviewed the updated interim list of control 

measures to make further refinements. At that time, states determined, for example, that there 

may be too few coal-fired ICI boilers in the MANE-VU states for that to be considered as a 

“regional” strategy, but that could be a sector pursued by individual states. They also determined 

that lime and cement kilns, of which there are few in the MANE-VU region, would likely be 

handled via state BART determination processes. Residential wood burning and outdoor wood 

boilers remain on the list for those states where localized visibility impacts may be of concern. 
58

The Commissioners of the environmental agencies of the northeastern States with Class I areas 

met on June 7, 2007 and agreed on a Statement of Principles to guide the direction of the future 

consultation process for Regional Haze Planning that occurred during the summer of 2007. This 

Statement of Principles was designed to guide the consultation process, set forth the importance 

of Regional Haze long-range planning for all states, and highlighted the critical role that air 

pollutant transport plays in regional haze and interstate air pollution. The principles that New 

Jersey and the other MANE-VU States laid out in this document are included in Appendix A5.

The Commissioners of the MANE-VU States also agree upon certain long-range goals for the 

control of specific source categories within MANE-VU and agreed on certain specific targets to 

“ask” of other States outside of the MANE-VU planning region and to “ask” of the USEPA. 

These planning agreements are included in Appendix A6, and summarized in Table 4.3. New 

Jersey included these targets in its Regional Haze air quality planning document.41

Table 4.3: Summary of MANE-VU Planning Targets

Controls Inside of the MANE-VU 

Region

Controls Outside of MANE-VU 

Region

National Controls (to “ask” of the 

USEPA)

Timely implementation of BART 

requirements

Timely implementation of BART 

requirements

The MANE-VU states and tribes 

request that the USEPA work with 

the eastern Regional Planning 

Organizations to develop a proposal 

for tightening the CAIR program to 

achieve an additional reduction in 

SO2 by no later than 2018

A 90% or greater reduction in SO2

emissions from EGUs identified by 

MANE-VU

A 90% or greater reduction in SO2

emissions from EGUs identified by 

MANE-VU

Ultra Low sulfur fuel strategy in the 

inner zone states

Application of reasonable controls 

on non-EGU sources

Low sulfur fuel strategy in the outer 

zone states

Continued evaluation of other 

control measures, including energy 

efficiency, alternative clean fuels, 

and other measures to reduce SO2

and NOx emissions from all coal 

burning facilities by 2018, and new 

source performance standards for 

wood combustion

Continued evaluation of other 

control measures, including energy 

efficiency, alternative clean fuels, 

and other measures to reduce SO2

and NOx emissions from all coal 

burning facilities by 2018, and new 

source performance standards for 

wood combustion

Although emission reduction benefits from the MANE-VU efforts that are targeting PM2.5

precursors (SO2 and NOx) will occur after the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS attainment date (April 5, 

2010), the reductions from the measures listed in Table 4.3 will help the State attain the new 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, as well as all the other PM2.5-related air quality goals discussed in 

Chapter 1.

State Specific Efforts

In addition to New Jersey’s participation in the regional control measure identification efforts, 

the State implemented its own outreach initiative, entitled “Reducing Air Pollution Together.” 

 

41 New Jersey proposed its Regional Haze SIP September 15, 2008. 
59

“Reducing Air Pollution Together” was designed to gather control measure ideas and 

suggestions from the New Jersey public, regulated communities, and other interested parties. In 

addition, the NJDEP, as required by the Clean Air Act, completed its own internal RACT and 

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) analyses, to identify viable controls for 

significant sources within the State. All of these efforts, as well as any control measures 

identified from them, are discussed in greater detail below.

New Jersey Workgroup Efforts

The NJDEP began a collaborative effort to discuss the air quality challenges facing New Jersey 

by hosting a public workshop on June 29, 2005. This workshop served to initiate a dialogue 

between the NJDEP and interested and affected parties about reducing emissions in order to 

improve air quality in New Jersey. Over 200 persons representing various industries, 

environmental and civic groups attended. As a result of the “Reducing Air Pollution Together”

workshop, the following six air quality workgroups were formed and collaborated over several 

months to develop recommendations on how to reduce air emissions from their specific source 

categories:

 Diesel Initiatives 

 Gasoline Cars and Trucks 

 Homes and Restaurants 

 Non-Automobile Gasoline Engines

 Stationary Combustion Sources 

 Volatile Organic Compounds from Industrial Processes and Consumer

Products

The workgroups identified potential control measures to reduce NOx, VOC, PM2.5, and SO2

emissions for possible inclusion in the State’s upcoming SIP revisions. Through the cooperative 

efforts of the NJDEP, federal agencies, industry, consultants, environmental groups, and other 

members of the regulated community, the workgroups evaluated available emission inventories, 

technical information and field data to develop lists of potential air emission control strategies 

related to their topic area. The criteria used by the workgroups to prioritize control measures 

included technical feasibility, economic feasibility, environmental benefits, and implementation 

feasibility. The air quality workgroups compiled their recommendations into reports that were 

submitted to the NJDEP for further consideration on October 31, 2005. The workgroups 

presented a summary of their recommendations to the NJDEP’s Air Quality Management Team 

on November 14, 2005. This event was another opportunity for the NJDEP staff and workgroup 

members to discuss the workgroup recommendations.

The NJDEP’s workgroup leaders and facilitators met with the NJDEP’s Air Quality Management 

team to review the over 200 workgroup recommendations and identify those control strategies 

with significant potential emissions reductions. After culling that list down to 60 potential 
60

control measures, the NJDEP then generated white papers42 for each measure. These white 

papers were posted on the NJDEP’s website for public review and comment. The NJDEP made 

revisions to individual white paper where appropriate, based on comment and/or additional 

information. In addition, the NJDEP invited the public, representatives from local businesses, 

industry and environmental groups, and others to a follow-up workshop to discuss potential 

emission reduction strategies on May 17, 2006. The purpose of that workshop was for the 

NJDEP to provide an update on efforts during the past year to address air quality challenges 

facing New Jersey and to share preliminary regulatory and nonregulatory plans to reduce air 

emissions. Following the May 17, 2006 workshop, the public was asked to provide feedback on 

the workshop, and on the 60 white papers drafted by the NJDEP and discussed at the 

workshop.43

Many of the white paper measures are the same as those identified through the OTC and 

MARAMA efforts, and the State’s own RACT and RACM analyses for both ozone and PM2.5. 

The PM2.5 RACT and RACM analyses are discussed in more detail in Sections 4.3.1.5.4 and 

4.3.1.5.5, respectively. 

4.01.1.1.1 New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) Energy Master Plan Efforts

On October 3, 2006, Governor Jon S. Corzine announced the commencement of an interagency 

planning process that will culminate in an energy master plan, a long-term energy vision for the 

state that plans for the state’s energy needs through 2020.44 

The Energy Master Plan (EMP) will address three areas: security, safety, and reliability of prices 

of energy supply and services; economic impact of energy production, transportation, and end 

use; and environmental impact associated with the production of energy.45 The main goal of the 

EMP is to reduce projected energy use by 20 percent by 2020 and meet 20 percent of the 

State’s electricity needs with Class 1 renewable energy sources by 2020.46 Other goals of 

the EMP are described below:

Goal 1: Secure, Safe, and Reasonably Priced Energy Supplies and Services – To provide 

safe, secure, reasonably priced energy supplies and services to New Jersey’s commercial, 

industrial, transportation, and residential customers, while reducing dependence on 

traditional fossil fuels and fossil fuel generation, decreasing electric and natural gas 

transmission congestion, utilizing efficiency and renewable resources to supplement the 

 

42 A complete list of white papers, with links to the actual papers, can be found at 

www.nj.gov/dep/airworkgroups/docs/wp_summary_table_web.xls.

43 Comments received on the white papers are posted at www.nj.gov/dep/airworkgroups/comments.html. 44 State of New Jersey Office of the Governor. Governor Corzine Announces Initial Phase of Energy Master Plan. 

Available at http://www.nj.gov/governor/news/news/approved/20061003.html. October 3, 2006. 45 State of New Jersey Office of the Governor. Governor Corzine Announces Initial Phase of Energy Master Plan. 

Available at http://www.nj.gov/governor/news/news/approved/20061003.html. October 3, 2006.

46 State of New Jersey Energy Master Plan. Energy Master Plan Goals. Available at: 

http://www.nj.gov/emp/about/goals.html.
61

State’s energy resources, proactively planning for in-state electricity generation retirements, 

and reducing the demand for energy.47

Goal 2: Economic Growth and Development – To encourage and maintain economic 

growth prospects for the State by recognizing and fostering the multiple functions of energy 

in the economy.48

Goal 3: Environmental Protection and Impact – To promote the achievement of Federal 

and State environmental requirements and objectives in an effective and low-cost manner 

and, where possible, provide market-based incentives to achieve those goals.49

Public participation began October 2006, with a series of stakeholder meetings held throughout 

the State; that continued with the formation of External Working Groups for energy categories. 

More than 500 people have attended EMP meetings, offered input and ideas, and joined the 

listserv. The draft EMP was released in April of 2008 with public hearings held in July of 2008. 

The final EMP was released on October 22, 2008.

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)

New Jersey’s PM2.5 reasonably available control technology (RACT) analysis was conducted 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7502(c)(1) (Section 172(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act), which requires

states with nonattainment areas to submit State Implementation Plans (SIPs) implementing all 

reasonably available control measures (including such reductions in emissions from existing 

sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably 

available control technology) as expeditiously as practicable to attain the NAAQS.

New Jersey’s RACT analysis demonstrates that reductions of direct PM2.5 emissions and its 

precursors, SO2 and NOx, from major stationary source categories are reasonable. New Jersey’s 

full RACT analysis is included in Appendix A7.

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

A Reasonably Available Control Measure, or RACM, is defined by the USEPA as any potential 

control measure for application to point,50 area, onroad, and nonroad emission source categories 

that meets the following criteria:

• The control measure is technologically feasible

• The control measure is economically feasible

• The control measure does not cause “substantial widespread and long-term adverse 

impacts”

 

47 Ibid. 48 Ibid.

49 Ibid. 50 RACM applies only to those point sources not already addressed as part of the Reasonably Available

Control Technology (RACT) analysis. The USEPA’s PM2.5 Implementation Rule (72 Fed. Reg. 20585-667 (April 

25, 2007)) considers RACT a part of RACM, and not an independent requirement, which is how RACT is 

considered in the Ozone Implementation Rule (70 Fed. Reg. 71611 - 71705). However, New Jersey determined to 

conduct these two analyses separately, consistent with how it addressed its RACT and RACM requirements for 8-

hour ozone. New Jersey’s separate RACT analysis for PM2.5 is contained in Appendix A7.
62

• The control measure is not “absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable”

• The control measure can advance the attainment date by at least one year

New Jersey’s 2007 PM2.5 RACM analysis was conducted to fulfill the requirements of Section 

(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act. This analysis addressed the following PM2.5 precursors: direct 

PM2.5, SO2, and NOx. VOC and NH3 were not addressed, consistent with USEPA guidance.

A total of 628 potential non-transportation control measures51 were compiled and reviewed to 

determine whether or not any of these measures could be considered a RACM that would 

advance the attainment date for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by at least one year. In order to 

advance the attainment date by one year, potential RACM measures would have to be 

implemented by 2008. After pre-screening, 61 potential non-transportation control measures 

(TCMs) were further evaluated using the RACM criteria. Seventeen (17) non-TCMs passed all 

RACM criteria, but would not be implemented by 2008. 

The NJDOT conducted a separate PM2.5 RACM analysis for TCMs. Twenty-six TCMs were 

identified and evaluated based on the RACM criteria. One TCM passed all RACM criteria, but 

would not be implemented by 2008.

It was determined that none of these 18 potential measures could be implemented by 2008. The 

RACM analysis did identify several promising measures that New Jersey will consider 

implementing at a later date, and confirmed other measures that New Jersey is already 

addressing. 

New Jersey’s full RACM analysis is included in Appendix A8.

Additional Measures 

There are additional State measures that, while not identified specifically in any of the regional 

or state control measure initiatives, have been, or will be, implemented in time to provide 

quantitative PM2.5 emission reductions prior to and during 2009. The remainder of this section 

discusses these measures:

Diesel Idling Rule Changes: Since diesel engines are significant contributors of ozone and fine 

particulate precursors in the State of New Jersey, any efforts to control and reduce those 

emissions contribute to the State’s attainment of the ozone and fine particulate matter NAAQS. 

On September 18, 2006, the NJDEP proposed amendments to the existing diesel idling rules.52 

The rules became effective July 25, 2007. These rules address the allowable idling duration for 

diesel-powered motor vehicles, and exemptions to that maximum idling limit. The changes 

reduce the allowable exemptions to a three-minute diesel idling standard. There were 

exemptions to the idling limit which allowed qualified vehicles to idle for an unlimited length of 

 

51 Transportation Control Measures, or TCMs, are transportation strategies specific to onroad mobile sources, which 

reduce emissions by reducing the number and/or length of vehicle trips and/or improve traffic flow. 

52 Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution from Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicles Air Administrative Procedures and 

Penalties Proposed Amendments: N.J.A.C. 7:27-14.1, 14.3, 7:27A-3.10(m)14. New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection. September 18, 2006.
63

time under certain conditions. The revisions to the rule modify these exemptions to further limit 

idling in cold weather; limit the idling time for vehicles that transport people; clarify the idling 

rules regarding trucks waiting in line; clarify the type of vehicle which would be considered an 

“emergency motor vehicle,” and the times which would be considered “an emergency situation;” 

eliminate the exemption for idling while a vehicle is in for repairs that do not require the engine 

to be engaged to complete; eliminate the exemption for idling while attaching or detaching a 

trailer, should it take longer than the allowed three consecutive minutes; and phase out the 

exemption for sleeper berths. 

Diesel Smoke (I/M Cutpoint) Rule Changes: Like the diesel idling efforts, the NJDEP 

requirements for the inspection and maintenance (I/M) of diesel vehicles are designed to reduce 

the emissions from diesel engines, which are significant contributors to ozone, PM2.5 and its 

precursors. The NJDEP is currently working to propose amendments to its existing diesel I/M 

rules to reduce the allowable smoke from heavy-duty diesel vehicles. Smoke opacity, which is 

used as a surrogate for particulate matter, is the degree to which a plume of smoke will obstruct 

transmission of visible light. Smoke opacity is used as an indicator for mal-maintenance. 

Currently available technology allows diesel engines to emit smoke at rates much lower than the 

existing cutpoints, when operating in accordance with the manufacturers’ specifications. 

Therefore, it is appropriate to revise the heavy-duty diesel vehicle inspection program standards 

to reflect the current diesel engine technology and ensure appropriate maintenance is performed. 

Although newer diesel-powered vehicles and equipment usually operate more cleanly and may 

contribute less to air quality problems than their predecessors, diesel-powered trucks and buses 

tend to remain in service for 20 years or more. Unless the excess emissions due to malmaintenance or lack of repair are reduced, trucks and buses will continue to emit excess levels of 

exhaust particles and contribute to air pollution in the State for many years to come. 

Implementing stricter opacity cutpoints for diesel-powered vehicles will result in appropriate 

maintenance and reduce emissions.

Case-by-Case NOx Limit Determinations (FSELs/AELs): Existing RACT rules set performance 

standards for many source categories. Major NOx facilities with emission sources having a 

potential to emit more than 10 tons of NOx per year where no previous NJDEP RACT limit has 

been established in the RACT Rules (N.J.A.C. 7:27-16 and N.J.A.C. 7:27-19), i.e., sources 

without performance standards, must apply to the NJDEP for a Facility-Specific Emission Limit 

(FSEL). When a performance standard exists and the source determines it is not reasonable, they 

apply to the NJDEP for an Alternative Emission Limit (AEL). FSELs and AELs are determined 

on a case-by-case basis.

Currently, New Jersey has about 40 of these case-by-case FSEL/AEL determinations for sources 

throughout the State. New Jersey’s FSEL and AEL provisions for oxides of nitrogen are found 

at N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.13. 

As part of its RACT analysis, the NJDEP reviewed all of its existing FSELs and AELs and found 

that many were approved as long ago as 1997. In many cases, control technologies have 

advanced sufficiently since that time, warranting the reevaluation of these case-by-case 

determinations. The NJDEP proposes to require all facilities with existing FSELs or AELs to 
64

either comply with the existing or revised RACT limits, where applicable, or demonstrate that a 

new FSEL/AEL is warranted. The NJDEP further proposes that the newly issued AELs will 

terminate after a certain number of years, requiring periodic re-evaluations and determinations, 

in an effort to keep these limits current until compliance with specific rule emission limits are 

achieved. 

Municipal Waste Combustors (Incinerators) NOx Rule: New Jersey has five resource recovery 

facilities (RRF) located in Essex, Union, Camden, Gloucester, and Warren Counties, 

respectively. There are 13 municipal waste combustors (MWC) at these five facilities. The 

NJDEP approved facility specific emission limits (FSELs) pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.13 for 

each of these MWCs to meet the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, because these facilities qualified as 

major facilities (i.e., those facilities with the potential to emit more than 25 tons of NOx per year 

containing a source operation that has the potential to emit greater than 10 tons per year) and the 

State did not establish specific RACT source requirements for MWCs. The USEPA has adopted 

Federal Plans for both large and small MWCs. New Jersey is the delegated state authorized to 

implement and enforce those plans, in accordance with Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) 

between the State and the USEPA. The Federal standard for emissions of NOx from MWCs, as 

reflected in the Federal rules dated May 10, 2006, and previous Federal plans, is 205 ppm.53 

Currently, all New Jersey MWCs are in compliance with the Federal standard.

As part of its ozone RACT analysis, the NJDEP reviewed the Municipal Waste Combustor 

FSELs and determined that, when equipped with selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR), NOx

controls are capable of more NOx reductions than are currently being achieved by some of the 

municipal solid waste facilities. The ozone RACT rulemaking proposal will eliminate the 

various MWC FSELs and set a more stringent source category NOx emission limit, which will 

result in further NOx emission reductions from this source category.

Refineries - Process Heaters and Boilers: Process heaters and boilers operating at petroleum 

refineries emit large amounts of NOx, carbon monoxide, SO2, and PM emissions. Boilers are 

designed to generate steam for use throughout the refinery, while process heaters burn fuels to 

transfer heat directly to process materials. Boilers and process heaters are similar in that they are 

indirect combustion devices that burn fuels such as natural gas, fuel oil, and refinery fuel gas. 

New Jersey currently regulates NOx emissions from indirect heat exchangers at N.J.A.C. 7:27-

19.7. 

Available control technologies for controlling NOx emissions from these units include Ultra Low 

NOx Burners (LNB) and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR). These control technologies have 

been successfully applied to both types of equipment achieving emission reductions up to 90 

percent. Recent enforcement settlements required some refineries to reduce NOx emissions to 

0.04 lbs NOx/MMBtu.

New Jersey Low Emission Vehicle Program: The NJDEP’s Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) 

program (or Clean Car Program) rule was adopted on November 28, 2005, with an operative date 

of January 27, 2006.54 The rule requires all new vehicles delivered for sale in New Jersey to be 

 

53 70 Fed. Reg. 75348-69 (May 10, 2006). 54 38 N.J.R. 497(b) (January 17, 2006).
65

California certified for emissions beginning January 1, 2009. This rule also establishes a zero 

emission vehicle (ZEV) sales requirement for New Jersey and requires that each auto 

manufacturer’s sales fleet in New Jersey meet a declining fleet average non-methane organic gas 

(NMOG) emission standard.

The rule is designed, in part, to encourage auto manufacturers to offer the ultra-low emitting 

California certified models in New Jersey prior to the 2009 mandatory compliance start date. 

Auto manufacturers delivering such vehicles to New Jersey can earn ZEV credits that can be 

used by manufacturers to help transition into the mandatory requirements in 2009 and beyond. 

Currently, 36 models are certified to the Partial ZEV (PZEV) or Advanced Tech PZEV 

(ATPZEV) standard, which will generate such credits if sold in New Jersey. There are 23,493 

vehicles that have either received or are currently receiving ZEV credits in New Jersey.

Distillate and Residual Fuel Strategies: Lowering the sulfur content in fuel oil is a part of the 

long-term strategy established by the MANE-VU states to reduce and prevent regional haze. 

The MANE-VU states in the inner zone (New Jersey, New York, Delaware and Pennsylvania) 

plan to reduce the sulfur content of distillate oil to 0.05 percent sulfur by weight (500 ppm) by 

2012, the sulfur content of No. 4 residual oil to 0.3 percent sulfur by weight by 2012, the sulfur 

content of No. 6 residual oil to 0.3 to 0.5 percent sulfur by weight by 2012, and to further reduce 

the sulfur content of distillate oil to 15 ppm by 2016. The MANE-VU states in the outer zone 

plan to reduce the sulfur content of distillate oil to 0.05 percent sulfur by weight by than 2014, 

the sulfur content of No. 4 residual oil to 0.25 to 0.5 percent sulfur by weight by 2018, the sulfur 

content of No. 6 residual oil to no greater than 0.5 percent sulfur by weight by 2018, and to 

further reduce the sulfur content of distillate oil to 15 ppm by 2018 (depending on supply 

availability).

The NJDEP is planning to propose to amend N.J.A.C. 7:27-9, Sulfur in Fuels, specifically 

section 9.2, which specifies sulfur content standards and maximum allowable sulfur dioxide 

emissions. The potential amendments will affect those who store, offer for sale, sell, deliver or 

exchange fuel for use in New Jersey, as well as the users of these fuels. The anticipated 

amendments will reduce the maximum allowable sulfur content in fuel and the maximum 

allowable SO2 emissions from fuel combustion in order to reduce the emissions of SO2 and other 

pollutants from the combustion of fuel in New Jersey. 

Currently, maximum allowable sulfur levels in No. 2 and lighter fuel oil in New Jersey are either 

2,000 parts per million (ppm) or 3,000 ppm. Maximum allowable sulfur levels in No. 4 fuel 

ranges from 3,000 ppm (0.3 percent) to 20,000 ppm (2.0 percent). Maximum allowable sulfur 

levels in No. 5 and No. 6 fuels also range from 3,000 to 20,000 ppm. The NJDEP is evaluating a 

proposal to reduce the maximum allowable sulfur content of No. 2 and lighter fuel oil to 500 

ppm (0.05 percent), then 15 ppm (0.0015 percent) statewide; reduce the maximum allowable 

sulfur content of No. 4 fuel oil to 3,000 ppm (0.3 percent) statewide; and reduce the maximum 

allowable sulfur content of No. 5, No. 6 and heavier fuel oils to 5,000 ppm (0.5 percent) in Zones 

1, 2, 3 and 5 (the standard will remain 3,000 ppm (0.3 percent) in Zones 4 and 6).

Fleet Turnover: The turnover of the onroad fleet of cars and trucks will result in additional NOx

and PM emission benefits in 2009 and beyond because the new vehicles have significantly lower 
66

emission standards than the vehicles they are replacing. The new vehicle emission standards are 

lower primarily because of a number of Federal rules such as the Tier 2 standards for 

automobiles and light trucks and the 2007 Heavy Duty Diesel standards for large diesel highway 

trucks. A number of post-2002 New Jersey rules also contribute to the fleet turnover emission 

benefits, such as the New Jersey Low Emission Vehicle (NJLEV) new vehicle program.

Controls from EGU Consent Decrees (PSE&G Mercer and Hudson): On November 30, 2006, the 

USEPA, U.S. Department of Justice, and the State of New Jersey reached a settlement with 

PSE&G related to failure to comply with a 2002 consent decree requiring installation of 

pollution controls at its coal-fired power plants in Jersey City (Hudson) and Hamilton (Mercer), 

New Jersey.55,56 The settlement required additional air pollution controls, lower sulfur coal, 

lower emissions, and environmental projects. At the Hudson plant, PSE&G was required to take 

interim steps to reduce emissions of NOx, SO2, and PM until the required pollution control 

equipment was installed as required by the original consent decree or the unit was shut down. 

These interim measures included year-round operation of the existing NOx control equipment 

utilizing selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) to reduce NOx, use of ultra-low sulfur coal, 

compliance with interim annual emission caps for NOx and SO2, and operation of an electrostatic 

precipitator and a fly ash conditioning system to control PM. These additional emission control 

measures will improve air quality in the region. This agreement also included new fabric filters 

being installed on the PSE&G Mercer generating plant by December 31, 2008. For the period of 

the consent decree, PSE&G will significantly reduce its emissions of NOx, SO2, and PM in order 

to achieve the same reductions required under the 2002 Consent Decree. 

Federal

The Federal government plans to implement several measures that will provide quantitative 

emission reductions prior to the summer of 2009. The remainder of this section discusses these 

measures. 

Small Offroad Engine Rule: On May 18, 2007, the USEPA proposed new rules that would set 

stricter standards for most lawn and garden equipment and small recreational watercraft.57,58 

Specifically, the proposal would establish new exhaust emission standards that manufacturers are 

expected to meet using catalytic converters in many types of small watercraft, lawn, and garden 

equipment. This proposed rule also includes fuel evaporative standards for all the types of 

 

55 USEPA. United States and New Jersey Announce Clean Air Act Settlement with PSE&G Fossil LLC for 

Violations of 2002 Consent Decree; Utility Required to Pay Significantly Increased Penalties and Reduce 

Emissions. Accessed from: 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/1ef7cd36224b565785257359003f533f/c59ece80a8a072d1852572360065c

298!OpenDocument. November 30, 2006.

56 State of New Jersey v. PSEG Fossil LLC, Amendment to Consent Decree, Newark Division, New Jersey, U.S.

District Court (November 30, 2006). Accessible at 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/decrees/amended/psegfossil-amended-cd.pdf. 57 72 Fed. Reg. 28098-146 (May 18, 2007). 58 For more information about the proposal, visit USEPA’s websites at Lawn and Garden 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/equip-ld.htm for lawn and garden equipment and http://www.epa.gov/otaq/marinesi.htm 

for gasoline boats and personal watercraft. 
67

equipment and watercraft covered in the rulemaking. The new standards would apply as early as 

2011 for most lawn and garden equipment (under 25 horsepower) and 2009 for watercraft. 

Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters per 

Cylinder: On March 14, 2008, the USEPA adopted more stringent exhaust emission standards 

for locomotives and marine diesel engines.59 The standards include: tightening emission 

standards for existing locomotives when they are remanufactured; setting near-term engine-out 

emission standards (Tier 3 standards) for newly-built locomotives and marine diesel engines; and 

setting longer-term standards (Tier 4 standards) for newly-built locomotives and marine diesel 

engines that reflect the application of high-efficiency aftertreatment technology. The USEPA is 

also proposing provisions to eliminate emissions from unnecessary locomotive idling. 

The standards for remanufactured locomotives will take effect as soon as certified remanufacture 

systems are available (as early as 2008). Tier 3 standards for newly-built locomotive and marine 

engines would phase in starting in 2009. Tier 4 standards for newly-built locomotives and 

marine diesel engines would phase in beginning in 2014 for marine diesel engines and 2015 for 

locomotives.

Energy Conservation Standards for New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family High-Rise 

Residential Buildings and New Federal Low-Rise Residential Buildings: The United States 

Department of Energy (USDOE) has developed standards for all new Federal commercial and 

high-rise multi-family residential (over three stories in height above ground) buildings and all 

new low-rise residential buildings pursuant to the requirements of the Energy Conservation and 

Production Act (ECPA). The effective date of the rule is January 22, 2008. The rule establishes 

an energy efficiency baseline for new Federal commercial and multi-family high rise residential 

buildings based on referencing ASHRAE60 Standard 90.1-2004 and the 2004 IECC.61 The 

standards establish requirements for the structure and major systems of a building, and are 

mandatory for new Federal buildings. The rule establishes a requirement for new Federal 

buildings to achieve a level of energy efficiency 30 percent greater than that of the 

ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA62 or the 2004 IECC levels when life-cycle cost-effective. This rule is 

expected to reduce NOx and SO2 emissions.

Additional Actions

The State is also taking the following additional actions to reduce PM2.5 emissions.

High Electrical Demand Days (HEDD) Program: In March 2007, following a year long process, 

six of the OTC states committed to pursue reductions in NOx emissions from electrical 

generating units that primarily operate on high electrical demand days (HEDD) starting with the 

 

59 73 Fed. Reg. 25097 (May 6, 2008). 60 The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers 61 International Energy Conservation Code 62 American National Standards Institute/ The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers/ The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America
68

2009 ozone season.63 On these high electric demand days, increased power generation is 

needed, usually on short notice. In Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland and Pennsylvania, boilers 

and turbines that primarily run to follow electrical load needs supply HEDD power generation. 

In New Jersey and New York, combustion turbines primarily supply HEDD power generation. 

The majority of the HEDD units in the six states are not controlled and produce significant NOx 

emissions on HEDDs. For example, on a typical summer day (June 4, 2005), NOx emissions for 

the six states for all Electric Generating Units (EGUs) were 551 tons per day (tpd). On a HEDD 

(July 26, 2005), NOx emissions were 1,349 tpd. Most of this increase in emissions is due to 

power production from uncontrolled HEDD units.

As part of the HEDD initiative, New Jersey plans to reduce NOx emissions by 19.8 tpd on the 

nominal high electrical demand days. Specifically, power generators in New Jersey will be 

responsible for securing these reductions and will be required to submit a plan on how they will 

reduce NOx. The generators will have flexibility in securing the 2009 reductions. New Jersey 

also plans to require that all HEDD units meet performance standards that reflect modern low 

NOx technology by May 1, 2015.

Ports: The Port of New York/New Jersey is the largest port complex on the East Coast of North 

America. It is located at the hub of the most concentrated and affluent consumer market in the 

world, with immediate access to the most extensive interstate highway and rail networks in the 

region. The Port Authority directly oversees the operation of seven privately owned cargo 

terminals in the New York-New Jersey region (landlord tenant relationship). Each year, more 

than 25 million tons of oceanborne general cargo moves through this port, including 4.5 million 

TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent container units) of containerized cargo. The Port 

Newark/Elizabeth-Port Authority Marine Terminal complex (NJ), the Port Authority Auto 

Marine Terminal (NJ), Brooklyn Piers and Red Hook Container Terminal (NY), and Howland 

Hook Marine Terminal (NY) handle most of the cargo. In addition, there are private operators, 

such as Global Marine Terminal and a number of marine terminals, operated by private bulk 

cargo operators. The Passenger Ship Terminal known as The New York Cruise Terminal is 

operated by P&O Ports North America for the City of New York.

Containerized cargo volumes in the Port of New York and New Jersey rose nearly 8 percent in 

2006, to a new record high. The dollar value of all cargo moving through the port in 2006 

exceeded $149 billion for the first time, up 13 percent from 2005. In the next 10 years, nearly $2 

billion in infrastructure upgrades are planned for marine terminal facilities and for off-port roads 

and railways to improve the flow of cargo.

To minimize the impact that this tremendous growth has on our environment, the NJDEP 

Commissioner outlined the following action item in the document entitled “Priorities and Action 

Plan,” January 2007. This goal is reiterated in the draft document entitled “Environmental 

Justice Priorities for the NJDEP – May 2007.” 

 

63 Memorandum of Understanding Among the States of the Ozone Transport Commission Concerning the 

Incorporation of High Electrical Demand Day Emission Reduction Strategies into Ozone Attainment State 

Implementation Planning. Ozone Transport Commission, March 2, 2007.
69

“Target [NJ]DEP efforts to establish a coordinated effort on protecting the health of 

urban residents from environmental causes and ensure that [NJ]DEP’s efforts to support 

economic growth and redevelopment in urban areas results in improved urban 

environmental health. Specifically, [NJ]DEP will coordinate its efforts at NJ’s two major 

ports to deliver tangible environmental improvements.”

The NJDEP is working closely with the Port Authority of NY/NJ, the USEPA Region 2, the 

South Jersey Port Corporation, and the Northeast Diesel Collaborative to develop and implement 

a comprehensive diesel risk reduction strategy for the port areas. Some possibilities include 

requiring cleaner fuel for oceangoing vessels while at dock or near the port; upgrading the cargo 

handling equipment; reducing idling emissions from ships, trains and trucks doing business at the 

port; and modernizing the drayage truck fleet that calls on the port.

At the South Jersey Port Corporation in Camden, New Jersey, several specific projects are 

underway at the terminals that they own and operate. First, as part of an enforcement settlement, 

nearly $400,000 was spent on retrofitting both on-road and off-road vehicles in the Camden 

Waterfront South area. Second, Clean Air Communities in partnership with NJDEP, the South 

Jersey Port Corporation, and others received a $250,000 grant from the USEPA titled 

“Community Action for a Renewed Environment.” The grant will be used to work with the 

project partners to: establish a forum for dialogue with local businesses; and undertake 

community campaigns, such as publishing an environmental justice toolkit for high school 

students and educating children about environmental health. The NJDEP agreed to supplement 

the $250,000 grant with $500,000 from an enforcement settlement so that the South Jersey Port 

Corporation could undertake additional diesel emission reduction projects on the diesel 

equipment that they operate in Camden.

Open burning/Outdoor wood burning – Smoke Management Plans: New Jersey already has a 

regulation in place to control emissions from open burning at N.J.A.C. 7:27-2, Control and 

Prohibition of Open Burning,64 and is considering changes to agricultural burning portion of 

these requirements. This source category is also addressed in the “Smoke Management” section 

of New Jersey’s Regional Haze SIP (including the agricultural and forestry smoke management, 

prescribed burning, and agricultural management discussions in that SIP proposal).65 One 

particulate control measure has already been implemented, namely to limit air pollution control 

permits to prevent open burning on days forecast to be of unhealthful air quality. This permit 

condition requires the permit holder to delay open burning until forecast meteorological 

conditions and air quality have improved so that forecasted unhealthful conditions for that day 

will not be made worse by this activity. Similarly, New Jersey is considering a seasonal home 

wood heating advisory program to further curtail wood smoke emissions, similar to the program 

adopted in Lane County, Oregon.66 This program would advise homeowners when they could 

heat their homes with wood, according to the current air quality.

 

64 Available at http://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqm/Sub%2002%20v1994-06-20.pdf (Accessed November 19, 2007). 65 The first regional haze air quality protection plan for New Jersey will be completed in 2008 (see Chapter 1 for 

further details).

66 LRAPA. Public Education: Home Wood Heating Programs. Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA). 

http://www.lrapa.org/public_education/home_wood_heating_programs/, accessed May 14, 2008.
70

Change-out programs: Control measures might include wood stove and fireplace change-out 

programs, and lawn mower replacement programs. Financial incentives would be necessary to 

ensure a productive program. New Jersey would consider implementing a change-out program 

in the future if funds become available. 

Fugitive dust emissions: New Jersey has a control strategy in place for the control of stormwater 

runoff from streets under the New Jersey Municipal Stormwater Regulation program67 that also 

has air quality benefits by the removal of fugitive dust. The strategy includes both mandated and 

voluntary street sweeping. Some streets are required to be swept monthly. 

New Jersey also has standards that reduce fugitive emissions from various sources such as tillage 

and construction. These standards have been adopted by the NJDOT and New Jersey 

Department of Agriculture (NJDOA) under the “Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Standards: 

Standards for Dust Control.”

This source category has also been identified as a potential PM2.5 RACT measure for certain 

facilities throughout the State. For more information, see the PM2.5 RACT analysis in Appendix 

A7.

Energy conservation and “green building”: New Jersey currently provides for rebates and other 

financial incentives to install energy-efficiency measures in a home. The New Jersey 

Department of Community Affairs (NJDCA) has minimum design standards for some 

appliances. The New Jersey Clean Energy Program (NJCEP) and the New Jersey Energy Master 

Plan (NJEMP) encourage energy conservation.

Train engines: As of January 1, 2008, New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit) has voluntarily 

implemented an “Idling Reduction Policy” to shut down their diesel passenger locomotives 

within one hour of stopping to reduce idling at train yards by 70 percent to 90 percent. NJ 

Transit has also agreed to move forward with a New Jersey Transportation Planning Authority 

(NJTPA) proposal to evaluate idling reduction technologies.

Truck Stop Electrification: On October 20, 2004, the first Electrified Truck Stop in New Jersey 

was opened at Paulsboro, New Jersey. The Truck stop has ninety-eight truck electrification bays 

equipped with IdleAire Service Modules. These modules mount on the cab's passenger window 

to provide heat, ventilation, air conditioning, power for the refrigeration unit and appliances as 

well as cable TV, telephone and Internet service. New Jersey encourages the use of this 

technology to reduce PM2.5 emissions from diesel trucks. Discussions are underway for an 

electrification project at the Vince Lombardi Rest Area in Ridgefield, Bergen County, New 

Jersey. New Jersey is considering other locations for electrification, as well.

Medium Duty Motor Vehicle Inspection: New Jersey is evaluating an inspection program for 

medium duty vehicles with a gross weight between 8,501 – 17,999 pounds. The inspection 

program would be a combination of OBD and Smoke opacity inspections, and would help 

control particulate emissions. 

 

67 2006 Annual Report summary on New Jersey’s Stormwater Regulation program is available at 

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dwq/pdf/2006msrpannualreportlong.pdf (Accessed November 19, 2007).
71

VOC Measures

The State is implementing several VOC control measures that were adopted as discussed in the 

2007 8-hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP.68 Although the USEPA does not consider 

VOC as a PM2.5 precursor for SIP and conformity purposes, New Jersey anticipates a PM2.5 

benefit from the implementation of these measures. The proposed VOC measures are listed in 

Table 4.4.

Table 4.4: VOC Control Measures

Control Measures Sector

Pre-2002 with benefits achieved Post-2002 - On the Books

Federal

Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery (ORVR) beyond Stage II Area/Onroad

Post-2002 - On the Books

New Jersey Measures Done Through a Regional Efforta

Consumer Products 2005 Area

Architectural Coatings 2005 Area

Portable Fuel Containers 2005 Area and Nonroad

Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing Area

Solvent Cleaning Point and Area

New Jersey Only Measures

Stage I and Stage II (Gasoline Transfer Operations) Area

Federal

USEPA MACT Standards Point

Post-2002 - Beyond on the Way

New Jersey Measures Done Through a Regional Effort

Consumer Products 2009 Amendments Area

Portable Fuel Containers 2009 Amendments Area and Nonroad

Asphalt Paving Area

 

68 NJDEP. State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for the Attainment and Maintenance of the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard: 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Proposal. June 15, 2007. 
72

Control Measures Sector

Adhesives and Sealants Area and Point

Refineries – Fugitive Equipment Leaks Point

New Jersey Only Measures

VOC Stationary Storage Tank Measures Point and Area

USEPA CTGs (4 categories) Point and Area

Conclusions on Control Measures

The control measures discussed in this section make up the core of the State’s PM2.5 attainment 

demonstration and contingency measures. The use of these measures in each of those 

demonstrations, as well as how the benefits from the implementation of those measures were 

calculated, is discussed in Chapters 5 and 6, respectively. Many of the benefits were determined 

from the USEPA MOBILE6 model and the USEPA Nonroad model. Most of the control 

measure benefits (quantitatively) were included in the attainment modeling. Those that were not 

included in the attainment modeling are listed and discussed in Chapter 5. 

There are a host of other measures that have been, or will be, implemented in and around New 

Jersey whose benefits cannot be accurately estimated or quantified. These measures are 

described in Chapter 5. These measures, while not quantified, are providing a benefit to the air 

quality in New Jersey, as well as its upwind states,69 and increase the likelihood that the State 

will attain the PM2.5 health standard by its attainment date of April 5, 2010.

 

69 Please see Chapter 8 for a discussion of the impact of New Jersey control measures on upwind states.